Yup this is spirit
Fighting Texas Aggie Class of 2012
737 Max in the news again
36,515 Views |
346 Replies |
Last: 1 mo ago by nortex97
What we don't know is if Spirit does the plug. They may just deliver standard Sections 45s and Rendon installs the plug.
Mechanic who installed plug thinking….damn Gorilla glue didn't hold.
They are very lucky the plug blew clear of the rear control surfaces.
LGB
I think Spirit installs the plugs but I don't think they make them.
From a.net thread;
[url=https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/struggling-with-defects-boeing-supplier-spirit-aerosystems-fires-ceo/][/url](Note: those are regular exit doors over the wings, and those are apparently removed when it gets to Boeing in Washington).Quote:
It appears that 737 fuselages leave Spirit with the exit plugs in place, unless these are temporary fixtures. This is the best picture I found of a MAX fuselage in transit with a plugged door:
Of course ultimately Boeing is responsible for quality control on its aircraft, regardless of whether work is done in-house or outsourced, but Spirit has been having some major problems lately, including mis-drilled holes on rear pressure bulkheads. Their CEO was fired in October over quality and management issues:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/struggling-with-defects-boeing-supplier-spirit-aerosystems-fires-ceo/
From a.net thread;
Quote:
N664US wrote:
Current potential scope of the door plugs is 578 frames (based on my quick counting from planespotters.net, likely +/- a couple considering I might've miscounted):
737-900ER: 377 in service with plugs, versus 127 with exits
--> operators with door plugs: AS, DL* (ex-Lion Air/Batik aircraft from ship 3931 up still have doors), LY, KE, TK, PS, UA, 7W, and 1 BBJ
737-9MAX: 201 in service with plugs, versus 18 with exits
--> operators with door plugs: AM, AS, CM* (appears to be in-progress converting doors to plugs, all counted as plugged here), TK, UA, and 2 BBJs
737-8MAX-200: none have door plugs, but 137 in service with exits
It also means the oldest aircraft with plugs is flying around likely 16 years old (N37413, a -924ER at UA), which leads to another question -- do these plugs get replaced at some point in a 737's service life?
Quote:
The aircraft is designed and built with an opening in the fuselage that can either take a door (emergency exit only, in this case) or the door can be replaced with a simple "plug" if the airline doesn't require the exit. The plug is lighter, requires less maintenance and looks like a regular window from inside (no exit row with extra leg room necessary).
The extra exit is usually only required for high-density configurations like for some low-cost carriers. With the exit, the Max 9 can carry up to 220 seats, otherwise it's limited to 189 seats.
No one was Injured? I thought it would suck people out? I bet that was a cold ride down.
This is going to yet again cause a massive logistical nightmare for the airlines if (when) the FAA grounds the max pending issuance of a structural AD.
Yes, those are installed plugs. A temporary shipping fixture would not have a window.
Keep in mind that is there is a fundamental problem with the plugs, it probably would be manifested in NEWER jets, not older ones. The more GAGS the airframe has been through, the less likely there is a static load failure would occur.
I guess there the chance of a fatigue failure, but older aircraft have gone through so many C and D checks that its hard to imagine cracking would have gone undetected.
Keep in mind that is there is a fundamental problem with the plugs, it probably would be manifested in NEWER jets, not older ones. The more GAGS the airframe has been through, the less likely there is a static load failure would occur.
I guess there the chance of a fatigue failure, but older aircraft have gone through so many C and D checks that its hard to imagine cracking would have gone undetected.
Maybe. The plugs are used because they are cheaper and lighter, less maintenance etc. and you don't have to configure it with an exit row.fc2112 said:
Yes, those are installed plugs. A temporary shipping fixture would not have a window.
Keep in mind that is there is a fundamental problem with the plugs, it probably would be manifested in NEWER jets, not older ones. The more GAGS the airframe has been through, the less likely there is a static load failure would occur.
I guess there the chance of a fatigue failure, but older aircraft have gone through so many C and D checks that its hard to imagine cracking would have gone undetected.
I don't think fatigue makes sense as the plane was only a couple months old. There are 'only' around 500 of these types of plugged planes flying/in service, so not as big a deal as the previous grounding/**** show after the crashes. If they can find the plug quickly that would help expedite the 'what happened' factor, of course. Since it was pretty low/over an apparently urban area maybe that happens. They should be able to track down when it happened pretty precisely.
Anyone know which seat numbers have the plugged doors (to avoid in the future)?
Aggie Jurist said:
They are very lucky the plug blew clear of the rear control surfaces.
No kiddin, that's a scary thought. Presumably this would be an issue across the airlines? How prevalent is this model with United?
Aggie Jurist said:
They are very lucky the plug blew clear of the rear control surfaces.
Luck or design feature? Looks like a very clear break as part of an FMEA to me
Going to Boston in April for opening day. I think I'll drive.
SlackerAg said:
Anyone know which seat numbers have the plugged doors (to avoid in the future)?
Row 28 on 739.
45-70Ag said:
Going to Boston in April for opening day. I think I'll drive.
Relax, it's a 737MAX, what are the odds lighting strikes twice?
Me right now. Max 8. Totally different I hope, but it really does make you think.
Anyone decipher how this is secured? Looks like internally there are some form of bracket on top... don't see one on bottom. Then it has these little bolt locations. Seems like the interior bracket failed in some way.
The MAX8 model does not have the aft exit door in question. It's just on the MAX9 model and the MAX8-200.
TriAg2010 said:45-70Ag said:
Going to Boston in April for opening day. I think I'll drive.
Relax, it's a 737MAX, what are the odds lighting strikes twice?
Wasn't some poor woman struck twice some time in the last 20 years.
Ag with kids said:Air France 447 says hold my beer.Bubblez said:
Airbus is far superior than Boeing. No question about that now.
Boeing and American civil aviation has really lost their way.
If it's principally Airbus' fault that the Air France crew didn't follow the procedure for loss of reliable airspeed, then I've got bad news about the 737MAX crashes.
Bubblez said:
Airbus is far superior than Boeing. No question about that now.
Boeing and American civil aviation has really lost their way.
Thanks libs
Not sure the airline but Alaska just standardized to one safety brief for their max 8 and max 9's.buda91 said:
Me right now. Max 8. Totally different I hope, but it really does make you think.
As someone who is from Wichita the level of worker at our aircraft manufacturing facilities has dropped dramatically. A lot of the best workers left to go work in the south. The Unions have diluted the talent pool and have pushed a diversity agenda for a decade.
Guppy said:
It's an extra exit for regulatory compliance for high density passenger aircraft - not required if you don't have a certain number of seats on the aircraft.
And Superman could not have opened that mid flight (though maybe chuck norris)
Most likely it was installed wrong after a safety check. Not a fleet wide issue IMO.
Waiting 24 hrs for facts
Could you expand on this? Why would an airline not try to maximize the number of seats? What's the average count difference between the two? I'm honestly curious.
Knee room.aTm2004 said:Guppy said:
It's an extra exit for regulatory compliance for high density passenger aircraft - not required if you don't have a certain number of seats on the aircraft.
And Superman could not have opened that mid flight (though maybe chuck norris)
Most likely it was installed wrong after a safety check. Not a fleet wide issue IMO.
Waiting 24 hrs for facts
Could you expand on this? Why would an airline not try to maximize the number of seats? What's the average count difference between the two? I'm honestly curious.
Ok watching that video they say no one was seated next to the window/door/plug but you see a few folks very close with their hair just blowing in the wind. If anyone in my family was anywhere near that opening I'd be totally freaking out. How was no one sucked out? Those people within a couple rows of that hole should get free air travel for life - am I wrong thinking that would be totally terrifying? And I fly 50x a year and am used to all sorts of turbulence, etc and it doesn't faze me. This would faze me.
For those not familiar (and this doesn't necessarily apply to the 737 MAX9), Boeing planes are manufactured/outsourced all over the world and assembled here. Obviously, some of the parts are manufactured in the US but much of the plane is actually made elsewhere depending on the model.
aTm2004 said:Guppy said:
It's an extra exit for regulatory compliance for high density passenger aircraft - not required if you don't have a certain number of seats on the aircraft.
And Superman could not have opened that mid flight (though maybe chuck norris)
Most likely it was installed wrong after a safety check. Not a fleet wide issue IMO.
Waiting 24 hrs for facts
Could you expand on this? Why would an airline not try to maximize the number of seats? What's the average count difference between the two? I'm honestly curious.
Think about foreign airlines who don't have a first or premium class. Their goal is to fit 30 extra people on the plane bc very few would want to pay for a budget airline premium seat anyway.
So some airlines like frontier or spirit.
American Airlines a321 - 181-186 people
Spirit Airlines a321 - 228 people.
Bunch of random hardware and a bracket sitting in somebody's tool cart at Boeing.evan_aggie said:
Anyone decipher how this is secured? Looks like internally there are some form of bracket on top... don't see one on bottom. Then it has these little bolt locations. Seems like the interior bracket failed in some way.
Its Not Rocket Surgery
Joined:
Nov 4, 2007
Posts:
1,810
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I used to be a "if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" person, but they are not the company they once were. There's an old joke that McDonnel Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money. Basically, the MD board of directors took all of the senior leadership positions at Boeing when Boeing bought them out. Which leads me to another old saying in the aviation industry, "Boeing builds aircraft, McDonnel Douglas builds profits." MD built some great aircraft over the years, but I think you can read between the lines on where corporate priorities headed after the two companies merged.
I cringed when they announced they were moving their global HQ from Chicago to Virginia. They should have gone back to Seattle and focused on engineering the best products in the world. Instead, it appears they went to DC to lobby their way out of their issues. Boeing absolutely has a huge place in my aviation loving heart, but I worry about where the company is headed (or will continue to head) in the future.
I cringed when they announced they were moving their global HQ from Chicago to Virginia. They should have gone back to Seattle and focused on engineering the best products in the world. Instead, it appears they went to DC to lobby their way out of their issues. Boeing absolutely has a huge place in my aviation loving heart, but I worry about where the company is headed (or will continue to head) in the future.
Sort of like assembling Ikea furniture, he thought those must have been extras.Stat Monitor Repairman said:Bunch of random hardware and a bracket sitting in somebody's tool cart at Boeing.evan_aggie said:
Anyone decipher how this is secured? Looks like internally there are some form of bracket on top... don't see one on bottom. Then it has these little bolt locations. Seems like the interior bracket failed in some way.
I feel very much the same way. As I said earlier in the thread, my grandfather worked at the Wichita plant his entire career - my father for a very brief stint in college. I swam in the Boeing pool as a kid (long since filled in and paved over). My first flight was in a 727 and I have been a Boeing fan my entire life (and an aviation nut - I own a Cessna 182). It's impossible to overlook what Boeing has become. It lives off of the government and produces inferior products at exorbitant prices (see Boeing aerospace). They seem to care little about the quality of their aircraft. It pains me to say it, but Airbus is so far ahead at this point. One can only hope they get the 797 right and start competing again.Quote:
I used to be a "if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" person, but they are not the company they once were. There's an old joke that McDonnel Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money. Basically, the MD board of directors took all of the senior leadership positions at Boeing when Boeing bought them out. Which leads me to another old saying in the aviation industry, "Boeing builds aircraft, McDonnel Douglas builds profits." MD built some great aircraft over the years, but I think you can read between the lines on where corporate priorities headed after the two companies merged.
I cringed when they announced they were moving their global HQ from Chicago to Virginia. They should have gone back to Seattle and focused on engineering the best products in the world. Instead, it appears they went to DC to lobby their way out of their issues. Boeing absolutely has a huge place in my aviation loving heart, but I worry about where the company is headed (or will continue to head) in the future.
LGB
Its Not Rocket Surgery said:
I used to be a "if it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" person, but they are not the company they once were. There's an old joke that McDonnel Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money. Basically, the MD board of directors took all of the senior leadership positions at Boeing when Boeing bought them out. Which leads me to another old saying in the aviation industry, "Boeing builds aircraft, McDonnel Douglas builds profits." MD built some great aircraft over the years, but I think you can read between the lines on where corporate priorities headed after the two companies merged.
I cringed when they announced they were moving their global HQ from Chicago to Virginia. They should have gone back to Seattle and focused on engineering the best products in the world. Instead, it appears they went to DC to lobby their way out of their issues. Boeing absolutely has a huge place in my aviation loving heart, but I worry about where the company is headed (or will continue to head) in the future.
I think there was a documentary recently that highlighted the merger
Featured Stories
See All
SEC Round-Up: Dawgs facing possible playoff elimination this week
by Olin Buchanan
33:59
20h ago
1.8k
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 12
by Matthew Dawson
29:44
2h ago
793
23:22
2h ago
609
ElkoSZN
Instead of scheduling tough non-conference games like ND...
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
68
Cm214
Thoughts Thread - Dan Campbell for College Gameday Guest Picker?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
53
LosAngelesAg00
Instead of scheduling tough non-conference games like ND...
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
45
Redbeard85
Thoughts Thread - Dan Campbell for College Gameday Guest Picker?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
44