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

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Airborne On ANN

Airborne 08.29.16

Airborne 08.30.16

Airborne 08.24.16

Airborne 08.25.16

Airborne 08.26.16

Airborne Hi-Def On YouTube

Airborne 08.29.16

Airborne 08.30.16

Airborne 08.24.16

Airborne 08.25.16

Airborne 08.26.16

Tweet Us The Coolest Things You See @OSH16!
#OSH16Coolest!

It's Alive!: AirVenture 2016 Innovation Preview on Vimeo!

It's Alive!: AirVenture 2016 Innovation Preview on YouTube!

 

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

Airborne 08.26.16: Citation Longitude Update, Falcon 9 Display, N Shore Heli Rte

Also: Aerosim Scholarship, Santa Monica Nonsense, Marine One, UAV Developer Kit, FAA Penalty, F-35 Weapons Test, Coastal Helicopters The Cessna Citation Longitude moves closer to i>[...]

AeroSports Update: European Aerobatic Champion Determined

Aerobatics Legend, Mikhail Mamistov, Takes Record Fifth FAI European Aerobatic Championship The World Air Sports Federation (FAI) European Aerobatic Championship (EAC) competition >[...]

Aero-News: Quote of the Day (08.29.16)

"We, as an industry, can do better... and while its not an infraction on the scale of those we've documented recently with Icon and other bad actors, it apparently created enough d>[...]

Cheesy--Or Just Plain Dishonest? FlyQ Email Suggests ForeFlight Offer--But Isn't

Recent E-Mailing Suggests One Product... But Is Actually Something Else Altogether ANN has made much of the fact that we, as a community, need to be able to depend on one another a>[...]

Another Tough Weekend For Airshows... Two Pilots Lost

Accidents in Oregon and China Take Pilot's Lives It's been a lousy weekend to be an aviation journalist as we document the tragic loss of two well-known pilots in two separate airs>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2016 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC