EHHO From Bulgaria, joined Dec 2005, 815 posts, RR: 8 Posted (7 years 5 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 13206 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 (7 years 5 months 1 day ago) and read 12951 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: 19 Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 1 day ago) and read 12760 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 (7 years 5 months 1 day ago) and read 12646 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.
Aviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 47 Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 12561 times:
Quoting Goaliemn (Reply 5): If the FAA pulls the airworthiness certificate, I believe the plane is grounded worldwide.
Nope, FAA has no authority over all PH registered A/C.
KLM would have to stop with maintenance on all N.... Registered machines and/or all of the countries which are flying under FAA rules.
Quoting Goaliemn (Reply 5): From my flight training, the airworthiness certificate can only be issued once, by the airplane manufacturer and the country where its built.
Airworthiness has nothing to do with it, we are talking about a maintenance license.
KLM is also doing maintenance for other operators(read US registered) operators and for that you need a FAA(FAR66/145) approval like you need an EASA(JAR66/145) approval for European A/C.
Willem
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 19687 posts, RR: 56 Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 23 hours ago) and read 12531 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.
-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Fokker70NG From Netherlands, joined Nov 2005, 233 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 22 hours ago) and read 12309 times:
Quoting Lamedianaranja (Reply 8): I feel that's what the article is all about, not about forbidding KL to fly to the States. They'll revoke the license to do maintenance on N regs.
That's indeed what the article is about..
For which US-based airlines is KLM E&M doing maintenance? NW is one of them, aren't they?
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. -Albert Einstein
YOWza From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4781 posts, RR: 17 Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 22 hours ago) and read 12086 times:
Two things:
I find it curious that people who can't read the article (non-Dutch speakers) have the most to say.
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?
SunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 3946 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 21 hours ago) and read 11969 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, 2465 posts, RR: 32 Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 21 hours ago) and read 11851 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, 5217 posts, RR: 6 Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 20 hours ago) and read 11142 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 United States of America, joined exactly 9 years ago today! , 4085 posts, RR: 7 Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 19 hours ago) and read 10390 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
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, 952 posts, RR: 10 Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 18 hours ago) and read 9508 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.
APFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 18 hours ago) and read 9195 times:
I think the bottom line is that
a)KLM is a very very safe Airline
b)a Clerical Error may have happened/being happening (repeatedly)
it will be sorted and I doubt any major consequences will be seen.
EHHO From Bulgaria, joined Dec 2005, 815 posts, RR: 8 Reply 22, posted (7 years 5 months 17 hours ago) and read 9015 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!
Quoting Lamedianaranja (Reply 8): They'll revoke the license to do maintenance on N regs.
Basically, that is indeed what the article implies, though it is pretty vague in its explanation. Thanks for pointing it out!
"Get your facts first. Then you may distort them as much as you please" -- Mark Twain
FokkerVII From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 47 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (7 years 5 months 16 hours ago) and read 8300 times:
As these are mostly admin issues there does not seem to be any specific safety issue.
The FAA probably has issue with other companies along these lines as well.
25 Wjcandee: Well, much of the safety that we in the US take for granted today is the result of having specific procedures and documentation thereof when doing mai
26 Aogdesk: Clerical error? Would you classify secretaries signing off work (as happened in the not so distant past at one US major airline) as a repeated cleric
27 Gemuser: Not as a "normal" or default condition, they have agreed to said access in return for US aircraft having equilivent access to other countries. Of cou
28 Matt72033: so surely that would mean the CAA over her in the UK only has jurisdiction over G registered aircraft? how come the phuket 743 was grounded at LGW th
29 ANother: I think it was 1944 The US is a signatory to the International Air Transit Agreement which grants unlimited 1st freedom rights to other signatorys. B
30 Gemuser: Illeaglly by international law. What probably happened was that the CAA contacted the Thai authorities who were not able/willing to correct matters,
31 Thegooddoctor: KLM is very safe - this has to do with the maintainance agreements. As for the Dutch vs. non-dutch speaking inflamatory comments: Pipe down... No one
32 SKA380: Aviopic is right! From my understanding, this has very little to do with the mainline KLM, but rather KLM Technic. FAA does a yearly inspection of all
33 Drinkstrolley: Where is Suriname? Never heard of it..........
34 Edoca: Where is Hampshire? Never heard of that!
36 Goaliemn: 29 posts.. I was waiting for a bash the US post
37 Kaddyuk: The FAA can prevent Aircraft which have been maintained by KLM flying into US airspace, that is it. If the aircraft were already on the ground then th
38 Flyabunch: The most important thing that I noticed in the translated copy (thank you) was that the Dutch aviation authority agreed that their were some issues to
39 ANother: Bash? Why would you say that? Do you disagree with my comment?
Sponsor Message: 
From Bulgaria, joined Dec 2005, 815 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 120 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 541 posts, 
From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, 
From Venezuela, joined Nov 2004, 1246 posts, 
That's indeed what the article is about..
From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 4781 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5217 posts, 
, 4085 posts, 
From Brazil, joined Jun 2005, 365 posts, 
x 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
