Southwest Airlines Grounds B737 Fleet

[Tabs 2,790]

Side bar....Why does youtube let folks post videos taken in the back of the airplane during takeoff and landing (at least within the US)? It is a violation of US federal law to use electronic devices during those phases and of maritime law to disobey crew member instructions.I'm not saying we should throw the guys in jail, but leaving the videos up encourages more videographers to break the law.I know the arguments about it not really impacting avionics and even if it did, they're in CAVU... but that's beside my point.

I don't think it's actually illegal - it breaks the airline's rules to do it, but I don't think it's actually a federal crime. Even if it was, the crime would be the act of operating the camera, not the existence or viewing of the video.

[michal 44]

I hope this isnt targeting my post.

Not yours

[Efussander 0]

Not yours

Even if it was, no hard feelings. I was just checking. :(

[Guest 747dash8]

Will this be simulated?

[Tabs 2,790]

Will this be simulated?

Explosive decompression is a simulated failure, yes. Not specifically a hole on top of the plane from metal fatigue though.

[Deano777 0]

Don't worry about the descent rate. It's quite normal during an emergency depressurisation dive. The pilot flies to VNE effectively turning the a/c into a brick for the first part of the dive. Then pulling into the buffet zone to prevent overspeeding in the lower atmosphere, being careful not to over control as he levels out at the designated altitude. Which is dependant on terrain safety altitudes of course!!!vololiberista

Not technically correct.The speed will be VMO or MMO (-10kts). The other thing that will restrict the speed to something lower than this is structural failure. Having had reports from the cabin that there was a hole in the side of the fuselage the descent would have been alot gentler and slower than you might think for obvious reasons.

[shafs 0]

i flew with this airline about two years ago when i went to the US for holidays. Very friendly people at the time i though they were flying mostly late models 73s. would this be a major upset for southwest i am not aware if they have that many spare aircraft.

[rX 1]

The NTSB update press release today (April 4th):

[4116705510 4]

Well Southwest has gotten away with this for too long. They've been fined $7.2 Million a few years back for not properly maintaining their planes. Ever since the Aloha Airlines incident, airlines have been keeping close tabs on their 737s. Even Northwest spent millions to keep their DC-9s flying safely. I'd like to see Southwest get a huge fine for this, its unacceptable. Good thing is, this is a problem just with the 737, its not effecting the 757's. Southwest's whole fleet could get grounded. This may be bad for them but its good for the other airlines, which Southwest has undermined. So many of their planes have problems, its just unacceptable.

[michal 44]

I'd like to see Southwest get a huge fine for this

Sad to disappoint but your wish won't be granted. If you bothered to listen to the NTSB briefing you would actually learn something.

[ExNusquam 11]

Well Southwest has gotten away with this for too long. They've been fined $7.2 Million a few years back for not properly maintaining their planes.

Southwest voluntarily grounded those aircraft and told the FAA that they had screwed up. They then inspected and fixed the aircraft and paid the fine.

Ever since the Aloha Airlines incident, airlines have been keeping close tabs on their 737s. Even Northwest spent millions to keep their DC-9s flying safely. I'd like to see Southwest get a huge fine for this, its unacceptable.

A exhibited microscopic cracking that was not visible to the naked eye. The aircraft's last mandated inspection was last spring, and all they had to was a visual check. Southwest wasn't operating outside the regulations here. Why would a service bulletin be in the works if this was a problem that had been considered before?

Good thing is, this is a problem just with the 737, its not effecting the 757's. Southwest's whole fleet could get grounded.

No, it couldn't. As stated in the NTSB report, this likely only affects 737-300 models with comparable cycles. Less than half of WNs fleet is the -300

This may be bad for them but its good for the other airlines, which Southwest has undermined. So many of their planes have problems, its just unacceptable.

Last I checked, Southwest operates in a country that doesn't regulate air travel, so all they are guilty of is having good business practices. Also, Southwest has had one hull loss in it's entire history.That's better than most airlines.

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Gents-I realize that as an ATP holder with multiple type ratings who has spent 20 or so years in the airline industry including a stint as a Chief Pilot at a Part 121 certificated US Air Carrier doesn't give me nearly the qualifications as some others in this thread...But I'm going to comment anyway. :( First- lets talk about aircraft age" In the industry we measure an aircraft's age not only chronologically, but in terms of cycles. It is well known that short haul operators age their aircraft more quickly because of the rapid up/down cycles. There is nothing wrong with this, nor is there anything dangerous about it. Second- airframe fatigue: Takeoff and landing have very little to do with imparting stress on the airplane. The major source of stress to an airliner comes from the pressurization cycle. A significant amount has been learned about this process since the mid 80s, and many newer aircraft designs have special features to minimize the potential impact of pressurization cycles on the airplane. For example, after studying the Aloha Airlines incident, as well as some other highly publicized fatigue failures, the engineers at Boeing changed the design of the 737s pressurization system in order to improve the fatigue life of the airplane. This feature is actually quite simple in that the pressurization system does not pressurize the fuselage to the maximum rated differential pressure on every flight. Instead, it works to maintain a constant cabin altitude thus allowing for lower stress levels over the life of the airplane. (you'll be able to see this in the NGX, btw!) The 737 classics do not have this feature and thus their fuselage components have a more difficult fatigue life than the newer NGs. This doesn't make them bad, or worse or unsafe, it simply makes them more costly to maintain as they age.Third- maintenance: SWA runs a first rate maintenance operation. For those who didn't read any deeper than the MSNBC news headline, what you missed out on was that the big fine they paid was for a PAPERWORK PROBLEM. ie: The recordkeeping on existing inspection intervals did not meet the FAA's requirements- so they were required to reinspect and re-file the paperwork... If I had a nickle for every time I had to be involved in an FAA paperwork drill like this in my airline career, PMDG would be giving products away for free... :( Lastly- "Hard Landings as SOP": Wow... Uhm... This one is so far off the reservation that it is hard to comment upon. I've spent more of my life than I care to recall working with regulatory bodies in developing operating procedures- and for anyone to suggest that "hard landings" are an SOP at any passenger carrying air carrier operating in/out of normal facilities is downright wrong. Airlines live on standardization. We want our air crews landing aircraft the SAME WAY EVERY TIME. Doing so minimizes the opportunities for screwups...Will you get firmer landings on shorter runways? Absolutely. You don't have the time to muck around with a greaser of a landing when you are landing on a 5000' strip in winter with a crosswind. Landing more firmly doesn't damage the airplane, it doesn't stress the airplane, and it certainly doesn't indicate that the pilots are unskilled or that the airline is out to break their own equipment. To the contrary, it shows that the pilots and the airline are using a safety based decision making process that is working effectively.Having an overhead bin pop open might seem dramatic to someone who doesn't fly very often, but it isn't all that unusual, especially given the crap that people stuff into the bins. Heck I've had landings so hard that the O2 masks deployed, and that doesn't do anything to the airframe at all. (My FO was landing... yeah.... THAT'S what happened!)At any rate- all the hyperventilation in the media over this thing is pretty funny. The industry is carefully evaluating this incident and I am quite certain that new inspection procedures and more thorough inspections at certain pressurization cycle counts will be the result...This type of study and attention is why the industry has the lowest fatal incident rate in its history...

[dazz 69]

Well, I really don't know anything about all this stuff, but that part of the NTSB briefing where they said that particular section of the fuselage was not supposed to show fatigue at that early stage hence no inspections were required is sort of disturbing. Or did I get it wrong?

[Tabs 2,790]

Boeing just ordered inspections on all 737 classics too btw - this is NOT a Southwest-only issue. The fact that they did that likely means lap-joint cracks have been found at other airlines now too.

[Tabs 2,790]

i flew with this airline about two years ago when i went to the US for holidays. Very friendly people at the time i though they were flying mostly late models 73s. would this be a major upset for southwest i am not aware if they have that many spare aircraft.

SWA is the world's largest 737 operator - they currently have 173 -300s, 25 -500s, and 373 -700s. 113 more -700s are on order and 20 -800s are on order with deliveries beginning next year. They've had to cancel some flights because of this, but it's not going to be a super huge deal that threatens the airline or anything.