Will Alaska stay healthy through this crash.

I think things will be slow for now but when all the news dies down about the crash and MD-80s Alaska Airlines will be fine.

It seems that new developments have come up with the FAA investigation. The same plane that crashed was known to have the problem, but when reinspected the part was magically fine, but never replaced. This is the same for a few others in the fleet as well.

I wrote a thread about that a little ways down "The Plot thickens in the AS investigation"

Honestly...if the same test was repeated 5 times, and the results were all within tolerance, than I would think the plane is safe. What is unfortunate about this crash, is that Alaska probably has the safest planes in the air right now of any airline, but people are still looking at what MAY have happened 14-18 months ago.

What has saved AS so far has been that they've handled the press very well. In other crashes, the media have attacked the airlines because of their lack of information. Alaska has been very cooperative with everything and everyone.

I tend to think different... Alaska, you're in BIG trouble!

I am not a lawyer, but one thing i know is that AK will stay in court for the next ten years! welcome to U.S. tort law!

who cares about handling the media.... judges and jury's don't care about the media.... they care about who died and how they died. they care about a part that was clearly worn and unservicible.

my question to forum members is...

what is the mtce & inspection requirements of the screw and gimble nut?

I think the short- and long- term survival of the airline depends on public perception. Is the airline perceived as a party interested in doing all they can for the families and assisting investigators in any way possible? Or are they perceived as more interested in shifting blame, and denying any culpability before all the facts are in. It's a tough balancing act, especially in the "instant news cycle" media environment we live in. With so many news organizations chasing so few "facts" the truth tends to get distorted. How many inspections occurred, what were the findings, what are the relevant FAA regulations? Media "experts" rarely get these details right. It's in the airline's interest to set the record straight on a factual basis but without seeming insensitive or overly defensive. I think they've been very effective at striking this balance, particularly through their web site, where they can help fill the information vacuum without having to call a press conference and respond to unnecessarily provocative and misleading questions from reporters. So far, I give them high marks for how they've handled this terrible situation.