Oops! AA flys AA31 LAX-HNL 31 Aug '15 with Airbus 321S, not ETOPS 321H
Anyone fly on AA31 (LAX-HNL) on 8/31? Apparently, it was accidentally flown with a non-ETOPS 321 and the return flight (AA162) had to be cancelled. Oops!
|
Apparently, it was accidentally flown with a non-ETOPS 321 and the return flight (AA162) had to be cancelled. Oops! I sense a really embarrassing FAA fine and a new large-font line item on the improved pre-flight checklist. Not to mention dispatchers and pilots having a finger-pointing contest. "Verify tail number appears on this list." "Now have the other pilot independently verify the tail number appears on this list." "Since this is really important have the person driving the tug verify the tail number is on this list." |
Originally Posted by jjglaze77
(Post 25389866)
Anyone fly on AA31 (LAX-HNL) on 8/31? Apparently, it was accidentally flown with a non-ETOPS 321 and the return flight (AA162) had to be cancelled. Oops!
Even the pilots should have caught that one if nobody else did. Like when they do their quick around-the-plane spot checks. And they notice the ETOPS marking is not there on the forward landing gear. |
Originally Posted by Fanjet
(Post 25390243)
How does that happen accidentally? :confused:
Even the pilots should have caught that one if nobody else did. Like when they do their quick around-the-plane spot checks. And they notice the ETOPS marking is not there on the forward landing gear. Just lucky nothing happened during the flight. Imagine the liability claims for something like that! I doubt their insurance would cover that. Just like car policies don't cover damage from illegal use. |
Originally Posted by jjglaze77
(Post 25389866)
Anyone fly on AA31 (LAX-HNL) on 8/31? Apparently, it was accidentally flown with a non-ETOPS 321 and the return flight (AA162) had to be cancelled. Oops!
Now they'll have to ferry that aircraft back, not anywhere nearly as big a deal as flying a plane load against prevailing winds on a A321S with standard tankage and equipment, MEL, no ETOPS certification. Crikey, that's bad! |
It was ship N137AA which is registered as a non ETOPS plane. I just can't imagine how this could even happen.
|
I actually find this really really funny... :D
It's amazing how many people had to screw up for this to actually happen. |
Originally Posted by cmd320
(Post 25390617)
I actually find this really really funny... :D
It's amazing how many people had to screw up for this to actually happen. |
Originally Posted by JDiver
(Post 25390629)
This is so classical it could be part of a groupthink error study. Pilot, First Officer, IOPS - Dispatch, ground crew... Thank goodness there was no harm.
|
Originally Posted by JDiver
(Post 25390629)
This is so classical it could be part of a groupthink error study. Pilot, First Officer, IOPS - Dispatch, ground crew... Thank goodness there was no harm.
"An additional life raft is located in a ceiling compart... oh, %!@#%!" |
Originally Posted by rjw242
(Post 25390735)
I guess that's one instance where a manual safety demo might've saved the day.
"An additional life raft is located in a ceiling compart... oh, %!@#%!" |
Originally Posted by cmd320
(Post 25390674)
Indeed. I mean, to be fair, I believe it's just a matter of certification, otherwise the A321S and A321H are identical aircraft, but still. Major fines likely coming AA's way once the FAA sifts through the case.
The first is the aircraft type must be tested and approved - A320 family aircraft are ETOPS-180 certified from this side. The second is the airline must convince the FAA of their ability to conduct ETOPS flights safely and gain ETOPS operational certification. This includes more rigorous preventive maintenance schedules, as well as certified mechanics and flight crew. The "H" is said to have extra tankage, though I've not seen it documented, and it definitely has safety equipment (e.g. rafts) and an enhanced maintenance schedule for certification. I flew on Aloha 737-200 that were ETOPS certified (weirdly enough) and the maintenance schedule was more rigorous. :eek: Alaska operates a subfleet of 737-800s that are ETOPS certified; these are the ones that fly to Hawaii, and can be discerned from non-ETOPS certified aircraft by the "ETOPS" on the nose gear door and the flower lei under the Eskimo portrait depicted on the tail. Maybe AA should paint a two meter wide gold band on the forward fuselage of their ETOPS A320 family aircraft; they might be more obvious. :D Maybe some fundi at AA still believes ETOPS is the acronym for "Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim"? The FAA won't be laughing, I suspect. |
Originally Posted by JDiver
(Post 25390629)
This is so classical it could be part of a groupthink error study. Pilot, First Officer, IOPS - Dispatch, ground crew... Thank goodness there was no harm.
Since all ended well, this may be inflammatory, but some elements remind me of Asiana... " The NTSB met June 24 to rule on a cause of the July 2013 accident, saying the crew "over-relied on automated systems that they did not fully understand" and citing mismanagement as key factors in the accident. Pilots were confused whether an automated system was maintaining speed. 'Pilots must understand and command automation, not become over-reliant on it. The pilot must always be the boss.' – Christopher Hart, acting NTSB chairman " |
From the pilot forum that I follow, it sounds like the Captain received his IOE (Initial Operating Experience) in an A319 in the Central America/Caribbean division which would qualify him to fly an ETOPS route, but would not necessarily prepare him thoroughly for the ins/outs of ETOPS. It's possible this was to be his first time on board the A321H airplane and without knowing about the "ETOPS" on the nosewheel (or on the logbook), how would he know it was missing? According to the forum, there is no mention of this visual cue anywhere in the operating manuals (which are approved by the FAA). As has been said, there are many links in the chain that seem to have failed in this instance, so I don't think it's fair to place the lions share of the blame on the Captain. How many people were involved in getting that jet scheduled to fly that route before the Captain was even at the airport?
I'm glad everything turned out OK ^ |
Originally Posted by jjglaze77
(Post 25391290)
As has been said, there are many links in the chain that seem to have failed in this instance, so I don't think it's fair to place the lions share of the blame on the Captain. How many people were involved in getting that jet scheduled to fly that route before the Captain was even at the airport?
Originally Posted by jjglaze77
(Post 25391290)
I'm glad everything turned out OK ^
N137AA was delivered on June 20, so I guess it's new enough to be Hawaii assigned, but its flying pattern shows that it's not an A321H, with this "accidental" trip to HNL being the only time it's ventured into the Pacific: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N137AA |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:44 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.