Jairz

This news report certainly suggests so and makes me afraid to fly US airlines. on YouTube. And there's this. on YouTube. I know the safety record of US airlines has been excellent in recent years, but I can see how the issues uncovered in the news report could be a ticking time bomb and that it's only a matter of time before planes start crashing. Is it safe to fly US airlines at present? Is the issue unique to them Should I be worried? I'm flying on AA soon. Thanks in advance.

JDiver

Welcome to FlyerTalk.

Searching YouTube for those files results in errors for me, so I can’t respond to those specific allegations. If you PM me the full URLs, I can check and post them or edit them into your post (as a Moderator).

There’s no indication flying in the US is not safe, from my perspective of flying throughout six continents over 70 years, including AA.

AA is having contract discussions and some actions by management and mechanics / engineers, but they are impacting on time and operations issues, not safety. Even the low cost carriers are likely to be as safe as any other Western LCC, from Ryanair to Aer Lingus or Icelandair.

JDiver

Ah. Those videos.

When US Airways executive team approached AA employees to support the merger, they approached and made welcome offers to AA pilots and cabin crew. The rest of the employee force was pretty much left out, but those approached supported the merger in lobbying and other efforts.

The mechanics have not had a contract for years. They have some points of concern that in my opinion are less about safety than they are about issues that affect their unions and positions now and in the future.

Example: AA now contracts out heavy maintenance of the 777 fleet to HAECO in Hong Kong. While that certainly affects AA mechanics, careers and the like, HAECO is a division of the Swire Group - which also owns and operates Cathay Pacific, which has its aircraft maintained by HAECO. I’ve never seen any data indicating either HAECO or Cathay are unsafe.

Management and the mechanics’ unions are in the conflict phase of establishing a contract one side wants to enhance careers, benefits etc. while the other side may try reducing in house maintenance in the future by allowing further outsourcing once these older, higher paid people retire. IMO, tensions and public statements are escalating, and we’ve been noticing more “working to rule”, longer times for repairs, the aircraft log book going for unscheduled wanders - affecting on time operation, sometimes forcing cockpit crew to time out - this may require, beyond delays, finding another aircraft or another, fresh crew.

I do not believe cockpit crew will fly unsafe aircraft, nor do I believe the mechanics / engineers will allow aircraft to fly if they know of unsafe equipment. But the latter do seem to be frustrated to the point if causing costly delays and pain to the airline, applying pain to pressure points to get the action they want.

At this time, a court has ordered the mechanics to stop the slowdowns and delays, but they have the power to use the safety issue with little ability for others to fight them because they’re the ones with the Airframe and Powerplant certifications, not the pilots or managers.

I’d avoid AA for its operational unreliability if I could use another airline conveniently, but not because I believe the airline - or any other US airline - is unsafe.

C17PSGR

<redacted deleted post quotation>

It's a shame that CBS would broadcast propaganda like this.

The reality is that unfortunately, that AA gave the mechanics a unilateral raise rather than using it in contract negotiations. Now that they've done that, its much hard to get a contract. And, the unions have been offered their choice of the contract of any of the other airlines ... which they don't want.

FAA1996

Union propaganda poppycock... the airlines and the mechanics will be liable if any action they take results in anything that endangers passenger's lives. Our society is very litigious and would sue the pants off anyone who plays games with safety.

seigex

Purely anecdotal, but I was on a CX 777 flight where a landing gear door fell off during takeoff as the gear was retracting and wonder what was missed that allowed that to happen. It was just a single incident of many flights, and I'm sure was isolated, but enough to make me wary of flying in a CX 777 again. That said, I've never felt unsafe in any AA plane, 777 or otherwise.

TheDudeAbides

writerguyfl

<redacted>

It's interesting how people view safety. I would bet that most people of are concerned about flying think nothing about getting into a car. But, the statistics about motor vehicle deaths say otherwise.

Per the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a total of 37,133 people were killed in motor vehicle traffic crashes in 2017. But, because almost all of those deaths don't make the news, many people don't consider their risk.

If you translate those deaths into airplane crashes, it's the equivalent of:

• Boeing 737-800 (160 seats): 232 planes = 4.4 crashes every week
• Airbus A320 (150 seats): 247 planes = 4.7 crashes every week
• CRJ-200 (50 seats): 742 planes = 14.2 crashes every week

Traffic Safety Facts: https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api...ication/812603
American Airlines Planes: https://www.aa.com/i18n/travel-info/...false&from=Nav

Flying Yazata

I know you're a knowledgable FT'er and a very seasoned frequent flyer, but I will have to correct you on the matter of LCCs. Ryanair (FR) is indeed that - and with a healthy safety record, but Aer Lingus (EI) and Icelandair (FI) are not. They're both legacy carriers, with EI being the former Irish national airline and Icelandair is the flag carrier of Iceland. Both operate a two class service (except for EI on intra-European routes) and have longhaul routes, so their business model isn't equal to FR, U2 etc. - or an American reference: NK and F9.

But this wasn't to be nasty on you, rather just wanting to cross the T's for the sake of clarity.

As for the original topic at hand: I personally don't think Doug Parker & co would play a risky game with all the liability involved, would they sacrifice safety in a way that can be pointed out from a papertrail etc. Personally I think it's much more crucial to maintain an impartial and professional FAA, that doesn't bow to anyone and does a great job for improving safety, not profit margins. That's what they exist for and that's what they need to be tasked to do - now and in the future. The 737 MAX debacle is still unresolved, but it's unfortunately raising questions regarding how impartial FAA is.

RoxyMountain

Fortunately America has an excellent network of public transportation so no need to use American Airlines flying death machines. Walking and hitch hiking are also excellent, cheap, alternatives.

JDiver

I hear what you’re saying, but operationally, I disagree. Ryan Air, Easy Jet et al are often looked at as ULCCs, ultra-low cost carriers. All are classified Budget Airlines by normal travel sources, compared with AA, AY, BA, DL, LH, LX, UA etc.

Aer Lingus operates two class longhaul flights and basically acts as a LCC in Europe, with a single class (economy).

Iceland air offers low cost flights with its own formula of low fares and offers a Saga business class that is not remotely close to full legacy carriers. The several times I’ve flown FI in Saga I’ve been in seats that were essentially most like the domestic first class found on major US airlines.

They’re both at their core low cost carriers, in my experience and in how they’re classified by many others. I used them to indicate even LCC and ULCCs in the west are safe. (Some other countries do not have enviable safety records, or endure corruption to the extent regulations can get ignored.)

As to the 3M8, it’s useful to note AA bought them with both the “optional safety extra” angle of attack indicator in the primary flight display and the AoA disagree warning - the only airline in the US that did so, and at best one of a handful of airlines worldwide that did so. (Southwest purchased the AoA disagree warning, but it turns out Boeing didn’t tell them it couldn’t work without the AoA display.)

Out of my Element

Tell us about yourself, OP. What airlines do you fly? What other things concern you?

<redacted>

757FO

I can assure you, as an airline pilot for another US based carrier, and as the future husband to a current American Airlines pilot, US based carriers are VERY safe,

<redacted>

Flying Yazata

But that still doesn't make them LCC, at least IMO. Essentially LCC is about not joining partnerships (FI is a partner with e.g. AS and AY) and not having codeshares, operating a single class service (which I BTW did note for EI in terms of shorthauls), not having a FFP or at least not recognising other carriers, not offer lounges etc. The difference between LCC and ULCC is debatable, indeed, but I can't see EI and FI being in either of those categories, because they have so many legacy carrier hallmarks. If they'd be LCCs, I wouldn't earn FFP award points with another carriers or have e.g. lounge access.

I personally think that D8 (Norwegian) and TR (Scoot) are LCCs, because they have two classes of service, but the product is discounted in terms of pricing and quality. In terms how I'd distinguish LCCs and ULCCs from one another, I have no good answer. I was about to say that IAG's Level and Vueling are perhaps an example of each type of lower price spectrum carrier, but then again some Level flights do earn FFP credits with IB Plus, which doesn't exactly fit the ULCC image. So it's not all that easy to define LCC and ULCC. I personally usually don't make a difference between the two and only talk about LCCs, which is why your take on EI and FI is a bit away from my idea of a LCC. But sure some good points made there.

JDiver

Unfriendly, unwelcoming comments are contrary to the FlyerTalk Rules, and such language will cause post editing or deletion.

Quote:

12. Abusive Or Disruptive Behavior Or Content - Link to this topic

12.1 Friendly, Respectful and Welcoming

FlyerTalk is a community and is intended to be a friendly, helpful and collegial place.

Please post in a friendly, respectful, welcoming manner. 'Snarky,' unfriendly posts will not be allowed. If you don't have something constructive to contribute to a thread, please do not post.

Unhelpful posts, such as "Do a search" or those that merely comment on the worthiness of others' posts or threads are neither friendly nor welcoming and will not be allowed. If you can't be helpful or contribute substantive content to a thread, please refrain from posting.

12.2 Avoid Getting Personal

If you have a difference of opinion with another member, challenge the idea — NOT the person. Getting personal with another member is not allowed. Personal attacks, insults, baiting and flaming will not be tolerated.

FlyerTalk is a diverse, multi-cultural community. Expressions of prejudice or discrimination in any form are not permitted (such as those concerning race, nationality, religious belief, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability, etc).

If another member gets personal with you, do not retaliate. Retaliation may well subject you to the same discipline. Instead, please use the 'Alert a moderator to this thread' button in the lower-left-hand-corner of each post, send a note explaining your concern to the moderator team, and leave it to them to handle. Please also see Rule 22 — When you believe someone has violated the rules.

Please understand about 40% of FlyerTalkers aren’t even from the USA, so it would be quite possible from someone from another country viewing or reading some of our open, uncontrolled if occasionally freewheeling media might get an idea we have unsafe aviation practices. As well, please remember on the Internet fora we are devoid of body language, gestures, vocal tone and inflection - and we may interpret different meaning or intent to words we use; for a goodly number of us, English is not our natal or first language.

Please help keep FlyerTalk the friendly, helpful and collegial community it is intended to be.

Thank you,

Moderator