Is aviation sabotage a real threat?

[Guest]

This article refers to an incident at Meacham Airport, Ft. Worth. I first became aware of this incident last year when it occurred. An Air Traffic Controller friend of mine at Meacham had told me the story, and pointed me to the news article in the Star Telegram, of Dallas-Fort Worth.http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/3568909.htmThis interesting read http://usread.com/Aviation/Sabotage.htmldiscusses these facts, and poises the conjecture that based on our current unregulated, unmonitored system of Aviation Maintenance, it may be time for a heightened awareness of just who is maintaining our Civil Air Fleet.Make your own opinions.Cheers,

[Guest]

Sounds goofy. Particularly the 40 Airbuses with rotated bolts. That is far too large a number of planes to be a conspiracy. It/s not like a mechanic can just get up on a tail and start loosening bolts without drawing some attention to himself.

[Guest]

>>...............based on our current unregulated, unmonitored system of Aviation Maintenance,.............Unregulated? Unmonitored? You have got to be kidding....

[Guest]

No I'm not kidding. There is a large contingency workforce of folks from other lands, who are willing to work for less. They are brought into this country to do the maint. at costs far lower than the US workforce. They have underlying issues with certifications, with visas, with a lot of topics.Unregulated, Unmonitored...yes.Cheers,bt

[Guest]

>No I'm not kidding. There is a large contingency workforce >of folks from other lands, who are willing to work for less. > They are brought into this country to do the maint. at >costs far lower than the US workforce. They have underlying >issues with certifications, with visas, with a lot of >topics. >>Unregulated, Unmonitored...yes. >>Cheers, >>bt Do you have alot of those guys at the airline you work at?

[Guest]

>No I'm not kidding. There is a large contingency workforce >of folks from other lands, who are willing to work for less. > They are brought into this country to do the maint. at >costs far lower than the US workforce. They have underlying >issues with certifications, with visas, with a lot of >topics. >>Unregulated, Unmonitored...yes. >>Cheers, >>bt What airline or repair facility is recruiting personnel overseas and bringing them to the U.S. to work?

[Guest]

Try the one in the story for one example. B1900 also has spoken to these issues I believe in this very forum. Cheers,bt

[Guest]

>Try the one in the story for one example. B1900 also has >spoken to these issues I believe in this very forum. >>Cheers, >>bt I reread the article and couldn/t find where it said that Spirit recruited mechanics from overseas and brought them here to work on U.S. aircraft. I did see where it said that Spirit had hired mechanics that had come from overseas though. There is a difference.If you want to get upset about foreign nationals working on our transports, look at the trend towards having heavy checks farmed out to overseas vendors. Northwest is big into that these days. They are doing their heavy checks in Singapore. You see it is much cheaper to fly the plane there than to import workers, send them to school for 2 years and then hire them, particularly when it is more than likely that they will be hiring in at a fixed, union set, scale. BTW, I have heard of 2 other episodes of tampering with aircraft. Both times it was one guy who was upset with the company.

[Guest]

Since I started this thread, perhaps I'll close it. Interesting comments, my only addition would be a clarification.When I say be aware of the workforce, I mean everyone. White, Black, Red, Yellow, Brown...American, Canadian, Mexican, British, on and on and on.Cheers,

[Guest]

Braun,I don't think the media are that well known for telling the 'facts' or dare I say it, the 'truth', more so since 9/11. The articles are full of conjecture and half truths. Take the tragic A300 crash in NY. This was due to the vertical fin being overstressed, due to the rudder rapidly moving its full travel from one side to the other. What is not known is if it was mechanical failure or the pilot's input that caused the rudder movement and subsequent overstress. The vertical fin in an aircraft is not designed nor certified to take that sort of stress. In fact if the media investigated properly, it would have found that certain aircraft manufacturers subsequently issued notices stating that under certain circumstances it is possible to overstress the vertical fin on their aircraft.The part about the 'bolts' is a red herring. If, after a serious accident/incident there is a 'possibility', no matter how remote that possibility maybe, that a certain component could be at fault, then the regulatory authority may issue a notice asking for these components to be inspected asap. For the media to suggest that there is a link between the A300 and possible sabotage, without looking at the facts, is an insult to the victims of that accident. It takes the spotlight away from the real reasons for the accident.Its about time that the US media concentrated on WHY the attacks of 9/11 could have happened, then maybe, just maybe the world will learn something. 'Aiming' their targets on non-us citizens hinges on racisim, and achieves absolutely nothing - IMHO.Darren

[Guest]

Hi Darren...every comment, save one, you have made is opinion, and that is understandable. No one knows the real cause of the AA587 crash. Not you. Not the NTSB. Not the FAA. Not I.I would question your one comment:The articles are full of conjecture and half truths. Take the tragic A300 crash in NY. This was due to the vertical fin being overstressed, due to the rudder rapidly moving its full travel from one side to the other. What is not known is if it was mechanical failure or the pilot's input that caused the rudder movement and subsequent overstress. You are guilty of the same conjecture and speculation that you state the media are culpable in. I say to you, there is no "truth" in your statement above other than it is your opinion. To state it otherwise, and to present it as fact as you do does a great disservice to aviation, and the search for truth concerning this tragic crash.Since I started this thread, I would like to comment about "non-US Citizens". In 1963, my family and I immigrated to the US from Canada. Prior to that we had lived in Great Britain. Three great counties. Three great democracies. In those days, living here as a guest was a privilege, not a right. Along with those privileges came responsibilities, including reporting into the US govt. concerning your whereabouts, your employment, your legal status, etc. We accepted this gladly. We understood. We knew that once we earned our citizenship, those burdens would be lifted. That is not the way things are handled now. Our borders are open. Our govt. does not track guest citizens. There is no accountability. This is the thrust of my comments when I started this thread, and that is the message I get from the articles you call into question.IMHOBest,bt

[Guest]

Braun,Thanks for the replyMy statement on the A300 crash is not my opinion, (in hindsight maybe badly worded). We have had documents at work about it and if you visit the NTSB site, the information is there to see. (I cannot find any mention of possible sabotage) Here is a link on a safety recommendation that had been issued directly as a result of the A300 crashhttp://www.ntsb.gov/Recs/letters/2002/A02_01_02.pdfThe point I was trying to make (badly) was that the media across the world, even here in the UK, are failing to report all of the facts. They have been very selective of what they publish, to the point of scaremongering. Best RegardsDarren

[Guest]

Darren...Thank YOU for the reply.A bit of clarification on my one point. I do not dispute the tail separated from the Aircraft. I DO dispute the statement that that was the cause of the crash. It could have been. What if it was a symptom of events that caused the crash? Some other thoughts on that:http://usread.com/flight587/rudder_timelin...r_timeline.htmlAlso, the current thrust of the NTSB is the rudder movements were Pilot induced. There are MANY that disagree witht that. I'll provide just one example:http://www.airdisaster.com/news/0202/11/news.shtmlMany more can be found at:www.pprune.orgCheers!bt

[Guest]

Braun,I think I have taken this thread a bit off topic with regard to the A300 crash. I tried and failed to show how the media does not give us the full story. (In the article there was no mention about the investigation into the rudder reversal).We could both discuss this all day long, but it would be better over a beer or two. Best RegardsDarren

[Guest]

Daren: I agree that we could discuss it until the proverbial or virtual cows come home! :)As to your self-perceived failure to show the angle of media...don't get me started there!!! I will say this, in full support of your statements: "When news becomes business, in the absence of news, news must be madeBest always,bt