SWA and what it means At US

[crazystnic]

With the SWA fuselage tear, what does it mean for inspections at US.?

SWA has taken 80 jets 737 - 300's out of service...

will US do the same and what does US do for current inspections?

Seems like a lot of these on 737's lately.

I'm fine flying these at 310 or lower... really don't feel the need to go to 350...

 

[BoeingBoy]

It will depend on what the FAA/NTSB find to be the cause. While the CNN video doesn't show detail about where the "tear" was, I assume it started where skin panels meet - that's been the case on pretty much all of these incidents that weren't bullet holes.

Once the cause is determined, it's likely to result in some sort of increased inspections. One thing struck me about this incident - WN probably puts more cycles on their planes than any other 737 operator because of their short average stage length so it could be due more to cycles than time.

Jim

 

[traderjake]

Is this one of the airplanes Southwest knew had stress fractures due to improper stripping of paint?

 

[Art at ISP]

I am withholding judgement on this until we know the cause of the failure. Thankfully the crew was able to land safely and no one was injured.....with relation to US, I think they will comply with any mandated inspections issued as a result of the findings in this case...but if I recall correctly the 737 fleet is going away within the next two years.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Is this one of the airplanes Southwest knew had stress fractures due to improper stripping of paint?

I haven't heard of that - US did have some damage from improper stripping of a few 737's which required more frequent or a different type of inspection. All I remember is that the area had to be stripped and inspected on a repetitive schedule. As I recall, it wasn't fractures but gouges/scratches that could lead to stress fractures.

Jim

 

[traderjake]

I haven't heard of that - US did have some damage from improper stripping of a few 737's which required more frequent or a different type of inspection. All I remember is that the area had to be stripped and inspected on a repetitive schedule. As I recall, it wasn't fractures but gouges/scratches that could lead to stress fractures.

Jim

Your right, they are scatches and gouges caused by improper stripping of paint.

I think the number of Southwest airplanes was about 80.

What I was told is that Southwest was going to have retire the airplanes early because the fix was too expensive.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I think the number of Southwest airplanes was about 80.

That's what the media is saying. Also that WN was cancelling about 300 flights today and possibly as many tomorrow.

Jim

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

I haven't heard of that - US did have some damage from improper stripping of a few 737's which required more frequent or a different type of inspection. All I remember is that the area had to be stripped and inspected on a repetitive schedule. As I recall, it wasn't fractures but gouges/scratches that could lead to stress fractures.

Jim

IIRC, the FAA ordered that those a/c never be painted again. CCY same up with some silly markting thing to go with bare metal scheme. They went out of the fleet no long thereafter,

 

[cynic]

One thing struck me about this incident - WN probably puts more cycles on their planes than any other 737 operator because of their short average stage length so it could be due more to cycles than time.

Jim

From what I've read, it wasn't a terribly high cycle or time aircraft. Not sure if what I read was accurate though.

 

[phlwookie]

IIRC, the FAA ordered that those a/c never be painted again. CCY same up with some silly markting thing to go with bare metal scheme. They went out of the fleet no long thereafter,

Looks like it was N350US and N573US. Photos:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/US-Airways/Boeing-737-301/0737342/
http://www.airliners.net/photo/US-Airways/Boeing-737-301/0520048/

They didn't last long before retirement. 573 was in TUS without tiles by Feb 2006:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Boeing-737-301/1090829

I assume both have either been scrapped or are with other operators now. Given the additional maintenance steps needed, I would lean towards the former.

 

[BoeingBoy]

From what I've read, it wasn't a terribly high cycle or time aircraft. Not sure if what I read was accurate though.

Definitely not old according to the media - about 15 years. It's hard to tell how much time or how many cycles an aircraft has from general sources. For an airline with relatively short average stage length, I would guess it had more time/cycles than one of US' of equivalent age although US has flown the classics on mostly shorter segments for the last decade or so.

Jim

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Boeing-737-301/1090829

I assume both have either been scrapped or are with other operators now. Given the additional maintenance steps needed, I would lean towards the former.
[/quote]

573 has gone down Mexico way
http://www.airliners.net/photo/VivaAerobus/Boeing-737-301/1300299/&sid=1c16238a8df33a88d6ec5e93de082572


actually, didn't look that shabby, without the goofy banner
http://www.airliners.net/photo/US-Airways/Boeing-737-301/1303661/&sid=cb3d805df12514566423238ffb2724bd

 

[autofixer]

We have already been having "scribe" inspections performned on all LCC B737 and B757s.

 

[crazystnic]

What is a scribe inspection?
My concern flying these has always been this kind of event... Ours are 26 years old and even with less cycles that's too much.... They look like tanks and not airplanes with all the patches on them... It's time for them to go!

at the Shuttle we used to raise the cabin to 4K feet on a flight of 21,000 to lower the differnetial down to 5 or so... Great idea that didn't put so much stress on the aircraft.. That could be done on some of our lower flown routes.

 

[700UW]

IIRC, the FAA ordered that those a/c never be painted again. CCY same up with some silly markting thing to go with bare metal scheme. They went out of the fleet no long thereafter,

The FAA did not tell US they couldnt paint that plane, what happened was that it would need to be inspected more, so if the plane was painted, they would have to strip the paint and then repaint, it wasnt cost effective to do that, so Management decided to leave them bare.