• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

3 month old 737-9 Max depressurisation incident

Bayum

Established Member
Joined
21 Mar 2008
Messages
2,920
Location
Leeds
The rear mid-cabin exit door assembly separated from an Alaska Airlines 737-9 MAX minutes after take off from Portland on 5 January. The aircraft, registration N704AL, departed Portland (PDX) bound for Ontario, CA (ONT) at 17:06 local time (01:06 UTC +1). The aircraft reached a maximum altitude of 16,325 feet AMSL. It diverted safely back to Portland, landing at 17:26, reaching the gate at 17:30. The flight was carrying 174 passengers and six crew.
The rear mid-cabin exit door
On the 737-9 MAX, Boeing includes a rear cabin exit door aft of the wings, but before the rear exit door. This is activated in dense seating configurations to meet evacuation requirements. The doors are not activated on Alaska Airlines aircraft and are permanently “plugged.” The door position in question is highlighted below inside the red circle.
N704AL (MSN 67501) was delivered to Alaska new from Boeing on 31 October 2023. It entered commercial service on 11 November 2023 and has accumulated 145 flights since then (including the incident flight).

AS1282 was the aircraft’s third flight of the day and second take off. It had flown from San Diego to New York overnight and then on to Portland earlier in the day.
From FlightRadar, 6th January, accessed 6th January
https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/alaska-airlines-737-9-max-exit-door-separates-in-flight/ Link shows original article.

<Attached image shows the rear ‘plugged door’ (window to Daily Mail) blown out>
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9715.jpeg
    IMG_9715.jpeg
    95.3 KB · Views: 126
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

74A

Member
Joined
27 Aug 2015
Messages
626
What a strange door. Sounds like another Boeing bodge like the MCAS system !
 

HullRailMan

Member
Joined
8 Oct 2018
Messages
362
Nothing would get me to fly on a MAX…such a shame that a once great, engineering led company has fallen so far.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,634
Location
First Class
Is this the door that is "activated" on the aircraft supplied to Ryanair?

If you mean the MAX 8-200, it appears to be in a similar position. It’s an additional door in the case of the MAX 8-200 though, whereas I presume it’s standard on the MAX 9.
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,618
My first thought was that it’s more concerning (to a layman) that the “door” that isn’t a door has come away (than if it was a door that had opened when it wasn’t supposed to). But then thinking about it, if I was onboard I don’t think I’d care too much about the why either way if I was onboard
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
11:42 p.m. Pacific time, Jan. 5
A statement from Alaska Airlines CEO, Ben Minicucci:
At Alaska Airlines, safety is our foundational value and the most important thing we focus on every day. Following tonight’s event on Flight 1282, we have decided to take the precautionary step of temporarily grounding our fleet of 65 Boeing 737-9 aircraft. Each aircraft will be returned to service only after completion of full maintenance and safety inspections. We anticipate all inspections will be completed in the next few days.

I am personally committed to doing everything we can to conduct this review in a timely and transparent way.

We are working with Boeing and regulators to understand what occurred tonight, and will share updates as more information is available. The NTSB is investigating this event and we will fully support their investigation.

My heart goes out to those who were on this flight – I am so sorry for what you experienced. I am so grateful for the response of our pilots and flight attendants. We have teams on the ground in Portland assisting passengers and are working to support guests who are traveling in the days ahead.

-Ben

Information for impacted guests
Guests whose flights have been impacted by this grounding are being notified with guidance on next steps and are also encouraged to visit alaskaair.com for self-service options. We deeply apologize to our guests and are working to reaccommodate everyone as quickly as possible.

7: 55 p.m. Pacific time, Jan. 5
Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 from Portland, Oregon to Ontario, California, experienced an incident this evening soon after departure. The aircraft landed safely back at Portland International Airport with 171 guests and 6 crew members. The safety of our guests and employees is always our primary priority, so while this type of occurrence is rare, our flight crew was trained and prepared to safely manage the situation. We are investigating what happened and will share more information as it becomes available.


This will be an operational nightmare for Alaska Airlines for the next few days, if not weeks.

NTSB is investigating an event involving Alaska Airlines Flight 1282. We will post any updates regarding the investigation when they are available.

Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 returned safely to @flyPDX around 5 p.m. local time on Friday, Jan. 5, after the crew reported a pressurization issue. The aircraft was traveling to @flyONT in California. The FAA and National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will investigate.

We are aware of the incident involving Alaska Airlines Flight #AS1282. We are working to gather more information and are in contact with our airline customer. A Boeing technical team stands ready to support the investigation.

For those wondering, Honeywell Grimes is the supplier for emergency exits on the 737-9, 737-8-200 and 737-900ER.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Child on the same row had a shirt sucked right off his body but luckily noone ejected from the plane and the window seats were empty at the time. All Alaskan airlines planes have the door plugged.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,870
Location
Scotland
The investigation of this one will be interesting. I wonder if there's any chance that someone was playing with the mechanism on an earlier flight?
All Alaskan airlines planes have the door plugge
Oh, never mind the above. I thought it was active on their planes.
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
NEW DELHI: The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has directed Air India Express, Akasa Air and SpiceJet to "carry out a one time inspection of the emergency exits immediately on all Boeing 737-8 Max aircraft currently operating as part of their fleet." The regulator issued this directive as an "abundant precautionary measure" following an Alaska Airlines B737-9 Max saw a mid cabin emergency exit assembly and portion of the plane's fuselage blow out shortly after take off in the US. No Indian carrier operates the B737-9 variant of the Max yet but they have the B737-8 Max in their fleets."Pursuant to the Alaska Airlines incident involving Boeing 737-9 Max aircraft, there have been no inputs /guidance from Boeing so far. None of the Indian air operators have Boeing 737-9 Max as part of their fleet yet. However, as an abundant precautionary measure, we have directed all Indian air operators to carry out a one time inspection of the emergency exits immediately on all Boeing 737-8 Max aircraft currently operating as part of their fleet," said a senior DGCA official.
An Alaska Airlines B737-9 Max had made an emergency landing at Portland International Airport after a window and a portion of the plane's fuselage blew out shortly after take-off. Following the incident, Alaska Airlines has grounded all of its Boeing 737-9 aircraft.The three Indian carriers have 42 B737 MAX in their fleet as of now — Akasa (20); SpiceJet (12) and AI Express (10).
This is the second trouble for the aircraft with a chequered history in recent days. On December 31, 2023, Boeing had asked MAX operators globally to carry out safety checks on this aircraft after finding a loose bolt in one of the planes. Boeing has asked operators to inspect specific tie rods that control rudder movement for possible loose hardware. Among other things, rudder basically helps an aircraft turn left or right.
The MAX troubles are mounting at a time when another about 35 Airbus A320 neo family of planes with Pratt & Whitney’s snag-ridden GTF engines are set to be grounded for checks following the latest concern regarding these engines of metal powder contamination. Already about 50 IndiGo A320neos are grounded for months due to PW’s inability to supply replacement engines. If the MAX troubles worsen, along with PW’s unending GTF engine issues, India is staring at yet another capacity crunch that could mean fewer flights and higher airfares — something that’s seen last summer when GoAir had collapsed.


Akasa Air will be the most impacted by this, not only because they are the largest 737 MAX operator in India and their fleet only comprises of the MAX, but because they operate the high density 737-8-200 which features the same emergency exit doors as the 737-9 and 737-900ER.
The Alaska Airlines aircraft experienced pressurization issues twice on Jan. 4, the Air Current reported, citing two people familiar with the matter. A warning light had prompted Alaska Air to remove the jet from extended-range operations, or ETOPs, the outlet said.

Not a good look for Alaska Airlines for this to happen, or for Boeing to have a 10 week old aircraft already have pressurisation issues.
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
14,864
Location
Epsom
What a strange door. Sounds like another Boeing bodge like the MCAS system !
The A321 neo has the same optional plugged door installed.

It's so they can have a single fuselage design for the regular airlines and the "pack 'em in tight" budget brigade who need an extra exit fitted because of the number of seats they squeeze in. They simply cover it over inside if it's not required, but you can still see the outline of the door outside.
 

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,515
Location
Farnham
MAX again. Interestingly enough, I've only ever flown a MAX once, and that was in the emergency exit row by the window :lol: I won't be so keen next time.
 

Ted633

Member
Joined
15 Mar 2018
Messages
278
It may well have been a 'MAX again', however as has been stated this door is also fitted to the NG -900er and the A321 neo. Its quite possible it could've happened to either if those aircraft.
Reminds me of the Ethiopian 787 fire at Heathrow. That was all '787 again', however was found to be a faulty ELT that was fitted to lots of types and was just unlucky it happened to a 787. As an aside, I was involved in inspecting the ELT's after the above incident, and we a handful that were fitted to B777's and B747's that were in a condition where they could've gone up.
 

MasterSpenny

Member
Joined
28 Jul 2023
Messages
585
Location
the middle of pointless protests
There has now been a ground of Boeing 737-9 MAX jets following the incident
The FAA said the planes must be parked until emergency inspections are performed, which will “take around four to eight hours per aircraft.”
The order impacts 171 Boeing 737 MAX 9 jets, the agency approximates.


The MAX was famously subject to a nearly two-year grounding after two fatal crashes of its MAX 8 model involving a different flaw.


[ORIGINAL STORY FOLLOWS]


Alaska Airlines has temporarily grounded its fleet of Boeing 737-9 Max aircraft after one of its planes made an emergency landing in Oregon on Friday, officials said – an incident that a passenger says involved a section of the plane blowing out in flight.


Alaska Airlines Flight 1282, which was headed from Portland to Ontario, California, returned safely to Portland International Airport around 5 p.m. PT after “the crew reported a pressurization issue,” the Federal Aviation Administration said.
A panel of the fuselage, including the panel’s window, popped off shortly after takeoff, passenger Kyle Rinker told CNN.


“It was really abrupt. Just got to altitude, and the window/wall just popped off and didn’t notice it until the oxygen masks came off,” Rinker said.


Firefighters were called to assess minor injuries after the landing, and no serious injuries were reported, the Port of Portland Fire Department said.


A passenger’s video posted to social media shows a side section of the fuselage, where a window would have been, missing – exposing passengers to the outside air. The video, which appears to have been taken from several rows behind the incident, shows oxygen masks deployed throughout the airplane, and least two people sitting near and just behind the missing section.


In a statement late Friday, Alaska Airlines said it was working with Boeing to understand what took place on Flight 1282. The aircraft is a 737-9 Max that received its certificate of airworthiness on October 25, 2023, according to the FAA.


The airline’s grounded fleet of 65 Boeing 737-9 aircraft is expected to undergo full maintenance and safety inspections over the next several days before being returned to service, the airline said.


“My heart goes out to those who were on this flight – I am so sorry for what you experienced,” Alaska Airlines CEO Ben Minicucci said in a statement.
Though the airline has acknowledged an incident on Friday’s Flight 1282, it has not detailed what the incident entailed. The plane “landed safely back at Portland International Airport with 171 guests and six crew members,” the airline said.


According to FlightAware, the flight was airborne for about 20 minutes. The plane departed from Portland International Airport around 5:07 p.m. local time and landed at 5:27 p.m.


‘A really loud bang… and a whoosh noise’


Evan Smith, a passenger on the flight, told CNN affiliate KPTV that he was sitting at least six rows in front of the section where the incident took place. “There was a really loud bang toward the rear of the plane and a whoosh noise and all of the masks dropped,” Smith said.


Emma Vu, another passenger, was asleep and woke up to a sensation of falling and seeing emergency masks drop down, she told CNN in a phone call. She apparently woke up after the panel section popped off; it wasn’t clear how close to the missing panel she was.


Vu said she texted her parents their code word for emergencies to let them know about the incident. “I’ve never had to use it before, but I knew that this was that moment,” Vu said.


People sitting on either side of her comforted her, she said. “The flight attendant came over too, and told me it was going to be OK,” Vu said. “The fact that everyone was kind of freaking out and she took that time to kind of make me feel like I was the only passenger – honestly that was really sweet.”


Vu plans to take a different flight to her intended destination on Saturday morning, she said.


The FAA and National Transportation Safety Board will investigate the incident, both agencies said.


In a statement to CNN, Boeing said it was aware of an incident involving Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 and was working to gather additional information.


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.


CNN transportation analyst Mary Schiavo said Saturday that issue probably had nothing to do with Friday’s incident. But, overall, the issues raise serious questions about Boeing quality control in manufacturing that the FAA must investigate, Schiavo said.


Boeing’s engineering and quality problems have posed major challenges for the company. The crashes of two of 737-8 Max jets that killed all 346 people on board the flights led to a crippling 20-month grounding of the plane. It also was one of the most expensive corporate tragedies in history, costing Boeing more than $20 billion.


The Max returned to the air carrying passengers in most markets around the globe beginning in late December 2020. But it has encountered other problems, including in April when Boeing said it has discovered a manufacturing issue with some 737 Max aircraft after a supplier used a “non-standard manufacturing process” during the installation of two fittings in the rear fuselage – although Boeing insisted the problem did not constitute a safety risk.
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
It may well have been a 'MAX again', however as has been stated this door is also fitted to the NG -900er and the A321 neo. Its quite possible it could've happened to either if those aircraft.
Reminds me of the Ethiopian 787 fire at Heathrow. That was all '787 again', however was found to be a faulty ELT that was fitted to lots of types and was just unlucky it happened to a 787. As an aside, I was involved in inspecting the ELT's after the above incident, and we a handful that were fitted to B777's and B747's that were in a condition where they could've gone up.
The emergency exit installation method is also on the 737-8-200.
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
"Safety is our top priority and we deeply regret the impact this event has had on our customers and their passengers. We agree with and fully support the FAA's decision to require immediate inspections of 737-9 airplanes with the same configuration as the affected airplane. In addition, a Boeing technical team is supporting the NTSB's investigation into last night's event. We will remain in close contact with our regulator and customers."

Waiting to see the reaction from other regulators. The NTSB is yet to comment on the topic. Haven't seen any airline's response yet.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,973
Location
Nottingham
My first thought was that it’s more concerning (to a layman) that the “door” that isn’t a door has come away (than if it was a door that had opened when it wasn’t supposed to). But then thinking about it, if I was onboard I don’t think I’d care too much about the why either way if I was onboard
Not clear from what I have seen whether it's an actual door hidden behind an interior panel, or some kind of blanking plate that is fixed "permanently" but can perhaps be swapped out if the plane needs to be re-configured to a high density layout.

Either way, it appears it wasn't a structural component of the fuselage, which therefore probably wasn't at risk of further breakup. And if it hit the tail on its way off it didn't cause any critical damage there.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,870
Location
Scotland
Either way, it appears it wasn't a structural component of the fuselage, which therefore probably wasn't at risk of further breakup.
No, it wasn't in as much as the door frame structure is the same with either exit door or blank. But rapid decompression is a violent event and an unbelted passenger seated next to the non-exit turned into an exit would likely have disappeared.
 

Peter Mugridge

Veteran Member
Joined
8 Apr 2010
Messages
14,864
Location
Epsom
Not clear from what I have seen whether it's an actual door hidden behind an interior panel, or some kind of blanking plate that is fixed "permanently" but can perhaps be swapped out if the plane needs to be re-configured to a high density layout.
There are a number of picture on Twitter of MAX-9 aircraft in the same fleet which clearly show the outline of a door on the exterior; it is a safe deduction that it's an actual door which is simply blanked off inside with a regular trim panel. A lot of the comment implies the same as well.

As some of these images were posted by very reputable sources, I have no reason to doubt them.

Here is one such example:


Last night: Alaska Airlines #AS1282 suffers an inflight separation of the left mid-aft cabin exit door. Overnight: Alaska announces inspections of its 737-9 MAX fleet. This afternoon: FAA announces emergency airworthiness directive grounding subset of all 737-9 for inspection.

...and a close up of one of the pictures from that same tweet, with the door in question ringed:

1704578942593.png
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,870
Location
Scotland
There are a number of picture on Twitter of MAX-9 aircraft in the same fleet which clearly show the outline of a door on the exterior; it is a safe deduction that it's an actual door which is simply blanked off inside with a regular trim panel. A lot of the comment implies the same as well.
As I understand it, it isn't actually a door, in as much as it's (supposed to be) permanently fixed in place, and is removable from the aircraft only during maintenance.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
As I understand it, it isn't actually a door, in as much as it's (supposed to be) permanently fixed in place, and is removable from the aircraft only during maintenance.

^this^

It isn‘t a door, it’s a plug panel. It has no door furniture…ie has no handles, hinges or emergency slides etc with the inside being covered by normal internal panels.
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
As I understand it, it isn't actually a door, in as much as it's (supposed to be) permanently fixed in place, and is removable from the aircraft only during maintenance.
It is a door but is deactivated by Boeing for Alaska Airlines, most passengers don't even know its a door, Boeing activates this when the seating capacity of the aircraft increases to over 200.

Update: NTSB has launched a Go Team to Portland, Oregon to investigate an event with a Boeing 737-9 MAX during a flight from Portland to Ontario, California. No serious injuries were reported.

NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy will brief the media today at 8:00 p.m. PT on yesterday’s event involving Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 on a Boeing 737-9 MAX. The briefing will be at the Embassy Suites Portland Airport Hotel (900 NE 82nd Ave, Portland, OR 97220).

Yet to get an update from this meeting or from the Go Team.

Boeing 737 MAX 9 fleet update
Safety is always our top priority. Following the incident on an Alaska Airlines Flight on Friday, we have temporarily suspended service on select Boeing 737 MAX 9 aircraft to conduct an inspection required by the FAA.
We are working directly with impacted customers to find them alternative travel options. Please check United.com or the United app for the latest on your flight status and to access travel assistance resources.
Update: These inspections have expanded to include all our 737 MAX 9 aircraft. Flights operated by a 737 MAX 8 are not impacted.
The investigation into what happened on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 on Friday, Jan. 5, is underway. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has now assumed the lead role in the investigation. Alaska’s safety and technical teams, along with representatives from Boeing, are closely involved in supporting the NTSB.

At this early stage, here are details that we can share:

As we shared last night, Alaska made the decision to temporarily ground its 737-9 MAX fleet pending inspections which began early this morning.
Today, the FAA issued an emergency airworthiness directive (EAD), requiring all operators of the 737-9 MAX aircraft to conduct specific inspections before returning the aircraft to service. We are working with the FAA to ensure that our inspections meet their detailed requirements and comply with the EAD, but this process will take more time.
Our voluntary temporary grounding of our 737-9 MAX fleet and ongoing work to comply with the FAA’s EAD has impacted travel plans for many of our guests. As of 4pm PT today, we have cancelled 160 total flights, affecting roughly 23,000 guests. We are identifying necessary cancellations for tomorrow and expect the disruption to last through at least mid-week. A flexible travel policy is in place for guests to change or cancel their flights. Guests should visit alaskaair.com for rebooking options. We are deeply sorry for the disruption this has caused our guests.
Eighteen of Alaska’s 737-9 MAX aircraft received in-depth inspections as part of heavy maintenance checks and continued in service today until we received the FAA’s EAD. These aircraft have now also been pulled from service until details about possible additional maintenance work are confirmed with the FAA. We are in touch with the FAA to determine what, if any, further work is required before these aircraft are returned to service.
The aircraft involved in flight 1282 was delivered to us on Oct. 31, 2023. The part of the aircraft involved in this event is called a plug door – a specific panel of the fuselage near the rear of the aircraft.
Several guests onboard experienced injuries that required medical attention. All guests have now been medically cleared.
We will continue to share information as we learn more. Thank you to our guests for their understanding as we safely return our fleet of 737-9 MAXs to service.

The inspections aren't taking too long (thankfully) meaning that this isn't such a big operational nightmare for airlines.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Yes its a cavity in the fuselage to accommodate a door which is sealed off with a permanent blanking plug, the outline of the plug can be seen from the outside but not the inside where it has regular wall panelling. The cavity is there so only one design of fuselage is required to be built that accommodates both options. The cavity isnt present on -7 fuselages and is always a door on -10 fuselages, on -8 and -9 it is an optional emergency door depending on seating density, *Ryanair has it as a door on its -8's whereas no US carriers at present use it as a door and all have the plug installed instead.

*Easyjet to Ryanair
 
Last edited:

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,634
Location
First Class
^this^

It isn‘t a door, it’s a plug panel. It has no door furniture…ie has no handles, hinges or emergency slides etc with the inside being covered by normal internal panels.

This is my understanding. The question therefore is whether it’s subject to the same inspections and servicing as an actual door, and if not should it be (I suspect we know the answer to the latter!).

Yes its a cavity in the fuselage to accommodate a door which is sealed off with a permanent blanking plug, the outline of the plug can be seen from the outside but not the inside where it has regular wall panelling. The cavity is there so only one design of fuselage is required to be built that accommodates both options. The cavity isnt present on -7 or -8 fuselages and is always a door on -10 fuselages, on -9 it is an optional door depending on seating density, Easyjet has it as a door whereas no US carriers at present use it as a door and all have the plug installed instead.

That’s a good explanation.
 

Ediswan

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2012
Messages
2,864
Location
Stevenage
I have seen (but cannot now find) an image comparing a real door to the fixed panel. The real door has a small round window. The fixed panel has a regular square window. Pictures of N704AL prior to the incident show the square window.
 

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
Real door
lukas-souza-08-30-23-arn-ryanair-boeing-737-max-8-200-2[1].jpg

Plug

alaska-airlines-737-max-21.jpg
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,732

Akasa Air will be the most impacted by this, not only because they are the largest 737 MAX operator in India and their fleet only comprises of the MAX, but because they operate the high density 737-8-200 which features the same emergency exit doors as the 737-9 and 737-900ER.


Not a good look for Alaska Airlines for this to happen, or for Boeing to have a 10 week old aircraft already have pressurisation issues.
Not sure that Alaska comes out of this badly, as it’s fairly clear already that it was a problem during the manufacturing process.
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
Following a request for comment by AviationSource, a spokesperson for the airline said the following:

“Copa Airlines informs that, following the Airworthiness Directive issued by the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), it has temporarily suspended the operations of twenty-one (21) 737 MAX9 aircraft, as per the mentioned directive, until they undergo the required technical inspection.”

“Copa has initiated the necessary technical inspections and expects to return these aircraft
safely and reliably to the flight schedule within the next 24 hours.”The airline’s team is working to minimize the impact on our passengers, although some delays and
cancellations are expected due to this situation beyond the airline’s control.”

“Copa Airlines will make every effort to provide timely information and support to passengers affected by this situation.”

“We recommend our passengers to check their flight status on copa.com or on the Copa Airlines mobile app.”

This now means that Alaska Airlines, United Airlines, Turkish Airlines & now the Panama-based carrier is now affected by these temporary groundings due to the notice put out by the Federal Aviation Administration this evening, affecting a total of 171 aircraft.


Almost all North and South American 737-9 operators are inspecting their fleet, Lynx Air is yet to follow suit.

Turkish Airlines said Sunday that it would ground five Boeing 737 MAX 9 jets in its fleet for inspections after a panel blew out of one of the planes in midair in the US, forcing an emergency landing.

The Alaska Airlines scare over Oregon on Friday prompted the US Federal Aviation Administration to order immediate inspections of around 171 of the jets operated worldwide.

For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app.

A sealed-over door panel had opened and come off mid-flight, prompting the cabin to suddenly lose pressure.

“In light of the incident with the Boeing 737 MAX 9 operated by Alaska Airlines, five Boeing 737 MAX 9 in the Turkish Airlines fleet have been recalled for checks as a security precaution,” the airline said in a statement.

They will be grounded “where they are to land,” it added.

Alaska and United Airlines, which has the world’s largest fleet of 737 MAX 9s, have also grounded their planes for checks, leading to dozens of flight cancelations.

Aeromexico and Panamanian carrier Copa Airlines also said they had grounded the planes affected by the FAA order, while Icelandair said none of its 737 MAX 9s had the plane configuration specified in the FAA grounding order.


Icelandair will join the club now due to the below:

European safety regulators have followed the US FAA in taking action against the Boeing 737 Max 9, after the Alaska Airlines depressurisation incident.

The FAA has ordered a temporary grounding of the Max 9 after a mid-cabin door detached from the Alaska aircraft as it climbed out of Portland on 5 January.

It states that the issue could affect other aircraft of the same design, and has ordered inspections before further flight of the aircraft.

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency has formally adopted the FAA directive, although it believes no operators in EASA member states are affected.

EASA says that, to its knowledge, and based on Boeing and FAA information, no European airline operates the aircraft in the “relevant configuration”, with the mid-cabin exit replaced by a ”plug-in panel”.

This de-activation is typically adopted by carriers with lower-density interiors, because the exit is unnecessary to meet evacuation requirements.

EASA says Max 9s in Europe do not have this configuration, and the aircraft are ”therefore not grounded” and can ”continue to operate normally”.Relatively few Max 9s operate in Europe. Carriers using the type include Turkish Airlines, which configures its jets with 169 seats, and Icelandair which has Max 9s with 178 seats.


EASA has now joined the club. Seeing as the UK doesn't have any 737-9 operators, I wonder if the CAA will choose not to issue an AD for this. Interestingly, this AD doesn't affect the 737-8-200 which has the same doors, O'Leary will be relieved.
 

YorkRailFan

On Moderation
Joined
6 Sep 2023
Messages
1,306
Location
York
Seeing as the UK doesn't have any 737-9 operators, I wonder if the CAA will choose not to issue an AD for this.
Following @FAANews' EAD, we can confirm there are no UK-registered 737 MAX 9 aircraft. The impact on UK operated aircraft and consumers is minimal.

We have written to non-UK and foreign permit carriers to ask inspections have been undertaken prior to operation in UK airspace.

I'm interested how Transport Canada will respond as Lynx Air operates the 737-9.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,870
Location
Scotland
Not sure that Alaska comes out of this badly, as it’s fairly clear already that it was a problem during the manufacturing process.
I agree that it's 99.9% certain to be a manufacturing defect, but no possibility should be ruled out offhand.

Part of the investigation will be to verify that neither Alaska nor their contractors have done any work on that area of the plane.
 

Top