AA Up To 30 Rows Of Seats On 757 Not Secured

ripcordd · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:14 pm

I can tell you that it is not Sabotage by AA employees once again AA employees put their very own familes on those planes. I think the FAA will come out with the answer to this problem. And if AA was not locked up with all their own labor problems this would barley make the news.

[Edited 2012-10-02 14:37:35]

ikramerica · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:20 pm

Quoting ripcordd (Reply 52):
I can tell you that it is not Sabotage my AA employees once again AA employees put their very own familes on those planes. I think the FAA will come out with the answer to this problem. And if AA was not locked up with all their own labor problems this would barley make the news.

True, but a loose seat isn't exactly the most dangerous thing in the world. It's more likely to either be a nuisance or cause a cancelation, both of which would be a believable action by an overly aggressive employee with a beef, union or no.

According to AA, it's a systematic failure of the cabin installation process. So it doesn't sound like anyone is at fault who actually does the install, but someone who came up with the procedure, authorized the use of the part, etc.

aluminumtubing · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:20 pm

This is just sensationalism by the media. Real surprise there. Just another beat up on AA story to sell ads. I am sure as well, that as soon as the FAA checks all this out, that there will be a "rational" explanation to all this.

I can assure anyone interested, that AA has the best damn mechanics who do a superb job day in and day out. Nights too for that matter.

I would put my mother in law on any aircraft we operate. Ok, maybe that wasn't very convincing. I would put my kids on any aircraft we operate any time.

Cubsrule · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:31 pm

Quoting N737AA (Reply 49):
Some of the best mechanics I have seen have been at the MRO's, but AA has some really good mechanic's also. Where you work isn't an indication of how good of a mechanic you are.

This is an excellent point and why I think the "outsourced" versus "in house" maintenance distinction doesn't really have any place in this discussion. There's no empirical evidence on which I am aware that in house maintenance at AA or anywhere else does a better job than outsourced mechanics. If AA was flying planes to LH Technik, that's "outsourcing," but I'm pretty comfortable saying the quality of the work would not go down and might even go up some. It is AA management's responsibility to make sure that maintenance/overhaul work gets done correctly regardless of who does it. Ultimately, this reflects poorly on management.

trnswrld · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:31 pm

I have never hesitated taking myself and family on American Airlines aircraft and I will continue to use them if air travel is required. I wouldnt hesitate flying on ANY U.S. major carrier.

norcal · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:34 pm

Quoting AA94 (Reply 51):
AA has just announced the cause of the seat disconnect as a "faulty saddle clamp," and noted that these clamps are found on 47 757s currently flying. Full statement below.

Faulty saddle clamp from company PR department, I hope everyone who accused the TWU of sabotage offers an apology

aluminumtubing · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:36 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 55):
Quoting N737AA (Reply 49):
Some of the best mechanics I have seen have been at the MRO's, but AA has some really good mechanic's also. Where you work isn't an indication of how good of a mechanic you are.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 55):
This is an excellent point and why I think the "outsourced" versus "in house" maintenance distinction doesn't really have any place in this discussion. There's no empirical evidence on which I am aware that in house maintenance at AA or anywhere else does a better job than outsourced mechanics. If AA was flying planes to LH Technik, that's "outsourcing," but I'm pretty comfortable saying the quality of the work would not go down and might even go up some. It is AA management's responsibility to make sure that maintenance/overhaul work gets done correctly regardless of who does it. Ultimately, this reflects poorly on management.

The issue is not so much the outsourcing of maintenance in general. I have had a number of Fed's in the jumpseat who all agree that the big problem is that more and more maintenance is going out to some less than stellar operations in countries that have not always had the best reputations and that they do not have the manpower available to oversee those operations and the airline personnel that are in charge of those programs.

Cubsrule · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:39 pm

Quoting aluminumtubing (Reply 58):
I have had a number of Fed's in the jumpseat who all agree that the big problem is that more and more maintenance is going out to some less than stellar operations in countries that have not always had the best reputations and that they do not have the manpower available to oversee those operations and the airline personnel that are in charge of those programs.

Does West Virginia count as such a country? The last crash I'm aware of that was caused by outsourced m/x involved m/x done at HTS.

ripcordd · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:41 pm

I betcha the faulty saddle clamp dosnt make the news and there are prob other airlines that have these faulty sadle clamps in use which will never make the news.....

aluminumtubing · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:49 pm

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 59):
Does West Virginia count as such a country? The last crash I'm aware of that was caused by outsourced m/x involved m/x done at HTS.

I didn't say all the problems are overseas. In fact, I don't think shipping maintenance to Lufthansa Technik would be a problem. There are obviously some MRO facilities here in the states that need to be shut down. That the FAA needs to do a better job of overseeing domestic facilities goes without saying. That is a difficult enough job without having to oversee facilities in third world countries when you have insufficient manpower.

I just pointed out in my post what the FAA inspectors that I have had in my jumpseat are saying. They include pilot type inspectors and maintenance inspectors who frequently ride jumpseat as well. I am just the messenger.

santi319 · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:55 pm

AA is the unsafest airline of the Americas...

ripcordd · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:57 pm

Quoting santi319 (Reply 62):

And what are your facts to back this up? If your going to spout this s---t out back it up with facts

aluminumtubing · Tue Oct 02, 2012 9:57 pm

Quoting santi319 (Reply 62):
AA is the unsafest airline of the Americas...

Would you be willing to provide an articulate explanation as to how you reached that conclusion? Inquiring minds want to know.

1337Delta764 · Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:11 pm

Interestingly, the new article states that it is unknown whether the seats are Weber 4000 or 5000 series. I presume the Weber 4000 series seats are the old 757 seats. I know all AA 757 Y seats are made by Weber. Not sure what is the exact model number of the older seats, however, the newer seats are a modified Weber 5751 designed by Weber for AA. The older 757 Y seats appear to be the same model of Weber seat as DL's non-AVOD PMDL 752s, except that I think AA's seats have sliding tray tables.

AA mostly splits its seat business between with Weber and Recaro, with a few B/E and Contour seats thrown into the mix as well. AA initially went with Weber Y seats on the 757 and 767 fleets and Weber F seats on the 757s, then went to Recaro for the 738 and 772ER Y seats, as well as the current MD-80 Y seats and the angled-flat J class seats, and now went back to Weber for the new 738 and 752 Y and F seats, as well as the Y and J seats for the upcoming 773ERs. The MD-80s and old config 738s have B/E seats in F, and the 762ERs have B/E seats in J and F. The A300s had Y seats by PTC, who was the precursor company to B/E Aerospace, while the F seats were made by Weber. Contour seats are used exclusively for AA's international F suites.

[Edited 2012-10-02 15:22:26]

AA94 · Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:23 pm

Quoting santi319 (Reply 62):
AA is the unsafest airline of the Americas...

I am eagerly awaiting a response as to how you arrived at that conclusion ....

MD11Engineer · Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:48 pm

Quoting pvjin (Reply 18):
No, that was caused by the management who told maintenance personnel to use faulty procedures.

You are talking BS. In such a case the certifying staff has to ignore management orders and refuse to do the work illegally. After it is they whom are liable and responsible due to their licence and signature. I have told management to shove it and so has probably every A&P mechanic or LAME in his career at least once

Jan

lightsaber · Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:49 pm

Quoting AA94 (Reply 51):
Our maintenance and engineering teams have discovered that the root cause is a saddle clamp improperly installed on the foot of the row leg. These clamps were used on only 47 of our 102 Boeing 757 airplanes.”

I've been following this thread and am happy to see a root cause was found. Thankfully, due to computer records, they could know which seats had the clamp and thus which aircraft.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 59):
Does West Virginia count as such a country?

Yes.

Quoting ripcordd (Reply 60):
I betcha the faulty saddle clamp dosnt make the news and there are prob other airlines that have these faulty sadle clamps in use which will never make the news.....

I think you are correct, so I'm not taking that bet.

Now why was the clamp bad? Those things should be certified! Out of a certain material... fatigue tested, tested for the 9G crash load! Seriously, how is a clamp failing that is certified for the 'kick back' from a crash? I suspect counterfeit part. Ugh. Ok, I just had counterfeit parts training, so I might be biased.

Lightsaber

wjcandee · Tue Oct 02, 2012 10:51 pm

What are all these posts about "Fox News getting it wrong"?

Hello?! Anybody home? I have NEVER seen as whiny, bitchy, complainy or just-plain-ignorant an article about flying an airline (in this case, American) as I saw in the New York Times yesterday. Yecccch.

The only thing I can think is that that ridiculous piece of non-journalism was published because someone there thought it would help the unions' causes. But, really, it made the whining at Flyertalk look positively-enlightened.

ikramerica · Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:18 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 68):
Now why was the clamp bad? Those things should be certified! Out of a certain material... fatigue tested, tested for the 9G crash load! Seriously, how is a clamp failing that is certified for the 'kick back' from a crash? I suspect counterfeit part. Ugh. Ok, I just had counterfeit parts training, so I might be biased.

Sounds plausible, or it was installed incorrectly due to AA's faulty procedure, and it causes the part to fail?

AA94 · Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:23 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 68):
Now why was the clamp bad? Those things should be certified! Out of a certain material... fatigue tested, tested for the 9G crash load! Seriously, how is a clamp failing that is certified for the 'kick back' from a crash? I suspect counterfeit part. Ugh. Ok, I just had counterfeit parts training, so I might be biased.

The wording of the statement specifically says "...saddle clamp improperly installed on the foot..." which leads me to believe that the part was (a) installed improperly outside the listed procedures or (b) the install procedures themselves suggest incorrect installation. I could be interpreting it wrong, but it seems to me that the process failed, not the equipment itself.

Quoting ripcordd (Reply 60):
I betcha the faulty saddle clamp dosnt make the news and there are prob other airlines that have these faulty sadle clamps in use which will never make the news.....

ltbewr · Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:12 am

Quoting AA94 (Reply 71):
Quoting lightsaber (Reply 68):Now why was the clamp bad? Those things should be certified! Out of a certain material... fatigue tested, tested for the 9G crash load! Seriously, how is a clamp failing that is certified for the 'kick back' from a crash? I suspect counterfeit part. Ugh. Ok, I just had counterfeit parts training, so I might be biased. The wording of the statement specifically says "...saddle clamp improperly installed on the foot..." which leads me to believe that the part was (a) installed improperly outside the listed procedures or (b) the install procedures themselves suggest incorrect installation. I could be interpreting it wrong, but it seems to me that the process failed, not the equipment itself.

In my earlier post, I questioned if there were faulty 'fasteners' or improper procedures of installation. This leads to further questions. Where were these 'clamps' made? In China, the USA, Europe, Japan? Were they made by a sub-contractor for the seat makers? Was there sufficient specifications and quality checks by the seat makers of these clamps? Was there a change in the clamps and their related hardware to hold down costs or that should have led to a change in the installation procedures? I suspect a significant investigation is underway, by AA, the seat makers, the parts suppliers, the workers and air safety authorities. Hopefully this was just a narrow problem and doesn't grow. AA nor any other airline needs this kind of problem.

ripcordd · Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:11 am

santi319 sounds like you have a personel grudge against AA did they not hire you and you had to get a job with NK? cause this post here today and this one shows you have something against them.

Santi319 From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2005, 280 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted Wed Dec 1 2010 11:09:54 your local time (1 year 10 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11551 times:

Quoting YYZRWY23 (Reply 1):
Not a lot of info out now, but this hasn't been AA's day in Canada. AA 1409 went mechanical due to engine trouble at YYZ today and was subsequently cancelled.

Is it me or it always seem that there's something wrong with AA, I really do honestly think (In My Opinion!) that they are a very unsafe airline...but that's just me....

T prop · Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:41 am

Quoting santi319 (Reply 62):
AA is the unsafest airline of the Americas...

Relax everyone, it's just some 13 year old kid trolling...

santi319

spiritair97 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:07 am

Quoting AA94 (Reply 47):
Quoting spiritair97 (Reply 4):I was gonna say....even if it was the contractors' fault, the mechanics should have noticed it.... another enlightened quote from spiritair97 ...

Nice. Before taking shots at me for my statement, I meant that the people who do the inspections of the aircraft should have noticed it if it was something with the fasteners. I made a mistake by singling out the mechanics. Didn;t mean to do that and I apologize if I offended anybody with that. But nice job taking a shot at me for making a mistake.

santi319 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:05 am

Double post please delete

[Edited 2012-10-02 21:34:46]

santi319 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:21 am

Quoting ripcordd (Reply 73):
santi319 sounds like you have a personel grudge against AA did they not hire you and you had to get a job with NK? cause this post here today and this one shows you have something against them.

No, actually I have the best friends and family over at AA, that is why I never applied for a job for them, I know too much lol. And I am very very happy and very safe where I am now thank you very much...wherever that is.

strfyr51 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:30 am

they were reconfiguring the aircraft to ADD seats in Y class and got the seat track spacing wrong. Thats when they should have used the Foot extensions. Or it appears they Did use thefiit extenders and did it wrong according to the article

windy95 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 1:41 pm

Quoting falstaff (Reply 33):
Quoting windy95 (Reply 28):Do you know how a seat is installed?Doesn't matter... It has fasteners of some sort and they could be faulty.

Yes it does matter. If you do not know how it is done then perhaps then they should refrain from making guesses as to what went wrong. Faulty hardware would not cause this to happen on multiple airplanes in such a close time. Faulty procedure would. Preliminary information indicates that the aircraft had recently undergone maintenance during which the seats had been removed and re-installed. And as the news has now shown the saddle clamp's had been improperly installed on the planes where the seats disengaged.

Quoting AA94 (Reply 49):
AA has just announced the cause of the seat disconnect as a "faulty saddle clamp," and noted that these clamps are found on 47 757s currently flying. Full statement below.

From your article

Quote:
The union notes that much of the work related to seat installation on American’s aircraft has been done by an outside firm, TIMCO, rather than by maintenance personnel employed by the airline.

Interior work at these MRO's are done by non certified, low paid interiors employees.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 76):
they were reconfiguring the aircraft to ADD seats in Y class and got the seat track spacing wrong. Thats when they should have used the Foot extensions. Or it appears they Did use thefiit extenders and did it wrong according to the article

And this is usually the case when you see something like this pop up. It's that saddle clamp that was improperly installed on the planes where the seats disengaged.

n737aa · Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:01 pm

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 65):
Quoting pvjin (Reply 18):
No, that was caused by the management who told maintenance personnel to use faulty procedures.

You are talking BS. In such a case the certifying staff has to ignore management orders and refuse to do the work illegally. After it is they whom are liable and responsible due to their licence and signature. I have told management to shove it and so has probably every A&P mechanic or LAME in his career at least once

Jan

This is true, if I told my crew to do something that was not per the manual they would certainly question me and they would not do it plain and simple. There are many checks and balances in play. In the rare occasion that does happen the next action by the mechanic is to call the ASAP coordinator. Like I said, many checks and balances.

I am sure there are some management people that might be inclined to do such things, but I can tell you that it would not be tolorated and they would find themselves thinking about it for quite sometime as they are searching for a new job. Could it happen, yes, we are dealing with people...would it be tolorated...no, not at AA anyway!

Quoting windy95 (Reply 77):
Interior work at these MRO's are done by non certified, low paid interiors employees.

You would be surprised to know that many of the people who work on the interior's at AA are NOT certificated and probably make close to what the MRO folks make. As I have pointed out in other threads related to this subject (certifcation), there are many people throughout the industry that are NOT certificated and that includes the airlines.

There is no FAR that states you must have a certificate to work for a certificated Airline or Repair Station. There are FAR's that require properly certificated person's to perform certain functions such as return to service or aircraft release. Most people don't even know that an A&P certificate does not authorize you to perform return to service of an instrument, that takes a Repairman's Certificate.

1337Delta764 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:25 pm

FYI, in this article:
http://blog.apex.aero/cabin-interior...lamp-is-cause-of-757-seat-problem/

It states that the fastening system of the new seats are different from the old seats. The old Weber seats use four wrench-tightened bolts, while the new ones have two wrench-tightened bolts in the back and two hand-tightened bolts in the front.

Also, there are rumors from someone at the APEX blog that the affected seats are in fact the OLD Weber seats. The rumor states that AA was trying to improve passenger experience using the old seats during MX snafu.

[Edited 2012-10-03 14:25:54]

737tdi · Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:52 pm

Quoting N737AA (Reply 78):
You would be surprised to know that many of the people who work on the interior's at AA are NOT certificated and probably make close to what the MRO folks make. As I have pointed out in other threads related to this subject (certifcation), there are many people throughout the industry that are NOT certificated and that includes the airlines.

I wonder which airlines still allow this ? I understand the reasoning, who needs a A&P to overhaul seats, brakes, overhead bins, galleys? Also I see absolutely nothing wrong with it. I do know that my airline does require all of us mechs. to be certificated.

The MRO's I worked at had a pretty even mix of A&Ps and non A&Ps. Alot were just working there to get heavy jet experience to be able to meet the requirements of an airline.

1337Delta764 · Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:40 pm

BTW, according to the current rumor, 20 rows of the old Weber seats were reconfigured on the affected aircraft.

strfyr51 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:42 am

Quoting N737AA (Reply 78):

Nobody in management would be dumb enough to tell a mechanic to KNOWINGLY do slipshod work. (not anymore!)
I have seen BAD overhauls where the airplane came back and over 900 Gripes were found. That MRO operation was shut DOWN !! (Saber-jet Aviation) that was a VERY long time ago and although some middling problems have arisen with MRO Maintenance since, this is the first problem that I've heard of shoddy maintenance coming from TIMCO. They've done a LOT of work for United in the past 11 years and much of it has been ok. We've had a few problems here and there but nothing they didn't fix when we routed the airplane back to them. United has put more MRO's out of business than any airline I know of And ! They KNOW we're going to LOOK after they finish the work. If our mechanics COULD have shut them down?? They Surely Would have by Now.. I'll Bet we won't see this again. Bill Norman (President of Timco) has a black eye on this one..

crapper1 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:02 am

I'm hoping it isn't workers screwing with the aircraft. It does seem like a simple thing to do that would be easy to find loose seats and will put the plane out of service. so with the checks and balances i am hoping it isn't the case.

Now how about using new types of fasteners that worked on a 767 or some other plane and worked on this type but they never used it on this model of seat . perhaps they didn't grip the mounting as well and backed out. Its kinda out there but still plausible.

When re installing fixtures on aircraft do they use the old bolts and hardware or is it all brand new parts?

1337Delta764 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:32 am

FYI, reading further into the article that I posted, it looks like the affected seats are the OLD Weber seats after being reconfigured to MCE.

Perhaps there could be some confusion in the different ways the old and new seats are mounted. As stated in the article, the old Weber seats use four wrench-tightened bolts, while the new Weber slimline seats use two wrench-tightened and two hand-tightened bols. Considering that those seats are the oldest model of Y seat still used by AA, perhaps the workers who reconfigured these 757s aren't familiar with older seat models.

BTW, I think DL's PMDL domestic non-AVOD 752s use the same model of Weber seat as the old AA 757 Weber seats, except without the sliding tray tables. Were DL's EC mods in-house or outsourced? If they were outsourced, who did the EC mods for DL?

[Edited 2012-10-03 22:33:24]

RyanairGuru · Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:30 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 67):
I have NEVER seen as whiny, bitchy, complainy or just-plain-ignorant an article about flying an airline (in this case, American) as I saw in the New York Times yesterday. Yecccch.

The only thing I can think is that that ridiculous piece of non-journalism was published because someone there thought it would help the unions' causes

Geez, chill out! That article wasn't even supposed to be serious, it was a [supposedly] humorous op-ed piece inserted on a weekend (aka a slow news day). It was primarily there to fill space, not some covert yankee take-over!

HAWK21M · Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:25 am

Quoting crapper1 (Reply 83):

I'm hoping it isn't workers screwing with the aircraft. It does seem like a simple thing to do that would be easy to find loose seats and will put the plane out of service. so with the checks and balances i am hoping it isn't the case.

It looks to simple to be a faulty part........

n901wa · Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:32 am

Some info for 1337Delta764, The Delta EC mods were done in house. with maybe the aircraft in Heavy Checks, being done when the seat were reinstalled, by the company doing the checks.

danielkandi · Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:42 pm

Quoting tonytifao (Reply 32):

It would actually make a great CSI New York episode. One disgruntled worker, a bit racist tired of seeing foreigners take over his good ol' american heritage of work. I would tune in to watch it. But CSI would have to manufacture a death on a flight, then it would make sense as an episode.

off topic but still : does anyone remember the episode where (i think vegas) did an episode where a passenger was thought to be a terrorist by copassengers, and after 9/11, everyone freaked and killed the guy. always wondered what type of AC they build that mockup on...

kgaiflyer · Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:18 pm

Just curious. AA484 flying SAN-DFW lifted off late yesterday afternoon and then diverted to ABQ before arriving in DFW late. But the flight is listed as an MD83 rather than a 757.

Anyone know what the story was on this diversion (loose seats? mechanical? weather? fuel?) ?

AA777 · Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:01 pm

Quoting aerobalance (Reply 11):
Sabotage shouldn't be ruled out. How long does this go on before safety is compromised and criminal actions occur?

Sabotage? Come on.

n737aa · Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:27 pm

Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 89):
Just curious. AA484 flying SAN-DFW lifted off late yesterday afternoon and then diverted to ABQ before arriving in DFW late. But the flight is listed as an MD83 rather than a 757.

Anyone know what the story was on this diversion (loose seats? mechanical? weather? fuel?) ?

AA484 SAN-DFW pushed back 1 min early, was "OFF" 8 mins later than plan, and diverted to ABQ due to Medical Emergency....yes it was an MD80.

N737AA

kgaiflyer · Sat Oct 06, 2012 1:25 pm

Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 89):
AA484 flying SAN-DFW lifted off late yesterday afternoon and then diverted to ABQ before arriving in DFW late. But the flight is listed as an MD83 rather than a 757. Anyone know what the story was on this diversion (loose seats? mechanical? weather? fuel?) ?

Quoting N737AA (Reply 91):
AA484 SAN-DFW pushed back 1 min early, was "OFF" 8 mins later than plan, and diverted to ABQ due to Medical Emergency....yes it was an MD80.

Yet in the last three weeks, that one flight has departed late -- including 4 hrs 30 mins late Oct 2nd -- 14 different times.

That's unreal.

JAAlbert · Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:21 pm

I labored through all the posts above and didn't see a one of you discussing the "coking" of the fasteners as contributing to the problem. "Coking" (according to NBC news) refers to generations upon generations of sodas, cocktails, beer and food that spill onto the cabin floor caking onto the fasteners. So my question is -- when, if ever, does an airline actually clean that cabin floor? At some point in the plane's 20yr history the airline must decide to pull up the carpeting and clean things up a bit, no? And wouldn't the installers want to rinse off the fasteners if they saw that they were all gummed up?

It sounds like folks are flying in a movie theater, sticky floor and all. Nice.

737tdi · Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:42 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 93):
I labored through all the posts above and didn't see a one of you discussing the "coking" of the fasteners as contributing to the problem. "Coking" (according to NBC news) refers to generations upon generations of sodas, cocktails, beer and food that spill onto the cabin floor caking onto the fasteners.

Actually I think this problem is being misunderstood and misreported. It is not a problem with coke/debris on the fasteners but this gunk is in the seat track itself. Crap builds up on the bottom of the seat track thus preventing the locking mechanism from fully seating in the track.

It is the mechanics responsibility to clean the track sufficiently enough to prevent this from happening. To answer the question directly, yes the tracks are cleaned at every heavy check so they can be inspected for corrosion. I have done hundreds of seat replacements and always clean the areas where the seat locks into the track, if you don't with our types of seats you will never get the lock mechanism to pivot down and then slide the seat to allow it to be fastened.

billreid · Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:49 pm

Quoting charlienorth (Reply 31):
As a tech for a competing airline I would have no problem flying on an AA jet.

As much as I agree from a safety perspective. I do not agree from a value perspective. At present an AA seat priced at $400 is about equal to a $20 seat on anyone else from my checkbook.
Why would I risk a 48 hour trip duration on AA that might take 3hrs on anyone else?

In short AA needs US management 10,000 fold more than US needs AA. Right now Horton is losing all his chips.

JAAlbert · Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:55 pm

Quoting 737tdi (Reply 94):
Actually I think this problem is being misunderstood and misreported. It is not a problem with coke/debris on the fasteners but this gunk is in the seat track itself. Crap builds up on the bottom of the seat track thus preventing the locking mechanism from fully seating in the track.

It is the mechanics responsibility to clean the track sufficiently enough to prevent this from happening. To answer the question directly, yes the tracks are cleaned at every heavy check so they can be inspected for corrosion. I have done hundreds of seat replacements and always clean the areas where the seat locks into the track, if you don't with our types of seats you will never get the lock mechanism to pivot down and then slide the seat to allow it to be fastened.

Ah! Very interesting and enlightening. So to the extent that gunk build up is responsible, then somebody it seems didn't clean the tracks?

737tdi · Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:58 am

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 96):
Ah! Very interesting and enlightening. So to the extent that gunk build up is responsible, then somebody it seems didn't clean the tracks?

It's a ongoing joke with us when we are replacing seats. "Hey, I got some peanut butter for my sandwich". It was even worse when we used to serve raisins. Imagine all of the peanuts/raisins etc. that get dropped and slowly turn to gunk.

HAWK21M · Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:51 am

Why does Tech services not issue a call out to inspect the seat attachments a few hrs post installation.

MD11Engineer · Tue Oct 09, 2012 3:57 am

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 43):
Find it tough to believe that 30 seats were wrongly fitted or not locked in the track.This would have shown up immedietly on a check.
Looks more like a deliberate attempt.

What about miscommunication / bad handover during shift change? It seems to have become a trend to hire as few certifying people as possible (as few as the aviation authority lets them get away with) and to use uncertified (cheaper) mechanics to do the work, with one certificated person having to sign for all the work, especially in heavy maintence. There is a limit how many uncertified mechanics one certifying one can reasonably supervise and there is a lot of trust involved, e.g. I sometimes have to certify for work I wasn´t directly involved with, but have to trust the people who actually did the work that they did it correctly, simply because I have so many tasks to do that I can´t be everywhere.

It is quite possible that the previous shift put the seats into position, but didn´t lock the fasterners into the seat tracks (a nasty job with today´s seat pitches, because you have to lie between the seats and have barely space to move. Also it is often quite dirty down there). The next guy came, didn´t have time to do a physical check, saw the seats in place and closed the work card as "job done". Human factors at it´s best.

Jan

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net