Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

2nd time Jetblue has had this problem

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Chronic Jetlag said:
Gee, I wonder if the Republicans in the White House had anything to do with it? Gee I wonder if the geo-equitorial alignment of Saturn had anything to do with it? Maybe, just maybe...could it be....SATAN?

dork.
 
G4G5 said:
Neither aircraft has a fuel dump but one of them has a known nose wheel problem. I am not saying one is better then the other what I am saying is if all things are equal buy American.

And the 737 has a known rudder problem. Now the 737 has a supposed fix. When I flew it they had installed digital rudder pressure reducers that reduced maximum rudder authority at approximately 800 ft agl. It's been a few years since I was on the 73 so maybe someone has more info. Now the 737 has had at least three rudder hardover incidents of which two turned into fatal accidents. The Airbus has had 4 or 5 of these nosewheel incidents with no fatalities. Which is a worse problem to have?

Do I like Boeing better than Airbus? No but the 320 is better than 737, as much as I hate saying that.
I hope Boeing kicks Airbus's sorry French a$$ but for now I''ll keep flying the bus.
 
Could it be

Chronic Jetlag said:
Gee, I wonder if the Republicans in the White House had anything to do with it? Gee I wonder if the geo-equitorial alignment of Saturn had anything to do with it? Maybe, just maybe...could it be....SATAN?

Could it be...SOROS?
 
What is on the airbus nose wheel to control the tiller and the steering? Is there a pin or something?
 
KC-10 Driver said:
What inferior South American facility is JetBlue outsourcing heavy MX to? Is TACA inferior? What data can you share to back this up claim?

My understanding is that TACA has an excellent reputation for heavy MX -- this reputation is internationally recognized industry-wide.

Or, do you simply assume TACA MX is inferior because it is a Latin American company?

Lets start with the Inspector General's report:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/results/tools/ah_award_nominee_transportation.html

The team disclosed weaknesses in repair procedures and practices at 18 of the 21 repair stations visited that indicated FAA must take steps to enhance its oversight of these facilities. The team determined that these weaknesses in repair station oversight occurred because FAA inspectors did not place adequate emphasis on these facilities as part of their surveillance. The team determined that FAA had no mechanism in place to obtain information on how much work is sent to repair stations domestically or overseas so that FAA could adjust its surveillance resources as needed

Read the report or do a google search the GAO came up with the same findings in 1998.
FYI their are approx 300 certified foreign repair stations, the inspector could only get to 21 of them of which 85% had a failing grade. FYI the FAA has NO oversite in South or Latin America, the nearest office is Miami (they do have offices all over Asia and Europe)

http://www.aviationtoday.com/cgi/am/show_mag.cgi?pub=am&mon=0304&file=0304washington.htm

The problem with many foreign repair stations that are certificated by the FAA and accordingly perform maintenance on U.S.-registered aircraft is that they are not monitored at all, said the OIG (Inspector General). The report stated that some "foreign repair stations are not inspected by FAA inspectors at all because other civil aviation authorities review these facilities in FAA's behalf." Yet the OIG said that when it reviewed 16 of these foreign repair stations, in 14 of them their files did not contain enough information about what had been inspected and if any problems had been discovered. The FAA has to do a better job of reviewing these foreign repair stations, the OIG said. This report lends substance and statistical data to an old complaint by American repair stations that foreign FAA-certificated repair stations are able to use cost-cutting procedures that would not be approved in the U.S. because they are not closely monitored

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/08/AR2005060802324.html

Maybe you can come up with an Inspector General's report, or a GAO report, or an article by the Washington Post that supports your claim "My understanding is that TACA has an excellent reputation for heavy MX -- this reputation is internationally recognized industry-wide." Didn't think so.

The IG also discovered that most Latin/South American repair stations don't keep employee records on computer, they are on paper. When asked in many cases they could not verify that their employees met the FAA required experience.

Do you understand the concept of a CRS vs an A&P license? Certified Repair Stations don't require their mechanics to have A&P's. This was developed by the FAA because mechanics departing the armed forces don't get A&P's. The logic was; why should he, if he is fixing a 707 for uncle sam he is more then capable to fix a 707 for UAL or AA. So, he could be hired directly from the service and start on the line, not having to deal with the lengthy A&P testing process. Foreign CRS's take this one step further, the only person required to have an FAA license is the IA who signs off on the work. Weather the mechanic has the proper credentials is by the IG's report, up to the foreign facility. The FAA doesn't have enough inspectors to check everyone of Taca's mechanics but you can bet that each one of AA Tulsa tech or DAL's ATL guys have been checked.

http://www.amtonline.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=1&id=1713

Take a close look at the chart on the bottom of the article. Stop drinking the kool aid and do the research for yourself.

Now not to have you think that I am picking on Jetblue. How else do you think that it is possible for NWA to get rid of 1/2 it's mechanics over night? Foreign CRS's.

More high tech US jobs going abroad.
 
Last edited:
G4G5 said:
Fact: Take a close look at the chart on the bottom of the article, no one outsource's more maintenance JetBlue

Now not to have you think that I am picking on Jetblue. UAL is #2 on the list. How else do you think that it is possible for NWA to get rid of 1/2 it's mechanics over night? Foreign CRS's.

More high tech US jobs going abroad.

Thanks for posting a good article, and I agree with you about the problem of Mechanics jobs going overseas.

The list with your link is in order of increase in outsourcing - of which JetBLue is number one and UAL number two.

Listed in order of actual percent of maintenance outsourced the number one honors went to Alaska Airlines, followed by:

Alaska
America West
Continental
Southwest
Jetblue
US Airways
United
Northwest
Airtran
ATA
American
Delta
Frontier
Spirit

Murk
 
Percent of Outsourcing for 14 Air Carriers in 2002, 2003, and the First Three Quarters of 2004*

Air Carrier Percent of Maintenance Expense Outsourced
2002 2003 2004** Change (2002 to 2004)
Jet Blue 39% 51% 63% 24%
United 33% 41% 54% 21%
ATA 22% 20% 43% 21%
Air Tran 31% 46% 46% 15%
Frontier 20% 27% 33% 13%
US Airways 50% 58% 60% 10%
Northwest 44% 56% 51% 7%
American 38% 38% 42% 4%
Alaska 79% 75% 80% 1%
Continental 65% 65% 65% 0%
Southwest 65% 65% 64% (1%)
Delta 38% 37% 35% (3%)
America West 77% 75% 72% (5%)
Spirit NA 34%*** 30% Unknown


source Aviation Maint Tech magazine, link provided above

Thanks
 
G4G5 said:
Apparently this has happened twice to Jetblue once to UAL and once to AWA. How many times has it happened on a 737?

I don't know but there seems to be more 737 falling out of the skies these days...
 

Latest resources

Back
Top