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

SWA flight continues for 75 minutes after rapid depresurization!!

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
actually they were early 15 minutes!
 
linecheck said:
Taz, that was cute, thanks.

But back to the subject, I will concede that the probability of having a double emergency is slim to none. But nonetheless, it can not be precluded. ie. UAL232 comes to mind.

Regardless if the crew was in an emergency situation at the bottom of descent, the crew/company elected to continue for 75 minutes after an emergency event, with the rubber jungle hanging out, and with an important piece of cabin safety equipment expired: the pax O2 system and some of the crew O2 system. (and this of course is based on the information in the article which certainly can be heavily scrutinized.)

So why do we as "risk managers" want to take that risk? Why do pilots feel they need to place passenger/company needs above safety? This isn't directed specifically towards SWA, but I think the answer to this can be found within the company's culture.

To me its interesting comparing various company cultures and correlating that information to safety data as well as profitibility.

I stand by my first response." Cute" is not the word I would use.

There was nothing about safety continuing on in this situation. You are trying to make this a safety issue without any sound argument. You can "what if" anything into a smoldering burning hole if you want to.

I suppose you would have blown the slides and evacuated the airplane at the "nearest suitable" airport in the interest of safety because who knows....maybe the pressurization problem was the symptom of a greater life threating issue.

I have seen that happen.
 
furlough-boy said:
Those guys at KBUR were heroes too. Saved like 3 minutes on the approach by flying 250 to the numbers.

Now that's funny. They also save another 20 seconds by cutting everybody off as they rotate taxiing toward the runway for takeoff.

Let the boo hooing start right about.....now.
 
yeah, that was really funny... he he ha ha.
 
Lets see.......
Taxing quickly but safely to save 20 seconds a flight turns into:

20sec x 4000 flights a day = 80,000 seconds
80,000 sec = 22 hours of fuel saved each day
That equals 8030 hours of fuel savings each year.
I'm not sure what the 737 burns/hr, but I think I am starting to see why SWA is making more money each quarter than all the other airlines combined.

TexaSWA, dont forget about the girl in her bare feet asleep on the back seat and the trunk full of Shinerboch and LoneStar.
 
Last edited:
Uh, excuse me, but I have a question.

Exactly what caused the depressurization?

Blown seal? Malfunctioning outflow valve? Bad Cabin Press. Controller? Cracked aft bulkhead?

Unless you know FOR SURE--100%, you land at the nearest suitable airport and find out. And you don't have to do an emergency evac. to do that, either.

They got lucky. This "save-a-dime" mania will get someone killed someday.TC
 

Latest resources

Back
Top