Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Questionable SW MX? what is going on?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Skippy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Posts
561
i am by no means making fun of your airline or mx, but seriously, what is the deal with your MX?



FAA Investigates Southwest Over Parts

By ANDY PASZTOR and MIKE ESTERL

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
AUGUST 26, 2009 - Page B4

Federal air-safety regulators have launched an investigation into how unauthorized parts were installed on at least 42 Southwest Airlines Co. jets, and why the carrier's maintenance-control procedures failed to flag the problem, according to people familiar with the details.

The Federal Aviation Administration on Tuesday said the suspect parts -- pieces of a system that is designed to protect movable panels on the rear of the wings from being damaged by hot engine exhaust -- don't pose an "immediate safety issue."

But a dispute between the FAA and the airline kept planes temporarily grounded for part of Saturday, with some flights delayed for four hours or more.

After an FAA inspector's discovery last Friday that certain hinge fittings weren't approved for use on Southwest's fleet of Boeing 737 jets, according to people familiar with the matter, there was a flurry of late-night negotiations between senior airline officials and FAA managers over whether the affected planes could remain in service.

Following the schedule disruptions over the weekend, Southwest and the FAA came up with a mutually acceptable plan to replace the suspect parts in less than two weeks, according to one person familiar with the discussions, though that timetable could be extended. Nonetheless, this person said, the FAA has launched a formal investigation that could end with proposed civil penalties.

More broadly, the controversy illustrates continuing friction between airlines and federal regulators over how to deal with relatively minor maintenance lapses, which violate government rules about the airworthiness of aircraft.

Ashley Rogers, a Southwest spokeswoman, said the airline held 46 aircraft -- or nearly 10% of its fleet -- on the ground from Saturday morning until about

4 p.m. CDT that day, waiting for the FAA and Boeing Co. to sign off on a solution.

"We did have some significant delays throughout the system on Saturday,'' said Ms. Rogers. Some delays were as long as four hours and only 68% of Southwest's flights on Saturday were on time, down from more than 90% typically, she added.

The Southwest spokeswoman said the carrier temporarily grounded the planes "out of an abundance of caution'' and that the FAA told the airline Saturday afternoon that the existing parts were safe. She described it as a "paperwork" issue and played down any differences of opinion with the FAA. She added it was still unclear if Southwest would need to replace the parts in question.

FAA inspectors and managers maintained that since the specific parts were never authorized for aviation use, the planes that had them installed technically weren't fit to carry passengers. Only an airline can ground its aircraft, but carriers don't want to continue flying planes contrary to the FAA's wishes. The agency has authority to impose fines and other penalties when it feels certain planes shouldn't operate.

An FAA spokesman said Tuesday that an inspector uncovered the parts discrepancy "during a routine inspection" and since then, Southwest "has told us it plans to replace all of these parts on the affected planes." The FAA spokesman added: "We are closely monitoring their progress."

Last month, a Southwest jet carrying 126 passengers and five crew members developed a one-foot-wide hole in its main body midflight, and federal investigators are still trying to determine the cause. The incident was a setback for the discount airline just four months after it agreed to pay $7.5 million -- the second-largest civil penalty ever imposed by the FAA against a carrier -- for flying dozens of its older 737s on nearly 60,000 flights between June 2006 and March 2007 without performing necessary structural inspections.
 
ahhh

No Problem

Herb will just be called back to work and take a bottle of whiskey up to Washington to calm the herd.
 
Actually if you saw the level of perfection that comes out of there you would not criticize. Plus there are full time SWA inspectors there every day in addition to mx techs..

these issues go well above and beyond the location of the mx..
 
Actually if you saw the level of perfection that comes out of there you would not criticize. Plus there are full time SWA inspectors there every day in addition to mx techs..

these issues go well above and beyond the location of the mx..
So If the facilty is great, full time inspectors there, that must mean that Sw directs this happen and they should not be saying that it was the outsourcing company
 
I hate the idea of foreign outsourcing, however, TACA/Aeroman is currently working on only their 2nd SWA A/C. This work was most likely performed at a domestic vendor.
 
And is a repeat of past performances. SWA is guilty of the poorest mx practices and the cheapest fares.

SWA sells its retired airframes to foreign operators who kill foreigners. It just like selling a used car with a known problem without disclosing the problem.

SWA purposefully misses inspection deadlines on safety critical items hoping for extensions which are not an option and pays the largest FAA fines of all time.

SWA blows holes in its fuselages.

And when SWA does have a mx issue, it will and has burn its pilots and flight attendants as scapegoats. Heard a story from the late 1990's about a -200 being flown on its first revenue flight after a heavy maintenance inspection. It had a dual hydraulic failure because of poor maintenance.

It landed at a non-station airport in a very crippled condition. The crew initially decided not to evacuate after what appeared to be a normal landing. It was very hot inside and the captain ordered the doors opened for ventilation with the slides not armed because there was no need for an evacuation. After 20 minutes the brakes caught on fire. A successful evacuation occurred after the doors where closed, armed and the slides blown. The company then hung the entire crew for failure to evacuate after their heroic efforts had been overlooked as a result of poor company maintenance.

Do you feel the love? That crew sure didn't.
 
Last edited:
And is a repeat of past performances. SWA is guilty of the poorest mx practices and the cheapest fares.

SWA sells its retired airframes to foreign operators who kill foreigners. It just like selling a used car with a known problem without disclosing the problem.

SWA purposefully misses inspection deadlines on safety critical items hoping for extensions which are not an option and pays the largest FAA fines of all time.

SWA blows holes in its fuselages.

And when SWA does have a mx issue, it will and has burn its pilots and flight attendants as scapegoats. Heard a story from the late 1990's about a -200 being flown on its first revenue flight after a heavy maintenance inspection. It had a dual hydraulic failure because of poor maintenance.

It landed at a non-station airport in a very crippled condition. The crew initially decided not to evacuate after what appeared to be a normal landing. It was very hot inside and the captain ordered the doors opened for ventilation with the slides not armed because there was no need for an evacuation. After 20 minutes the brakes caught on fire. A successful evacuation occurred after the doors where closed, armed and the slides blown. The company then hung the entire crew for failure to evacuate after their heroic efforts had been overlooked as a result of poor company maintenance.

Do you feel the love? That crew sure didn't.

Please, tell us how you really feel. I sense you may be holding something back...
 

Latest resources

Back
Top