LOT B787 grounded over missing parts.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Feriton
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like somebody forgot to screw the panel on.
Engineer suspended for panel falling off Air India's Dreamliner | Firstpost
Engineer suspended for panel falling off Air India's Dreamliner | Firstpost
Looks like somebody forgot to screw the panel on.
Engineer suspended for panel falling off Air India's Dreamliner | Firstpost
Engineer suspended for panel falling off Air India's Dreamliner | Firstpost
That article raises more questions than it answers.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Eastern Anglia
Age: 75
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Composite panels weigh nothing (well almost) and are very stiff but wouldn't the aero loads dominate over panel mass when figuring out fastenings on an airplane skin panel?
...over to someone who knows....
...over to someone who knows....
fenland787,
Am no engineer, and know nothing specific to the B787. In the absence of a reply from someone who is and does, however, I'll try to answer your question.
The original photo from the Indian newspaper that Dave Reid has now posted appears to show some part of the fuselage centre-section fairings (falsework). Speaking in general of large airliners, they normally house divers systems equipment such as air-conditioning ducting (and packs, but not sure that applies to the B787), hydraulic reservoirs and accumulators, access to centre (fuel) tank furniture, L/G-door release handles, etcetera. When the main L/G is not in transit, the gear doors typically close to form a smooth profile with the centre-section fairings.
The fairings include panels for maintenance access to some parts of the aforementioned systems. Some panels which are likely to be opened frequently are hinged at the front, and have quick-release fasteners at the back. These are never as large as 4' X 8'. Removable panels of that size are secured by many fasteners, which in my experience are usually of the Dzus type, or similar, necessitating the use of a screwdriver (sometimes with a proprietary head).
The air loads on these panels should always, I think, be upwards/inwards. Damage would be likely only if the leading edge of the panel was hanging down, while the rest of it was secured.
Am no engineer, and know nothing specific to the B787. In the absence of a reply from someone who is and does, however, I'll try to answer your question.
The original photo from the Indian newspaper that Dave Reid has now posted appears to show some part of the fuselage centre-section fairings (falsework). Speaking in general of large airliners, they normally house divers systems equipment such as air-conditioning ducting (and packs, but not sure that applies to the B787), hydraulic reservoirs and accumulators, access to centre (fuel) tank furniture, L/G-door release handles, etcetera. When the main L/G is not in transit, the gear doors typically close to form a smooth profile with the centre-section fairings.
The fairings include panels for maintenance access to some parts of the aforementioned systems. Some panels which are likely to be opened frequently are hinged at the front, and have quick-release fasteners at the back. These are never as large as 4' X 8'. Removable panels of that size are secured by many fasteners, which in my experience are usually of the Dzus type, or similar, necessitating the use of a screwdriver (sometimes with a proprietary head).
The air loads on these panels should always, I think, be upwards/inwards. Damage would be likely only if the leading edge of the panel was hanging down, while the rest of it was secured.
The fairings include panels for maintenance access to some parts of the aforementioned systems. Some panels which are likely to be opened frequently are hinged at the front, and have quick-release fasteners at the back. These are never as large as 4' X 8'. Removable panels of that size are secured by many fasteners, which in my experience are usually of the Dzus type, or similar, necessitating the use of a screwdriver (sometimes with a proprietary head).
B777 Air Con access panel is hinged and is substantially bigger than 8' x 4'.
It ain't hinged at the front neither.
"Work on" is probably pushing the definition a bit Chris. Since I got my type rating I've not laid hands on one. 
It's obviously next to the air con pack and fwd of the landing gear but I'm really not sure without consulting the AMM.
It's obviously next to the air con pack and fwd of the landing gear but I'm really not sure without consulting the AMM.
Courtesy of airliners.net, here's a photo showing the panel in question. The arrows are the OP's, not mine, but they point to the correct location.
Best viewed in conjunction with the photo of the AI aircraft earlier in the thread for orientation.
Best viewed in conjunction with the photo of the AI aircraft earlier in the thread for orientation.
Last edited by DaveReidUK; 20th Oct 2013 at 21:14. Reason: typo
That's a big panel but not an unusual thing. Years ago at KJFK I was on the EAL ramp and looked up and across the field to see a DC-10 climbing away. Then, from its belly a large panel departed and went skimming its way down toward Jamaica Bay.
I called the tower but by then several DC-10 types had departed and they didn't know which one. Turned out to be an AA flight to KLAX,
There used to be (maybe still is) a neighborhood anti-airport group near KJFK that had a rented house and on the lawn had a display of a variety of aircraft pieces that had fallen on their neighborhood. Flap vane segments, antenna, side doors from landing gear, etc. If you don't screw or attach it right, it may come off in flight.
I called the tower but by then several DC-10 types had departed and they didn't know which one. Turned out to be an AA flight to KLAX,
There used to be (maybe still is) a neighborhood anti-airport group near KJFK that had a rented house and on the lawn had a display of a variety of aircraft pieces that had fallen on their neighborhood. Flap vane segments, antenna, side doors from landing gear, etc. If you don't screw or attach it right, it may come off in flight.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: redmond
Age: 88
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
riveting flaw ?? B pucky !
the av week articcle says
A preliminary investigation by India’s aviation regulatory agency of an Oct. 12 incident involving an Air India Boeing 787 indicates that a riveting flaw in the panel covering the heat exchanger unit could have caused the panel to detach from the fuselage.
Thats pure BS - photos elsewhere in media show some sort of proprietary female fastner receptcles . In aluminum- nutplates ( ( used to hold a nut in a blind fastener area ) are typicalym riveted inm the permanent structure, and some type of special scre/bolt used to secure panels used for access or closeout.
If rivets were used to hold ' nutplates of some type " , failure of a few rivets would not be a big deal, rather allowing ' nut' to rotate.- BUT NOT COME UNDONE - OR BE TORGUED UP.
Bottom line - whatever was not done or fastened had ZIP to do with rivets.
The article was written by the same types who said the panel was lost in flight between airports.
A preliminary investigation by India’s aviation regulatory agency of an Oct. 12 incident involving an Air India Boeing 787 indicates that a riveting flaw in the panel covering the heat exchanger unit could have caused the panel to detach from the fuselage.
Thats pure BS - photos elsewhere in media show some sort of proprietary female fastner receptcles . In aluminum- nutplates ( ( used to hold a nut in a blind fastener area ) are typicalym riveted inm the permanent structure, and some type of special scre/bolt used to secure panels used for access or closeout.
If rivets were used to hold ' nutplates of some type " , failure of a few rivets would not be a big deal, rather allowing ' nut' to rotate.- BUT NOT COME UNDONE - OR BE TORGUED UP.
Bottom line - whatever was not done or fastened had ZIP to do with rivets.
The article was written by the same types who said the panel was lost in flight between airports.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Age: 46
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw this news article on another site. Interesting and relevant quote:
Less riveting error and more extra parts at the end of the job, it seems.
Missing Dreamliner belly piece found in Bangalore - Pune Mirror,Pune Mirror
Investigations have since revealed that the 8-foot x 4-foot panel, part of the plane's belly, had been secured with only five screws instead of the usual 17.
Missing Dreamliner belly piece found in Bangalore - Pune Mirror,Pune Mirror
Less riveting error and more extra parts at the end of the job, it seems.
No 'spare parts' in the pocket and (in most cases) the unlatched fasteners project out from the panel whereas the latched ones pull in flush. This gives a visual check of any left loose.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: redmond
Age: 88
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Closer to facts -
My Kinda Sorta Mea Culpa for Previous 787 Post - Flying Lessons
Note photo - bottom line - NOW seems to be panel was NOT reinstalled after some sort of maintenace in that area
The fact that this panel was removed on every one of 89 Boeing 787s to conduct a manufacturer-ordered modification of the environmental control system to correct a problem of condensation and poor drainage led me further to believe the news account that the panel came off a brand new 787.
Early Friday morning Rabinowitz sent me a link to a story in First Post, reporting that an Air India mechanic has been suspended for removing the panel and failing to put it back. How a four by eight foot gaping hold was not detected during the pilot walk around prior to the flight is mystifying for me as it is for some of you who have commented on this story....
Note photo - bottom line - NOW seems to be panel was NOT reinstalled after some sort of maintenace in that area
The fact that this panel was removed on every one of 89 Boeing 787s to conduct a manufacturer-ordered modification of the environmental control system to correct a problem of condensation and poor drainage led me further to believe the news account that the panel came off a brand new 787.
Early Friday morning Rabinowitz sent me a link to a story in First Post, reporting that an Air India mechanic has been suspended for removing the panel and failing to put it back. How a four by eight foot gaping hold was not detected during the pilot walk around prior to the flight is mystifying for me as it is for some of you who have commented on this story....
Early Friday morning Rabinowitz sent me a link to a story in First Post, reporting that an Air India mechanic has been suspended for removing the panel and failing to put it back.
Regardless of what we might think, the media in general, and that article you quote in particular, haven't so far alleged that the panel was removed and not refitted.
In fact that First Post article specifically talks about:
"the panel which fell off a Delhi-Bangalore Air India flight last Saturday"
"a panel on a Boeing 787′s fuselage flew off when the aircraft was winging its way from Delhi to Bangalore"
"This latest incident of a panel falling off the brand new Dreamliner aircraft"
They'll get there in the end, I have no doubt. But not yet:
Investigations have since revealed that the 8-foot x 4-foot panel, part of the plane's belly, had been secured with only five screws instead of the usual 17.
"According to Air India officials, panels such as the one that came off the Dreamliner are ... tightened with a heavy-duty electric screwdriver using the prescribed torque to keep them locked firmly in place."
Torquing quick-release fasteners ? Now I've heard everything.
After several days of reading the Indian media, my faith in the Daily Mail is restored.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Eastern Anglia
Age: 75
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Torquing quick-release fasteners ? Now I've heard everything.
Some of the panels I had reason to remove from the underside of the wing occasionally were, indeed, held in place with torqued up screw fastenings. It all depends whether the panels are expected to be removed for routine maintenance or not I suspect.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: lancs.UK
Age: 77
Posts: 1,191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
any threaded fastener wll wear/ work-harden it's mating thread, given enough use.
there is no reason to suppose that panels not intended for regular removal,would be attached with a fastening-system designed for repeated use.
therefore the press-bullcrap is self-evidently, just that-sensationalist rubbish to sell "news"papers.
A Dzus fastener, by it's very design, is either secured or free...there's no way (unless badly worn/damaged) they can "come loose" If the panel was, indeed, partially secured, the secured fasteners would show considerable damage or rip out in their entirety.....saw no signs of that in the picture, but I'm old and my eyesight isn't as keen as it was....my Labrador and white stick didn't detect any damage either.
there is no reason to suppose that panels not intended for regular removal,would be attached with a fastening-system designed for repeated use.
therefore the press-bullcrap is self-evidently, just that-sensationalist rubbish to sell "news"papers.
A Dzus fastener, by it's very design, is either secured or free...there's no way (unless badly worn/damaged) they can "come loose" If the panel was, indeed, partially secured, the secured fasteners would show considerable damage or rip out in their entirety.....saw no signs of that in the picture, but I'm old and my eyesight isn't as keen as it was....my Labrador and white stick didn't detect any damage either.
This quote is utterly frightening.
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.