Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

B-737 Cargo Plane down in Hawaii

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

B-737 Cargo Plane down in Hawaii

Old 16th Jul 2021, 19:16
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Medically Grounded
Posts: 134
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
The cargo airline has now been grounded by the FAA for transgressions outside of this accident.

Airline grounded by FAA
Piper_Driver is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2021, 17:58
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 3,118
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
The cart before the horse, usual practice of the FAA
B2N2 is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2021, 18:23
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not sure I get this. Do you think they waited too long to ground them? Apparently they got busted for various issues even before trying to make a seaplane.
island_airphoto is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2021, 17:49
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We see so many accidents that happen in places like Indonesia where the primary causal factor is an almost complete lack of regulatory oversight.

How it is that a US airline operating under FAA oversight can get to the point where they have their AOC pulled for poor engineering and maintenance practices when they had no previous interventions?

What are the FAA Flt Ops / Engineering Inspectors doing FFS?
Magplug is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2021, 21:04
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That is a good question. One part of the answer is freight never gets the attention people do. Since forever "freight dogs" have been a low priority for the FAA. This operation DID get busted, but just in very slow motion. It reminds me of the time back in the day when freight operators bought up cheap old Lears and basically did nothing to maintain them and eventually the FAA grounded the lot of them and they were so far gone maintenance-wise I believe many were scrapped.
island_airphoto is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2021, 21:30
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2021
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you read the public comments that were posted by UPS regarding their objection to the implementation of FAR part 117 (rest rules) for cargo operators you will see in plain written English that they want the public to accept a higher level of risk in cargo operations because the 117 rest rules would be expensive, and a crash involving a cargo aircraft is unlikely to involve many fatalities. I guess the general public never reads the fine print, but it is interesting to see their justification written so bluntly.
PigBoat87 is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 03:05
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Been around the block
Posts: 630
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Magplug

the FAA is like most US gubment entities. It’s not proactive, it’s petty, combative, recalcitrant, run by risk averse bureaurocrats and probably corrupt or at least prone to side with manufacturers to “self test” band aid fixes, while not doing a very good job of administering much.
4runner is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 03:24
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,171
Received 87 Likes on 45 Posts
PigBoat87

If you take a look at the Extended Range operations rules (aka ETOPS) for 3 and 4 engine aircraft, you would have seen that years ago. In short, freight operators are basically exempt from the 3/4 engine Extended Range operations rules that passenger aircraft are subjected to.
That was codified over 10 years ago. Freighters are expendable.
tdracer is online now  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 04:30
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,935
Received 52 Likes on 33 Posts
If you are only killing pilots the regulators donít care. This is not a US issue, it is a worldwide reality
Big Pistons Forever is online now  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 07:27
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: EGLL
Posts: 555
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
​​​​​​...until one takes out an apartment block (LY1892 AMS 4OCT1992)
G-ARZG is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 09:12
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 992
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
This thing of freighter ops being treated differently to pax in US/CAN is new to me - not the case in Europe. How did this come about and how is it allowed to continue?
deltahotel is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 12:58
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: In the Old Folks' Home
Posts: 420
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
It will take action by the US Congress to fix it.
Smilin_Ed is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 15:25
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
deltahotel

It has been like that for 100 years more or less. I flew night freight in hard IFR over nasty terrain and water in piston singles and 208s. At the time NO WAY could you carry paying passengers in those conditions in a SEL. Lately I think a few SELs can do it, a C-208 is probably as safe as an old Aztec.
The idea is the knowledgeable pilot can understand the risks and choose to take the flight or not, the general public has no idea what is safe and what isn't, so they need to be protected from themselves. Also freight-dogging is the traditional way to build hours, so your pool of pilots is a lot of people desperate for ANY job that gets them hours even if it involves flying over volcanoes in a Jenny
island_airphoto is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 16:02
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: unknown
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
G-ARZG

Irrelevent to freighter ops except that it just happened to be a freighter, not an occurrence based on relaxed rules for freighters.
tcasblue is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2021, 19:01
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: US
Age: 65
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
deltahotel

Either set of US rules are stronger than European rules. The difference came about in the US when the new 117 rule was proposed and cargo operations were able to buy enough political capital to get a carve out exempting themselves from the new rule.
Sailvi767 is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2021, 08:53
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I fully accept that FTL rules are generally different (both sides of the Atlantic) as freighter ops and passenger ops are different. Fatigue however is not a stand-out cause of accidents so you can't blame lax rules for freight ops mishaps. Engineering and operations standards for a 737 outfit are the same whatever type of operation you run.

We have driven far too far down this road of allowing operators to be their own safety investigators and their own regulators. There is constant pressure in any administration for public costs to be reduced to make tax dollars go further..... Here we see the result of that. These guys were lucky to execute a successful ditching. Had they been departing LAX to the east at night they would have gone downtown with hideous numbers of casualties.

Allowing airlines to self-regulate is a one-way road to big trouble.
Magplug is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2021, 09:35
  #237 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cargo accidents consequences are always treated differently than Pax ones., also in Europe. Someone mentioned El Al Amsterdam as an exception .yes partially because it officially killed 40 people on the ground ( but most probably over a 100 since it hit an building full of illegal immigrants ) and it made the world news. However the poor state of the aircraft ( the descriptions of the multiple failures during the inbound JKF SPL fight is impressive,) and the engine fuse pin failure issue leading to a Boeing SD, did not.. Media focused instead on the cargo transported ( the famous "perfume" for those here old enough to remember) but cannot remember seeing much mention on the very poor state of aircraft used for cargo ops.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2021, 18:42
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Putting the "rumor" back in PPRUNE:

I asked an HNL-based mechanic if he'd heard anything new about this accident. He told me an acquaintance at Transair told him that the plane in question needed 8-9 quarts of oil every service. I've never flown, let alone wrenched on JT-8Ds, but that sounds like a lot.
ImbracableCrunk is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2021, 20:29
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 513
Received 114 Likes on 45 Posts
Tank capacity is 4 USG, minimum volume for dispatch is 3 gallons. What is the service interval? You certainly can't mean for every flight.
Winemaker is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2021, 14:42
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe he said “Every time we serviced it.”

So if they had as few as 27 quarts and were regularly burning/leaking down to 19 or 18 - wow.
ImbracableCrunk is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.