"When the cabin crew then admitted there was still a 5-foot section of wing tip missing, there was “a minor revolt” as seven passengers demanded to be let off the plane. The crew insisted that the plane could fly just fine without it, but passengers weren’t buying it."
NorthstarBoy From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1924 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 22407 times:
It's not clear in the article how the situation was resolved, but, if the aircraft is fit to fly, as judged by the airline and its trained maintenance personnel, then not flying becomes a voluntary change and any fare increases and or change penalties would apply. I wonder, after being informed of that, how many of those seven still had qualms about getting on the affected aircraft?
Why are people so against low yields?! If lower yields means more people can travel abroad, i'm all for it
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12710 posts, RR: 80
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 22119 times:
Quoting Dakar (Reply 4): Is this considered part of the MEL, CDL, or neither?
If it's anywhere, it would be on the CDL. The MEL is for inoperative equipment. The CDL is for missing structure.
Quoting JRadier (Reply 5): I believe a winglet on the A330/A340 is not on the MEL (Minimum Equipment List) so you can fly without it.
That's not the right way to interpret the MEL. A winglet would be CDL anyway, but Minimum Equipment List isn't the minimum list of stuff you can fly with (despite the title), it's the list of things that you're allowed to fly without. If something isn't on the MEL then you can't fly without it unless you get approval from some other source.
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12710 posts, RR: 80
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 21600 times:
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 10): Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 9):
but Minimum Equipment List isn't the minimum list of stuff you can fly with
Ummmmm, that's exactly what it is AFAIK. The MEL is the minimum equipment you need to safely operate the aircraft.
No, it isn't There is no single document that lists the minimum equipment you need to safety operate the aircraft. The MEL provides a list of items you are allowed to dispatch without. If something is not listed on the MEL, then you need it to dispatch or you need to get authority from another source to dispatch without it.
For example, the thrust reversers are on the MEL. That means you can dispatch with inoperative reversers. The engines are not on the MEL. That means you cannot dispatch with an inoperative engine.
SQ452 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1154 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 21223 times:
I remember when the back of a pylon was missing on the left wing of a CO 737-800 from BOS to EWR...a few passengers (including myself) asked the FA's if the plane could fly without it and eventually the captain came on and said it was ok...
...My guess is that the A340 could fly no problem without a wingtip. The A380 did it after its tip got clipped at BKK, but that was because they actually removed the wingtips on both sides instead of just the damaged one. You'll see this in the videos of the low pass over HKG a few days later. But I can obviously see why the passengers would consider getting off the plane if they saw the wingtip missing.
Wirelock From Spain, joined Sep 2007, 126 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 20574 times:
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 10): Ummmmm, that's exactly what it is AFAIK. The MEL is the minimum equipment you need to safely operate the aircraft
it's definetley in the CDL. You should have a look in the CDL. There are all sorts of things that you can fly without. For example Flap fairings, LDG doors. The usual is there is an operational penalty, mainly fuel.
Graphic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 20357 times:
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 10): Ummmmm, that's exactly what it is AFAIK. The MEL is the minimum equipment you need to safely operate the aircraft.
Common misperception. The MEL is a document that specifies what needs to be done to make an aircraft airworthy when certain equipment is inoperative, it usually states how to defer the item for maintenance and how to deactivate the item. If it isn't listed in the MEL, then the aircraft will be unairworthy (there are exceptions to this, IIRC, but a winglet isn't).
Burkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4479 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 20019 times:
Lufthansa operated a 744 without one winglet some time a while ago.
While I do not assume this to be an objective safety risk, I do not think that this is something good for reputation and prooven reliability. In this case, also I would not be concerned about the missing winglet - but would ask if the necessary checks have been done to the rest of the wing.
Bluewhale18210 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 237 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 18893 times:
As long as the winglet was removed by MX, the aircraft was ok to go. Although it would suffer fuel penalty.
Remember that winglets were put in place to save fuel. Missing one or both winglet just meant more fuel burn.
Just think a 744 without winglet to be a 744D.......that should give you a clear picture.
As far as real incidents go, here's one.
About 3 years ago a CI 340 was taxing into gate A12 at SEA from IAH. It was supposed to pickup about 100 PAX at SEA and then go to TPE. When it was taxiing the right side winglet struck an AA MD80's horizontal stablizer. The MD was parked and the A340 was on the taxiway centerline. Later SEATAC admitted the misplaced centerline would not accomodate an A340 quite well and since repainted the line.
Anyway the A340 left a few hours later, one winglet short. It also took on 5% extra fuel to compensate for the lost of aerodynamic efficiency. I know this firsthand because my father was the manager in charge at the scene. It's perfectly safe to fly without winglets.
JPS on A300-600RF A319/320 B737-400/800 B757-200F B767-300F CRJ-200/900. Looking to add more.
Gregarious119 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 537 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16847 times:
Quoting LAXspotter (Reply 11): so the Passengers think they know the best about their safety? scratchchin
This is the real problem here.
Some person, in their absolutely limited knowledge of what it takes to lift an airplane out of the air, and even further limited knowledge about the operating requirements of an A340, takes it upon themselves to make a judgement call about the safety of a widebody airliner and the effect that a missing wingtip will have.
Did they really believe that this captain, who probably has thousands of hours of flight experience, would just ignore a problem like that and no doubt fly off unto his ultimate peril? Where's the trust in the captain's experience?!
I hate to be "that guy" but I think you have it backwards.
A Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) is an approved document created specifically to regulate the dispatch of an aircraft type with inoperative equipment. It establishes the aircraft equipment allowed to be inoperative under certain conditions for a specific type of aircraft and forms the basis for a Minimum Equipment List
The MEL is a joint operations and maintenance document prepared for or by an air operator to:
a) identify the minimum equipment and conditions for an aircraft to maintain conformity with the standards of airworthiness and to meet the operating rules for the type of operation;
I think what this is saying is the MMEL identifies what can be inoperative while the MEL identifies what must be operative.
So my above statement is true..
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 10): The MEL is the minimum equipment you need to safely operate the aircraft.
Remcor From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 360 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 16578 times:
Quoting NorthstarBoy (Reply 7): It's not clear in the article how the situation was resolved, but, if the aircraft is fit to fly, as judged by the airline and its trained maintenance personnel, then not flying becomes a voluntary change and any fare increases and or change penalties would apply.
I think you're nuts if you think that it's unreasonable for passengers to be skeptical about the safety of a Sri Lankan Airlines plane they had just suffered a collision on and that still was not repaired. Charge them a change fee? Freakin' crazy.
Quoting Gregarious119 (Reply 21): Some person, in their absolutely limited knowledge of what it takes to lift an airplane out of the air, and even further limited knowledge about the operating requirements of an A340, takes it upon themselves to make a judgment call about the safety of a widebody airliner and the effect that a missing wingtip will have.
Why not? Some person, in their absolutely great knowledge of airplanes, had just crashed their airplane into another airplane. Why shouldn't passengers be skeptical about what the airline says?
It's one thing if this happened to a Lufthansa or BA airplane, but I'm sure that things don't operate as efficiently, honestly and smoothly in Sri Lanka as in Brittan or Germany. Perhaps Sri Lankan is a great airline, but I can fully understand passengers being unsure of whether the airline is trying to cut corners in certifying it to fly without replacing the wingtip.
The FAA approved MMEL includes those items of equipment related to airworthiness
and operating regulations and other items of equipment which the
Administrator finds may be inoperative and yet maintain an acceptable
level of safety by appropriate conditions and limitations; it does not
contain obviously required items such as wings, flaps, and rudders.
This is taken from the preamble to the MMEL (Master Minimum Equipment List) for the B747-400 on th "MyBoeingFleet" website. Other fleet types are similar. The MMEL is generated by the FAA and the manufacturer.
As can be seen the MMEL is a document that tells you what systems can be inoperative yet still allow the aircraft to fly safely. It is not a listing of the minimum equipment required to operate the aircraft.It is a listing of what can be inoperative. The MEL is a derivative document that is unique to the operator that developed it. It CAN NOT contain anything that is not in the MMEL.
The Dispatch Deviation Guide (DDG) or Dispatch Maintenance Procedures (DMP) is used in conjunction with he MEL in order to render an inoperative component or system safe for dispatch. Some MEL items have associated DMP's, some don't. From the MBF B747-400 website:
This document is intended to assist airline operations and maintenance organizations in developing the
procedures required to operate the aircraft in the various nonstandard configurations allowed by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) and the Airplane Flight Manual
(AFM) appendix Configuration Deviation List (CDL).
The CDL (Configuration Deviation List) is a document produced by both the manufacturer and the operator, and approved by the FAA, which allows certain, non-structual components to be missing from the aircraft. Some examples: access panels, flight control seals, fairings, winglets, landing gear doors, etc. These items being missing usually incur a weight of fuel penalty, or both. Not all items that can be missing on one aircraft can be missing on another.
Passengers neither have the knowledge nor expertise to make an informed decision about the airworthy status of an aircraft. If they insisted on some action...they should be free to get off the aircraft and be rebooked, if there is space available, and be charged the appropriate fees/fares.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
: No, it's us on a.net who know best. Let's remember that there are a lot of people out there who have a fear of flying at the best of times (irrationa