SWA flight continues for 75 minutes after rapid depresurization!!

[Prog 2/2]

Probably the 80 - 100 K tailwind from LAS provided plenty extra of fuel.....

Only if those winds were not used as part of the original dispatch planning, or were stronger than forecast.


"Different corporate culture" is absolutely a player here. You're missing the subtleties of this thread to say otherwise.

 

[TexaSWA]

Only if those winds were not used as part of the dispatch planning, or were stronger than forecast.

It doesnt sound like your experience level jives with your profile. When a situation arises to where a flight cannot be completed as per the release (original plan) ie, unexpected weather, headwinds, of different cruise altitude, you simply confer with dispatch and come up with a new plan. If you have enough fuel, and all else is well, you continue. If you dont, you dont. Simple as that.

There are many reasons why they would have had enough fuel to fly the last hour down low: Tankering (cheaper fuel at departure than destination) anticipated traffic delays, forcast wx etc.

An extra couple thousand pounds would have been enough. Its not as if your fuel burn doubles by flying low.

 

[TexaSWA]

"Different corporate culture" is absolutely a player here. You're missing the subtleties of this thread to say otherwise.

Our corporate culture is not one that lets us land with less than required fuel. The "subtleties" of this thread is just a bunch of jackbones second guessing each other. It has nothing to do with with what actually happened. Which is really nothing.

 

[canyonblue]

"Different corporate culture" is absolutely a player here.

Possibly. One culture that allows pilots to make the decisions, and the rest who cannot.

 

[SWA/FO]

Exactly CanyonBlue!!!

 

[737tanker]

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?

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.

First MHT has 2 runways (17/35 & 6/24) so unless an aircraft blows a tire right at the runway intersection it will remain open. If MHT does close you don't have to go to BOS, you can go to PSM, ALB, BDL, PVD, & Westover AFRB. Secondly when we take off at SWA we plan to land with 5000 lbs plus alternate, normal 45 min reserve is approximately 4000 lbs. Also MHT is one of the airports that it seems we are always tankering to, even from the West Coast. That is why I believe fuel was not even an issue.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

You just never know what Mr. Fed is thinking. If he thought you should have landed at the nearest most suitable airport, he will go after the crew.

Maybe, but...if the crew followed the very QRH that Mr. Fed's office approved...and that very QRH states...."Land as Appropriate" not "Land at the most suitable airport", then Mr Fed won't have a leg to stand on...especially when the Feds assigned to said airline are backing up the crew.

Tejas

 

[NAA Pilot]

Probably the 80 - 100 K tailwind from LAS provided plenty extra of fuel.....

Doesn't you dispatch consider this prior to the flight?

 

[NAA Pilot]

What if ..... what if ...... what if.??? what if.... what if??? what if.... what if... what if.... what if???? what if.... what if ... what if the crew just lands at an airport that is familiar to them while having plenty of fuel remaining with a cabin that is controllable at a lower altitude.

ALB is very familiar

 

[NEDude]

The problem was the outflow valve. At FL410 it went to full open. At 14,000 they were able to get it back under control and got the cabin pressure back under control at the normal cabin altitude of 8,000. Even if they hadn't gotten the outflow valve back under control it is safe and legal to fly unpressurized at 10,000.

So the pressurization was restored to an acceptable limit

You just never know what Mr. Fed is thinking. If he thought you should have landed at the nearest most suitable airport, he will go after the crew

if the crew followed the very QRH that Mr. Fed's office approved...and that very QRH states...."Land as Appropriate" not "Land at the most suitable airport", then Mr Fed won't have a leg to stand on

And since Mr. Feds FAA approved QRH for the situation states "If pressurization is restored, continue manual operation", it would be darned near impossible to violate the crew.

From everything I am reading about this, the crew followed the QRH. And based upon the situation, the QRH instructions, and the fuel situation, the crew decided it was safe to continue on to the destination. Hard to find any fault in their decision if you look at the facts. You can play the what-if game for any flight, even when nothing goes wrong. But you have to use your judgement and experience to determine where to draw the line. Again, looking at the facts as they have been reported, and refering to the QRH, this was a sound decsion.

 

[canyonblue]

Doesn't you dispatch consider this prior to the flight?

That is not a response from the Magic 8 Ball.

http://www.thepcmanwebsite.com/media/magic_8ball/

 

[V1Cutt]

Zzzzzzzzzzzz

I declare this thread officially beat to death. May it rest in peace, starting ........ NOW

 

[usav8r]

Omni Omni VOR
AMEN!!:beer:

 

[bubbers]

As a recently retired AA pilot I think the SWA crew did exactly what we would have done and continued to destination with the pressurization maintaining a safe cabin altitude. SWA does a fine job and AA might have to observe their operating procedures to learn how to compete in todays market.

AA used to make a profit making ultra conservative decisions taking the pilots out of the loop and just not caring about completing the mission. Now we have to fly a little smarter and let the pilots help get the job done safely. Ex Aircal where SWA learned their 25 minute turns.

 

[Prog 2/2]

------------------------

 

[canyonblue]

Ex Aircal where SWA learned their 25 minute turns.

The entire intrastate idea was sold to Herb based on AirCal and PSA. I flew both of them when I lived in CA, great airlines.

The tale begins on an afternoon in 1966 when businessman Rollin King strolled into a San Antonio law firm for a meeting. His attorney, Herb Kelleher, had been helping him dispose of his small commuter airline that was losing money flying to small towns like Laredo and Eagle Pass. Rollin wanted to discuss a new business venture. He proposed to serve large cities in Texas instead of the small towns his commuter airline was serving.

Herb did not know much about airlines at the time, but he definitely knew a crackpot idea when he heard one! He decided it was best to discuss this crazy idea elsewhere, so the two gentlemen headed to San Antonio’s elite St. Anthony’s Club. To illustrate his idea, Rollin drew a triangle on a cocktail napkin, with the corners representing the Texas cities of Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio.

Rollin expounded on his new idea. “Herb,” he said, “just listen a minute. As an intrastate carrier, we wouldn’t be subject to CAB (Civil Aeronautics Board) restrictions, and that offers all sorts of blessings and benefits right there. Oh, I know, a lot of intrastate carriers have had a hard time, but they weren’t in the right states. You’ve got to have a commercially booming state with some really big cities far enough apart to make bus or car travel inconvenient. Offhand, I only can think of two states like that. California’s one-and that’s why Pacific Southwest Airlines and Air California are going great guns as intrastate carriers. The other state is Texas, Herb, and we don’t have an airline like that.”

“Where would we get the capital?” asked Herb. Stunned, Rollin replied, “Capital? Oh, I guess we’ll have to raise it.”

Herb shut his eyes for several seconds, and when he opened them, there was Rollin grinning at him like a crazed man filled with determination.

Herb exclaimed, “Rollin, you’re crazy. Let’s do it!”

 

[TexaSWA]

------------------------

Last edited by Prog 2/2 : Today at 05:03. Reason: deleted cause it ain't worth the time

Thankyou for sparing us.

 

[1BigRodeo]

"Those most concerned with the path of righteousness most often have very little acquaintance with the journey it provides....." Smart dead Asian guy

Its amazing to me how the glass house crowd throws the most stones. We should know as professional aviators that there are two types of pilots; those who have, and those who will. No group is immune from error or fate. This was a benign incident. Need we remind ourselves that neither our W2, nor the company listed on it make us the pilots, or men that we are, for better or for worse.

If you think that SWA has ingrained a culture of completion above all else, you are dead wrong. We have some great managers that allow us to think on our feet and move quickly to keep the machine moving. Nowhere do I recall safety being a secondary consideration. I never remember flying from SYR to MHT unpressurized as an emergency procedure....even in a jet. I have done it hundreds of times in many aircraft. Jets can do it too. I would recommend that those who dont work at SWA and choose to judge our culture or anything else for that matter, take a look at the thread pummelling jetblue about 5 year contracts and not paying for jets before you throw another stone.....but then again, maybe you were throwing stones there too. If you dont KNOW, you dont know.

PS Linecheck....look into your flying background and previous employers and look at the bodycount before you point a finger in anyones direction. Those who have, and those who will...remember. We all train and fly every day to avoid the "Will" category. Also, we all know that anyone can be had on a linecheck, I used to give em, and I have taken a bunch of em. The self righteous ones usually arent capable of passing their very own checkrides.

 

[Prog 2/2]

Last edited by Prog 2/2 : Today at 05:03. Reason: deleted cause it ain't worth the time

Thankyou for sparing us.

Didn't wanna interfere with your little mutual strokefest.

 

[cocknbull]

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.

 

[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.