FAA Proposes Fines Against Horizon Air, Alaska Airlines | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne Unlimited-
Monday

Airborne-Unmanned w/AUVSI-
Tuesday

Airborne Unlimited-
Wednesday

AMA Drone Report-
Thursday

Airborne Unlimited-
Friday

Airborne On ANN

Airborne 04.23.18

Airborne-UnManned 04.24.18

Airborne 04.25.18

AMA Drone Report 04.26.18

Airborne 04.20.18

Airborne-YouTube

Airborne 04.23.18

Airborne-UnManned 04.24.18

Airborne 04.25.18

AMA Drone Report 04.26.18

Airborne 04.20.18

Fri, May 04, 2012

FAA Proposes Fines Against Horizon Air, Alaska Airlines

Says Horizon Failed To Comply With An AD On Certain Aircraft

The FAA announced it was assessing civil penalties against two Seattle-based airlines Thursday totalling over $600,000.

Horizon Air of Seattle is facing a $445,125 civil penalty for allegedly operating a Bombardier Dash-8-400 aircraft on 45 flights when it was not in compliance with Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA alleges Horizon failed to comply with an airworthiness directive (AD) that required the airline to inspect for cracked or corroded engine nacelle fittings on its Dash-8-400 aircraft. The AD, with an effective date of March 17, 2011, ordered inspections of the nacelles every 300 operating hours, and repairs as needed.
 
Between March 17 and 23, 2011, Horizon operated the aircraft on at least 45 revenue passenger flights when it had accumulated more than 300 hours of flight time since its last inspection.

The agency also is proposing a civil penalty of $210,000 against Alaska Airlines of Seattle for allegedly failing to properly document and tag deactivated systems and equipment before making repairs.

The FAA alleged that on 10 occasions between June 19, 2010, and January 13, 2011, Alaska performed maintenance on six of its Boeing 737 airplanes but failed to comply with the required alternative deactivation procedures. Specifically, the airline allegedly failed to document the alternative actions it took, and failed to install the appropriate danger tag. These requirements are safety measures designed to reduce hazards to technicians during maintenance and to prevent potential damage to the aircraft and onboard systems.

Both carriers have 30 days from the receipt of the notice of penalty to respond to the FAA.

FMI: www.faa.gov

Advertisement

More News

ANNouncement: Now Accepting Applications For Oshkosh 2018 Stringers!!!

An Amazing Experience Awaits The Chosen Few... E-I-C Note: There's very little we can say yet, but there is a reason why this may be THE year to throw in with ANN to cover the extr>[...]

AMA Drone Report 04.19.18: AMA Leadership, FAA Reauthorization, Coachella

Also: New French Regs, Drone Boot Camp, Public Safety Drone Standards, DroneShield Protects NASCAR It’s a little bit sad and yet a bit cool to see AMA make an exciting change>[...]

Airborne/Barnstorming 04.23.18: We Can Do So Much Better...

I'll Admit It... We're A Mite Frustrated, But We're ALSO Not Quitting... Ever Comments/Analysis/News/Video by ANN CEO/Editor-In-Chief, Jim Campbell We've accomplished so much over >[...]

Airborne-Unmanned 04.24.18: XPO 2018, Apple v Drones, Mosquito-Packed Drones

Also: Osage Nations Repurposes Airpark, UAV/Drone Certification, Leonardo's M-40 Target Drone, GA-ASI Flight Deck Taxi Only a few more days to go... THE major unmanned exposition o>[...]

Airborne 04.23.18: Hemisphere Suspended, Thunderbirds Fly, Apple v Drones

Also: New NASA Administrator, AD For CFM56-7B, Engine Display Upgrade On C-441, First BBJ MAX Textron Aviation has suspended work on the Citation Hemisphere large business jet, cit>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2018 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC