[nevereconomy]

I remember Americans saying years ago “If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going” – my personal approach is now the opposite. I have so far managed to avoid the 787 but
that cannot last…greed and poor managmen thas clearly caused them to lose the plot.

1 user thanked author for this post.

cwoodward

[Inquisitive]

I am bit surprised that bolt and washer missing discovered is a few Max and it looks like it is not considered as a major issue (like ground all aircraft’s and inspect). May be some technically knowledgeable person could explain that?
I am a bit nervous as have booking in Max in the coming weeks.

Some commented about less than adequate quality control by Boeing, but how about airlines own inspections? There surely be some incoming inspection after purchase and then periodic inspections, how come these are not found?

[maxgeorge]

Boeing also failed to disclose in the relevant operating handbook that, in the case of a sudden decompression,the cockpit door will open automatically.

Imagine the pilots reaction the that, whilst dealing with a sudden in-flight emergency. And with their headsets partially ripped off their heads.

[Johnnyg]

Boeing: US regulator to increase oversight of firm after blowout.

Today on the BBC

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67960717

[cwoodward]

It seems that there are more chapters to this story –

The B737 that suffered door blowout over Oregon was already suffering problems and was only being used for short flights over land after a warning light that could have indicated a pressurization problem lit up on three different flights federal officials have revealed. Most major airlines I believe would have grounded the aircraft until the root cause of these problems had been located and fixed

Alaska Airlines had apparently only restricted the aircraft from long flights over water so the plane “could return very quickly to an airport” if the warning light reappeared, said Jennifer Homendy, chair of the National Transportation Safety Board.

Homendy also said that the pressurization light might be unrelated to Friday’s incident in which a plug exit door blew off the Max 9 as it fly over Oregon.

Considering that the warning light came on during three previous flights: on Dec. 7, Jan. 3 and Jan. 4 — the day before the door plug broke off and apparently light also illuminated again during a flight on Jan. 3 and on Jan. 4 after the plane had landed.

It seems that investigators will not have the benefit of hearing what was going on in the cockpit during the flight as the cockpit voice recorder had not been activated or was not functioning.

“The explosive rush of air damaged several rows of seats and pulled insulation from the walls. The cockpit door flew open and banged into a lavatory door.The force ripped the headset off the co-pilot and the captain lost part of her headset. A quick reference checklist kept within easy reach of the pilots flew out of the open cockpit”, Homendy said.

According to Associated Press Boeing declined to publicly comment further on the incident.

This serious incident seems to me becoming more than a little murky.

1 user thanked author for this post.

maxgeorge

[IanFromHKG]

I have mentioned on another thread that this week I read an excellent book called Flying Blind (“The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing”) – written after the two earlier disasters but before this one. In journalistic style it rips into Boeing’s corporate culture and how it turned from being an engineering-led company prior to the merger with McDonnell Douglas into a firm totally driven by profits and share price (largely because their management was taken over by MD executives who regarded General Electric under Jack Welch as their role model); and how the FAA was actively complicit in turning their review responsibilities over to Boeing, having their inspectors report into Boeing (!) and incentivising them to certify planes and engines as quickly as possible (one inspector had as one of her performance metrics “certify the GE90 engine before [date]”).

It was said after the earlier tragedies that the MAX was the most inspected aircraft in history. So how come there are loose bolts on numerous aircraft and a faulty door plug? And how come repeated pressurisation warnings didn’t raise more of a red flag than a requirement that it didn’t fly far over water so that it could land quickly if there was an explosive decompression (instead of, say, examining the aircraft to determine the cause)?

After the earlier disasters I said I wouldn’t fly the MAX until it had at least two years of trouble-free operation. I just brought that personal rule back into force.

5 users thanked author for this post.

maxgeorge, Johnnyg, Jacob, GivingupBA, cwoodward

[TonyR]

This looks to be another Boeing design problem. Aircraft doors seal against the airframe from the inside so that the pressure differential is holding them closed and they can’t be opened in flight. This door plug appears to have been bolted on from the outside so that the pressure is pushing it off the airframe. A bit like the difference in trying to push a champagne cork into the bottle vs pulling it out. Seems like someone just didn’t think the door plug design through.

[stevescoots]

very interesting article, that is applicable to a lot of modern business practice https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/16/boeings-stark-lesson-for-contentedly-mediocre-businesses/

[FDOS]

@TonyR

Your statement is not quite right – the door plug is forced into the airframe by pressure, however it needs to be opened for maintenance and thus lifting it will allow this – bolts whould prevent this in normal operations.

The cabin doors are also plus type, but can be opened (in this case by moving them in, manouevering and opening.

This info came from the excellent blancolirio channel on YouTube, who cited a UK captain who maintains a very comprehensive 737 technical site.

[TonyR]

I can’t see that in practice. At 16,000ft there is about 2 tonnes of air pressure on the plug pushing it out. If it is larger than the hole, as all the doors and emergency hatches are, there is no way that is going to move with 2 tonnes pressing it against the airframe. And you would have to pull it into the plane and turn it to get it through the hole, as with the doors and hatches. I had heard this was not the case on the plug because being door, not hatch sized, you would need to remove the seats to remove it or do maintenance on it. I suspect also that if the door was moving on the previous flights with pressurisation warnings it would have been visible from the outside when the pilots did their walk-round. BICBW.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Inquisitive

[FDOS]

@tonyr

I have cut a link to the 737 technical channel and the detailed explanation from Capt Chris Brady.

It is awaiting moderation (because of the link) and hopefully will appear fairly quickly.

[FDOS]

@TonyR

737 technical channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLBGFYl9_o&t=477s

This is Captain Chris Brady’s channel.

[Inquisitive]

Notwithstanding Captain Brady’s explanation in YouTube, I think TonyR has a valid point. Although I have limited knowledge in physics and engineering, but from the practical applications that I was involved in my work, seen plugs and stopples behaves strangely under changing pressure situations if not designed correctly.
I am sure Boeing will come up with explanation on this.

Could anyone in the knowledge clarify if Airbus uses similar door plugs in any configuration?

[TonyR]

@FDOS. Just watched the video and it confirms what I said. The door is hinged at the bottom and opens by pivoting out from the aircraft as shown at 3:45 in.

Mid-exit doors open outwards and hinge downwards. So unlike doors 1&2 L&R, which are oversize doors, mid-exit doors don’t need gates to reduce their size

It is prevented from doing so by what is essentially a catch on either side at the top holding it in. This is unlike the doors and hatches which have to come into the aircraft and tilted/turned before they can be pushed out through the fuselage. So basically there are the two catches (roller pins) and some bolts only to prevent it flying out under the two tonne air pressure load at 16,000 ft and a lot more at cruising altitude.

[TonyR]

There’s a new update that makes it clear that the plug doors open outwards and a number of the parts that were supposed to stop it opening outwards in flight failed or were missing.

[Author]

Posts