Question

On-wing Component Tasks with Calendar Limits going overdue on Shelf

  • 28 February 2022
  • 4 replies
  • 79 views

Userlevel 2
Badge +3

Hi,

Would like to get ideas on how Maintenix users in Organisations handle inventory with calendar based on-wing tasks that go overdue whilst on shelf.

I believe this would affect any organisation using Maintenix for components with/without a supply solution. 

When inventory has an overdue task, a Maintenix job changes the status REPREQ. 

  1. The supply department would suspect the inventory requires repair, (in our business requires back-office review for each part to consider)
  2. The inventory cannot be issued or electronically fitted by the maintenance repair organisation without this back office support to clear or overrun the task.
  3. The maintenance repair organisation maybe now subject extra work without notification, this is depending on how your business handles overdue tasks. In our business we need to have the units RFI. Therefore back-office support is always required.

Explored options such as;

  • Baseline Create on Install, suits a limited range of tasks due to complaince.
  • DANI - Do at next install - doesn't work for overdue baseline tasks.
  • Deadline extensions, can only be done at point of issue or install for unscheduled changes, this requires back-office assistance.
  • Soft limits - hides from planning view and be easily overlooked if required at install. (Maintenix core governance is Hard Stop functionality, its a good thing)

Thanks In Advance, thinking maybe requires a logic change somewhere but would like other operators consensus before suggesting any enhancements or opting for customisation.


4 replies

Userlevel 4
Badge +7

Hi,

Could we get a little more information about the challenge that you want to solve? Based on the information presented it seems that you would like to defer this maintenance to the installation activity, but the state of REPREQ is preventing your supply chain processes from reserving the inventory, and bringing this component into that scenario, because Maintenix enforces that only RFI inventory can be reserved and issued?

From a compliance perspective, is the calendar deadline related to days fitted and in operation, or does the deadline intend to inspect and replace components that are subject to degradation over time like oxidation or rubberized fittings?

Userlevel 2
Badge +3

Hey Robert, Good to hear from you.

Your compliance scenario is accurate.

Regardless of time on shelf the operational check or Inspection task is still ticking whilst on shelf and needs to be done as part of the installation, if it should fall due.

So Supply chain personnel are not able to defer the maintenance/ issue the part.

And even if they did, the AMO is not able to install the part without involving the CAMO (part 42)

I think perhaps we are missing the ability to be able to make PNB/CS tasks that are on-wing, ‘soft’ until fitted.

Userlevel 4
Badge +7

Hi Bobby,

Our supply chain processes for addressing material demands are contingent on inventory being in a serviceable state. In 8.2-SP5 we softened this restriction by creating a new status called Ready For Build (RFB). An inventory is allowed to be missing mandatory sub-components and serviceable for the purposes of reservation and installation.

Your exploration into potential options is already quite exhaustive. I have reached out to our architects group to see if other options exist.

Badge

Hi,

 

I took a look into this, and I believe the originally proposed options (create on install, DANI, soft deadlines) are the only options available for modelling this scenario.

I also tried a combination of:

  1. A ‘Create on Install’ REQ for the accomplishment of the requirement
  2. A ‘soft deadline’ REQ for monitoring while the component is offwing (with the idea that this REQ would never actually be accomplished). 

The idea here being that, even though each option comes with drawbacks, perhaps a combination of these options would help mitigate these drawbacks . 

However, I wasn’t able to come up with a clean way to make sure the soft deadline task was initialized properly each time. Might be an avenue worth exploring though.

 

Ben

Reply