Southwest 737 lands at Yeager Airport after hole in fuselage
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia, USA
Age: 86
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hornet is right
Hornet is right, if you land a 737 at CRW, it's a real emergency. I don't think it's changed from the mid-60's. 5000-foot runway; that's 2000 under jet minimum. Lower than the mountains on either end because they cut off the top of one of the endless, even, flat-topped mountains to build it. Fog in the morning on a regular basis.
The embankments at either end fall away at at least 2 vertical to 3 horizontal. Zilch overrun. An A/C had gone off the end sometime before; dim memory but I think it was an ANG boxcar. Airline tests with 4-engined prop planes led to almost another disaster, if I recall (possibly it was a Connie they tried). So Eastern continued with the Martin (404?), and there was a similar Convair some flew. I think CRW was the only reason those ancient birds were still flying.
I flew in with an Eastern pilot on one engine one morning-- carburator. Fixed. Same captain and plane going out that night. Engine fire on start-up. Quietly pointed it out to the F/A. Nothing wrong reassurance. Anyway, the Captain had seen it after all. Both bottles, he said blandly, seconds later. Told me he had never lost an engine in 20 years of flying, and here he'd lost two the same day. The Electras solved this problem in style, for a while at least.
There was a plan in those days to cut down the next mountain and throw the rock into the gap to get a really long runway. It was 24 million cubic yards of cut, most of it rock, most could be ripped I think, but still 3 or 4 dollars a yard. And what couldn't be, blasting at 10-15 dollars. That was really a lot of money then, and I don't think it was ever done.
BTW, CRW must be right under an airway. Went right over it a bit ago. That might explain the choice-- could have been closest with no diversion required, nearly straight in.
OE
The embankments at either end fall away at at least 2 vertical to 3 horizontal. Zilch overrun. An A/C had gone off the end sometime before; dim memory but I think it was an ANG boxcar. Airline tests with 4-engined prop planes led to almost another disaster, if I recall (possibly it was a Connie they tried). So Eastern continued with the Martin (404?), and there was a similar Convair some flew. I think CRW was the only reason those ancient birds were still flying.
I flew in with an Eastern pilot on one engine one morning-- carburator. Fixed. Same captain and plane going out that night. Engine fire on start-up. Quietly pointed it out to the F/A. Nothing wrong reassurance. Anyway, the Captain had seen it after all. Both bottles, he said blandly, seconds later. Told me he had never lost an engine in 20 years of flying, and here he'd lost two the same day. The Electras solved this problem in style, for a while at least.
There was a plan in those days to cut down the next mountain and throw the rock into the gap to get a really long runway. It was 24 million cubic yards of cut, most of it rock, most could be ripped I think, but still 3 or 4 dollars a yard. And what couldn't be, blasting at 10-15 dollars. That was really a lot of money then, and I don't think it was ever done.
BTW, CRW must be right under an airway. Went right over it a bit ago. That might explain the choice-- could have been closest with no diversion required, nearly straight in.
OE
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Slovenia
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B727 cases
On the two B727 incidents referenced in IGh's post:
NTSB Safety Recommendation
NTSB Safety Recommendation
It is believed that in both incidents the scratch or score damage to the surface of the fuselage skin was probably caused by maintenance personnel Using improper tools in marking the metal while performing a repair to the structure.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shades of many years ago, on B707 aircraft, both long and short body.
Fuselage crown skin cracks found, altho in these past particular cases, straps were riveted on for 2500 cycles, then reskinning was necessary.
Not especially impressive for this airline, nor the airplane.
Fuselage crown skin cracks found, altho in these past particular cases, straps were riveted on for 2500 cycles, then reskinning was necessary.
Not especially impressive for this airline, nor the airplane.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: E.Midlands
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lapjoints?
Looking at the pics on Flight International the hole appears to be above the lapjoint at S-4L. 737CLs of this age are subject to at least 2 Service Bulletins looking for cracking or delamination of the bonded doublers (installed on older Classics) in the lapjoint areas. The repeat inspections intervals are quite stringent with the two I can think of - one requires a repeat two method NDT inspection at the same time as a detailed visual inspection. The wording of both is quite clear that failure in these areas could result in loss of structural integrity. Since the Aloha accident Boeing have been very active with any possible damage to the tear strap design of their skins on the 737CLs - I can't speak for other types though
Think all should be thankful this wasn't any worse - it could quite easily have been
Now..you ain't seen me,right.........
Think all should be thankful this wasn't any worse - it could quite easily have been
Now..you ain't seen me,right.........
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: South West
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't look like anything associated with lapjoint scribe mark inspection to me, completely different failure mode.
A lapjoint scribe failure would be a rip along rivet holes al a Aloha (there has been no reported failure at a lapjoint caused by a scribe mark as far as I'm aware before people jump on this).
From the external photo (link posted earlier) it looks like a skin fatigue crack has developed and quickly run out to the chemi-etched tear strap on the internal surface of the skin then continued round the edge of the tear strap AS IT IS DESIGNED FOR.
The crown skin is inspected regularly - external general visual inspection (GVI) each C Check, internal GVI each second C Check, is NDTed at 35,000 cycles with a repeat NDT each 4,500 cycles (I think). Cracks can develop between inspections though and that is acceptable given the design of the skin and this incident bears this out.
Disclaimer - All the above is my opinion only based on experience and a couple of published photos not a physical look at the aircraft. I could be completely wrong.
A lapjoint scribe failure would be a rip along rivet holes al a Aloha (there has been no reported failure at a lapjoint caused by a scribe mark as far as I'm aware before people jump on this).
From the external photo (link posted earlier) it looks like a skin fatigue crack has developed and quickly run out to the chemi-etched tear strap on the internal surface of the skin then continued round the edge of the tear strap AS IT IS DESIGNED FOR.
The crown skin is inspected regularly - external general visual inspection (GVI) each C Check, internal GVI each second C Check, is NDTed at 35,000 cycles with a repeat NDT each 4,500 cycles (I think). Cracks can develop between inspections though and that is acceptable given the design of the skin and this incident bears this out.
Disclaimer - All the above is my opinion only based on experience and a couple of published photos not a physical look at the aircraft. I could be completely wrong.
Join Date: Jan 1998
Location: Where the job is!
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: Hornet is right, if you land a 737 at CRW, it's a real emergency. I don't think it's changed from the mid-60's. 5000-foot runway; that's 2000 under jet minimum.
7,000 is nowhere near the minimum!
Canadian North and its predecessors, Canadian Airlines International and Pacific Western Airlines, normally operate B737s on shorter runways. The runways at Hay River, Inuvik and Fort Smith are 6,000. The runway at Norman Wells is 5,997. The two runways at Edmonton City Centre are 5,700 and 5,868. The gravel runway at Resolute Bay is 6,500 and the gravel runway at Cambridge Bay is 5,000. For approximately three decades the B737s have operated scheduled services to these places with no problems, including during genuine arctic winter conditions.
Last month a colleague observed three Canadian North B737s operating at Medicine Hat, which has a 5,000 runway. They were apparently on a troop-carrying military charter in connection with CFB Suffield.
7,000 is nowhere near the minimum!
Canadian North and its predecessors, Canadian Airlines International and Pacific Western Airlines, normally operate B737s on shorter runways. The runways at Hay River, Inuvik and Fort Smith are 6,000. The runway at Norman Wells is 5,997. The two runways at Edmonton City Centre are 5,700 and 5,868. The gravel runway at Resolute Bay is 6,500 and the gravel runway at Cambridge Bay is 5,000. For approximately three decades the B737s have operated scheduled services to these places with no problems, including during genuine arctic winter conditions.
Last month a colleague observed three Canadian North B737s operating at Medicine Hat, which has a 5,000 runway. They were apparently on a troop-carrying military charter in connection with CFB Suffield.
Hornet is right, if you land a 737 at CRW, it's a real emergency. I don't think it's changed from the mid-60's. 5000-foot runway; that's 2000 under jet minimum.
7,000 is nowhere near the minimum!
Canadian North and its predecessors, Canadian Airlines International and Pacific Western Airlines, normally operate B737s on shorter runways. The runways at Hay River, Inuvik and Fort Smith are 6,000. The runway at Norman Wells is 5,997. The two runways at Edmonton City Centre are 5,700 and 5,868. The gravel runway at Resolute Bay is 6,500 and the gravel runway at Cambridge Bay is 5,000. For approximately three decades the B737s have operated scheduled services to these places with no problems, including during genuine arctic winter conditions.
Last month a colleague observed three Canadian North B737s operating at Medicine Hat, which has a 5,000 runway. They were apparently on a troop-carrying military charter in connection with CFB Suffield.
7,000 is nowhere near the minimum!
Canadian North and its predecessors, Canadian Airlines International and Pacific Western Airlines, normally operate B737s on shorter runways. The runways at Hay River, Inuvik and Fort Smith are 6,000. The runway at Norman Wells is 5,997. The two runways at Edmonton City Centre are 5,700 and 5,868. The gravel runway at Resolute Bay is 6,500 and the gravel runway at Cambridge Bay is 5,000. For approximately three decades the B737s have operated scheduled services to these places with no problems, including during genuine arctic winter conditions.
Last month a colleague observed three Canadian North B737s operating at Medicine Hat, which has a 5,000 runway. They were apparently on a troop-carrying military charter in connection with CFB Suffield.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dallas
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure what the CRW comments are all about...
CRW has an ILS approach to both runway 5 and runway 23.
Runway 5/23 is 6,302 feet long, GS length is 5,126 or 5,435 - not a problem.
Here's how an airline pilot does it:
First, you fly the ILS procedure.
Second, you land and stop the aircraft.
Mountains have nothing to do with anything. If I were flying this aircraft and had established no other probs with the airframe, I would have probably landed at the same place. NBD...
As far as short airports go, SWA operated into DET airprort for several years in night/all wx conditions.
Length? Runway 15/33 from GS is 4,021 or 4,125 feet. Width? 100 feet.
NBD...
CRW has an ILS approach to both runway 5 and runway 23.
Runway 5/23 is 6,302 feet long, GS length is 5,126 or 5,435 - not a problem.
Here's how an airline pilot does it:
First, you fly the ILS procedure.
Second, you land and stop the aircraft.
Mountains have nothing to do with anything. If I were flying this aircraft and had established no other probs with the airframe, I would have probably landed at the same place. NBD...
As far as short airports go, SWA operated into DET airprort for several years in night/all wx conditions.
Length? Runway 15/33 from GS is 4,021 or 4,125 feet. Width? 100 feet.
NBD...
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: US
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most checklists involving engine failures, smoke and explosive depressurisations include land at nearest suitable airport, especially on two engine aircraft. The FAA would ask you to justify why you chose not to do that. Wx, familiarity and other reasons could justify it but if the nearest suitable airport is available and safe the FAR's say to land there.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zilch overrun. An A/C had gone off the end sometime before;
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bonger
I could have framed it better. Seems ballsy to eat a big fine, suffer the pr poison, and then fly with actual issues.
I could have framed it better. Seems ballsy to eat a big fine, suffer the pr poison, and then fly with actual issues.
Last edited by Will Fraser; 15th Jul 2009 at 18:52.
Thank $DEITY it wasn't an Airbus....
OK I'll bite.
Why would an Airbus have been a bigger problem in this case?
Why would an Airbus have been a bigger problem in this case?
Hole in the jet = land asap. No fart-arsing around with 'Threat and Error Management' or other such huggy-fluffy bull$hit. Nearest suitable will do, get it on the ground without delay, talk about it later over a beer. Another 30 min might have proved catastrophic - or it might not. You might want to gamble, I wouldn't.
Well done to the crew!!
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: alameda
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
roadmaster9
mountains don't make a difference
you have never flown near mountains.
I didn't say CRW was bad, I just said that if you could fly a few more minutes you would be a much better fields.
here you have a plane that is damaged...to what extent? unknown to the pilots.
what if a system designed for stopping the plane had been damaged? (not in this case as it turns out, but you don't know till you see things for yourself)
there are 13 special airports in the usa...most all of them have mountains nearby. I've flown to many of them...it does make a difference.
SWA went off the end at Midway and the runway is longer there.
mountains don't make a difference
you have never flown near mountains.
I didn't say CRW was bad, I just said that if you could fly a few more minutes you would be a much better fields.
here you have a plane that is damaged...to what extent? unknown to the pilots.
what if a system designed for stopping the plane had been damaged? (not in this case as it turns out, but you don't know till you see things for yourself)
there are 13 special airports in the usa...most all of them have mountains nearby. I've flown to many of them...it does make a difference.
SWA went off the end at Midway and the runway is longer there.