Before everyone gets off on the wrong foot...

I recognize my comments were anecdotal. I think we all recognize that there are certain minimum standards for maintenance. E.g. apparently part of the delay in my flight was that there are FAA starndards about the maximum size and depth a dent can be on a flight surface - so they had to get a cherry picker and do various measurements....

In my wife's case, the "fuel problem" that caused them to turn back wasn't the only issue. They had a landing gear problem and the plane had to be towed off the runway back to the gate after landing. It's hard to point to that being the FAA's fault.

Yes, it's an anecdotal report, but [link|http://www.palmbeachpost.com/pbcsouth/content/local_news/epaper/2007/05/31/m1a_TCCHALKS_0531.html|it's] [link|http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CWU/is_2005_Dec_20/ai_n15954941|one] [link|http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-03-29-airplane-maintenance_N.htm|of several] examples of things not being as good as it should be in aircraft maintenance land.

Beep writes:

There simply isn't time.

They don't want to make the time because they think it would cost too much money. It took them over 2 hours to figure out what to do in my case, and I lost about 5 hours before I was able to leave. They should have spent the 2-5 hours overnight to get the plane inspected and repair it or get other hardware in place. Or they should have rebooked everyone before loading the plane. It's not heart surgery. They do it the way they do it because they don't care about how much they aggravate their customers in the chase for saving a few hundreths of a cent per mile.

"But customers want low fares!" True. But I don't think I'll fly AA again if I have a choice, and I don't think my wife will fly Continental again either, if she has a choice. The airlines are being penny-wise and pound foolish, IMHO.

Have you seen the recent Southwest ad on TV? The one where the flight attendant lists the prices for all the "services"? :-/

YMMV, of course.

Cheers,
Scott.

they know it will cost too much money.

Even the Southwest model depends on fast turn of planes. I've also seen their "reality tv" show that documents that even the darling of the industry has major issues.

And you linked to 3 maintenance articles with a common theme. FAA is stretched. The base assumption is that if the airlines use a facility that the FAA doesn't watch then the airlines are skimping. Thats an assumption.

And again, I'm sure that there was a problem on your wifes flight. They certainly wouldn't have turned it around if there wasn't. My issue, it seems your assumption is that lack of maintenance created that problem. I don't make that base assumption. Major systems are all on regular maintenance schedules that are regulated by FAA. Landing gear and engines and fuel tanks are all major systems.

Unfortunately it sounds simply like a case of "shit happens". If I were to choose a carrier to not boycott, it would probably be CO or UA. AA, DL and NW are all operating fleets older than me and US can't get a back through Philly airport to the carousel in under an hour. Not fond of the cattle call that is a SW boarding either. YMMV. I fly them all. I have to.

Welcome to IWETHEY!