NYC-bound flight canceled when passenger notices missing bolts on plane wing

https://nypost.com/2024/01/22/news/nyc-bound-flight-canceled-when-passenger-notices-missing-bolts-on-plane-wing/

by Almondsetat • 3 years ago

130 145 3 years ago

anotherhue• 3 years ago

Should passengers be breathalysing the pilots too? If cost cutting is affecting safety then maybe it's gone too far. Every missing bolt should trigger a $1MM reduction in an exec's bonus.

jupp0r• 3 years ago

Not sure about you, but I'd appreciate a fellow passenger pointing out any missing bolts on any flights I'm on.

andix5• 3 years ago

If you notice the pilot being drunk you should speak up.

otikik• 3 years ago

I was, in fact, in a flight where one of the pilots didn’t seem… fit to flight when he was approaching the airplane at the airport. He was visibly wobbly. The flight was delayed until a replacement pilot arrived

trhway• 3 years ago

"The drunkennes of the pilot doesn't matter really, anyway the autopilot does the job" - that is how the representative of Aeroflot was trying to convince the passengers to proceed with the flight when he was called on board after the passengers refused to flight with the drunk crew (usually Russian passengers are fine with drunk pilots, the situation here was an exception because the actual passenger who felt entitled for sober crew and raised the noise was Ksenija Sobchak - the daughter of the guy who "godfathered" Putin when Putin was just a clerk in St-Petersburg city office)

JumpCrisscross3• 3 years ago

Every missing bolt should trigger a $1MM reduction in an exec's bonus

One of the crowning achievements of the FAA has been resisting the American penchant for retribution. If a missing bolt triggers a $1mm fine for a senior manager, you won't find missing bolts.

1letterunixname2• 3 years ago

Moral panic hysteria, but this is a non-story. Airbus came out to defend that that particular panel is held by a hundred plus fasteners.

Passengers should be concerned about shoddy bear straps on Boeing 737 NGs they can't see that were passed off as approved parts to make the production schedule. Boeing had the DOJ in their pocket making false statements about an ongoing NTSB investigation into AA 331 that broke up, likely due to substandard parts, when a 737 Classic would've likely remained intact in similar circumstances. 737 NGs are at variable unknown risk of breaking up on hard landings, runway overruns, and possibly even extreme turbulence. See also: Ducommun scandal.

karolist2• 3 years ago

4 bolts missing, that gives all sorts of red flags. How would a passenger know the limit of number of bolts to be missing before failure? Or be sure other bolts are properly fastened after seeing missing ones? Calling off the flight is absolutely the correct decision.

1letterunixname2• 3 years ago

No, it's hysteria. This is common practice on non-load-bearing access panels. I've seen many times on in-service commercial aircraft.

notaustinpowers• 3 years ago

I worked in aviation for years when I was younger, specifically around aircraft maintenance. If you think 4 missing bolts out of 150 are a red flag then I recommend you do not look at what has to happen for a plane to be deemed not airworthy.

jstanley• 3 years ago

How would a passenger know the limit of number of bolts to be missing before failure?

They wouldn't. That's why passengers aren't tasked with being safety inspectors.

aatd86• 3 years ago

That tells how good people care about safety... Or do you think that it's planted evidence? ;-)

Analemma_• 3 years ago

Every time there's some actual disaster on something like a commercial airliner, in the ensuing investigation it turns out there were tons of warning signs - missing bolts, ignored reports, etc. And then people, rightfully, go "why were all these warning signs ignored?"

And now here you are smugly telling us to ignore a bunch of missing bolts and that we're idiots for possibly thinking they could be indicative of a problem. Do you see how this is a big part of the answer to that perpetual question of "the signs were all there, why wasn't anything done?"

thejohnconway• 3 years ago

I have no horse in this race, but it’s possible that the answer to the first question of why were all the warning signs ignored is that there are a lot of trivial, spurious, or non-relevant reports, and no one retroactively looks at them in most cases because nothing happened. Upping the number of reports might make the problem worse.

fotta• 3 years ago

They should've slapped some speed tape over the holes

bombcar• 3 years ago

Speed tape is 100 Approved.

That stuff is INSANE.

brokensegue• 3 years ago

Neil Firth, the Airbus local chief wing engineer for A330, added that the affected panel was a secondary structure used to improve the aerodynamics of the plane. ... Each of these panels has 119 fasteners, so there was no impact to the structural integrity or load capability of the wing, and the aircraft was safe to operate, he said.

altairprime2• 3 years ago

While it’s comforting to know that the ultimate outcome of this going unnoticed would have been non-fatal, we don’t yet know whether this was:

1) “after a series of maintenance and inspection failures, a passenger noticed something unusual”; or,

2) “the bolts had been inspected on an appropriate schedule and had since gone missing, and a passenger noticed a new defect before the next inspection was scheduled to occur for this non-critical part”.

It matters whether it’s 1) or 2), or somewhere in between, and I don’t think we don’t know that yet. Public faith in airlines behaving safely is pretty low, and rightly so. I definitely support “treat as a process failure until determined otherwise” for airlines right now. Looking forward to that determination, regardless.

chris_va• 3 years ago

It's also possible that the A&P looked at it and decided it could wait, but then after the passengers noticed someone higher up decided it was not worth the brand risk.

If the fastener is called out in part 21.31, then it would be a required part, but airplanes _never_ fly with 100% of their parts in working order... this one was not required, so under normal circumstances I would assume they'd fly the plane.

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

this going unnoticed

You don't know it was unnoticed. In my profession, I see plenty of flaws that don't need attention, sometimes not immediately, sometimes not ever.

darkerside• 3 years ago

Great that the part was nonstructural, but it still seems like our could seems terribly to have a loose piece come off midflight and potentially impact other parts of the plane.

singleshot_2• 3 years ago

It seems like anyone who was in the aviation business when the Columbia disintegrated probably would not share the viewpoint that aero fairings’ attachment points aren’t safety critical.

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

We have no reason to believe that is a risk, other than our wildest imaginations.

iancmceachern2• 2 years ago

Yeah but that bolt Flys off on the runway and strikes the following small commuter plane in just the wrong place and you have an accident on your hands

lupire4• 2 years ago

And a meteor could hit the plane.

stavros4• 2 years ago

Each of these panels has 119 fasteners, so there was no impact to the structural integrity

This feels a bit off. It's implying that 119 fasteners are more than enough, but, if that's the case, why have more fasteners than necessary? How many are "just enough", and how many are too few?

lm284692• 2 years ago

Planes are possibly the most over engineered thing people use regularly, they rarely deal in term of "just enough"

coolThingsFirst2• 3 years ago

I love how it’s played like a minor thing but resulted in a cancelled flight.

masklinn2• 3 years ago

It can be both at the same time, delaying or cancelling the flight can be much safer brand wise than the complaints and negative publicity, even if technically there is no significant risk.

It's common for people to complain enough to get free or comped stuff they did not deserve at any point. As the saying goes, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, that doesn't mean that's where the maintenance should go.

Frost1x• 3 years ago

Especially after recent 737 Max incidents, people’s levels of concern are higher.

I don’t know how much a typical canceled flight is in lost revenue but I suspect it’s much lower than what Alaska Airlines and others are dealing with now.

jpk2f2• 3 years ago

It can be minor but still cause a cancellation. It may be non-obvious to the immediate ground crew that it's trivial, and an abundance of caution is obviously ideal when it comes to flight safety.

coolThingsFirst2• 3 years ago

I mean they’re starting to miss really obvious things after all it’s the safest mode of transport.

Just humans(meat) and a highly flammable jet fuel in a tube.

sokoloff4• 2 years ago

Even a short delay on departure for a UK to US flight can result in duty time limits being exceeded for the crew, which can result in the cancellation of the flight.

AlbertCory• 3 years ago

Did the flight attendant say, "Can I get you anything?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXHKDb0CNjA

lefixx• 3 years ago

4 bolts (I actually think they are screws) is not a danger but it signals a failure in the maintenance pipeline.

Johnny555• 3 years ago

4 screws randomly distributed among the 109 might not be a danger, but these were 4 in a row, which seems like it would be more hazardous.

dghlsakjg6• 3 years ago

You ever seen what happens when a screw comes loose and hits another surface at 500 mph?

I have had a small screw go through a plane propeller before. 1 missing screw, let alone 4, would terrify me.

ungruntled• 3 years ago

I’ve noticed missing bolts a few times when sitting in wing view seats. Didn’t realize that isn't supposed to be ok. This problem might be quite common.

gpderetta• 3 years ago

You ever seen what happens when a screw comes loose and hits another surface at 500 mph

well, obviously you are screwed.

edit: to be more constructive "Felipe Massa's life-threatening crash "( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEt5pbyiIdM )

thfuran• 3 years ago

If a screw coming loose and hitting another surface is a concern, shouldn't the missing fasteners in fact enhance safety? They're the only ones we can be sure won't fuck up the engine or whatever.

exabrial2• 3 years ago

Unless one flies out at 750mph, hits a critical part of the plane somewhere else.

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

Has that ever happened?

bluedino• 3 years ago

If your Airbus flight goes 750mph you have other problems

reisse2• 3 years ago

Unless they were inspected, acknowledged "not dangerous" and scheduled for replacement some time later. There are whole lists of things that are not required to be in good working order for the plane to fly safely, see e. g. what MEL is.

s1artibartfast2• 3 years ago

it might not even need to be noted and scheduled.

It may be the case that some failures are expected and tolerated between periodic inspections, and the period is designed to catch anything before it gets too far.

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

it signals a failure in the maintenance pipeline.

Without knowing the risk caused by it, it may signal nothing of the sort. The mechanics already had cleared the plane to fly. Very, very few planes have any sort of in-flight issue like that. Those facts, rather than our ignorant speculation, signal the state of the 'maintenance pipeline' (if such a thing exists).

vinni2• 3 years ago

It’s interesting that the flight was cancelled instead of flying without the concerned passenger.

andix5• 3 years ago

Always report anything suspicious to the flight attendants. In the past there were some accidents that could've been prevented if passengers spoke up.

As a passenger you have no idea what is dangerous and what isn't. And the cabin crew is trained to take every report serious.

o_nate2• 3 years ago

Once I was flying with my wife. She was in the window seat and she noticed that one of the plastic panels on the wall had come loose. She called the flight attendant over and told them. Long story short, they held the flight at the gate until a service crew could come and fix it (which they did by duct taping it back in place). Do you think the other passengers appreciated her perceptiveness, or was there a lot of dark muttering about why she didn't keep it to herself? (Spoiler: it was dark muttering)

andix5• 3 years ago

The other passengers didn't like it. So what? You probably never met them again.

copperx• 3 years ago

Obviously. No good deed ever goes unpunished.

nvm0n2• 3 years ago

Case in point, Aloha Airlines Flight 243, in which part of the roof of the plane disintegrated mid-flight due to metal fatigue:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243

During an interview, passenger Gayle Yamamoto told investigators that she had noticed a crack in the fuselage upon boarding, but did not notify anyone.[3]: 5

chris19933• 3 years ago

I certainly regret not reporting a burst tyre while taxiing to depart as we ended up diverted to an emergency landing with all the passengers in brace position. No real harm done but stressful for everyone.

andix5• 3 years ago

Wow, so not speaking up at the right moment is a bigger thing that I would have imagined. So you were the only one on the plane noticing a burst tyre during taxi out?

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

How could you see the tire from a passenger seat? Or were you the pilot?

travisjungroth• 3 years ago

As a passenger you have no idea what is dangerous and what isn't.

If this were true, there’d be no point in paying attention to what passengers reported. I think people do have some idea what’s dangerous.

The problem is the airline is in a CYA/image situation and will tend to do a fix they otherwise wouldn’t at that moment. But those fixes are expensive and cause delays.

Maybe what people need to keep in mind is “speak up about things that matter”. In general, it seems like someone’s willingness to say something has more to do with their personality than the severity of the problem. Some people will flag an FA for a paint chip. Some wouldn’t if an aileron was dangling off the wing.

thegrim33• 3 years ago

Interesting to see the obvious difference in coverage. Anything that has anything at all to do with Boeing would have Boeing in the title, the first sentence, plastered all over your eyeballs every chance they could get. But when it's not Boeing there's no mention of Airbus in the title and you have to read into the article for five paragraphs to see the first name drop of Airbus.

But hey, to be fair, a negative story about Airbus actually made it onto a prominent position on HN, so that's good at least. Usually it would just be completely ignored and not mentioned.

Aerbil313• 3 years ago

Doesn’t this have to do with airport maintenance rather than Airbus?

fritzo• 3 years ago

I think the issue here is maintenance rather than manufacturing

tennisflyi• 3 years ago

Aren't planes allowed to fly with a certain amount of "brokenness"?

anderiv• 3 years ago

Yes, for each aircraft, the amount of brokenness is specified in its Minimum Equipment List: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_minimum_equipment_list

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

I once noticed a potential problem (I have zero expertise in the subject) on a commercial flight; I walked to the galley and privately, calmly told a flight attendant, emphasizing my level of expertise and that I'd leave it to them. The flight attendant later stopped by and said it was nothing.

On my next flight, maybe a week later, the pilot announced that passengers may see this thing and that it's fine.

jjackson5324• 3 years ago

That's the cool thing about aligned incentives. If the plane is fucked for you, then it's fucked for the flight attendants & pilots as well.

wolverine87614• 3 years ago

Someday, we might have remotely piloted (with AI!) commercial passenger planes. Probably it won't be accepted for a long time, but no doubt a PE-owned airline will propose it to cut employment and outsource remaining piloting to some lower-wage country, people on HN will repeat the airlines' talking point ('it only has to match the injury rate of in-person pilots!'). I hope you remember to repost your comment then.

buildsjets• 3 years ago

Was it Alaska Airlines? https://www.cnn.com/2012/08/08/travel/alaska-airlines-wing-d...

Yes, that IS an structural repair manual approved temporary repair for certain kinds of damage on the flap trailing edge for the 737NG.

lulznews• 3 years ago

How many maintenance issues occur in Japan?

alephnan• 3 years ago

The McDonald's ice cream machine always work in Japan.

AndrewKemendo• 3 years ago

So is this a case of widescale availability bias and now everyone is nitpicking airline fastener status?

Or is this genuinely a widescale reduction in maintenance frequency, care and engineering?

Could be a bit of both also I suppose

However increasingly I have been asking a question to determine something like this: “If the overall system is improving, would we see more or less of these kind of events?”

In my experience, it actually is that the level of responsibility that workers are taking for their jobs has plummeted since COVID. Understandably or not, a core backbone of our infrastructure - hope for the future - is basically gone.

So that’s why to me it’s not just availability bias, you can see it almost everywhere and it’s well documented that “give a shit” is not improving, and that means core infrastructure is going to start failing rapidly.

vineyardmike• 3 years ago

In my experience, it actually is that the level of responsibility that workers are taking for their jobs has plummeted since COVID.

I have heard this repeated a ton. I see it too, but maybe I'm just being trained to see it. Is this an American thing, or do other people in other countries experience this too?

Foreignborn• 2 years ago

Anecdotally, I don’t feel this way about “giving a shit” in japan. We did have inflation and other issues, but I didn’t notice any big change of the sort here.

fxtentacle• 3 years ago

I agree on the "not giving a shit" part and in my observation, the effect is also strong in Germany and Italy.

But I believe it's not due to Covid. While Covid was happening, it became blatantly obvious that wealthy investors can still make 40% appreciation from their housing investments even while the majority of the population was struggling just to get by (and pay their rent). Similarly, investors profited handsomely from stock price increases while the same companies (whose market cap went up) were abandoning their employees, in some cases slashing an entire division with just a prerecorded Zoom call.

In short, Covid showed everyone that there's 0 loyalty for the little man and that trickle down doesn't work.

And I can easily understand how the realisation that hard work will almost never earn you a good place in society will lead to people avoiding the hard work.

robertlagrant3• 2 years ago

and that trickle down doesn't work

This isn't a problem with "trickle down". There's more demand than supply, so prices go up. Make your population grow more slowly, or build more houses, or pay more to live in smaller places. Those are your only options.

whalesalad• 2 years ago

Flight attendants on my last flight were joking with people in the exit row that during the pre flight check they are not actually locking the door, all they do is engage/arm the slide. The main male flight attendant said “doors are already locked!” and I said - but are the bolts tight? Guys face went absolutely frozen for a second and then he chuckled and said “we’ll be fine”

boppo1• 3 years ago

I can't help but think all this media about airplane safety is related to efforts to get average people to reduce their carbon footprints.

londons_explore• 2 years ago

So why were there 119 screws if it was fine to be missing 4 in a row?

Aircraft are usually built with a factor of safety of 1.5-2 or so - meaning it's probably only in the design spec for one screw to be missing in a row...

lupire4• 2 years ago

Probably for different parts of the assembly.

NYC-bound flight canceled when passenger notices missing bolts on plane wing

Related Stories