Swa maintenance issues?

[contrail67]

So will they be required to take all those aircraft out of service till the FAA is happy?!...not good.

 

[jetjock6]

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/06/news/companies/faa_southwest.ap/index.htm

 

[Whataburger]

Because guys like you keep making excuses for it. "Sh!t happens?" Are you kidding me? Airplanes flying around for 30 months without the required rudder inspections? On airplanes that have a horrible history of rudder hard-overs? Why can't you just admit that your management was in the wrong here? It's obvious that they did this to save a buck, even though they knew that it was in violation of the law and a danger to their crews and customers. This is simply appalling.

Sounds like the planes in question were the ones where the Enhanced Rudder Control System had already been installed. Possibly believed that if the new rudder system was installed, the AD did not apply to that plane. NONE, I repeat NONE, of the planes that crashed had the new 737 rudder system which our planes in question had.
Yes, somebody made a mistake. I guarantee you that our mgmt did not jeopardize our crews or passengers on purpose to save a buck. Our company was founded on integrity. I am sure our mgmt will ask Jesus, Santa, and the FAA for forgiveness.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

The real problem is the FAA mandate to police AND promote aviation. If the NTSB had enforcement powers stuff like this wouldn't happen. I wonder if the FAA personnel who apparently knew about this were former SWA employees.

 

[jke406]

if this is true, SWA is no different than any other major airline, except that their planes are orange and maize. In fact, it appears that they are worse.

It's easy to make a profit when you're skipping vital and time-consuming maintenance requirements.

however, I don't believe a word CNN says. Leftist morons.

 

[PCL_128]

It was for skin fatigue, not the rudder.

It was both.

You are either naive or unrealistic about even your own company's practices. This isn't exactly uncommon, industry wide. If AAI makes every inspection, misses nothing, adequately respresents itself and their maintenece practices everytime without fail, I apologize for my unfair characterizations.

If my company did this, then I wouldn't be defending them. That's the difference.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

We missed inspections, not repairs.

Wow.

I guess you could say your maintenance was perfect because you never found any problems!

 

[Tanker Clown]

I'd hate to see what you would find if you got access to some mx records at DAL. A buddy of mine worked mx there and used to brag about the corners they cut.

 

[Falconjet]

Because guys like you keep making excuses for it. "Sh!t happens?" Are you kidding me? Airplanes flying around for 30 months without the required rudder inspections? On airplanes that have a horrible history of rudder hard-overs? Why can't you just admit that your management was in the wrong here? It's obvious that they did this to save a buck, even though they knew that it was in violation of the law and a danger to their crews and customers. This is simply appalling.

Come on PCL, we know you don't believe that any organization (say, ALPA?) could possibly do anything wrong. Surely it is the pilots' fault because they are complacent and aren't involved enough in their company.

Why can't you or your brother Rez admit that ALPA management is not perfect and has made mistakes, just like SW management apparently made a mistake here? Or do you still contend that ALPA is perfect and owes the pilot group nothing?

IF it is true, I do agree, however, that it is appalling. Just proof that even stellar organizations (even ALPA) can make mistakes. Big ones.

FJ

 

[PCL_128]

Falconjet, I admit all the time that ALPA's made huge mistakes. Scope ring a bell?