For taping up holes no less. Not unheard of in Aviation, but UAL broke all the rules, and kept the "temporary" repairs way too long.http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/05/business...&partner=GOOGLEbt

I am glad to say, that at the airline I work for the kind of management pressures that caused this to occur are non existant.It sound's like another stupidvisory act. (see this info from UA mechs website), It seams that Deleted MGT. have resorted to taking hammers to aircraft. A few weeks ago, we had an aircraft with a cracked wingtip nav light lense cover. It was not deferable unless the crack extended to a fastner hole and we had no lense covers in stock. So to avoid having an out of service aircraft, a foreman went out and stood on a ladder and "TAPPED" on the lense cover with a hammer to try to extend the crack to the fastner hole. Needles to say, he shattered the lense cover. Can you say "BEST MAINTENANCE". If an AMT was caught doing that, he or she would be walked out. All our manager said was, "his intentions were good". Yesterday we had a 737 with a dent on the leading edge of #2 engine nose cowl. Didn't meet the depth to width ratio limits, oops, out of service. Once again a couple of foreman, under the direction of the manager and in full view of the passangers in the terminal, procceded to beat on the nose cowl with a 2x4 and a hammer. The theory was to make the dent wider so it would be within limits for deferal. They got LM approval and created a defered item. They were actualy dumb enough to write in the text "enlarged the size of dent" and the manager signed his name and file number. When the pilot who was to fly that airplane found out how the dent was handled, he refused to take the airplane and I've been told he filed a Captain's Report. It just so happens that the pilot was the local president of ALPA. The airplane sits on the ground out of service with no nose cowls available in the system. The manager called in sick today.

I wonder if UAL will survive bankruptcy. I've grown to prefer them on many flights, especially widebody long hauls. -John

>I am glad to say, that at the airline I work for the kind of >management pressures that caused this to occur are non >existant.It sound's like another stupidvisory act. (see this >info from UA mechs website), It seams that Deleted MGT. have >resorted to taking hammers to aircraft. A few weeks ago, we >had an aircraft with a cracked wingtip nav light lense >cover. It was not deferable unless the crack extended to a >fastner hole and we had no lense covers in stock. So to >avoid having an out of service aircraft, a foreman went out >and stood on a ladder and "TAPPED" on the lense cover with a >hammer to try to extend the crack to the fastner hole. >Needles to say, he shattered the lense cover. Can you say >"BEST MAINTENANCE". If an AMT was caught doing that, he or >she would be walked out. All our manager said was, "his >intentions were good". Yesterday we had a 737 with a dent on >the leading edge of #2 engine nose cowl. Didn't meet the >depth to width ratio limits, oops, out of service. Once >again a couple of foreman, under the direction of the >manager and in full view of the passangers in the terminal, >procceded to beat on the nose cowl with a 2x4 and a hammer. >The theory was to make the dent wider so it would be within >limits for deferal. They got LM approval and created a >defered item. They were actualy dumb enough to write in the >text "enlarged the size of dent" and the manager signed his >name and file number. When the pilot who was to fly that >airplane found out how the dent was handled, he refused to >take the airplane and I've been told he filed a Captain's >Report. It just so happens that the pilot was the local >president of ALPA. The airplane sits on the ground out of >service with no nose cowls available in the system. The >manager called in sick today. I/m willing to give the UAL mechanic the benefit of the doubt in that maybe he misread the manual limits and/or procedures. However the instances above go way beyond established procedures and common sense. The nav lens guy should get a fine, the nose cowl guys should lose their licenses.

This is just what I wanted to hear 12 days before I fly UAL to Florida... ;)I just hope the FAA will keep an eye on their remaining planes and make sure I'm not on one with holes in the spoilers. ;)

If memory serves me correctly, any handling of defects on a primary or secondary flight control is a RII or required inspection item. So the Inspection department will hang also.

>If memory serves me correctly, any handling of defects on a >primary or secondary flight control is a RII or required >inspection item. So the Inspection department will hang >also. That probably differs from airline to airline. We only require an RII if you replace or rerig a flight control. Anything else doesn/t require it.