Why is it unacceptable to criticize SWA?
10-30-2008, 04:11 AM
#21
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 581
Whenever any of us fly, we must use good judgement in our decision making. In the back of our minds there is always the possibility of a mishap and the ensuing NTSB review board.
In the example that I posted, I don't think the SWA Captain's decision to attempt an approach with a thunderstorm over the field is defensible. I believe that a plaintiff's attorney would have him for lunch.
Switching gears a bit...
I hope any SWA pilots will correct this if I have it wrong:
After the mishap at MDW when the SWA aircraft went off the end of the runway, I heard through a safety guy, that SWA policy with regard to multiple reports of braking action is to use the best one. For example if it's reported as "fair to good" use "good" in determining landing distance.
If that's incorrect, or the policy has changed, please correct this.
In the example that I posted, I don't think the SWA Captain's decision to attempt an approach with a thunderstorm over the field is defensible. I believe that a plaintiff's attorney would have him for lunch.
Switching gears a bit...
I hope any SWA pilots will correct this if I have it wrong:
After the mishap at MDW when the SWA aircraft went off the end of the runway, I heard through a safety guy, that SWA policy with regard to multiple reports of braking action is to use the best one. For example if it's reported as "fair to good" use "good" in determining landing distance.
If that's incorrect, or the policy has changed, please correct this.
10-30-2008, 05:44 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 191
Notice, no where in this post have I said SWA is the greatest nor have I put down any other company.
But here is an idea that we can try to see if my theory is wrong. Lets see if people can stop posting negative threads about Southwest and see how many "SWA is the Greatest" type threads pop up.
Any takers???????
10-30-2008, 06:42 AM
#23
gets time off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,234
I heard through a safety guy, that SWA policy with regard to multiple reports of braking action is to use the best one. For example if it's reported as "fair to good" use "good" in determining landing distance.
If that's incorrect, or the policy has changed, please correct this.
If that's incorrect, or the policy has changed, please correct this.
As for the rest of the BS on this thread. Most of it is half truths and misinformation. Everyday we all make decisions. No different then pilots from any other airline. There is not a culture here to push things that the pilots are not comfortable with. To think other wise is a joke. Look at the safety record.
We are not forced to fly with less gas like some other airlines were trying to do. I have seen CA say "no not going to happen". Just like the story of a SWA plane taking off when an American said no thanks. We had a CA say no thanks in MSY. It wasnt good for the next crew that did.
We can all make that 1 mistake. It doesnt matter who you fly for. Our culture on the other hand has no bearing in the decision making process. Not that I have seen anyway. As an FO I feel more then comfortable to say no. I have from day 1.
Last edited by mulcher; 10-30-2008 at 06:55 AM.
10-30-2008, 01:38 PM
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 69
Here is my very simple theory to your opening question:
FAMILY. I will always feel free to criticize my family, mother, father, sisters, brother, I can bi*ch, I can complain, I can poke fun, etc. HOWEVER, the minute some outside party picks on or calls out someone in my family, I have their back 100% without hesitation.
That is exactly what I see here, after several months of reading all these forums. People want to stick up for their company, some might even be a little proud of their company. My humble opinion, nothing wrong with that. I really don't think it is a big mystery or all that complicated. It is only as complicated as you want to make it.
FAMILY. I will always feel free to criticize my family, mother, father, sisters, brother, I can bi*ch, I can complain, I can poke fun, etc. HOWEVER, the minute some outside party picks on or calls out someone in my family, I have their back 100% without hesitation.
That is exactly what I see here, after several months of reading all these forums. People want to stick up for their company, some might even be a little proud of their company. My humble opinion, nothing wrong with that. I really don't think it is a big mystery or all that complicated. It is only as complicated as you want to make it.
10-30-2008, 04:59 PM
#25
Day puke
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
Time for some random quotes from NUTS!
1. "Be quick or be dead"
2. "At Southwest, speed is about doing things in days that take other carriers months to do"
3. "Southwest has learned that speed is both necessary for survival and essential to keeping people inspired and invigorated"
4. "In the world where the shelf life of our products and services keeps getting shorter and shorter, we can't afford to be too cautious and play it safe"
5. "The penalty for being slow and slothful........was the death of the airline and job security"
Now I'm not an idiot and realize that most of these quotes are not talking about flying an airplane or even taxiing. Therefore you're probably not going to find it in your FOM. However, I don't see how you can deny that it is embedded in your operation and taken to the extreme by some of your pilots.
Can somebody please explain to me why it is not acceptable to criticize your airline when it is obviously a part of the culture there to do things fast? When Alaska crashed flight 261 due to Shady at best maintenance practices I would call that criminal and absolutely unacceptable. ....
So what is different in the way that SWA operates? On a very similar topic....what about SWA and the late inspections and flying with cracked skins?
.
1. "Be quick or be dead"
2. "At Southwest, speed is about doing things in days that take other carriers months to do"
3. "Southwest has learned that speed is both necessary for survival and essential to keeping people inspired and invigorated"
4. "In the world where the shelf life of our products and services keeps getting shorter and shorter, we can't afford to be too cautious and play it safe"
5. "The penalty for being slow and slothful........was the death of the airline and job security"
Now I'm not an idiot and realize that most of these quotes are not talking about flying an airplane or even taxiing. Therefore you're probably not going to find it in your FOM. However, I don't see how you can deny that it is embedded in your operation and taken to the extreme by some of your pilots.
Can somebody please explain to me why it is not acceptable to criticize your airline when it is obviously a part of the culture there to do things fast? When Alaska crashed flight 261 due to Shady at best maintenance practices I would call that criminal and absolutely unacceptable. ....
So what is different in the way that SWA operates? On a very similar topic....what about SWA and the late inspections and flying with cracked skins?
.
Here's a thought: why not concentrate on keeping your house in order? When was the last time you "overlooked" an item or had something "fail in flight"? Especially on the last leg of a four day trip...
((Crazy thought to improve safety: make all trips end with a dead head so crews, infected with get-there-itis, can't rush or make a bad decision))
Leave others to manage their houses. But, if YOU do SEE something that is TRUELY dangerous, take it, in writing, to the FAA. Don't come on a forum annonymusly and start asking, "When did you stop beating your wife?" questions.
10-30-2008, 05:02 PM
#26
Retired
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: whale wrangler
Posts: 3,527
It,s not that its unacceptable ,its the way that some in here go about posting about SWA thats unacceptable.
Hope that makes sense?
Hope that makes sense?
10-30-2008, 05:35 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: retired
Posts: 645
Reacting fast (or quickly) as a business doesn't mean one has to drive or dive the aircraft faster than the regs.
As far as 1248 Midway, I think the F/O deserves an industry safety award for his action, with the T/Rs when the captain froze, that saved countless more lives.
I'm not sure where the lawsuits stand, but, I heard from a very reliable source that the landing calculation was dorked up...
As far as 1248 Midway, I think the F/O deserves an industry safety award for his action, with the T/Rs when the captain froze, that saved countless more lives.
I'm not sure where the lawsuits stand, but, I heard from a very reliable source that the landing calculation was dorked up...
10-31-2008, 08:28 AM
#28
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 233
Whenever any of us fly, we must use good judgement in our decision making. In the back of our minds there is always the possibility of a mishap and the ensuing NTSB review board.
In the example that I posted, I don't think the SWA Captain's decision to attempt an approach with a thunderstorm over the field is defensible. I believe that a plaintiff's attorney would have him for lunch.
Switching gears a bit...
I hope any SWA pilots will correct this if I have it wrong:
After the mishap at MDW when the SWA aircraft went off the end of the runway, I heard through a safety guy, that SWA policy with regard to multiple reports of braking action is to use the best one. For example if it's reported as "fair to good" use "good" in determining landing distance.
If that's incorrect, or the policy has changed, please correct this.
In the example that I posted, I don't think the SWA Captain's decision to attempt an approach with a thunderstorm over the field is defensible. I believe that a plaintiff's attorney would have him for lunch.
Switching gears a bit...
I hope any SWA pilots will correct this if I have it wrong:
After the mishap at MDW when the SWA aircraft went off the end of the runway, I heard through a safety guy, that SWA policy with regard to multiple reports of braking action is to use the best one. For example if it's reported as "fair to good" use "good" in determining landing distance.
If that's incorrect, or the policy has changed, please correct this.
10-31-2008, 09:57 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: MD11 CPT
Posts: 1,077
Actually I think if you look at it a little closer you will see that there are many SWA guys that will not let slams against their company go unchallenged. I don't see any threads here titled "Southwest is the Greatest Airline!!", but what I do see are several posters who regularly question the saftey and professionalism of the company and it's employees. From what I have learned about the company (from my own research, friends who work there, and my experiences with the company during the hiring process and when flying SWA as a pax) these are people who aren't going to back down when called out. They are going to speak their mind and defend their company. They have had to have a fighting spirit since the company was founded and they are proud of what they have accomplished.
Notice, no where in this post have I said SWA is the greatest nor have I put down any other company.
But here is an idea that we can try to see if my theory is wrong. Lets see if people can stop posting negative threads about Southwest and see how many "SWA is the Greatest" type threads pop up.
Any takers???????
Notice, no where in this post have I said SWA is the greatest nor have I put down any other company.
But here is an idea that we can try to see if my theory is wrong. Lets see if people can stop posting negative threads about Southwest and see how many "SWA is the Greatest" type threads pop up.
Any takers???????
Considering pilot's linear/logical (in most cases) though process it's amazing how superstitious we are, given that nobody wants to taunt the devil by even talking about safety records.
10-31-2008, 10:11 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,233
I'm sure I will get railed for posting this but I honestly don't care. I am not attacking any individuals in here but I'm sure it will be taken that way regardless of my diplomatic attempt.
I have posted in the past about ATC treatment of SWA and more recently about their hiring selection process that got sidetracked into a speed vs FAR compliance argument. At one point somebody told me "you just don't get it" I'm here asking.....what don't I get?
To begin, I would like to say that had I not gotten hired at Alaska, I would have loved to work at SWA. I think your business plan is solid and your executives understand how to lead and not manage. In short, it's hands down the best and friendliest airline to work for in my opinion.
What I don't understand is why the majority of the SWA and even non-SWA bubbas in here defend the operational practices at SWA to the death?
Time for some random quotes from NUTS!
1. "Be quick or be dead"
2. "At Southwest, speed is about doing things in days that take other carriers months to do"
3. "Southwest has learned that speed is both necessary for survival and essential to keeping people inspired and invigorated"
4. "In the world where the shelf life of our products and services keeps getting shorter and shorter, we can't afford to be too cautious and play it safe"
5. "The penalty for being slow and slothful........was the death of the airline and job security"
Now I'm not an idiot and realize that most of these quotes are not talking about flying an airplane or even taxiing. Therefore you're probably not going to find it in your FOM. However, I don't see how you can deny that it is embedded in your operation and taken to the extreme by some of your pilots.
Flight 1248 (Midway): "The National Transportation Safety Board identified the psychological pressure to complete their assigned task as one of the factors contributing to the crew's decision to land at Midway despite unfavorable conditions".
Flight 1455 (Burbank): "The NTSB concluded that the probable cause for the accident was excessive flight speed and too high of a glidepath, and the flight crew's failure to abort the approach when conditions were not met for a stable landing".
3rd person story from Orlando paraphrased: ATC advises of Windshear advisory, 1 legacy carrier (AA I believe) acknowledges, is cleared for takeoff, gets windshear warnings on their radar and clears the runway. 2 other legacy carriers (UA & Continental) all heed the warning and wait out the cell. 2 SWA flights disregard the warnings and takeoff with immediate turnouts to avoid the cell (as witnessed by close personal friend). Nothing happens, no mishap everybody is happy but was it necassary?
Can somebody please explain to me why it is not acceptable to criticize your airline when it is obviously a part of the culture there to do things fast? When Alaska crashed flight 261 due to Shady at best maintenance practices I would call that criminal and absolutely unacceptable. It makes my skin crawl that executives & managers would put crew & passengers lives at stake to save a buck or two. So what is different in the way that SWA operates? On a very similar topic....what about SWA and the late inspections and flying with cracked skins?
If there is any sarcasm noted it is unintentional. I do not mean any disrespect to any SWA crew or spouses, I just want somebody to explain to me why it's not acceptable for an outsider to be critical and judgemental on some poor decisions being made? I also realize that not EVERY SWA pilot operates like this, my only point to this entirely too long of post is that it seems to be embedded in the culture there and seems like it's only a matter of time before something even more tragic happens.
I have posted in the past about ATC treatment of SWA and more recently about their hiring selection process that got sidetracked into a speed vs FAR compliance argument. At one point somebody told me "you just don't get it" I'm here asking.....what don't I get?
To begin, I would like to say that had I not gotten hired at Alaska, I would have loved to work at SWA. I think your business plan is solid and your executives understand how to lead and not manage. In short, it's hands down the best and friendliest airline to work for in my opinion.
What I don't understand is why the majority of the SWA and even non-SWA bubbas in here defend the operational practices at SWA to the death?
Time for some random quotes from NUTS!
1. "Be quick or be dead"
2. "At Southwest, speed is about doing things in days that take other carriers months to do"
3. "Southwest has learned that speed is both necessary for survival and essential to keeping people inspired and invigorated"
4. "In the world where the shelf life of our products and services keeps getting shorter and shorter, we can't afford to be too cautious and play it safe"
5. "The penalty for being slow and slothful........was the death of the airline and job security"
Now I'm not an idiot and realize that most of these quotes are not talking about flying an airplane or even taxiing. Therefore you're probably not going to find it in your FOM. However, I don't see how you can deny that it is embedded in your operation and taken to the extreme by some of your pilots.
Flight 1248 (Midway): "The National Transportation Safety Board identified the psychological pressure to complete their assigned task as one of the factors contributing to the crew's decision to land at Midway despite unfavorable conditions".
Flight 1455 (Burbank): "The NTSB concluded that the probable cause for the accident was excessive flight speed and too high of a glidepath, and the flight crew's failure to abort the approach when conditions were not met for a stable landing".
3rd person story from Orlando paraphrased: ATC advises of Windshear advisory, 1 legacy carrier (AA I believe) acknowledges, is cleared for takeoff, gets windshear warnings on their radar and clears the runway. 2 other legacy carriers (UA & Continental) all heed the warning and wait out the cell. 2 SWA flights disregard the warnings and takeoff with immediate turnouts to avoid the cell (as witnessed by close personal friend). Nothing happens, no mishap everybody is happy but was it necassary?
Can somebody please explain to me why it is not acceptable to criticize your airline when it is obviously a part of the culture there to do things fast? When Alaska crashed flight 261 due to Shady at best maintenance practices I would call that criminal and absolutely unacceptable. It makes my skin crawl that executives & managers would put crew & passengers lives at stake to save a buck or two. So what is different in the way that SWA operates? On a very similar topic....what about SWA and the late inspections and flying with cracked skins?
If there is any sarcasm noted it is unintentional. I do not mean any disrespect to any SWA crew or spouses, I just want somebody to explain to me why it's not acceptable for an outsider to be critical and judgemental on some poor decisions being made? I also realize that not EVERY SWA pilot operates like this, my only point to this entirely too long of post is that it seems to be embedded in the culture there and seems like it's only a matter of time before something even more tragic happens.
See Southwest is a people airline. Anyone and everyone should be able to afford to fly them.
As we get closer and closer to building Communism in this country it'll become more and more unacceptable to criticize Southwest. In public that is, all criticism will move to whispering in the kitchens.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
