Scary article alleges substandard airline maintenance

Saw that. N

Doubleplus not good if the assertion in the article that FAA was covering up for them was really happening, either.
 
Isn't the FAA too busy trying to find new ways to increase the cost of flying light airplanes to have time to worry about the big iron?
 
My favorite part was "A Tampa Bay Times analysis last year found that Allegiant's planes were four times as likely to fail during flight as those operated by other major U.S. airlines"....I would love to know how this "analysis" was conducted and just exactly what "planes .... fail during flight" constitutes. It always cracks me up how reporters seem declare themselves experts on whatever they seem to be writing about at the time even if they have little or no actual knowledge of the subject. I mean hell, the way the major media outlets are today 90% of what you see in the news is garbage anyway. Really sad to see this is how things have become. [Sorry for the slight tangent there]. Anyhow, hopefully they get their stuff together, we have Allegiant at a regional airport right by the house that flies to Florida pretty dang cheap and I would like to keep it that way!
 
Here's another article.
http://avherald.com/h?article=48b6fd53&opt=0

The FAA described the legal fall out of the investigation: "Aircraft N407NV flew a total of 261 revenue flights (See IOP #26) before the nut backed off of the elevator power control boost cylinder rod end and caused the loss of pitch control that resulted in the aborted takeoff on August 17, 2015. Had the nut fallen off while the aircraft was actually flying, or had the crew not aborted the takeoff, the maintenance and inspection complacent actions performed by AAR Aircraft Services personnel would have resulted in an aircraft flying without the ability to control its pitch attitude, as evidenced by the aborted takeoff flight control response experienced by the crew on N407NV. Deliberate acts of noncompliance by company personnel resulted in improper maintenance that endangered numerous lives and properties during 261 subsequent flights following its return to service by AAR Aircraft Services, Inc., caused an unacceptable safety risk to safety and caused the airline to be in violation of 14 CFR. Part 121.369(b)(1)." Following the receipt of a response by AAR stating that the maintenance steps had been completed including the last steps 28 and 29, the FAA thundered: "This confirms that they are even now, still not familiar or do not intend follow the Allegiant Air GMM procedures for documenting Forms M301 and M302 specifically requires maintenance personnel to enter partial work to be entered in the Partial Work Accomplished sections of the form as indicated in GMM Page 21.2.19.1Section B items 4 and 5 (See IOP 21B), which the repair station is required to follow. Additionally, in the response from AAR Aircraft Services, Inc., on page 3 paragraph 2, they state and admit that they have had the same quality escape two other times. This shows these quality lapses are likely systemic, and yet the repair station shows angst over not being allowed to self-disclose a recurring concern."
Click to expand...
Quite an eery coincidence that the aircraft flew 261 flights before the part failed.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Yeah. If the part had failed in flight the result would have been very similar.

It's a total coincidence, but an odd one nonetheless
Click to expand...
In Alaska the elevator was jammed. Here it wasn't jammed, just not getting input from the yoke. What do you think the chances are they could have managed it enough with power, trim, flaps, slats, maybe even spoilers to at least have an outcome no worse than United's DC10 in Iowa?
 
I don't care how cheap they are….I
luvflyin said:
In Alaska the elevator was jammed. Here it wasn't jammed, just not getting input from the yoke. What do you think the chances are they could have managed it enough with power, trim, flaps, slats, maybe even spoilers to at least have an outcome no worse than United's DC10 in Iowa?
Click to expand...
They weren't exactly the same failure, but still would have produced similar pitch control issues in flight.

Alaska's was initially jammed…..until it finally broke completely. That's is when they died.

This one, the nut completely came off during or prior to the takeoff roll.
 
After working with some very substandard A&Ps I would imagine some of these made their way into the Airliners.
 
I wouldn't believe anything that came from tampa bay times that wasn't confirmed from another source.
 
Perhaps I'm naive, but I'd be surprised if the FAA was intentionally covering up known safety issues. I spent some time as the Chief Pilot of a charter company, and while working with the FAA I learned that 99% of being in compliance was making sure the paperwork was right. The FAA didn't have the manpower to actually *ensure* we were flying our airplanes on the up and up, but as long as I can point to paperwork which showed that we were coloring inside the lines, they took our word for it.

I feel like something similar might be happening here. Maybe Allegiant is great at the paperwork side of it, and that's keeping the FAA from digging any deeper.
 
kayoh190 said:
. I spent some time as the Chief Pilot of a charter company, and while working with the FAA I learned that 99% of being in compliance was making sure the paperwork was right. The FAA didn't have the manpower to actually *ensure* we were flying our airplanes on the up and up, but as long as I can point to paperwork which showed that we were coloring inside the lines, they took our word for it..
Click to expand...

There is some truth here. Check the boxes and move on, no time to check the plane.
 
The only time I would fly Allegiant, Spirit or Frontier is in my casket on the way home.

Cheers
 
GRG55 said:
Isn't the FAA too busy trying to find new ways to increase the cost of flying light airplanes to have time to worry about the big iron?
Click to expand...

Seriously? If you believe that then you really have no idea. Consider the following:
Part 23 rewrite.
NORSEE policy
The recent STCs issued to the EAA.
Light sport
The new compliance philosophy
and there's more.

The FAA has been trying very hard to be less burdensome on GA and has made great strides in this area. Not sure where you get your ideas.
 
kayoh190 said:
Perhaps I'm naive, but I'd be surprised if the FAA was intentionally covering up known safety issues. I spent some time as the Chief Pilot of a charter company, and while working with the FAA I learned that 99% of being in compliance was making sure the paperwork was right. The FAA didn't have the manpower to actually *ensure* we were flying our airplanes on the up and up, but as long as I can point to paperwork which showed that we were coloring inside the lines, they took our word for it.

I feel like something similar might be happening here. Maybe Allegiant is great at the paperwork side of it, and that's keeping the FAA from digging any deeper.
Click to expand...

This is true to a very large degree. The job of ensuring airworthiness falls on the operator. The FAA does not and cannot inspect every aircraft nor do so with any large amount of detail on the aircraft they do inspect. The FAA is not the airline's or the repair station's QC department. That is why the FAA requires the airline to have the 119 personnel and approved manuals & programs. The airline is also required to provide oversight on their maintenance vendors including their RII program. Obviously both Allegiant and AAR appear to have failed in this instance.
 
Don't worry. Whatever the "airlines" are doing or not doing - it's ALL FAA approved and supervised !!!!
 
I frequent KPIE all the time, (Clearwater Airport). I see the Allegiant airplanes on the grassy area lined up all the time.

Untitled.jpg

Maintenance stops by but I always wondered how extensive can the repairs be outside...95 degrees...100% Humidity. I rather take my chances with Thug United!!
 
Speaking of United did you guys see that Jimmy Kimbel Commercial..if not I got ya covered:

 
FloridaPilot said:
I frequent KPIE all the time, (Clearwater Airport). I see the Allegiant airplanes on the grassy area lined up all the time.

View attachment 53714

Maintenance stops by but I always wondered how extensive can the repairs be outside...95 degrees...100% Humidity. I rather take my chances with Thug United!!
Click to expand...
Spares. I don't see any maintenance vehicles out there.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Seriously? If you believe that then you really have no idea. Consider the following:
Part 23 rewrite.
NORSEE policy
The recent STCs issued to the EAA.
Light sport
The new compliance philosophy
and there's more.

The FAA has been trying very hard to be less burdensome on GA and has made great strides in this area. Not sure where you get your ideas.
Click to expand...
Trying hard to be less burdensome. . . Good God! Is that a serious comment? We're supposed to be grateful that an unaccountable bureaucracy, that can't get out if it's own way, has decided to only punch us in the face six times an hour, instead of ten?
 
Sundancer said:
Trying hard to be less burdensome. . . Good God! Is that a serious comment? We're supposed to be grateful that an unaccountable bureaucracy, that can't get out if it's own way, has decided to only punch us in the face six times an hour, instead of ten?
Click to expand...

:frown2: :sigh:
 
This is not the first time. As I recall, ValuJet has similar accusations. And there was a whole hullabaloo about lax FAA supervision of AA a number of years ago.
 
By the way, the CEO of Allegient was the CEO of ValuJet when 592 went down and there were accusations of maintenance issues at the airline.
 
SkyDog58 said:
:frown2: :sigh:
Click to expand...
I imagine you're working hard at FAA, and grant you that - but working hard isn't the same as working smart. . .is everything the FAA touches a crater? No, some good stuff happens, and there have been ATC folks I'd like to buy a beer - a lot them, actually, and very few I'd like to slap, for sure. But the accountability is NOT there - it's at such a far remove from the aviation community as to be, well, like the IRS is to tax payers. Only FAA is better funded. . .

But balanced against the good works are things like the sleep apnea nonsense, the NextGen (or, eventual Gen) effort, and the stop, stumble, and fall ADS-B project. Look at the FAR/AIM - a bloated, convoluted mish-mash of disorganized, poorly written, and frequently obscure buruacratic-ese. That it is useful is a testament to the pilots who flog their way through it, mining the value out of the surrounding junk.

So, yeah, IMHO, the "less burdensome" push at FAA is years, decades, late, and patting yourself on the back isn't appropriate - quietly going about getting it done, and being at least a little sheepish that three or four generations of your predecessors SHOULD have gotten off top dead center wold be more like it. As a policy maker, FAA is something right out 1960 - slow, inflexible, unable to admit when they take a wrong direction.

Rant complete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top