Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Good job gentlemen.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Good job gentlemen.

    757 cargo door opens in flight.

    http://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/7...ens-in-flight/

  • #2
    Speculation:

    Originally posted by Someone in the 1990s
    ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS!

    Alles touristen und non-technischen looken peepers!
    Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben.
    Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und poppencorken
    mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.
    Das rubbernecken sichtseeren keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das
    pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
      That was a copy-paste of an identical incident that happened in 2014. Back then the issue was traces to ice and snow accumulation in the latches and in the detection switches. I wonder if it is the same problem this time (which would mean that we didn't learn from past experience).

      http://avherald.com/h?article=47e66828&opt=0

      --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
      --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

        That was a copy-paste of an identical incident that happened in 2014. Back then the issue was traces to ice and snow accumulation in the latches and in the detection switches. I wonder if it is the same problem this time (which would mean that we didn't learn from past experience).

        http://avherald.com/h?article=47e66828&opt=0
        If there was no AD or fleetwide bulletin then, no, we didn't learn from past experience. Rosaviatsia issued recommendations. That's all it tells us.

        Interesting that both doors opened at about the same altitude. That must be where the pressure differential does its magic. Lucky thing. I'd hate to see how this goes at cruise altitude.

        Comment


        • #5
          Lost a friend of mine in a similar incident back in the late 80's in a DC-9. Door opened after takeoff. They slowly flew around and back to the airport. They overshoot final a little and the Captain tightened up the turn which apparently caused the door to move which caused them to roll inverted. The last words on the voice recorder where "push forward" from my friend, an aerobatic instructor. Went in inverted, no survivors.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
            Lost a friend of mine in a similar incident back in the late 80's in a DC-9. Door opened after takeoff. They slowly flew around and back to the airport. They overshoot final a little and the Captain tightened up the turn which apparently caused the door to move which caused them to roll inverted. The last words on the voice recorder where "push forward" from my friend, an aerobatic instructor. Went in inverted, no survivors.
            Do you have more details? (airline, where the accident happened, etc...) I would like find more info about this accident.

            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

            Comment


            • #7
              This story begins with the DC-10, which employed an outward-opening cargo door to save interior space. Unlike plug-type passenger doors, these doors rely on locking mechanisms alone to resist up to 300psi of outward pressure. The first reckoning came fast, in 1972 with AA Flight 96, which lost some control cables and the #2 engine when the cargo door failed and the decompression collapsed the cabin floor structures carrying the cables. The flight managed to land safely and nothing much was done about the design, despite the danger revealed. The event recurred two years later with Turkish 981, at 23,000ft, this time severing all the flight control cables. The plane impacted the ground at 430 kts, killing all 346 passengers, making it, if I'm not mistaken, the second worst single plane crash in history after JAL Flight 123. Then, the lesson got learned and changes were made.

              I still would never fly on combi's. Sooner or later, these accidents would reoccur. And they have, thankfully at low altitude. You would think by now the industry would have invented (and mandated) a foolproof (and stooge-proof) locking mechanism but obviously they have not.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                This story begins with the DC-10, which employed an outward-opening cargo door to save interior space. Unlike plug-type passenger doors, these doors rely on locking mechanisms alone to resist up to 300psi of outward pressure. The first reckoning came fast, in 1972 with AA Flight 96, which lost some control cables and the #2 engine when the cargo door failed and the decompression collapsed the cabin floor structures carrying the cables. The flight managed to land safely and nothing much was done about the design, despite the danger revealed. The event recurred two years later with Turkish 981, at 23,000ft, this time severing all the flight control cables. The plane impacted the ground at 430 kts, killing all 346 passengers, making it, if I'm not mistaken, the second worst single plane crash in history after JAL Flight 123. Then, the lesson got learned and changes were made.

                I still would never fly on combi's. Sooner or later, these accidents would reoccur. And they have, thankfully at low altitude. You would think by now the industry would have invented (and mandated) a foolproof (and stooge-proof) locking mechanism but obviously they have not.
                Amazing how you take a positive story and turn it into a negative rant. Somebody must piss in your Wheaties every morning.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post

                  Amazing how you take a positive story and turn it into a negative rant. Somebody must piss in your Wheaties every morning.
                  AA Flt 96 was a "positive" story until Turkish Flt 981 turned it into a "negative" one. There's nothing "positive" about cargo doors that still fail like this, even if the outcome seems that way, because they are a "negative" waiting to happen.

                  Now, an AD requiring redesigned locks on the 757 and a fleetwide retrofit would be a "positive". (See: the DC-10)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Evan View Post

                    AA Flt 96 was a "positive" story until Turkish Flt 981 turned it into a "negative" one. There's nothing "positive" about cargo doors that still fail like this, even if the outcome seems that way, because they are a "negative" waiting to happen.

                    Now, an AD requiring redesigned locks on the 757 and a fleetwide retrofit would be a "positive". (See: the DC-10)
                    Like I said, you are the consummate angry young man. Sure is a good thing you didn't become a commercial pilot.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Well the DC-9 my friend crashed in was operated by Evergreen Int'l Airlines, who I worked for, for 13 years. It was a DC-9-30. This was back in about 1988-89. Out of an Air Force base north of Dallas that I don't think is open any more. At the time locking the cargo door was the responsibility of the ground crew and not double checked by the flight crew. That obviously changed. The NTSB found the door was open but they couldn't tell how far. What apparently happened when he tightened up the turn was the door swung completely open over the top and the a/c rolled inverted.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Bobby
                        ...[Evan bashing]...
                        Interesting love-hate triangle.

                        I see Evan bashing engineers:

                        Originally posted by Oft-repeated situation

                        Here’s a concern- cargo door might open in flight (or these forward placed engines catch wind or any number of other things).

                        Here’s our mitigation...

                        Gee, I can envision that FUBARring...

                        It DOES FUBAR...

                        More engineering duct tape...

                        More doubts...

                        It FUBARs again...

                        Evan gripes
                        As irritating as Evan is, Engineering is done MORE at 0 kts and 0 ft AGL...and I thought there was a little disdain between pilots and engineers...

                        I guess I can be a little meaner to them than all the idiot cowboy pilots who deal with a lot more knots...
                        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Absolutely the opposite. I have the greatest respect for 99% of the engineers I flew with. It was never the same as far as I am concerned, when we parked the last of our 200/300's. It is a very comforting feeling to look back over your right shoulder and ask "okay, what have we got."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

                            Do you have more details? (airline, where the accident happened, etc...) I would like find more info about this accident.
                            Here it is:

                            https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=19890318-0

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
                              Well the DC-9 my friend crashed in was operated by Evergreen Int'l Airlines, who I worked for, for 13 years. It was a DC-9-30. This was back in about 1988-89. Out of an Air Force base north of Dallas that I don't think is open any more. At the time locking the cargo door was the responsibility of the ground crew and not double checked by the flight crew. That obviously changed. The NTSB found the door was open but they couldn't tell how far. What apparently happened when he tightened up the turn was the door swung completely open over the top and the a/c rolled inverted.
                              From the report:

                              Also contributing to the accident was the failure of the FAA to mandate modification to the door-open warning system for DC-9 cargo-configured airplanes, given the previously known occurrences of in-flight door openings."
                              I don't mean to harp on the "negative" but a simple AD could have prevented this tragedy. That's the lesson that I hope is being learned.

                              This a/c was a -33 combi from the factory, delivered to KLM and used in the 'rapid change' role for 19 years before going over to Evergreen. I always shyed away from these KLM combi flights because of the outward-opening cargo door. The baggage compartment doors are inward opening for safety reasons but somehow Douglas, Boeing and others got a pass from the FAA to install outward-opening doors on their pressurized passenger jets. Only 22 DC-9-33's were built.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X