American flies Non-ETOPS A321 to Hawaii
Joke:
Good Grief:
Perhaps a large brightly coloured retro-reflective decal in a prominent location on the panel not on the gear door. Prominent note in the logbook “ETOPS Check completed”.
I assume the aircrews will now CYA and, accompanied by legal councillors, start to ask the Dispatcher “Is this Aircraft ETOPS Complaint and is such fact noted on the dispatch paperwork?” While recording the exchange on their Iphone and streaming same.
Will a Notary Public have be present in order to stamp the paperwork as signed by at least 2 independent witnesses?
Joke over.
Good Grief:
Perhaps a large brightly coloured retro-reflective decal in a prominent location on the panel not on the gear door. Prominent note in the logbook “ETOPS Check completed”.
I assume the aircrews will now CYA and, accompanied by legal councillors, start to ask the Dispatcher “Is this Aircraft ETOPS Complaint and is such fact noted on the dispatch paperwork?” While recording the exchange on their Iphone and streaming same.
Will a Notary Public have be present in order to stamp the paperwork as signed by at least 2 independent witnesses?
Joke over.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was right around the USAirways/AA merger when the AA/DFW training department wouldn't take any input from "them inferior USAir folks", who actually had the 320 for almost twenty years at the time. When the 321 ETOPS model was introduced, senior USAir staff raised concern about the suggested ETOPS verification/check. This was brushed aside by the SUPERIOR AA masters, only to find out shortly after that their suggested method did not work. Instead of admitting their method was not foolproof, they told the FAA that this was a once-in-a-lifetime error due to new a/c (sub) type etc. What a shame that the very next day the same thing happened! The FAA then demanded the superior AA folks to adapt the suggestion brought by USAirways. Guess what happened ever since? Nothing! No incident, it worked. It just was not the method that Legacy AA introduced. The nerve!
Everything at AA is about AArogance. From the good old times crews walked "through these doors" in GSW, to the AA pilots union APA which sets records in giving away benefits and perks (because they weren't invented here), and bombard their members with long, convoluted emails how unfair life is etc. A senior check airman last year asked in a check airmen meeting why A320 procedures differ so much from the Airbus FCOM, only to be told by DH that "this is American Airlines". The only airline I assume that introduces "woke" procedures to their crews: fly Airbus the Boeing way and Boeing the Airbus way to satisfy "fleet harmonization". This urges me to ask pesky questions during my yearly recurrent training, but I don't ever want to send out CVs again, so I try to keep quiet, but I will wear my green lanyard!
Last edited by Saab Dastard; 13th Jan 2024 at 22:59. Reason: Thread "resurrection" is NOT a crime!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
7 Posts
Exactly. We could have the same aircraft be compliant on one flight but not on the next flight. It can depend on other items such as the maintenance performed(eg. each engine having oil service from a different technician). While the company is allowed to use all of its 777 on ETOPS flights, proof that the aircraft is ETOPS compliant is confirmed by the large E stamped in the logbook while there is no E in the logbook for the same aircraft on the shorter flights. No E in the logbook, no ETOPS allowed.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly. We could have the same aircraft be compliant on one flight but not on the next flight. It can depend on other items such as the maintenance performed(eg. each engine having oil service from a different technician). While the company is allowed to use all of its 777 on ETOPS flights, proof that the aircraft is ETOPS compliant is confirmed by the large E stamped in the logbook while there is no E in the logbook for the same aircraft on the shorter flights. No E in the logbook, no ETOPS allowed.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How was the airplane dispatched by Flight Dispatch? At my company, the flight planning system identifies which fins are ETOPS qualified and a non-ETOPS fin couldn't have a flight plan created by the flight planning system for an ETOPS route.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As previously mentioned, this happened during AA/US merger times and when this subtype was new. No ETOPS issues have occurred since.
