Boeing problems...

[Zorba]

Odds the sensors were deactivated since 'it's not a door anymore', and it was put on incorrectly?

Looks like that was likely the case. It's still a plug style door so it should not be able to open with pressure on it. Based on the AD that came out, they are looking for missing deactivation bolts and rods. These make sure the door can't be opened, but the door still shouldn't open itself without these considering they aren't installed on any aircraft where this door is activated. The bolts just provide the equivalent level of safety needed to deactivate the sensors.

Also video of the door opening normally.

 

[HomerJS]

I would lose my shit like a shit collector with amnesia.

You wouldn’t lose it. It would be in your pants

 

[Drach]

Can you imagine sitting in that seat when the wall just falls off?

I would lose my shit like a shit collector with amnesia.

Well the kid in that did lose his SHIrT.

 

[skyking]

At this point Boeing would have been better off with a clean sheet design.

That door is exactly the same in the 737-900, circa 2004. It is required as an emergency exit in high density seating.
It is old tried and true tech, but the assembly line and inspection screwed up.

 

[Zorba]

That door is exactly the same in the 737-900, circa 2004. It is required as an emergency exit in high density seating.
It is old tried and true tech, but the assembly line and inspection screwed up.

There is a possibility Alaska opened it and/or checked it during their conformity checks, not really sure if that would be part of that or not.

 

[Zorba]

For anyone that is interested in the door design and how it relates to this incident, this is an extremely good video:

 

[hal2kilo]

For anyone that is interested in the door design and how it relates to this incident, this is an extremely good video:

Hope they find the plug.

 

[Zorba]

Hope they find the plug.

This is the area it fall into, I'm sure it'll be found. Very lucky it didn't go through someone's roof in that area:

Cedar Hills · Oregon, USA

Oregon, USA

maps.app.goo.gl

 

[skyking]

there are more than a few bodies of water out there and it will sink.

 

[Exterous]

That door is exactly the same in the 737-900, circa 2004. It is required as an emergency exit in high density seating.
It is old tried and true tech, but the assembly line and inspection screwed up.

And when you think of the number of miles flown by the rather large fleet that uses this design it's a pretty sound design. Some speculation on flyertalk that a contractor who has already been troublesome might be to blame

 

[Zorba]

there are more than a few bodies of water out there and it will sink.

They found the door. A teacher found it last night in her back yard. She is very lucky it didn't go through her roof.

 

[Drach]

/\

Door plug that blew off Alaska Airlines plane in-flight found in backyard

The NTSB described a chaotic scene in the Boeing 737 Max 9's cockpit after the blowout, which forced the plane to return to Portland, Oregon minutes after takeoff.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[iRONic]

Ohman… freshly delivered aircraft with mx write ups on the plug?!?! Article intimates the lights were MEL’d for over water ops… No bueno!

 

[Zorba]

Ohman… freshly delivered aircraft with mx write ups on the plug?!?! Article intimates the lights were MEL’d for over water ops… No bueno!

They didn't say the light was MEL'd they said that mx cleared the error and returned the aircraft to service. Sounds like their repeat control group flagged the repeat error, scheduled it for more in-depth checks and added the no-ETOPS restriction.

It does look like there is an MEL for it in the MMEL, though, if they wanted to use one. IIRC, the light shows a problem with the controller, since the fault cleared when they changed controllers, it might be completely unrelated.

 

[woolfe9998]

Abbreviations are not useful to people who do not know the jargon.

 

[Drach]

ETOPS used to stand for Extended Twin-Engine Operations, and now is Extended Operations. Originally, it was a certification that permitted twin engine aircraft to fly routes which may, at the time, be greater than 60 minutes flying time from the nearest airport that is suitable for an emergency landing.
A minimum equipment list (MEL) is a list which provides for the operation of aircraft, subject to specified conditions, with particular equipment inoperative (which is) prepared by an operator in conformity with, or more restrictive than, the MMEL established for the aircraft type.


A minimum equipment list (MEL) is a list which provides for the operation of aircraft, subject to specified conditions, with particular equipment inoperative (which is) prepared by an operator in conformity with, or more restrictive than, the MMEL established for the aircraft type.


The master minimum equipment list (MMEL) is a list established for a particular aircraft type by the organisation responsible for the type design with the approval of the State of Design which identifies items which individually may be unserviceable at the commencement of a flight. The MMEL may be associated with special operating conditions, limitations or procedures.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Abbreviations are not useful to people who do not know the jargon.

Sounds to me like someone took the easy way out of something.

 

[Drach]

Sounds to me like someone took the easy way out of something.

If you are referring to me I didn't know so I had to google.

 

[woolfe9998]

Sounds to me like someone took the easy way out of something.

Try googling MEL or even m.e.l. It starts with the Michigan Electronic Library, then moves on to Mel Gibson and Mel Brooks.

 

[Zorba]

ETOPS used to stand for Extended Twin-Engine Operations, and now is Extended Operations. Originally, it was a certification that permitted twin engine aircraft to fly routes which may, at the time, be greater than 60 minutes flying time from the nearest airport that is suitable for an emergency landing.
A minimum equipment list (MEL) is a list which provides for the operation of aircraft, subject to specified conditions, with particular equipment inoperative (which is) prepared by an operator in conformity with, or more restrictive than, the MMEL established for the aircraft type.


A minimum equipment list (MEL) is a list which provides for the operation of aircraft, subject to specified conditions, with particular equipment inoperative (which is) prepared by an operator in conformity with, or more restrictive than, the MMEL established for the aircraft type.


The master minimum equipment list (MMEL) is a list established for a particular aircraft type by the organisation responsible for the type design with the approval of the State of Design which identifies items which individually may be unserviceable at the commencement of a flight. The MMEL may be associated with special operating conditions, limitations or procedures.

I'll add the MMEL (Master list) is a public document owned by the FAA so it can be found by searching for "737 MMEL." Alaska's specific MEL is a private document that is approved by the FAA.

 

[Zorba]

Sounds to me like someone took the easy way out of something.

Without the minimum equipment lists (MEL), if a reading light on seat 36E burned out, the aircraft couldn't take off until it was replaced. The MEL allows them to fix the light within 10 days and go for now. Literally nothing on an airplane can be broken or not working without some sort of authorization, the MEL being the most common. The MEL is based on the safety design of the aircraft and takes redundancy into account. It also provides any additional inspections or operational restrictions required to operate with that item not working.

MELs can be abused, but the FAA and pilots come down hard on this. My old operator lost their ability to MEL the aux power units on some fleets because they were being used too often.

Try googling MEL or even m.e.l. It starts with the Michigan Electronic Library, then moves on to Mel Gibson and Mel Brooks.

Sorry, I'll try to spell them out in the future.

 

[iRONic]

I can only correct you on one thing, Zorba. FAA doesn't “approve" your MEL or your operating certificate, ie Part 91, 135, or 121. They “accept” it.

I’ve written, submitted, and had accepted at least four over my career. I’ve been retired for about 11 years now but I can't imagine that part of the FARs have changed.

 

[Drach]

Without the minimum equipment lists (MEL), if a reading light on seat 36E burned out, the aircraft couldn't take off until it was replaced. The MEL allows them to fix the light within 10 days and go for now. Literally nothing on an airplane can be broken or not working without some sort of authorization, the MEL being the most common. The MEL is based on the safety design of the aircraft and takes redundancy into account. It also provides any additional inspections or operational restrictions required to operate with that item not working.

MELs can be abused, but the FAA and pilots come down hard on this. My old operator lost their ability to MEL the aux power units on some fleets because they were being used too often.


Sorry, I'll try to spell them out in the future.

TY

 

[Roger Wilco]

Ffs

 

[MrSquished]

Shoulda allowed higher quality union labor in that shop. Boeing has lost its lustre