SWA flight continues for 75 minutes after rapid depresurization!!

[Remington]

Does Southwest operate under part 91 or 121?

 

[SWA/FO]

Let it rest guys.... we rule. end of story. :beer:

 

[FN FAL]

Section 91.7: Civil aircraft airworthiness.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

1. Did the pilots know there was not structual damage to the aircraft?
2. Would the 737 be consider "Airworthy after this event?

If you answer NO to any of those questions then you think these guys broke the FARs.

The FAA has violated several airline pilots for continuing flights when an unairworthy condition occurs in-flight.

FAR's is one thing, then you got lawsuits to worry about....

Passengers sue Alaska Airlines over cabin pressure loss on Seattle flight

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Alaska Airlines was sued by six passengers who were aboard a jetliner that lost cabin pressure at 26,000 feet.

A foot-long gash opened in the aluminum skin of the jet on Dec. 26 during a flight from Seattle to Burbank, Calif. The pilot took the plane down and returned to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.

Nobody aboard was seriously hurt, but the suit contends six passengers suffered hearing damage.

They also were shaken by "what they thought was their near-death experience," said their lawyer, James Kreindler.

The plane's fuselage was creased when a baggage handler bumped it with equipment in Seattle, federal investigators said.

The suit, filed Friday in Los Angeles County Superior Court, contends that Alaska and the ground services contractor, British-based Menzies Aviation, improperly handled the accident, which the baggage handler failed to report.

The plaintiffs, including Los Angeles residents Mark Reveley and Emma Hellsten and four others who live in Sweden, seek damages to be determined at trial.

A call to Alaska Airlines corporate office in Seattle was not immediately returned Saturday.

Menzies spokesman David Marriott told the Los Angeles Times that the company had not seen the lawsuit and could not comment

 

[lifeguard]

Heros! Plane and simple.

The fact that this made the news does not make the pilots "heroes". It seems like the way the word "hero" is thrown around these days takes away the true meaning them.

 

[SWA/FO]

The fact that this made the news does not make the pilots "heroes". It seems like the way the word "hero" is thrown around these days takes away the true meaning them.

Looks as if its been covered already dude (from this exact thread) you should have read further down:

Guys the hero comment is based on when someone calls a professional football player a hero... an example would be (from TV interviews) someone says "My kid is upset that T.O. has been suspended...thats my kid's hero". So I was throwing it around to be funny. I agree, they are not heros. But I am one, just ask BBB.

 

[32LT10]

The CA is a 23+ year guy and the F/O is a Lance CA (or close).

The QRH says nothing about landing at the nearest suitable airport if the pressurization is controllable. Heros.. making moey for SWA. Great job!!

Hero or Zero? Maybe it was the twit that had all the website postings on a.net. Any luck he will have some nice photos of the event to share. Bet he dug out the digi. camera as soon as the mask fell. They probably continued while he fixed his hair and tidy'd up his makeup for the photo shoot.

"Here I am modeling the latest in O2 mask wear. It does not go with my shoes or purse but I am really good at gulping O2", "Hey I am an individual not a number, Hrrrumph!"

That guy was good comedy.

 

[JetDude]

Hero or Zero? Maybe it was the twit that had all the website postings on a.net. Any luck he will have some nice photos of the event to share. Bet he dug out the digi. camera as soon as the mask fell. They probably continued while he fixed his hair and tidy'd up his makeup for the photo shoot.

"Here I am modeling the latest in O2 mask wear. It does not go with my shoes or purse but I am really good at gulping O2", "Hey I am an individual not a number, Hrrrumph!"

That guy was good comedy.

This post reminds me of an open sewer pipe I once encountered while driving down the road.

 

[Marty Moose]

Section 91.7: Civil aircraft airworthiness.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight. The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

1. Did the pilots know there was not structual damage to the aircraft?
2. Would the 737 be consider "Airworthy after this event?

If you answer NO to any of those questions then you think these guys broke the FARs.

These guys were not at 30 West, they had plenty of suitable alternates close by, if conditions worsened

 

[DX Jake]

Okay, fair enough.

Now how about the fuel?

How far into the resv + alt, or just resv, did they burn? All that tooling around at 140 wasn't accounted for in the original dispatch fuel, and MHT sure isn't an ETP destination, right? I don't think you guys carry that much extra around to begin with (I don't think anybody does anymore), so what did they land with?

And, yeah, I know all about burning the resv, that it's a dispatch requirement only, etc.,etc........

But did they consider that MHT (IIRC) is a single suitable runway airport, that someone else's blown tire might have shut down the only game in town, and that BOS and the rest of the airports around aren't as easy to get into as DAL?

Or did the decision to continue on commit them to land at MHT, without enough to go elsewhere?

I'll hold judgment till the facts are out there, but if I were one of the guys in the head shed I'd sure have some questions about this one.

--- you bring up some excellent points...
we did think of that.. trust me. as the event happened... it was too heavy for mdw. also cle, cmh, and pit, were at very low vis with light snow. that wouldn't of been wise. dtw was also messed up with low vis. as for the fuel... it was planned on a mountain wave dev route... which it flew through cuz atc said it was smooth... and it was a tanker leg through to bwi. We tanker through to cities... yes even on longhauls. trust me, we thought of it all.

 

[worldfly]

Remember the Alaska guys last year. Masks dropped in the climb. They continued to LA? and climbed to FL410!

Gup

I have it on good authority that delta did the same thing last week.