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 Makes emergency landing in Yuma AZ

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
It is a Boeing problem.

My wife has a free ticket on SWA and refuses to fly on them. In the past she would call reservations and make sure it wasn't a 737-300. Now she says it is just not worth the hassle and will only fly on other airlines. I am sure a lot of informed passengers will make similar decisions.

It sounds like Southwest might not be doing a proper job maintaining these airplanes. "Federal records show cracks in the airframe were found and repaired a year ago, according to the Associated Press." http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0...ancels-300-flights-begins-inspecting-aircraft

How long until the 737-700s and 737-800s start showing their improper design issues. Maybe never...maybe soon.
 
Last edited:
It sounds like Southwest might not be doing a proper job maintaining these airplanes. "Federal records show cracks in the airframe were found and repaired a year ago, according to the Associated Press." http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/04...cting-aircraft

Hey retard, if SWA wasn't doing a proper job they wouldn't have found the cracks. The problem is not a SWA induced problem it is a Boeing and FAA issue that SWA is having to deal with. I bet your 152 has cracks if you knew how to find them.
 
Hey retard, if SWA wasn't doing a proper job they wouldn't have found the cracks. The problem is not a SWA induced problem it is a Boeing and FAA issue that SWA is having to deal with. I bet your 152 has cracks if you knew how to find them.




ra·tion·al·ize

   http://app.dictionary.com/signup/po...lbackAction=addToFav&domaindest=reference.com/ˈræʃ
thinsp.png
ə
thinsp.png
nlˌaɪz,
ˈræʃ
thinsp.png
nlˌaɪz
/ Show Spelled [rash-uh-nl-ahyz, rash-nl-ahyz] Show IPA verb, -ized, -iz·ing.
–verb (used with object) 1. to ascribe (one's acts, opinions, etc.) to causes that superficially seem reasonable and valid but that actually are unrelated to the true, possibly unconscious and often less creditable or agreeable causes.

2. to remove unreasonable elements from.

3. to make rational or conformable to reason.

4. to treat or explain in a rational or rationalistic manner.

5. Mathematics . to eliminate radicals from (an equation or expression): to rationalize the denominator of a fraction.

6. Chiefly British . to reorganize and integrate (an industry).


–verb (used without object) 7. to invent plausible explanations for acts, opinions, etc., that are actually based on other causes: He tried to prove that he was not at fault, but he was obviously rationalizing.

8. to employ reason; think in a rational or rationalistic manner.




Use rationalization in a Sentence


See images of rationalization


Search rationalization on the Web

Also, especially British , ra·tion·al·ise .
 
So, what exactly was beetle 07 trying to rationalize? His hatred for SW?

I have nothing against SW. I have something against the operation of unsafe airplanes.

Boeing aircraft have had uncommanded flight control inputs resulting in several crashes, they have had uncommanded thrust reduction to idle resulting in a 777 crash and several close calls, and they have had numerous structural failures of their fuselage in very recent history.

The FAA, airlines, and pilots need to step up their game when operating these Boeing aircraft. I only mentioned pilots because it was the Aloha first officer who missed the crack on their 737 when even a passenger noticed it during boarding and resulted in the death of a flight attendant.
 
I have nothing against SW. I have something against the operation of unsafe airplanes.

Boeing aircraft have had uncommanded flight control inputs resulting in several crashes, they have had uncommanded thrust reduction to idle resulting in a 777 crash and several close calls, and they have had numerous structural failures of their fuselage in very recent history.

The FAA, airlines, and pilots need to step up their game when operating these Boeing aircraft. I only mentioned pilots because it was the Aloha first officer who missed the crack on their 737 when even a passenger noticed it during boarding and resulted in the death of a flight attendant.

This is clearly a Boeing issue, yet you turned it into a SW issue. Boeing and the FAA come up with the maintenance and inspection procedures, and operators follow them. You said that "informed" passengers are gonna boycott SW because of this. Informed passengers will more likely look at our 40 year safety record.

Airbii disposajets haven't killed anyone right?
 
I assume all heavy checks are outsourced at SW, as is most of SW's non-line mx right?

Anyone know who does it (AAR in IND?) and when this a/c's last check was done?
 
Airbii disposajets haven't killed anyone right?

Actually, I can't think of an example. The Air France flying into a thunderstorm is the closest I can think of or maybe the A300 where the pilots went full deflection on the rudders in both directions (outside of design limits for any commerical aircraft as explained to me by the 737 test pilots who were getting their A320 type rating).

All the Airbus accidents I can think of have been human error.
 
SWA airplanes have lot's of sheetmetal repairs, and most of the repairs are very poorly done. Boeing problem? They didn't build like that and they wouldn't repair them that way either. No one reputable would....
 
I have heard rumors that Southwest has started having a lot of its maintenance done in Central America...is this true?

I want to see Southwest be successful, but not at the expense of maintenance costs or American jobs. I see this more as an industry problem than an airline problem. I would like to see the FAA require that all U.S. Certificated Airlines conduct mainenance at a U.S. repair facility. As soon as one airline starts having foreign repairs at minimal costs, good airlines like Southwest are forced to do the same to remain cost competitive.
 
I have heard rumors that Southwest has started having a lot of its maintenance done in Central America...is this true?

I want to see Southwest be successful, but not at the expense of maintenance costs or American jobs. I see this more as an industry problem than an airline problem. I would like to see the FAA require that all U.S. Certificated Airlines conduct mainenance at a U.S. repair facility. As soon as one airline starts having foreign repairs at minimal costs, good airlines like Southwest are forced to do the same to remain cost competitive.


Yes it's true. As does JetBlue, Airtran, Delta, United, UsAirways etc..etc... Nice to know people who are used to working on mud huts are now "aircraft mechanics" But hey, at least we have low air fares and well paid CEO's.
 
SWA airplanes have lot's of sheetmetal repairs, and most of the repairs are very poorly done. Boeing problem? They didn't build like that and they wouldn't repair them that way either. No one reputable would....

Well, this one was never "repaired" by SW. It was as it came from the factory.

Thanks for playing!
 
Why did they divert to Yuma? Seems out of the way.
 
NORTH AMERICA
AirlineMillion
FlightsFatal
EventsAdj. Fatal
EventsLast
Fatal
AccidentAbove / Below Average
Accident

Rate Air Canada
4. 90​

0
0
(1983)
+150%​

AirTran Airways(ValuJet)
2.35​

1​
1.00​
1996​
-28%​

Alaska Airines/ Horizon
6.43​

1​
1.00​
2000​
+97%​

American Airlines
20.33​

6​
4.04​
2001​
+219%​

American Eagle / Executive
13.31

4
3.72
1994
+36%​

Comair
5.69​

3​
3.00​
2006​
-126%​

Continental AL/Cont. Exp.
14.80​

4​
2.34​
2009​
+219%​

Delta Airlines
19.93​

3​
0.94​
1996​
+517%​

Hawaiian Airlines
1.66​

0​
0​
None​
+51%​

JetBlue
1.37​

0​
0​
None​
+42%​

Midwest Express Airlines
0.82​

1​
1.00​
1985​
-75%​

Southwest Airlines
18.78​

0​
0​
None​
+575%​

United Airlines
16.47​

6​
3.42​
2001​
+162%​

United Express
12.57​

3​
2.67​
1996​
+118%​

US Airways
15.58​

5​
2.52​
1994​
+225%​

USAir Shuttle
0.90​

0​
0​
None​
+28%​

WestJet
1.15​

0​
0​
None​
+35%

Sorry it did not post well....here is the site http://www.planecrashinfo.com/rates.htm
 
Last edited:
"It's a Boeing Problem...." That's rich!

OBTW, the Jackhole above who posted Accident data? Could you research and find me how many times an explosive hole has appeared in a Delta 737? We have been flying them before you Herb Turds were a Wild Turkey stain on his business plan bar napkin.....

What's that? Never? Thought so.....
 
Blame shifting is how SWA runs. SWA is an airline invented, run by, and operated by lawyers.

SWA never takes responsibility. Ask a SWAPA pilot about age 65 and they will tell you age 65 is ALPA's fault. Now every major SWA MX problem is Boeing's.
 
Last edited:
aww Gup.....you had to go there. I was responding to some FI monkey saying it's a Boeing problem.

Read my first post on page one....find me a potshot? You know I don't stoop that low....it could happen to anybody.....

What were you saying Bill?

Gup
 
Appearantly guys, it is a Boeing problem.

These particular planes were built differently than the rest.....sorry to burst your Anti-Southwest bubble!
 
The FAA, airlines, and pilots need to step up their game when operating these Boeing aircraft. I only mentioned pilots because it was the Aloha first officer who missed the crack on their 737 when even a passenger noticed it during boarding and resulted in the death of a flight attendant.

Classy. The preflight of the Aloha airplane was IN DARKNESS and the crack was in the upper surface of the fuselage. The NTSB/FAA stated it was not reasonable to expect an exterior preflight would find it and they could never verify a passenger's comment after the accident that they saw a crack, for all they know it was bird doo-doo and they are making it what they want to believe it was. Way to slander a crew that flew an airplane to a safe landing with half the roof gone.
 
    • Inspections of the remaining aircraft in the sub-fleet (79 total) will continue for the next few days at six different locations. As inspections are completed with no findings, those aircraft will continue to be put back into service.
      • The 79 aircraft designated for the additional inspections were designed differently in the manufacturing process.
Looks like a Boeing problem to me! a/0:nuts:
 
Last edited:

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom