Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: JAL, carried passengers with engines fitted in wrong place

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    The weather sucks in Seattle
    Posts
    4,899

    JAL, carried passengers with engines fitted in wrong place

    JAL plane carried passengers with engines fitted in wrong place
    A Japan Airlines (JAL) Boeing 747 aircraft whose left and right engines were mixed up during maintenance carried passengers on international flights for seven months before the error was uncovered, it has been learned.

    Company officials said a maintenance firm in Singapore got the engines mixed when fitting them, and Japan Airlines officials failed to notice the mistake when the plane was handed over.

    The error caused a check on one of the engines to be delayed beyond the specified period. Land, Infrastructure and Transport Ministry officials have instructed the airline to prevent a reoccurrence of the error.

    Airline officials said the maintenance firm worked on the plane over two months from Feb. 14 this year. During this period the firm reportedly mixed up the far left and right engines of the four-engine plane. When Japan Airlines received the aircraft, officials failed to check serial numbers on the engines. From April 14, the plane departed and landed about 440 times on international flights.

    The error was uncovered during an inspection on Nov. 14. Checks on a case covering the engine were delayed in the wake of the error.
    JAL officials said the output of the engines was the same, but the placement angle differed depending on the engine, which affected reverse thrust. The error did not pose a safety threat, officials said. (Mainichi)

    December 21, 2005
    The problem with socialism is that you eventually,
    run out of other people’s money.
    ” - Margaret Thatcher

  2. #2
    Administrator PhilDernerJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    12,470
    That's pretty stupid.

    Though it seems it wasn't a safety threat, what WOULD have made it dnagerous? What real problem is it?
    Email me anytime at [email protected].

  3. #3
    Senior Member Ari707's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    West Hempstead, NY
    Posts
    1,153
    at least they were pointing in the right direction... :?
    Overheard on JFK TOWER - S Turns are fine, U-Turns are bad....

  4. #4
    Administrator PhilDernerJr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    12,470
    hahahahahahaha
    Email me anytime at [email protected].

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southampton, UK
    Posts
    19
    I don't think it was dangerous as such, but my interpretation of it is that it is one of the two had higher time on it, and it missed an overhaul. It must be a nightmare job organising these things.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •