MalevTU134
Posts: 2188
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:04 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:05 am

I can't believe the best solution is to strip 40-something belts off another of your aircraft. I mean they were in Chicago, not in The Congo. Couldn't they fly new ones in from the manufacturer? As somebody already asked: what happened to that other plane; the one at JFK? How was that allowed to depart without those seat belts?
 
wjcandee
Posts: 7989
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:48 am

Blows my mind that people who actually know something about aviation are arguing that the FAA should just have let the aircraft go and that they are "being ridiculous" or retaliatory for enforcing a significant safety regulation.

Aircraft parts have tags. For multiple reasons: date of manufacture; proof of origin/authenticity; proof of compliance with particular standards, proof that it's the correct part, and more. If tags are missing or unreadable, the proper thing for the regulator to do is to presume that the part is noncompliant -- maybe not genuine, maybe not proper for this use, maybe past its expiration. A seatbelt in an emergency is subject to extraordinary stress, and failure results in injury.

This wasn't one belt without a tag. This was more than four-dozen. Fifty-six in total. Were some of these belts past expiration and the airline just chose to pull the tags? Were some of these belts off someone's car?

Seriously. If there's a rule that says that this part has to be handled a certain way, and the inspector finds more than four-dozen noncompliant parts in just a quick at-the-gate inspection of the aircraft, it's an enormous red flag.

Are we on this forum qualified to say which rules the inspector is supposed to ignore a flagrant violation of? If the rule is that you don't leave without a functioning first aid kit, should the aircraft go anyway? If the rule says that the aircraft shouldn't leave with an inoperative latch on a hatch, should they speed-tape it and send it on its way if there's no procedure for that?

It is fairly-well established that the MM calls for an inspection of the belt tags every 100 hours (or whatever). If someone was supposed to inspect the belts and signed off on them, and more than four dozen have missing or illegible tags, what else did the person sign off on that they didn't actually inspect?

It seems absurd that anybody would fault the inspector for grounding the aircraft after a cursory inspection of an easy-to-inspect required item reveals not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven, not eight, not nine, not ten, not eleven, not twelve, but fifty-six noncompliant safety-related parts whose failure in an emergency would be hazardous to the passengers.

That this airline is "furious" rather than embarrassed is telling. It speaks of a deficient safety culture. Oh. Wait.

This is the same airline that flew multiple 787s after they were grounded. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424 ... 3919390740

This is the airline that flew an aircraft for an entire 1.5-hour flight without retracting the landing gear, levelling off at FL24 rather than FL35 because the drag so required, diverting because there wasn't enough fuel to reach the destination, and never figuring out that the gear was down until they hit the "gear down" call in the landing procedure. Seriously. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 747345.cms

This is the airline that savaged one of their 787s, leaving it grounded for nine months, because they had cannibalized over 400 parts from it. http://www.firstpost.com/india/air-indi ... 44342.html

Sorry, but with this kind of activity, all reflecting a lack of disciplined operation, when a part doesn't have a tag on it, I'm assuming that someone scavenged it from somewhere improper.

And that's the right move.
 
hayzel777
Posts: 614
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:18 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:11 am

What an airline. Blaming the regulatory agency for doing their jobs. Not surprised that AI failed the inspection.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:33 am

wjcandee wrote:
Blows my mind that people who actually know something about aviation are arguing that the FAA should just have let the aircraft go and that they are "being ridiculous" or retaliatory for enforcing a significant safety regulation.....


I don't think anyone said that. You are just throwing tantrum. Those who are familiar said, this is the equivalent of a busted tail light traffic stop.

There are close to dozen B787s grounded right now across the world for lack of parts. Five years after EIS. There are unsold B788s going to scrappers straight from the factory. AI grounding B787s in 2012 for lack of parts is no big deal. Boeing paid compensation and extended warranty on troubled parts beyond standard four years.

Rockwell is AI's asset/parts manager and AI is also Boeing RES subscriber.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 11:42 am

wjcandee wrote:
Blows my mind that people who actually know something about aviation are arguing that the FAA should just have let the aircraft go and that they are "being ridiculous" or retaliatory for enforcing a significant safety regulation.

Aircraft parts have tags. For multiple reasons: date of manufacture; proof of origin/authenticity; proof of compliance with particular standards, proof that it's the correct part, and more. If tags are missing or unreadable, the proper thing for the regulator to do is to presume that the part is noncompliant -- maybe not genuine, maybe not proper for this use, maybe past its expiration. A seatbelt in an emergency is subject to extraordinary stress, and failure results in injury.

This wasn't one belt without a tag. This was more than four-dozen. Fifty-six in total. Were some of these belts past expiration and the airline just chose to pull the tags? Were some of these belts off someone's car?

Seriously. If there's a rule that says that this part has to be handled a certain way, and the inspector finds more than four-dozen noncompliant parts in just a quick at-the-gate inspection of the aircraft, it's an enormous red flag.

Are we on this forum qualified to say which rules the inspector is supposed to ignore a flagrant violation of? If the rule is that you don't leave without a functioning first aid kit, should the aircraft go anyway? If the rule says that the aircraft shouldn't leave with an inoperative latch on a hatch, should they speed-tape it and send it on its way if there's no procedure for that?

It is fairly-well established that the MM calls for an inspection of the belt tags every 100 hours (or whatever). If someone was supposed to inspect the belts and signed off on them, and more than four dozen have missing or illegible tags, what else did the person sign off on that they didn't actually inspect?

It seems absurd that anybody would fault the inspector for grounding the aircraft after a cursory inspection of an easy-to-inspect required item reveals not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, not six, not seven, not eight, not nine, not ten, not eleven, not twelve, but fifty-six noncompliant safety-related parts whose failure in an emergency would be hazardous to the passengers.

That this airline is "furious" rather than embarrassed is telling. It speaks of a deficient safety culture. Oh. Wait.

This is the same airline that flew multiple 787s after they were grounded. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424 ... 3919390740

This is the airline that flew an aircraft for an entire 1.5-hour flight without retracting the landing gear, levelling off at FL24 rather than FL35 because the drag so required, diverting because there wasn't enough fuel to reach the destination, and never figuring out that the gear was down until they hit the "gear down" call in the landing procedure. Seriously. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 747345.cms

This is the airline that savaged one of their 787s, leaving it grounded for nine months, because they had cannibalized over 400 parts from it. http://www.firstpost.com/india/air-indi ... 44342.html

Sorry, but with this kind of activity, all reflecting a lack of disciplined operation, when a part doesn't have a tag on it, I'm assuming that someone scavenged it from somewhere improper.

And that's the right move.

Well, there is not much information here, and you're also jumping to conclusions. I didn't see any FAA statement yet, and all information we have seems to be third-hand. So far I seen the following reasons:
-tags missing TSO number
-tags missing
-tags worn out.

I doubt any news agency would know about TSO, so most likely that is the official reason. It matches worn-out tag explanation pretty well. "Tags with missing TSO number" can be edited to "tags missing" with quick removal of strange terminology... Assuming that is the case - if that worn-out tag is past design lifetime, manufacturing defect, maintenance neglect or something else is still to be seen.
I would give 50/50 chances to AI issues and FAA power trip, possibly a rehearsal tor Norwegian assault. In either case, we're past 48 hours on the issue, and it hit the news, so FAA has to explain. If no statement from FAA is released by noon, I would say chances are 25% AI fault, 75% FAA fault.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:05 pm

kalvado wrote:
... If no statement from FAA is released by noon, I would say chances are 25% AI fault, 75% FAA fault.


FAA won't release details of ramp inspections, particularly of foreign carriers. If this gets classified as an incident/accident NTSB will investigate and publish a report. Same for any country.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:17 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
kalvado wrote:
... If no statement from FAA is released by noon, I would say chances are 25% AI fault, 75% FAA fault.


FAA won't release details of ramp inspections, particularly of foreign carriers. If this gets classified as an incident/accident NTSB will investigate and publish a report. Same for any country.

Then AI statement of slightly worn tags go uncontested. I have to conclude this is another power trip by US government employee. Been there, seen that. Pay the fine, swear, move on - US is short of money, and every dollar helps to reduce budget deficit.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:31 pm

kalvado wrote:
Then AI statement of slightly worn tags go uncontested. I have to conclude this is another power trip by US government employee. Been there, seen that. Pay the fine, swear, move on - US is short of money, and every dollar helps to reduce budget deficit.


It is within the rights of FAA or any other regulator. Ramp inspections are always touchy topics, particularly for fans. In 2014 when UA EWR-BOM landed with missing/damaged(contested) engine cowl, DGCA did an inspection which led to a write-up on few more things, plane spent a month in HongKong fixing things. Even then fans were complaining why DGCA inspected the plane.

To the disappointment of a.nutters this inspector didn;t find something major.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 12:50 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Then AI statement of slightly worn tags go uncontested. I have to conclude this is another power trip by US government employee. Been there, seen that. Pay the fine, swear, move on - US is short of money, and every dollar helps to reduce budget deficit.


It is within the rights of FAA or any other regulator. Ramp inspections are always touchy topics, particularly for fans. In 2014 when UA EWR-BOM landed with missing/damaged(contested) engine cowl, DGCA did an inspection which led to a write-up on few more things, plane spent a month in HongKong fixing things. Even then fans were complaining why DGCA inspected the plane.

To the disappointment of a.nutters this inspector didn;t find something major.

I do not dispute the right of FAA - or their sister agencies in other countries - to do inspections. In fact, such inspections are a great reason to keep things top notch at all times. But power always comes with responsibility to use it wisely. In this case "wise" part is being disputed. And I would say that given the situation did hit the news, it would be wise of FAA to provide a bit more information. If this is indeed a revenge grounding, as was suggested earlier in the thread, I am with AI and their passengers - who got hit with delay for capricious inspection standards. I would be the first to applaud FAA if same situation was due to a real maintenance problem - as opposed to paperwork/label glitch.
Now, as far as I understand FAA inspectors have no type-specific training, and I am not sure if they have to be certified mechanics. As far as I know, many lower level government positions require high school diploma and citizenship as main qualifiers, with obsession by the letter of paperwork being next biggest criterion. That unfortunately matches with those scary words about "...and I am here to help you"
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:13 pm

kalvado wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Then AI statement of slightly worn tags go uncontested. I have to conclude this is another power trip by US government employee. Been there, seen that. Pay the fine, swear, move on - US is short of money, and every dollar helps to reduce budget deficit.


It is within the rights of FAA or any other regulator. Ramp inspections are always touchy topics, particularly for fans. In 2014 when UA EWR-BOM landed with missing/damaged(contested) engine cowl, DGCA did an inspection which led to a write-up on few more things, plane spent a month in HongKong fixing things. Even then fans were complaining why DGCA inspected the plane.

To the disappointment of a.nutters this inspector didn;t find something major.

I do not dispute the right of FAA - or their sister agencies in other countries - to do inspections. In fact, such inspections are a great reason to keep things top notch at all times. But power always comes with responsibility to use it wisely. In this case "wise" part is being disputed. And I would say that given the situation did hit the news, it would be wise of FAA to provide a bit more information. If this is indeed a revenge grounding, as was suggested earlier in the thread, I am with AI and their passengers - who got hit with delay for capricious inspection standards. I would be the first to applaud FAA if same situation was due to a real maintenance problem - as opposed to paperwork/label glitch.
Now, as far as I understand FAA inspectors have no type-specific training, and I am not sure if they have to be certified mechanics. As far as I know, many lower level government positions require high school diploma and citizenship as main qualifiers, with obsession by the letter of paperwork being next biggest criterion. That unfortunately matches with those scary words about "...and I am here to help you"

I sure am glad you aren't in charge of any safety management programs . You missed the whole point. Your first concern is always the safe operation and airworthiness compliance of the aircraft. If AI had adequately performed their maintenance then the passengers wouldn't have to worry about being delayed. And if you're calling into question the qualifications of the FAA inspectors, I would say they are already more than qualified compared to the AI maintenance team, who couldn't be bothered to comply with on if the smallest requirements. Makes me wonder how they treat torques and safeties in difficult to reach places.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:23 pm

kalvado wrote:
I do not dispute the right of FAA - or their sister agencies in other countries - to do inspections. In fact, such inspections are a great reason to keep things top notch at all times. But power always comes with responsibility to use it wisely. In this case "wise" part is being disputed. And I would say that given the situation did hit the news, it would be wise of FAA to provide a bit more information. If this is indeed a revenge grounding, as was suggested earlier in the thread, I am with AI and their passengers - who got hit with delay for capricious inspection standards. I would be the first to applaud FAA if same situation was due to a real maintenance problem - as opposed to paperwork/label glitch.
Now, as far as I understand FAA inspectors have no type-specific training, and I am not sure if they have to be certified mechanics. As far as I know, many lower level government positions require high school diploma and citizenship as main qualifiers, with obsession by the letter of paperwork being next biggest criterion. That unfortunately matches with those scary words about "...and I am here to help you"


You are reading too much into it. It is in the news because of the delay and media needs some AI story. Not because of FAA inspector doing their job.

Broken tail light cover is not a major safety equipment violation, but still people get tickets for those.

The delay was minimal considering 40+ seat belts were removed from ALJ and it departed on time on 8/4, belts were shipped to ORD and installed on ALK. DL being an AI interline partner helped, so does mx contractors at both ends.

No training or certification is required to be an inspector in this country.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9766
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:33 pm

Dalmd88 wrote:
Some have said it's not important. The tag says it is the correct part. Not some cheap knock off.

I'm sure you can find a guy in chinatown who will get you a cheap knock off with the correct tag :)
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:33 pm

B737900ER wrote:
And if you're calling into question the qualifications of the FAA inspectors, I would say they are already more than qualified compared to the AI maintenance team, who couldn't be bothered to comply with on if the smallest requirements. Makes me wonder how they treat torques and safeties in difficult to reach places.


They are not. AI Engineering has 2000 highly qualified and trained engineers, not two week crash course certificate holders. They can take apart any plane and put it together on their own.

It is ramp inspection, not a D-Check, There are systems to monitor health. Give a rest to your spin. EK is not going to get any mileage out of it.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:56 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:

No training or certification is required to be an inspector in this country.

I think you formulated the take home message of this thread...
 
Antarius
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:56 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
B737900ER wrote:
And if you're calling into question the qualifications of the FAA inspectors, I would say they are already more than qualified compared to the AI maintenance team, who couldn't be bothered to comply with on if the smallest requirements. Makes me wonder how they treat torques and safeties in difficult to reach places.


They are not. AI Engineering has 2000 highly qualified and trained engineers, not two week crash course certificate holders. They can take apart any plane and put it together on their own.

It is ramp inspection, not a D-Check, There are systems to monitor health. Give a rest to your spin. EK is not going to get any mileage out of it.


And these 2000 highly qualified and trained engineers dropped the ball. If there was one or two wrong then maybe you could argue that the FAA was being petulant, but 56 seatbelts is a large number. It is more akin to a bunch of your car lights being out and throwing a hissy fit that you failed state inspection.

Stop trying to make this about your ME3 conspiracy of bad press. This is an embarrassing screw up. Period.
19:SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI BNA
 
Virtual737
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 1:59 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
They can take apart any plane


Yep, seen that.

Sorry, couldn't resist.
 
B737900ER
Posts: 1028
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:26 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:09 pm

You guys are incredible. You'll argue anything just to take a contrarian viewpoint. There's no way you can excuse what AI did. Even though you consider it a small matter, it was still grossly negligent, and you can't argue that. Now if an airline can't even make sure something like a seat belt is airworthy, what do you think they are doing with the hard stuff?
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:17 pm

Antarius wrote:
And these 2000 highly qualified and trained engineers dropped the ball. If there was one or two wrong then maybe you could argue that the FAA was being petulant, but 56 seatbelts is a large number. It is more akin to a bunch of your car lights being out and throwing a hissy fit that you failed state inspection.

Stop trying to make this about your ME3 conspiracy of bad press. This is an embarrassing screw up. Period.


If AI is the first airline in the world to be written-up for worn seat-belt tags, sure I would agree. Who would have guessed an inspector picks on worn tags, not belts.

Like others explained only one side of the belt is tagged, so AI still can buy the other half from local Chinatown. I heard they are good at producing high-quality knock-offs. Or AI can buy just tags and sew them on same belts. Almost all world's most expensive clothes are stitched in India.

I don't have an issue with FAA for calling out AI on this. I have a problem some PR team trying to show AI as unsafe.
 
hoya
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 2:25 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:19 pm

This story reminds of the Van Halen (famous band) story and their "ridiculous" demand that no brown M&Ms be allowed in their backstage room in their bowl of M&Ms. Why did they have such a ridiculous requirement? Because if the people setting up the equipment can't be trusted to read the contract fully and complete the simple task of removing brown M&Ms, then they cannot be trusted to setup all the super expensive and specialized musical equipment on stage. If AI cannot complete such a simple task as ensuring all the seatbelts are in compliance with regulations, what about more complex and demanding regulations? It's called attention to detail, and it's critical in the aviation industry.
Hoya Saxa!!
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 800
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:36 pm

It's in likely that the airplane was actually grounded, more likely is that the FAA said those seats were unable to be occupied without the correct seatbelt tag or being made "inoperative/MELd". Sounds like some of those improper seat belts were on crew seats, so the financial hit may have been too much. But I highly doubt the FAA grounded the airplane, they just said those seats need to be fixed or MELd correctly making it financially unviable to fly the airplane.

Also, why didn't AI ask UA or AA for the parts? They should have tons of extra seat belts, even FA jumpseat sets around ORD, seams a bit over the top to canibqlize another aircraft in a different city when there should be stores on the field.
Boiler Up!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 2:52 pm

What is the rub here.

1) FSI didn't find an engine missing/inop
2) Flight had 100% load, as opposed to 74%
3) Delta rushed to help AI, as opposed to pulling out an installed part.

Other than it is just a teachable moment for FAA and lesson learned for AI.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21747
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:10 pm

B737900ER wrote:
You guys are incredible. You'll argue anything just to take a contrarian viewpoint. There's no way you can excuse what AI did. Even though you consider it a small matter, it was still grossly negligent, and you can't argue that. Now if an airline can't even make sure something like a seat belt is airworthy, what do you think they are doing with the hard stuff?

To me it's just as huge a leap to suggest that if the seat belt tags are worn then there should be concern about how the harder stuff is being handled.

Also if the best way we have for the FAA to monitor how airlines handle the harder stuff is to check the seat belt tags then there's a bigger problem.

Lots of huge leaps being made on this thread.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Virtual737
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:28 pm

Revelation wrote:
To me it's just as huge a leap to suggest that if the seat belt tags are worn then there should be concern about how the harder stuff is being handled.

Also if the best way we have for the FAA to monitor how airlines handle the harder stuff is to check the seat belt tags then there's a bigger problem.

Lots of huge leaps being made on this thread.


These are 2 different things.

Concerns over harder maintenance based on shoddy maintenance of something highly visible is reasonable. It's a concern - it's not saying the harder maintenance MUST be shoddy, but there is good reason to take a closer look.

20% of road accidents are caused by drunk drivers, which means that 80% are caused by sober drivers, so it's safer to drive drunk.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:36 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
To me it's just as huge a leap to suggest that if the seat belt tags are worn then there should be concern about how the harder stuff is being handled.

Also if the best way we have for the FAA to monitor how airlines handle the harder stuff is to check the seat belt tags then there's a bigger problem.

Lots of huge leaps being made on this thread.


These are 2 different things.

Concerns over harder maintenance based on shoddy maintenance of something highly visible is reasonable. It's a concern - it's not saying the harder maintenance MUST be shoddy, but there is good reason to take a closer look.

20% of road accidents are caused by drunk drivers, which means that 80% are caused by sober drivers, so it's safer to drive drunk.

A big issue is that "worn out tag" is a fairly subjective thing. My better part often says that my jeans are too worn out when I feel they are still OK. If she got it her way, I would be buying a new pair once a month...
We have a hard threshold for being drunk, 0.08 whatever those units are. I am not sure if 0.079 vs 0.081would make it or break it on the road, but you need to draw a line for legal action somewhere. And it makes it or breaks it in court. It is easier to draw a line when exact numbers can be measured - but I think that is not the case for the tag...
 
User avatar
glideslope
Posts: 1557
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 8:06 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:49 pm

bennett123 wrote:
IMO, the biggest concern is that so many were missing or unreadable.


Agree. I would be quite concerned about the missing tags.
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:54 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
These are 2 different things.

Concerns over harder maintenance based on shoddy maintenance of something highly visible is reasonable. It's a concern - it's not saying the harder maintenance MUST be shoddy, but there is good reason to take a closer look.

20% of road accidents are caused by drunk drivers, which means that 80% are caused by sober drivers, so it's safer to drive drunk.


Are you suggesting FSI spent all the time just checking 340 tags and ignored major issues??? Imagine how monotonous and time consuming checking 340 tags.

No one drinking the Koolaid you are serving.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:01 pm

glideslope wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
IMO, the biggest concern is that so many were missing or unreadable.


Agree. I would be quite concerned about the missing tags.

Since nobody has exact wording of FAA order, we have to go with AI comments:
The American air safety regulator on Friday stopped an Air India aircraft to take off as scheduled from Chicago for India due to missing tag numbers from several seat belts.
[..]
An airline spokesman said: "The seat belts were perfectly fine. Only some had tags worn out. This is an instance of impractical or irrelevant stipulations being imposed on Air India by FAA. However, we would take necessary action to ensure such things don't recur. A lot of new seat belts have been ordered."

I still don't understand if tags were missing, damaged or something else.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:06 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
These are 2 different things.

Concerns over harder maintenance based on shoddy maintenance of something highly visible is reasonable. It's a concern - it's not saying the harder maintenance MUST be shoddy, but there is good reason to take a closer look.

20% of road accidents are caused by drunk drivers, which means that 80% are caused by sober drivers, so it's safer to drive drunk.


Are you suggesting FSI spent all the time just checking 340 tags and ignored major issues??? Imagine how monotonous and time consuming checking 340 tags.

No one drinking the Koolaid you are serving.


Says the man spouting ME3 conspiracy theories left and right.

The above point stands.. 56 out of 340 seat belts were deemed defective by the FAA. What else is wrong that isn't just visible?

This coupled with the steady stream of stories such as not retracting landing gears etc. Makes me personally question ever flying AI again. Will stick to 6E or 9W next time I have to visit.
19:SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI BNA
 
Virtual737
Posts: 628
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:19 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
These are 2 different things.

Concerns over harder maintenance based on shoddy maintenance of something highly visible is reasonable. It's a concern - it's not saying the harder maintenance MUST be shoddy, but there is good reason to take a closer look.

20% of road accidents are caused by drunk drivers, which means that 80% are caused by sober drivers, so it's safer to drive drunk.


Are you suggesting FSI spent all the time just checking 340 tags and ignored major issues??? Imagine how monotonous and time consuming checking 340 tags.

No one drinking the Koolaid you are serving.


No I'm not. I'm suggesting that if you've already seen a significant lapse in one area then it would be reasonable to look at other areas. Nothing more, nothing less.

Get it yet, with or without Koolaid?
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:20 pm

Antarius wrote:
Says the man spouting ME3 conspiracy theories left and right.

The above point stands.. 56 out of 340 seat belts were deemed defective by the FAA. What else is wrong that isn't just visible?

This coupled with the steady stream of stories such as not retracting landing gears etc. Makes me personally question ever flying AI again. Will stick to 6E or 9W next time I have to visit.


Last line of your post proves first line of your post. No one is asking you to buy or sell AI tickets. Peddle whatever suits you.

If you have any clue how modern aircraft work, most of the health checks are done by computers and displays on flight deck or a connected laptop will show what is wrong. Visual part is a very minimalism portion of .overall checks.

B787 health monitoring is even advanced, health data gets transmitted to dedicated B787 IT servers at airline, get replicated to Boeing and FAA has direct access.

AI cannot stop if FAA want to take apart their plane, as long as they know how to reassemble it.

You guys should get updated talking points from your client, repeating same old level 7 temper tantrums are not cutting it.
 
Aptivaboy
Posts: 804
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:32 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:21 pm

The above point stands.. 56 out of 340 seat belts were deemed defective by the FAA. What else is wrong that isn't just visible?


Concur. I sincerely doubt that the FAA simply got a burr up it's collective butt and decided to drop the hammer on AI out of the wild blue yonder. One wonders what else is perhaps questionable that the FAA flagged before, and if this wasn't simply the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
 
indcwby
Posts: 318
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 7:32 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:25 pm

Isn't this the same Air India that used a new 787 for spare parts? May not be against regulations (that I'm not aware of) but then when you are on record to do that as seen with pulling seatbelts from another aircraft in JFK, why shouldn't the FAA have a concerned about worn parts and where they come from. Isn't that the whole point of the tag to track?
A319, A320, A330, A340, B717, B727, B737, B747, B757, B767, B777, CRJ7, DC10, MD88, MD11, E145, E175
"Always remember that you fly an airplane with your head, not your hands."
 
kalvado
Posts: 2108
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:39 pm

indcwby wrote:
Isn't this the same Air India that used a new 787 for spare parts? May not be against regulations (that I'm not aware of) but then when you are on record to do that as seen with pulling seatbelts from another aircraft in JFK, why shouldn't the FAA have a concerned about worn parts and where they come from. Isn't that the whole point of the tag to track?

We do hear once in a while that relatively new plane was written off since it was worth more in parts than as a flying frame. Current pricing policies often make parts and consumables a major source of revenue.
Well off-topic example, but inkjet printers were often sold at a loss, with ink cartridges being priced for profit.
So buying a brand new frame for parts may seem extreme, but may make financial sense in some cases...
 
VolvoBus
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 5:43 pm

Re-reading the original article, 44 passenger and 12 crew seats were non-compliant. How many crew seats and crew does a 787 have ? It seems that the only way the flight could have operated was by bumping passengers to provide compliant seats.

I can envisage a scenario where the FAA inspectors got on,checked the nearest 2 seats (crew) ,found them non-compliant, so looked more closely at the opposite seats and found them non-compliant. If you go 0 for 4 at the start of a safety inspection, it invites closer inspection.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 5:50 pm

VolvoBus wrote:
Re-reading the original article, 44 passenger and 12 crew seats were non-compliant. How many crew seats and crew does a 787 have ? It seems that the only way the flight could have operated was by bumping passengers to provide compliant seats.

I can envisage a scenario where the FAA inspectors got on,checked the nearest 2 seats (crew) ,found them non-compliant, so looked more closely at the opposite seats and found them non-compliant. If you go 0 for 4 at the start of a safety inspection, it invites closer inspection.


The a/c in question was a 777. Usually there are 12-15 crew on a longhaul 77W. Sounds like most (if not all) seats were inop.
19:SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI BNA
 
VolvoBus
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 5:47 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:08 pm

Antarius wrote:
VolvoBus wrote:
Re-reading the original article, 44 passenger and 12 crew seats were non-compliant. How many crew seats and crew does a 787 have ? It seems that the only way the flight could have operated was by bumping passengers to provide compliant seats.

I can envisage a scenario where the FAA inspectors got on,checked the nearest 2 seats (crew) ,found them non-compliant, so looked more closely at the opposite seats and found them non-compliant. If you go 0 for 4 at the start of a safety inspection, it invites closer inspection.


The a/c in question was a 777. Usually there are 12-15 crew on a longhaul 77W. Sounds like most (if not all) seats were inop.


Thanks for the correction.

How long before we see AI's unions going public about 'AI's cavalier attitude to crew safety' ?
 
User avatar
litz
Posts: 2302
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2003 6:01 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:28 pm

I had a passenger train held up once because a FRA inspector discovered a grab iron (the handle things next to the doors on the train) was 1/8" too close to the carbody. Had to hold up departure until -- literally -- someone ran to Ace Hardware for two fender washers to install under the feet of the grab iron.

That's how anal a Federal Inspector can be.

(thank goodness in the railroad world, we don't have to have certified parts like aviation).
 
ckfred
Posts: 5155
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2001 12:50 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:00 pm

Several years ago, my wife was booked on what is now Envoy from ORD to ATL. One of the stickers had come off. The sticker, on the wind, shows where passengers climbing out of window exit are to step, when moving on the wing during evacuation. Maintenance could not find a sticker anywhere at ORD, and the flight was scrubbed. A sticker was going to be flown into ORD later in the day from the Envoy maintenance base.

A friend of mine is a pilot with AA. He once had a 757 departure that was canceled, because the exterior sticker underneath one of the cockpit window that opens had come off, and Maintenance could not find another sticker to apply.

FAA rules can seem very, very picky, but they have to be followed. If they aren't, an airline risks fines and other forms of punishment.
 
Dalmd88
Posts: 2951
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 3:19 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 7:48 pm

So many in this thread think the FAA is picking on AI over this little seatbelt issue. Nope, Like I said before. THIS IS A COMMON FAA FINDING! Usually it is only one or two seats, but 12 CREW seats, that should be found on a maintenance layover check. These along with placards are the things FAA inspectors regularly find wrong.
 
Canuck600
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:13 pm

It's not just the FAA that are picky all Regulators/Inspectors are supposed to be thorough. It's when they are not thorough enough that problems start to arise. Lack of thoroughness can be because the agency isn't staffed well enough or there is pressure from higher levels of government to "go easy" on certain carriers because of political influence.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:43 pm

There are two things that make this whole situation baffling and scary

1. 16% of the seatbelts had tag issues. So this isn't a one off, two off issue. It is systematic
2. AI has a small fleet (119 aircrafts if I am not mistaken). That is roughly 10% of that of American Airlines or 16% of Southwest. The number of incidents for such a small fleet is also concerning.
19:SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI BNA
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:19 pm

Antarius wrote:
There are two things that make this whole situation baffling and scary

1. 16% of the seatbelts had tag issues. So this isn't a one off, two off issue. It is systematic
2. AI has a small fleet (119 aircrafts if I am not mistaken). That is roughly 10% of that of American Airlines or 16% of Southwest. The number of incidents for such a small fleet is also concerning.


Most of your data and math is wrong and you have no clue how many times and how much FAA fined US carriers.

Why don't you list #1 Incidents/accidents AI had and #2 How many times a foreign CAA called out, not just FAA, #Fines it paid, go broad, including worldwide?

Barring an actual list, it is just a tantrum.
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:45 pm

Sometimes the trigger for scrutiny comes from unlikely sources. Like when financier / leasor condition inspection report comments are ignored, the next step can be a chat to regulators.
 
jagraham
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 11:10 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:12 pm

mozart wrote:
jumbojet wrote:

doesn't change the fact that Delta helped, rescued, whatever verb you want to use, get AI X # of parts from point A to point B.


Except that verbs like "rescue" and "help" are misleading and frankly a little ridiculous. They imply that Delta has done something that is outside its normal business procedure, when all they did is transport some freight on one of its flights. Pretty much what an airline does, isn't it? Unless you call "rescue" when they transport a piece of luggage that you check in (and pay for one way or another). I would call it transport.



Agreed. If Delta even raised the price over the published schedule it would be gouging.

If Delta went into its own inventory and came up with some seatbelts, that is another matter entirely. It's quite doubtful AI has maintenance supplies in the USA.
 
abul1988
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:12 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Mon Aug 07, 2017 10:28 pm

the tags are probably needed to check manufacture and expiration dates and all other pertinent details. AI can only blame itself, as it failed this simple routine check. This is a quality assurance issue, a big one at that with 56 seats failing including crew seats. How can something so easy be overlooked, AI mgmt need to have a word with their maintenance supervisor.
 
7673mech
Posts: 522
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 10:10 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:01 am

For anyone trying to minimize the finding .... The TSO tags are required to be there, legible and not frayed.
These not wear or disappear overnight. The carrier or their maintenance provider are not doing their job.
The FAA is picking on no one.
Typically this happens when the carrier is previously warned and chooses not to act.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Tue Aug 08, 2017 1:41 am

Next - incidents.

1.All toilets inop - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi ... 611352.cms
2. Pilots forget to retract landing gear - http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... ding-gear/
3. Aircraft veers off runway - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... t-4653118/
4. The numerous B787 issues (IIRC AI has the lowest dispatch reliability of the type globally)
5. Pilot falls asleep - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/ ... ndia-crash
6. AI jet intercepted - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... re-safety/
7. This issue from this thread

These are the ones I remember at the top of my head. For a 119 fleet airline that has generally low utilization rate of aircraft, it seems like my concern is warranted.
19:SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI BNA
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7221
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:19 am

Antarius wrote:
Next - incidents.

1.All toilets inop - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi ... 611352.cms
2. Pilots forget to retract landing gear - http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... ding-gear/
3. Aircraft veers off runway - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... t-4653118/
4. The numerous B787 issues (IIRC AI has the lowest dispatch reliability of the type globally)
5. Pilot falls asleep - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/ ... ndia-crash
6. AI jet intercepted - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... re-safety/
7. This issue from this thread

These are the ones I remember at the top of my head. For a 119 fleet airline that has generally low utilization rate of aircraft, it seems like my concern is warranted.


Is that the best you can do? Take 24 hrs and come back with a detailed list. I will hold my response until then.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1758
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:35 am

No thanks Lalit Bhanot.

Your AI defense is tiresome. Try a real airline for once and report back- it's refreshing. So many to choose from - SQ, CX, QR etc.

For those of us with no agenda, the seat belt tag issue on SO many seats is concerning. It may not be for you. Have fun with that.
19:SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS DOH BLR KTM MFM MEX MSY BWI BNA
 
GoSharks
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:23 am

Re: FAA bars AI 126 ORD-DEL from flying

Tue Aug 08, 2017 2:36 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
Antarius wrote:
Next - incidents.

1.All toilets inop - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi ... 611352.cms
2. Pilots forget to retract landing gear - http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/ ... ding-gear/
3. Aircraft veers off runway - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... t-4653118/
4. The numerous B787 issues (IIRC AI has the lowest dispatch reliability of the type globally)
5. Pilot falls asleep - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/ ... ndia-crash
6. AI jet intercepted - http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... re-safety/
7. This issue from this thread

These are the ones I remember at the top of my head. For a 119 fleet airline that has generally low utilization rate of aircraft, it seems like my concern is warranted.


Is that the best you can do? Take 24 hrs and come back with a detailed list. I will hold my response until then.

Those 7 are enough to convince me that AI has a safety problem.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos