SW 737 with a hole in fuselage lands at MCAS Yuma

[wink]

If we told you, we'd have to kill you.....seriously......it's a secret. Airline opsec.

Actually, it isn't a secret!! BUT, after consultation with others, I will leave the post deleted out of an abundance of caution. Suffice it to say, the emergency action taken was not for safety of flight but security. My original post included details that are not classified, but simply unknown to almost everyone. I posted those details because it is my experience that too many Americans do not believe a threat still exist to commercial aviation. I wanted to point out that the threat IS out there. Too many think that if there were a problem Bubba, Jim Bob, and Hoss would take care of it. Just a minute's reflection should make it clear there are ways to endanger an aircraft without Bubba, Hoss or Jim Bob being able to intervene. If anyone tells you that they aren't afraid of terrorism because passengers will not allow it, please tell them their intentions are noble, but they are STUPID!

 

[STLEngineer]

So here is the lesson, don't be taking a leisurely recreational dump in an aircraft lavatory at cruise altitudes.

There's a joke in here somewhere...

 

[wink]

Latest. More cracks in SWA B737s. Previous cracking and repairs in incident aircraft.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/03/southwest-airlines-cracks-2-planes/

 

[craftingraptor]

Passengers recalled tense minutes after the hole ruptured overhead with a blast and they fumbled frantically for oxygen masks. Pilots made a controlled descent from 34,400 feet into a southwestern Arizona military base.

According to the almighty wiki:

Flight level TUC
FL 300 1 to 3 mins
FL 350 30 sec to 60 sec

^^exciting in a bad way.

 

[phrogpilot73]

I like how the news keeps saying that they landed at military base in Arizona. Probably adds to the sensationalism of it. If you say they landed at Yuma International Airport, it's not as exciting.

For those that don't know - Yuma International Airport = MCAS Yuma for all intents and purposes. One side is commercial, one side is military.

 

[BusyBee604]

News?

I like how the news keeps saying that they landed at military base in Arizona. Probably adds to the sensationalism of it. If you say they landed at Yuma International Airport, it's not as exciting.

For those that don't know - Yuma International Airport = MCAS Yuma for all intents and purposes. One side is commercial, one side is military.

I picked up on that right away. From all our Wpns Dets down there, it had always been a "dual use" Mil/Civ Airport (much like Kirtland AFB/ABQ International is). Standard News sensationalism I guess??? Those "News" bubbas are soooo predictable! aperbag_
BzB :sleep_125

 

[KBayDog]

I like how the news keeps saying that they landed at military base in Arizona. Probably adds to the sensationalism of it. If you say they landed at Yuma International Airport, it's not as exciting.

For those that don't know - Yuma International Airport = MCAS Yuma for all intents and purposes. One side is commercial, one side is military.

Those pax were probably left with the impression that Yuma is a really happening place, what with all the choppers, plopters, fast-movers, and...uh..Hercs in town.

(I'm just ASSuming all the WTI birds are in town. Don't know, don't care, and don't have any desire to find out.)

 

[Fog]

FWIW, FoxNews reported this morning that the SW 737-300 involved had over 39,000 pressurization cycles in its 15 years of use. Man, that's a lot of times to blow-up & deflate a metal balloon.

 

[Pugs]

Latest. More cracks in SWA B737s. Previous cracking and repairs in incident aircraft.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/03/southwest-airlines-cracks-2-planes/

Well, off to BWI to catch SWA to Manchester. Check in later... maybe

 

[Harrier Dude]

I picked up on that right away. From all our Wpns Dets down there, it had always been a "dual use" Mil/Civ Airport (much like Kirtland AFB/ABQ International is). Standard News sensationalism I guess??? Those "News" bubbas are soooo predictable! aperbag_
BzB :sleep_125

FWIW, Yuma is the only airport in the country that is a military base with a civilian airport as a tenant. There are many others the other way around (military base tenant on a civilian airport, ie Kirtland/ABQ).

It's actually a little more complicated than that, but that's the short version.

I saw the jet this morning, and it's no big deal at this point.

KBay.....indeed WTI is in full swing. We need you here to test choppers.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why we still need to make a shit ton of phrog WTIs.

They're everywhere!

 

[KBayDog]

KBay.....indeed WTI is in full swing. We need you here to test choppers.

I've done more than my share of WTI support. Time to pass the baton to the young bucks.

Besides, as you know, Mother Corps has other plans for me.

 

[Jim123]

FWIW, FoxNews reported this morning that the SW 737-300 involved had over 39,000 pressurization cycles in its 15 years of use. Man, that's a lot of times to blow-up & deflate a metal balloon.

Holy crap that seems like a LOT! No matter which way you cut it, that is a lot, right? (Right?)


(Somebody mentioned the DH Comet disasters of the 1950s earlier. Apples vs oranges comparison, but both of those happened at about 1,000 cycles.)

 

[HAL Pilot]

Holy crap that seems like a LOT! No matter which way you cut it, that is a lot, right? (Right?)

Not really. Our 717s each fly and average of 12-15 flights a day, 5-6 days a week and are 10-12 years old. So they are at that number now and still have years of life in them. It's all about the inspections and maintenance.

 

[Jim123]

Not really. Our 717s each fly and average of 12-15 flights a day, 5-6 days a week and are 10-12 years old. So they are at that number now and still have years of life in them. It's all about the inspections and maintenance.

Hmm, well I just learned something. That's more than I would have guessed but then the math makes enough sense. Thanks HAL.

 

[Fog]

Holy crap that seems like a LOT! No matter which way you cut it, that is a lot, right? (Right?)


(Somebody mentioned the DH Comet disasters of the 1950s earlier. Apples vs oranges comparison, but both of those happened at about 1,000 cycles.)

Jeem: I can't tell if you're making fun of me - but it really doesn't matter, it still seems like a lot to me. My point, if I have one, is that another pax a/c that stayed in service an incredibly long time was the DC-3. But it wasn't pressurized. No other high-usage, pressurized jet a/c is still around like the 737. Early DC-9s are long gone, and all but the -80s are also pretty much retired. I don't think the "metal balloon" analogy is a bad one, and there might just be some number certain of pressurization cycles an airframe can withstand before the damn rivets just start popping.