EHHO From Netherlands, joined Dec 2005, 815 posts, RR: 7 Posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 14593 times:
According to an article in the Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad yesterday, the FAA has issued KL a warning concerning aircraft maintenance, after a yearly audit conducted at AMS. This threat of certificate revocation concerns the period after 12-31-2006.
I couldn't find any supporting sources on FAA's website, or elsewhere.
What kind of license would be concerned? The right to fly to or over the US, or the right to operate US-made aircraft? The article says that "FAA demands improvement in the maintenance of American aircraft"
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14338 times:
I doubt that the FAA can prevent KLM from operating US-made aircraft outside the US, regardless of level of maintenance. Its most probably the license to fly within FAA controlled airspace, which would probably equate the the JAA doing the same.
Kappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 14147 times:
Surprising. But i'm glad it's just administrative inconsistencies, as they say. KLM has a great name safety-wise, so it would be a shock if they were cutting corners. Any aircrash is terrible, but if it's because of faulty maintenence, it's even worse, though an airline could have such a crash and survive (like AS).
Anyway, it's good to know that these audits happen, so aviation can continue to as safe as it is.
Goaliemn From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 463 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 14033 times:
If the FAA pulls the airworthiness certificate, I believe the plane is grounded worldwide. From my flight training, the airworthiness certificate can only be issued once, by the airplane manufacturer and the country where its built.
They could pull their authority to fly in the US. I can't read the original dutch article, so I'm not 100% sure which they are talking about.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 22564 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 13918 times:
Quoting Goaliemn (Reply 5): If the FAA pulls the airworthiness certificate, I believe the plane is grounded worldwide. From my flight training, the airworthiness certificate can only be issued once, by the airplane manufacturer and the country where its built.
I don't think this involves the airworthiness certificates, but rather the operating license. It wouldn't affect KLM's ability to fly their planes (outside of the US), but if the FAA does something other authorities tend to follow suit, so it would start to create a serious problem.
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
SunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 5752 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 13356 times:
Quoting YOWza (Reply 12): Secondly what brought all this on, is KL MX doing something in particular wrong or is it little things. Has any other major European airlien been through the same thing with the FAA?
You should read all the postings thoroughly. It is reported to be administrative, in other words the paperwork is not up to snuff. This is nothing to do with a hands on the wrench issue.
For the bureaucrats in FAA and their equivalents this is unforgiveable.
AA777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 2560 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 13238 times:
Quoting A319114 (Reply 3): The FAA criticism is especially aimed at KLM maintenance administration (they speak of 'inconsistencies'.
Ooh wonderful...just when I'm about to take KLM from IAD-AMS-DXB in less than a week. I'm taking AF on the way home... hopefully their maintenance is better? lol....though, if I didnt trust the airline I wouldnt ever take it....
Gemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 6179 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 12529 times:
Quoting Goaliemn (Reply 11): Quoting Aviopic (Reply 6):
Nope, FAA has no authority over all PH registered A/C.
They have full authority over them when they are in US airspace. They can always deny them entry.
Why is it I just knew this would be said!
The FAA have no authority over PH registered aircraft ANYWHERE, not even in US airspace. The Dutch authorities have full authority. Just like the FAA have full authority over N registered aircraft everywhere.
The operation of ALL aircraft engaged in "international civil aviation" is controlled by the Chicargo Convention of 1947 and the rules made under its authority by ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organisation].
If the FAA or any national authority has a problem with an airline or maintance organisation from another country, it first approaches the relevent authority, its only if this fails will it resort to any attempt to ban said airline/aircraft from US airspace and this is a double edge sword, particularly in the case of a first world country who would most likley ban N registered aircraft in return.
Having said all that it appears from other poster comments that this is a case of a maintance org wanting FAA approval to service N registered aircraft, so the issue of PH aircraft does not arise.
Iowaman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 11777 times:
Quoting Gemuser (Reply 15): The FAA have no authority over PH registered aircraft ANYWHERE, not even in US airspace. The Dutch authorities have full authority. Just like the FAA have full authority over N registered aircraft everywhere.
The U.S. can deny entry into the U.S. to any foreign aircraft.
AMSSFO From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 954 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 10895 times:
It's clear that a lot of people apparently can not read Dutch and have no way to translate it, so I will give you some excerpts translated into English:
"The American aviation authority FAA requires that the KLM improves the work processes in the maintenance of American planes.
During a periodic inspection by the FAA, previous month, some findings seems to indicate a lack of discipline and not sticking to the procedures, according to the head of the technical service of the KLM, P. Somers.
Current FAA-license expires on 31 January 2006.
Although the findings are "not huge", KLM must take "acceptable correcting measures".
Klm-engineers have been worried for years about the security culture at KLM, wgich became clear in October from internal KLM - files.
Also the IVW (Dutch FAA) is carefully observing KLM. According to Somers, the head of the IVW, H. Nepperus, has let know that accurate corrections are needed.
After a strike at KLM technical service in 2002, the IVW made agreements with KLM to improve the work processes. The IVW demands that the technical service becomes "a more self-learned and self-improving organisation" The technical service does not always accurately follow all procedures. According to the IVW there is no "direct threat" to safety."
A KLM spokesman told the newspaper in a response that "the FAA have mainly found administrative matters that were inconsistently dealt with"."
So in summary, it's all about maintenance of N-registered planes. It's not the first time the authorities find "inconsistencies" but its mainly administrative issues.
EHHO From Netherlands, joined Dec 2005, 815 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (9 years 11 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 10402 times:
Quoting AMSSFO (Reply 19): It's clear that a lot of people apparently can not read Dutch and have no way to translate it, so I will give you some excerpts translated into English
Thanks a lot AMSSFO! I realize that have not been diligent by not providing a more thorough translation from the outset. It's already good that there has not been any flaming yet on the thread due to misunderstanding each other. Nogmaals bedankt!