Southwest Grounding - Check your flights

For those of you flying Southwest this coming weekend and near future:

The airline has grounded 128 of its 665 Boeing 737 aircraft due to missed maintenance on backup rudder hydraulic systems. At least 90 flights have already been cancelled as of Tuesday evening.

It's unknown the extent and/or duration of the grounding and its impact on flight schedules, so I would suggest that anyone flying WN keep a watchful eye on their flight status.

And remember...WN doesn't interline, so you can't ask to have your tickets endorsed over to another carrier.

Zoinks! My thoughts with everyone impacted. That cannot be fun.

I'm no aircraft mechanic (and some of you are either aircraft engineers or have extensive experience in maintenance). BUT isn't this another time when WN is allowed to keep flying SOME of the unmaintained aircraft for a rather serious situation when AA had to shut down almost the entire fleet due to 1/4" mis-spaced zip ties. According to reports on industry publications/emails this morning, only part of the fleet was grounded and that was voluntarily by WN. Sure sounds to me that WN is getting favoring treatment again. This from the email from Kalitta this morning:

"Late Tuesday night, the Federal Aviation Administration agreed to let the airline resume flying the planes while inspections are done, likely during overnight hours. FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford confirmed that the agency approved the plan after talking with Southwest and Boeing, the manufacturer of the planes.

"The airline voluntarily removed these aircraft from service while the FAA works with Boeing and Southwest to evaluate a proposal that would allow the airline to continue flying the planes until the inspections are completed over the next few days," the FAA said in a statement."

If Southwest is getting preferential treatment, that's some crap for sure. Unfortunately, while I am an aero engineer, I don't have many details about this and haven't had the time to research it yet, so I'll withhold comment.

i'm no aircraft mechanic (and some of you are either aircraft engineers or have extensive experience in maintenance). But isn't this another time when wn is allowed to keep flying some of the unmaintained aircraft for a rather serious situation when aa had to shut down almost the entire fleet due to 1/4" mis-spaced zip ties. According to reports on industry publications/emails this morning, only part of the fleet was grounded and that was voluntarily by wn. Sure sounds to me that wn is getting favoring treatment again. This from the email from kalitta this morning:

 

"late tuesday night, the federal aviation administration agreed to let the airline resume flying the planes while inspections are done, likely during overnight hours. Faa spokesman lynn lunsford confirmed that the agency approved the plan after talking with southwest and boeing, the manufacturer of the planes.

 

"the airline voluntarily removed these aircraft from service while the faa works with boeing and southwest to evaluate a proposal that would allow the airline to continue flying the planes until the inspections are completed over the next few days," the faa said in a statement."

mte.

Another case of SWA and systemic maintenance issues. Every few years incorrect, shoddy, or overlooked maintenance is discovered. Currently SWA faces the biggest fine in FAA history but they are in court fighting it. If that fine is reduced, a different SWA fine from 2008 (?) will keep the "biggest fine" record. (Southwest has had several repeat incidents where a patch of fuselage skin blew out and the cabin lost pressure. The latest fine is because modifications to prevent this were done incorrectly).

The current issue is periodic inspection were overlooked on some of their 737-700's. To their credit, SWA proactively grounded the places and notified the FAA (SWA was probably doing some damage control for their court case). Periodic inspection to the backup hydraulics for the rudder was not done. It's similar to your car being overdue for an oil change...not an immediate danger, which is why the FAA is allowing the aircraft to fly and be inspected by Sunday. That said, it's definitely signs of a poorly run maintenance program.

Certainly folks would like to see that all maintenance directives are followed. But, to put it into perspective, on the news last night it was mentioned that Southwest has had only 1 fatality in 50 years of flying.

Another case of SWA and systemic maintenance issues. Every few years incorrect, shoddy, or overlooked maintenance is discovered. Currently SWA faces the biggest fine in FAA history but they are in court fighting it. If that fine is reduced, a different SWA fine from 2008 (?) will keep the "biggest fine" record. (Southwest has had several repeat incidents where a patch of fuselage skin blew out and the cabin lost pressure. The latest fine is because modifications to prevent this were done incorrectly).

 

The current issue is periodic inspection were overlooked on some of their 737-700's. To their credit, SWA proactively grounded the places and notified the FAA (SWA was probably doing some damage control for their court case). Periodic inspection to the backup hydraulics for the rudder was not done. It's similar to your car being overdue for an oil change...not an immediate danger, which is why the FAA is allowing the aircraft to fly and be inspected by Sunday. That said, it's definitely signs of a poorly run maintenance program.

I can't believe their DOM still has a job. I work within a different transportation field although still oversight by the DOT, and I can tell you with zero uncertainty that this would be a fireable offense that would trickle down the pipeline. There was recently a similar situation at a large transportation provider where the DOM, the Sr. Maintenance Analyst, and the Manager of Service Operations were all canned after a DOT tri-annual review showed repeated failure to perform required inspections in a timely manner. A handful of wrench turners were reprimanded for allegedly fudging paperwork--the only thing that saved their jobs was their union status--it was determined that it would cost more to fight the union to fire them than it was worth as they claimed they were acting on orders from superiors.

Periodic inspection to the backup hydraulics for the rudder was not done. It's similar to your car being overdue for an oil change...not an immediate danger, which is why the FAA is allowing the aircraft to fly and be inspected by Sunday. That said, it's definitely signs of a poorly run maintenance program.

Those overdue oil changes can STOP a vehicle dead in its tracks. Just one little piece of bearing or other contaminant in unchanged oil with an old oil filter can cause a catastrophic engine failure. Does it happen often? No, usually on new equipment where the engine parts are still "settling" and the factory crap left over is getting out of the system or on very old equipment. But I sure wouldn't want to take the chance that the main hydraulics failed for whatever reason, then the backup system failed and the plane falls out of the sky.

Your engine blowing up on the freeway generally causes a traffic jam worst case scenario unless you are paying attention and get off the road quickly when the problem occurs. A plane??? WN needs to be fined and fined and fined again. I am still very resentful for all the money AA lost shutting their planes down (they weren't given the opportunity to "re-space" the zip ties overnight) while WN has had some MAJOR failures and keeps flying. Still wonder whose pockets are getting lined by WN???

But I sure wouldn't want to take the chance that the main hydraulics failed for whatever reason, then the backup system failed and the plane falls out of the sky.

???

737's don't have a RAT??

I don't think it is so dooms day for failing timely inspections on secondary system. Is the secondary system on the MEL anyway? (Can they fly with it not working?)

???

737's don't have a RAT??

I don't think it is so dooms day for failing timely inspections on secondary system. Is the secondary system on the MEL anyway? (Can they fly with it not working?)

737's do not have a RAT (Ram Air Turbine, an electrical power source of last resort) because it's unnecessary. If both engines and the APU all failed, the "windmilling" engines will still provide hydraulics. The A320 has a RAT because electrical power is required for the "fly by wire" system to keep the plane flying.

AFAIK the missed inspection was a valve/piston unit that pushes and pulls on the rudder (called a PCU). There is a main and a standby PCU that can obtain hydraulic pressure from one of 2 or 3 sources.

The rudder PCU was a problem on the 737-200 thru -500 and caused 2 or 3 crashes and several close calls. The issue doesn't exist with the latest 737 models...but pointing out a PCU failure can definitely "doom the day" as you commented.

WN needs to be fined and fined and fined again.

They probably won't for this one since they self-reported the problem. Like it or not, in FAA-think, mea culpas show a "culture of compliance".

I am still very resentful for all the money AA lost shutting their planes down (they weren't given the opportunity to "re-space" the zip ties overnight) while WN has had some MAJOR failures and keeps flying. Still wonder whose pockets are getting lined by WN???

The zip ties were installed exactly per written procedure. A photo in the procedure was wrong, and did not match what was written. Hence, the work on the planes did not match the photo and FAA grounded the aircraft. (The photo showed the zip ties spaced about 1/2" farther apart).

AAL did it right...written procedures prevail when drawings or photos disagree. The strong rumor was FAA in the Texas region was putting the thumbscrews to SWA over numerous maintenance violations. SWA complained to the politicians on their "payroll" they were being singled out.

 

The zip ties were installed exactly per written procedure. A photo in the procedure was wrong, and did not match what was written. Hence, the work on the planes did not match the photo and FAA grounded the aircraft. (The photo showed the zip ties spaced about 1/2" farther apart).

 

AAL did it right...written procedures prevail when drawings or photos disagree. The strong rumor was FAA in the Texas region was putting the thumbscrews to SWA over numerous maintenance violations. SWA complained to the politicians on their "payroll" they were being singled out.

I read the directive and looked at the picture. As you state, a "world" apart. And the only thing I am familiar with mechanically between an airplane and a semi truck is those darn zip ties. There are a zilllion on a semi-holding all the air lines that have to be properly spaced (plus fuel and water lines but those aren't particularly DOT violations unless they are really hanging loose). I was just astounded about the 1/4" spacing being such a big deal.

You hit the nail on the head with your last sentence. Still wonder whose pockets are getting lined? Let's hear it for "de regulating" those corporate campaign contributions.