FAA Drags Feet on Jet Fuel Tank Safety

Not all important politics in America is decided at the ballot box or on the floor of the House or Senate. A matter that affects every airline passenger has been stalled at the Federal Aviation Administration for almost nine years. The National Transportation Safety Board has suggested rule changes that would prevent a fuel tank explosion like that which destroyed TWA Flight 800 over Long Island, New York almost a decade ago. The FAA has resorted to a bureaucratic defense, “It is better to have a proposed rule that is correct and makes sense than to have one that gets out the door too early.” This is criminal negligence posing as prudence.

The explosion that killed all 230 people on TWA Flight 800 on July 17, 1996 occurred in the center fuel tank. This “rare event” was the result of the fuel tank heating while the air conditioning ran when the jet was parked on the runway. Some of the fuel vaporized in the tank where it mixed with oxygen, and a spark set off the accidentally created mixture. A similar event occurred on a Thai Airways 737-400, but because it was on the ground, only one person died.

The NTSB has suggested a couple of ways to get rid of this risk. The quick and dirty solution is to cool planes on the ground with externally supplied air. The FAA admits this is good, but it isn’t perfect. Neither is the FAA’s response. According to the NTSB press release, “At the Safety Board's request, FAA staff surveyed airlines last year to determine whether the use of ground conditioned air had changed within the previous 5 to 7 years. The FAA found that only one airline had changed procedures to use ground conditioned air on all of its flights. It further found that 94 percent of daily airline flights do not exclusively use ground-conditioned air.” The one airline that has changed is Southwest Airlines, which incidentally posted its 57th consecutive quarterly profit yesterday (going back to 1991).

The FAA says the solution is to pump nitrogen, a blessedly plentiful and inert gas, into the fuel tanks rendering them incapable of exploding in this fashion. And it is the perfect solution, except for the $200,000 per plane price tag. The FAA also says that there is a proposed rule “in final coordination,” Federalese for getting final approvals from other departments. Then, there will be a period of public review and comment before it goes forward.

Meanwhile, those 3,800 planes are flying on a daily basis. Air traffic delays happen, and it is summer in the northern hemisphere where most air travel occurs. Those planes are sitting on the runways, and most are not cooled by external air. The FAA has had years to get this done, and it has failed. If another plane explodes, the cause of death can be listed as “bureaucratic infighting.”



© Copyright 2005 by The Kensington Review, J. Myhre, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent.
Produced using Fedora Linux.


Home