FAA probe of American Airlines may widen: rep
10-17-2009, 04:05 PM
#1
Seat 0B
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 793
FAA probe of American Airlines may widen: rep
More Mx troubles.. Surprised this has not been posted yet although most of you seem to be in denial about where and who is maintaining the aircraft that you fly and your family's fly on..
Sat Oct 17, 12:16 pm ET
CHICAGO (Reuters) – AMR Corp's American Airlines operated jets later found to have substandard repairs, and federal regulators are probing allegations that at least one plane was considered unsafe to fly at normal cruise altitude, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday.
The newspaper, citing people familiar with the matter, said the latest moves by the Federal Aviation Administration indicate the agency is expanding its probe into suspected structural problems with rear bulkheads on some of American's fleet of MD-80 jets, the newspaper said.
FAA inspectors are pursuing allegations by pilots that one of those MD-80s was believed to be in such poor condition that it was ferried without passengers from Dallas to the carrier's Tulsa, Oklahoma maintenance base at unusually low altitudes to avoid the stress of pressurizing the fuselage during the trip, the newspaper said.
Preliminary FAA findings have identified as many as 16 American Airlines twin-engine MD-80s that were operated for months despite allegedly substandard bulkhead repairs. Agency investigators are looking into whether other MD-80s also may have been flown for repairs at low altitudes without passengers, The Wall Street Journal said.
No ruptures in the rear bulkhead on the American MD-80s have been reported to the FAA, the newspaper said.
But people familiar with the investigation said American potentially faces millions of dollars in civil penalties stemming from the widening investigation, and the FAA is also considering the unusual tactic of eventually taking punitive action against individual mechanics or supervisors who may have signed off on substandard work.
A spokeswoman for the FAA would not comment on specifics in the story.
"There is an investigation and it would be premature to talk about any of the results of that," said FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown.
A spokesman for American Airlines could not be reached for comment.
(Reporting by Brad Dorfman)
Sat Oct 17, 12:16 pm ET
CHICAGO (Reuters) – AMR Corp's American Airlines operated jets later found to have substandard repairs, and federal regulators are probing allegations that at least one plane was considered unsafe to fly at normal cruise altitude, the Wall Street Journal reported on Saturday.
The newspaper, citing people familiar with the matter, said the latest moves by the Federal Aviation Administration indicate the agency is expanding its probe into suspected structural problems with rear bulkheads on some of American's fleet of MD-80 jets, the newspaper said.
FAA inspectors are pursuing allegations by pilots that one of those MD-80s was believed to be in such poor condition that it was ferried without passengers from Dallas to the carrier's Tulsa, Oklahoma maintenance base at unusually low altitudes to avoid the stress of pressurizing the fuselage during the trip, the newspaper said.
Preliminary FAA findings have identified as many as 16 American Airlines twin-engine MD-80s that were operated for months despite allegedly substandard bulkhead repairs. Agency investigators are looking into whether other MD-80s also may have been flown for repairs at low altitudes without passengers, The Wall Street Journal said.
No ruptures in the rear bulkhead on the American MD-80s have been reported to the FAA, the newspaper said.
But people familiar with the investigation said American potentially faces millions of dollars in civil penalties stemming from the widening investigation, and the FAA is also considering the unusual tactic of eventually taking punitive action against individual mechanics or supervisors who may have signed off on substandard work.
A spokeswoman for the FAA would not comment on specifics in the story.
"There is an investigation and it would be premature to talk about any of the results of that," said FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown.
A spokesman for American Airlines could not be reached for comment.
(Reporting by Brad Dorfman)
10-17-2009, 04:15 PM
#2
Working Class Dog
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Spares Pusher
Posts: 1,668
10-17-2009, 07:05 PM
#4
Seat 0B
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 793
Quite the opposite my friend, I would love to see it all come back in house where it belongs. I actually found the piece interesting because AA is the only major who has the majority of their work still in house. Personally, I just found it interesting that at my airline, most of the pilots could give a rats behind who was working on the a/c or where they were being worked on as long as a current MRD was in the log book...
10-17-2009, 08:37 PM
#5
Working Class Dog
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Spares Pusher
Posts: 1,668
JetDoc,
Perhaps I misjudged you based on your opening comments. The suggestion "most of you" was a pretty broad statement. That and I'm always a little suspicious when a story is centered around a legitimate procedure but spun in such a way that is misleading to someone unfamiliar with the strict requirements for a ferry flight. I would be curious to know what the "unusually low altitude" was. Unusual, compared to a revenue flight?
As for Airlines performing/not performing their own maintenance, unfortunately, everyone is outsourcing. It's almost become the rule rather than the exception. That said, the gang at Tulsa is a good bunch.
Regardless, I probably shouldn't have gone off on you like that.
Thanks for keeping us safe.
Perhaps I misjudged you based on your opening comments. The suggestion "most of you" was a pretty broad statement. That and I'm always a little suspicious when a story is centered around a legitimate procedure but spun in such a way that is misleading to someone unfamiliar with the strict requirements for a ferry flight. I would be curious to know what the "unusually low altitude" was. Unusual, compared to a revenue flight?
As for Airlines performing/not performing their own maintenance, unfortunately, everyone is outsourcing. It's almost become the rule rather than the exception. That said, the gang at Tulsa is a good bunch.
Regardless, I probably shouldn't have gone off on you like that.
Thanks for keeping us safe.
10-18-2009, 04:58 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: NOYDB
Posts: 876
JetDoc,
Perhaps I misjudged you based on your opening comments. The suggestion "most of you" was a pretty broad statement. That and I'm always a little suspicious when a story is centered around a legitimate procedure but spun in such a way that is misleading to someone unfamiliar with the strict requirements for a ferry flight. I would be curious to know what the "unusually low altitude" was. Unusual, compared to a revenue flight?
Perhaps I misjudged you based on your opening comments. The suggestion "most of you" was a pretty broad statement. That and I'm always a little suspicious when a story is centered around a legitimate procedure but spun in such a way that is misleading to someone unfamiliar with the strict requirements for a ferry flight. I would be curious to know what the "unusually low altitude" was. Unusual, compared to a revenue flight?
10-18-2009, 05:00 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,067
...and the FAA is also considering the unusual tactic of eventually taking punitive action against individual mechanics or supervisors who may have signed off on substandard work.
Now if we could just get management held to that standard as well...
10-18-2009, 05:14 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,919
I would think that AA mx control was worried that the aft pressure bulkhead would not hold if the aircraft was pressuized, so they ferried to Tulsa, unpressurized below 12,000. It seems as though all the manpower reductions and penny pinching for hefty management bonuses has caught up with the airlines. The FAA is not a proactive but more a reactive entity. The FAA got caught with their pants down for being lax on or not doing inspections, so now they're playing catch up and nit picking every little thing. The grounded 4 of my aircraft in JFK for chipped paint!
10-18-2009, 08:44 AM
#9
Seat 0B
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 777 FO
Posts: 793
JetDoc,
Perhaps I misjudged you based on your opening comments. The suggestion "most of you" was a pretty broad statement. That and I'm always a little suspicious when a story is centered around a legitimate procedure but spun in such a way that is misleading to someone unfamiliar with the strict requirements for a ferry flight. I would be curious to know what the "unusually low altitude" was. Unusual, compared to a revenue flight?
As for Airlines performing/not performing their own maintenance, unfortunately, everyone is outsourcing. It's almost become the rule rather than the exception. That said, the gang at Tulsa is a good bunch.
Regardless, I probably shouldn't have gone off on you like that.
Thanks for keeping us safe.
Perhaps I misjudged you based on your opening comments. The suggestion "most of you" was a pretty broad statement. That and I'm always a little suspicious when a story is centered around a legitimate procedure but spun in such a way that is misleading to someone unfamiliar with the strict requirements for a ferry flight. I would be curious to know what the "unusually low altitude" was. Unusual, compared to a revenue flight?
As for Airlines performing/not performing their own maintenance, unfortunately, everyone is outsourcing. It's almost become the rule rather than the exception. That said, the gang at Tulsa is a good bunch.
Regardless, I probably shouldn't have gone off on you like that.
Thanks for keeping us safe.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
