Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Southwest FLT 812 Decompression and diversion

Wikiposts
Search
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Southwest FLT 812 Decompression and diversion

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 12:29
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's what they are designed to do

Seems like this plane has absolutely been beat to death, and makes me ask the question if there is some kind of "multiplier" to take into account cycles in gauging aging and airworthiness?
An airliner is designed to fly, not be parked up. Being a shorthaul aircraft, this one has "only" managed to stay airborne for just under nine hours per day where as some long haul aircraft manage 16 hours per day, every day. This aircraft, like all others, has some components which are "lifed" by cycles, some which are "lifed" by hours and others which are calendar dependent and finally some that have no finite life as long as they meet certain inspection criteria. So there is already a very good "multiplier" in effect. From what I understand about Southwest, it will remain in service as long as it firstly serviceable and secondly it is economic to keep it there. They will be as keen as everyone else to find out what actually happened, just so they can stop it reoccurring. Unfortunately, I can also feel the legal scum looking information just so they can screw someone over.

PM
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 12:38
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Age: 51
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Couple of new pics here

Large hole discovered after Southwest flight makes emergency landing - CNN.com

Tweets and twitpics from PAX

Twitter
@BluestMuse

Last edited by me myself and fly; 2nd Apr 2011 at 12:48.
me myself and fly is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 13:01
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Avon, CT, USA
Age: 68
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SW claims to always make a profit every year.

We all know in the airline business this is an impossibility.
Something has to slide and it's usually maintenance.
ATPMBA is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 13:12
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You have to wonder why the European equivalent of SWA, who operate the vast majority of their flights outside of Ireland, still have all aircraft operating under Irish registration? Whilst not inheritantly unsafe - I'm sure it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the somewhat lax requirements of the Irish CAA to aircraft maintenance overhaul inspections, compared to other nations!!
First, someone tries to make it an Airbus v Boeing slanging match, now you try an anti-Irish, anti Ryanair rant. Par for the course.

IAA are subject to EASA rules, as are ALL EU CAAs. All EU registered airlines can operate anywhere within the EU without restriction - look at it as a Texan carrier being able to operate in New Jersey.

FR operate a robust maintenance regime - even arch cost cutter M O'L is on record many times as being very maintenance aware (read Siobhan Creatons book for references). FR do not operate old aircraft - they are moved on after no more than 10 years, as current disposals indicate. Certainly no second hand aircraft such as those SW use, and al to a standard spec at present.

MD
MidlandDeltic is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 13:20
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 60
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
N632SW was delivered new to Southwest on 13 June 1996.

AIRFRAMES.ORG - Aircraft Database - N632SW
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 13:29
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: DogHouse
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SW claims to always make a profit every year.

We all know in the airline business this is an impossibility.
Something has to slide and it's usually maintenance
.

Same story from you the ppune "expert pontificators"....it must be short cuts on the MX side...they must be hiding something. Y'all are full of SHIITE, these aircraft as are other models are on an expanded inspection schedule that is a product of BOEING and the regulators, fact is this happens to other airlines and aircraft as well. And who on this planet believes with the previous and current scrutiny on the aviaiton industry that SWA would attempt to hide anything relating to MX.

6 foot hole really??????Says who the investigators??? or Brenda Reese and the MEDIA machine. Glad Ms Reese and the 118 pax and 5 crew are safe thanks to the professional flight and cabin crew at Southwest Airlines.

Of course while Reese is making her rounds on the talking head programs this morning I have not heard her once utter a word of praise for the crew, just sensationalist BS like I 'll have to think more carefully about getting on a plane...fine good luck on the roads.

Do us all a favor, put a muzzle on it, let the investigation move forward and in the meantime SWA has taken the step of a precautionary safety standown of 81 aircraft that are on a similar inspection program to the event aircraft (notice I did not use incident or accident because the NTSB has not made that determination yet) in order to determine if further inspections beyond that currently required by AD are required..that to me does not sound like hiding something...

THAT SOUNDS LIKE PROACTIVE AIRLINE SAFETY...
MacDaddy is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 13:38
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
1. did something like this happen outside US also in the past?
You are probably thinking of the Aloha accident. That was also a Boeing 737.
DX Wombat is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 14:30
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could that be a bit of attack being the first line of defence McDaddy?

So skin problems, including aircraft that already have been reskinned once already, aren't the subject of conjecture and discussion in house, with the Feds and up in Seattle for a significant amount of time before this incident?

Is it possible that those in the know have been bracing themselves for an aging aircraft program to be developed and invoked for months now?
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 14:41
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: n/a
Posts: 1,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
notice I did not use incident or accident because the NTSB has not made that determination yet)
Lemme see... Failure in the structure requiring major repair. I think you can stop worrying, it will be accident.
Daysleeper is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 16:17
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ventura, California
Age: 65
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sprocky_

I don't know why some of the guys here can't be polite enough to just answer a simple question. There was a decompression incident in July of 2009 where a "football sized" hole opened in the top of the fuselage of a Southwest 737; that was inside the U.S.

Southwest inspects planes after emergency landing - USATODAY.com

The $7.5 million fine was agreed to in March 2009 as a settlement for violations which occurred in 2008.

Last edited by thcrozier; 2nd Apr 2011 at 17:48.
thcrozier is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 16:58
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: a shack on a hill
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Over the years, a single airline seems to suffer increased numbers of inflight failures, fires etc. - Qantas. As per areas, this seems to be the USA, concerning pressurized structures failures. (Even when it happened in Taiwan, it was maintained by TBC in the US.) Once is coincidential, twice is a trend...
heavy.airbourne is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 17:15
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,226
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
CNN is reporting, in interview with aviation "consultant", that SWA gets most of its "heavy maintenance" done in El Salvador.

a) Correct?
b) I though mechanics had to have FAA licenses same as pilots - is there some kind of recognition of non-US licensing that allows mechanics without FAA licenses to do work on aircraft owned and operated in US airspace by US operators?
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 17:29
  #33 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
pattern is full:

CNN is reporting, in interview with aviation "consultant", that SWA gets most of its "heavy maintenance" done in El Salvador.

a) Correct?
b) I though mechanics had to have FAA licenses same as pilots - is there some kind of recognition of non-US licensing that allows mechanics without FAA licenses to do work on aircraft owned and operated in US airspace by US operators?
CNN is reporting, in interview with aviation "consultant", that SWA gets most of its "heavy maintenance" done in El Salvador.

a) Correct?

b) I though mechanics had to have FAA licenses same as pilots - is there some kind of recognition of non-US licensing that allows mechanics without FAA licenses to do work on aircraft owned and operated in US airspace by US operators?
Fox just interviewed a former NTSB board member. I recall the gentleman was a aircraft mechanic with US Air before he went with the Board.

He stated that SWA's heavy maintenance is done in El Salvador. He had serious questions about oversight. Further, he said FAA inspectors can't just show up at the facility as they do in the U.S. Instead, they have to phone ahead for an appointment.

Smells a tad, doesn't it.
aterpster is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 18:57
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Way too much speculation to known fact ratio here.

Lots of questions need to be answered, but let's try and keep the questions simple rather than connect the dots with a broad paintbrush.

For starters look at how the questions and answers played out in the Aloha incident (accident) and the earlier SWA incident (accident) then let's see what lines up in this incident (accident)
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 18:58
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: My Stringy Brane
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another lap joint failure?

Machaca is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 19:50
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some people shows signs of old age at 45, I guess the same applies to planes... Early retirement....
Well put, the same aircraft with the same hrs/cycles could have had less hard landings, turbulence etc. HRS/CYCLES do not equal wear and tear.
grounded27 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 20:09
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Pattern Is Full

CNN is reporting, in interview with aviation "consultant", that SWA gets most of its "heavy maintenance" done in El Salvador.

a) Correct?
b) I though mechanics had to have FAA licenses same as pilots - is there some kind of recognition of non-US licensing that allows mechanics without FAA licenses to do work on aircraft owned and operated in US airspace by US operators?
Can not confirm what MRO's SWA is using at this time. I can say though that foreign MRO's are inexpensive and they as domestic MRO's only need a ratio of FAA liscenced to non liscenced labor. Being in a foreign land there is much doubt that the FAA gives said MRO the attention they need to ensure their compliance.

Having worked in domestic MRO's I dislike them greatly as profit is a evil motivator. In my opinion, a tech at an airline unionized or not is less likely to rush a job, cut a corner (just do what their supervisor said for fear of losing their job).
grounded27 is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 21:24
  #38 (permalink)  
VFD
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: us
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another lap joint failure?
There is just not enough resolution in your picture to tell. This is the first exterior shot I have seen. I know that the aircraft in question has been painted within the last year or so.
I remember some years back when a repainter was leaving scribe marks from sharp tools at lap joints from the paint removal process causing localized stress and failure.
I suspect that since SWA has grounded the 737-300 aircraft for inspections that they have a clue as to exactly what they are looking for. They just forgot to inform PPRuNe.
VFD is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 21:45
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Age: 63
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AD-2010-25-06 and SWA 812

I took a quick look at B737-300 ADs involving fuselage frame and skin crack inspections. AD-2010-25-06 requires inspection of frames at STA 616 and 639 which, I believe, is on either side of row 12 in a 737-300. This is where the decompression occurred leading me to wonder if this aircraft had been inspected under this AD. The AD as issued allows the operator 4500 hours to perform the inspection. That's about a year and a half (using my fingers and toes) and the AD was issued 9 months ago. So, my guess is that SWA was operating the aircraft within the range of hours permitted by the FAA for the inspection and repair to be performed when this incident occurred. Go read the AD yourself here.
techgeek is offline  
Old 2nd Apr 2011, 21:48
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Europe
Age: 49
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some guys were so kind to have a serious look into my questions. Thanks.

DX Wombat
You are probably thinking of the Aloha accident. That was also a Boeing 737.
Maybe my question was a bit misleading and I hope to make it more clear with this one: Did something like this happened to any other carrier not running under the flag of the USA?

thcrozier
Does that mean the fine was not related to the decompression accident in 2009?

MidlandDeltic
There was no intention to start a Airbus vs. Boeing match. I only wanted to know if decompression happened to an Airbus already. You can also take Tupolev, Antonov, Embraer, Bombardier, etc. I picked Airbus because they are well-known and some of their aircraft might have the same duty as this B737 has.
sprocky_ger is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.