Reliability and Maintenance Lessons from the Deadly Skies

Four questions and answers related to the impact of the recent airline issues on R&M and four predictions.

In this editorial we have four basic questions that we are going to answer related to the present airline industry maintenance issue.  Following the drafting of this editorial over the past weekend, we noticed that the attention given to the issue has followed the predictions that we made.  Therefore, we are keeping the editorial exactly the same as when it was initially drafted.

The questions are as follow:

1. How long will attention be on the airline industry related to reliability, maintenance, and safety?
2. Why is the focus on the FAA?
3. Why did American Airlines have the hardest hit on inspections?
4. What are the possible results of this escapade?

The issue we are dealing with is quite complex.  Believe me, the news organizations would rather be reporting on anything except this particular issue especially seeing as where it is pointing.  In fact, if you were to review all of the data related to aircraft crashes you would find that very few relate to ‘pilot error,’ which is the common media hype.  This also brings up our next R&M urban myth: human error.  We will return to that subject another time, now, we have to answer the questions at hand.

Question 1: How long will attention be on the airline industry related to reliability, maintenance and safety?

Answer 1: Unfortunately, the attention given to this subject will not last near long enough to implement positive change, but has been long enough to have a negative impact.  There are several reasons for this that we will explore, the primary one being that the media we count on for information is now as cost-centric as most businesses.  In effect, sales and marketing guide much of what is covered more so than real news.

Airlines are big advertisers resulting in an interesting conflict.  If it were not for the significant delays to travelers, the whole episode would hardly be reported.  As it is, tremendous effort is put into distracting everyone from the issue.  For instance, just as with OSHA and MSHA, most of the flight safety maintenance checks are ‘written in blood’ as determined based upon serious findings, crashes, or deaths.  Selection of the inspections and procedures are developed to prevent problems and are not arbitrarily developed.

For example, the stress fracture and crack inspections that Southwest Airlines chose to neglect were not arbitrary.  They dealt directly with the Aloha Airlines failure in April, 1988, that killed a stewardess and injured 61 passengers and crew.  Yet, even though 22.6% of the aircraft requiring inspection had significant enough fractures and ACTUAL CRACKS (each at least 4 inches), the emphasis was given to the CEO who claimed that no one was in real danger.  The news media failed to connect the dots between the statement from the Southwest’s senior executive and the actual reported findings!

In the case of the cable bundles and cable ties, the news media has chosen to focus on how the FAA is too stringent about the maximum distance between the cable ties.  The result, according to the general media, is that the FAA is to blame for the flight delays, stranded passengers, and the $10’s of millions lost by American Airlines.  They are very careful to select the right talking heads and not air anything related to the fact that the FAA is an oversight group and that the airlines were both informed and required to meet the inspections and tasks!

Am I being alarmist?

“The problem is that tying a journalist’s income to his organization’s financial performance in effect changes the journalist’s allegiance.  The company is explicitly saying that a good portion of the journalist’s loyalty must be to the corporate parent and to shareholders – ahead of readers, listeners, or viewers.  What if an advertiser makes it clear that more income will come if the coverage of an issue begins to ease off, or if a certain reporter is fired or moved off a beat?  When has an advertiser ever urged more coverage of business corruption or price-fixing?  How do you tell the news without fear or favor when you are explaining to the editor that one of his key goals is making money this quarter?  [Management by Objective] tied to the bottom line divides that loyalty.” (‘The Elements of Journalism,’ by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel).

Or farfetched?

During an issue in Old Saybrook, CT, the town First Selectman was making a political move that involved taking land from local associations.  The surface of the project seemed noble enough.  However, when pressed I was able to determine the actual purpose of the program, which was counter to the original premise.  The Hartford Courant was a backer of this particular politician, who held several important positions with the state.  I had a meeting with the association and it was determined that I would lead the cause and be the spokesperson (local politics hold little influence on my business).  No one in the neighborhood was to talk to, or respond to, the press who had already very carefully hid the agenda of the land program in their reporting.

I was contacted and interviewed by a reporter who was quite frank: ‘We are supporting Mr. Pace’s program.’ I pointedly asked about neutrality in reporting.  She laughed and said, ‘This is the real world.’ Once the 90 minute interview concluded she thanked me.  The next day I was contacted by concerned neighbors each asking if I had read the piece where, apparently, I was the devil incarnate.  When I read the article I realized that absolutely none of the information nor even the material put into quotations was accurate, nor had I even uttered the words!  I was contacted by the senior editor asking if I would like to respond because he could not find anyone in the neighborhood to defend me or even respond to the article.  I asked if a ‘good fight would sell papers and keep the issue alive.’ He said, ‘yes.’ So, I simply stated that everything reported was absolutely correct and I had no rebuttal.  The issue was dropped in the paper (conflict garners attention) and through a great deal of effort we were able to defeat the program.

So, when I watch the news coverage related to the present issue I question everything and note the premises and which direction (slant or spin) the reporting takes.  That is why I predict that this issue will be dropped pretty quickly.  I also predict increased advertising on networks and cable news programs by the airlines.

Question 2: Why is the focus on the FAA?

Answer 2: Many of the acts performed by FAA management during the alleged collaboration between the airlines and FAA border on, or are, criminal if proven.  For instance, alleged (yep, gotta use that word again in this one!) accusations of direct threats to FAA inspectors if they reported specific condition and issues with the airlines.  This is not the first time this has happened based upon under-reported investigations by the US Department of Transportation Inspector General.

The primary reason these issues arose is the mistaken direction of the FAA to consider the airlines their ‘customers.’ The word ‘customer’ conveys a significant meaning – in this case the specific treatment of the airline industry.  Unfortunately for the general public, the persons who made this horrible mistake forgot that their job was to oversee the airlines and that the PUBLIC is their customer!  Their job is oversight of the conditions within the airline industry to protect US!

In the meantime, government oversight committees are able to investigate the FAA.

This issue often occurs within manufacturing and industry where we lose sight of who our actual customers are.

Question 3: Why did American Airlines have the hardest hit?

Answer 3: According to many of the ‘talking heads’ on the news, there was no immediate danger due to the wire harness issue.  Apparently, they have forgotten flight TWA 800 in 1996 that crashed as a result of a short in a wire harness.  The distance selected for the tie straps was determined in such a way to reduce abrasion between individual wires from vibration in the wheel wells of the MD-80 aircraft (note: TWA 800 was a 747, but the wire bundle issue is similar).

We now run into a different problem.  Instead of hitting a ‘bad actor,’ American Airlines was specifically hit because they were in compliance for maintenance reporting.  This generates a particularly dangerous situation: American now has been given incentive to break their union and increase outsourcing maintenance to organizations that have no reporting requirements (Reference: Chapter 4.7 of ‘Physical Asset Management for the Executive’).

The FAA leadership made the conscious cost-centric decision to rely upon reporting/computer data to determine public risk.  Unfortunately, many of the outsourced organizations have no reporting requirements under FAA rules and a majority of maintenance, including critical maintenance, is being outsourced.  This means that the risk data is both inaccurate and highly suspect.  Present knee-jerk reactions by the FAA has resulted in a public flogging of the airline most in compliance with data reporting!

Question 4: What are the possible results of this escapade?

Answer 4: Based upon simple cause-effect thinking, I am going to make the following predictions:

a. Public interest will wane as soon as flight delays and cancellations stop, if not sooner [note: already happening!].  We will then return to the status quo and the subject will only come up again during a fatal accident.  I will then get to say, ‘I told you so,’ before it promptly disappears and is forgotten again.
b. This R&M issue will bring a slight increase in the public awareness of our industry as the I-35 bridge collapse in Minneapolis, MN on August 31, 2007, did.  However, the attention will last just as long.  Already public pressure on repairing other bridges in the USA is running along the same budget concepts as ‘they have not failed yet, why are we spending the money?’ This attitude allowed the I-35 incident to happen in the first place as repairs were deferred since 1990!
c. A required expansion of accountability by the FAA over airline executives will not occur.  Safety will again take a back seat to cost-centric management, leaving the public vulnerable.
d. American Airlines will launch an immediate and significant campaign effort to crush their maintenance union.

I hope I am wrong.  However, we are doomed to repeat history as long as we cannot seem to learn from it.

Sincerely,

President, SUCCESS by DESIGN Reliability Services
Executive Director, Institute of Electrical Motor Diagnostics, Inc.
Member, National Writers Union (UAW Local 1981) and
International Federation of Journalists

Go Back