LOT B787 grounded over missing parts.

[ironbutt57]

Meaning somebody connected had not properly re-installed the panel...

[fenland787]

This official also said though the incident was regrettable, it never had any safety implications since the panel fell off when the aircraft had already landed on the runway.

Presumably the same argument would apply to the wing?

[Interested Passenger]

the next plane to land may dispute that

[DaveReidUK]

The moral of the tale is: if you're going to tell porkies, you need to have a good memory in order to avoid contradicting yourself.

The story coming out of India has changed at least 3 times. First, nothing was found on the runway at BLR. Then, the panel was apparently found several miles from the destination.

Now, it seems, it was found on the runway after all, but somehow it didn't present any hazard to the aircraft itself or to any other arriving/departing flights. How very convenient.

I don't suppose we will ever learn the truth.

[TURIN]

The 787 does not use quick release fasteners. Almost all panels are secured with titanium countersunk bolts (or screws, depends on your definition).
All to save weight and of course, titanium doesn't react with CFRP.

[DaveReidUK]

The 787 does not use quick release fasteners. Almost all panels are secured with titanium countersunk bolts (or screws, depends on your definition).

That's interesting. So presumably, unlike a Dzus-type fastener which normally stays attached to whatever it's fitted to, the screws* that attach the panel in question aren't captive, i.e. when released they are then free and would normally be collected and bagged ready to refit the panel later ?

So, if we believe the accounts that the panel was refitted to the aircraft after removal, but with considerably fewer than the correct number of screws (which I'm still sceptical about), that begs the question of what happened to the rest of the fasteners, and why any sane AME would fit just a few and not the remainder..

* in the days when I used to get my hands dirty, a screw was anything that you tightened or torqued by applying force to the head, as opposed to holding it still and winding a nut on the other end.

[EEngr]

the panel was refitted to the aircraft after removal, but with considerably fewer than the correct number of screws

We prefer to call it 'weight savings'.

Thank you. Signed,
Management

[joy ride]

So could it perhaps be that as a different fastening method is used, a mechanic perhaps was not following a known operational sequence, and this led to the problem?

I'm not trying to cast blame on manufacturer for changing to a different fastener, or absolve a mechanic of potential blame, just curious as to what could have caused this failure. A new and unfamiliar component or process can throw anyone!

[DaveReidUK]

So could it perhaps be that as a different fastening method is used, a mechanic perhaps was not following a known operational sequence, and this led to the problem?

Screws (albeit not titanium ones) have been used to secure access panels since Pontius was a pilot.

Apart from anything else, an AME when faced with a panel, an aircraft, and a bag of screws doesn't really need to be told what to do with them, other than possibly the torque setting value, and if all else fails there's always the Maintenance Manual.

[tdracer]

Since this is an unhinged panel - I'm sure the mechanic in question had one or more 'helpers' holding the panel in place while he stalled a few screws to hold it in place - just enough that the helpers could stop and go do something else. I'm thinking after he did that, he was distracted and simply forgot to install the remaining fasteners.

[joy ride]

Cheers Dave, ... as I thought but was just trying to guess why this might have occurred, I thought perhaps a different type of fastening from that expected in that location might have thrown the mechanic; the scenario in tdracer's reply sounds plausible to me.

As a practical man, this incident gives me a distinct feeling of "there but for the grace of God go I". However much I train myself not to be distracted, something unexpected can still cause trouble!

[fenland787]

Now, it seems, it was found on the runway after all, but somehow it didn't present any hazard to the aircraft itself or to any other arriving/departing flights. How very convenient.

I guess I'm just old and cynical but given the apparent lack of damage and speed of replacement I still don't buy into the 'fell off on landing due to not enough bolts' bit - unless 'not enough' means zero of course but, as DaveReid says, I doubt we'll ever find out the truth.

[Volume]

the panel was refitted to the aircraft after removal, but with considerably fewer than the correct number of screws

We prefer to call it 'weight savings'.

Actually we call it "process optimisation" as it saves weight, labour and inspection time, parts...

[deeceethree]

The moral of the tale is: if you're going to tell porkies, you need to have a good memory in order to avoid contradicting yourself.

The story coming out of India has changed at least 3 times. First, nothing was found on the runway at BLR. Then, the panel was apparently found several miles from the destination.

Now, it seems, it was found on the runway after all, but somehow it didn't present any hazard to the aircraft itself or to any other arriving/departing flights. How very convenient.

I don't suppose we will ever learn the truth.

I guess I'm just old and cynical but given the apparent lack of damage and speed of replacement I still don't buy into the 'fell off on landing due to not enough bolts' bit - unless 'not enough' means zero of course but, as DaveReid says, I doubt we'll ever find out the truth.

I sense that many posters are just now beginning to understand that when it comes to Indian officialdom, face-saving comes further up the list than honesty and integrity. The corruption and incompetence in so much of Indian society, including aviation, as attested to me by Indian work colleagues (I have been in aviation for over 30 years, and visit India regularly ...) is how b0ll0cks excuses like those behind this incident come about.

Nevertheless, having one's porkies uncovered in this way is not considered a bar to holding office in India. In fact, one is unlikely to have gained office in the first place without the behaviour being displayed by officials pronouncing on this incident.