I have not seen this posted. I seem to remember the FAA under fire a few years ago for looking the other way with some maintenance work on Southwest aircraft. Is most of their maintenance on their aircraft done inhouse or is it outsourced for engines?
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/sou ... 80-tragedy
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
What is missing in the article is a comparison to other airlines in regards to fines and maintenance practices. I suspect that Southwest has a better than average record. No one is perfect.
Any valid audit will include such comparisons... and they will find something to improve- as is the nature of such audits (they always find things to improve).
Have a great day,
Any valid audit will include such comparisons... and they will find something to improve- as is the nature of such audits (they always find things to improve).
Have a great day,
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
2175301 wrote:What is missing in the article is a comparison to other airlines in regards to fines and maintenance practices. I suspect that Southwest has a better than average record. No one is perfect.
Any valid audit will include such comparisons... and they will find something to improve- as is the nature of such audits (they always find things to improve).
Have a great day,
I don't think it's necessarily about Southwest, I think it has to do with how the FAA reacted to the incident itself.
-
- Newbiepilot
- Posts: 3646
- Joined:
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
kiowa wrote:Is most of their maintenance on their aircraft done inhouse or is it outsourced for engines?
Why does that matter? It seems like most heavy maintenance nowadays is outsourced in the United States. There are entire airlines that don’t have a single mechanic working for them who are no less safe than those who still have engine shops and do C Checks in house. There are different quality levels for both in house and outsourced maintenance whether it is inside or outside the United States.
-
- Newbiepilot
- Posts: 3646
- Joined:
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
2175301 wrote:What is missing in the article is a comparison to other airlines in regards to fines and maintenance practices. I suspect that Southwest has a better than average record. No one is perfect.
Any valid audit will include such comparisons... and they will find something to improve- as is the nature of such audits (they always find things to improve).
Have a great day,
Good point. I doubt any airline flying passenger jets in the US exists that hasn’t been fined. Fines and oversight are part of the role of the FAA.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Newbiepilot wrote:There are entire airlines that don’t have a single mechanic working for them (...)
That's so interesting. Which ones are those?
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Newbiepilot wrote:There are entire airlines that don’t have a single mechanic working for them (...)
That's so interesting. Which ones are those?
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
This was mentioned the day of the PHL incident as a possible outcone of the investigation. With the previous history of WN and non compliance and creating inappropriate relationships with FAA oversight this was almost inevitable. WN needs to grow up in many ways as an airline to have the professional level interactions meet the size of the enterprise.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
"Deadly Southwest Aircraft"? That's a bit rich.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
[twoid][/twoid]
What is WN “history of noncompliance” that differs appreciably from its peer carriers? I appreciate the argument that the industry and FAA are too cozy. In a sense, the structure of FAA makes that inevitable because of specific employees’/offices’ focus on single carriers. But WN isn’t unique among large carriers in that regard.
mcdu wrote:This was mentioned the day of the PHL incident as a possible outcone of the investigation. With the previous history of WN and non compliance and creating inappropriate relationships with FAA oversight this was almost inevitable. WN needs to grow up in many ways as an airline to have the professional level interactions meet the size of the enterprise.
What is WN “history of noncompliance” that differs appreciably from its peer carriers? I appreciate the argument that the industry and FAA are too cozy. In a sense, the structure of FAA makes that inevitable because of specific employees’/offices’ focus on single carriers. But WN isn’t unique among large carriers in that regard.
-
- Newbiepilot
- Posts: 3646
- Joined:
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
wjcandee wrote:Newbiepilot wrote:There are entire airlines that don’t have a single mechanic working for them (...)
That's so interesting. Which ones are those?
Without going into too much detail it happens in the charter and freight world. Some are 100% contract maintenance for line and heavy maintenance.
There are also companies that handle everything on behalf of an airline like Boeing Global Fleet Care and Monarch Engineering
https://www.boeing.com/commercial/services/overview/
https://www.monarchaircraftengineering.com/
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Cubsrule wrote:[twoid][/twoid]mcdu wrote:This was mentioned the day of the PHL incident as a possible outcone of the investigation. With the previous history of WN and non compliance and creating inappropriate relationships with FAA oversight this was almost inevitable. WN needs to grow up in many ways as an airline to have the professional level interactions meet the size of the enterprise.
What is WN “history of noncompliance” that differs appreciably from its peer carriers? I appreciate the argument that the industry and FAA are too cozy. In a sense, the structure of FAA makes that inevitable because of specific employees’/offices’ focus on single carriers. But WN isn’t unique among large carriers in that regard.
Southwest previously had issues of non compliance with maintenance items. It appears whistleblowers are now claiming deficiencies in pilot training in addition to the maintenance issues.
Not good news for WN to see this spread from maintenance to pilot training.
Code: Select all
http://wsau.com/news/articles/2018/jun/21/us-watchdog-auditing-faa-checks-of-southwest-air-after-engine-failure/Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Read somewhere USDOT is auditing FAA's emergency evacuation certification process as well.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
mcdu wrote:Cubsrule wrote:mcdu wrote:This was mentioned the day of the PHL incident as a possible outcone of the investigation. With the previous history of WN and non compliance and creating inappropriate relationships with FAA oversight this was almost inevitable. WN needs to grow up in many ways as an airline to have the professional level interactions meet the size of the enterprise.
What is WN “history of noncompliance” that differs appreciably from its peer carriers? I appreciate the argument that the industry and FAA are too cozy. In a sense, the structure of FAA makes that inevitable because of specific employees’/offices’ focus on single carriers. But WN isn’t unique among large carriers in that regard.
Southwest previously had issues of non compliance with maintenance items. It appears whistleblowers are now claiming deficiencies in pilot training in addition to the maintenance issues.
Not good news for WN to see this spread from maintenance to pilot training.
Whistleblowers claim lots of things. Again, where is the EVIDENCE that WN differs in some material respect from AA, DL, or UA?
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
dtw2hyd wrote:Read somewhere USDOT is auditing FAA's emergency evacuation certification process as well.
Glad to hear it if this is true. Someone needs to police the police. I also find it interesting that the FAA does not rotate their people among the airlines. That certainly can lead to inspectors getting too chummy with the individual airline as has happened in the past.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
kiowa wrote:dtw2hyd wrote:Read somewhere USDOT is auditing FAA's emergency evacuation certification process as well.
Glad to hear it if this is true. Someone needs to police the police. I also find it interesting that the FAA does not rotate their people among the airlines. That certainly can lead to inspectors getting too chummy with the individual airline as has happened in the past.
Just double checked.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/19/faa-fac ... dards.html
https://www.oig.dot.gov/library-item/36578
-
- Super80Fan
- Posts: 1622
- Joined:
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
How is the FAA under fire for this but not the whole Allegiant fiasco? I'm just going to assume Allegiant paid the FAA off and Southwest didn't.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Coming as someone who doesn't work in the industry, I don't see anything happening that I wouldn't have expected to happen after an incident where someone died. I don't see the IG looking at the FAA as some indictment of the corruption at the agency. I see it as something happened and let make sure there wasn't something wrong that the FAA was working that could have contributed to it.
Same with the FAA looking at Southwest's Maintenance practices, they're not saying WN has shoddy practices, it something happened and why did it happen. It could come back that their procedures were bad and caused it, but it can also come back saying there was no practical way they could have prevented it from happening. Sometimes an issue isn't an issue until it is.
Same with the FAA looking at Southwest's Maintenance practices, they're not saying WN has shoddy practices, it something happened and why did it happen. It could come back that their procedures were bad and caused it, but it can also come back saying there was no practical way they could have prevented it from happening. Sometimes an issue isn't an issue until it is.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Any accountability of a government agency is welcome. The FAA has a lot of authority. They also need to have some responsibility to go along with their authority to be effective.
-
- deltal1011man
- Posts: 5399
- Joined:
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Newbiepilot wrote:kiowa wrote:Is most of their maintenance on their aircraft done inhouse or is it outsourced for engines?
Why does that matter? It seems like most heavy maintenance nowadays is outsourced in the United States. There are entire airlines that don’t have a single mechanic working for them who are no less safe than those who still have engine shops and do C Checks in house. There are different quality levels for both in house and outsourced maintenance whether it is inside or outside the United States.
I bet you think if you buy something from wal-mart for 1 dollar it the same quality as buying something from a high end store for 100 dollars (life hint, it isn't)
So yes, it does matter. Ask the people on valujet 592 about "why does it matter" oh wait.
Also I don't believe you that a company doesn't have a single a&p working for them(at least in the US) even small corporation aviation departments I have dealt with have at least one a&p for paperwork and QA
-
- deltal1011man
- Posts: 5399
- Joined:
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
kiowa wrote:I have not seen this posted. I seem to remember the FAA under fire a few years ago for looking the other way with some maintenance work on Southwest aircraft. Is most of their maintenance on their aircraft done inhouse or is it outsourced for engines?
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/sou ... 80-tragedy
Sorry forgot to answer this
No, engine and components the only airline that does a lot of it in house is Delta, United and American.
Iirc GE is the vendor Southwest uses for its engines.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Super80Fan wrote:How is the FAA under fire for this but not the whole Allegiant fiasco? I'm just going to assume Allegiant paid the FAA off and Southwest didn't.
Maybe I'm just innocent to that, but the view I've gotten of the FAA is less of bribery and more one of massive @ss-covering.
The problem is that when a passing grade is given by an inspector the inspector is now invested in what happens. If something goes wrong the inspector signed off on it, so an attack of the airline's practices is also an attack of the inspector, and by extension the FAA.
It is also my experience that the "standards" of how things are to be done vary significantly from one FSDO to another. Airlines are very aware of this and will stick with the same FSDO come hell or high water. If an airline was assigned the Chicago FSDO and completely stopped all service to Chicago they would fight like hell to keep being reviewed by the Chicago FSDO just because switching to another one with its own new maze of contradicting standards would be a living hell. That alone is a measure of how broken the system is, but at its crux is that an attack of a carrier that passed an inspection is also an attack of the FAA and they will defend themselves. It's broken. I'm sure there must be a way to combat that.
I suspect this problem exists in pretty much every similar situation like food inspection and drug evaluation.
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
Super80Fan wrote:How is the FAA under fire for this but not the whole Allegiant fiasco? I'm just going to assume Allegiant paid the FAA off and Southwest didn't.
I'm guessing it's because nobody died on G4, but someone did on WN
Re: FAA facing scrutiny for deadly Southwest aircraft
enilria wrote:Super80Fan wrote:How is the FAA under fire for this but not the whole Allegiant fiasco? I'm just going to assume Allegiant paid the FAA off and Southwest didn't.
Maybe I'm just innocent to that, but the view I've gotten of the FAA is less of bribery and more one of massive @ss-covering.
The problem is that when a passing grade is given by an inspector the inspector is now invested in what happens. If something goes wrong the inspector signed off on it, so an attack of the airline's practices is also an attack of the inspector, and by extension the FAA.
It is also my experience that the "standards" of how things are to be done vary significantly from one FSDO to another. Airlines are very aware of this and will stick with the same FSDO come hell or high water. If an airline was assigned the Chicago FSDO and completely stopped all service to Chicago they would fight like hell to keep being reviewed by the Chicago FSDO just because switching to another one with its own new maze of contradicting standards would be a living hell. That alone is a measure of how broken the system is, but at its crux is that an attack of a carrier that passed an inspection is also an attack of the FAA and they will defend themselves. It's broken. I'm sure there must be a way to combat that.
I suspect this problem exists in pretty much every similar situation like food inspection and drug evaluation.
Excellent analysis.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: BaconButty, BoeingVista, dhdaviation, Italianflyer, jamsco99, knxguy11340, SCQ83, sunking737, tautliner, usairways85, ZK-NBT and 193 guests