FXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7469 posts, RR: 80 Posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1448 times:
AA 92 blew out a left side aft fuel boost last week en route to Dublin. This a/c was in TUL for mx 3 days prior and they neglected to replace the pump because of the cost. Good call, diverting the a/c to JFK, burning fuel, and putting up 200 passengers overnight. AA 48 dropped a chunk of the external skin on take off. An AA 738 was grounded at MIA a few days ago because they didn't have a spare tire. Six cancelled segments that day and all the lost revenue. FX and UA don't get to keep many spare parts at outstations anymore. FX had two DC10s go down tonight cause of failed hydraulic lines. Down long enough to splice together some line from another a/c. Two more sub a/c and all that time and hourly wage to trans-load freight - wasted. All the neglected AA S80s, chalk up the UA 772 that was taking the press to Europe to follow President Bush that diverted for mx. WN getting fined for failed inspections.
The list is endless and your comments are welcome.
Do you expect an airline to stock hydraulic lines at every station? Flexible lines are stocked in various sizes and lengths in the hope that the line that fails is of the proper size. Can't possibly stock the right combination for every line.
Poop happens everyday in this industry. Airplanes are OOS everyday for the most mundane issues. There is a greater awareness in the media of even the smallest bump now days because of the SWA and AA AD thing, but I'll submit...the same number of issues occur today that occurred yesterday.
FXramper From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 7469 posts, RR: 80
Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1414 times:
Read another email a bit ago - AA is doing FAA required checks and inspections on 35 of their AB6. I'm not sure if this is there entire fleet of Airbus, but AMR stated it won't effect A300 flights like the S80 did.
Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 1): Do you know the specifics of your "charges"?
I was told, it is stocked in bulk and cut to appropriate fit. They won't let hubs and major outstations keep it on hand anymore. Must contact supplier and wait a few weeks to receive now. Another cut-cost, which is why it was brought up.
I'm not a A&P, but I chat with enough of them, from multiple airlines, to know for certain - yesterday isn't today in the airline industry.
Dl757md From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1562 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1408 times:
Quoting FXramper (Thread starter): AA 92 blew out a left side aft fuel boost last week en route to Dublin. This a/c was in TUL for mx 3 days prior and they neglected to replace the pump because of the cost.
You know that this pump wasn't replaced due to cost how?
Quoting FXramper (Thread starter): An AA 738 was grounded at MIA a few days ago because they didn't have a spare tire.
Quoting FXramper (Thread starter): FX had two DC10s go down tonight cause of failed hydraulic lines. Down long enough to splice together some line from another a/c.
It's been well documented on these forums and in the news, both mainstream and aviation, that AA's problems with Md-80 wiring AD compliance and subsequent inspections were an issue of FAA incompetence, not neglect on AA's part.
Don't have a rebuttal for that one. WN seems to have mis-interpretted what they were allowed to do with their airplanes that were overdue AD required inspections. I don't think though that it was cost-driven.
Quoting FXramper (Thread starter): chalk up the UA 772 that was taking the press to Europe to follow President Bush that diverted for mx.
Happens everyday, just not in such a high profile arena.
Yup, and so are the flight ops. As long as airplanes are flying they are going to break. Get over it.
As for low spare part inventories, in today's economic environment, it's going to happen....a lot. It's called JIT or just in time inventory. It doesn't work very well but everybody does it so it must be good. As the cost of oil spirals upward it's going to get worse.
Consider this. In 2007 there were no scheduled air carrier fatalities. Is the system perfect? No. Is there room for improvement? Yes. Do we need to sensationalize every unscheduled maintenance event at U.S. air carriers by crying neglect? Absolutely not.
Fr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 6334 posts, RR: 16
Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1357 times:
Quoting FXramper (Reply 4): If they do it to save a dime and in the process are neglecting passenger safety; yes.
I can't speak for any airline but mine and the little world I control. I do not allow skimping on maintenance. If I become aware mechanics moving an unsafe aircraft, I hammer them. If I find out one of my supervisors is pushing it, I hammer him.
Look, all airlines are looking to save money, but it's up to the individual mechanic to do it right.
Stocking parts and materials at various stations...that has always been a balance. The airline does a cost/benefit analysis and some risk assessment and management and rolls the dice. We deal with it.