Back to Squawk list
  • 26

FAA let American Airlines fly planes that shouldn't have been considered airworthy after maintenance oversight lapses

The Federal Aviation Administration "lacks effective oversight" of American Airlines' maintenance safety programs, the US Department of Transportation reported on Friday, and as a result the airline flew aircraft that should not have been considered airworthy. ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Brian James 15
The incorrectly installed engine struts is chilling - especially since incorrect engine installation resulted in the loss of an American Airlines DC-10 and all aboard during takeoff from Chicago. I guess we choose to ignore our history and keep our fingers crossed.
Lois Lettini 4
I remember THAT!! Scary. I didn't recall what the cause was.
Jesse Carroll 1
The forklift used to raise the new engine to the airframe, was used improperly! In result it cracked the pin/bolt holding the engine on the mount. Or something like that!
Tim Dyck 10
WOW! This needs to be fixed and if we think it is only American Airlines that has untrained inspectors we will be deluding ourselves. Customers deserve a safe flight and anything that impedes that safety must be addressed immediately.
avionik99 6
So these so called "Untrained" inspectors only work on American Aircraft? All other Carriers have Trained inspectors? This article makes no sense, if these guys are not trained when inspecting American then neither are any other inspectors at Southwest, Delta United etc etc. Why is only American being called out?
Tim Dyck 2
I was thinking the same thing. And citing how American Airlines hasn’t had a fatality in a long time actually makes it more likely that complacency will set in. This article points out a problem that needs to be addressed befor an accident happens.
ADXbear 5
Bad enough by the FAA, BUY where is the honor and truthfulness in providing a safe aircraft to their customers? .
They know what's airworthiness or not! Signing off otherwise is Shameful where A&P licenses should be on the line for actions.
So they require my flight's crew to shutter one of the bathrooms on a long haul flight because THE ASHTRAY is broken but they ignore incorrectly installed struts... that sounds about right.
Cleffer 3
Let the finger pointing BEGIN!
Joseph Sede 5
Another government agency ( like the FDA) that is tasked with protecting the public and fails miserably.
Jim Allen 4
Would this be the same FAA that allowed the 737 Max debacle by allowing Boeing to oversee their own regulatory functions? Save money. Cut costs. Bring the plane to market faster. You know our shareholder/owners have their expectations. Unfortunately these are cost items that generate no immediate revenue. I don’t know about anyone else,but I’ll gladly pay $20 more/ticket to fly on an aircraft that’s adequately maintained.
After the last seven months nothing surprises me anymore.
I'm from the government and I'm here to ..................snooze.
Byron May 1
Not enough information to really assess the gravity of the engine strut problem. Could have been very minor and very low risk (e.g. incorrect size of safety wire) or egregious and a completely unacceptable risk (e.g. failed inspection and returned to service anyway). BTW, the engine mounts on 191 were damaged due to an improper airline-developed engine replacement procedure that overloaded them. The rest was tragic history.
DV Svejk 1
This report rings true based on my personal experience.

A couple of years ago, as a general member of the flying public, I submitted a complaint to the FAA re: AA maintenance. Despite the e-mail of the person who responded to me, I got the distinct feeling I was corresponding with an AA employee. If not that, then an FAA employee cutting & pasting input from AA. The final resolution was unsatisfying. It simply stated the end repair was done correctly - I do not doubt that otherwise the pilots would not have flown - but completely sidestepped my complaint for a root cause analysis of why a defective aircraft was delivered to the gate straight from the hangar.

I get that the FAA has finite resources and relies on cooperation of industry to get its oversight accomplished. However, it is a very fine line to walk between that and regulatory capture by industry. I am of the opinion that line was crossed a while back. The danger in this scenario is that poor practices, whether intentional or not, get baked into a an organization's operations. Getting back to a proper state of affairs is a lot of work.
nigel mahood 1
I was working the AA DC-10-30's at HNL as a ground support agent in the '80's, one day a flight came in and I noticed the center main gear was not extended, I checked the log book and found out it was deactivated the week before because of a fluid leak, but yet it was still being fully loaded as a 30 series when it should have fallen under the 10 series guidelines.
Billy Koskie 1
Oh my goodness.
Phil Howry -3
So a larger centralized federal government is better, right? As it turns out a massive centralized federal government not only restricts American's freedoms it allows real safety hazards; (i.e., "effective oversight"?).


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.