http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/n...4-788e-11e2-b6e1-0019bb2963f4.html

Fair use:

"A former senior aircraft mechanic for Atlantic City International Airport’s only carrier claims the airline regularly falsified inspection records and performed subpar maintenance on its aircraft, according to a lawsuit filed last month in state Superior Court."

Apparently six mechanics were fired for reporting these issues to the company's human resources department and one man was transferred to the night shift in violation of union/seniority rules.

I wonder what the ramifications of this suit will be.

It would not surprise me if these alligations are true, considering the penny pinching attitude of NK.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Thread starter): I wonder what the ramifications of this suit will be

If proven true, this could revoke their FAA operating certificate. NK's timing on a safety issue with their young Airbus fleet couldn't come at a worst time for the FAA considering all the press about the B-787 battery issue.

IIRC, weren't there allegations about 4-5 years ago that NK was doing this, but were quietly buried?

If their licence was revoked, would Spirit fold.

Sour grapes by ex employee.

As the article mentions the FAA investigated and "found no evidence to substantiate allegations."

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4): Sour grapes by ex employee. As the article mentions the FAA investigated and "found no evidence to substantiate allegations."

The FAA has not really been known to take investigations very seriously. I fail to remember the last time they took a serious stance against a commercial airline. Even knowing the problems including unqualified check airman rides etc they still failed to take any action at Colgan until after the DHC8 crash.

I guess you don't see my regular post about endless fines imposed on airlines due to various safety violations.

The FAA does investigate and fine as appropriate.

Here are some recent ones:

FAA Fines Pinnacle Airlines - Safety Violations (by LAXintl Jan 8 2013 in Civil Aviation)
FAA Fines US Airways - Safety Violations (by LAXintl Oct 25 2012 in Civil Aviation)
FAA Fines ASA - Safety Violations (by LAXintl Sep 19 2012 in Civil Aviation)
FAA Fines Horizon Air – Safety Violations (by LAXintl Aug 9 2012 in Civil Aviation)
FAA May Fine AA $162.4mil For Safety Violations (by LAXintl Aug 7 2012 in Civil Aviation)
FAA Fines Alaska & Horizon Air – Safety Violations (by LAXintl May 4 2012 in Civil Aviation)

=

This doesn't surprise me one bit..

A reporter asked Spirit's CEO once if JetBlue and AirTran were his main competitors? He said "NO, Greyhound is"

Quoting flyorski (Reply 5): I fail to remember the last time they took a serious stance against a commercial airline

Pro Air (XL) was hammered by the FAA around 2000.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4): Sour grapes by ex employee.

That is the most likely thing I can think of. Back when NW's mechanic were on strike there were kinds of talk about how unsafe NW was (even though many of the strike breakers were former NW employees) because of scab labor, but is was really just angry employees making noise.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 8): Back when NW's mechanic were on strike there were kinds of talk about how unsafe NW was (even though many of the strike breakers were former NW employees) because of scab labor, but is was really just angry employees making noise.

Many of the "replacement" workers were not qualified A&P's which is legal if they are being overseen by a qualified A&P mechanic. It is really hard for 1 guy to keep tabs on what 3 or 4 are doing especially when in a time crunch situation of keeping schedule. I didn't fly on NW(hard living in DTW!) until Delta stepped in and took over and many of the replacement workers were replaced.

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 3): If their licence was revoked, would Spirit fold.

Once the FAA pulls an airline's certificate, it's hard to get it back. The FAA has threatened to pull the operating certificate of airlines similar in size (or larger) as NK in the past and typically that airline works with the FAA to get things straightened out and end up paying a fine. Some airlines have voluntarily surrendered it in order to stave off having it pulled by the FAA and some do end up restarting service after meeting criteria that the FAA and the Dept. of Transportation outs before them (ValuJet is one such example.). The airlines that typically get their o.c. pulled by the FAA are smaller airlines that are teetering on the brink of collapse and it's almost as though they're putting them out of their misery, as the lessors of their fleet come to repossess their planes within days.

Quoting flyorski (Reply 5): The FAA has not really been known to take investigations very seriously. I fail to remember the last time they took a serious stance against a commercial airline.

:facepalm:

Quote: Records show Spirit has seen $152,325 in six fines since 2005 for maintenance-related issues flagged by the FAA, the largest of which was a $50,000 fine in 2008. The FAA has levied even larger fines against Spirit in the past. In 1999, the company was fined $86,000 for failing to inspect a jet within a required timeframe. A $67,000 fine followed the next year after an FAA inspection of eight Spirit planes found the airline jeopardized passenger safety because signs throughout the plane displayed incorrect information or did not work properly, the FAA said at the time.

Straight from the article.

Quoting OzarkD9S (Thread starter): I wonder what the ramifications of this suit will be.

It'll likely be dismissed. Whether or not he really was illegally retaliated against, or what Spirit is or isn't doing, he simply has zero proof or even a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing.

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 6): The FAA does investigate and fine as appropriate.

Nothing wring with that. but if they were really serious about things like that, they'd pull an operating certificate for a specified time as a punitive measure.

It's been my experience that the FAA is actually very forgiving, for better or worse.

Quoting g500 (Reply 7): A reporter asked Spirit's CEO once if JetBlue and AirTran were his main competitors? He said "NO, Greyhound is"

Maybe. But what does that have to do with MX standards? It isn't as though the wheels are falling off Greyhound Buses all over the place or something...

Quoting g500 (Reply 7): This doesn't surprise me one bit.. A reporter asked Spirit's CEO once if JetBlue and AirTran were his main competitors? He said "NO, Greyhound is"

RyanAir might say the same thing but it's my understanding that they have top notch maintenance. How does the market segment you fly in define your maintenance practices?

-Dave

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 4):

If the FAA currently states they do not have sufficient manpower to oversee the scope of all the work they need to do.
How thorough could this investigation had been in the first place?

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 12): Maybe. But what does that have to do with MX standards? It isn't as though the wheels are falling off Greyhound Buses all over the place or something...

lol, exactly. Are we now to assume that Greyhound has shoddy maintenance because, in general, they cater primarily to low budget travellers. Ive never heard of this being the case.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1): If proven true, this could revoke their FAA operating certificate. NK's timing on a safety issue with their young Airbus fleet couldn't come at a worst time for the FAA considering all the press about the B-787 battery issue.

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 3): If their licence was revoked, would Spirit fold.

This article is reporting on the opening of a civil suit against Spirit, not on a pending or ongoing administrative investigation by the FAA. The FAA investigation took place shortly after the 2011 accusations and found Spirit in compliance with required procedures. Spirit's operating certificate is not in jeopardy in relation to this article.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1): It would not surprise me if these allegations are true, considering the penny pinching attitude of NK.

So because an airline has an ultra low cost operating model (penny-pinching, whatever you want to call it), you assume inadequate maintenance? Do you also assume that if an airline has a relatively high cost model they never have been found to have taken maintenance shortcuts resulting in things like rows of seats falling over in flight or holes taring open in their aircraft's roofs? I, myself, would probably look at relevant indicators like Spirit's stellar safety record for its 23 years in existence, and on time performance (somewhat of a direct indicator of maintenance and fleet readiness) on par with other airlines that also have the majority of their operations on the congested and weather prone East Coast when making a broad assumption of an airlines maintenance adequacy.

The fact is since Valuejet, the FAA has scrutinized low cost airlines much more closely in regards to mx and operating procedures. Spirit knows this and also knows and has seen in the past that they are in a prime position for this scrutiny and would absolutely not have a chance of taking blatant, widespread maintenance shortcuts. Not saying that one bad seed or mx shift manager or a procedure being performed or taught wrong couldn't undermine this (obviously this could happen anywhere in any industry), just saying it would be very very difficult for shortcuts to be the norm at Spirit.

Also, I don't mean to slam Southwest or American specifically, just making the point again that any airline can have a bad apple or two, or have a procedure being taught or performed incorrectly in a department as critical as maintenance that leads to an accident or highly publicized incident.

[Edited 2013-02-17 16:10:13]

[Edited 2013-02-17 16:14:13]

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 13): RyanAir might say the same thing but it's my understanding that they have top notch maintenance.

Quoting beechtobus (Reply 15): So because an airline has an ultra low cost operating model (penny-pinching, whatever you want to call it), you assume inadequate maintenance?

  

Michael O'Leary, the loud-mouth maverick everyone loves to hate, is very firm on this point. Ryanair will not cut corners on maintenance. Period.

The reason is is that if there was an accident involving an FR plane, everyone would assume it was because they cut corners etc etc and would therefore think twice before flying FR. O'Leary suggests that this means that he has to have more rigourous safety procedures than BA, because if a BA plane were to crash people would think "oh well, it was a one off, they're a safe airline".

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 12): they'd pull an operating certificate for a specified time as a punitive measure.

That would be huge. It also isn't the right first step. If the FAA had pulled AA's certificate, would you have thought that was right? That would be a very quick way to week out airlines in this economy. If a certificate is pulled, than leased planes are repossessed for it takes a certificate to lease a plane...


The FAA works by cooperation with airlines, fines, and suggestions. The system will never have enough inspectors. Hence why they focus on stickers... But if Spirit really skimped on maintenance, there would be 'an event' and that would end them as per the MOL/FR example above.

Quoting beechtobus (Reply 15): The fact is since Valuejet,

The system has improved since Valuejet. Vendors, including Pratt, complained to the FAA due to Valuejet 'sticking out' in ways that implied less maintenance than required. It highlighted a problem in the system that seems to be fixed today.

Lightsaber

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17): That would be huge. It also isn't the right first step. If the FAA had pulled AA's certificate, would you have thought that was right? That would be a very quick way to week out airlines in this economy. If a certificate is pulled, than leased planes are repossessed for it takes a certificate to lease a plane...

Didn't say it would have to be a first step, but it should be in there somewhere. And yes, it would be huge.

Would it have been right to do it to AA? Probably. If you're referring to their problems between 2007 - 2008, they had quite a bit of forewarning on that wire bundle issue, and really should have been sanctioned a lot more than they were.

Leases... I've done some work with repossessions (although in aviation these are usually called "recoveries"; repossessions are for cars & sofas) before, and while it is true that leaseholders will want a plane back over that one (though that would only ever be per contract as the certificate is between the airline and the FAA), the reality is that for a number of reasons the airline likely would not actually have the plane taken for about 60 days or so, so long as payments continue. As a practical matter, especially when talking about S80s, leaseholders really don't want a flock of planes back if they can take payments for them in the meantime.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17): The system will never have enough inspectors.

This is true. A good deal of the inspections they are tasked with are actually carried out by the operators themselves. There's a lot of mixed feelings about that one, but until it becomes the cause of a major event (i.e. not a former employee suing an airline), I do not expect this to change.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17): It highlighted a problem in the system that seems to be fixed today.

Yes, the system, as well as operators, are an order of magnitude better than those days. I generally avoid the crap out of NK, but I would not feel unsafe aboard one of their slaveships.

Quoting beechtobus (Reply 15): Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):If proven true, this could revoke their FAA operating certificate. NK's timing on a safety issue with their young Airbus fleet couldn't come at a worst time for the FAA considering all the press about the B-787 battery issue.Quoting bennett123 (Reply 3):If their licence was revoked, would Spirit fold. This article is reporting on the opening of a civil suit against Spirit, not on a pending or ongoing administrative investigation by the FAA. The FAA investigation took place shortly after the 2011 accusations and found Spirit in compliance with required procedures. Spirit's operating certificate is not in jeopardy in relation to this article.

Correct. But if the civil suit brings evidence to light, the FAA would then have to take action. At the very minimum they would open a new investigation into the charges and evidence found by the civil court.

Quoting beechtobus (Reply 15): Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):It would not surprise me if these allegations are true, considering the penny pinching attitude of NK. So because an airline has an ultra low cost operating model (penny-pinching, whatever you want to call it), you assume inadequate maintenance?

NK has one of the youngest fleets in the industry, with an average of about 5 years old. They expanded to new build, but leased Airbuses from the older MD-80/DC-9 series they had just a few years ago, and before that very old B-727s as Charter One, before that they were a trucking company.

NK has a fleet of about 45 A-32X family airplanes, with more than 100 on order. In their MD-80 days they had less than 30 airplanes. That is a fleet expansion of 50 % in about 5 years, with a more than 200% growth (over the current fleet) planned by the end of this decade. Expansions on this scale put airplane lease payments at the top of their monthly liabilities, above fuel and labor costs.

That is a lot of money changing hands every month. Keep in mind they have done this during the worst US economy since the depression days. It is also on top of the crippeling pilots strike back in 2010.

They have to be cutting corners somewhere, and possibly falsefying airplane insections is an easy way to do that. Perhaps a better indication of the maintenance condition of their airplanes is how often the flight crews need to refer to the MEL (inoperative systems/equipment that can be legelly deferred) before they fly that airplane. Is it at, above, or below the industry average?

This is an airline that charges you $5 just to print out your boarding pass and restrites the weigh of your baggage to just 40 lbs., well below the industry standard, charging another $25 for bags over that weight. They also will cancel your entire intinary if you miss just one leg (but they will keep your money).

Compare the extra charges of NK, to the 'premire' LCC in the US, WN and you will see the differences.

Yes, this is a penny pinching airline, and one I will not fly.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19): They have to be cutting corners somewhere

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19): Yes, this is a penny pinching airline, and one I will not fly.

Having flown on NK many, many times.. I have never been worried about my safety.. and while a lot of people won't fly them , and I get that.. to say they have to be cutting corners somewhere without proof is a pretty interesting remark.

NK is a very safe airline and I let their safety record over 20+ years speak for itself. NK has just purchased two A320 simulators and are building a new sim center in FLL. NK has been hiring numerous mechanics and has in sourced maintenance in ORD, DFW and LAS amongst other stations. NK isn't perfect, but they are making investments in the safety infrastructure of their operation.

As to this mechanic, I imagine it is probably sour grapes. Unlike NK's pilots and flight attendants, the mechanics are not unionized. I could easily imagine since he has no recourse following his termination, he would try to cry 'safety' as retaliation against NK. If this has any truth to it, rest assured, NK's FAA overseers will be all over it.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19): They expanded to new build, but leased Airbuses from the older MD-80/DC-9 series they had just a few years ago, and before that very old B-727s as Charter One, before that they were a trucking company.

Just to correct this, Spirits predecessor, Charter One had Convair 580s, not 727s. I believe Express One is the 727 operator your referring to. They had no relation to Spirit.

You then refer to Spirits large physical and capital growth in recent years and then say this:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19): They have to be cutting corners somewhere, and possibly falsefying airplane insections is an easy way to do that.

To me this is like stating the broad assumption that you're more likely to get food poisoning from from Sbarro than Olive Garden because you get a similar end product at both (a belly full of Italian food) but Sbarro is much cheaper and is still making money. they must be cutting corners on sanitation or proper food handling procedures. I say not so because they both must adhere to several rigid local, regional, state, and federal standards regarding sanitaton and food handling. There are several other ways where Sbarro cuts cust to make its products cheaper and bring in money (ie counter insead of waiter service, no liquor licensing, paper nakins instead of cloth, inexpnsive mall food court locations, you get the point)

This is the same with Spirit, they must comply with the same maintenance standards that United, Southwest, Great Lakes, American, etc must comply with and are likely even looked at closer by the FAA because of their ultra low cost sigma. Yes Spirit is making money by keeping very efficient (by charging for everything besides beyond just renting you a seat for a few hours and the small area below the seat, flying their airplanes 2-3 hours more a day than the US average [ie large use redeye flying], and keeping labor costs low [ie paying less than competitors for some employee groups]). I dont think its fair to just assume subpar maintenance.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19): Perhaps a better indication of the maintenance condition of their airplanes is how often the flight crews need to refer to the MEL (inoperative systems/equipment that can be legally deferred) before they fly that airplane. Is it at, above, or below the industry average?

Good question, is it? Do we now just assume that in Spirits case it is because they are 'penny-pinching"? 1) I don't think this is documented public information so again, we cannot just assume that Spirit flies with more MELs/DMIs than other airlines because they "penny pinch", and 2) Even if the number of MELs on a particular aircraft were public, This could be very misleading. All MELs are not created equal. In other words, I would much rather be on an aircraft that had 25 MELs for faded seatbelt manufacturer tags (yes, this is an MEL item), than 1 MEL for one of its 4 main wheels having inop breaks (believe it or not, this too can be MELd).

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 3): If their licence was revoked, would Spirit fold.

Kind of depends on how long, doesn't it? If they can't fly, then clearly they would not be able to last very long. Even a short-term disruption would have disastrous consequences with the media and the travelling public but revoking or suspending the license of a major airline is pretty much unheard of in the USA. ValuJet comes to mind, but I think NK is a long way from ValuJet which flew older aircraft and did have some high-profile incidents prior to the fatal crash which essentially ended the airline. Even after a couple of high profile incidents (ValuJet lost a plane in ATL, I believe, with no fatalities), there was no shutdown. That all changed after the crash in the Everglades, of course, but it has to be noted that even that crash was not a result of bad maintenance but poor labeling/handling of cargo by a ValuJet supplier.

But let me spell this out - there is NOTHING in the article or lawsuit that makes me think that Spirit will be shut down for any period of time. If anything, they may come under further scrutiny from maintenance inspectors but I really don't think anything will come of this lawsuit other than a quick settlement. How much money changes hands probably depends on how much media attention this gets.

For my money, NK is a discount carrier in every sense of the word. While I cannot speak to mx deficiencies, I don't think they are unsafe either. They are just such a classless carrier and I don't like their business model very much, but that is opinion not fact. They are truly the Ryanair of the Americas, only I don't know that we are ready for this kind of airline on this side of the pond. WIth that said, they are pretty strong financially-speaking.

Very early in its lifetime, Westjet was shut down by Transport Canada for Maintenance issues. I believe it lasted about three days. Clearly they continued on to be a successful (and safe) airline.

Last year, Porter Airlines went through the same issue, but was not shut down ... they complied in time.

Quite often these Maintenance issues are less about what is being done to the aircraft than the records being kept. Personally I don't see the value in shutting down an airline, to satisfy some "Anal Alice" in Ottawa that wants T's crossed and I's dotted, when the aircraft are still being maintained properly.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19):

Record of MELs or even Technical Log entries, may not correspond with actual technical status of airplanes. While I have not any experience dealing with NK, I found others LCC where pilots did not make maintenance entries while out of main base in an open violation of CFR 25.

Quoting falstaff (Reply 8): That is the most likely thing I can think of. Back when NW's mechanic were on strike there were kinds of talk about how unsafe NW was (even though many of the strike breakers were former NW employees) because of scab labor, but is was really just angry employees making noise.

IS that a fact?....Well I happen to be one of those angry ex mechanics and I can tell you there were quite a few legit problems happening when we were on strike at NWA..I had friends who were still working on the inside and in MEM there were several instances of main tires coming of DC-9's after landing as well as other "incidents"..In fact an FAA inspector out of MSP found issues that were going on there and after NW complained he was reassigned to a desk job..The FAA was bought and paid for as well as the media. I would have never believed it if I hadn't experienced it. Would NW have gotten away with it today?..Most likely they would not. The FAA seems to be a different animal today as well as the administration. As to these NK mechanics and their charges?..Well I do know a Spirit pilot and he has told me the aircraft he flies are loaded with MEL stickers. Still doesnt mean they are doing anything wrong. But I do know that aircraft maintenance is a nessissary evil so companies will try to get away as cheap and legal as they can.

One reason I'm defending NK is I'm not hearing the industry 'skuttlebutt' about NK that I heard about FL before their crash. I knew individuals frustrated at FL back then as the maintenance records were poor to the point where FL scrapped items as they couldn't produce the paper to keep using them or even have them legally rebuilt.

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 18): Didn't say it would have to be a first step, but it should be in there somewhere.

After being found at fault and an implementation plan proposed and not jumped on by NK.

Quoting longhauler (Reply 24): Quite often these Maintenance issues are less about what is being done to the aircraft than the records being kept.

   But in aviation the paper is what was done. Otherwise, with so many individuals who might touch an aircraft, no one would know the status.

NK's fleet is very young. That lowers the risk and thus lowers the FAA chance of pulling their cert.

Quoting stratosphere (Reply 26): But I do know that aircraft maintenance is a nessissary evil so companies will try to get away as cheap and legal as they can.

To a point. At some point too many items with waivers mean an aircraft is ready to sit as it waits for a fix.

Quoting richierich (Reply 23): For my money, NK is a discount carrier in every sense of the word. While I cannot speak to mx deficiencies, I don't think they are unsafe either. They are just such a classless carrier and I don't like their business model very much, but that is opinion not fact. They are truly the Ryanair of the Americas, only I don't know that we are ready for this kind of airline on this side of the pond. WIth that said, they are pretty strong financially-speaking.

That sums it up. They have a business model many do not like. But nothing is illegal about that business model.

Now their ontime performance needs to be improved. And they seem to have an apropriate Skytrax ranking (2) which is incredibly low. Now is it a good thing their service is better than Air Koryo. (There is a cost cutting opportunity there.)  


Lightsaber

Quoting stratosphere (Reply 26): The FAA was bought and paid for as well as the media.

Sorry, for a media that blows normal things out of proportion when it comes to aviation, there's no way anybody bought them out.

Quoting stratosphere (Reply 26): I would have never believed it if I hadn't experienced it.

Didn't you say you were on strike when "the wheels fell off"?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 28): Didn't you say you were on strike when "the wheels fell off"?

I was on strike this was witnessed by rampers who I was friends with in MEM. As for I would not have believed. I was referring to the collaboration of the unions and the govenment and the media and the airline to conspire against AMFA.