Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Tue Mar 08, 2016 9:50 am

Quoting Grisee08 (Reply 42):
Did NW refuse? or did J7 not want to pay the cost of having NW do the MRO? There is a difference.

They absolutely refused.
 
apfpilot
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Tue Mar 08, 2016 1:11 pm

Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 49):
I lost friends on AS 261...I can't believe I'm reading this. Knowing what we do now, an airline would fail to lubricate jack screws on a MD80?? Criminal negligence.

Correct, however one has to be mindful that this report was put together by a union that is currently in heated negotiations with G4. Having said that I tend to lend more credibility to this report than would ordinarily be given for a few reasons. First, where there is smoke there is fire, it is an undeniable fact that G4 has had number of high profile incidents recently, and second for the Teamsters to put something like that if false could cause significant damage to G4 both in reputation and value shows they have source they feel is pretty reliable.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
KarlB737
Posts: 2911
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Tue Mar 08, 2016 6:16 pm

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 28):
Allegiant has had a string of serious incidents this year, which appear to be caused by unsafe aircraft. A crash may be unlikely, but a pattern is emerging, and the underlying causes of the incidents haven't been addressed.

I believe WA707atMSP really sums up the whole issue well. I also believe that the FAA now that Allegiant has just announced a bucket load of new routes will have to ground the airline until an appropriate investigation is made.


Two links that will now be clickable:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Running list of G4 incidents.

https://www.aeroinside.com/incidents/airline/allegiant
http://www.aeroinside.com/incidents/airline/allegiant

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 46):
Anyone that has concerns on safety or service can report it on faa.gov and I encourage us all to do so. We have an obligation as well as the FAA to let them know when there is an issue.

https://www.faa.gov/contact/safety_hotline/
http://www.faa.gov/contact/safety_hotline/
 
cbphoto
Posts: 1270
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:23 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 12:27 am

The crew aborted the T/O just prior to 100 kts (yes in the high speed regime)

Quoting tjwgrr (Reply 29):
I keep thinking about PGD's 7,193' rwy 4/22 and G4's large Mad Dog operation there... often with temperatures 80+ degrees Fahrenheit. .... scary thoughts.

PGD is an all Airbus base now, has been since the beginning of the year. Only TYS and AVL are run by a MD-80 out of PGD and its not daily by any means. Regardless of what operates where, no matter how long or short the runway is, all commercial aircraft have to have sufficient performance numbers to depart a runway, or adequate distance to stop prior to V1, should an abort be needed.



Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 49):
I lost friends on AS 261...I can't believe I'm reading this. Knowing what we do now, an airline would fail to lubricate jack screws on a MD80?? Criminal negligence.

While I can't speak for the lubrication on G4s MD-80s, I can tell you that lubricant alone will not bring down an MD-80 today. Procedures and checklists have been changed for MD-80 crews. Remember, that while maintenance failed on to lubricate the screw, that crew trying to unjam the trim is what eventually lead to the stripping of the jack screw. Crews are taught now, that if the trim fails, leave it where it fails and land the airplane as soon as possible!
ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4496
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 12:56 am

Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 49):
lost friends on AS 261...I can't believe I'm reading this. Knowing what we do now, an airline would fail to lubricate jack screws on a MD80?? Criminal negligence

I was floored when I read it too. I too had friends on 261. In fact, I was supposed to take the trip. I was pretty lucky, and count my blessings.

Quoting apfpilot (Reply 51):
Correct, however one has to be mindful that this report was put together by a union that is currently in heated negotiations with G4. Having said that I tend to lend more credibility to this report than would ordinarily be given for a few reasons. First, where there is smoke there is fire, it is an undeniable fact that G4 has had number of high profile incidents recently, and second for the Teamsters to put something like that if false could cause significant damage to G4 both in reputation and value shows they have source they feel is pretty reliable.

At first I thought it was a ploy to settle contract talks. However, the blasting article by the mechanic who walked off the job raised my eyebrows. It is clearly evident that G4 has a very serious problem with their maintenance program. The guy was there for a very short period of time, and really had no vested interest or axe to grind. Mix that in with the increasing problems, I have to assume it is true.

The jack screw issue has alarms ringing in my head. As mentioned above, there is no excuse for this. 261 taught a valuable lesson. If this is true, Allegiant needs to be shutdown immediately. The FAA should have every available resource investigating this claim. If there is a lack of training on critical maintenance like this, the FAA should easily find it.

Has anyone noticed how quiet the FAA and NTSB has been? I don't get it! The traveling public deserves something more than words of "the FAA and NTSB is investigating." Is there any response from them regarding any of these incidents?
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
diverted
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 3:17 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 1:02 am

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 54):
At first I thought it was a ploy to settle contract talks. However, the blasting article by the mechanic who walked off the job raised my eyebrows. It is clearly evident that G4 has a very serious problem with their maintenance program. The guy was there for a very short period of time, and really had no vested interest or axe to grind. Mix that in with the increasing problems, I have to assume it is true.

He also had many years experience at a "reputable" airline to base his judgement off of.

Red flags all around folks
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4496
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 1:45 am

Quoting diverted (Reply 55):
He also had many years experience at a "reputable" airline to base his judgement off of.

Red flags all around folks

I agree. He had not been there long enough to have an axe to grind, and I highly doubt he went to the media to enhance the union. I just don't get why it takes blood for the FAA to take action. I was just watching Air Disasters on the Ethiopian Airlines hijacking. Nobody took steps to secure cockpit doors after that. Then 9/11 happens, and sweeping changes happen.

If G4 lost a plane due to a jack screw similar to Alaska 261, would the FAA jump on it? I just don't get it! I feel like we are witnessing the making of a potential tragedy that could be prevented. I only see 2 actions happening. When bookings start dropping and the stock starts diving, the CEO will take action to fix the problem and make it a public move to steer the airline from losing big money. Or, we will see a serious event, and the FAA will finally do something besides fine the airline.

For the sake of the airline, the employees, and the customers..... The CEO must come to terms, and allocate more money to maintenance. Perhaps they are so ultra low cost, they might be going ultra low maintenance? It is agonizing to see all this happening, and I know I can't be alone in that agony. Sure, I could be wrong about it. But, I don't see an Allegiant response that soothes any concerns. A blanket statement, "we take safety as our #1 priority" just isn't enough. We have witnessed several airlines in our history that gave the same statement, only to have a serious event that revealed the statement wasn't true.

Gosh, I hope I am wrong! I really do. For some reason, I don't think I am, or anyone else as concerned is wrong.  

Can the pilots refuse to fly until a commitment to safety is made? I can't imagine how concerned the flight crews may be. Is there a pilot or flight attendant forum with anyone from G4 airing their concerns by chance?
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1517
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 1:46 am

Quoting planesntrains (Reply 47):
We didn't ask.

lol. Even the President of Canada said it would helpful if Americans knew more about what was going on around the world.

Quoting planesntrains (Reply 47):
So someone (like me) who's never flown on Allegiant should complain about their safety to the FAA? Are we to assume that the FAA is unaware of their aforementioned incidents until someone visits their website and tells them?

Just trying to grasp what we are hoping to accomplish.

If there is something suspicious we have an obligation to report it. Complaining about it on the internet isn't going to do anything. At least now we know that the FAA has had the red flag raised.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5601
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 5:23 am

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 57):
the President of Canada

Oh the irony!

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 8:08 am

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 57):
lol. Even the President of Canada said it would helpful if Americans knew more about what was going on around the world.

Again, nobody asked your opinion on that, and it adds nothing but pot-stirring to the thread. If you have a political point to make, go to non-av. They'll love you over there.

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 57):
If there is something suspicious we have an obligation to report it. Complaining about it on the internet isn't going to do anything. At least now we know that the FAA has had the red flag raised.

Who's "we"? Hearsay shouldn't be something that turns into a vigilante killing. If you experience something on their flights, then by all means report it. I'm certainly not going to start making robocalls based on something that I have no direct knowledge of outside of an online forum. And again, are you assuming that the FAA has no clue about these incidents?

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 58):
Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 57):
the President of Canada

Oh the irony!

Tell me about it.  

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22026
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 09, 2016 4:20 pm

Quoting planesntrains (Reply 47):

So someone (like me) who's never flown on Allegiant should complain about their safety to the FAA? Are we to assume that the FAA is unaware of their aforementioned incidents until someone visits their website and tells them?

Exactly. I've never flown with G4 and even without their safety issues, I never will because I don't like the product they offer (which is allowed; I won't fly F9 or NK either, but I have no doubts about safety with those airlines).

I think the FAA is well aware of what is going on, but for some reason they are dragging their feet.

Here's a breakdown of G4 incidents since 1/1/16:
-RTO due to engine failure, MD-80
-Emergency landing due to loss of cabin pressure, A320
-Emergency landing due to electrical odor in cabin, A319
-RTO due to engine failure, MD-80
-Emergency landing due to electrical odor in cabin, MD-80
-Burst all MLG tires on landing, MD-80
-IFSD/Emergency landing, MD-80

In addition, from 12/28 to 12/31:
-Diversion due to anti-ice system failure, A320
-Diversion due to engine trouble, MD-88 (didn't mention what sort of engine trouble or if there was IFSD)
-Emergency landing due to smell of smoke in cabin, MD-80

By contrast, for DL (with a fleet 10x the size and higher overall utilization):
-Diversion due to low backup oxygen pressure for crew, 763
-Diversion due to hydraulic leak, A319
-Lightning Strike, aircraft already on approach and landed safely, B739
-Diversion for unruly crew, 752
-Diversion to origin for bird strike, 752
-Emergency landing for smoke in cabin, 752
-Go-around and emergency landing for hydraulic failure A319

The prior incident was in October, 2015. Of the above, the lightning strike, unruly crew, and bird strike were not due to any issues having to do with the airframe itself. So from 1/1 DL had four incidents due to aircraft issues that could be conceivably attributed to maintenance, while G4 had seven.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
solarflyer22
Posts: 1517
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:07 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:00 pm

Quoting planesntrains (Reply 59):
Who's "we"? Hearsay shouldn't be something that turns into a vigilante killing. If you experience something on their flights, then by all means report it. I'm certainly not going to start making robocalls based on something that I have no direct knowledge of outside of an online forum. And again, are you assuming that the FAA has no clue about these incidents?


We would be ANetters. Hearsay implies you don't have any first hand knowledge which isn't technically correct, DAVE. Clearly, there have been a number of incidents as outlined by other ANetters which I've reviewed and found to be statistically anomalous. Secondly, its a request for an investigation by the FAA. That's different from presuming guilt and saying punish them outright. An important distinction. FAA might know but it might not. Or it might be not be well known.

Quoting planesntrains (Reply 59):

Again, nobody asked your opinion on that, and it adds nothing but pot-stirring to the thread. If you have a political point to make, go to non-av. They'll love you over there.

Oh I do Dave, I do.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Thu Mar 10, 2016 6:25 pm

A good PR move, and truly beneficial act, would be to hire that mechanic back as a consultant reporting directly to the President, and tasked with poking around the Florida shop and recommending changes that would be implemented from the top down, and then verifying that the changes were made.

Maybe they should hire TechOps to do the line maintenance on their aircraft at TPA.

Maybe they should pull the MRO work from AAR (which is actually a pretty-well-regarded shop) and give it to AMES, which has a lot of experience on DC9 variants and a reputation for quality. And put someone like the newspaper mechanic in there as the company rep.

Because they are non-union on the mech side, they can actually do a lot very quickly to address reliability through outsourcing to quality providers and/or revamping their internal operation without having to get a union's acquiescence. If it's as bad as is being said, however, I suspect that a union would support the additional training and procedures that are probably needed.

Or, cynical me says just let the IAM organize the shop. I don't know what effect it would have on actual quality of work, but the folks who are now being portrayed as nitwits would instantly become "licensed trained union expert professionals" in all future media coverage and pilot-union PR.  Smile

[Edited 2016-03-10 10:51:19]
 
yeelep
Posts: 766
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 7:53 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Thu Mar 10, 2016 8:46 pm

Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 49):

Quoting apfpilot (Reply 48):
Mechanics have reported that critical jobs, such as the lubrication of stabilizer jack screws, cannot be performed due to a lack of training on equipment and unavailable equipment."

I lost friends on AS 261...I can't believe I'm reading this. Knowing what we do now, an airline would fail to lubricate jack screws on a MD80?? Criminal neglige
Quoting F9Animal (Reply 54):
The jack screw issue has alarms ringing in my head. As mentioned above, there is no excuse for this. 261 taught a valuable lesson. If this is true, Allegiant needs to be shutdown immediately. The FAA should have every available resource investigating this claim. If there is a lack of training on critical maintenance like this, the FAA should easily find it.
Quoting F9Animal (Reply 56):
If G4 lost a plane due to a jack screw similar to Alaska 261, would the FAA jump on it? I just don't get it! I feel like we are witnessing the making of a potential tragedy that could be prevented.

The issue is lack of training/qualifications and equipment, not a lack of jackscrew inspections.

Nowhere is it stated that the jackscrew inspection/lube is not ever being accomplished, just that in at least one instance it could not be done when scheduled by planning. They have two options when this happens, if there is time left before the inspection is due it can just be rescheduled, or if there is not, the plane is taken out of service until the job is completed. Now if they claimed the inspection was being done by unqualified mechanics or without the correct certified equipment you would have reason to be upset. As it is it's just the union trying to be as dramatic as possible to make their point.
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4496
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 11, 2016 12:00 am

Quoting yeelep (Reply 63):
The issue is lack of training/qualifications and equipment, not a lack of jackscrew inspections.

Nowhere is it stated that the jackscrew inspection/lube is not ever being accomplished, just that in at least one instance it could not be done when scheduled by planning. They have two options when this happens, if there is time left before the inspection is due it can just be rescheduled, or if there is not, the plane is taken out of service until the job is completed. Now if they claimed the inspection was being done by unqualified mechanics or without the correct certified equipment you would have reason to be upset. As it is it's just the union trying to be as dramatic as possible to make their point.

I agree, to a certain extent. However, the continued problems with G4 planes has red flags all over the entire maintenance program. The possibilities of the jack screw issue are endless. Do they park the airplane until the inspection and job is complete, or do they use the plane until it can be done. Let's keep in mind, we are dealing with a ULCC that is being run by the former Valujet CEO. If there isn't a coincidence with history repeating itself, I have no idea what else to say. I am highly suspicious, and very concerned for the crews and passengers.
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 11, 2016 3:42 am

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 64):
Let's keep in mind, we are dealing with a ULCC that is being run by the former Valujet CEO.

A CEO who wanted Northwest to do their maintenance, and who had passed an FAA inspection not too long before the crash, which, of course, wasn't caused by anything wrong with the plane.
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4496
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 11, 2016 6:10 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 65):
A CEO who wanted Northwest to do their maintenance, and who had passed an FAA inspection not too long before the crash, which, of course, wasn't caused by anything wrong with the plane.

So, am I wrong to be concerned? I see a very alarming trend. Doesn't history have a way of repeating itself. No, 592 wasn't caused by the airplane. However, nobody can deny it should have never happened. Do we need another, it should not have happened, happen again?
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 11, 2016 6:24 am

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 61):
FAA might know but it might not. Or it might be not be well known.

Regardless of what they would ultimately say in retrospect, I absolutely believe that they are aware of the goings-on at G4. Whether they do anything about it or not is another story, but I don't think any action that I could take through complaining would make any difference in the outcome. I think the best thing [the traveling public] can do is vote with their wallets. There's been plenty of news coverage of their reliability and professionalism issues - anyone who cares to can simply google "Allegiant" in the news and I'm sure get enough info to make an informed decision if they so choose.

That's my take, and I respect of course if/that you disagree.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 11, 2016 8:35 am

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 66):

So, am I wrong to be concerned? I

Probably not. But it's more persuasive to stick to the relevant facts, not the cheap meaningless ones. What concerns me are: the elevator incident, the poor procedures and discipline in the shop(s), the frequency of returns, and the mishmash of avionics on the md80s.
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4496
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 11, 2016 11:02 pm

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 68):

Probably not. But it's more persuasive to stick to the relevant facts, not the cheap meaningless ones. What concerns me are: the elevator incident, the poor procedures and discipline in the shop(s), the frequency of returns, and the mishmash of avionics on the md80s.

I agree. I just feel see a former behavior repeating itself. Valujet had very similar problems. Is it a coincidence, or am I barking up the wrong tree?

I went to Google and clicked on wiki about Valujet. Here is a little snippet about Valujet, that seems to nearly copy behaviors happening at Allegiant.

The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Atlanta field office sent a memo on February 14, 1996, to Washington, D.C., stating that "consideration should be given to an immediate FAR 121 re-certification of this airline" - in other words, the FAA wanted ValuJet grounded. ValuJet airplanes made 15 emergency landings in 1994, 57 in 1995, and 57 from January through May 1996. In February the FAA ordered ValuJet to seek approval before adding any new aircraft or cities to their network, something the industry had not seen since deregulation in 1979. This attempt at removing ValuJet's certification was "lost in the maze at FAA" according to NTSB Chairman Jim Hall.[7] By this time, ValuJet's accident rate was not only one of the highest in the low-fare sector, but was more than 14 times that of the legacy airlines.

[Edited 2016-03-11 15:07:08]
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:56 am

I hear you. Remember, though, that there was a lot of political pressure and Union pressure to squish ValuJet because they were destroying their competition. It was like the Southwest effect on steroids, and a lot of people were petrified of their success. They had over a billion dollars in cash in the bank at the time of Critter 592. And that's the only reason they survived. There was nothing about the crew's performance that day that should have concerned anyone. Candy Kubek, on the CVR transcript, is totally professional and by the book. The only thing that might have made a difference is if the FO had said fire rather than smoke, which would have led investigators to the true cause more quickly, which would have eliminated the weeks of media hysteria and political opportunism that ensued after the accident. Kubek said fire, the FO reported smoke. That one thing might have changed the public perception of the airline long-term. Initially, you probably remember, the FAA administrator himself stood in the swamp and said that the airline was safe. And you probably also remember that Delta would have had exactly the same accident with an md-80 but for the fact that the oxygen generators at Delta went up on the ramp AFTER travelling cross-country on two flights. The technical violation that critter did not carry a certification for HazMat is pretty irrelevant. The Delta generators, and the generators carried by myriad other airlines, would have had the same effect on those airlines' aircraft, certification or not. The fact is that ValuJet wasn't carrying a lot of crap in the hold that other airlines were. They got hurt because someone illegally sent something by Comat that the carrier itself had no idea it was putting on its plane. That's not to say that someday something might have happened on a ValuJet aircraft that was due to a maintenance irregularity. That can happen at any carrier. And the more maintenance irregularities, the more the likelihood that something will go sideways during the response to one. Look at that American Eagle flight where they shut down the wrong engine and crashed. But efforts to link Critter 592 somehow to maintenance are a big reach, and usually done for simplistic or political purposes.

I think that G4 is surprisingly tone deaf to the issue, and that they should be taking aggressive affirmative steps to get their level of air returns and gate returns down to where they are for the md-80 fleets at Delta and American. It would be a good way to relieve the union of the club that it is using, with increasing effectiveness, to bludgeon the airline.
 
F9Animal
Posts: 4496
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 12, 2016 3:37 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 70):
Candy Kubek, on the CVR transcript, is totally professional and by the book.

She was a friend of mine. This is part of the reason why I am so sick to see this happening. I am certain she would have done anything to get that plane down safe. I still steam about the FO not expressing the severity. Perhaps ATC would have had them down much sooner.
I Am A Different Animal!!
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:08 am

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 71):
Perhaps ATC would have had them down much sooner.

I would rest easy about that. They had carte blanche to go anywhere they wanted. There was just no way even to make Opa Locka. She did her best in a situation that deteriorated faster than anyone in aviation could ever have imagined. From a pop and "What was that?" to an inferno in mere seconds (18 seconds actually). She commanded a return immediately, seconds into that sequence. You have doubtless seen that tire-fire of an FAA demonstration, which shocked every expert who was involved in it. Nobody appreciated how bad that could go and how fast, and anyone who says to the contrary isn't being honest. The absolute horror of that situation, with full-fledged fire erupting through the floor of the pax cabin, is just beyond cavil. I will have another look at that CVR transcript tonight in their memory. If she was your friend, you shouldn't, because it is painful. Like I said, that was a truly-inescapable situation.

[Edited 2016-03-11 21:08:54]

[Edited 2016-03-11 21:13:20]
 
hiflyeras
Posts: 2318
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:48 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 12, 2016 5:12 am

I always felt bad for ValuJet as well...that accident could have happened to anyone. The way they were maligned wasn't really fair. Hopefully we won't have a similar incident with lithium batteries.
 
cbphoto
Posts: 1270
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 6:23 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:05 pm

Quoting HiflyerAS (Reply 73):
Hopefully we won't have a similar incident with lithium batteries.

Sadly, we already have lost a few cargo aircraft and crews due to Lithium batteries.
ETOPS: Engines Turning or Passengers Swimming
 
National757
Posts: 486
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:05 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:44 pm

G4 has the power to make things right by improving operations. Don't understand why it's taken them so long but for the sake of all involved, hope their planned switch to one fleet type is the solution we have all been waiting for.

Mechanical delays occur with all airlines but the premature rotation at LAS last year could have brought the airline down had it not been for luck and the skill of the pilots. They earned their keep on that day, no doubt about it.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:23 pm

One fleet type won't make a difference. The md80s is just as easy, if not more so, to repair than the other aircraft.
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5392
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:43 pm

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 15):
However, the one incident that should have sent shivers down everyone's spine was the elevator failure and the reason for it. I saw something somewhere recently that suggested that it was an error made by and at AAR, who does work for everybody and so can't be called a lesser operator as MROs go, but it is a gargantuan red flag that needed to be evaluated. G4 did have AA do their MRO work for years, so it's not that they weren't willing to pay for that; AA shut them down when they shut down MCI, claiming not enough room at OKC. Similarly, of course, ValuJet wanted NW to do its MRO, and NW refused.

You come running to defend AAR and your beloved (crap) MROs so quickly but you don't even know where AA's maintenance base is?                I love anet sometimes.

Anyways AA didn't drop G4s work because of MCI shutting down, MCI had very little to do with MD80 work. Also I'm about 99.9% sure that contract ended after MCI shut down anyways.

G4 wanted a cheaper vendor and AA didn't really want to do the work anymore.
 
Flaps
Posts: 1679
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2000 1:11 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:03 pm

Quoting F9Animal (Reply 71):
I still steam about the FO not expressing the severity. Perhaps ATC would have had them down much sooner.

There was no delay whatsoever in getting the aircraft down. The fact that the FO said smoke instead of fire had no bearing on the crash at all. The crew knew exactly what they were dealing with and immediately executed all appropriate procedures including an immediate turn back to MIA (note the repetition of immediate). As stated above it might have sped up the initial investigation had the FO stated fire and that might have saved much post crash speculation about the cause. As for the effect on the results of the situation itself, there were none. They weren't going to make it no matter what. That fire was sudden and it was intense.

As for AS 261 the crew did not fully understand what they had on their hands. I f they had they would have left the damn thing alone instead of pissing around with it until they broke it. This was no the fault of the crew and I am not condemning them in any way. There was no way for them to know but I'm pretty sure that IF they had known they would have left the damn thing alone and they would be alive today. Also as stated above procedures were changed as a result and this accident wont be repeated. Reading that accident report and knowing the end result one cannot help but scream to oneself just leave the &%$# thing alone, don,t touch it any more!!! But hind site is 20/20 and that crew simply did not have that information as we do now.

As for Allegiant, I wont argue that there are issues. I won't agree however with all of the hysteria and over dramatics at play on this thread. The FAA IS looking into the issues. It is not part of their mission or obligation to publish the findings of ongoing investigations to satisfy the witch hunters of A-Net. It is part of the FAA mission to work with operators in resolving and correcting issues first and foremost to ensure safety of flight. Fines, groundings and revocations only occur when an operator fails to abide or cooperate in the process. As of now there is no indication that G4 is not cooperating or acting. These are old aircraft of numerous variations and configurations that do not fly a lot and are being worked on by multiple MRO's. That in itself is an issue to be sure and that process bears investigation. The investigation is ongoing.

The concerns listed in this thread are largely valid. The hysteria and over dramatization and overreach however is way over the top. The incident rate is higher than what should be expected. The aircraft however are not falling apart and they are not dropping out of the sky. The carrier is being looked at and if there are serious systemic issues they will be and probably are being addressed. The fact that these actions aren't all over your local news does not mean in any way that they are not being addressed.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Mon Mar 14, 2016 12:19 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 77):
You come running to defend AAR and your beloved (crap) MROs so quickly but you don't even know where AA's maintenance base is?                I love anet sometimes

Oh please. Dumb personal attacks like that are exactly what people hate about Anet. It was a brain cramp / typo on my part when I once wrote OKC instead of Tulsa in a post when I meant Tulsa. I had just been watching an OKC basketball game, as a matter of fact, because I like the team. I once represented AMR Corp, so I damn well know where their maintenance bases are.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Mon Mar 14, 2016 12:30 am

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 77):

Anyways AA didn't drop G4s work because of MCI shutting down

From when it happened:

"Allegiant used AA in TUL extensively. In fact, the CNBC feature on AA pictured an Allegiant MD-80. I do not know the details other than AA could not support all of Allegiant needs for this year. Unofficially I was told with TUL absorbing the MCI work created a constraint on non-AA work. "

And

"While AA stood a very good chance of keeping the business, during negotiations in October AA revised its offer and advised G4 they now only had room to accommodate 5 of the required a previously bid 16 heavy checks needed in 2010 by Allegiant, and 2011 plan was a bit gray as well."
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 22026
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:48 am

Quoting Flaps (Reply 78):
The aircraft however are not falling apart and they are not dropping out of the sky.

So far.

Safety doesn't wait for blood to be spilled.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 16, 2016 9:44 pm

And here is yet another emergency landing.

http://www.the-leader.com/article/20160314/NEWS/160319883

Just a faulty indicator light.

I like the gratuitous reference to "children were crying". (Aren't kids on planes ALWAYS crying? It seems so on most of my flights.)

Although incidents like this don't reflect actual safety issues, they do draw unnecessary issues. If they happen more frequently at Allegiant because Allegiant does not go the extra mile to try to prevent them (which is what that mechanic said: that there would be lots of extra air returns, gate returns, and diversions because of the way it conducts its Florida maintenance operation), isn't there a point where the negative PR eliminates the benefit of whatever cost savings they achieve by pushing the metal?
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5517
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 16, 2016 9:54 pm

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 82):
isn't there a point where the negative PR eliminates the benefit of whatever cost savings they achieve by pushing the metal?

I doubt most people buying tickets on G4 have noticed the PR. In fact, I doubt most people outside of A.net have noticed the PR. The reality is that unless G4 has a really catastrophic incident, the general public is unlikely to notice.
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:33 pm

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 83):
I doubt most people buying tickets on G4 have noticed the PR. In fact, I doubt most people outside of A.net have noticed the PR. The reality is that unless G4 has a really catastrophic incident, the general public is unlikely to notice.

Heck, I could count on one hand - with four fingers to spare - the number of people I know who have even heard of Allegiant. Granted, they don't serve SEA (where I live), but BLI isn't that far away.

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:46 pm

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 83):
I doubt most people buying tickets on G4 have noticed the PR. In fact, I doubt most people outside of A.net have noticed the PR. The reality is that unless G4 has a really catastrophic incident, the general public is unlikely to notice.

Well... remember that as Allegiant goes into a city, it depends on local media coverage to spread the word, a typical article will be extensive, because it's a big deal in these little places:
"New Airline Service At Podunk International!!"

But look what happens now:

Here's a random article: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/busines...nt-air-to-start-service?artslide=0

Here is the SECOND PARAGRAPH of that article announcing service: "The low-cost air carrier, which has come under federal scrutiny recently following several incidents, will begin flying two nonstop flights to McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas on May 19 and Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport on May 26."

Ouch.

[Edited 2016-03-16 16:48:03]
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 21175
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Thu Mar 17, 2016 1:25 pm

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 84):
Heck, I could count on one hand - with four fingers to spare - the number of people I know who have even heard of Allegiant.

Yet somehow they have a business model...

I have a few friends who fly them often. I express my concerns, but I respect the choice is their choice.

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 85):
The low-cost air carrier, which has come under federal scrutiny recently following several incidents, will begin flying two nonstop flights to McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas on May 19 and Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport on May 26."

Ouch... Ironically the press will help get the name out.

Lightsaber
3 months without TV. The best decision of my life.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5517
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Thu Mar 17, 2016 1:30 pm

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 85):
But look what happens now:

Here's a random article: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/busines...nt-air-to-start-service?artslide=0

Here is the SECOND PARAGRAPH of that article announcing service: "The low-cost air carrier, which has come under federal scrutiny recently following several incidents, will begin flying two nonstop flights to McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas on May 19 and Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport on May 26."

I doubt most people reading that line will even notice. They'll see cheap tickets and nonstop service to vacation destinations. They'll be more worried about what hotel they should book on the Strip than G4's safety record.
 
Grisee08
Posts: 468
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 4:20 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:41 pm

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 76):
The md80s is just as easy, if not more so, to repair than the other aircraft.

That's not exactly true. The A320 has FBW Avionics, whilst the MD-80 has very cumbersome cable rigging all throughout the aircraft that a lot of was even eliminated on the MD-95 (717). Therefore, it can be easier to fix some parts on an A320 series aircraft than on an MD-80. That is not an excuse though for the events that have been occurring. If nobody has seen this video,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R0CViDUBFs I suggest watching it, as he explains why he loves the MD-80, but also explains its own quirks.
Alright Alright Alright!
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9524
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:35 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 86):
Yet somehow they have a business model...

Absolutely. I really don't have a problem with their model, but I just don't know anyone who's aware of them.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 87):
I doubt most people reading that line will even notice. They'll see cheap tickets and nonstop service to vacation destinations. They'll be more worried about what hotel they should book on the Strip than G4's safety record.

I think air accidents have become so infrequent that people sort of casually trust that regardless of who they are flying on, that they'll arrive safely at their destination. Of course, an accident will change that, but until then....

-Dave
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
Brewfangrb
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 19, 2016 5:49 am

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 40):
Here's a nice example of that which some of us are probably familiar with:
http://youtu.be/NQZzTPd1HJw

This was interesting. Thanks for sharing it.

Quoting apfpilot (Reply 48):
First thought: This isn't good if true: "There is inadequate tooling and equipment. Mechanics have reported that critical jobs, such as the lubrication of stabilizer jack screws, cannot be performed due to a lack of training on equipment and unavailable equipment."

*shudder*

Quoting solarflyer22 (Reply 57):
lol. Even the President of Canada said it would helpful if Americans knew more about what was going on around the world.

Oh, where to begin. But you're busy condemning us for not understanding the world, so I'll leave you to wallow in your ignorance.

But to the point: Why did you even bring this up in THIS thread? Forget non-av or not, nothing in this thread has anything to do--at all--with Americans' possession or lack of knowledge on international relations.

As for

Quoting exFWAOONW (Reply 3):
And yet everyone onboard got to their destination and walked away without a scratch. Where exactly is the drama that justifies a blanket condemnation?

You need to watch more "Air Disasters". The dismissal of minor issue and the alignment of multiple *minor* issues is exactly what causes crashes.

In my job (a property casualty underwriter), we have a basic premise (one of a few) that guides us: "Frequency leads to severity."

For this reason, a driver who has had multiple minor (i.e., with low payout) at-fault crashes will have their policy non-renewed, even if they have been profitable with their carrier. Why? Because: 1) A driver with one at-fault crash is still statistically far more likely to have *another* at-fault crash than a driver with NO at-fault crashes and 2) Repeated at-fault crashes points to the pattern of decision-making. Because of point #1, the fact the prior at-fault crashes were "minor" is NOT a positive. They are more likely to have another at-fault crash and eventually, one of those at-fault crashes will be severe (high payout).

Thus, the analogous line of thinking for G4 is: Repeated incidents like this *could* be "bad luck" or what have you--but it's a rate of activity FAR beyond the industry and exceptionally above the best-performing airlines. If these incidents ARE related to a culture of delayed or minimized maintenance, eventually the incident will be severe, as will the consequences.

Like me non-renewing a client with at-fault accidents, I would avoid G4 until they can prove--shown by a reduction in the rate of incidents--that the risk of a severe incident is inline with other airlines. (It's moot bc I don't buy purely on fare and basically, if DL flies there, I fly them. But it's a good point for those that do fly them to consider).
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 19, 2016 6:05 am

Quoting Brewfangrb (Reply 90):
For this reason, a driver who has had multiple minor (i.e., with low payout) at-fault crashes will have their policy non-renewed, even if they have been profitable with their carrier. Why? Because: 1) A driver with one at-fault crash is still statistically far more likely to have *another* at-fault crash than a driver with NO at-fault crashes and 2) Repeated at-fault crashes points to the pattern of decision-making. Because of point #1, the fact the prior at-fault crashes were "minor" is NOT a positive. They are more likely to have another at-fault crash and eventually, one of those at-fault crashes will be severe (high payout).

Thus, the analogous line of thinking for G4 is: Repeated incidents like this *could* be "bad luck" or what have you--but it's a rate of activity FAR beyond the industry and exceptionally above the best-performing airlines. If these incidents ARE related to a culture of delayed or minimized maintenance, eventually the incident will be severe, as will the consequences.


This is a very cogent analysis, and an appropriate analogy.

The major complaint by the Florida mechanic wasn't exactly that maintenance was per se delayed or minimized, but rather that a combination of lack of training, experience, documentation and tooling, along with supervisors not taking the time to make sure that (1) the problem was properly-diagnosed; and (2) the repair was properly-executed and the work completed, along with (3) sloppy transitions and hand-overs of information and status from one shift to the next, was causing repeated instances of the same fault on the same aircraft. His tale included numerous instances where he, from experience, knew that the repair being executed wouldn't solve the problem being reported, and of the repair not being properly-tested after execution, leading to multiple air returns or gate returns for the same problem in relatively-close proximity. And that is in fact what seems to be happening. US airlines are required to have surveillance programs to pick this stuff up, and to try to identify root causes (which this guy apparently did, independent of any data-surveillance system). The problem is that whatever actions the airline purports to be taking to address these issues doesn't seem, at least from a distance, to be effective.

There is a human (and management) tendency that I have long made it a personal mission to eliminate in any operation for which I am responsible, and that is: "Never enough time to do it right, plenty of time to do it over." In my operations, I want it done right the first time, which saves money in the long run and directly-drives higher reliability, but takes more time in the short run. I would consider it to be an imperative in any operation that involves safety.

[Edited 2016-03-18 23:38:22]
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 19, 2016 6:17 am

Quoting Grisee08 (Reply 88):

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 76):
The md80s is just as easy, if not more so, to repair than the other aircraft.

That's not exactly true. The A320 has FBW Avionics, whilst the MD-80 has very cumbersome cable rigging all throughout the aircraft that a lot of was even eliminated on the MD-95 (717). Therefore, it can be easier to fix some parts on an A320 series aircraft than on an MD-80.

If you're in the business, I stand corrected. What I was led to understand years ago by a good friend who was among the mechanical leadership at a now-defunct mid-sized scheduled US airline was that their MD80s were comparatively easy to get back in the air after going tech as opposed to their 737s. He lauded the frame's straightforward systems and design. What he focused on was that the stuff that was more likely to need fixing/adjusting/replacing was, on average: (1) easy to access; (2) easy to remove and replace; and (3) less-time-consuming to do (1) and (2). He had a few examples of intelligently-located items and intelligently-located access as compared to some real bears on the 737, and he said something about any line-replaceable item being replaceable in X minutes on the MD80. Both frames have their quirks, of course, and tribal knowledge within an organization always makes a huge difference not only as to the ease, speed and effectiveness of repairs, but also as to their perceived ease. His airline was replacing DC9s with 737s and MD80s, so there may have been more knowledge about the one frame over the other, and his opinion was his opinion only, but it made sense.

[Edited 2016-03-18 23:17:53]

[Edited 2016-03-18 23:19:46]
 
Brewfangrb
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:13 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 19, 2016 6:58 am

Quoting wjcandee (Reply 91):
The major complaint by the Florida mechanic wasn't exactly that maintenance was per se delayed or minimized, but rather that a combination of lack of training, experience, documentation and tooling, along with supervisors not taking the time to make sure that (1) the problem was properly-diagnosed; and (2) the repair was properly-executed and the work completed, along with (3) sloppy transitions and hand-overs of information and status from one shift to the next, was causing repeated instances of the same fault on the same aircraft.

And each of these concerns seem to support a lead-up to the incidents that have been reported. Point (3) is particularly concerning. When I read this in your post, I immediately thought of Continental Express 2574 where the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer was to be replaced. The screws had been removed on one half of the stabilizer but not replaced.

(The Wiki article doesn't have anything beyond this, but I remember the Air Disasters episode on this crash. If I remember correctly, a mechanic supervisor went up there and removed the screws on the port half of the stabilizer to "help the guys out" but never documented it and then it was miscommunicated to the next shift, so they never replaced the screws. The leading edge pulled off and caused complete loss of control).
 
wjcandee
Posts: 9980
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Allegiant Engine Failure RTO 3/5

Sat Mar 19, 2016 9:13 am

Quoting Brewfangrb (Reply 93):
Point (3) is particularly concerning.

Yeah...to me the whole thing is concerning. That it's more a matter of ineptitude than intentional malfeasance really doesn't change the fact that they need to take action. Here's hoping they are.

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