Southwest Accident May Be Indicative of Carrier-Specific Problem

[328dude]

When all those 737s were having Rudder Hard overs, SWA never had one.quote]

Um, three? 2 at United and USAir? I call it luck the SWA never had one. They were just as quick to jump on the PCU change request from the FAA on that issue. Come on.....

 

[FDJ2]

Southwest Accident May Be Indicative of Carrier-Specific Problem

Pure speculation at this point, and it's still too early for that.

 

[HawkerF/O]

When all those 737s were having Rudder Hard overs, SWA never had one.quote]

Um, three? 2 at United and USAir? I call it luck the SWA never had one. They were just as quick to jump on the PCU change request from the FAA on that issue. Come on.....

Of course they were quick to do it as it was not optional!!!! Are you high? Had they not changed it and they had a hard-over that resulted in injury, they would have gotten sued and rightfully so. The fact that they did change them quickly just shows teir dedication to the prevention of accidents.
Umm, 2 at UAL and USAir still equals ZERO at SWA!!! Call it luck or whatever you want, it still does not change the fact that SWA had none and they are the largest 737 operator in the world.

 

[V-STALL]

What do you call a 100 lawyers on the bottom of the ocean?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
A good start! :laugh:


:beer:

 

[imadumbpilot]

Furloughfodder,

He forgot the Auto-throttle too. That equipment was disconnected because they are not fleet-wide. They are only on some airplanes. As they get these new planes and put them into service, it would be a financial and logistical nightmare to try to get only the "trained" pilots paired with auto-brake and auto-throttle specific aircraft. It would cripple the company and put them out of business. Planes would sit.

That's a bit of a ridiculous statement. It's called differences training, send out a training bulletin and, whamo, everyone is qualified. They disconnect that stuff because it costs money to fix, and keep spare parts plane and simple.

Just trying to keep you honest.

 

[Capt. X]

We all luv to Monday Quarterback, but this could have been a number of problems..ie..Auto Brake malfunction, Grd Spoiler malfunction, reverser malfunction, anti-skid malfunction and upon landing possible Braking Action at Nil. We just have to wait and see. I am a little confused on how it will take a year to figure this out, at least that's what the NTSB has said. I assume the intrumentation perameter part of the Black Box can yield this information much sooner than a year IMHO.

 

[Creamer]

SWA has an awesome safety record and this goes to show that an accident can happen to any airline at any time. One of the sections the NTSB will look at is the ops manual for the airline. It is my understanding that it is SWA policy that all approaches are flown by hand. Can somebody comfirm this? A common mistake on hand flown, low visibility approaches is to get high on glideslope when getting into the ground rush. The lights and snow do not help either. A long landing on a short, snow covered runway is a recipe for disaster. I will be curious to see if the NTSB will cite this company policy of hand flying all approaches as a contributing factor if the aircraft did indeed land long. Anybody can have a bad day. Fly safe everyone.

 

[temcgrew]

So two over-runs make it a "company" problem? I would believe that if anyone could show me that southwest is the only airline to ever slide off the end of those runways at those two airports.

come on, how many flights per day do they do out of there? We see one over-run without the NTSB's findings on the matter and some lawyer wants to blame it on the company?

 

[Draginass]

Some of the airports that SW prefer to fly out of are inherently unsafe and should be closed. Midway is one of them.

 

[str8upflyrght]

Some of the airports that SW prefer to fly out of are inherently unsafe and should be closed. Midway is one of them.

Out of curiosity, in your opinion what are the other ones?