This has gotta suck for FLYI

[homerjdispatch]

http://biz.yahoo.com/cbsmb/050721/e67975c73ff042ac805549d0b5eb2d59.html?.v=1




MarketWatch
Market Pulse: FAA to fine Independence Air $1.5 million
Thursday July 21, 4:40 pm ET
By Rex Nutting

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Federal Aviation Administration has proposed a $1.5 million fine against Atlantic Coast Airlines, now doing business as Independence Air , for operating thousands of flights last September and October that were not in compliance with FAA regulations, the agency said Thursday. The FAA said the company has taken corrective actions. The airline has 30 days to respond to the FAA's proposed civil penalty. The FAA said one plane went 455 flights past its regular heavy maintenance inspection

 

[FlamingFUPA]

Doh!!

 

[Rick James]

The FAA said one plane went 455 flights past its regular heavy maintenance inspection

There has got to be more to the story than this. You dont just forget to spend several hundred thousand dollars on heavy MX.

 

[tk855]

You dont just forget to spend several hundred thousand dollars on heavy MX.

Yes you do, especially when you don't have the money to spend!

 

[Rick James]

Yes you do, especially when you don't have the money to spend!

Money really doesn't matter when the FAA shuts you down for blatant negligence. Sorry, if they were that short the doors would close.

 

[AutoCars Armed]

That is really scary. 455 flights! WTF...Like how mgmt gambles with peoples lives to make $$$..

 

[tarp]

Old news.

The violations occurred under the old ACA banner and during a time when company was switching maintenance computer programs. This news is at least 18 months old if not older - only the fine is just now being announced by the FAA (where all things move with blinding speed).

As to 455 flights - In the D328 jet making tons of 30, 45, and 60 minute flights a day all over Ohio (CVG) - that is exactly one calendar month. So one plane due to have heavy maint by JUL31 got its record screwed up and went to AUG 31. This is not like a 17 year old 747 went a whole year without maintenance - this was a barely 3 year old airplane that was having engines swapped monthly due to P&W's great 605 fan blade experiment and was having all it's daily checks and other service checks - it just missed a month due to a record screw up.

The company "self-disclosed" all these violations when they became evident with the new computer system - the FAA did not find them, ACA did.

So, the fine has been levied, it can be appealed or reduced and 1.5 million is about what they are losing every day, so this just turns out to be a 366 day year.

Move on folks - nothing to see here - nothing at all.

 

[homerjdispatch]

]


removed by dispatch_ike out of respect for FLYI employees

 

[DoinTime]

As to 455 flights - In the D328 jet making tons of 30, 45, and 60 minute flights a day all over Ohio (CVG) - that is exactly one calendar month.

There is no way you can cramm in 455 flights into one month. Thats over 15 segments per day. Even on a frantic schedule with ultra short flights and no overnight to speak of, 12 segments per day is a tall order.

 

[Jimdandy]

you don't work for lakes do you?

 

[dojetdriver]

If I remeber correctly, UAL and AA encountered a similiar problem at about the same time frame. All due to a software problem

 

[Captain Overs]

Can you say Valu Jet? Accident waiting to happen?

 

[Fins Up]

Old news.

The violations occurred under the old ACA banner and during a time when company was switching maintenance computer programs.

Blame it on the computer. How convenient.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Blame it on the computer. How convenient.

Well, no. Garbage in garbage out... more like the user.

There is probably a perspective here that the instant gratifiy-ers don't want to see....

 

[dojetdriver]

Blame it on the computer. How convenient.

It works that way on an airbus.

 

[Peleton]

The stupity of some people amazes me.

1.) We use a system called MAXIMO for MX records. It is a system that works much like MS Access on steriods. It is great once you get everything up and running, but as JM pointed out garbage in garbage out. We have had several times when instead of checking parts at flight hours it was put it in the computer as checking at cycles. We have had several simple math errors that ALL airlines have when moving to a new system. Nothing too big that has not been corrected.

2.) One aircraft in question came from Midway, instead of uploading all the flight time the aircraft had at Midway they started it with zero time. Thus when it was due for a MX check on our records it was in reality overdue. Stupid, yes it was, dangerous not at all. All aircraft and parts have lifespans, but all manuufactors put in a "fudge factor" just in case something happens the part will not fail right at 1000 hours of flight time for example.

3.) We self disclosed, that right there shows you it was not a big deal. With all the paperwork associated with running an airline it is VERY easy to hide a few, or several, infractions from the FAA. If we disclosed it on ourselves it must be because we wanted the FAA to know about it.

4.) If you are in the airline buisness you know that this sort of crap happens EVERY single day. You CANNOT, repeat CANNOT, run an airline without bending some rules here and there. If you think you can you not being honest with yourself. It is all about risk managment, some things you overlook, some big things you do not. If you made a mistake you own up to it and move on. I mean how many people here have exceeded an aircraft limitation once of twice , either it being riding the barberpole and hitting the clacker or putting the flaps down 3 knots fast. Like I said this crap happens all the time.

Finally, people in glass houses should not throw stones. UAL/AA/DAL/MESA/SKYW/AW/REP ect have al had the run ins with the FAA for either MX issues, training issues, flight issues, manual issues, ect...... For one pilot to take pleasure on something like this is stupid.

 

[GogglesPisano]

For one pilot to take pleasure on something like this is stupid.

Nope. It's just flightinfo.

 

[FreedomAList]

That is really scary. 455 flights! WTF...Like how mgmt gambles with peoples lives to make $$$..

I think you mean to LOSE $$$. These guys are just like the legacies when it comes to spending in the red . . .

 

[House_X]

The stupity of some people amazes me.

1.) We use a system called MAXIMO for MX records. It is a system that works much like MS Access on steriods. It is great once you get everything up and running, but as JM pointed out garbage in garbage out. We have had several times when instead of checking parts at flight hours it was put it in the computer as checking at cycles. We have had several simple math errors that ALL airlines have when moving to a new system. Nothing too big that has not been corrected.

2.) One aircraft in question came from Midway, instead of uploading all the flight time the aircraft had at Midway they started it with zero time. Thus when it was due for a MX check on our records it was in reality overdue. Stupid, yes it was, dangerous not at all. All aircraft and parts have lifespans, but all manuufactors put in a "fudge factor" just in case something happens the part will not fail right at 1000 hours of flight time for example.

3.) We self disclosed, that right there shows you it was not a big deal. With all the paperwork associated with running an airline it is VERY easy to hide a few, or several, infractions from the FAA. If we disclosed it on ourselves it must be because we wanted the FAA to know about it.

4.) If you are in the airline buisness you know that this sort of crap happens EVERY single day. You CANNOT, repeat CANNOT, run an airline without bending some rules here and there. If you think you can you not being honest with yourself. It is all about risk managment, some things you overlook, some big things you do not. If you made a mistake you own up to it and move on. I mean how many people here have exceeded an aircraft limitation once of twice , either it being riding the barberpole and hitting the clacker or putting the flaps down 3 knots fast. Like I said this crap happens all the time.

Finally, people in glass houses should not throw stones. UAL/AA/DAL/MESA/SKYW/AW/REP ect have al had the run ins with the FAA for either MX issues, training issues, flight issues, manual issues, ect...... For one pilot to take pleasure on something like this is stupid.

You need to hang out with some of our MX guys and buy them a beer...after a couple you'll find out that MAXIMO is not "great when it's up and running". We are the only airline that uses it...WHY????....because other airlines are smart enough not to buy a cheap program used for tracking MX for TRUCKS.

There's no excuse for a MX fine...

 

[Peleton]

We did not buy MAXIMO, it was a given to us, though we have paid for updates that always seem to be lacking. Checking the website of MRO it is kinda nice to see the many companies that use MAXIMO, including Boeing, USMC ect. It is not the super program like UAL'S, or other major airlines, but it is light years ahead of what we once had.

Secondly, MAXIMO is not so much the problem as the lack of training and the low quality individuals you get for 9/hour in the IAD region, that input information into the program. Management does not hire the right individuals for the data processing and software management functions. Like ALL airlines they are trying to get by with the least amount of people they can. The program is an asset tracking program, and it does what it is designed to do.

No excuse for a MX fine....are freaking kidding me. Every part of an airplane must be FAA/PMA approved, tracked, serviced, ROR, ect and everything has to be documented for the FAA and kept on file for years. Just the shear size of that task guarentees that errors will occur. It is just a matter of when and if the FAA finds about it and if they choose to fine the company. I mean UAL got in trouble for using speed tape illegally on a 727 a couple of years ago, yet I did not see that talked about too much. AA/AE did not service the oil correctly on the ERJ's for years and the got less of a fine than what was proposed to us. MX issues can and will occcur daily in this industry, just no way around that fact. The idea is to minimize the errors and try to learn from them.

BTW..The Mx guys are great to hang out with, if you get a chance check out the tool boxes in CAE. They have all the confiscated pictures from the 328 years taped to the tops.

 

[wolfpackpilot]

Can you say Valu Jet? Accident waiting to happen?

Well I can say the two have nothing to do with each other. The ValuJet accident would have happened regardless of their mx practices. It was an illegal hazmat shipment improperly marked. The shipper was at fault and the company went bankrupt because of it. Unfortunately, so did ValuJet.

I don’t see the connection.

 

[House_X]

We did not buy MAXIMO, it was a given to us, though we have paid for updates that always seem to be lacking. Checking the website of MRO it is kinda nice to see the many companies that use MAXIMO, including Boeing, USMC ect. It is not the super program like UAL'S, or other major airlines, but it is light years ahead of what we once had.

Secondly, MAXIMO is not so much the problem as the lack of training and the low quality individuals you get for 9/hour in the IAD region, that input information into the program. Management does not hire the right individuals for the data processing and software management functions. Like ALL airlines they are trying to get by with the least amount of people they can. The program is an asset tracking program, and it does what it is designed to do.

No excuse for a MX fine....are freaking kidding me. Every part of an airplane must be FAA/PMA approved, tracked, serviced, ROR, ect and everything has to be documented for the FAA and kept on file for years. Just the shear size of that task guarentees that errors will occur. It is just a matter of when and if the FAA finds about it and if they choose to fine the company. I mean UAL got in trouble for using speed tape illegally on a 727 a couple of years ago, yet I did not see that talked about too much. AA/AE did not service the oil correctly on the ERJ's for years and the got less of a fine than what was proposed to us. MX issues can and will occcur daily in this industry, just no way around that fact. The idea is to minimize the errors and try to learn from them.

BTW..The Mx guys are great to hang out with, if you get a chance check out the tool boxes in CAE. They have all the confiscated pictures from the 328 years taped to the tops.

I had TWO MX guys in my crashpad. The people using MAXIMO are not $9/hr office workers, they are certified A&P's. Now your saying MAXIMO was given to us...your pumping out false propaganda as if your management, feverishly defending our mistakes in the public eye. $100 million quarter loses, 700 pilots on the street, planes getting repoed...now more MX fines...



At least I can admit that it's embarrassing.

 

[Peleton]

I will stand by my statement MAXIMO was free. We got the program free as a test to see if it would bridge into the avaition world. We have paid for updates the the program but I stated that earlier. If somebody is stating we paid for intial program I would like to see the bill of sale because EVERYBODY in MX managment, Corporate managment, ad down on all have statede the inital program was obtained free of charge.

Secondy, ask yor MX friends who inputed all the data into MAXIMO during the start of the transition. I have met and talked to the indivuals who did this I can tell you they were not AP/AI's. These were people hired as data processors for the great wage of less than 10/hour to spend hours upon hours to input the data into the program. Next time you see a position for network admin open up on corporate job postings see what the salary is and then look at the job description.

I refuse to acknowledge that is is embarassing to get nailed by the FAA for self disclosing MX oversights. It happens every day on every airline, so why should it be a surprise it happened to flyi.

To be exact ONE plane was repoed....635, the rest were returned to the lenders after mutually agreeing to part ways.