Boeing 737 Max at it again

[Mr.BR]

FAA Grounds Boeing 737 Max 9 Jets After Exit Door Incident​

* a plug not an exit door

The Air Current reports that the exact jet involved in this incident had some pressurization issues the previous day.
On January 4, 2024, the same exact jet apparently had a pressurization warning light appear during taxi-in following a flight. The airline then decided to remove the jet from ETOPS operations (meaning the airplane couldn’t fly overwater), in line with the company’s maintenance rules. The same light appeared again later the same day while inflight.

Boeing 737 MAX 9s grounded after Alaska Airlines in-flight blowout

An emergency aboard Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 may have long-lasting implications for 737 MAX maker Boeing, as well as Alaska.

www.seattletimes.com

 

[_Windrider_]

FAA Grounds Boeing 737 Max 9 Jets After Exit Door Incident​

* a plug not an exit door

The Air Current reports that the exact jet involved in this incident had some pressurization issues the previous day.
On January 4, 2024, the same exact jet apparently had a pressurization warning light appear during taxi-in following a flight. The airline then decided to remove the jet from ETOPS operations (meaning the airplane couldn’t fly overwater), in line with the company’s maintenance rules. The same light appeared again later the same day while inflight.

Boeing 737 MAX 9s grounded after Alaska Airlines in-flight blowout

An emergency aboard Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 may have long-lasting implications for 737 MAX maker Boeing, as well as Alaska.

www.seattletimes.com

Just to clarify, it was an exit door. It’s called a plug type door.

 

[Caymanboy]

All I know was it was eerily quiet inside for a plane flying at whatever speed it was with a large hole in the side.

 

[Caymanboy]

Just to clarify, it was an exit door. It’s called a plug type door.

I'm guessing the plug didn't work? )

 

[Mr.BR]

Just to clarify, it was an exit door. It’s called a plug type door.

Is it still a door if its really a plug permanently shut in place and covered over on the inside

 

[Mr.BR]

All I know was it was eerily quiet inside for a plane flying at whatever speed it was with a large hole in the side.

Almost as quiet as Japan Airlines on fire with someone pressing call the flight attendant button throughout the fiery but mostly peaceful landing

 

[_Windrider_]

Is it still a door if its really a plug permanently shut in place and covered over on the inside

You know my mistake. I read it was an emergency exit door plug that popped. But now this story says it was a plug where an exit could be. NBC also said it was a 747

Guess I’ll just wait for the NTSB report or ill
Call my friend who is a technical pilot at Alaska. He likely did the acceptance on this plane from the factory.

 

[_Windrider_]

Almost as quiet as Japan Airlines on fire with someone pressing call the flight attendant button throughout the fiery but mostly peaceful landing

Now this one blows my mind. The airplanes on fore and you pull out your camera. I almost wish they died in the accident

 

[Mr.BR]

Now this one blows my mind. The airplanes on fore and you pull out your camera. I almost wish they died in the accident

IF you look at the airport cam and compare it to inflight mobile , who ever took that recording was realy fast as the whole thing did not take long and he managed to snap 15+seconds of it.

 

[rjacobs]

nothing to do with this being a Max... The regular NG -900's have them also.

My buddy at United said he wasnt shocked and was actually surprised this hadn't happen sooner as its a really sketchy design in his opinion after seeing one without the interior panels on it.

United doesnt use theirs as emergency exits either and its blanked over like the Alaska ones.

My company doesnt have any 900's or -9's so finally, advantage us...

 

[_Windrider_]

IF you look at the airport cam and compare it to inflight mobile , who ever took that recording was realy fast as the whole thing did not take long and he managed to snap 15+seconds of it.

Doesn’t matter. Don’t be stupid. Your desire to make a video or get your bag could kill people behind you even if you get out.

 

[_Windrider_]

nothing to do with this being a Max... The regular NG -900's have them also.

My buddy at United said he wasnt shocked and was actually surprised this hadn't happen sooner as its a really sketchy design in his opinion after seeing one without the interior panels on it.

United doesnt use theirs as emergency exits either and its blanked over like the Alaska ones.

My company doesnt have any 900's or -9's so finally, advantage us...

Let’s be real here. I think it’s time the 73 just went away. It’s an amazing airplane but Boeing can’t keep floggging it along to appease you know who.

 

[rjacobs]

Let’s be real here. I think it’s time the 73 just went away. It’s an amazing airplane but Boeing can’t keep floggging it along to appease you know who.

honestly this has zero to do with even the 737... This "door" could have been on any one of their airframes or airbus's for that matter. And they have been on Boeings for at least the last 12-13 years to my knowledge and this is the first one that has come off. Probably the same guy bolting that "plug" in that was bolting on the tails where the bolts were found loose... Thats Boeings problem right now is their shoddy workmanship. I have heard the airplanes we get from Boeing it takes us almost 2x as long to put them on the line as it used to because we dont trust Boeings work.

I'm not sure I trust Boeing right now to build a 737 replacement without it being a raging piece of shit... And the way things are going if they started today it would take 10+ years to get the first one certified and off the line with the 1000x power microscope they are under.

But the 737, after the airlines mechanics go through them, is a good airplane. They are work horses. I think we fly ours on avg. 11 hours a day, ive seen some that did upwards of 14-15 hours a day in peak season. And they just keep going and going and going. I fly airplanes with very few MEL's, mostly due to our great maintenance folks, but the airplane has been around so long, all the quirks and issues have "generally" been worked out. Lets say you drove your Toyota 11 hours a day every day at say an avg of 50mph...thats 200k miles a year. That car would be TRASH in under 2 years, even though its a Toyota. I think our oldest 737 is from the early 2000's, so 20+ years old... still a solid airframe.

 

[_Windrider_]

honestly this has zero to do with even the 737... This "door" could have been on any one of their airframes or airbus's for that matter. And they have been on Boeings for at least the last 12-13 years to my knowledge and this is the first one that has come off. Probably the same guy bolting that "plug" in that was bolting on the tails where the bolts were found loose... Thats Boeings problem right now is their shoddy workmanship. I have heard the airplanes we get from Boeing it takes us almost 2x as long to put them on the line as it used to because we dont trust Boeings work.

I'm not sure I trust Boeing right now to build a 737 replacement without it being a raging piece of shit... And the way things are going if they started today it would take 10+ years to get the first one certified and off the line with the 1000x power microscope they are under.

But the 737, after the airlines mechanics go through them, is a good airplane. They are work horses. I think we fly ours on avg. 11 hours a day, ive seen some that did upwards of 14-15 hours a day in peak season. And they just keep going and going and going. I fly airplanes with very few MEL's, mostly due to our great maintenance folks, but the airplane has been around so long, all the quirks and issues have "generally" been worked out.

Oh I’m not saying they are a bad airplane. They are actually awesome as far as airframe. The cockpit on the other hand……..

As far as this incident. Could happen to any aircraft at anytime. This isn’t a 737 issue. It’s just unfortunate that it happened in an airframe that’s already under a lot of scrutiny to a company that has really fallen from grace. Boeing needs to fix their shit.

 

[rjacobs]

The cockpit on the other hand……..

whatever pays my paycheck and fully funds my 401k...and profit sharing...

I've always been of the opinion that I will fly a Cessna 152 if you pay me enough and provide a good enough QOL...

 

[_Windrider_]

whatever pays my paycheck and fully funds my 401k...and profit sharing...

I've always been of the opinion that I will fly a Cessna 152 if you pay me enough and provide a good enough QOL...

Same same. I’d fly anything to be home based and make the same money. I don’t care what it is.

 

[Stevo86]

Same same. I’d fly anything to be home based and make the same money. I don’t care what it is.

What do you prefer to fly?

 

[_Windrider_]

What do you prefer to fly?

I fly an airbus these days.

 

[jbuck88]

Lol. Scheduled to fly in a 737-9max SEA to HNL for work next weekend. AD&D pays triple if it happens on the job. So hopefully won't need it.

 

[_Windrider_]

Lol. Scheduled to fly in a 737-9max SEA to HNL for work next weekend. AD&D pays triple in happens on the job. So hopefully won't need it.

You’ll be fine. This was a freak accident.

 

[Milf Dots]

I fly an airbus these days.

For some reason I miss the 727- maybe because I was a passenger on quite a few to meet the greatest woman I ever knew!

 

[UKDslayer]

FAA Grounds Boeing 737 Max 9 Jets After Exit Door Incident​

* a plug not an exit door

The Air Current reports that the exact jet involved in this incident had some pressurization issues the previous day.
On January 4, 2024, the same exact jet apparently had a pressurization warning light appear during taxi-in following a flight. The airline then decided to remove the jet from ETOPS operations (meaning the airplane couldn’t fly overwater), in line with the company’s maintenance rules. The same light appeared again later the same day while inflight.

Boeing 737 MAX 9s grounded after Alaska Airlines in-flight blowout

An emergency aboard Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 may have long-lasting implications for 737 MAX maker Boeing, as well as Alaska.

www.seattletimes.com

Those lib girls always found religion. Almost.

 

[Hobo Hilton]

Where's the logic ?

An airplane has a mechanical issue. The owner restricts the operation of the plane by saying it can not fly over water. The door of the plane blows off. Now, at that moment does it really matter if it is over water or not ?

Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout

The jet involved in Friday's incident had been prevented from long trips over water, US investigators say.

www.bbc.com

 

[_Windrider_]

Where's the logic ?

An airplane has a mechanical issue. The owner restricts the operation of the plane by saying it can not fly over water. The door of the plane blows off. Now, at that moment does it really matter if it is over water or not ?

Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout

The jet involved in Friday's incident had been prevented from long trips over water, US investigators say.

www.bbc.com

Everything in hindsight has a different perspective. But I’ll bet they are glad they did cause if that happened halfway to Hawaii in all likelihood could have also ended up in ditching in the pacific because they ran out of fuel.

 

[DocRDS]

Wasn't it the Max8 that got grounded for the bad chips or am I getting old?

Got nothin cept govt watch programs watch the paint dry and collect money.

 

[Hobo Hilton]

Everything in hindsight has a different perspective. But I’ll bet they are glad they did cause if that happened halfway to Hawaii in all likelihood could have also ended up in ditching in the pacific because they ran out of fuel.

I rely on hindsight to plot my course down the path.
I don't see myself getting on a commercial airplane.

 

[rjacobs]

Where's the logic ?

An airplane has a mechanical issue. The owner restricts the operation of the plane by saying it can not fly over water. The door of the plane blows off. Now, at that moment does it really matter if it is over water or not ?

There's a ton of stuff that dequals and airplane for ETOPS yet it can still fly over land. No clue what they found on the pressurization the day before, but my guess is something was on MEL. I mean not having a printer can kill an airplanes ETOPS cert. I saw one one day where the oil pressure from engine to engine was more than 10 psi difference=no etops... that one was a surprise to me because as long as we have oil pressure and nothing is flashing or amber colored, im pretty happy.

 

[Hobo Hilton]

There's a ton of stuff that dequals and airplane for ETOPS yet it can still fly over land. No clue what they found on the pressurization the day before, but my guess is something was on MEL. I mean not having a printer can kill an airplanes ETOPS cert. I saw one one day where the oil pressure from engine to engine was more than 10 psi difference=no etops... that one was a surprise to me because as long as we have oil pressure and nothing is flashing or amber colored, im pretty happy.

What is the difference in crashing over land as opposed to crashing over water ?

 

[lonegunman762x51]

Is it still a door if its really a plug permanently shut in place and covered over on the inside

Not really. It's only a door if it was ever intended to open and close. It was a hole that was plugged. There was never an actual door in the hole.

 

[Fig]

Just before this I spent winter break with an engineer from Boeing (in missiles, not aircraft), and he was telling me what a POS Airbus is, and how he wouldn't ride on one.

 

[E. Bryant]

My guess is that Boeing can fix this with some more stock buy-backs and executive bonuses.

 

[rjacobs]

What is the difference in crashing over land as opposed to crashing over water ?

No clue, but like I said there are some items that take an airplane out of over water service that are perfectly acceptable to fly over land that dont make sense to me because IMO they are nothing that I would even bat an eye at or even notice, like my example of the oil pressure difference from engine to engine. I think if the printer is broken it could take the A/C out of over water certification.

And crashing is a bit extreme when it comes to failures "in general"...99% of equipment failures on an commercial aircraft are not known at all to the passengers. This plug blowing out IMO would in zero way endanger the aircraft to a point that it might actually crash. A/C decompresses, we put on masks in the cockpit that are FAR better than the masks in the back, and do an emergency decent. I believe the certification is service ceiling to below 25k in 4 minutes or less and down to 10k in 10 minutes or less. I cant recall the number the 737 can descend at, but its something in the 6-7k fpm range. So 41-25= is 16k feet we could do that in like 2.5 minutes give or take. They give some credit for recognition and putting masks on. NOW the time of consciousness with a rapid/explosive decompression at say 41k feet(which losing that door at 41k feet would be explosive) is like 3-5 seconds so our masks are designed to be put on in under 5 seconds. Everybody in the back would go unconscious almost immediately, but we would be breathing force fed oxygen up front.

 

[rjacobs]

My guess is that Boeing can fix this with some more stock buy-backs and executive bonuses.

you forgot the kick backs to the feds and airline executives...

 

[_Windrider_]

Wasn't it the Max8 that got grounded for the bad chips or am I getting old?

Got nothin cept govt watch programs watch the paint dry and collect money.

Not bad chips.

There's a ton of stuff that dequals and airplane for ETOPS yet it can still fly over land. No clue what they found on the pressurization the day before, but my guess is something was on MEL. I mean not having a printer can kill an airplanes ETOPS cert. I saw one one day where the oil pressure from engine to engine was more than 10 psi difference=no etops... that one was a surprise to me because as long as we have oil pressure and nothing is flashing or amber colored, im pretty happy.

yep. We have a few A321 Neos that are restricted due to split EGT’s. But I also appreciate that because the last thing I want is to lose an an engine while over the North Atlantic and im
No where near a suitable runway. Seems dumb but it’s not.

 

[_Windrider_]

Just before this I spent winter break with an engineer from Boeing (in missiles, not aircraft), and he was telling me what a POS Airbus is, and how he wouldn't ride on one.

Of course he did. I mean honestly if I was gonna be in a an accident that involved fire and crashing I’d want to be in a Boeing. They are built like a brick shithouse. But for everyday work and comfort, you can’t beat an Airbus flight deck.

 

[rjacobs]

We have a few A321 Neos over the North Atlantic

gross... LOL

 

[_Windrider_]

gross... LOL

 

[Threadcutter308]

Of course he did. I mean honestly if I was gonna be in a an accident that involved fire and crashing I’d want to be in a Boeing. They are built like a brick shithouse. But for everyday work and comfort, you can’t beat an Airbus flight deck.

I had thought that AL 291 was a 37, but it was an MD80. Pretty good read. Sad, but a good read;

Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now, for this latest event, I believe it was a manufacturing defect on the part of Boeing's subcontractor (Spirit) and not maintenance related, because the AC had only just been put into service. Flip side of the coin is that Alaska had warnings the day before. Now, the warnings didn't appear to directly point to the plug. But, I'm guessing (hoping anyway) that the FAA, Airlines and manufacturers will take this shit more seriously going forward and put more effort into finding the problem before the problem finds the passengers.

I flew on Alaska a lot for my last/final job. The 37's were a hell of an AC for decades. But, I'll never forget taxiing around the N. satellite, B and C terminals at SEA and seeing all the 37's at their gates, propped up by yellow jackstands. Jeebuz, what a cluster.....

 

[_Windrider_]

I had thought that AL 291 was a 37, but it was an MD80. Pretty good read. Sad, but a good read;

Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Now, for this latest event, I believe it was a manufacturing defect on the part of Boeing's subcontractor (Spirit) and not maintenance related, because the AC had only just been put into service. Flip side of the coin is that Alaska had warnings the day before. Now, the warnings didn't appear to directly point to the plug. But, I'm guessing (hoping anyway) that the FAA, Airlines and manufacturers will take this shit more seriously going forward and put more effort into finding the problem before the problem finds the passengers.

I flew on Alaska a lot for my last/final job. The 37's were a hell of an AC for decades. But, I'll never forget taxiing around the N. satellite, B and C terminals at SEA and seeing all the 37's at their gates, propped up by yellow jackstands. Jeebuz, what a cluster.....

Well this is what happens without those jackstands

 

[308pirate]

Is it still a door if its really a plug permanently shut in place and covered over on the inside

You're arguing with an airline pilot about what that fucking door is called?

LOL

 

[308pirate]

Where's the logic ?

An airplane has a mechanical issue. The owner restricts the operation of the plane by saying it can not fly over water. The door of the plane blows off. Now, at that moment does it really matter if it is over water or not ?

Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout

The jet involved in Friday's incident had been prevented from long trips over water, US investigators say.

www.bbc.com

Yes it does.

There are no divert airfields in the middle of the ocean.

A loss of pressurization is not a big deal. Put on your fucking O2 mask (if you want to remain conscious) and shut up.

 

[308pirate]

Now, for this latest event, I believe it was a manufacturing defect on the part of Boeing's subcontractor (Spirit)

Just so you know, Spirit Aerosystems bought Boeing's Wichita division (where the 737 fuselages and a whole host of other airframe sections are made) lock stock and barrel.

Everything made there is still made on Boeing-made tooling and with Boeing work and quality processes.

The change of ownership itself probably has little to nothing to do with this.

 

[Threadcutter308]

Well this is what happens without those jackstands

View attachment 8317492

Yep, have seen the videos.

like I said, what a cluster.....

 

[308pirate]

What is the difference in crashing over land as opposed to crashing over water ?

You must be terminally stupid. A loss of cabin pressurization doesn't mean crash.

 

[308pirate]

No clue, but like I said there are some items that take an airplane out of over water service that are perfectly acceptable to fly over land that dont make sense to me because IMO they are nothing that I would even bat an eye at or even notice, like my example of the oil pressure difference from engine to engine. I think if the printer is broken it could take the A/C out of over water certification.

And crashing is a bit extreme when it comes to failures "in general"...99% of equipment failures on an commercial aircraft are not known at all to the passengers. This plug blowing out IMO would in zero way endanger the aircraft to a point that it might actually crash. A/C decompresses, we put on masks in the cockpit that are FAR better than the masks in the back, and do an emergency decent. I believe the certification is service ceiling to below 25k in 4 minutes or less and down to 10k in 10 minutes or less. I cant recall the number the 737 can descend at, but its something in the 6-7k fpm range. So 41-25= is 16k feet we could do that in like 2.5 minutes give or take. They give some credit for recognition and putting masks on. NOW the time of consciousness with a rapid/explosive decompression at say 41k feet(which losing that door at 41k feet would be explosive) is like 3-5 seconds so our masks are designed to be put on in under 5 seconds. Everybody in the back would go unconscious almost immediately, but we would be breathing force fed oxygen up front.

You're talking to a barely functional idiot who thinks he's an expert at everything.

 

[E. Bryant]

Just so you know, Spirit Aerosystems bought Boeing's Wichita division (where the 737 fuselages and a whole host of other airframe sections are made) lock stock and barrel.

Everything made there is still made on Boeing-made tooling and with Boeing work and quality processes.

The change of ownership itself probably has little to nothing to do with this.

You know as well (or better) than I do that a lot of those places claim to have a process-dependent system, but ultimately there is some people-dependence at various spots and thus the loss of key personal proves catastrophic.

The fact that Spirit fired its CEO a couple of months ago does not suggest that all is well.

It's way too early to determine who might carry the burden of blame on the product side. Feels pretty safe to say that the airline did a good job of demonstrating normalcy bias by keeping the aircraft in service despite multiple warnings of a potential problem. "We get those warnings all the time", cries the peanut gallery - yep, and you better heed every single one if you wish to maintain a 10-sigma record of ensuring that the number of landings equals the number of takeoffs.

 

[7.62willdo]

You must be terminally stupid. A loss of cabin pressurization doesn't mean crash.

Depends on how rapidly the loss happens…….

 

[7.62willdo]

You must be terminally stupid. A loss of cabin pressurization doesn't mean crash.

And by the way the over water thing has everything to do with crashing and nothing to do with pressurization….. if you don’t understand that leave this conversation…..

 

[Mr.BR]

Glad that phone landed safely .

Now we wait for plug to pop up on ebay ,by the way can the federales ,NTSB demand the door without compensation

 

[Threadcutter308]

Glad that phone landed safely .

Ummmm……….WHERE you found the phone(s) is a fairly important piece of information…..