User avatar
eksath
Crew
Posts: 1295
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:19 am

Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Sun Nov 11, 2007 11:59 pm

"It’s not clear what the big deal was. It was only part of the wing.

But SriLankan Airlines passengers said there was no way they were flying without it.

Britain’s Daily Mail reported that after an airliner lost its wingtip in a runway collision at London’s Heathrow Airport, passengers rebelled and said they weren’t getting back onboard.

"

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/in...l/europe/view.bg?articleid=1042668

"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."

[Edited 2007-11-11 16:35:46]
World Wide Aerospace Photography
 
wirelock
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:55 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:02 am

its allowed on the a320 to fly without a wing tip. Maybe is the same for an A340. A check in the CDL should be able to confirm if this is possible
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:07 am

Didn't we have a long discussion about this a week ago??
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
OB1504
Posts: 2985
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:10 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:16 am

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 2):
Didn't we have a long discussion about this a week ago??

Yes, but that was concerning the British Airways 747 involved in the accident.
 
Dakar
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:11 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:26 am

Is this considered part of the MEL, CDL, or neither?

Oops, I guess I should have asked this first, was it the winglet or the actual wingtip itself? I guess a portion of the wing would fall under MEL/CDL, but wouldn't a winglet?

[Edited 2007-11-11 16:29:19]

[Edited 2007-11-11 16:31:39]
 
JRadier
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 11:36 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:28 am

I believe a winglet on the A330/A340 is not on the MEL (Minimum Equipment List) so you can fly without it. You take a drag (and thus fuelusage) penalty though
For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
 
User avatar
eksath
Crew
Posts: 1295
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:19 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:39 am

http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...d=536885538&filename=phpYhnaFT.jpg
Here is the wingtip post incident. It is likely that engineering REMOVED it due to damage sustaied before the incident noted in the first post.
World Wide Aerospace Photography
 
NorthstarBoy
Posts: 1416
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 12:53 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:39 am

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?
Yes, I'd like to see airbus go under so Boeing can have their customers!
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:13 am

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.

Tom.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:37 am

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.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
LAXspotter
Posts: 3227
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 4:16 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:41 am

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 2):
Didn't we have a long discussion about this a week ago??

so the Passengers think they know the best about their safety?  scratchchin 
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:49 am

Quoting LAXspotter (Reply 11):
so the Passengers think they know the best about their safety?

Hey, this is an age where unmanned drones crash because of pilot error. Aviation can't win any battles, might as well let the passengers have their day.
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 5:24 am

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.

Tom.
 
sq452
Posts: 993
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 4:49 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:44 am

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.
SIN > CVG > BOS
 
Geo772
Posts: 439
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 11:40 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:09 am

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 13):
The engines are not on the MEL. That means you cannot dispatch with an inoperative engine.

Except in unusual circumstances such as a 3 engine ferry flight on a jumbo. This of course is non-revenue.
Flown on A300B4/600,A319/20/21,A332/3,A343,B727,B732/3/4/5/6/7/8,B741/2/4,B752/3,B762/3,B772/3,DC10,L1011-200,VC10,MD80,
 
wirelock
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:55 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:25 am

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
Posts: 1293
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 10:41 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:37 am

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).
Demand Media fails at life
 
Burkhard
Posts: 1916
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:34 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 9:03 am

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.
 
justplanecrazy
Posts: 528
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 11:26 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:10 am

i would be more concerned about wether the wing has been weakened by the collision and not at all bothered by the wing tip missing.
your pilots today on this 747 flight are captain oliver hardy and assisting will be FO stan laurel.Have a safe flight
 
aerofede
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2006 9:33 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:25 am

Better to fly with a winglet missing, than not having an airplane flying (thus not producing any revenue) at all.

In MXP I have seen a couple of times a Royal Air Maroc 744 fly without a winglets.
After all safety check are done, only a performance penalty remains.
 
bluewhale18210
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:23 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:28 am

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
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:59 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:14 pm

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?!
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:18 pm

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 13):



Quoting Graphic (Reply 17):

I hate to be "that guy" but I think you have it backwards.

MMEL:
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

MEL:
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.

Here's the source that has this info...
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache...ment+list&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=8&gl=us
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
remcor
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:30 pm

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.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6606
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:18 pm

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 22):

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:

Document Purpose
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.

Quoting Remcor (Reply 23):

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.
 
YYZYYT
Posts: 899
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:41 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:24 pm

Quoting LAXspotter (Reply 10):
Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 2):
Didn't we have a long discussion about this a week ago??

so the Passengers think they know the best about their safety?

No, it's us on a.net who know best.

Quoting Remcor (Reply 23):
oting 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.

Let's remember that there are a lot of people out there who have a fear of flying at the best of times (irrational as it may be). For some, it doesn't take much to convince them that the aircraft is unsafe. I see no harm in letting them off a flight if they are uncertain, and I'm sure any airline would accomodate.
 
michlis
Posts: 696
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:13 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 2:25 pm

Quoting Remcor (Reply 23):
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?

 checkmark 
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
 
wirelock
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:55 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:54 pm

Quoting Michlis (Reply 26):



Quoting Michlis (Reply 26):
Quoting Remcor (Reply 23):
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?


well in this case, if the airplane was taxiing off the centre line then the pilot has to answer. However if the pilot of the 340 was taxiing normally then the airport authorities are at fault for parking the 747 in the wrong position and then taxiing the 340 past it.
nothing wrong with letting passengers off, however if an engineer has released the aircraft then he must have signed off an inspection as per AMM and removed the damaged winglet as per CDL. If this is all written in the tech log, i would have no problem flying in this aircraft.
 
LH526
Crew
Posts: 1960
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2000 2:23 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:00 pm

taking away the "we are oh so knowledgabel average crowd" .. here's a scan of an A330s CDL that shoudl clear the problem:





Mario
LH526
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4275
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:14 pm

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. You take a drag (and thus fuelusage) penalty though


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rotate



YOWza
 
Boeingluvr
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:56 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 4:31 pm

Although the plane may be able to fly without that part of the wing, it's still perception. If there are pax that don't want to fly, which maybe should have been forseen, these pax should be reacommidated and everyone should be given the option of reaccomidation or to fly on that a/c. Just my personal opinion.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 5:38 pm

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 24):
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.

I agree with that. It's the MEL we are figuring out.

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 24):
It is not a listing of the minimum equipment required to operate the aircraft.

Never said the MMEL was, I said the MEL was.

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 24):
The MEL is a derivative document that is unique to the operator that developed it.

Correct. So do you agree with what I posted....

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 22):
the MEL identifies what must be operative.

???
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
arv79
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 3:57 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 5:50 pm

Forgive me if this question has been asked before. When the winglet has been removed, how is the wingtip capped? Also I assume the winglet assembly does not contain the nav light.
 
fr8mech
Posts: 6606
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 9:00 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:35 pm

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 31):

Not to spin this off completely, but have you ever seen an MEL or MMEL? I work with them all the time. They are in the same format and have the same information. An airline chooses what it wants in its MEL. It picks from the MMEL. The wording is exactly the same, for the most part. In short, the MMEL and the MEL are the same document except as to the amount of content. One does not tell you what can be inoperative and the other tell you what has to be operative. They serve the same function. The MEL tells you what can be inoperative on an aircraft and not remove the aircraft from service.
When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
 
SBBRTech
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 2:32 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:47 pm

Quoting Lh526 (Reply 28):

This is what they should have handled to each pax before telling them to shut up!
"I'm beginning to get the hang of this flying business" - C3PO
 
Cingularity
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:44 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:08 pm

I have been studying commercial airliners, airlines, and the industry in general for about 20 years. I don't pretend to know everything but I also am not a "misinformed passenger". I still wouldn't want to fly on that plane even though it probably wouldn't have a significant impact on safety. If both winglets were removed, I would have felt more comfortable.
Aviat & AviaProgress only exist in my head. A flight of fantasy.
 
wirelock
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:55 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:42 pm

Quoting Boeingluvr (Reply 30):
Although the plane may be able to fly without that part of the wing, it's still perception. If there are pax that don't want to fly, which maybe should have been forseen, these pax should be reacommidated and everyone should be given the option of reaccomidation or to fly on that a/c. Just my personal opinion.

planes fly all the time with different parts, systems either inop or working with reduced capability. however people like urself and millions of other passengers fly on these aircraft everyday. because you can see the defect doesn't really give you an excuse to expect the airline to accomodate you. If the aircraft has been released by an engineer and accepted by a pilot then that is that. if you choose not to fly then it is your own choice and you should not expect to accomodated by an airline in any way IMO.
 
futurecaptain
Posts: 1918
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:54 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:45 pm

Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 33):
Not to spin this off completely, but have you ever seen an MEL or MMEL?

Nope, never seen one. But from what I read they seem like very different documents. Hence the confusion.

MMEL:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 22):
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

MEL:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 22):
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;
AirSO. ASpaceO. ASOnline. ASO.com ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO. ASO.
 
wirelock
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:55 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:56 pm

Quoting Arv79 (Reply 32):
Forgive me if this question has been asked before. When the winglet has been removed, how is the wingtip capped? Also I assume the winglet assembly does not contain the nav light.

High speed tape would used to cover the gap where the wing and the winglet are attached. then the strobe and the nav light missing would be released IAW MEL. CAT C i suspect. The winglet would have to be replaced ASAP. in this case the plane would be returning to home base so i expect the part is waiting there when the plane arrives back
 
MD11Engineer
Posts: 13916
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 5:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:40 pm

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 37):
MEL:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 22):
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;

Just believe the people who are using these documents everyday. The MEL lists those parts which are allowed to be inoperative or missing on an aircraft and the conditions under which they can be missing (e.g. maximum time limits, operational limits, rquired maintenance action before dispatch etc.) while keeping the airplane airworthy.
What is not listed in the MEL is either too important to be missing, e.g. wings installed two; required for dispatch: two. or it is peanuts like "coffee stain on cabin carpet".
Generally, as long as it is not a trivial, cosmetic item, if it is not listed in the MEL it is not dispatcheable.

Jan
Je Suis Charlie et je suis Ahmet aussi
 
aviateur
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:54 pm

For what it's worth, this wouldn't be an MEL stipulation, it'd be a *CDL* stipulation.

In any case, the poster above makes a good point with respect to public perception and PR. If a carrier is going to do this, it needs to be very thorough in how it explains the situation to customers and the media.

- PS
Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:58 pm

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. You take a drag (and thus fuelusage) penalty though

Its like refusing to get in a car because theres no spoiler on the boot.
 
FlyDeltaJets87
Posts: 4479
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:51 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:00 pm

Quoting Eksath (Thread starter):

Guess he shouldn't fly us then. We don't even require all the engines to be working.

Signed,
British Airways.

 duck   wink 

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. You take a drag (and thus fuelusage) penalty though

The airline may have decided it was cheaper to take the penalty and replace the winglet at its home maintenance facility than the costs associated with delays, plus ferrying a winglet in.



I will say that the passengers skepticisms, even if misguided, are not unjust.
"Let's Roll"- Todd Beamer, United Airlines Flight 93, Sept. 11, 2001
 
remcor
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 9:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:18 pm

I think a lot of us are talking at cross-purposes here. There are two issues:
1. whether the aircraft is truly safe or not
2. placating understandably nervous passengers

Based on what people are saying it sounds like the aircraft was safe to fly, but I fully understand some passengers not trusting what the airline says in regards to this when the damage is still visible. Despite actually being a safe aircraft these passengers undoubtedly have undergone a lot of inconvenience (hours of delays, I'm sure) and at least a little bit of trauma. Charging a change fee for those passengers who still feel unsure about boarding a plane with such visible damage would be nothing but crass. If that happened to me I'd probably board the plane and trust things would be ok, but if I felt like i was forced to board it or incur a fee I'd never want to fly that airline again.
 
virgin747
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 1999 12:20 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:55 pm

ha! they should have seen the A380 a few weeks ago after that incident where it hit the hangar. It flew without its wingtip. And in 2004 Air Canada's symphony of voices lost its wingtip after being hit by a fuel truck.
 
aviateur
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:15 am

Quoting Remcor (Reply 43):
Based on what people are saying it sounds like the aircraft was safe to fly, but I fully understand some passengers not trusting what the airline says in regards to this when the damage is still visible. Despite actually being a safe aircraft these passengers undoubtedly have undergone a lot of inconvenience (hours of delays, I'm sure) and at least a little bit of trauma. Charging a change fee for those passengers who still feel unsure about boarding a plane with such visible damage would be nothing but crass.

I disagree. Why should an airline be forced to placate passengers who are being unreasonable? Provided the airline offers a thorough and accurate explanation, the onus then falls to the customer. That people are, on the whole, uneasy about flying is not reason enough to give in to irrational behavior.

- PS
Patrick Smith is an airline pilot, air travel columnist and author
 
wirelock
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:55 pm

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:45 am

Quoting Cingularity (Reply 35):
I still wouldn't want to fly on that plane even though it probably wouldn't have a significant impact on safety. If both winglets were removed, I would have felt more comfortable.

If both winglets are removed then that aircraft goes nowhere!!
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:15 am



Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 22):
MMEL:
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

MEL:
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..

I work with both documents every day. The MEL and the MMEL contain exactly the same kind of data. Although the definitions you posted from the CAA are technically accurate, they suggest a difference between the two documents that doesn't actually exist.

The MMEL comes from the manufacturer. The operator is allowed to modify the MMEL to create the MEL, which is what is actually used for operations. They both list exactly the same kind of data: what equipment you can fly with while inoperative. Neither document lists the stuff you have to have.

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 24):
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.

This is correct. The MEL can be more restrictive than the MMEL, but never less (since the MMEL is part of type design).

Tom.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3939
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:36 am

While I completely understand that passengers might feel uneasy about getting back on a plane that was just in a collision, (no matter how minor), it is, ultimately, up to the airline, (and governing authorities), to decide whether or not the plane is airworthy.

If it has been inspected and deemed airworthy, that's all the obligation the airline needs to fulfil. Of course, from a customer service standpoint, that's a very shortsighted view.

Placating passengers is something that an airline has to deal with every day. In my opinion, most airlines don't seem to do a very good job at it.
What the...?
 
User avatar
eksath
Crew
Posts: 1295
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:19 am

RE: Passengers Refuse To Fly Without A 340 Wingtip.

Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:49 am

here is the wingtip in question


Sri Lankan A 340 wingtip damage after minor mishap.


Ok..I tried to make the image show up because it did happen last time I posted it. I guess this works! Great!

[Edited 2007-11-12 20:50:27]

[Edited 2007-11-12 20:51:28]
World Wide Aerospace Photography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AC_B777, Baidu [Spider], bayouflyer, Bing [Bot], FLIHGH, IPFreely, klkla, N809FR, psimpson, Ulsterman81, ZKLOU and 187 guests