I thought that pre-flight safety checks were mandatory prior to each and every flight. If this story is true, how does DJ get away with only inspecting their aircraft once a day? Is this a genuine issue, or is this another media smear campaign designed to cause fear to the uninitiated travelling public?
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 2, posted (3 years 10 months 4 hours ago) and read 11718 times:
Quoting CXB77L (Thread starter):
I thought that pre-flight safety checks were mandatory prior to each and every flight.
No. First flight of the day, and first flight after crew change is normal.
Quoting CXB77L (Thread starter): Is this a genuine issue, or is this another media smear campaign designed to cause fear to the uninitiated travelling public?
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5340 posts, RR: 11 Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 4 hours ago) and read 11591 times:
Ugh- allow me:
"The plane was preparing for take-off when a ground engineer noticed one of the wheels had fallen off."
Really? I didn't realize that there was an engineer at the end of the runway looking at nose tires. INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING WORDING.
Further, they go on to say that there isn't an inspection performed.... so what do they chalk this "engineer" "noticing one of the wheels" to? Just a rogue vagabond going about and looking at tires? Those crazy Aussies, never can predict what they're going to inspect next!
""If it had've occurred as say the wheel carriage was coming up, the wheel could have gone through one of the engines. Certainly it would have been serious.""
Debatable. Sure, the wheel COULD have gone through the engine. But that's like saying, "If my car engine stalls, I would lose my power steering, which COULD send my car careening into the Grand Canyon." Yes, of course it's possible, but wheels, see, are very heavy, and gravity being the only thing more predictable than death or taxes, they FALL when they FALL OFF.
And I love how quickly the finger gets pointed at Lufthansa Technik, noting that THEY did the work one year ago.
Of note, none of the rest of the fleet possessed corrosion or cracking.
So, as usual, the media isn't reacting appropriately. Yes, it's newsworthy, but not in the way it's been presented.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 3 hours ago) and read 11480 times:
I'm pretty sure that's why every bogey on a commercial aircraft has 2 wheels, even though in theory, some of the smaller planes could use a single wheel for the nose, and possibly even the main gear depending on loading.
Redundancy is a wonderful thing.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
MSYPI7185 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 699 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (3 years 10 months 3 hours ago) and read 11355 times:
So the article would also have you believe that the agents working the flight would have not notified the flight crew of the missing wheel on arrival. The person marshalling in the aircraft would not have noticed it either and the person chocking the nose wheel would not have noticed it? If any of these did see this, did they kept quiet? Give me a break, that would be the ultimate not my job!!
I find it interesting that if the nose wheel fell of mid-flight it could possibly go through one of the engines. Nose gear is not exposed mid-flight so that would be interesting.
Although this would be rare if not impossible, during the landing phase of flight when the gear was lowered, the wheel separated from the nose gear due to metal fatigue. I would believe that the separation would occur upon landing when the nose gear contacts the runway.
737 nose gear tires are very light as compared to MLG tire, so they could very well go out towards an engine, but not mid-flight. IIRC when I handled the Rotables at our station the 737 nose gear wheels weigh around 50 lbs +/-. MLG wheels are another story if they separate completely your talking about a wheel weighing at least 600 - 700 lbs as the brake assy would be more than likely included in the separation.
I have personally seen the latter when I was at CLT we had a 733 divert to us when a MLG tire separated from the aircraft on takeoff from MCO. The flight was headed to DAY.
MSYPI7185 From United States of America, joined Oct 2007, 699 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 11156 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 8): Really good to know the "Pieces fall of aircraft all the time!" brigade has arrived in full force...
Makes me feel quite safe as a pax.
Pieces do not fall off all the time, but on occasion they do. It is not unheard of for a piece to actually "fall off".
The vast majority of the time if a piece is missing it was deliberately removed by maintenance, usually to prevent something from happening to the aircraft or anyone on the ground if there is a chance it will fall off during flight. There are several pieces on the exterior of the aircraft that can be removed without compromising the safety of the aircraft, these pieces tend to be aerodynamic and/or cosmetic in nature. If a piece becomes damaged and a replacement is not readily available, then it usually will be removed to prevent further damage to the piece and/or other aircraft surfaces.
JQflightie From Australia, joined Mar 2009, 880 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (3 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 11145 times:
Every plane on every sector has the pilot do a 'walk-around' to check the aircraft, but most airlines in Australia dont have the engineer check the aricraft every sector, the only airline in Australia that does that is QF...
Next Trip: PER-DPS-LOP-CGK-KUL-PVG-LHR, LCY-MAD-VLC, BCN-LYS-TLS-IST-JED-KUL-SGN-CAN-MEL
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21029 posts, RR: 60 Reply 10, posted (3 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 11072 times:
Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 8): Really good to know the "Pieces fall of aircraft all the time!" brigade has arrived in full force...
Wheels are redundant on aircraft because they do occasionally come off (for whatever reason) and we'd be dealing with a lot of fatalities if they weren't redundant. 737s have 6 wheels but can land or takeoff on 5, for example.
Which is not to say that it's okay that this one fell off, or everything is fine when it happens, just that the plane isn't going to crash when it happens.
Knowing that pieces can come off planes and still allow for safe landings should make you feel safer. If it doesn't, maybe you worry too much?
I'd feel much less safe if I knew that if any piece of a plane fell off, the plane would crash. I feel much safer knowing that even if mechanics slip up, I'm likely to survive their mistake.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Rsg85 From Australia, joined Aug 2006, 257 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10873 times:
Channel 9 has been showing some great close up shots on an ERJ nose landing gear.
Channel 10 has been showing images of DJ's blue/50th 737 taxing at SYD
But finally 7 has actual film of a DJ 737 at MEL, amazing journalism.
Springbok747 From Australia, joined Nov 2004, 4387 posts, RR: 13 Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10865 times:
Bah..just more scare-mongering. ABC seems to be going the way of 7, 9, 10 and all other crap so-called 'news' outlets. AA737-623 made the point eloquently.
PWMRamper From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 574 posts, RR: 3 Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10788 times:
TheCommodore From Australia, joined Dec 2007, 2346 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 10475 times:
Does anybody know the registration of the 738 involved?
Also, from personal experience, DJ typically take 30 mins to turn a 737 around at the gate but board the aircraft using both front and rear doors. QF seem to take longer, but typically use only the front door (at SYD at least).
Is it true that QF have an engineer inspect the aircraft after each flight and does this contribute to the slightly longer turn-around?
Flown 905,468 kms or 2.356 times to the moon, 1296 hrs, Longest flight 10,524 kms
AA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5340 posts, RR: 11 Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10296 times:
Quoting MSYPI7185 (Reply 6): MLG wheels are another story if they separate completely your talking about a wheel weighing at least 600 - 700 lbs as the brake assy would be more than likely included in the separation.
No, it wouldn't. The 737NG MLG tire/wheel assy weighs 250lb with container, 225 without. Let's assume that the mechanics were smart enough to remove the container during the install (shouldn't assume anything these days, but still...) so you're looking at 225.
The brake assemblies are held onto the aircraft by steel cable. So even if the whole R/H axle was somehow ripped away with #2 tire, the #2 brake would still be there, dangling in the breeze.
What's FAR more likely (even though we're dealing with "likely" being equivalent to being struck by lightening 200 times by your fifth birthday) is the tire/wheel coming off by itself, due to improper install. In which case the brakes would stay on the axle as though nothing had happened.
Anyhow, it's not that this isn't a big deal, it is; it's simply that the journalism is being predictably irresponsible. As are certain officials involved, which is a trend I've noticed of late.
Peergynt From United States of America, joined exactly 4 years ago today! , 33 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8695 times:
As a passenger I do have a terrible time accepting that anything going wrong with an aircraft seems to be regarded as *not unusual*, *common*, *media exaggerating*, *redundancy is a wonderful thing*.
So if the media doesn't bring the news how else would we know what is happening with our *safe airplanes*?
Media is usually not accurate. But how could they be? Would they need specialized crew for every subject?
Also please reflect about this: outside of your aviation area of expertise, how often do you really ponder about other subjects brought to you by the same media?
I am sorry but due to the economic turmoil, I don't believe is that hard to imagine airlines cutting expenses on maintenance. I really hope they are not.
"The plane was preparing for take-off when a ground engineer noticed one of the wheels had fallen off."
Really? I didn't realize that there was an engineer at the end of the runway looking at nose tires. INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING WORDING.
Further, they go on to say that there isn't an inspection performed.... so what do they chalk this "engineer" "noticing one of the wheels" to? Just a rogue vagabond going about and looking at tires? Those crazy Aussies, never can predict what they're going to inspect next!
Ugh....why don't we actually just get some facts correct here?
Firstly, tell me where it says anywhere in the article where the plane was at the end of the runway when noticed by an engineer? Thus tell me, if it says no such thing, how do you get "intentionally misleading wording" out of something that doesn't exist? Secondly, are you seriously saying there's no-one around an aircraft to notice something without it being a formal inspection?
C'mon, let's be frank and honest here......your whole 'argument' and feigned disdain is based on everything you've written being a pure concoction. Indeed, rather than being the article, your entire post is INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING WORDING (to use the very words you were accusing others of)
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 8740 posts, RR: 52 Reply 18, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5557 times:
Quoting AirNZ (Reply 18):
Ugh....why don't we actually just get some facts correct here?
An axle breaking is not good, but not something to panic about. It's not like the plane was taxiing to the runway with a wheel not connected to the plane. I would guess that it apparently broke during push back.
[Edited 2009-07-27 12:51:41]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
Flylku From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 721 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2977 times:
Quoting Peergynt (Reply 16): So if the media doesn't bring the news how else would we know what is happening with our *safe airplanes*?
Media is usually not accurate. But how could they be? Would they need specialized crew for every subject?
Are you suggesting that it is better to report it wrong than not at all? Perhaps not but it sounds that way.
In the old days I think that editors valued accuracy over speed. News articles were how people stayed informed rather than entertained. Reporters actually viewed themselves as disseminators of facts rather than storytellers and as such would wait until they had an expert (or two) verify their report before printing/broadcasting it. They called it fact checking. Unfortunately, today they are just giving us what we demand. This is a real problem for technical industries like aviation.
EMBQA From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 9286 posts, RR: 13 Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2227 times:
Quoting CXB77L (Thread starter): If this story is true, how does DJ get away with only inspecting their aircraft once a day?
Easy... the maintenace program was approved by the governing agancy. With the airline I worked foe we only looked at the aircraft every 5 and 10 days.... the crews took care of the rest
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
Rsg85 From Australia, joined Aug 2006, 257 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1884 times:
Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 18): It's not like the plane was taxiing to the runway with a wheel not connected to the plane. I would guess that it apparently broke during push back.
The incident happened on the taxiway and was spotted by another aircraft
Tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 22, posted (3 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1760 times:
Quoting Peergynt (Reply 16): As a passenger I do have a terrible time accepting that anything going wrong with an aircraft seems to be regarded as *not unusual*, *common*, *media exaggerating*, *redundancy is a wonderful thing*.
I believe that's true...most passengers feel the same way. That's because most passengers have no idea of the design philosophy behind aircraft. That's not a shot at you, or meant to "pooh-pooh" your concerns, it's just reality. A fundamental basis of aircraft design is that no single failure can threaten the safety of the aircraft or it's passengers. So, one thing breaking (like a single wheel), though certainly not desirable, and not "normal", is also not unsafe.
It's unusual for an airplane to have nothing wrong with it for very long...there's very often something on temporary repair, MMEL, CDL, etc. This is very very very different from being unsafe.
Quoting Peergynt (Reply 16): So if the media doesn't bring the news how else would we know what is happening with our *safe airplanes*?
The major point is that, even after the thing happening, it's still a safe airplane. The difference between factory-fresh and actually unsafe is pretty huge...most airplanes spend most of their lives somewhere in the grey zone in between. The threshold that's allowable under the regulations, though, is still far far far biased towards the "factory-fresh" side.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2183 posts, 
From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 1923 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5340 posts, 
, 33 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
