cpizzull Posted March 12, 2008 #1 Share Posted March 12, 2008 For those of us leaving this weekend, and those next week, you may want to keep a close eye on your flights! So far so good here. Just an fyi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trock Posted March 12, 2008 #2 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Scary isn't it??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMo Posted March 12, 2008 #3 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Why?? Do you have a link?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpmaximus Posted March 12, 2008 #4 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Southwest had several planes that were way past due for inspections still flying in the air illegally. Its a really big deal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trock Posted March 12, 2008 #5 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Why?? Do you have a link?? http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080312/faa_southwest_airlines.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko7 Posted March 12, 2008 #6 Share Posted March 12, 2008 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23594457/ Here is the SWA story. Gecko7:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMo Posted March 12, 2008 #7 Share Posted March 12, 2008 http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080312/faa_southwest_airlines.html Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trock Posted March 12, 2008 #8 Share Posted March 12, 2008 ;) ;) Thank you! ;) Cant say i am not too shocked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko7 Posted March 12, 2008 #9 Share Posted March 12, 2008 It's one way to keep their costs down. Skip inspections and cut corners. Welcome to low cost airlines.:eek: Gecko7:o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truecruiser Posted March 12, 2008 #10 Share Posted March 12, 2008 there go the dings! i guess. i just got an email from them on friday countering the claims last week, and stating that the former NTSB inspector-in-charge, greg feith, said there was no risk to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko7 Posted March 12, 2008 #11 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Thngs that make you go hmmmmm.:rolleyes: Gecko7:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stargate fan Posted March 13, 2008 #12 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I flew to and from BWI yesterday (long day) on Southwest. Both flights were delayed about 30 minutes due to waiting for passengers. Thankfully, I was visitng family. I felt bad for those who missed connecting flights, and there were many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wennfred Posted March 13, 2008 #13 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Plan B, start driving. Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Mach* Posted March 13, 2008 #14 Share Posted March 13, 2008 there go the dings! i guess. i just got an email from them on friday countering the claims last week, and stating that the former NTSB inspector-in-charge, greg feith, said there was no risk to the public. No one in the media bothers to mention that SouthWest reported the missed inspections themselves. Had they not the Feds would never have known about it. Early yesterday evening 9 of the 41 had been returned to flight status. They will all be inspected and cleared or repaired by early afternoon today. The inspection takes about 90 minutes... The fine they were slapped with was outlandish. It was only that high because they can afford it. The fines are dependent upon ability to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko7 Posted March 13, 2008 #15 Share Posted March 13, 2008 You sound like you work for SWA. Gecko7:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chmie Posted March 13, 2008 #16 Share Posted March 13, 2008 there go the dings! i guess. i just got an email from them on friday countering the claims last week, and stating that the former NTSB inspector-in-charge, greg feith, said there was no risk to the public. He probably flew another airline. Failing to conduct a mandated inspection for cracks and rudder issues does put the public a risk. The FAA has to fine itself for not grounding these planes. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Mach* Posted March 13, 2008 #17 Share Posted March 13, 2008 You sound like you work for SWA. Gecko7:D Nope... far from it. I've been a professional pilot almost all of my adult life including a stint in flight test. I just find it galling that the media only presents one side of the story and then blows it way out of proportion. I know aircraft EXTREMELY well. After 18,500 hours as pilot in command I should... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladyray Posted March 13, 2008 #18 Share Posted March 13, 2008 You sound like you work for SWA. Gecko7:D He might, but he's absolutely correct with the info! Not ashamed to say my DH is a pilot for Southwest and they are no less safe than any other airline out there. You would be suprised and shocked to learn of other airlines mechanical problems that have never been reported to the media. Put it this way, there are some I would never fly. The media, like always, has taken a source of information and blown it way out of proportion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMo Posted March 13, 2008 #19 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Nope... far from it. I've been a professional pilot almost all of my adult life including a stint in flight test. I just find it galling that the media only presents one side of the story and then blows it way out of proportion. I know aircraft EXTREMELY well. After 18,500 hours as pilot in command I should... You don't think it's dangerous to fly an airplane that has cracks in the skin????? Come on, now!!! My DH is an aircraft mechanic, has been for over 40 years. (Not for SWA.) He knows a little something about airplanes, too. The aircraft expands and deflates according to air pressure...like a balloon. So, cracks in the skin would not be a good thing. If you were in a plane that had the skin peel off the top, as in Hawaiian Air, you would find out real quick how important the inspections are. Just my .02 BTW....I have reservations on SWA for May 10!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gecko7 Posted March 13, 2008 #20 Share Posted March 13, 2008 If you were in a plane that had the skin peel off the top, as in Hawaiian Air, you would find out real quick how important the inspections are. BTW, it was Aloha in 1988. I too work for an airline and we self disclose thing all the time. Some are serious and some not so much, but anyway to look at it. If the inspection only takes 90mins to complete then shame on SW for not completing them during an overnight b-check. Especially after they did self-disclose. The fine is a result of them not doing a comprehensive fix as they likely indicated they would. IMOP, Gecko7:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Mach* Posted March 13, 2008 #21 Share Posted March 13, 2008 You don't think it's dangerous to fly an airplane that has cracks in the skin????? Come on, now!!! My DH is an aircraft mechanic, has been for over 40 years. (Not for SWA.) He knows a little something about airplanes, too. The aircraft expands and deflates according to air pressure...like a balloon. So, cracks in the skin would not be a good thing. If you were in a plane that had the skin peel off the top, as in Hawaiian Air, you would find out real quick how important the inspections are. Just my .02 BTW....I have reservations on SWA for May 10!!! I'm sure that your husband also knows that there are allowable limits to cracks and that cracks are repairable and please don't lecture me in the importance of inspections. I'm completely aware of how important they are. No, cracks aren't a good thing. I never said they were. What I said was, please reread my post, that SWA had notified the FAA themselves of the inspections that they failed to perform. Airframes have a life cycle. At the end of that life cycle they're taken out of service. No one expects an aircraft to last forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMo Posted March 13, 2008 #22 Share Posted March 13, 2008 BTW, it was Aloha in 1988. I stand corrected! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenMo Posted March 13, 2008 #23 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I'm sure that your husband also knows that there are allowable limits to cracks and that cracks are repairable and please don't lecture me in the importance of inspections. I'm completely aware of how important they are. No, cracks aren't a good thing. I never said they were. What I said was, please reread my post, that SWA had notified the FAA themselves of the inspections that they failed to perform. Airframes have a life cycle. At the end of that life cycle they're taken out of service. No one expects an aircraft to last forever. Don't be mad!! I honestly wasn't trying to lecture you!! Yes...cracks in planes can be deferred, on short flights, depending on where they are. According to the link in post #5, SWA has been flying these planes since last year. Even after all the ongoing media hype about SWA...I'm no more apprehensive about getting on a SWA plane than I am any other plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truecruiser Posted March 13, 2008 #24 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Nope... far from it. I've been a professional pilot almost all of my adult life including a stint in flight test. I just find it galling that the media only presents one side of the story and then blows it way out of proportion. I know aircraft EXTREMELY well. After 18,500 hours as pilot in command I should... thank you for your comments, mach. i am on a flight sat, so i hope the one i get on is fine. i can only proceed on the premise that they pilot and crew will not fly an aircraft which is unsafe. in light of recent media events and the fine that was subsequently slapped on them, i am going with the mindset that the plane i will be on will not have dangerous cracks in the fuselage.:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolivar5599 Posted March 13, 2008 #25 Share Posted March 13, 2008 To my knowledge there have been NO incidents, near misses or possible tragedies - only the bureacracy rearing its ugly head. Southwest notified the FAA themselves of the missed inspections - not the other way around. I have no problems with flying on Southwest - they show more consideration for their passengers than most other airlines and until proven otherwise I will not panic. Glad I am not flying for 2 months though becuase taking 41 planes out of the mix cannot be a good thing for the traveling public. How long do these inspections take? I still think this is a tempest in a teapot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.