![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Actually, they are already leveling a fine (unjustly) against
Southwest. From today's WSJ: The Federal Aviation Administration, imposing the largest financial punishment against an airline in about two decades, proposed a $10.2 million civil penalty against Southwest Airlines Co. for flying passengers in 46 of its planes without complying with mandatory inspections to check for possible structural cracks. "The FAA is taking action against Southwest Airlines for a failing to follow rules that are designed to protect passengers and crew," said FAA Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety Nicholas A. Sabatini. "We expect the airline industry to fully comply with all FAA directives and take corrective action." According to the agency, the airline flew hundreds of thousands of passengers in the planes from June 2006 to March 2007 without complying with a September 2004 safety directive to inspect for fuselage cracks. After advising the FAA of its mistake, the airline received verbal approval from the local FAA Dallas office to keep operating the aircraft, and the FAA said in a press release that the carrier flew an additional 1,451 flights before completing the inspections. The FAA said the size of the penalty "reflects the serious nature of those deliberate violations." Southwest has 30 days to appeal. So, Southwest realized it was in error and had not properly inspected for ADs. It informs the FAA who say go ahead and keep flying, so Southwest follows the verbal directions of the FAA. Then the FAA comes back and slaps them with a $10MM fine. Honestly, thats rediculous. They are getting fined for doing what the FAA told them to do. How would you like it if you were told to go ahead and keep flying your glider while waiting to be able to perform an AD, and then later, after performing the AD, get slapped with a fine? The villian here is bureaucratic double-talk. Wouldn't be at all suprised if Southwest wins this one in the courts. On Mar 6, 3:40*pm, "noel.wade" wrote: Don't know if you all have seen this article yet: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/03/06/sou...nes/index.html There's more to this article than just panicking the public here in the USA (and possibly elsewhere)... To me, its quite possibly the most blatant evidence ever, showing the undue influence that the airlines have on the FAA. Could you imagine the immediate legal action and penalties that would be imposed on a soaring operation or a private owner, if it was discovered that they took paying passengers up in aircraft that were in violation of ADs? *sigh* *I seriously hope the oversight committees take a long hard look at this... --Noel |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TBO and airworthiness | Jim Stewart | Owning | 26 | April 17th 07 05:05 PM |
Missing a/c Airworthiness and Registration? | Michael Horowitz | Home Built | 14 | August 9th 05 11:28 PM |
Restricted Airworthiness | Brad Mallard | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | May 20th 04 05:18 PM |
Teaching airworthiness | Roger Long | Piloting | 28 | October 2nd 03 09:08 PM |
Airworthiness certification of an experimental | Ace Pilot | Home Built | 0 | July 16th 03 03:26 PM |