Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
777/767 Pax Doors  
User currently offlinecvg2lga From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 623 posts, RR: 1
Posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4369 times:

Why did Boeing revert back to outward opening doors on the 777 instead of keeping doors that slide upwards like the 767s' doors do? Are all 777/767 frames designed with outward/upward opening doors?

Tchau

DA-


They don't call em' emergencies anymore. They call em' Patronies.
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15457 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4349 times:

Quoting cvg2lga (Thread starter):
Why did Boeing revert back to outward opening doors on the 777 instead of keeping doors that slide upwards like the 767s' doors do?

I don't know for sure, but one potential reason is that on the 767, not all of the doors had power opening/closing leaving a lot of manual labor to open or close the other doors (I think that the number of doors with power was up to the airline). I don't know how it works on the 777 exactly, but I'd wager that manually opening one of those doors is a good bit easier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dijpw...B7F7280353C2CC&playnext=1&index=85



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4482 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4301 times:

Quoting cvg2lga (Thread starter):
Why did Boeing revert back to outward opening doors on the 777 instead of keeping doors that slide upwards like the 767s' doors do? Are all 777/767 frames designed with outward/upward opening doors?

The short answer is that outward-opening doors are a lot less maintenance intensive. Fewer moving parts and easier repairs if something does go wrong...plus you eliminate having to service an alternative or quick-release mechanism for the door.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineMarkHKG From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4261 times:

Also, the B767 exit was somewhat notorious for inadvertent slide deployments by cabin crew. The arming lever was hard to visualize from a distance if the door was armed/disarmed amongst other difficulties noted.


Release your seat-belts and get out! Leave everything!
User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2752 posts, RR: 45
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 12 hours ago) and read 3985 times:

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 3):
Also, the B767 exit was somewhat notorious for inadvertent slide deployments by cabin crew. The arming lever was hard to visualize from a distance if the door was armed/disarmed amongst other difficulties noted.

That's true; it's not an intuitive design at all.

Ironically the L-1011 had a nearly bulletproof, simple, and effective system for door opening and closing in every mode, so the problem with the inadvertant deployments on the 767 are not due to any specific factor making undesired deployments intrinsically more likely with inward sliding doors, but with the horrible control configuration Boeing designed into that particular aircraft.


User currently offlineMattRB From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1624 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 10 hours ago) and read 3932 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
I don't know how it works on the 777 exactly, but I'd wager that manually opening one of those doors is a good bit easier.

It is. The door is equipped with a pull out handle, located on the door, that you rotate to open the door and then manually pull the door open. It's much easier than the 767 (imo).



Aviation is proof that given, the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
User currently offlineBoeEngr From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 321 posts, RR: 34
Reply 6, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3654 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 2):

The short answer is that outward-opening doors are a lot less maintenance intensive.

Absolutely correct. I'd have to check, but it wouldn't surprise me if the 767 door and mechanism are heavier than the 777. Also, if I'm not mistaken, using a 767 style door on a 777 would cut into the overhead crew rest space.


User currently offlineMender From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 237 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3631 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 2):
The short answer is that outward-opening doors are a lot less maintenance intensive. Fewer moving parts and easier repairs if something does go wrong

I disagree. From my experience the 767 door require very little maintenance compared to the 757 or 737. You might occasionally have to change a bearing in the handle mechanism but I can't remember the last time we had to remove the actual door from a 767, unlike the 757's which have at least two doors overhauled per C check.


User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24061 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (3 years 5 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3624 times:

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 2):
The short answer is that outward-opening doors are a lot less maintenance intensive.

But they avoid expensive incidents like the following:
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local-bea...Fuselage-at-DFW-Gate-96490959.html
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_9929086
SQ 777 Has Door Ripped Off By Catering Truck (by Zkpilot Jan 18 2009 in Civil Aviation)

Many earlier types, both jet and prop, had inward-opening doors. Some slid upward and some slid sideways inside the fuselage. A few that come to mind: Caravelle, Trident, Britannia, L-188 Electra, Constellation. and several Russian types.


User currently offlineFlyingColours From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2003, 2315 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3430 times:

Quoting MarkHKG (Reply 3):
Also, the B767 exit was somewhat notorious for inadvertent slide deployments by cabin crew. The arming lever was hard to visualize from a distance if the door was armed/disarmed amongst other difficulties noted.

Yup

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 4):
but with the horrible control configuration Boeing designed into that particular aircraft.

Exactly, I'm not going to get out my Doors 101 guide again but the design of the door controls is beyond laughable, Yes it is good that they are all there together and easy to operate in an emergency (say the door was disarmed at the gate and something goes wrong, the other doors which are not at the gate can be instantly re-armed and opened saving precious seconds). However the flaw is that the handles can be confused, there are differences between them one being red and only moving a few inches either outboard or inboard and the other being a huge silver one... The thing is after an 11 hour flight concentration starts to wander and the wrong handle can be used (ironically it is usually more senior crew who do this because they have become complacent, rather than rookies who are petrified of doors just in case...)

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 1):
I don't know for sure, but one potential reason is that on the 767, not all of the doors had power opening/closing leaving a lot of manual labor to open or close the other doors

It depends upon the airline as to what doors have power assisted opening, the forward left door would have it on the 762 and 763, depending upon the configuration of the 763 the second left door may have power assist too (as this would commonly be the boarding door). All of the other doors are a bit of a git to open manually but they are still better than 757 doors in my opinion, at least as far as opening and closing go.

Phil
FlyingColours



Lifes a train racing towards you, now you can either run away or grab a chair & a beer and watch it come - Phil
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 24061 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (3 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3312 times:

At least one business jet, the Lockheed Jetstar, also had an inward-opening door. It slid sideways inside the fuselage.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Newton
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Roel Van Der Velpen - MST-Aviation



Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 777/767 Pax Doors
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
767/757 Doors posted Sat Apr 4 2009 16:52:34 by Jetplaner
Can A 777/767/757 Fly Only On One Engine? posted Wed Mar 1 2006 07:43:52 by Swank300
777/767 Aileron Question posted Tue Jun 15 2004 16:03:58 by Worldoftui
Doors On The 767 & 777 posted Fri Nov 28 2003 01:50:07 by Fanoftristars
757 767 777 Doors posted Mon Apr 22 2002 08:02:50 by Aq737
767/777/787 Exactly How Close Or Far Apart? posted Sat Aug 28 2010 20:17:00 by VC10er
What Part Of An 777 Is 757/767 Related? posted Fri May 7 2010 22:03:40 by 747400sp
Was There Ever A 767-100 Or 777-100? posted Tue Mar 30 2010 10:10:16 by c5load
767 Nose Cone On 777? posted Tue Mar 30 2010 09:27:27 by September11
767-400 And 777 Cockpits - How Similar? posted Tue Feb 23 2010 09:52:28 by mozart

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format