SAFETY OVERSIGHT
- Thread starter SKY HIGH
- Start date
I couldn't agree with you more. Controversy sells on the news, and regardless of what the significance of a story may be, as long as it's SHOCKING... people will buy into it.
Magsau... so given the situation, what avenue should the airline have taken at the point where they realized that these inspections had lapsed? Do you think that a jury will convict the airline of deliberately placing unfit aircraft in service? And if so, who EXACTLY should the blame rest with? Should we convict and sentence a line maintenance supervisor? Manager? The Station manager? The CEO? Should the entire airline be convicted ? Should they fold up business and say, well, we eff*ed up, so much for that.
Believe me, I'm not normally a supporter of Southwest, but I truly believe that your accusation of DELIBERATE actions is not well supported, and even moreso, it strongly supports the argument that some people will take any situation available to knock this successful entity whenever they can.
QA4Jet-A
Veteran
Who covered up? WN, the FAA, or both? I have a gut feeling there will be more to come of this. Let's see who was at fault, was it:
A. Mx Planning
B. Regulatory Compliance Group
C. Quality Assurance
D. Flight Attendents
E. Mx Records
F. Pilots
G. Chico at his Taco Stand in the Terminal
Going back a few pages, it was said, 'It is a non-issue', No one died. I agree/disagree with that in that yes, no one died or was hurt but, it could have happened down the road. On the 'Flip side', if there had been a travesty, it would have been an issue and serious. I give WN credit for going public with this, not derogatory comments. None of us are perfect, sometimes as a group we even screw up. The best hope is, people will learn from this and hopefully it will not repeat itself. I'll fly on them anytime.
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
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
AD’s, FAR’s, and OEM FAA recommended periodic maintenance checks are not to be taken lightly. The aviation industry is ‘continually’ expanding the time periods between maintenance checks based on two criteria.
1. Inspection findings of zero to minute problems found and corrected.
2. No one died
Much of the problems that I see are that the historical data to extend periodic maintenance checks is based on young airplanes that have been maintained per regimented OEM specifications and inspection periods. In the case of UAL, everything was maintained by the airline until the 2002 meltdown. Now it's a crap shoot.
As the aircraft age, one would think that inspections would be more stringent and the time periods reduced, but this has not been the case in recent years mainly due to criteria #2.
Like one of the ‘passenger posters’ elaborated, the perception of having a clean cabin, neat and working overhead bins, seats, and IFE take precedence over little nit picky stuff like a crack in the aircraft hull.
That is the ‘passenger’ expectation, not mine.
They are of the ignorant mindset that government mandated (FAA) oversight will dictate the serviceability of the aircraft while in fact the maintenance crews and aircraft crew members ‘constantly’ perform due diligence above and beyond FAA oversight on a flight-by-flight basis.
More than likely, the only individual that will be suffer ‘retribution’ will be the whistleblower.
JMHO,
B) UT
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
Let's do this one more time. Nothing was covered up because as soon as WN became aware of the oversight, the FAA and Boeing were notified. All three parties agreed as to how to handle the situation. If at that time the FAA wanted to ground aircraft it would have been done. It was not, because the FAA agreed to have the aircraft inspected asap since they felt, as Boeing also felt, that there was no safety of flight issue. WN did not at any time deliberately over fly an AD on it's own. Boeing and the FAA agreed it was a non safety issue. This is being churned up again due to infighting within the FAA, a certain inspector mentioned in the dallas morning news as seeking whistleblower status, seeking retribution against his managers for personal reasons. And it doesn't help that WN turned him down for a job in the past.
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
And it doesn't help that WN turned him down for a job in the past.
You are a Liar!
Prove it!
B) UT
Wow, just signed up and both posts making accusations about the whistleblower. There's no way you have a stake in this, is there?
Southwest screwed up their inspections, that is a major issue. The larger issue is that the FAA allowed the aircraft to continue revenue operations for more than a week. That is not acceptable in any way, shape or form. Whoever made that decision should be fired. As much as Southwest deserves some abuse for screwing up on over 100 aircraft, when you consider both the rudder and crack inspections, the bigger problem is with the FAA for allowing them to subject passengers to a potentially dangerous/deadly situation. If the guy reporting the whole thing has an axe to grind so what? It doesn't make the facts any less true.
orangeman
Advanced
Quite to the contrary!!! SWA employees never "talk crap" about other airlines! Mostly stuck defending crap from others who are just jealous! WN employees have never wished that someone else would lose their job or that another airline would go out of business! I can't say the same for many "other airline" employees that post here. <_<
You got that right. Why has there been no focus on nwa and their practices???? Hell an FAA inspector was red flagging problems during the mechanics strike and what do you think the FAA did? Yep Nw complained and the inspector reassigned..Problem solved...Tombstone agency is puttting it mildly I have ZERO respect for the FAA. Bought and paid for like any other corrupt govt agency we have.
orangeman
Advanced
Are you serious? I have been a WN F/A for over 17 years. I also nonrev and or buy tix for my travels. I often hear PA's changed on AA, CO and DL! My most recent was on DL and it had a Christmas flair that she had composed herself. I was actually full fare from ATL-PHX. She was great and all of the necessary instructions were included. If all of the instuctions are included it is fine. Most times it is better because Pax may actually listen!
________________
My major concern is not really directed at Southwest, but rather the FAA. The system they use to approve and monitor carriers allows the FAA's regional offices great leeway in how carriers are approved and monitored. The most immediate example is the way that Southwest is and was allowed to do their preflight announcements much differently then other airlines. No other airline, to my knowledge, was allowed to make that announcement humerous or anything other then a rote recitation of whatever was contained in that airline's flight attendant's manual.
Other differences appear on other levels and I don't blame Southwest for any of this, but rather the FAA's methodology in allowing significant variations based upon which regional office is responsible for that airline. In my opinion that practice is wrong and all airlines should be playing under both the same rules and the same interpretation of those rules.
[/quote]
________________
My major concern is not really directed at Southwest, but rather the FAA. The system they use to approve and monitor carriers allows the FAA's regional offices great leeway in how carriers are approved and monitored. The most immediate example is the way that Southwest is and was allowed to do their preflight announcements much differently then other airlines. No other airline, to my knowledge, was allowed to make that announcement humerous or anything other then a rote recitation of whatever was contained in that airline's flight attendant's manual.
Other differences appear on other levels and I don't blame Southwest for any of this, but rather the FAA's methodology in allowing significant variations based upon which regional office is responsible for that airline. In my opinion that practice is wrong and all airlines should be playing under both the same rules and the same interpretation of those rules.
[/quote]
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,284
- 1,427
Excellent post UAL Tech. I remember in my last years at NWA, the company implemented interior checks on the fleet, while at the same time expanding the time period on overnight checks from 3 days to 7 days. We would be changing out seat parts and other cabin amenities while other a/c sat on the gate on their 6th night without a "line/service" check. They convinced the FAA that this was ok due to our great safety record...based on the earlier maintenance plan that had worked for so many years??? :blink:
U
UAL_TECH
Guest
And here we are yet again.
Thanks for the Link
B) UT
I has come full circle.
