Posted on 03/07/2008 4:44:26 AM PST by radar101
The Federal Aviation Administration plans to fine Southwest Airlines $10.2 million for allegedly flying airplanes without proper inspections, including six aircraft that were later found to have small cracks in their fuselages.
The Dallas-based carrier said it would vigorously contest the proposed fine -- the largest levied against an airline by the agency -- and argued that it has an exemplary safety record stretching back 37 years.
"We do not fly unsafe planes, period, end of story," said Beth Harbin, Southwest spokeswoman. "We just don't."
The FAA informed Southwest of the fine in a letter Thursday and gave the carrier 30 days to respond. The agency accused Southwest of operating 46 Boeing 737 planes on nearly 60,000 flights without properly inspecting them for fuselage cracks. After the airline discovered that it hadn't done the inspections, the FAA claims, it continued to fly the planes on a total of 1,451 flights.
"The amount of the civil penalty reflects the serious nature of those deliberate violations," the agency said in a statement.
But Southwest executives say they worked in conjunction with the FAA last year once airline officials realized that some older planes hadn't been inspected for the cracks.
"We developed a plan to remedy the situation, and we executed it with the FAA," Harbin said. The planes were removed from service to be inspected, she said, and the cracks, which she said were very minor, were repaired.
Until this week, she said, the airline had considered the matter closed.
Troublesome cracks
The cracks in question, called "fatigue" cracks, can develop in airplanes with pressurized cabins. The pressurized air causes the fuselage to swell slightly as each flight begins.
"If you get a tiny crack or hairline fracture, it can get bigger and bigger each time the airplane expands and contracts," said Keith Cianfrani, an aviation-safety specialist with Aviation Safety Consultants of Sellersville, Pa. "Over time, it can be a very serious thing."
Cianfrani, a pilot and former aircraft inspector with the Army, said such cracks are what caused the fuselage of an Aloha Airlines plane to tear open during a 1988 flight. A flight attendant was sucked out of the aircraft through the hole.
But he added that travelers shouldn't be worried about flying Southwest. He said he will be flying the airline to Florida in a few days.
"I don't think we need to worry, particularly right now that they're under the spotlight," he said. "They're going to really be going out of their way to do everything by the book."
Harbin noted that it was Southwest that brought the inspection issue to the FAA's attention. "We blew the whistle on ourselves," she said.
Congressional hearing
The issue was recently highlighted after an FAA inspector complained to Congress that the agency was too easy on Southwest in their initial response to the case, according to officials with Professional Aviation Safety Specialists, the union that represents FAA safety inspectors.
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has scheduled an April 3 hearing on the case to look at Southwest's inspections and the FAA's handling of the issue.
"The major airlines are very powerful organizations," said Linda Goodrich, a former safety inspector who is now the union's vice president. "It is very frustrating to our inspectors when the FAA and the airlines have such a close relationship."
Goodrich says the problem isn't just at Southwest. She described a case in which an FAA inspector alleged unsafe maintenance practices at Northwest Airlines during the 2005 mechanics' strike. The inspector claimed that his supervisors did not take his claims seriously.
A report by the FAA's Office of Inspector General, issued in September, concluded that the FAA "did not demonstrate a willingness to thoroughly review and address the issues that the [inspector] identified" and the agency's review process "had significant shortcomings."
Harbin said airline officials plan to testify before Congress in their defense. She also stressed that the airline has a sophisticated and comprehensive safety program.
"Our airplanes are under constant scrutiny," she said.
The airline scrambled to defend its safety record Thursday after The Wall Street Journal first reported the FAA's proposed fine.
Reservations and customer-service employees were briefed on how to answer questions from worried passengers, Harbin said. And employees in the carrier's communications office also chimed in on Internet chatter about the case.
"The safety of our customers, employees and aircraft is always our Number 1 concern," spokeswoman Paula Berg commented on the Sky Talk aviation blog on the Star-Telegram's Internet site. "Southwest has an excellent maintenance program, and this experience has helped improve the overall safety of the fleet."
Shares of Southwest (ticker: LUV) closed at $12.50, down 49 cents, in trading Thursday.
TREBOR BANSTETTER, 817-390-7064 tbanstetter@star-telegram.com
MY SUSPICIONS:
A. Someone in the FAA is buddies with a loser airline (Northwest, Delta, Continental,US Air, and wants to use the FAA to “level the playing field”.
B. Some bureaucrat got caught doing something an opponent did not like. This isd used as a tool against that bureaucrat.
I’ve been a big fan of Southwest for quite a while now, fly them whenever I can. But this is not good for Southwest....it casts doubt on the sincerity of their business model of exemplary customer service.
Safety is of huge concern to customers.
SW has a safety record that can only be admired by other airlines. To my knowledge they have never had a crash and one plane slid off the runway in Chicago during an ice storm recently.
When you consider before they ever put a new 737 into service, they have the cockpit configured like every other plane they own so that when a pilot steps into the cockpit nothing is different than with any other plane. My son flies SW all the time.
OB
I was once the Chief Pilot for a fairly large cargo airline, before being sucked up by big brown.
When the FAA inspectors came to inspect pilot records I always greeted them thus ...
I; “ Well I guess this is where we start lying to each other””
FAA: “What?”
I: “ You know.. you say “ I’m here to help you “ and I say “I’m glad to meet you”
Always put ‘em back on their heals...
Mar 5, 2000, Southwest Flight 1455 went off the end of the runway while landing at Burbank, CA., went across a highway and into a gas station. There were 142 people on board, no fatalities, 2 serious injuries.
That's pretty darn funny. I love tweaking brain dead burrocrats. I wish I could figure out how to make an honest living out of it.
Especially #1.
Actually Linda I am more concerned when union pukes try to grab power and headlines by manipulating the FAA.
Speaking about close relationships, how are your friends in the FAA and on the Hill?
A good friend of mine has flown for Southworst his entire career. It consistenly seems to me to be one of the only properly run businesses in an industry otherwise characterised by political influence, incestuous bank and union relationships and corrupt managments. And its safety record really does speak for itself.
SO, you are going to do what the character in Suspicion #1 wants: Fly Loser airlines.
The first page of Google results about Southwest Airlines flack Paula Berg tells us this:
http://www.blogsouthwest.com/2007/06/15/behind-the-scenes-blog-queen/
Now, never mind “wacky”, and “off-the-wall” - “behind-the-scenes Blog Queen” and “Nuts about Southwest” say it all for me.
So, to Paula Berg of Southwest Airlines, the airline company’s “behind-the-scenes Blog Queen”, who says, regarding the events of March 6-7, 2008, and the now-record US$10,200,000 in fines racked up by Southwest:
“...this situation was never and is not now a safety of flight issue”.
Nonsense, Paula. Cracks in airplanes? Nonsense, Paula.
I’ve been around publicists and other entertainment folk for over 20 years, and I have heard better publicity emanating from self-plugging screenwriters on acid.
And, Paula, as for:
“[t]he FAA approved our actions and considered the matter closed as of April 2007”.
Nonsense, Paula.
It’s not “closed”, until WE the PUBLIC say it is closed! Take that back to your superiors for me - and tell them that we are just getting started.
Oh – and, congratulations on staying behind the scenes.
John J. Tormey III, Esq.
Quiet Rockland
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.