AA flew a non-ETOPS A321S LAX-HNL on Aug 31; Oops!

[FWAAA]

On August 31, AA flew a non-ETOPS A321S (N137AA) from LAX to HNL as AA31. Discovered once the plane had passed the halfway point, so too late to turn back. Return flight HNL-LAX (AA162) cancelled, plane ferried back to LAX.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american-us-airways-merger/90400-non-etops-hnl.html

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N137AA

Many people failed to do their job properly for this to happen - dispatch, pilots, etc. I suspect the pilots will shoulder most of the blame.

Fleet standardization has its advantages.

 

[WorldTraveler]

As long as AA flies any fleet type for more than one type of mission, something like this is going to happen if there aren't very defined processes to check the type of mission against the aircraft capabilities.

I doubt very seriously that AA is going to make every 321 in its fleet ETOPS - but they could.

Does AA use its pre-merger dispatch system and if so it seems hard to believe that AA did not have fleet and mission checks in its systems.

Doesn't sound like this is merger related if it was a PMAA aircraft using PMAA's dispatch system.

This has got be sending up some red flags at the FAA.

 

[Rogallo]

Yup, looks like it wasn't on ETOPS Spec yet!  Oops!

 

[WorldTraveler]

aircraft are regularly ferried between Hawaii and the mainland whether they are ETOPS or not.

Presumably this aircraft really wasn't ETOPS.... and that is the question that has to be answered... how it was categorized as one aircraft type when it was not. If it wasn't fully approved for ETOPS operations, it should not have been categorized as being capable of it. and there should be checks to make sure that aircraft are capable of flying the missions to which they are assigned - whether it be ETOPS or any other aspect of a flight's mission.

and the need for that capability extends to ANY airline that flies more than a single type of mission or fleet type or subtype.

 

[700UW]

If it wasn't ETOPS the dispatcher and pilots wouldn't have planned and flown the flight.

You once again are talking about things you have no idea about.

Every ETOPS flight has a job card that has to be completed by maintenance and have the logbook signed off certifying the plane is ETOPS certified and qualified.

You are showing your lack of knowledge once again.

 

[WorldTraveler]

Or more likely you are talking about something that YOU know nothing about.

To argue that I know nothing about a subject when it was started by someone else and cited other people is the height of your Teflon coated inability to acknowledge that someone screwed up and I had nothing to do with it.

Either the flight was operated by a non-ETOPS aircraft or it once not. Like being pregnant, an aircraft isn't partially ETOPS certified. It either was or it was not.

if you want to call the source a liar, then do that.

The evidence says the aircraft was flown beyond its capabilities.

The discussion and question is how that happened and what will be done to make sure it never happens again.

 

[Rogallo]

It had ETOPS checks done at both stations.
 
Dispatch obviously failed to realize the aircraft wasn't certified ETOPS yet.

 

[700UW]

I know what I am talking about worked many ETOPS flights and had to sign off the relevant block on the job card and sign off a form and give it to the captain to prove the plane was serviced.

Something you wouldn't have known when you were at DL in your cubicle.

 

[Rogallo]

I know what I am talking about worked many ETOPS flights and had to sign off the relevant block on the job card and sign off a form and give it to the captain to prove the plane was serviced.

Something you wouldn't have known when you were at DL in your cubicle.

 
Serviced with what, Blue Juice?

 

[WorldTraveler]

We don't care what you did in the past. and since you aren't a mechanic you signed off on nothing other than a lav system service.

The vast majority of people are going to believe someone like Rogallo than someone like you that wants to gleefully pretend that nothing happened.

 

[robbedagain]

Would the nose gear door specify ETOPS lime ual and swa have on theirs?

 

[1AA]

If it wasn't ETOPS the dispatcher and pilots wouldn't have planned and flown the flight.
You once again are talking about things you have no idea about.
Every ETOPS flight has a job card that has to be completed by maintenance and have the logbook signed off certifying the plane is ETOPS certified and qualified.
You are showing your lack of knowledge once again.

You don't have a clue what we as AMT'S do on a ETOPS flight. A walkaround, check oils, interior checks is the majority of the work. Logbook sign off is the end of the check. We do not pull up the certification status to verify if it's ETOPS or not. Not required and not on the paperwork. Even the captain verifies to make sure the check was accomplished. He does not question if he is in command of a ETOPS certified aircraft. Not required. I believe the only person that verifies the ETOPS status prior to departure would be a stock clerk in aile 4 counting 387 bulbs.

 

[700UW]

I know what PMUS mechanics do for an ETOPS flight, I worked along side them for 10 years on the international flights.
 
And I worked the Phase Check in CLT for the 767 and the Phase Check in PHL for the A333s.

So if an AA mechanic did an ETOPS check on and that wasn't ETOPS knowing it was an ETOPS flight is going to be held responsible for his part, might even get an LOI from the FAA, if I was him he needs to fill out an ASAP form.

Guess you took the ground version of crew resource management, it's all about the chain of events and how to prevent an incident.

 

[MetalMover]

 
So if an AA mechanic did an ETOPS check on and that wasn't ETOPS knowing it was an ETOPS flight is going to be held responsible for his part, might even get an LOI from the FAA, if I was him he needs to fill out an ASAP form.

 

Oh the mechanics will have their feet held to the fire on this one. No doubt. This is the new culture for mechanics. And a friend of mine,  FAA inspector, says they will be going after mechanics more vehemently now. 
As far as the ASAP goes, the FAA can reject it. They don't rubber stamp every ASAP. 
Now, having said that, who the hell would schedule a non-etops aircraft on an etops flight?  Can't blame the mechanics for that.

 

[700UW]

I am not blaming the mechanic, but if you took Human Resource Management, we did at US, it goes over the ValuJet crash, and how many links in the chain of events could have prevented those O2 generators from ever being loaded.
 
Every person involved has a connection to the incident, and all will be questioned.