Trying to decide between CAMP and SierraTrax. CAMP is about 4X the cost, and claim they are more full service and more accurate. Our shop likes them because they don't have to enter as much data. SierraTrax seems much more user friendly for the owner/operator (os opposed to A&P).

I don't mind paying the shop an extra few hours of labor each year to do the data entry with SierraTrax, but I'm concerned some off field maintenance shop just won't do it and I'm new to turbines and not 100% sure I'll do a good job of it. Curious of any thoughts people have. This is for a Conquest, but I assume similar for a Citation.

I also understand CAMP is connected to the maintenance manual, and SierraTrax isn't. They claim this is coming. Not sure how big of a deal this is.

My very limited research of some time ago concluded that any of these programs make little to no sense for an owner/operator. First, log books are the least common denominator technology, and can't get screwed up by all of the many things that can go wrong with a cloud company or technology. Second, any shop will have a way to print a sticker for a log entry, but trying to teach them something they haven't done before can be next to impossible. Third, there will never be a data format change where something can no longer be read (think of CD-ROMs - how many CDR readers do you have anymore). You get the idea.

Good theory. Bad in the real world. My $.02.

I stayed with CAMP for no other reason then I'm lazy and did not want to go through the hassle of setting up SierraTrax. My plane has been on CAMP since new so the data is complete.

It is "nice" to have CAMP track maintenance due, SB, and ADs; however, the ROI is very marginal at best for a part 91 owner/operator.

I have planes on both tracking systems. It would be very cumbersome to maintain a jet without some sort of tracking system. I've also seen some guys make detailed Excel sheets and that works OK also but announces your cheapness when you go to sell the airplane. Mx tracking is a common language for the owner, pilot and mechanic and also allows you to plan for the future mx needs of the airplane. I know good tracking makes an airplane easier to sell and gives legitimacy to your bird.

Pros of each:

Sierratrax

1) Less Expensive
2) Chris Webber is excellent as is Kara
3) Instant updates to status
4) Self directed (you are in control so garbage in/garbage out)
5) Ability to print out task lists
6) Evolving and improving constantly

Cescom/CAMP

1) You are assigned an analyst that watches everything and catches mistakes. They actually will call you if something doesn't look right and fix it.
2) Excellent document storage
3) A mature product
4) Incredibly easy to populate if you swap an engine vs typing in 50 part numbers.
5) Great access to historical data
6) Accepted as an industry standard for Cessna Citations

If I wasn't paying the bills, I'd be on CAMP because I like the human analyst but I generally recommend Sierratrax to my friends and use for my personal airplane.

My quote for CAMP was $6000 per year, ST is $1200 ($99/month). That's a substantial difference.

A concern is that Sierratrax just got bought by JSSI and their offerings are not typically "economical" from what I have seen. They could decide to, say, double the cost and still be the lowest price option.


The accuracy of the system is ENTIRELY dependent on the folks inputting data.

My plane was on CAMP and factory service center maintained since birth. The CAMP data was transferred to ST when I bought it. I have found numerous errors in the tracking, but ALL of them were in the CAMP data at time of transfer. ST can't fix those errors.

For example, my vapor cycle compressor is listed as PN 12500162. This is an R-12 system, Fort Worth Air, installed at the factory with delivery, so I thought I had an R-12 airplane. However, the actual airplane has a R-134a system installed in it (nice surprise!) and only SOME of those parts are in the tracked data. For example, my condenser fan is PN FWA13410, which is correct and an R-134a system part.

Some day I need to go through the report and verify all the data not because it is ST, but because it is accumulated error from CAMP and the service centers. CAMP would be just as wrong and I would need to do the same review.

I don't yet know how I, as owner/operator, fix the problems I do find.


It should be the same data. What is ST collecting that CAMP does not?


I've got a few hurdles like this.

I have a shop that has done some work and has not entered it into ST. I need to do that myself, but have not done so. I will try to figure out how to do it for them to keep things all lined up.

Ultimately, what CAMP or ST do is VERY simple, they track your dates, times, and cycles and tell you what needs done and when. This is almost trivial to do. I've been tempted to do it myself with a spreadsheet at times.


I've never used CAMP so I can't say how well this MM connection works.

I have a copy of the MM complete separate from ST, so it is no big issue to look up an inspection or part without it being linked. You want a copy of the MM for your airplane, PARTCIULARLY for a Conquest so you can lock in your MM revision and stop Textron from dumping new inspections on you. I would not put a huge weight on the CAMP MM connection feature.

When converting from CAMP to ST, it is best to NOT cancel CAMP so ST can get more data from CAMP (such as MTRs, basically log entries). I didn't have that option (I wasn't going to spend $6000 just to make that transfer, I had no access to prior owner's account), so I was loaded from a CAMP report and not from CAMP data directly. I don't feel like this caused any issues, just that my ST file lacks the MTRs from the past, which I have in paper records.

Mike C.

Hmm, must have been asleep on my plane in the past. Hard to miss an R-12 compressor on a R-134a equipped airplane.

Mike C.

Decided to go with SierraTrax, CAMP won't give us the data export without signing up and I didn't think to ask the previous owner for it before they cancelled. This alone is a bad sign for CAMP. So we might have to sign up for a quarter to get the data out then never use it again.

Here's some shocking things that were missed by CAMP:

Both windshields replaced
NLG drag link replaced
Engine hydraulic hoses
Strobe power supply replaced
Fire extinguisher cartridge replaced
Prop governor replaced
Engine AD

I haven't much experience, but so far, if CAMP was 1/4 the cost of SierraTrax and not the other way around I might still go with SierraTrax.

Let's be clear, CAMP doesn't "miss" anything, all it really does is records what the users put into it.

Sierratrax can "miss" things in exactly the same way.

What one needs is a log review service which takes your current tracking state and does a systematic page by page review of the log books to make sure the tracking is correct. This is painstaking work and may require, in some cases, an actual examination of the airplane to verify unclear items.

I figure I will end up doing that myself at some point. I already know of about a dozen things not consistent between the log books, Sierratrax, and the actual state of the airplane.

Mike C.

Perhaps I am not understanding the role of CAMP, but is it not an online maintenance logbook? If the “logs” missed these items, how did you know they were missed?

Perhaps I am not understanding the role of CAMP, but is it not an online maintenance logbook? If the “logs” missed these items, how did you know they were missed?

No, it is just a status report of when items have bene done and when they are due.

It has no legal basis. The logs are the true legal documents.

You could, in theory, not have it and simply read back in the logs every time you need to check on the status of an inspection or part.

You could also do a home made system using a spreadsheet, which is what many do for airplanes of lesser complexity.

My MU2 status sheet fit on one page.

My C560 status report has 989 items and takes 105 pages to print out.

Much of this is not so much the change in airplane as the change in detail that is expected for jets. It sounds onerous, but actually it makes things easier to have very detailed tracking.

Mike C.

Oh, I own a 40 year old turbine… I get that.

I thought the digital logs were more “replacement” of paper than they apparently are, thanks for the description.

Let's be clear, CAMP doesn't "miss" anything, all it really does is records what the users put into it.

Sierratrax can "miss" things in exactly the same way.

What one needs is a log review service which takes your current tracking state and does a systematic page by page review of the log books to make sure the tracking is correct. This is painstaking work and may require, in some cases, an actual examination of the airplane to verify unclear items.

I figure I will end up doing that myself at some point. I already know of about a dozen things not consistent between the log books, Sierratrax, and the actual state of the airplane.

Mike C.

My airplane has 30 years of only Textron factory service center maintenance and CAMP. Lots of things have been missed.

I was under the impression the shop did ALL the CAMP entries.


That does not sound like "we do the new data entry by reading the MTRs and extracting changes in status". It sounds like "we check over what the shop has entered and approve it". Those are very different activities.


Possibly.

One thing I'm not yet sure about is how to "fix" Sierratrax. I have a few items I know are wrong, and I'm going to try and get them fixed. I'll see how hard that is. The impression I get is that these service tend to prevent owners from making changes.

Mike C.

That's kind of odd, I would think they'd want people to fix the data. Maybe they believe they are gatekeepers against maintenance fraud or something?