Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Doctor Gollum]

First sensible take on it...

https://youtu.be/I9EvHpf8jZg?si=6Z63Mr_hwp6xTqfd

Looks like a derivative of the door used on the 757 for D3... That was also bottom hinged. Pulling the handle releases the clamps and it falls away from the aircraft deploying the slide as it goes. (All door mounted slides are clamped to the floor at the door frame when armed and this type would be permanently armed,
 very different to the equivalent door on an A321).

The obvious differences between this and the 757 D3 are a smaller bustle (shorter slide due to the much lower sill height) allowing for a standard window.

[Doctor Gollum]

And the ATC recording...

https://youtu.be/29ghXy6O2dc?si=r-8J41fFh1ox-qRw

[Doctor Gollum]

Check out playback of aircraft N704AL on Flightradar24. https://fr24.com/data/aircraft/n704al#3374f24e

And it spent New Years Day in the hangar.

[Doctor Gollum]

https://youtu.be/nw4eQGAmXQ0?si=UBSmTvKe8iW9Wjne

The missing piece and how it works.

[Doctor Gollum]

https://youtu.be/nw4eQGAmXQ0?si=UBSmTvKe8iW9Wjne

The missing piece and how it works.

And a bit more detail from the same source as to why it shouldn't just open...

https://youtu.be/maLBGFYl9_o?si=b834oc9QP7nCZ-fv

[TheBoy]

As I understand it, on the Max-9, this wasn't an exit, but had a special non functioning "door"?

[LC0112G]

It's an additional emergency exit that can be fitted to what is called 'high density' layouts - basically where the whole cabin is packed with as many seats will fit in the sardine can. Alaska Airlines don't do that - they have first class and buisness class, so the max number pf PAX on their B737-9's is only 170 odd. For that number of seats (up to 200 IIRC) the rules only require 8 emergency exits - which on a 737 are two front, two rear and 4 over-wing.

In their wisdom Boeing have fitted all Max-9s with provision for 10 exits - the additional ones are in the middle of the rear cabin each side - and if fitted and useable the aircraft can legally carry (IIRC) 239 PAX. However, in low density seating, this extra exit is sealed and blanked off, with all the hinges, handles and emergency slide stuff removed to save weight. Inside the cabin the passengers can't tell that the 'porthole' window they're looking through is any different from any other window, and there is no way for them to use this extra exit in an emergency.

So the question becomes how/why does a supposedly sealed emergency exit 'blow out'. Duff Boeing Design, Duff Boeing Manufacturing or Duff Alaska Airlines servicing would appear to be the obvious candidates.   

[Doctor Gollum]

As I understand it, on the Max-9, this wasn't an exit, but had a special non functioning "door"?

Essentially a blanking structure located and attached to the fuselage as  a door in the same position would have been.

On the Emergency Exit version the frame is beefed up to allow for the additional forces imposed buy the sprung loaded hinge and subsequent slide deployment and also to allow for the fitting of assist handles either side, but aside from a few extra.components this plug or door or plug door or door plug is essentially a door that can be opened using tools but serves limited purposes beyond maintenance access.

The basic latching and locating mechanism is the same for any door fitted in this position. The difference being that instead of cam locks it uses four wire locked through bolts to keep it in the latched and secured position. By virtue of how and where they are fitted, one such bolt would be sufficient...

So either someone screwed up in production or during the post delivery work at Alaskan... There's ten days clear between delivery and entry to service. Every aircraft regardless of manufacturer or customer arrives from the factory and goes into the hangar.

There's a whole list of stuff that has to be done from basic snagging and rectification to airline specific software/post production modification/fitting and checking safety equipment and markings etc.

And this aircraft was in the hangar overnight on January 1st. As bourne out by flightradar24.

[Doctor Gollum]

It's an additional emergency exit that can be fitted to what is called 'high density' layouts - basically where the whole cabin is packed with as many seats will fit in the sardine can. Alaska Airlines don't do that - they have first class and buisness class, so the max number pf PAX on their B737-9's is only 170 odd. For that number of seats (up to 200 IIRC) the rules only require 8 emergency exits - which on a 737 are two front, two rear and 4 over-wing.

In their wisdom Boeing have fitted all Max-9s with provision for 10 exits - the additional ones are in the middle of the rear cabin each side - and if fitted and useable the aircraft can legally carry (IIRC) 239 PAX. However, in low density seating, this extra exit is sealed and blanked off, with all the hinges, handles and emergency slide stuff removed to save weight. Inside the cabin the passengers can't tell that the 'porthole' window they're looking through is any different from any other window, and there is no way for them to use this extra exit in an emergency.

So the question becomes how/why does a supposedly sealed emergency exit 'blow out'. Duff Boeing Design, Duff Boeing Manufacturing or Duff Alaska Airlines servicing would appear to be the obvious candidates.

Regardless of the former, the latter is more likely.

From what I know of 737NG cabins, the FAA mandated inspection is probably a couple of hours work for both sides plus any rectification work. The side wall panel will pop off and everything you need to check is just there. Removing the seat would be an unnecessary complication.

And opening this 'door' has a maintenance function and you can't inspect the seals without opening it.

If you've not watched them, both of Chris Brady's videos cover it in much detail with clear pictures, although he does confuse up and down regarding how the door releases from the fuselage... It drops down behind the securing pegs and therefore has to go up to clear them in order to be opened. This is reiterated by the fact that the door has to go UP to clear the guide pins.

[Doctor Gollum]

If the bolts had been forgotten from the factory, the door would have opened at the first landing, equally it's unlikely that all four bolts failed simultaneously. Even if they were loose but otherwise correctly fastened, the door wouldn't be able to move.

[Doctor Gollum]

Well, Bob has found the door...

[Doctor Gollum]

https://youtu.be/WhfK9jlZK1o?si=2n46Q3NIJePlApKL

[Doctor Gollum]

https://www.youtube.com/live/kGWLBLb9Pm4?si=GGR84G4Lf__rbtOw

The latest NTSB press conference.

It turns out that the upper door guides sheared. On the face of it, this suggests that the upper bolts had been at least partially in place at the time as the path of least resistance would be to go UP and clear the guides. The fact that the guides sheared would indicate that the guide tracks are longer than the distance required to clear the stops, and for that failure to be the path of least resistance then the last remaining bolt must have worked loose and become jammed in the outer face of the guide rail as the door moved up and out. The spring pressure pushing the door up and the cabin pressure pushing the door out.

And for the springs to be able to push the door up, the bottom bolts were either missing or otherwise worked loose, the spring and pressure differential loads eventually overcoming the shear strength of the guides. When the door went it did so with enough force to rip both cable stays of the frame and force the lower hinge tubes past the stop washer on the end of the hinge posts.

What work either pre or post delivery had been carried out on that door will be a crucial detail. Interestingly no mention has been made of the last hangar input on January 1st.

Although, given that loose bolts have been found on other aircraft, it will be interesting to see what the fix is going to be.

[Varche]

I wonder if Ryanair will charge a premium for non window seats?

Pay £10 priority to guarantee you WON’T get allocated a seat next to an innocent looking window which is actually a “ plug” with loose bolts.

It is like something out of squid games!

[LC0112G]

The fact they seem to be finding the same/similar fault on some United Airlines planes suggests to me that it's not an Alaskan Airlines servicing issue.

The B737 fuselages are actually built by Spirit Aviation (in Witchita Kansas), and then moved by rail from Spirit to Boeings final assembly in Seattle. This is correct - they was a rail accident a few years ago where several fuselages were wrecked. One rumour going round is that in order to prevent dirt and grime getting into the airframe whilst in transit, Spirit fit the the main doors and door plugs. Once in Seattle the main doors and overwings are removed by Boeing for proper emergency exit fitting, but the plug doors are not. If Spirit only put the doors in 'loosly for transit' and don't fit them properly expecting Boeing to do that during assembly, then we have the required holes in the cheese. 

[LC0112G]

I wonder if Ryanair will charge a premium for non window seats?

Pay £10 priority to guarantee you WON’T get allocated a seat next to an innocent looking window which is actually a “ plug” with loose bolts.

It is like something out of squid games!

Ryanair (and TUi) are buying/leasing Max8. Max8 doesn't have the mid cabin exit.

[Doctor Gollum]

Spudulike does due to the density... 737-8200 is a Ryanair only 737-9 aircraft variation. But is fitted with an exit door which is secured differently into the same frame with cam locks and door lock sensors.

And I can't believe that no one would not take advantage of a seat sized hole to fit the interior.

One of my last jobs for my previous employer was to strip and refit
 a 737-700 based BBJ (HZ-MF1) as part of a D Check and getting the rear cabin seats out of the rear door was a total ball ache as there's not the space to get the seats between the rear lavs and around the corner in the galley.  In the end we stripped one half of that cabin and piled it up on the opposite side whilst they did what they needed to and then swapped when the first side was ready.

Traditionally the seats are fitted through the front door opening from back to front once the rear toilets and galley are put in. You have to strip the rear cabin to get the lavs out, (overhead lockers, side wall panels and ceiling all have to come out just to unbolt them) and then the rear door isn't wide enough to get the lav assembly out in one piece.

Also the case when swapping out individual seat assemblies on GB Airways 737s in the early 2000s.

[LC0112G]

Spudulike does due to the density... 737-8200 is a Ryanair only 737-9 aircraft variation. But is fitted with an exit door which is secured differently into the same frame with cam locks and door lock sensors.

And I can't believe that no one would not take advantage of a seat sized hole to fit the interior.

I stand (sit) corrected. Not flown FR since pre pandemic. However, the extra doors on FR are proper emergency exits, with a seat row removed, so hopefully not affected by whatever the 'plug door' issue turn out to be.

[Doctor Gollum]

I wonder if Ryanair will charge a premium for non window seats?

Pay £10 priority to guarantee you WON’T get allocated a seat next to an innocent looking window which is actually a “ plug” with loose bolts.

It is like something out of squid games!

Ryanair charge their extra legroom rate to sit by that exit door on their version of the -9. And if you book an extra legroom row on any aircraft, don't bother taking hand luggage, especially on short haul as you won't have anywhere to put it.

[Doctor Gollum]

One subtle difference between this plug and a regular door, (I don't know which way round either of the exit options are configured), is that on a regular door the guide pin is part of the over centre cam mechanism and part of the door. As the handle is operated the guide pin rotated into a curved J shaped guide, locking it in and simultaneously tensioning the door against the stops. I believe the overwing exit latches are a variation of the same principle.

The pin being on the door and the guide on the frame. On the plug door these are reversed... The pin is on the frame and the guide on the door and overall is a much simpler mechanism but it relies on the bolts to keep it from moving...

[Doctor Gollum]

Spudulike does due to the density... 737-8200 is a Ryanair only 737-9 aircraft variation. But is fitted with an exit door which is secured differently into the same frame with cam locks and door lock sensors.

And I can't believe that no one would not take advantage of a seat sized hole to fit the interior.

I stand (sit) corrected. Not flown FR since pre pandemic. However, the extra doors on FR are proper emergency exits, with a seat row removed, so hopefully not affected by whatever the 'plug door' issue turn out to be.

Afflicted or not, I would rather eat my own organs than ever fly with them.

[STEMO]

[Doctor Gollum]

 

[Doctor Gollum]

https://youtu.be/ubCQZtLTAug?si=im6leBHEldYpfSYW

[STEMO]

The wheels have completely come off now 

https://news.sky.com/story/nose-wheel-falls-off-boeing-757-as-delta-air-lines-flight-prepares-to-take-off-from-atlanta-airport-13055350

[TheBoy]

Did I hear that United was throwing in the towel, and looking at getting a load of 321neo's instead?

[LC0112G]

Did I hear that United was throwing in the towel, and looking at getting a load of 321neo's instead?

Trouble is, the order book is full for all A320/321's stretching out till 2028 so even if ordered now unlikely to be many in service till 2030 ish.

Does look like Boeing have flogged an old horse one too many times instead of biting the bullet a starting a clean sheet design (5-10 years ago).

[Doctor Gollum]

Did I hear that United was throwing in the towel, and looking at getting a load of 321neo's instead?

Southwest are.

[Doctor Gollum]

The wheels have completely come off now 

https://news.sky.com/story/nose-wheel-falls-off-boeing-757-as-delta-air-lines-flight-prepares-to-take-off-from-atlanta-airport-13055350

More lazy shit reporting, not that you would expect anything more from a sales driven media outlet.

This incident has absolutely zero to do with the 737 debacle, yet two thirds of it is banging on about that just because this aircraft happened to be built by the same company, even though that 757 was probably flying before the person writing the article left school. rather eejits.

I would wager, without looking, that this 757 had just had a tyre replaced and a locking clip was missed. What's more of a concern is that neither the flight crew doing their preflight checks, the engineer dispatching the flight or the ground crew didn't spot it. Especially the push back team as the bar connects to the nose gear and is manually locked and released so at least three missed opportunities to spot it.

[Doctor Gollum]

A further update from Blancolirio...

https://youtu.be/yKX0ydWYDzc?si=hHEXezfbHwIDUgnG

https://youtu.be/XhRYqvCAX_k?si=Nz2yj0LyPCAw89FQ

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Initial investigation has reported that four bolts from the door, were missing altogether !

[Doctor Gollum]

Indeed. Something very wrong there... At the very least, Boeing should have an inspection team at Spirit Aero double checking them before they're loaded for shipping and once again once they get to final assembly.

Better yet, bring the fuse assembly back in house.

Obviously, starting with the wrong aircraft hasn't helped 

[Migalot]

Never mind about missing bolts. What about cushions that are too thick?

Talk about putting passengers lives at risk...

https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2024/02/08/british-airways-flight-delayed-after-italian-aviation-officials-discover-some-of-the-seat-cushions-were-too-thick-no-really/ 

[Doctor Gollum]

Actually that's a thing.

My previous job involved changing the seat covers on easyJet.

On those seats (Recaro) there are at least 9 different size/shape seat cushions and respective covers.

It used to really piss off my bodhitandscarper colleagues because I refused to fit the correct covers to the seat position without performing a survey of the cushions.

No point fitting the correct seat cover for the seat position if the cushion foam was wrong.

Legally, if the rear seat rows had the wrong (wider) foams fitted they didn't fit properly and they also encroach into the aisle which has a minimum certified width. Any narrower and you impede an evacuation.

The overwing cushions are less thick and a different density foam. This is to allow the exit door to be opened onwards without obstruction. It might seem like a petty thing, but in a ditching, the overwing exits on an A320 are a primary exit, so potentially a quarter of all 186 passengers will be expecting to use that exit. If you can't get the door open because the seat cushion is in the way then it could actually kill someone.

[Doctor Gollum]

Seeing as how are short haul aircraft all have pleather seat covers, the chances are that cushion was put back in the wrong place by Don't Handle Limpio during a deep clean.

It's a pretty stupid thing to be picked up on during a SAFA spot check. Especially as the correct cushion and cover both have a postcard sized label on them saying EXIT WINDOW ONLY in big red letters

[Doctor Gollum]

Seeing as how our short haul aircraft all have pleather seat covers, the chances are that cushion was put back in the wrong place by Don't Handle Limpio during a deep clean.

It's a pretty stupid thing to be picked up on during a SAFA spot check. Especially as the correct cushion and cover both have a postcard sized label on them saying EXIT WINDOW ONLY in big red letters

Edited to correct AI interference.

[STEMO]

Seeing as how our short haul aircraft all have pleather seat covers, the chances are that cushion was put back in the wrong place by Don't Handle Limpio during a deep clean.

It's a pretty stupid thing to be picked up on during a SAFA spot check. Especially as the correct cushion and cover both have a postcard sized label on them saying EXIT WINDOW ONLY in big red letters

Edited to correct AI interference.

You can turn it off.

[Doctor Gollum]

Seeing as how our short haul aircraft all have pleather seat covers, the chances are that cushion was put back in the wrong place by Don't Handle Limpio during a deep clean.

It's a pretty stupid thing to be picked up on during a SAFA spot check. Especially as the correct cushion and cover both have a postcard sized label on them saying EXIT WINDOW ONLY in big red letters

Edited to correct AI interference.

You can turn it off.

Sets lee wow that wirx

[Doctor Gollum]

https://youtu.be/fnFzT6aUehg?si=LrkMaPuSDi8ecF8V

NTSB preliminary report and evaluation thereof.

[Marks DTM Calib]

Indeed. Something very wrong there... At the very least, Boeing should have an inspection team at Spirit Aero double checking them before they're loaded for shipping and once again once they get to final assembly.

Better yet, bring the fuse assembly back in house.

Obviously, starting with the wrong aircraft hasn't helped 

It's a pretty basic quality failing, you would expect them to weigh the assembly as part of the QC to make sure there is the correct part count as a minimum.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Im glad I dont do flying any more. 
Havent been on a plane for nearly 10 years and have no plans to do so.

[Doctor Gollum]

Indeed. Something very wrong there... At the very least, Boeing should have an inspection team at Spirit Aero double checking them before they're loaded for shipping and once again once they get to final assembly.

Better yet, bring the fuse assembly back in house.

Obviously, starting with the wrong aircraft hasn't helped 

It's a pretty basic quality failing, you would expect them to weigh the assembly as part of the QC to make sure there is the correct part count as a minimum.

Weighing the door wouldn't have helped as the bolts would have been removed to get the door assembly off for weighing...

Boeing and Spirit bang to rights as the door was removed during final assembly in order to allow Spirit techs to rework 5 rivets. Photo evidence taken during the post rework reassembly shows the interior being reassembled with the door back in place and ALL four bolts NOT present. It's a wonder that the door hadn't already popped open during a rough landing.

Whether the oversight was criminal or not is upto to the NTSB to decide, but someone screwed up and someone else failed to spot it. Even simple maintenance tasks are checked and double checked to avoid this very thing.

Unfortunately, with the potential increase on A320 family production as a result, the chances of this same thing happening at Airbus are statistically quite high.

[STEMO]

Indeed. Something very wrong there... At the very least, Boeing should have an inspection team at Spirit Aero double checking them before they're loaded for shipping and once again once they get to final assembly.

Better yet, bring the fuse assembly back in house.

Obviously, starting with the wrong aircraft hasn't helped 

It's a pretty basic quality failing, you would expect them to weigh the assembly as part of the QC to make sure there is the correct part count as a minimum.

Weighing the door wouldn't have helped as the bolts would have been removed to get the door assembly off for weighing...

Boeing and Spirit bang to rights as the door was removed during final assembly in order to allow Spirit techs to rework 5 rivets. Photo evidence taken during the post rework reassembly shows the interior being reassembled with the door back in place and ALL four bolts NOT present. It's a wonder that the door hadn't already popped open during a rough landing.

Whether the oversight was criminal or not is upto to the NTSB to decide, but someone screwed up and someone else failed to spot it. Even simple maintenance tasks are checked and double checked to avoid this very thing.

Unfortunately, with the potential increase on A320 family production as a result, the chances of this same thing happening at Airbus are statistically quite high.

Or didn't.