US airline 'broke safety rules'

[HURAKAN]

US airline 'broke safety rules'

US aviation officials have accused American Airlines of major breaches of safety, including intentionally flying planes known to need repairing.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said it wanted to fine the company a total of $7.1m (£3.8m).

It said two MD-83 passenger jets were used on dozens of flights in 2007, even though repair work reported as necessary by pilots had not been done.

Problems with drug and alcohol testing were also found, officials said.

American Airlines, which can appeal against the fine, had no immediate comment.

The FAA statement comes hours after British Airways confirmed it had sealed an alliance with American Airlines, allowing the two carriers to agree fares, routes and schedules together.

The alliance also includes Spain's Iberia, which is merging with BA.

Safety regulations

In a statement, the FAA said that in December 2007, "American used the wrong provisions of its Minimum Equipment List (MEL) to return two MD-83 aircraft to service after pilots had reported problems, and flew the planes 58 times in violation of FAA regulations".

The MEL contains components and systems without which the aircraft may operate safely under specific limitations.

The FAA believes the large total amount of the fine for these violations is appropriate because American Airlines was aware that appropriate repairs were needed, and instead deferred maintenance
Federal Aviation Administration

On 11 and 12 December, the airline "operated the first MD-83 on eight flights in airspace it should have been restricted from after maintenance on part of the autopilot system was improperly deferred", the FAA said.

An FAA inspector discovered the error and informed American Airlines, but the plane was still flown on 10 further flights until the problem was fixed, it added.

In another incident involving the same aircraft on 21 December, the autopilot disconnected during landing because of a faulty altimeter.

However, technicians did not check the problem and instead deferred maintenance, allowing a further 36 flights to take place, the FAA said.

A second MD-83 also experienced an "autopilot disconnect" on 27 December.

"Although American mechanics correctly diagnosed the problem, they again deferred maintenance under the wrong item of the MEL. As a result, the aircraft operated on four revenue flights without a fully functioning autopilot," the FAA said.

The FAA proposed a $4.1m civil penalty for the violations in the first case and $325,000 for the second. It said the fines were appropriate because the airline deferred repairs even when it was aware.

"In intentionally continuing to fly the aircraft, the carrier did not follow important safety regulations intended to protect passengers and crew," the FAA said.

The FAA is also proposed $2.7m in civil penalties for "alleged past deficiencies in its drug and alcohol testing programs and for allegedly operating aircraft in past years without timely inspections of emergency escape path lighting systems".

[Stephanie]

They should be fined to bankruptcy.

[vbhoutex]

That is inexcusable!!! They should not be allowed to do anything but pay the full fines and their entire fleet should be checked imo.

[gtalum]

They should be fined to bankruptcy.

Good idea. Those thousands of employees probably don't need their jobs anyway.

[vbhoutex]

And the thousands of lives they probably endangered are of no consequence???

[Category 5]

They should be shut down.

[gtalum]

And the thousands of lives they probably endangered are of no consequence???

There were no "thousands of lives endangered". This is your typical sensationalist blown-out-of-proportion airline safety story where the "journalists" have no idea what they're writing about. Operating with a malfunctioning autopilot, while against FAA regulations in certain situations, is not dangerous or life-threatening. The "MEL", or "Minimum Equipment List" consists of non-critical minimum required equipment.

These are minor regulatory violations, as indicated by the relatively minor fines imposed. When the FAA finds documented life-endangering problems, they immediately shut the airline down and hand over the evidence to the Department of Justice for prosecution. They don't bother with fines.

[Stephanie]

And the thousands of lives they probably endangered are of no consequence???

There were no "thousands of lives endangered". This is your typical sensationalist blown-out-of-proportion airline safety story where the "journalists" have no idea what they're writing about. Operating with a malfunctioning autopilot, while against FAA regulations in certain situations, is not dangerous or life-threatening. The "MEL", or "Minimum Equipment List" consists of non-critical minimum required equipment.

These are minor regulatory violations, as indicated by the relatively minor fines imposed. When the FAA finds documented life-endangering problems, they immediately shut the airline down and hand over the evidence to the Department of Justice for prosecution. They don't bother with fines.

Would you consider them minor if you were on that plane? Wouldn't you wonder what the heck else is wrong with it? US Air and most of the others have been bleeding for years, even without the fuel price crisis. I think that they are all run by a bunch of incompetents and do not give a crap about the mechanical safety of their planes. How many stories have we seen lately about several of them being fined for lax mechanical checkups, etc.? And don't get me started on baggage problems, though they've gotten better in Philadelphia. When something so basic as getting luggage back from a plane that you just got off of is a problem, logically, you need to wonder about the rest of the system and how unorganized that must be. It can't just be in one area.

[gtalum]

Would you consider them minor if you were on that plane?

yes, I would. Pilots fly withoput autopilot all the time.

Wouldn't you wonder what the heck else is wrong with it?

No. For one thing, the pilots have the final say in whether to fly or not. WHy woudl a pilot agree to fly if the plane had actual safety issues?

How many stories have we seen lately about several of them being fined for lax mechanical checkups, etc.?

No more than before. Remember the Alaska Airlines crash back in 2000? They were making tons of money then, and still had some lax maintenance procedures. There's nor eason to fear it now more than then. The airlines still do regular checks, going so far as to completely tear planes apart and rebuild them every couple of years. Being lax in a minor regulatory issue does not indicate that the C and D checks are handled inappropriately.

Flying is by far the safest way to travel.

[ohiostorm]

There might have been times where someone small and non-critical was wrong with an aircraft you were flying on and you probably had no idea. MEL's happen all the time, everyday to every airline.