Alaska Airlines grounding fleet of Boeing 737 Max jets for inspection after emergency landing

[JIMinNC]

It was just a couple of weeks ago that Boeing asked airlines to check a rudder bolt as the nuts were falling off.

Bill

Boeing asks airlines to inspect 737 Max jets for potential loose bolt

According to Boeing, there have been no in-flight incidents caused by this condition to date

calgaryherald.com

That’s called an FAA Airworthiness Directive (AD). The FAA issues those every time any kind of anomaly is found in one aircraft that could potentially be a safety issue in other planes with the same or similar part. It’s a very routine process and the FAA issues hundreds if not thousands of them every year on every kind of plane from private planes to jumbo jets. We usually get a couple every year on the small Piper Archer single engine private plane I own with six other partners. Some ADs are non-urgent and can be complied with at regular scheduled maintenance events or within a few hours of flight time, while other emergency ADs must be complied with before further flight.

Given the high profile accidents with the 737 Max series several years ago, even routine ADs issued for that type, like the bolt issue, now get picked up by the general media and amplified. Scary sounding stories about plane incidents get eyeballs and clicks since most people don’t have a lot of understanding about aviation. Obviously, the failed exit door plug on Friday is a bigger deal and warrants more coverage in the general mainstream media, but more routine issues like the bolt inspections are routine items all aircraft operators deal with all of the time.

 

[MULTIZ321]

NTSB Seeks Public's Help Locating Door From Alaska Air Blowout

NTSB Seeks Public’s Help Locating Door From Alaska Air Blowout

The National Transportation Safety Board appealed to the public to help locate the missing door that suffered a blowout on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 as the agency began the process of finding out what went wrong.

www.bloomberg.com

Richard

 

[easyrider]

Our friends flight was canceled for today and tentatively leaves on Tuesday. To catch these flights require staying a night in a hotel, long term parking and a long drive. They also loose a couple of nights in Hawaii.

Are these types of problems compensated by the airline ?

Bill

 

[bnoble]

Are these types of problems compensated by the airline ?

No. That's what trip insurance is for.

 

[Luanne]

No. That's what trip insurance is for.

Actually, the answer is maybe.

Here is an article that outlines passenger rights when a flight is cancelled. It does mention compensation for hotel stays.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/30/delayed-and-canceled-flights-what-to-know-about-your-rights.html

 

[bnoble]

It is my understanding that that generally applies to mis-connections, not at the point of origin.

 

[davidvel]

What do you mean "not true" ? Every 737 Max underwent inspections for this which isn't the same thing as the regular routine maintenance performed on this aircraft.

Bill

true: adjective
1. in accordance with fact or reality.

2. accurate or exact.
"Not true" would be the opposite of true, such as not in accordance with fact or reality, inaccurate.

You posted "as the nuts were falling off." There was a single case of one nut having been off, none others found after inspections. That means your statement was "not true." You often post your opinions and unsubstantiated facts as truth, which is why I take such issue with your post.

This is a very significant event, and accurate facts lead to more informed discussions, vs. hyperbole and misrepresentations. People can and will debate whether one is too many, and who was at fault (Boeing vs. the airline maintenance), etc. Debating over facts that have been well established is pointless and not helpful.

 

[easyrider]

You posted "as the nuts were falling off." There was a single case of one nut having been off, none others found after inspections.

Two 737 max 9's had this problem Columbo. I decided to help you. Here is another link.

Bill

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/06/us/alaska-airlines-window-landing/index.html

Previous issues with Boeing’s 737 Max jets​

CNN reported last month that Boeing has asked airlines to inspect all of their 737 Max jets for a potential loose bolt in the rudder system after an airline discovered a potential problem with a key part on two aircraft.

 

[Luanne]

It is my understanding that that generally applies to mis-connections, not at the point of origin.

If you are referring to my post I would push for it happening anywhere along the trip. I'm the type that will ask for compensation regardless. Sometimes I'll get it, sometimes not. But in most cases the airline will give me something.

 

[easyrider]

It is my understanding that that generally applies to mis-connections, not at the point of origin.

I just had a call from our friends and Alaska Airlines sent them an email with the tentative schedule change meaning their flight will be compensated. No idea if their other costs will be compensated. They really didn't care about the other costs but are more concerned about when they will get here.

Bill

 

[bnoble]

That makes sense. Generally when an airline cancels a departure, I'm given the option of a refund or to be rescheduled. But, anything else is on me. If the airline can't get them there in reasonable time (possible depending on their load factors and how many other flights they have to drop) it can sometimes be worth buying a last-minute ticket on another carrier--but the fare difference is on my dime.

 

[Cornell]

Man I would have a hard time getting on a plane if I had experienced this. I know the statistics and all but still....this would really shake me up.

‘Is It OK if I Hold Your Hand?’: Inside the Cabin of Alaska Airlines Flight 1282

Passengers recount a harrowing experience after a chunk of the plane broke off midair.

www.wsj.com

 

[davidvel]

Two 737 max 9's had this problem Columbo. I decided to help you. Here is another link.

Bill

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/06/us/alaska-airlines-window-landing/index.html

Previous issues with Boeing’s 737 Max jets​

CNN reported last month that Boeing has asked airlines to inspect all of their 737 Max jets for a potential loose bolt in the rudder system after an airline discovered a potential problem with a key part on two aircraft.

You may have meant Columbo as an insult, but I take it as a compliment. As for the "truth," the airline found ONE missing bolt (you claimed more than one.) It was deemed not to be a safety issue. Boeing found [a nut on a]* bolt in another aircraft that was not tightened properly prior to delivery during inspections. No other issues have been identified.

I am sorry that you cannot comprehend the difference. You may think you are helping, but you are simply adding to the confusion, which is par for your course. While some may think the distinction is trivial, facts and an understanding of the processes matter more than hyperbole in these technical matters.

*Typo corrected, it was a loose nut.

 

[easyrider]

You may have meant Columbo as an insult, but I take it as a compliment. As for the "truth," the airline found ONE missing bolt (you claimed more than one.) It was deemed not to be a safety issue. Boeing found a bolt in another aircraft that was not tightened properly prior to delivery during inspections. No other issues have been identified.

I am sorry that you cannot comprehend the difference. You may think you are helping, but you are simply adding to the confusion, which is par for your course. While some may think the distinction is trivial, facts and an understanding of the processes matter more than hyperbole in these technical matters.

I do use Columbo as a compliment regarding you, lol.

They found this issue on at least two of the 737 Max and it was only the nuts, not the bolt that was missing. If the bolt was missing the rudder most likely wouldn't work at all. Boeing has claimed they found this issue on a non-delivered 737 Max so it could be Boeing. If not Boeing it is likely that vibration and or expansion and contraction of the materials is the reason for this issue. It could actually be the known problem for the 737 Max which is just lowering costs.

It seems you might be thinking that a non-functional rudder on a passenger aircraft isn't an issue but the fact is a non-functional rudder was the cause of at least one jet airliner to crash killing everyone on board. So it is an issue , imo.

Bill

 

[davidvel]

I do use Columbo as a compliment regarding you, lol.

They found this issue on at least two of the 737 Max and it was only the nuts, not the bolt that was missing. If the bolt was missing the rudder most likely wouldn't work at all. Boeing has claimed they found this issue on a non-delivered 737 Max so it could be Boeing. If not Boeing it is likely that vibration and or expansion and contraction of the materials is the reason for this issue. It could actually be the known problem for the 737 Max which is just lowering costs.

It seems you might be thinking that a non-functional rudder on a passenger aircraft isn't an issue but the fact is a non-functional rudder was the cause of at least one jet airliner to crash killing everyone on board. So it is an issue , imo.

Bill

Nobody, including me, said they thought a non-functioning rudder on (any) aircraft isn't an issue. Why do you continue to make things up? Just so you can disprove what no one said? It is a bad look.

What I said is that it was reported that the missing [nut] was not a safety issue, so it was determined the single missing [nut] was not critical to the rudder functioning. Of course, rudder control is a bit important, and the claim that anyone with a miniscule understanding of aircraft would think otherwise is absurd.

Not sure what other incident you are referring to but doubt it has anything to do with this one, other than involving the rudder.

*again corrected, but neither a nut nor bolt was considered a safety issue, and there was only one nut that fell off. Changes nothing in this discussion.

 

[easyrider]

it was determined the single missing bolt was not critical to the rudder functioning.

Nope. It is the nuts falling off the bolts, not the bolts falling off the nuts.

To make this simple for you, the nut attaches to the bolt. The bolt attaches to the shaft. The shaft attaches to the pivot. If the nut falls off, the bolt can fall out which can cause a problem using that portion of the rudder.

You could probably get a job as a Boeing engineer with your explanation that a nut falling off is actually a bolt falling off that is nothing critical, lol. You might be right, unless maybe, you need that particular ruder function.

Bill

 

[x3 skier]

Nope. It is the nuts falling off the bolts, not the bolts falling off the nuts.

To make this simple for you, the nut attaches to the bolt. The bolt attaches to the shaft. The shaft attaches to the pivot. If the nut falls off, the bolt can fall out which can cause a problem using that portion of the rudder.

You could probably get a job as a Boeing engineer with your explanation that a nut falling off is actually a bolt falling off that is nothing critical, lol. You might be right, unless maybe, you need that particular ruder function.

Bill

A) See post 26.

B) If it was critical to the rudder operating, the fleet that had that design would have been immediately grounded. They were not and from your article “ Southwest, for example, said it was currently performing all of these inspections during routine overnight maintenance.” If it were critical, there would have been an Emergency Airworthiness Directive issued as was done for the recent loss of the plug door, the subject of this thread. Emergency AD 2024-02-51

C) You might be interested in how many AD’s were issued for “Large Aircraft “ in one two week period last month. Almost 30.

Dynamic Regulatory System

drs.faa.gov

 

[davidvel]

Nope. It is the nuts falling off the bolts, not the bolts falling off the nuts.

To make this simple for you, the nut attaches to the bolt. The bolt attaches to the shaft. The shaft attaches to the pivot. If the nut falls off, the bolt can fall out which can cause a problem using that portion of the rudder.

You could probably get a job as a Boeing engineer with your explanation that a nut falling off is actually a bolt falling off that is nothing critical, lol. You might be right, unless maybe, you need that particular ruder function.

Bill

Yes, it was a nut, not a bolt, but the fact remains there was only 1 nut that fell off. Nice try. But you really should know it is all ball bearings these days.

 

[easyrider]

You might be interested in how many AD’s were issued for “Large Aircraft “ in one two week period last month.

I'm not to interested in the all of the issues facing all of the aircraft. I only brought up the missing nuts on the 737 Max that has been reported on the news, in at least two aircraft according to CNN, to illustrate the aircraft has bugs not yet worked out.

I'm also having some fun messing with @davidvel with his math and hardware skills. The both of us must be a bit bored today, lol.

Bill

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

I only brought up the missing nuts on the 737 Max that has been reported on the news, in at least two aircraft according to CNN, to illustrate the aircraft has bugs not yet worked out.

I don't think there is a single product in the marketplace that does not have bugs that need to be worked on. A decision to not release a product until it is totally bug-free is a decision to never bring any thing to market. And, ultimately, there is no way to find all bugs until a product is put into service.

Practically speaking, when it comes to issues such plane airworthiness, automobile safety standards, sanitary conditions in food processing facilities, the reliability of drinking water treatment facilities, seismic retrofitting of buildings in earthquake country, etc., at some point as a society working through government agencies, we say this is good enough - we are willing to live with the residual risks. And, often when real life indicates there are operating issues that need to be addressed, then things such as airworthiness directives (with their counterparts in other situations) are issued.

The corollary to all of that is that if you put a microscope on any product, you can create a page-clickable story about the history of problems and the failures of existing management tools to eliminate risks.

********

Cycling back to the Boeing MAX, I'm part of a group that views the more significant issue, the problems with the MCAS system, to reflect a basic failure to apply fundamentals of safety engineering to the design of the aircraft, and that failure is likely attributable to the erosion in engineering standards in Boeing that ensued after the McDonnell-Douglas combination. A basic principle in safety engineering is that with mission critical systems, designs that eliminate a hazard should always be selected over designs that incorporate engineering controls to mitigate the hazard. Control of hazards should only be deployed when it is not feasible to eliminate the hazard.

Under the bean-counting culture brought in with the McD suits, when the problem with attack angle emerged (resulting from reusing prior engine mounts), Boeing eschewed the notion of redesigning the engine mounts (would have been more costly and delayed the project), and instead applied engineering controls.

As history subsequent showed, that engineering short-cut was a horribly flawed decision. And this is a classic example of how a "bug" played out in real time. To restate the obvious, if you design to eliminate hazard (in lieu of managing hazard), you eliminate the bugs.

Now sometimes you don't have any alternative but to use things like nuts and bolts to address a problem that can't be designed away. In which case, you do things such as set-up regular inspection schedules. And, as things proceed in real time, you learn from issues and refine and update procedures.

 

[MULTIZ321]

Explainer: Now-found door plug may hold vital clues to how a gaping hole blew open on a jetliner

Explainer: Now-found door 'plug' may hold vital clues to how a gaping hole blew open on a jetliner

Few people thought much about “plugs” that seal unused exits on planes until one of them failed and blew a hole in an Alaska Airlines jet

abcnews.go.com

Richard

 

[Ken555]

Diagram of a Boeing 737-9 mid-cabin door plug and components (Source: Boeing) [courtesy NTSB]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

Man finds iPhone 'perfectly intact' that likely fell 16,000 feet from Alaska Airlines flight

The man said the iPhone was found still in airplane mode and open to a baggage claim number for Alaska Airlines flight 1282, which suffered an inflight blowout and was forced to make an emergency landing.

www.fox13seattle.com

 

[Superchief]

Man finds iPhone 'perfectly intact' that likely fell 16,000 feet from Alaska Airlines flight

The man said the iPhone was found still in airplane mode and open to a baggage claim number for Alaska Airlines flight 1282, which suffered an inflight blowout and was forced to make an emergency landing.

www.fox13seattle.com

I'm sure that this story will soon appear in Iphone ads. I don't understand why my daughter's phone doesn't work when her dog knocks it off the sofa.

 

[T_R_Oglodyte]

Looks as if there might be something more systemic involved here. United found loose bolts on the plug when it did its inspections.

Alaska, United find loose hardware during inspection of 737 MAX 9s

Alaska Airlines and United Airlines said Monday they found loose hardware during inspections of their 737 MAX 9 aircraft.

www.seattletimes.com

This points to the Spirit Aerosystems facility in Wichita, where the fuselages are assembled.

At one time Boeing did all fabrication and assembly so they had control of the whole process. Again, the bean counter suits from McDonnell Douglas decided to outsource much of the production to free up capital and reduce costs, and there has been a raft of production issues resulting from that decisions.