Back to Squawk list
  • 26

CFM Files Lawsuit After Finding Fake Parts On 68 Engines

Submitted
Engine manufacturer CFM International has filed a lawsuit against UK-based supplier AOG Technics for supplying falsely certified components. CFM says is taking aggressive legal action to identify parts sold by AOG Technics with falsified documentation. AOG Technics appears to have engaged in deceptive practices, including fabricating certificates and falsifying employee career histories, prompting airlines and regulators to remove parts supplied by the company. A lawsuit filed by engine… (www.msn.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


M20ExecDriver
M20ExecDriver 1
Next up is the rebranded far east parts going in to u.s. made avionics. Patiently waiting for that shoe to drop, just need a whistleblower who is retired or not working.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
I am glad the found the source...
avionik99
avionik99 -8
Fake? You mean "uncertified" parts? Fake is a grade school word
sparkie624
sparkie624 13
Simple math.. They both add up to the same thing!
gretair
RG GR 1
Unapproved parts is agency ligo
CerealSpiller
Mike G -1
Says the attorney. For the defendant. To the jury.
AndyShank
AndyShank -2
> Fake is a grade school word

Why are you so passionate about this word?
Bandrunner
Bandrunner 0
Heads need to roll.
MoominMama
Janice Watkins 0
Contrary to some of the comments on here, the phrase, "supplying falsely certified components" means, that although the components are real, they are being falsely certified as new. This does NOT mean that the parts are fake/counterfeit, it means that they are NOT new and unused, i.e. secondhand.
The parts were probably up to specification when manufactured, but who will know when that was? These parts may not necessarily be up to spec for the present day?
As they are time limited components not having the accurate age/use can cause the airlines innumerable problems, not knowing the correct time to replace at maintenance checks.
This is the result of tendering out contacts in any business/service. Going for the cheapest instead of the best.
This is a reprehensible course of action by the contractor when lives are at stake. Falsifying employee records is heinous, has destroyed the credibility of the company through greed.
djames225
djames225 3
While I agree with your later half about the irresponsibleness of this, most do not agree with your first part.
I myself have received falsely "certified parts". I could tell they were not proper OEM/certified aftermarket or even very good used. You could also see the supplied "yes these are authenticate certification paper" itself was also fake as it was poorly written and the ink signatures were not correct.
They were indeed very poorly made and flimsy. Yet they were new/never ever worked. They were not used. Heck even good used was in better condition than these and so never bought from that supplier again.

chiefaviator
chiefaviator 1
As to the first part. It becomes a bit more.

It could be timed out parts certified as new or still within life cycles.

It is also overhauled parts using non aviation and sub standard parts and materials. Also certified.

Many can lead to catastrophic failures and loss of life.

This needs to be costly to the suppliers with long jail sentences.
cmuncy
Chris Muncy -7
Headline really doesn't match the actual story. Big difference between fake and uncertified.
ghstark
Greg S 8
What's the substantive difference between a "fake" part and a part with a falsified certification?

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

ghstark
Greg S 15
No, that's not what they are talking about. They are talking about, at least in the referenced cases, used parts that have falsified (or "faked") certifications listing them as new. Calling them "fake" seems like an accurate summary for the purposes of a headline.
djames225
djames225 9
No they are talking about a fake part. We, and seems CFM, don't know if it was manufactured to specs. The certification paperwork isn't lacking, it's fake.
If it was a true part, the certification documentation would not have needed to be falsified. "An EASA investigation found that some of the fraudulent components include turbine blades," fraudulent>fake.
AndyShank
AndyShank 2
The article says the paperwork was faked. Fraudulent in other words. Are you saying that you believe the paperwork wasn’t fake?

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss