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

Then I had been wrong. However SWA is very secure.

No worries! I'm wrong a lot! :(

Woah, that doesn't look good

So who is gonna be the first to ask if this will be modeled in the upcoming PMDG NGX?Buddy Morgan

So who is gonna be the first to ask if this will be modeled in the upcoming PMDG NGX?Buddy Morgan

Another interesting question...Are SWA VA 737 pilots also grounded?

Midway airport, southwest landing protocol, and sketchy maintence is what is causing all these problems.We all know how hard southwest runs their planes as well. As for midway,1. Short runways2. Strict landing protocol southwest adopted, especially at midway that basically slams the planes down on the runway3. Constant take off and landings day in day out pounding the planesIts basically simple wear and tear, sped up by their protocol and rules that are followed regarding landings. I landed last year in a southwest plane at midway on a trip to see my cousin in chicago. The plane hit the runway so hard one of the overhead compartments flew open and everyone was pretty startled. it was one of the loudest bangs ive ever heard in my life. I bet we were doing around -600 fpm when we hit. I'm sure the fact that southwest has a sketchy maintence track record comes in to play as well here.

I think the media reporting on this story has been absolutely terrible:1. The crazy decent rate figures being quoted in the media were read directly off flightaware, who say right in their FAQ (which was up long before this incident) that numbers are often incorrect and are artifacts of the way the FAA computer system works. A decent rate of 16,000 feet per minute as is being quoted in the media is ridiculous. It was likely 6,000 or so at max. A passenger reported the descent from FL360 to 11,000 taking about 4 minutes, which seems much more likely.2. Southwest is statistically the safest airline in the United States - they have never had a passenger death. Two runway overruns (one at KBUR and one at KMDW) are the only "crash" incidents in their entire existence and I don't believe either even resulted in a hull loss.3. Breathless passenger reports on the about how "we almost died", "I'm going to think twice before flying" etc are par for the course with incidents like this.4. This is actually one of the newest 737-300 in the SWA fleet - the plane was delivered to SWA new in 1996, just before their first 700 deliveries started in 1997. The reports claiming this is some super old decrepit aircraft are way off here.

Another interesting question...Are SWA VA 737 pilots also grounded?

:LMAO:Buddy Morgan

I think the media reporting on this story has been absolutely terrible:

The media is terrible at reporting most stories. They always get facts wrong and overhype everything and make it seem like the world is comming to an end in 10 seconds. Anyways, The number one issue here in my opinion is how hard they land their planes, espeically at midway. I've had to be a part of one about a year ago, and the plane hit the runway so hard an overhead bin came open. Southwest landing protocol calls for very hard landings at airports with around 7000 feet or less of runway. This protocol was a direct result of the two runway overruns during the past decade. This can and does take a big toll on the airframe, espeically with the quick turnaround stop and go rate and workhorse likeness of the southwest fleet. Southwest may be a safe airline, but I believe its just because they are getting lucky and relying on how well the boeing 737 is made and its saftey designs in place when a breach in the hull does take place. While this is purely speculation at this time, it might also be worth noting to take into account how well the pilots responded with almost instantaneous full situational awareness of the problem and solution. It is almost as if they were expecting it to happen, and knew this could be a problem at any time because of the stresses southwest puts on their aircraft. Incidents like this make me question how well the hard, but brittle new plastic airframe of the 787 is going to hold up after 5 - 10 years of similar conditions and rough landings.

The number one issue here in my opinion is how hard they land their planes, espeically at midway. I've had to be a part of one about a year ago, and the plane hit the runway so hard an overhead bin came open. Southwest landing protocol calls for very hard landings at airports with around 7000 feet or less of runway. This protocol was a direct result of the two runway overruns during the past decade. This can and does take a big toll on the airframe, espeically with the quick turnaround stop and go rate and workhorse likeness of the southwest fleet. Southwest may be a safe airline, but I believe its just because they are getting lucky and relying on how well the boeing 737 is made and its saftey designs in place when a breach in the hull does take place.

And you're basing this on what knowledge exactly? Are you an aerospace engineer or a metalurgical engineer? I very seriously doubt Boeing and the FAA would allow SWA to adopt an SOP that endangers the structure of the aircraft. You're using a latch on a flimsy plastic overhead bin giving way as evidence that the aluminum structure is unsafe? That's more than a bit of a stretch there. The main gear on the 737 sit under the wing box - how the top of the fuselage would absorb any significant shock from "hard" landings is beyond me. I don't know the exact g-force figures but I do know that all airliners are certified/stressed for landings FAR in excess of what the average passenger would deem a hard landing.

And you're basing this on what knowledge exactly? Are you an aerospace engineer or a metalurgical engineer? I very seriously doubt Boeing and the FAA would allow SWA to adopt an SOP that endangers the structure of the aircraft. You're using a latch on a flimsy plastic overhead bin giving way as evidence that the aluminum structure is unsafe? That's more than a bit of a stretch there. The main gear on the 737 sit under the wing box - how the top of the fuselage would absorb any significant shock from "hard" landings is beyond me. I don't know the exact g-force figures but I do know that all airliners are certified/stressed for landings FAR in excess of what the average passenger would deem a hard landing.

I am an engineer and i work on CNC and EDM equipment in a precision tool and die shop, the kind that make the parts for these planes. Anyways, Its based on engineering and scientific evidence. The structural integrity and critical tensil strength of these aluminum airframes can only take so much before they bend or wear and tear is caused. Landings can cause wear and tear anywhere on the plane, including the fuselage. landings in excess of around 500 FPM will start causeing yeild strength issues. If you do this to the plane over and over again, the yeild strength and ultimate strength gradually decay over time. the aluminum used in boeing 737's is strong but its not THAT strong. hundreds upon hundreds of rough landings in excess of 500 FPM could easily cause cracks and ruptures anywhere on the plane,. And how can you possibly make the statement that you doubht very seriously boeing and the FAA would allow SWA to adopt a SOP that endagers the structure of the aircraft when they were just fined millions for not taking care of their planes? Boeing and the FAA dont even have no say in what landing procedures an airline adopts. Southwest was fined millions for illegal maintence practices and they did find cracks and stress fatigue in more than just several of the planes in their fleet.These planes can and do suffer from metal fatigue, and routine hard landings most definetly speed up the process. there is scientific data to back that up.

I'm almost positive Boeing and the FAA do in fact have to approve the airlines' SOPs Tom. Someone please correct me if you know for certain that I'm wrong on that, but that has always been my understanding. Boeing themselves create the initial set of procedures that the airlines base their own modifications on.

I'm almost positive Boeing and the FAA do in fact have to approve the airlines' SOPs Tom. Someone please correct me if you know for certain that I'm wrong on that, but that has always been my understanding. Boeing themselves create the initial set of procedures that the airlines base their own modifications on.

Watch from 2:30 - 3:00The landing I was a part of at chicago midway in 2009 was easily 150% harder than that landing.It is blatently obvious to me that the shock absorbers didnt absorb 100% of the shock either, if they had then there would have been no loud bang and the plane would have not shook like an earthquake.

Is that 737 going to be written-off?

I seriously doubt it. If this aircraft was 15 years old it was still a fairly young airframe. I could bet my home it will be flying again.

@ 2:50 - 3:15 is a perfect example of exactly how they perform their landings at midway. they hover over the touchdown zone marking and then drop it like a rock at the aiming point bars. My landing was IDENTICAL to this, aside from the fact that our landing was about 15-25 feet higher, and the drop it like a rock became a stall it like a rock @ 25-50 feet above the runway. If this doesnt convince you that landings like this, hour after hour day after day cant impact the stress fatigue or yeild strength stress ratio of a aluminum airplane, then you needa go take a course in metallurgy. So does southwest. before they start killing people.