AN MD80 HAD A BROKEN PAX SEAT. THE PAX WAS MOVED AFTER AN FAA INSPECTOR NOTIFIED THE FLT ATTENDANT THAT THE SIT WAS UNACCEPTABLE.

Date: 2003-07 · Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model · Phase: ground

Anomalies: aircraft-equipment-problem-less-severe|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy

Synopsis

AN MD80 HAD A BROKEN PAX SEAT. THE PAX WAS MOVED AFTER AN FAA INSPECTOR NOTIFIED THE FLT ATTENDANT THAT THE SIT WAS UNACCEPTABLE.

Narrative

WHILE ENRTE ON FLT; #1 FLT ATTENDANT NOTIFIED ME THAT THERE HAD BEEN A PROB DURING THE BOARDING PROCESS. WHILE BOARDING; THE PAX SEATED IN ROW XYZ NOTIFIED FLT ATTENDANT #2 THAT THEIR SEAT WOULD NOT LOCK IN THE UPRIGHT POS. FLT ATTENDANT; THINKING IT WAS A FULL FLT; INSTRUCTED THE PAX THAT SHOULD A PROB ARISE; THEY WERE TO BE SURE TO PUSH THE RETRACT BUTTON AND MAKE SURE THAT THE SEAT BACK FULLY RETRACTED. THE PAX IN THE ROW DIRECTLY BEHIND OVERHEARD THE CONVERSATION AND HAPPENED TO BE AN FAA INSPECTOR. THE FAA INSPECTOR THEN APCHED THE #1 FLT ATTENDANT; IDENTED THEMSELVES; AND MADE IT KNOWN THAT THE SIT WITH SEAT WAS UNACCEPTABLE. THE FLT ATTENDANTS THEN MOVED THE PAX TO ANOTHER OPEN SEAT. AT THIS POINT; THE CABIN RPT WAS RECEIVED WITH NO MENTION TO MYSELF OF WHAT HAD JUST TRANSPIRED AND THE FLT DEPARTED. ENRTE; AFTER LEARNING WHAT HAD HAPPENED; I SPOKE WITH THE FLT ATTENDANT AND REVIEWED THE SAFETY IMPLICATIONS OF THE SIT; STRESSING THAT SAFETY IS FIRST AND FOREMOST. I ALSO SPOKE TO THE FAA INSPECTOR DURING DEPLANING AND HIS ACCOUNT OF THE INCIDENT RECONCILED WITH THE FLT ATTENDANT'S ACCOUNT.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.