Thread: SWA Maintenance in news again

  #23  
III Corps's Avatar
III Corps , 04-05-2008 09:28 AM
No one's home
III Corps
No one's home
close
  • Joined APC
    Aug 2006
  • Posts:
    1,091
Quote: Okay III Corps, you've done the research that indicates SWA had roughly 450 days to comply with the AD....... So, in that 450 days, SWA couldn't find 90 minutes to git'r done and avoid grounding 44 airplanes (6 of which apparently did have fatigue cracks)
Again, no one is excusing SW for failure to comply HOWEVER remember even Boeing said this was not akin to Aloha's fatigue and NO ONE WAS AT RISK. Now, maybe Boeing is also not telling the truth. Maybe Boeing is being 'slack' to quote a fellow poster. Maybe Boeing should also be fined.

But this incident is being used to show the FAA has failed and that there may be problems in the industry. Not that there are problems because no one can show that to be fact. There have been some publications that have even gone so far as to call it a 'growing crisis' which is always good for the front page. The MD-80 wire bundle is another example. Self disclosed and some aircraft were found to have spacers at 1 1/4in rather than the 1in specified in the AD. What was reported? That the AD had not been complied with or inspections were incomplete. No mention that most of the airplanes were found to be in compliance and many of those which were not were off by 1/4 inch.

I guess after a few decades on this planet and a few decades flying for airlines and doing hufacts studies and working with maint guys, I have more faith in the guys on the line than I do in election year Congressional hearings starring 'whistleblowers.' I guess it is just my growing a bit jaundiced and not wanting to swallow every bit of pap offered by what seems to be more and more tabloid journalism.
Reply