Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

curt1

SWA skimps on options

Recommended Posts

The updated Southwest Airlines livery reflects the current options of the airline. They have no minimums callout, no GPWS callouts, no V1 callout, and also use the old analog standby attitude indicator. Clearly, SWA doesn't want a computer talking to their pilots. Would this be a matter of safety or economics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I would imagine it's pilot preference. Those guys love to hand fly at every opportunity.Most airlines tend to listen to what their pilots want but also have to take into account economics.If they didn't, the pilots would ask for Ipads, Iphones, sexy cabin crew etc......etc........LOL.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Southwest is more anti-computer than any other airline I know about. I think it is actually more safer, the way they operate. For example, their aircraft don't have the ability to perform an autoland if I remember correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of this makes sense, but having no EGPWS callouts seems a little over the top, even by their standards. Then again, I´ve never heard of a CFIT event that was averted due to ######ing betty. From this VFR PP´s perspective, she starts yapping when it´s way too late. Maybe someone will correct me on this.Also, not listening to pilots who simply want sexier flight attendants is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Up until recently they had no auto throttles. Very basically, this saved money with maintenance. Recently SWA has re-activated the auto throttle systems as it turns out the AT system makes the aircraft more economical...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same goes for VNAV to if I recall correctly. For the longest time the button was disabled on the MCP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot of this makes sense, but having no EGPWS callouts seems a little over the top, even by their standards. Then again, I´ve never heard of a CFIT event that was averted due to ######ing betty. From this VFR PP´s perspective, she starts yapping when it´s way too late. Maybe someone will correct me on this.Also, not listening to pilots who simply want sexier flight attendants is ridiculous.
Back when the basic GPWS existed (60s through the invention of EGPWS, when the GPWS sounded your &@($* was handed to you in a few seconds. Basically enough time to firewall it and pull up before you hit something hard. Now with EGPWS, you have the 2500 call and others way before you're about to hit something hard. This is all to the best of my recollection as I read that somewhere some time ago...Now with the sexy flight attendants, haven't seen those yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Same goes for VNAV to if I recall correctly. For the longest time the button was disabled on the MCP.
Correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I understand, they liked having their pilots engaged and having to re-trim the plane with thrust or altitude changes. They believed it increased their situational awareness.Hard to argue with their safety record.Colin Ware

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding of the whole rather 'basic' Southwest NG's was simply an issue of commonality with older -300 airframes and operating procedures proven over the 2+ decades they've operated.Don't hear much about them in Canada but I heard they're even equipping some of their lower-cycle "Classics" with NG style cockpits.I'm pretty confident it's not an issue of a "anti-computer" corporate culture or anything on those lines. It's refreshing to see something in the aviation industry focused on the simple truths of getting there safely and effectively, and not being caught up in the whole "latest and greatest phase" that big airlines seem to go through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Southwest is more anti-computer than any other airline I know about. I think it is actually more safer, the way they operate. For example, their aircraft don't have the ability to perform an autoland if I remember correctly.
So ... these guys are not going to shoot any CATIII approaches where autoland is required?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bpcw they use HUD for that AFAIK
Didn't know that was an option from the FAA regulations point of view.But if you have CAT IIIc conditions, using a HUD with no visual cues doesn't do the trick either?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, in CAT IIIc definitely not. As I understand it, most B737 are not even theoretically able to do IIIc since they have no rollout guidance. That said, I know about fail operative option, but I have no idea if it is c or b. I believe HUGS based systems are limited to CAT IIIa, but dont quote me on that. While we are on that topic, apparently the 737 (and PMDG) HUGS can provide flare guidance and runway outline, and I am looking forward to playing with that one particular system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So ... these guys are not going to shoot any CATIII approaches where autoland is required?
From what I've heard, they hand fly all approaches and landings.They did upgrade all their classics, or were in the process, to makethem RNAV compatible with the NG's. Also, supposedly they havedone away with the EFIS-MAP display for the NG's, and have goneto PFD-ND. They did use the EFIS-MAP to be classic compatible,but since they upgraded the classics, there was no need to continueusing that in the NG's.The changes were done to save fuel. But I think they are stillquite manual when it comes to flying approaches and landings.I don't work there, so you would have to take anything I say witha grain of salt.. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The updated Southwest Airlines livery reflects the current options of the airline. They have no minimums callout, no GPWS callouts, no V1 callout, and also use the old analog standby attitude indicator. Clearly, SWA doesn't want a computer talking to their pilots. Would this be a matter of safety or economics?
Its ALL about SWA wanting to save money wherever they can save money

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of it came from situational awareness as well as having a smooth transition between aircraft, some pilots fly the 733 and 737 in the same day so it was easier for them to transition between aircraft. It actually makes a lot of sense, I think the just started using VNAV again in the last year.-Matt Chase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand changing the -700 avionics package to reflect RNP ops along with A/T and Autobrake Testing but I cant figure out why they 1. Still have a gasper fan Along with a RECIRC Fan and why their -500's aren't updated with winglets nor expected to have upgraded avionics as the -300's are scheduled for. If anyone knows the answers to this I would appreciate it. Tristan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can understand changing the -700 avionics package to reflect RNP ops along with A/T and Autobrake Testing but I cant figure out why they 1. Still have a gasper fan Along with a RECIRC Fan and why their -500's aren't updated with winglets nor expected to have upgraded avionics as the -300's are scheduled for. If anyone knows the answers to this I would appreciate it.Tristan.
I would imagine many of the -500's are on the way out....ironically as there are probably more -200's operating in the world then -500's nowadays (what is was intended to replace.....-ish...no idea if this is true).Southwest probably has their schedule sorted out sufficiently enough to ensure good load factors on the larger -300 and -700 variants. The economics of the -500 probably just don't pay out enough for their liking.I wasn't aware that they had equipped NG's (that's what your talking bout right?) with seperate Gasper fan....maybe it's because of the hot climates or something they occasionally operate down south there...Now on the old -200's (only type I sorta know about), you could run the gasper fan with the packs off and it would produce a little air movement in the PSU's and flight compartment gaspers...so...perhaps the idea is an economics one...Perhaps SWA wants to be able to still move some air in the cabin with the Packs off, APU off, and without any ground equipment? A way to save some money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The -600's has the same fuselage as the -500 and is waaay better on fuel as well so hopefully if phased out they replace them with the -600. Yeah the -700's has gasper fans as seen on airliners dot net under "southwest 737-700 cockpit" dated april and july 2011. As for economics not sure how much more efficiency gasper fans have overall then again maybe your right about it being economical. The AirTran 737-700's does not have it installed so not sure if they're going to phase them out or installed them on their acquired NG's. I sent a request for the PMDG team to implement a gasper fan option which hopefully we can expect maybe next year or so since they have more serious projects to tend to. Great point of views tho.-Tristan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's some misinformation from certain people going on here I think...- I do not believe it was a cost thing for SWA regarding A/T and VNAV - all NG's come standard with those features and they *increase* efficiency, not decrease it! I think had everything to do with maintaining commonality with their 300s and 500s. Their classics had analog flight decks until very recently when they were retrofitted with EFIS displays and the newer MCPs/APs to support RNP operations.- Deactivating GPWS callouts doesn't save money. That's a standard feature as well - it probably again has to do with the commonality stuff.In general I think a lot of you don't give real pilots and real procedures enough credit here - not having computerized callouts, handlfying, and other stuff doesn't make a plane dangerous - the PNF is more than capable of calling them out him/herself, this is how it was done for decades and decades prior to the computerized stuff. SWA has never lost a passenger on-board one of their aircraft in an accident and I think the safety record speaks for itself - most of the world's major airlines only wish they had a record that good. I'd much rather be on an aircraft where the crew regularly handflys vs. some automation-is-the-rule place where you can get incidents like AF447 happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might also have to do with operational philosophy. When a flight crew has to make all the calls, calculate and execute departure, climb, descent and approach profiles while hands on stick and throttle and at the same time eyeballing the intruments, then you don't have incidents like overflying your destination at cruise altutude while sleeping, um, I meant checking route schedules on your laptop in the flightdeck.Southwest may have been forced to upgrade to the more modern 73 options against their own operational philosophy because of the growing number of Rnav and now RNP approaches.JB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites