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 -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-05.06.24

Airborne-NextGen-04.30.24

Airborne-Unlimited-05.01.24 Airborne-AffordableFlyers--05.02.24

Airborne-Unlimited-05.03.24

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

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (05.05.24): Omnidirectional Approach Lighting System

Omnidirectional Approach Lighting System ODALS consists of seven omnidirectional flashing lights located in the approach area of a nonprecision runway. Five lights are located on t>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (05.05.24)

"Polaris Dawn, the first of the program’s three human spaceflight missions, is targeted to launch to orbit no earlier than summer 2024. During the five-day mission, the crew >[...]

Airborne 05.06.24: Gone West-Dick Rutan, ICON BK Update, SpaceX EVA Suit

Also: 1800th E-Jet, Uncle Sam Sues For Landing Gear, Embraer Ag Plane, Textron Parts A friend of the family reported that Lt. Col. (Ret.) Richard Glenn Rutan flew west on Friday, M>[...]

Airborne 05.03.24: Advanced Powerplant Solutions, PRA Runway Woes, Drone Racing

Also: Virgin Galactic, B-29 Doc to Allentown, Erickson Fire-Fighters Bought, FAA Reauthorization After dealing with a big letdown after the unexpected decision by Skyreach to disco>[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (05.06xx.24)

“Our aircrews are trained and capable of rapidly shifting from operational missions to humanitarian roles. We planned to demonstrate how we, and our BORSTAR partners, respond>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2024 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC