It seems like un-authorised parts were used. Being in a company that does repairs, we know ALL about traceability. But, this is not good for WN.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FAA-inves ... l?x=0&.v=8
Printable View
It seems like un-authorised parts were used. Being in a company that does repairs, we know ALL about traceability. But, this is not good for WN.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FAA-inves ... l?x=0&.v=8
In WN's defense and the company as well it is not always easy to figure out what parts are genuine and which are not. In fact the FAA and way parts are dealth with is basically a joke and getting them tagged as good is quite easy.
I have to disagree with you Nick. That is what a lot of subsidiaries in our company do - repair and maintenance. Our application that we use to control the repairs, overhauls and maintenance has VERY strict rules on parts and what is called traceability. Parts can't be used for repairs without traceability, approved part numbers, etc. If the company that did that had the same type of application, it would be easy - but I guess they don't. WN is responsible to make sure that the appropriate forms are complete and the company that does the work is responsible for making sure they supply the orrect paperwork. If they don't - they can lose their repair station license!
Excuse me???? Are you saying that wrong parts on the aircraft are a jokeable item with the FAA, and this is a simple offense? Is that how I am reading it.
If you work for an airline let me know which one and I will be sure I never fly on it.
How do trace the tag? Sure the forms can be complete and the parts can be tagged as genuine but getting these tags are not hard to counterfeit and the oversight is very lame. A&E did a hidden camera report on this a few years ago and it was scary how some parts dealers would just copy the FAA #s and print their own paperwork passing off fake parts as genuine.Quote:
I have to disagree with you Nick. That is what a lot of subsidiaries in our company do - repair and maintenance. Our application that we use to control the repairs, overhauls and maintenance has VERY strict rules on parts and what is called traceability. Parts can't be used for repairs without traceability, approved part numbers, etc. If the company that did that had the same type of application, it would be easy - but I guess they don't. WN is responsible to make sure that the appropriate forms are complete and the company that does the work is responsible for making sure they supply the orrect paperwork. If they don't - they can lose their repair station license!
No, I mean the oversight on how parts are bought and sold by the FAA are a joke. A&E followed fake parts around the world that were traced and the FAA never came close. In fact one example of how there is no oversight is I think BA had a 747 destroyed when the gulf war broke out and the insurance company demanded video proof that the engines (that were somewhat intact) were destroyed so they parts would never hit the market. Well they accepted still photos that the engines were destroyed and the parts surfaced as used on other aircraft. These parts were subject to fire and did not hold up to the standards a replacement part needed. They were tagged as good and nobody knew the difference. Again if you think every part that is sold is legit your kidding yourself and no airline or mechanic can tell the difference unless an expert or metallurgist inspects it.Quote:
Are you saying that wrong parts on the aircraft are a jokeable item with the FAA, and this is a simple offense? Is that how I am reading it.
Here are some links
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/05/25/us/co ... -used.html
I know many here do not like Mary Schiavo but her work in "Flying Blind" documents all of this.
It goes the the seriousness of the operation I guess. In all our operations, the tags are attached to the physical paperwork that is filed because of traceability issues. We have 30+ subsidiaries in our organization and the slackness of one subsidiary can cause a huge headache for the whole organization. The subsidiaries vary on the parts the work on - we have one that does electronics (TCAS, VSI, etc), others work on engine parts (combustion chambers, etc) to one that works on air frames, wings, etc. It's drilled into the organization as a whole about quality and quality parts. We have subsidiaries that manafacture parts under FAA approval as well. We have to be perfect - we are always under scrutiny. Now - I can't speak to other operations.......Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKV69
I will only speak as an aviation fan and not a WN Employee, so refrain from attacking me personally regarding WN.
WN states that they didn't know the parts used by those contractors were unapproved. What I ask is, when a contractor wants to use a part, is it WN's responsibility so specifically check the part to make sure it is FAA approved, or is that part of the trust WN puts in the contractor to know which parts are FAA approved and which are not?
The timing of all the incidents are not looking good for WN, but I still will fly them when I have to and trust their safety. Luck or not, it is no accident WN has had a tremendous safety record with only one hull loss and no passengers lost in any incident.
As a WN person I obviously cannot post any inside information being posted on our website, but as always WN states safety is their number one concern and is working with FAA to come to an agreement. WN wants to remind everyone this was a grounding done by WN themselves and nor were they ever forced to be grounded by the FAA.
Will keep you all updated as I can/hear anything.
Carry On Folks!
Alex
Alex
It definately is the responsibility of the contractor to make sure they only used FAA approved parts - there is no option there. However, when it comes to the paperwork that is sent back to WN, it is up to WN to spot check, if not scrutinize the paperwork for correctness. Let me expalin with one of our subsidiaries. They do a lot of work on JT8D combustion chambers for various airlines. They repair or overheaul the combustion chamber to strict FAA guidelines as well as additional guidelines of the customer. When the repair/overhaul is complete, at least two pieces of paperwork go back to the customer - a Final Inspection certificate signed by a FAA registered inspector and a Certificate of Airworthiness that says the part is authorized to go back on a functional aircraft. Our customers scrutinze that paperwork. Customers can reject and return parts because they are not happy with the traceability of the part - that is their perogative. So, while our subsidiary is repsonsible to make sure that everything is FAA regulated and correct, the customer makes sure that what we supply them is correct and certified too. Get the drift?? :lol: