Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China Airlines door opens mid-flight
Japan Today ^ | Friday, December 21, 2007 at 17:40 EST

Posted on 12/22/2007 4:22:51 PM PST by DeaconBenjamin

TAIPEI — A China Airlines passenger jet earlier this month turned back mid-flight shortly after take-off from Taiwan after a cabin door malfunction at an altitude of 3,000 meters, local media reported Friday. Passengers on Flight CI008 panicked after a "swishing" sound emanated from the slightly ajar door, whose handle had malfunctioned, prompting the pilots to jettison fuel and turn back to Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport, the reports said.

Nobody was hurt, and the Los Angeles-bound Boeing 747-400 landed without incident, which occurred Dec 8, said Taiwan's Civil Aeronautics Administration. The problem emerged five minutes into the flight as passengers and cabin crew became alarmed at what appeared to be an unlocked lever on the cabin door and sounds of escaping air pressure.

The CAA's initial findings point to possibilities that include the door being affected by jarring or banging of the jet in the process of taking off, and ground crew failing to fully secure the door. A door suddenly opening in a pressurized cabin at a high altitude could cause passengers to get sucked out of the cabin and the jet to crash.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: airlines
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last
Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: patton

“That happens occasionally - DC 10 cargo doors, eg.”

I’ve seen baggage doors on a private jet fly open on takeoff. Oops!


22 posted on 12/22/2007 4:58:51 PM PST by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin

Why is Boeing using Chinese-made parts for its doors?


23 posted on 12/22/2007 5:00:46 PM PST by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

The China Airlines lounge in Taiwan’s Taoyuan International Airport serves both CA and United.


24 posted on 12/22/2007 5:00:58 PM PST by Perdogg (Fred Thompson for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Passengers on Flight CI008 panicked after a "swishing" sound emanated from the slightly ajar door

"Oh, it's a big pretty white plane with red stripes, curtains in the windows and wheels and it looks like a big Tylenol."

25 posted on 12/22/2007 5:06:28 PM PST by Turbopilot (iumop ap!sdn w,I 'aw dlaH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patton
> Oh, yes. Very much so. The floor on a passanger air liner cannot withstand pressure, so the entire tube is pressurized to the limits of the pressure bubble (space, not psi). So if you lose a lower deck door, the plane is going down.

Wow... seems like a good argument for doing the cargo doors with the same "open-inward" design as the passenger cabin. Are the cargo doors open-outward or something? Or did the cargo door fail despite being open-inward?

26 posted on 12/22/2007 5:17:41 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

The DC 10 door openened outward, so that a standard aircraft shipping contaner could fit through it.

The designed worked, until metal fatigue caught up with it.

Three of them went down do to door failures, that I heard of.


27 posted on 12/22/2007 5:23:09 PM PST by patton (cuiquam in sua arte credendum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: patton
> The DC 10 door openened outward, so that a standard aircraft shipping contaner could fit through it. The designed worked, until metal fatigue caught up with it. Three of them went down do to door failures, that I heard of.

Dang... I would have grounded them after two and redone it, standard container or not... but I'm an engineer by nature, not an airline manager or bean-counter.

28 posted on 12/22/2007 5:26:45 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Actually, it caused MCD-D to go bankrupt, and sell out to Boeing.


29 posted on 12/22/2007 5:28:15 PM PST by patton (cuiquam in sua arte credendum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: patton
> Actually, it caused MCD-D to go bankrupt, and sell out to Boeing.

Don'tcha just hate it when that happens... but seriously, thanks for the history! Fascinating.

30 posted on 12/22/2007 5:40:05 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: patton
The designed worked, until metal fatigue caught up with it.

The door in question was the rear belly door. The locking handle (lever) for that door was not on the door but forward of it and that made for a long linkage mechanism. The door lifted upwards and was motor controlled. When closing the door you had to hold the switch an extra second for it to fully seat.

Here, IMO, was the problem: If the door was not fully seated then the locking mechanism (mortise and tenon type) would not be lined up and would bind without engaging. That could occur because of the length of the linkage between the locking handle and the locking mechanism. The linkage could bend enough to allow the handle to fall into place without the locking mechanism engaging.

The fix, IIRC, was to add a flag to indicate the locking mechanism had engaged.

I was an aircraft loader (we locked the doors) from '69 to '74 at JFK and so had the opportunity to play with the door to see what the problem might be.

31 posted on 12/22/2007 5:47:11 PM PST by decimon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: decimon

yep, that airplane.


32 posted on 12/22/2007 5:53:40 PM PST by patton (cuiquam in sua arte credendum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
prompting the pilots to jettison fuel

Wasted fuel...

33 posted on 12/22/2007 6:32:46 PM PST by Buddy B (MSgt Retired-USAF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Are you smoking dope?


34 posted on 12/22/2007 6:38:17 PM PST by jettester (I got paid to break 'em - not fly 'em)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: decimon

I’m sorry. I was getting another bourbon. Could you repeat that?


35 posted on 12/22/2007 6:45:11 PM PST by ditto h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
China Airlines has an abysmal safety record.I flew them once....*before* I learned of this.

Outdated knowledge. CAL used to be below average both because of personel and traing. They had some incidents in the early 90's as recall and called in consultants from the US and I think some US pilots. So they are as safe as anyone, except maybe Quantas, and the servic is superb.

36 posted on 12/22/2007 6:49:10 PM PST by SandwicheGuy (*The butter acts as a lubricant and speeds up the CPU*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
Unless you're talking about a 747 cargo door, which still opens outward. Wouldn't want to intrude on precious cargo space now would we?

Boeing does many things right, but they still do a few things wrong.

37 posted on 12/22/2007 6:49:57 PM PST by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: patton
So if you lose a lower deck door, the plane is going down.

Not always, re UAL 811.


38 posted on 12/22/2007 6:58:38 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: decimon

A later problem with the latch mechanism of the cargo doors was traced to shorted wires which caused the latch motor (DC) to reverse itself. The difficulty in actually solving that problem was that the loss of the door took all the evidence with it. IIRC they finally fished a door off the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea which provided the clues to solve it.


39 posted on 12/22/2007 6:59:27 PM PST by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: jettester
> Are you smoking dope?

Umm, lemme check.... nope. Why do you ask? Because I expressed interest in how an engineering design flaw might have the huge and unintended consequence of bringing down a major manufacturer? As an engineer for the past 35 years or so (when I wasn't doing System Admin), I'm acutely aware of how dramatically errors in products can affect the companies that make them. I just wasn't aware of that one.

Or were you asking because you want a hit?

40 posted on 12/22/2007 7:14:41 PM PST by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson