AA scrubs 200 FLights

[robbedagain]

just seen on CNN that AA is scrubbing 200 flights, all of which are operated by AA MD-80 due to concerns by the FAA and AA about a bundle of wire in the MD-80 that was all they said as it broke at 9am on CNN

 

[jimntx]

So gald I'm on vacation until next week.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

So in other words, they were about to get caught with their pants down so they just decided to do the right thing?

Between this and Southwest, the FAA is doing nothing but scaring the crap out of the traveling public!

 

[flyhigh]

I wouldn't say "pants down" at all. From everything I've heard & read, AA has already complied with this. The FAA, after getting b*itch-slapped by the media over the Southwest issue is now going back to make sure there was no other incidents of FAA inspectors not doing their jobs.

 

[700UW]

The company said it canceled about 200 flights so it could check on wiring bundles in its MD-80 planes.

"We are reinspecting the MD-80s to make sure the wiring is installed and secured exactly according to the directive," AMR said in a statement.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

I highly doubt it. The FAA would be hard pressed to explain why they would walk into a carrier's headquarters and arbitrarily knock ten percent of their planes out of service on a whim without sufficient cause. If it wasn't a big deal, the FAA could have done a few at a time so as to not disrupt upwards of 40,000 air travelers all at once. I mean, think about it, Spring break, packed flights and AA is just bending over on 200 aircraft on an FAA whim? Don't think so.

There is a reason this happened - we may never know what it is but you can trust if something is found the FAA will lay the blame squarely on AA and not any of their inspectors.

 

[DalMD88]

So what is the reinspect all about? I heard some wiring in the wheel well that was improperly clamped. The instructions state clamp every one inch, but some have been found to be clamped with 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 inch spacing. Any truth to this? If so which wire bundle?

 

[limit]

I highly doubt it. The FAA would be hard pressed to explain why they would walk into a carrier's headquarters and arbitrarily knock ten percent of their planes out of service on a whim without sufficient cause. If it wasn't a big deal, the FAA could have done a few at a time so as to not disrupt upwards of 40,000 air travelers all at once. I mean, think about it, Spring break, packed flights and AA is just bending over on 200 aircraft on an FAA whim? Don't think so.

There is a reason this happened - we may never know what it is but you can trust if something is found the FAA will lay the blame squarely on AA and not any of their inspectors.

Don't.
While The FAA is correct that a problem exists,they are definitely over reacting on this by practically grounding the fleet.
Without going into details this could have been resolved in a few days(and a lot of overtime).
This presented them with the perfect opportunity to "restore their name" while going after a really big fish at the same time.
The fault definitely falls on the ones that gave them this opportunity (AA),but do not think for a minute there is no other motivation behind it.
A month ago this would have resulted in an announcement, a fine and time alloted to fix the issue.

DalMD88.
Aux pump.

 

[the cave]

what is in question is a wire harness on the aux hyd pump. planes are going t be inspected on overnights as they hit a maint station and will be corrected before the next flight. we didnt fair to bad here at dfw but they still brought guys in from tul and afw. if you are flying the next couple of days be ready for some cxld flights and delays

 

[signals]

I wouldn't say "pants down" at all. From everything I've heard & read, AA has already complied with this. The FAA, after getting b*itch-slapped by the media over the Southwest issue is now going back to make sure there was no other incidents of FAA inspectors not doing their jobs.

So true so true! Again that's what happens when you open a can of worms!

 

[The Goose]

So what is the reinspect all about? I heard some wiring in the wheel well that was improperly clamped. The instructions state clamp every one inch, but some have been found to be clamped with 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 inch spacing. Any truth to this? If so which wire bundle?

Not sure as to the correctness, but heard something yesterday evening about pencil whipping, an aux hydraulic pump, and "high level" negotiations going on between the company and the FAA.

 

[Joe Patroni]

I wouldn't say "pants down" at all. From everything I've heard & read, AA has already complied with this. The FAA, after getting b*itch-slapped by the media over the Southwest issue is now going back to make sure there was no other incidents of FAA inspectors not doing their jobs.

True to form, the FAA powers that be do not like having the media or Congress shining the spotlight on their little kingdoms so they over react.

 

[skypilot85]

The airworthiness directive consists of repositioning and applying a protective sleeve over the wiring harness that the goes to the auxiliary hydraulic pump in the right wheel well. This A.D. has been complied with on all of our M.D. 80’s, but during an FAA compliance audit of the ECO (engineering change order) they discovered that some aspects of the modification were not done according to the document.

In some cases the string tie in which the protective covering is secured to the wire bundles was tied in increments greater than the one inch noted on the document. In addition a small wire bundle which branches off the main one was routed outside the protective covering. These infractions are in fact minor, and the FAA is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

It was discovered this morning that there are two separate procedures to accomplish this task depending upon the type of protective tubing used in the modification. One type of tubing is split and must be wrapped around the bundle, and thus string tied in one inch increments to secure it to the wire bundle. The other type of tubing is continuous, as in a garden hose, it is slid over the wire bundle from the cannon plug disconnect at the hydraulic pump. The tubing is then positioned over the wires covering the length of the bundle in its entirety. Because this method provides a continuous concentric protection the additional string tie is not needed. This procedure does not require the string ties to be spaced in the one inch increments, and it is not known if The FAA understood the distinction between the two.

Two of the airplanes in Tulsa that the FAA has deemed incorrect were of the continuous type of tubing, and therefore did not require the string ties to be at the one inch increments that the other procedure utilized. The FAA was referring to photographs taken of the split tube procedure, and it is not known if they realized that there were in fact two different applications. The two airplanes in Tulsa were from the former TWA and required the modification utilizing the continuous tubing not requiring the one inch spacing on the string ties.

The ECO was issued as a precaution due to possible abrasion of the pump harness due to the proximity of a hand pump in the area that is utilized to service the hydraulic system. The pump handle could rub against the harness during the back and forth action of the pump handle moving, and thus required the relocation and protection of the bundle by adding the covering. It should also be noted that the hand pump is rarely used to service the hydraulic system. The system is in most cases filled with a device known as a “bowserâ€￾ that incorporates its own pump and does not require the use of the airplane’s hand pump.

 

[flyhigh]

I think even changing the names of their notices from "Airworthyness Directive" to something that doesn't necessarily let NBC jump to the conclusion that MD-80's are not airworthy would be a wise idea. It's not like this issue would cause planes to fall out of the sky. We're not talking roof flying off or wings detaching after take off. Letting these hacks in the media to print headlines that make it sounds as if AA will be grounding half of its fleet because they are not allowed to fly them is a little more harmful than it should have been given the current FAA environment.

 

[777 fixer]

The ECO was issued as a precaution due to possible abrasion of the pump harness due to the proximity of a hand pump in the area that is utilized to service the hydraulic system. The pump handle could rub against the harness during the back and forth action of the pump handle moving, and thus required the relocation and protection of the bundle by adding the covering. It should also be noted that the hand pump is rarely used to service the hydraulic system. The system is in most cases filled with a device known as a “bowserâ€￾ that incorporates its own pump and does not require the use of the airplane’s hand pump.

In all my years at AA I have yet to use that hand pump to serivce MD-80 hydraulics.