Posted on 04/11/2008 4:48:54 AM PDT by Gamecock
If that were the case, i could agree with you, but it isn't. AA wasn't trying to bypass or circumvent the requirement, they were trying to get the FAA to work with them and allow them to conduct the inspections in a way that didn't impact their schedule to this degree. Again, this is NOT an emergrency situation. My job requires me to fly a lot and if it were an emergency, I'd be on your side. It simply isn't.
Lastly, once the inspections are completed, the issue isn't gone. AA as well as every other airline sold a ticket to provide goods or services. That ticket serves as a contract between the airline and the customer. If/when AA is sued for not keeping up its end of its obligation as the result of this silliness on the part of the FAA, who will (likely) get the judgement against them - AA or the FAA?
Ah yes!
I understand your mindset much better now as to the importance of inhering to approved data! : D
I just got back from around your area early this AM. Left St. Louis monsoons and was greeted by snow and slush runways in MSP.
I think you nailed it!!
Prove that to be true and take personal responsibility for it then.
You couldn't speak up sooner, could you!?!
I'll wait while they grease the jackscrew too.....
I don't mind that my flight was 5 hours late. I don't even mind that they dumped me off at a closed airport this morning at 1:00 AM. What p!sses me off to no end, however, is my luggage not arriving with me.
Attention all airlines: People like to fly with their luggage!
The FAA should have enforced the rules all along... But they did not, and we have this mess.
I blame the FAA as much as the airlines.
BTW, what airlines have all of their maintenance done in Guatemala? Talk about your warm fuzzy feelings.....
They were given 18 months starting in 2006. They failed to comply. How does this make it a problem on the side of the FAA?
Words mean something, 1 “ means 1” not 1.25” but 1”.
Some FAA Inspector having a bad day make a big deal of a matter that should have been addressed when it was due.
Both the airline and more important the FAA are to blame.
But who suffers? Not the FAA for their part, but the airline for their lack of perfroming the inspections as required, and the public who has no voice at all in this closter fu**.
Will the FAA get fined for not performing their job as required, yea the day after hel* freezes over.
Granted, they were probably lax. The issue is still NOT an emergency situation requiring the grounding of AA's entire MD-80 fleet. Cabling problems rarely contribute to airplanes falling out of the sky.
Once the issue was discovered by/at AA, an agreement to work with the FAA to comply with the cabling tie requirement at the next maintenance cycle would have been acceptable under most circumstances. As ASOC noted, the FAA probably cozied up to SWA and let them circumvent too many inspections. In order to regain their credibility, they needed to come down hard on the next target - AA.
So, somebody had to take the blame for the complacency at the FAA. If the order was issued in 2006, as you noted, why is it AA's fault that it wasn't done before now? The ball is still in the FAA's court because they have the responsibility of spot checking to ensure that the inpections are being properly performed. Evidently, there are some FAA inspectors who were "pencil-whipping" the paperwork instead of doing what we pay them for.
Remember when the speed limit was 55 and you would get these events where people would create multiple car moving 55 mph roadblocks to demonstrate the stupidity of the whole thing?
I think that may be what happened here: Let’s all follow the precise letter of the law and see what happens.
AA could fold.
No? Really?
Yet you so casually are prepared to bankrupt one of our major airlines.
FAA designated inspectors are not necessarily FAA emplyees. In many cases, they work for the airline, aircraft manufacturer, or maintenance contractor.
It is the applicant's (read: airline's) responsibility to ensure that their inspections conform to the required standards. This is akin to blaming the test monitor because the student failed to pass the test.
At any rate, we disagree. If you'd like to continue the discussion, I'd be happy to, although I doubt either of us will sway the other. :-)
Well then, this whole scenario has been created because of a headline from The Onion?
Me thinks that if you have taken responsibility and have approved data which shows that this situation is safe and you have signed off on it with credentials, "proving" that it isn't an issue, that makes it an irrelevant issue then.
It's YOU who will be taking responsibility for any mishaps and possibly deaths that may come about because of misjudgment with safety of air travel.
You must be at least an accredited DAR, DER, and/or PMI then.
Doohickey, CEO, American Airlines...
The buck stops at Doohickey. /s
Actually, yes, I can think at least two instance where that very thing happened.
Most are not, however they are approved via proxy to do the work of the FAA.
The FAA still is responsible for their approval of them thus their actions too.
I know, you already know this MortMan. ; )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.