Can't Anyone Here Play This Game?
Okay, I totally concur that American Airlines was at fault for not following the airworthiness directive to the letter, which I assume was backed up by a rigorous risk assessment that showed that one-inch spacing of wire bundle straps poses the least amount of risk to the safety of flight, and that anything more than that - like a quarter inch - poses such a risk.
I, for one, can hardly wait to see that risk assessment, along with all the experimental and field data showing that any deviation from the one-inch spec could cause wire chafing and bring down an MD-80 aircraft.
I trust, given the unprecedented disruption of flights, that the FAA will be posting on its Web site in the near future this risk assessment showing why the one-inch spacing was so risk critical.
The FAA also may want to post a detailed discussion about the American Airlines situation to clear up the safety paradox it has created in the minds of the flying public, or at least in the 250,000 passengers who saw their flights canceled last week.
On one hand, the FAA allowed American 18 months to comply with the directive, which I assume meant the bundles weren't secured very well and therefore prone to chafing. On the other hand, after American secured the bundles a few weeks ago, the FAA now felt that the wire bundles, even though secured by straps, being off by a small amount now meant that the airplanes were no longer safe to fly.
Was the risk of chafing associated with misplaced tie-down straps or with the bundles being free to move about?
This whole episode has served to create an overall impression of risk confusion, not competent risk management.
NEXT STORY: Baldridge Award Curse Strikes Again