Another Southwest close call
Agreed. But I am sure they are not proud of it either.
Does anyone know what this one was about? Original was Bloomberg, but it is behind a pay wall. Cited by the (UK) Guardian newspaper. 8 April 2024, SWA but no flight number, says it was a Max 8. Off Hawai, 4,000 fpm rate of descent and bottomed out at 400 ft over the ocean.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...rop-dutch-roll
Just curious.
Thanks.
https://www.theguardian.com/business...rop-dutch-roll
Just curious.
Thanks.
FAA investigates after Southwest plane drops to ‘within 400ft’ of Pacific Ocean
News comes as US regulators investigate separate incident after Boeing 737 Max 8 plane did a ‘Dutch roll’ in MayAdam GabbattSun 16 Jun 2024 17.54 BST
ShareThe Federal Aviation Administration is investigating after a Southwest Airlines flight reportedly plunged to “within 400ft” of the Pacific Ocean during a flight.
A memo distributed to Southwest pilots, obtained by Bloomberg, said that the Boeing 737 Max 8 plunged at a rate of 4,000ft a minute off the coast of Hawaii, coming within hundreds of feet of the ocean before climbing to safety.
News of the incident comes as investigators said a Southwest-operated Boeing 737 Max 8 sustained significant damage after it did a “Dutch roll” during a flight from Phoenix to Oakland in May.
The plunge off the coast of Hawaii occurred on 11 April, amid adverse weather conditions. The plane had been flying from Honolulu to Lihue when it experienced the rapid descent, Bloomberg reported. The report said the descent took the plane to about 400ft above the ocean, according to data from a flight tracking website.
No one was injured. “Nothing is more important to Southwest than Safety,” the airline said in a statement provided to media outlets. “Through our robust Safety Management System, the event was addressed appropriately as we always strive for continuous improvement.”
The FAA told CNN that it learned of the incident immediately and opened an investigation. The plane eventually re-routed to Honolulu.
In the separate incident, on Friday Bloomberg reported that a Boeing 737 Max suffered damage to parts of the plane’s structure after it went into a “Dutch roll” during a Southwest Airlines flight in May.
The incident happened as the jet cruised at 34,000ft from Arizona to California. Associated Press reported that the plane landed safely, but said Southwest did not notify the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) about the roll or damage to the jetliner until 7 June.
“Following the event, SWA performed maintenance on the airplane and discovered damage to structural components,” the NTSB said.
A Dutch roll occurs when the plane’s tail slides from side to side, and the plane rocks in a way that causes the wings to roll up and down.
A report by the FAA said that “substantial” damage was discovered to a unit that controls backup power to the plane’s rudder. It is unclear what triggered the incident, which was the latest to involve a Boeing 737 Max aircraft.
In January the FAA ordered nearly 200 Boeing 737 Max 9 to stop flying after a chunk of fuselage blew out of the plane mid-flight. The planes were allowed to return to the air after undergoing an expansive inspection and maintenance process.
Last year Southwest agreed to pay a record-setting $140m civil penalty after a December 2022 holiday meltdown left 2 million passengers stranded at airports around the US. The airline canceled 8,000 flights over a four-day period, following a winter storm.
The US Department of Transportation found that Southwest violated consumer protection laws by failing to provide adequate customer service assistance “via its call center to hundreds of thousands of customers”, as well as failing to provide prompt flight status notifications to more than 1 million passengers and prompt refunds to thousands.
The following users liked this post:
Pegase Driver
The US ATC seems to have more serious incidents lately than was typical previously.
The interview of the controller involved in the Austin incident last year points out a person who seemed to lack a reasonable understanding of controlling aircraft in low visibility.
There has been a push for decades by the FAA to decrease runway incursions, yet they seem to happen more than ever today. Both pilot and controller errors.
The interview of the controller involved in the Austin incident last year points out a person who seemed to lack a reasonable understanding of controlling aircraft in low visibility.
There has been a push for decades by the FAA to decrease runway incursions, yet they seem to happen more than ever today. Both pilot and controller errors.
The following users liked this post:
In which batch of sub-standard pilots was the Captain recruited? Why are people blaming the FO? He/she was not responsible for the safe conduct of the flight.
The ADS-B data appear to show that 8 seconds elapsed between the level off and the dive below MDA. The data indicate no significant climb and a 37 kt increase in airspeed in those 8 seconds. Was the Captain sleeping?
The ADS-B data appear to show that 8 seconds elapsed between the level off and the dive below MDA. The data indicate no significant climb and a 37 kt increase in airspeed in those 8 seconds. Was the Captain sleeping?
Last edited by EXDAC; 19th Jun 2024 at 23:25. Reason: add airspeed trend (based of GS increase)
The following users liked this post:
In which batch of sub-standard pilots was the Captain recruited? Why are people blaming the FO? He/she was not responsible for the safe conduct of the flight.
The ADS-B data appear to show that 8 seconds elapsed between the level off and the dive below MDA. The data indicate no significant climb and a 37 kt increase in airspeed in those 8 seconds. Was the Captain sleeping?
The ADS-B data appear to show that 8 seconds elapsed between the level off and the dive below MDA. The data indicate no significant climb and a 37 kt increase in airspeed in those 8 seconds. Was the Captain sleeping?
It's a normal thing in the US that different airlines have different opspecs issued by the FAA for lowest usable minimums, that depend on availability of autoland, HUD, Cat 1/2/3, lowest usable RNP, and things like that.
OK. Sounds like TOGA and push forward. That is perplexing. I flew commuters in Hawaii in the 90's and landed there almost daily for 5 years. It's a beautiful island for sure. Glad everyone is safe and hope this unfortunate event is a wakeup call. I am sure it will be.
FD fixation and FD still in approach mode seems to fit the data but that theory does not seem popular with those who have time on type.
As expected, the First Officer did not have the runway in sight by minimums and called, "Go-Around." Both Pilots described the events from the First Officer's go-around call to the holding altitude as a high workload and task saturated. During the go-around, the First Officer inadvertently pushed forward on the control column while following thrust lever movement commanded by the autothrottle. At this point, the First Officer noticed the red airspeed tape and pulled back on the thrust levers, resulting in a descent. Safety data confirmed the Crew received a "DON'T SINK" GPWS aural warning followed by a "PULL UP" GPWS aural warning. The First Officer later stated they did not hear the warnings due to the intense task saturation.
The Captain assessed that the aircraft was in an undesirable state based on the
GPWS warnings, and verbalized "Climb" and "Turn left," immediately prompting the First Officer to increase the thrust. The aircraft climbed aggressively during the recovery, maxing out at +8,500 feet per minute.
FO statement follows. If go around was not selected the throttles would not have advanced.
As expected, the First Officer did not have the runway in sight by minimums and called, "Go-Around." Both Pilots described the events from the First Officer's go-around call to the holding altitude as a high workload and task saturated. During the go-around, the First Officer inadvertently pushed forward on the control column while following thrust lever movement commanded by the autothrottle. At this point, the First Officer noticed the red airspeed tape and pulled back on the thrust levers, resulting in a descent. Safety data confirmed the Crew received a "DON'T SINK" GPWS aural warning followed by a "PULL UP" GPWS aural warning. The First Officer later stated they did not hear the warnings due to the intense task saturation.
As expected, the First Officer did not have the runway in sight by minimums and called, "Go-Around." Both Pilots described the events from the First Officer's go-around call to the holding altitude as a high workload and task saturated. During the go-around, the First Officer inadvertently pushed forward on the control column while following thrust lever movement commanded by the autothrottle. At this point, the First Officer noticed the red airspeed tape and pulled back on the thrust levers, resulting in a descent. Safety data confirmed the Crew received a "DON'T SINK" GPWS aural warning followed by a "PULL UP" GPWS aural warning. The First Officer later stated they did not hear the warnings due to the intense task saturation.
You have not used quotation marks, and the text is written in third person, A cite would be delightful
The following users liked this post:
Starting from AP/AT on, the AT advancing with TOGA is what normally happens. So I'd take it as the default assumption regardless of story trustworthiness.