Southwest GROUNDS 41 JETS !

Nictoe

Newbie
Mar 12, 2008
3
0
Apparently its the 300-400 series, but I want to know if any MDW-LAS-ONT flights are affected by this ?

Southwest Grounds 41 Jets

DALLAS (AP) - Southwest Airlines grounded 41 planes overnight—about 8 percent of its fleet—in the wake of its recent admission that it had missed required inspections of some planes for structural cracks.

Southwest shares fell 4 percent in midday trading.

The move announced Wednesday comes as Southwest faces a $10.2 million civil penalty for continuing to fly nearly 50 planes after the airline told regulators that it had missed required inspections of the planes.

The Federal Aviation Administration, which announced the penalty last week, has also come under fire for failing to immediately ground the Southwest jets when it learned they had not been inspected for cracks in the fuselage.

Southwest spokeswoman Christi Day said Wednesday that the move to ground 41 planes resulted in some flights being canceled, although she didn't have a precise figure.

The company said it had 520 Boeing 737 jets at the end of last year. Nearly 200 of them are older models, the Boeing 737-300, that were supposed to undergo extra inspections for cracks in the fuselage.

Southwest Chief Executive Gary Kelly had said Tuesday he was concerned by findings from an internal investigation into the missed inspections. He announced that the Dallas-based company had placed three employees on paid leave while it investigated the situation.

Acting FAA Administrator Robert A. Sturgell called the events "a twofold breakdown in the aviation system"—first, Southwest's failure to properly inspect its planes; and the FAA's failure to ground the jets as "at least one FAA inspector looked the other way."

The $10.2 million penalty is the largest the FAA has ever imposed on a carrier. Southwest has said it will appeal.

Its shares fell 51 cents, or 4.1 percent, to $11.89 in afternoon trading on Wednesday. That is near the lower end of their 52-week range of $11.02 to $16.96.
 
According to the noon news here in Dallas, the required inspection takes about 90 minutes and 8 of the a/c had already been returned to service. With SWA overall safety record, this is as close to a non-story as I've ever seen.

If you are already ticketed and your flights are affected, I'm sure SW will contact you.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
According to the noon news here in Dallas, the required inspection takes about 90 minutes and 8 of the a/c had already been returned to service. With SWA overall safety record, this is as close to a non-story as I've ever seen.

If you are already ticketed and your flights are affected, I'm sure SW will contact you.

Thanks thats a relief. I'm almost certain I'll be flying on the 700 types, but I'll keep checkin.
 
According to the noon news here in Dallas, the required inspection takes about 90 minutes and 8 of the a/c had already been returned to service. With SWA overall safety record, this is as close to a non-story as I've ever seen.

If you are already ticketed and your flights are affected, I'm sure SW will contact you.
What if the [Required] Inspection reveals Fuselage cracks ??? Southwest will then be required address the problem, which would require more down time, Right ?

What about the rudder inspections ??
I believe the replacement of the Rudder PCU's will take more than 90 minutes..
 
According to the noon news here in Dallas, the required inspection takes about 90 minutes and 8 of the a/c had already been returned to service. With SWA overall safety record, this is as close to a non-story as I've ever seen.

If you are already ticketed and your flights are affected, I'm sure SW will contact you.


If it only takes 90 minutes to "inspect" the planes, why didn't SWA just do it and not risk the 10M fine and all the press? Well, unless they knew it wasn't going to pass inspection. Hmmmm.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #6
I'm tellin you people, If I find out Southwest CANCELED my flight because of this.....then I'm gonna go ahead and do a:

NICKI SANTORO
 
What if the [Required] Inspection reveals Fuselage cracks ??? Southwest will then be required address the problem, which would require more down time, Right ?

What about the rudder inspections ??
I believe the replacement of the Rudder PCU's will take more than 90 minutes..

What if Osama Bin Laden turned out to be a Bush cousin? Speculation on something that hasn't happened is a waste of brainpower. I'm quite certain that if fuselage cracks or rudder problems are found, SWA will fix them before returning the a/c to service.

Since there was an FAA employee involved in this, I'm sure there will be a major FAA "crackdown"--something the Bush administration doesn't like because it interferes with unfettered commerce. Government interference in business and all.

It would be interesting to see how many of us would come out with clean hands from a thorough FAA review of our maintenance.
 
According to the noon news here in Dallas, the required inspection takes about 90 minutes and 8 of the a/c had already been returned to service. With SWA overall safety record, this is as close to a non-story as I've ever seen.

If you are already ticketed and your flights are affected, I'm sure SW will contact you.
Tell that to the ones onboard the aircraft that lost it's top half of the cabin that the cracks are a "non-story"!
 
What if Osama Bin Laden turned out to be a Bush cousin? Speculation on something that hasn't happened is a waste of brainpower. I'm quite certain that if fuselage cracks or rudder problems are found, SWA will fix them before returning the a/c to service.

Since there was an FAA employee involved in this, I'm sure there will be a major FAA "crackdown"--something the Bush administration doesn't like because it interferes with unfettered commerce. Government interference in business and all.

It would be interesting to see how many of us would come out with clean hands from a thorough FAA review of our maintenance.
Thanks for your "witty" response....My point is that there is more to this mess than just a 90 minute quickie walkaround..
Do you know for sure if fuselage cracks were found on any of these aircraft ????
 
Thanks for your "witty" response....My point is that there is more to this mess than just a 90 minute quickie walkaround..
Do you know for sure if fuselage cracks were found on any of these aircraft ????

I dunno know, do you know if fuselage cracks were found on any of these aircraft? What are the pilots saying about this? If there are cracks found, I'd be cracking someone's wallet that compromised my life and my family's wellbeing. Where is the union? Where is my lawyer?!!!!I love the smell of fresh money.
 
Thanks for your "witty" response....My point is that there is more to this mess than just a 90 minute quickie walkaround..
Do you know for sure if fuselage cracks were found on any of these aircraft ????

You are the one implying that the flying public was put in major danger. My whole point was that we don't know if there were any cracks. All we know so far is that the required inspections were not done on schedule. We also know that 8 of the a/c have been inspected and put back in service. Uh, I'm guessing no cracks on those.

Knowing the integrity and forthrightness of SWA top executives, they will do whatever it takes to make this right.
 
What if Osama Bin Laden turned out to be a Bush cousin? Speculation on something that hasn't happened is a waste of brainpower. I'm quite certain that if fuselage cracks or rudder problems are found, SWA will fix them before returning the a/c to service.

Since there was an FAA employee involved in this, I'm sure there will be a major FAA "crackdown"--something the Bush administration doesn't like because it interferes with unfettered commerce. Government interference in business and all.

It would be interesting to see how many of us would come out with clean hands from a thorough FAA review of our maintenance.

I agree that speculation is a waste, so lets stick to the facts. Rudder inspections and fuselage inspections are mandated and set by the aircraft manufacture, the airline and the FAA. These are extremely important safety inspections that were born out of necessity to ensure the safest and most reliable aircraft in the world. The time limits are reasonable and mandatory, and the airworthiness of the aircraft is assured by the completion of these and numerous other inspections. Is that a major deal?? You bet it is!

Self discloser of FAA violations does not change the facts....these aircraft are and will remain un-airworthy until the inspections are made.

Self discloser of FAA violations is neither noble or honorable....they are done to avoid the really big fines should the FAA find them in violation.

Self discloser of FAA violations does not make aircraft airworthy....

All that said....virtually every FAA maintenance review results in fines imposed on the carrier....and those fines are usually negotiated down to lower amounts, and in my experience the infractions are usually accounting issues....paperwork issues. I do realize that some paperwork issues can and do affect an aircrafts airworthiness, by largely, that s not the case. The single worst infraction a carrier can incur, IMHO, is knowingly operating an aircraft the is unairworthy. This is precisely what Southwest Airlines did. It is not merely speculation.
 
You are the one implying that the flying public was put in major danger. My whole point was that we don't know if there were any cracks.

Of course they DON'T know if there were cracks in the airplanes. THAT IS WHAT THE INSPECTIONS ARE FOR. For crying out loud you can not ignore required maintenance and expect to get a pass. SWA failed to comply, intentionaly failed to comply I might add, and thus must pay the price for their arrogance or ignorance.
 
Why do you have your panties in such a wad about SWA? Is it the fact that they are the one consistently profitable airline in the U.S.? The fact that they do what they do extremely well and stick to it? That a lot of people would rather fly them than your airline or mine? What? Life is too short to stay that twisted up all the time over something you can do nothing about.

P.S. SWA will survive this, and I predict that their average passenger load will not drop one iota from this incident.
 
Why do you have your panties in such a wad about SWA? Is it the fact that they are the one consistently profitable airline in the U.S.? T

Profitable at the expense of safety? Hardly a status symbol anyone would want to hang their reputation on. SWA has not had a level playing field due to fuel hedges (good for them) however even the CEO has said they would have lost money without the hedges. Imagine what the true operating cost would have been had they actually complied with the FAA checks? Do you really want an airline that is operating at a profit to the offset of compliance with the FAR'S? It would be nice to see SWA comply with the FAR's and compete on a level playing field with the other carriers.

SWA has operated in a hazardous manner in many ways for many years. It is finally catching up to them and this is something that many have wanted to see enforced. For them to finally be shown for the fraud they truly are is a refreshing bit of journalism. Maybe they can get Sptizer to be the head legal counsel on this issue. Seems they are very much alike. One face to the public and another in truth.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top