SAFETY OVERSIGHT

[InternationalShannon]

US 737 has visible cracks all over it: cracked seats, cracked side panels, overhead bin doors broken or missing.



????

You'd rather put your kids on an airplane that you know has fuselage cracks because you don't like the crack on the first class seat? Lady, I'm disgusted at the crack in the seat too, but I think that's getting a little overboisterous.

WN is getting a spank, deal with it, US's hiney is sore. You guys will be fine. And BTW, no one flies with the bins missing doors. Fuselage cracks, perhaps, but those FAs are hard core on those overhead bins.

 

[wasone]

Southwest says it missed the inspections as in inadvertent oversight. The carrier voluntarily self-reported the incident and completed the required inspections within 10 days of doing so, according to the Journal. As for the inspections, the Journal says "six of the 46 affected aircraft turned out to have cracks -- some as long as four inches -- in the fuselage, according to one person familiar with details." The Journal adds that no accidents or incidents resulted from the problem.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...nterstitialskip

OVERSIGHT.........This AD is years old, Gee like where have you been!

 

[AdAstraPerAspera]

We all know how much Southwest loves to point to their stellar cancellation and on-time-arrival record.

I guess now we know how they've been pulling it off so well. It's easy when you avoid pulling an a/c off a line and thus not destroying Southwest's 11-leg daily flight lines. Except I guess that means putting off mandatory maintenance. Oh well.

 

[swflyer]

Whew!!! Glad we already know that SWA is guilty of deliberate mx abuse!! Saves all the trouble disputing the reporting and providing evidence to the contrary. <_<

I liked the Dallas Morning News article here. It reports that SWA found the hole in the maintenance schedule, self-reported to the FAA, and fixed the problem and aircraft involved, all with the blessing of the FAA inspector of the time. Now another inspector is taking exception with the way it was handled.

Notice I didn't say it didn't happen. Notice I'm saying the jury's still out.

.....and now back to our regularly scheduled program, "SWA is sooo bad....."

 

[SolidCactus]

Honestly, WN is one of the companies that I most admire. From the management to the people on the front lines, Southwest is really one class act... IF this happened at WN, I can only think that it is going on all over the industry, and the FAA is just turning a blind eye...

 

[UAL_TECH]

It's still not going to have any impact at all on Southwest. Ok, maybe they pay a bigger fine and someone from the FAA gets fired. Maybe someone in mx at Southwest gets fired too, but it isn't going to stop "their" passengers from getting on the planes.

Probably the most 'true' statement in this thread.
No one died so this is a 'non-issue'.

B) UT

 

[mrbillm5]

Probably the most 'true' statement in this thread.
No one died so this is a 'non-issue'.

B) UT

I bet you must take the FAA approach to tombstone regulation. I know how SW can save even more money on maintenace, they can contract all of there aircraft checks out to vendors and third party outfits to pencil whip, not just their heavy checks. This is not just an oversight on SW part but a deep rooted problem with a broke system that makes Aeroflot a first class operation. Maintenace has been the red headed step child and the first thing to be cut from airlines ever since 9-11.

 

[Fixed Wing]

No one died so this is a 'non-issue'.

B) UT

Unbelievable statement !
Is this the argument you would make if pulled over for DUI?

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

NBC World News Tonite(6:30 PM/EST) stated THAT this lil' "oversight" will cost WN.....$10 MILLION "smackeroos", the LARGEST FINE EVER doled out by the FEDS !!!

Thats an eye opening stat to have "plastered" into WN's Bio/Resume' !!

Hey, Lets call it what it IS.................WN got caught with there drawers down :down:

I doubt if It will have a long term effect on them .

 

[tech2101]

Probably the most 'true' statement in this thread.
No one died so this is a 'non-issue'.

B) UT

UAL Tech's statement is true.

The flying public considers it a non-issue because there is no smoking wreckage to watch on TV.

 

[USAir757]

Probably the most 'true' statement in this thread.
No one died so this is a 'non-issue'.

UT

This is clearly NOT a non-issue. In fact, from what I've seen, the reactions of people who are normal travellers (not affliated with the industry) are not good, and the word "ValuJet" quickly comes to the surface.

Southwest may have originally self-reported the issue, but now the national media has grabbed hold of this story, and the FAA will need to save face and make the American public believe that they are on top of these things. Look to see WN fined major for these discrepancies.

I know for many of you WN loyals, this is a hard thing to stomach, because you believed that the airline could do know wrong. And I know what that feels like.... I'm a New England Patriots fan. Nuff said. <_<

 

[KCFlyer]

We all know how much Southwest loves to point to their stellar cancellation and on-time-arrival record.

I guess now we know how they've been pulling it off so well. It's easy when you avoid pulling an a/c off a line and thus not destroying Southwest's 11-leg daily flight lines. Except I guess that means putting off mandatory maintenance. Oh well.

It's too bad they didn't have mechanics that threw things into an engine to keep a jet that he felt was unsafe from leaving the gate, like a Frontier mechanic did a few years ago.

 

[a320av8r]

Probably the most 'true' statement in this thread.
No one died so this is a 'non-issue'.

B) UT

You are nuts. This is a criminal act and jail time should be involved!
WN says this was not a safety issue? The fuselage tearing apart or a rudder hard-over is not a safety issue? Since they were lucky it is okay!?

My family and I have flown on WN on several occasions but never again! I will also warn my friends. Even if their philosophy should change (which I doubt) they have broken the trust, not with just the customers but with the crews whose lives they endangered as well. They should change their call sign to "Critter" since are now on the same level as ValuJet.

And no, this is not an industry wide problem, it's just the cowboy attitude of Southwest and thinking that they are above it all.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/06/southwest.planes/index.html

 

[USAir757]

There are really two sides to this...

Yes, it IS a big deal. They violated federal law, posed a danger to public safety, and they should be punished accordingly. They were very lucky a catastrophe did not occur as a result of their actions. Anyone who argues that it's not a big deal need only have watched CNN's American Morning today where Southwest CEO Gary Keller appeared in the studio merely 12 or so hours after the story first broke on the news, to do damage control.

HOWEVER....

The airline responded appropriately by (1) self-inspecting aircraft in question, (2) voluntarily reporting their own infractions, and (3) cooperating with the FAA to get compliant and move forward. The previous article notes that both the airline and the FAA considered the matter closed as of April, 2007. The only thing that has happened since then is that the media grabbed a hold of the story. Southwest hasn't gotten less safe since last April, they've just been exposed. Had CNN not broke the story, we would go on and never knew it happened. Furthermore, Southwest has no obligation to release this kind of news on a press release or anything of that sort.

Some heads should roll, sure.... if nothing else, than for Southwest to save face and show how serious they are about safety. But with the evidence we know, there isn't any criminal activity here.

 

[a320av8r]

Some heads should roll, sure.... if nothing else, than for Southwest to save face and show how serious they are about safety. But with the evidence we know, there isn't any criminal activity here.

They identified which aircraft had not been inspected IAW the AD but continued flying those aircraft in revenue service anyway- that's not criminal?