Anyone flying in an MD-80 soon?

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Any truth to this, or is it just the press blowing something way out of proportion? I still see a lot of MD 80's in the air and I've always liked flying in the, especially in the forward cabin where it's very quiet. I'm sad to see the fleet aging.Johnhttp://www.cnn.com/2008/US/04/08/griffin.l...gear/index.html

[BIGSKY 316]

As the economy gets worse,We will see the safety margin decrease. Thats why I now work on subway cars,for more money and weekends off.

[tf51d 284]

AA canceled 1000 flights yesterday, and more are expected today, to inspect the Landing gear wiring harnesses on their MD80 fleet. AA has had problems in the past regarding Landing Gear on their MD80 fleet as well as others they are contracted to maintain. Last year their was an emergency landing and nose gear up at Orlando Sanford airport. While it was an Allegiant MD80, maintenance for Allegiant was contracted out to AA.

[Guest fullstoplanding]

From the article..."In a statement to CNN, Boeing, which makes the MD-80 jetliner, says it is committed to safety but offered no comment on MD-80 nose landing gear problems."Boeing makes the MD-80? :-hmmm --Roger

[KevinAu 441]

Boeing bought McDonnell Douglas many many years ago.

[scott967 62]

I think "makes the MD-80" is journalist-speak, as the B-717 line shut down and Long Beach is closed.scott s..

[downscc 1,327]

Even the FAA has stated that this is not a safety problem, but a compliance problem (ref TWSJ articles). The beaucrats didn't like testifying before congress that they screwed up a compliance problem at SWA so they are covering their behinds on this one. I don't think any cares about risk/cost analysis on this one.

[tf51d 284]

>Even the FAA has stated that this is not a safety problem,>but a compliance problem (ref TWSJ articles). The beaucrats>didn't like testifying before congress that they screwed up a>compliance problem at SWA so they are covering their behinds>on this one. I don't think any cares about risk/cost analysis>on this one.Maintenance inspection requirements are for safety, so of course this is about safety, gee talk about spin!! It's especially important since AA (and other airlines MD80's maintained by AA) has had a number of problems with the landing gear of the MD80's just in the last year, the one I mentioned and at least 23 other incidents in the last few months as the article above mentions, some resulting in an emergency landing!!

[LAdamson 240]

>Maintenance inspection requirements are for safety, so of>course this is about safety, gee talk about spin!! It's>especially important since AA (and other airlines MD80's>maintained by AA) has had a number of problems with the>landing gear of the MD80's just in the last year, the one I>mentioned and at least 23 other incidents in the last few>months as the article above mentions, some resulting in an>emergency landing!! >I don't care! This whole mess could have been handled in a much better matter! If I see crap like this happen again, then fire them all, including the FAA!L.Adamson

[RFields5421 1]

This issue has absolutely nothing to do with the landing gear. Just that an aux manual pump handle happens to be located the wheel well near a bundle of wires.The issue is shielding of the wiring bundle should a mechanic on the ground need to use the pump - and avoiding damage to the wires in the area of the handle.This is everything about politics and power struggle and zero about safety.This week AAL has had dozens of MD80 aircraft approved by FAA inspectors as completely meeting the new requirements. The airplane makes one flight - and FAA inspectors in another city will ground the aircraft because it does not meet their requirements.AAL is trying to comply even when FAA inspectors in different cities have different standards of compliance.Remember the AD is over two years old. The AD was created at the request of AAL because they saw a potential issue. Every MD-80 of AAL and the other airlines in the US has been 'repaired' in the past and the repair approved by an FAA inspector.Two weeks ago - the FAA inspectors approved the aircraft check worksheet - specifying exact steps, distances and such. Then the FAA turned around and said our instructions were not specific enough.The AD is for shielding of "approximately four inches" and "appropriate lacing" of the bundle. To some inspectors 'approximately four inches' means 3.75 to 4.25 inches. To others, 1/32 of an inch more or less than four inches is out of compliance.AAL chose to specify the cable ties for the lacing at 'about one inch' distance while most airlines use two inches as the spacing.AAL has had planes grounded because some lacing cable ties are 3/4 inch apart - for being too close.And yes, I really hope AAL gets this straight because we have a trip to Fort Lauderdale next weekend to see my wife's son and grandkids - both legs on MD-80 aircraft. The flights have not been flying this week.The only real question about the AAL mess is which airline and which aircraft will be next - the A320, the ERJ-145, UAL, DAL ??? Don't worry - it will happen soon.