bikerthai wrote:Well, if they link to the photo of the original derailment as part of their analysis, then one would have to assume that it was the derailment that they were referring to. If not, then it is sloppy journalism.
Seems pretty clear that they meant what they wrote.What we think now is that this frame with line number 8219 was maybe one of three that was seriously damaged while transported by a train. That train crashed while on its way to Renton, after which three 737 fuselages rolled down a slope into a river. The fuselage of 8219 was assumed to be scrapped but possibly now fake used on another fuselage with BuNo 169564.
And yes if there was another derailnent that would have involved another frame loss, you would have been able to find it on the internet. The Seattle Times would have been on top of that as well.
By the way, the 8219 frame loss was not due to a derailment. It was some transportation mishap that was not revealed to the public. If that article can find out the detail to happened to that frame, then they would have my congratulation.
bt
How possible is it that the often discussed here original line number 8219 was on the same transport as line number 8165. Because the latter just rolled out of the FAL but does look like it has been through some serious "adventures".
https://twitter.com/AeroimagesChris/status/1470195070947127299/photo/1