This Jet Was A Ticking Time Bomb | Air Canada Flight 680
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 02. 2024
- This is the story of Air Canada Flight 680, on the 17th of september 1979 an air Canada dc9 was on the ground at Boston getting ready for the flight to yarmouth nova scotia. Cna I just say that air canada liveries peaked with the livery right here, in my opinion the rouge livery comes close but this right here is the best, if someone from air canada is watching please put this livery on a 787 or something. The flight today had 50 people on board with 45 passengers and 5 crew members. The DC 9 lined up and took off at 12:12 pm local time and soon flight 680 was on the climb to get to their cruising altitude of 25,000 feet, As the jet climbed the pilots worked though the checklists, it was mundane but it had to be done and on this day nothing really stood out to the crew as being a cause of concern. Minutes later they reached their cruising altitude of 25000 feet. They were looking forward to a boring cruise and then an explosion rocked the jet as the air was sucked out of the passenger jet at near supersonic velocities, something onboard had just given way. The first officer was flying the plane when the loud bang rocked the plane, while the plane was in autopilot the pilots donned their oxygen masks and carried out communication checks. Looking back the pilots saw that the cockpit door was somehow missing and the blue sky at the back of the plane. This was bad very bad, a huge chunk of their tail had to be missing if they could see straight out of the back of the plane;. The pilots knew that they had to get the jet down to a more breathable altitude fast they said “"Boston Center, Air Canada 680 is doing a rapid emergency descent. Clearance back to Boston, we're out of twenty-three thousand, descending." tower immediately cleared the jet for a right turn and cleared them direct back to boston. As the pilots brought the jet down they let the controllers know that they had just had an explosive decompression and that they would be leveling off at 9000 feet. Then as flight 680 got a sense of what was going on air traffic control got this chilling transmission “"Roger, we are just leveling now and the back end of our tail is blown completely off. If you could have some emergency crews standing by.". The explosive decompression was worse than anyone had anticipated, they needed to get this DC9 on the ground now. As they flew the wounded bird down one of the flight attendants told the pilots that everyone was accounted for and okay except for one flight attendant who sustained a slight impact to her head. Once they had leveled the plane off the first officer went into the cabin to make sure that everyone was okay and to assess the situation. Once the first officer got back into the cockpit the captain told him that the right engine would not go beyond an EPR value of 1.25. But they still had all their hydraulics, if they had lost their hydraulics then it would have been way harder to land this jet. The flight crew wanted the closest runway to them for landing and that was runway 33L at Boston, once the controllers knew that they were headed to runway 33L they sent a small army of emergency services to the runway, ready for anything that might happen. As the pilots lined the jet up with the runway the Boston approach asked the pilots if they had any problems with the controls and thankfully the controls were still responsive, at least for now. They had a tough landing ahead of them they needed to lose speed and altitude but the engines weren't as responsive as usual and since they needed a little bit of margin if something went wrong they decided to come in higher than usual and they decided to use their flaps and landing gear to lose altitude. With that the pilots lined the crippled jet with runway 33L. Then they slowly started to take the plane down, they had no idea what their jet was capable of and everything that they did from this point on might send them straight into the ground. But the jet held together and the pilots brought the plane to a stop on runway 33L their ordeal was over. I looked all over the internet for an image of the damaged DC9 but I wasn't able to find anything, unfortunately. If you have an image of the DC9 send me an email! Or drop it in the comments i’d love to see it.
- Věda a technologie
When bean-counters take over from engineers, it is a disaster in the making. Remember the Ford Pinto, where the accountants decided it 2as cheaper to pay wrongful death-claims than to correct the vulnerability of the gas-tank? To clarify my stance, I'm an accountant who has lost all respect for the profession. Remember Enron?
not bean counters, wall street investors.they only care about share prices and their profits. human lives and safet are secondary or collateral for them in their greed fueled endevour to become rich.
Yes, I appreciate your comments, i’m in engineer in group one and I’m not looking to be put in charge of finance at a Bank. There should be zero authority for Business type people at an engineering centric outfit. Book keeping is their job
Accurate!
When iacocopuffs was informed of the potential danger in the pinto, he simply turned his back on the messenger by turning his chair around.
Juuuuust a bit outside. He tried the corner and missed.
I love the way you buzzed the DC3 holding in position on the runway!
😂
A reference to the video Mentour Pilot recently did?
Ah, you noticed that too ?
I've said this before: If you ask if we want another video, don't bother asking just add it to the lineup to make...
Let the man do what he wants
I ABSOLUTELY AGREE! BE HAPPY WITH WHAT THE CHANNEL INFORMS OF CONCERNING THE TOPIC! IF NOT, CREATE YOUR OWN CHANNEL TO SUIT YOU AND YOU ALONE! RIGHT ON! RIGHT ON! DIG THAT!! ❤🎉😮
Don’t watch. 🫨
Clown comment
Keep saying that, erich!! 🥱🥱😴
By the way, this exact plane was involved in 1983. A in-flight fire in the rear lavatory. It was believed to have started in that walls. Before that though the pilots stated that the circuit breaker was constantly tripping. once it landed, it had a flashover. Among the dead was Stan Rogers. A Canadian folk singer.
Makes me wonder if something went wrong with the rebuilding of the rear.
OMG! Did anyone else notice that runway incursion? 😂
I really appreciate your videos every time they show up!
I just can’t get enough!👍🇨🇦
Twice, in each of his first 2 simulations!
Msfs generic aircraft
90% probably it’s heading to Florida
One issue that they found is that nicotine was creating corrosion at the back of the plane where air was directed out through outflow valves. Remember that in 1979 people were still smoking in the cabin. Find and observe old image of airplane of that time and look for those yellow stains showing up near the tail area. This was found to be a cause of those cracks forming. A couple years later smoking was banned.
And yes, I wish someone could come up with a nice livery for that Maddog M-82. Love that plane in MSFS. I’m an old DC9 pilot from way back in 1980.
I remember people who smoked being so pissed off about not being allowed to smoke wherever they want. Smoking is a drug that turns normal people into self centered.
I'm not going to mention names because every airline was permitting smoking. I was part of a small pre-arranged tour of a hangar facility at Pearson by someone who'd retired from the firm but stayed on as the tour guide. He'd been in aviation since the early bush pilot days. He brought up that he was a regular smoker until the day he joined a maintenance crew that tears down the insides of the passenger area. He said they found microswitches that help control things like the exit doors and these switches' contacts wouldn't have worked because of the amount of tar gumming them up. It gets through the tiniest of gaps in the "dress up" parts the passengers see and into the stuff that matters. He quit smoking that day. The tour was in the mid 1980s.
In my opinion, it was a mistake by Boeing to put MD people in top positions after the acquisition. It was compounded by moving the headquarters to Chicago and putting distance between the management and the engineers.
Exactly. There is a REASON McD-D was failing. I cannot believe how naive and stupid the Boeing people were. McD-D had a track history of not telling customers about their airplanes, and guess what is happening now with the 737 MAX!
Not telling SAS about their new airplanes resulted in the accident of SAS 751 in Gottröra. Noone died but the airplane was in three parts.
That's not an opinion; it's a fact. I worked at Boeing both pre and post-McDonnell-Douglas merger and experienced in real-time the cultural transition from an innovative and world-class engineering company where quality control and safety of flight were absolute and non-negotiable to adopting a poisonous mission statement of allowing accountants to make engineering decisions, along with cutting corners and costs to the bone that were never meant to be cut for the end goal of moving product out the door as fast as possible for the sake of huge payouts of bonuses to management with little to no regard to the long term consequences.
@@LeftyStratPlayer You must have been so pissed by all this shareholder cuddling. I know I am, and I'm Swedish.
It then became all about share price which was more in line with McDonnell Douglas and less with the proud avionics tradition in the Pacific Northwest.
Why did you say In my opinion,
I remember in high school in Canada in the 80s, there was a Career Day for the older students. One of the speakers was a maintenance technician for Air Canada, and he mentioned the flight 797 disaster less than two years prior as a reminder of the responsibility his job had to keep people safe. Although the NTSB report was inconclusive, he said the fire on-board was likely caused by wiring of the washroom water pump. But we'll never know for sure if major repairs to the rear of plane contributed to the disaster.
So glad they managed to land safely with the tail blown off! Reminds me of JAL123, who also lost a tail and weren't so lucky.
That’s the damn truth
True. Also, China Airlines 611 broke up on May 25th, 2002 after a 1980 tail strike. Yep. The crack lay hidden in the tail for 22 years! Coincidentally, the tail strike also happened on February 7th. I was born on February 7th, 1988.
@@borninjordan7448 Resulting from a botched repair, just as with JAL123. The repairs had inadequate strength and ultimately failed.
@@grahamstevenson1740 Yep.
@@borninjordan7448True, but China 611 and JAL 123 differ from survivability. JAL 123 lasted longer because parts of the tailplane were still connected, but China 611's tail broke off completely causing decompression and a mid air breakup.
Noooo! Not the drink cart!
I am so embarrassed by how much this made me giggle
I'm sure the passengers and crew would have appreciated those tiny liquor bottles after this ordeal.
@@lauriepenner350Not at the prices they charge
No kidding, eh? 😂
And right when you need a drink.
A Air Canada DC-9 took the life of my favorite folk singer. Their is a reason relays are used, don't reset them if they are for a toilet motor. Rest in peace Stan Rogers, may light perpetual shine upon you. Amen
I absolutely agree that the MacDonnell Douglas acquisition of Boeing and their business practices since then is directly involved in many of the current issues with the 737. Consider the fact that it's not just the 737 that's had issues; for example:
- 787 Battery Fires
- 787 Issues with poor fitting of parts, carbon fibre contamination during manufacturing
- KC-46 rejected by the US Air Force on four separate occasions due to poor quality control standards
- The flight test failure of the Boeing Starliner, and extensive delays on getting that fixed
It's not just a coincedence - it's a pattern of behaviour dating back over a _decade._
The 737 max, I thought the bolts were missing not loose. That is worse than loose bolts.
It is hard to say where the original Boeing management would have gone without the takeover, some of the pressure board was under is common to any large company. However MD management had just basically destroyed one company, and was given another on basically the promise would push a larger share of profits to shareholders, with R&D one of the easier places to cut.
I totally agree. The people responsible for bringing MD down were moved to the successful company to work their magic. It seems culturally they have succeeded in turning Boeing into MD. If it weren’t for military contacts and the loyalty of some US airlines it would be hard to see how Boeing could survive.
His name was McDonnell and the final nail in the coffin was Stonecipher.
I was employed at one of the US3 air carriers at the time of the merger. I remember someone saying there are basically 3 airframes: arrogant, hungry, and incompetent and arrogant just bought incompetent. As too often happens, the incompetent seemed to end up with more influence.
RIP Stan Rogers, Canadian folk singer, lost in the fire you showed at the end of the video. Looking very much like the Alaska Air plug door was not structural but quality control. Hundreds of those plug doors in service without problems on -900 and Max 9 planes. Bolts were missing.
This plane, I believe, was involved in a second incident in Cincinnati when a fire broke out in loo and the plane barely made it to Cincinnati. 23 people died as the plane burnt up.
Of course. The plane on this incident (CF-TLU, later re-registered as C-FTLU) was the one that later destroyed by fire in Cincinnati.
That fire took the life of Canadian singer songwriter Stan Rogers and 22 other passengers.@@WNDWSTIDN
Did you fall asleep during video LOL ? Narrator mentioned that...
4:48 The fake spider on the bulkhead, lol.
That was one big-assed spider!!!
I was looking for this comment 😂
What WAS that?? Looks like an alien invasion!
The spider is real, its silk repairing bulkhead cracks as they emerge.
@@GalootWrangler if only!
Thanks for your work!!!
Yup! I thought of the similarities with the MAX 9 immediately when hearing the beginning narration. As for the McDonnell Douglas acquisition, I am one of the people who believe it did change how Boeing does things and not for the better.
Here is another interesting tidbit about this Air Canada DC9. After this aircraft caught fire in Cincinnati Ohio, it was put in a hanger after the fire was put out. Meanwhile Ozark airlines had a DC9-30 that collided on the ground in Sioux Falls, South Dakota with a snow plow shearing off one of the wings. The wings of the air Canada DC9 were actually removed and shipped to Ozark and were installed on the Ozark DC9, that tail number being N994Z. After being repaired, Ozark sold it to Republic and then Republic passed it on to Northwest, where it was then retired after Northwest was merged into Delta.
Darn if I remember 100 years ago that wing that was sold had a different length than the other wing on the fuselage it was mounted to-
4:53 you gotta be careful about those big aeronautical spiders messing with the bulk head
Great video, Aaron! I agree with you about Air Canada's livery. It was far better looking in the late seventies. Cheers from The Six!!
Back before streaming, you could watch regular TV channels on planes. Once I was mid-flight and the Discovery Channel started playing Mayday, specifically the episode about this accident. It's a good thing I don't scare easily. Chances are I was flying Air Canada too.
I think this was the peak AC livery as well. Great video.
What is striking about the Alaska 737 MAX incident is it was the same manufacturer as the DC9: McDonell Douglas. One would think the lax quality culture would catch up with them over the decades. Apparently not!
The cracking on the bulkhead reminds me of JAl123
Yes, but JA123 was a much sadder story. When I heard "bulk head" I was troubled. Thanks goodness they got the AC down safely.
@@roderickcampbell2105Exactly right. They LOST the tail section and still kept the plane in the air for 30 minutes, even through the phugoid cycle. That had to be the scariest 30 minutes of those peoples lives.
Thank you for your work.
Yes, yes we ALWAYS want you to do a video on that. Whatever it is. If there’s a plane in it, then the answer will be a resounding YES! 😂😂😊
You should do Austral Flight 2553 if you haven't already. It was also a DC9.
Definitely making a video on this one
It wasnt an emergency door on the 737max, it was a door plug which is used when the configuration of seating is less than the maximum capacity. The max9 only needs an operational emergency door there if it has maximum seating configuration to be able to adhere to the 90 second rule
Great report. More are very welcome.
That sounds like the issue they found on the Max9 recently.
Ah! I wrote this before I reached 07:00 where you mention it.
Note there were issues with the adt bulkhead on max as well. Something to do with a subcontractor.
In 737 Max-9 (incident of January this year) that wasnt emergency exit, but door plug instead of door.
True
Incident, not an accident.
@@theresacaron4238 corrected. Thx.
The wiring bundle that was damaged in original bulkhead separation was repaired by Mc Donald Douglas, became the DC 9 flt 797 out of Texas that caught fire, original thinking was the l/h washroom trash bin fire, caused by cigarette or lav motor which resulted in, I believe small Co2 cartage's that blow with heat to extinguish any fire. However I believe the fire could have been caused by a bad splice during the original repairs
Investigators looked for evidence of arcing from the splices and didn't find any, noting however that damage from the fire was severe and so there couldn't be a definitive determination made one way or the other. Nearly four years had gone by between the events, so if there was an inadequacy in a splice it couldn't have been too glaring to have gone for that long.
Somewhat in support of the "splice theory" OTOH, is that the smoke didn't seem to be coming from in the lavatory but rather from edges/seams, i.e. somewhere outside of it.
As avionics AME I've had reasons to look at that wiring and was shocked that there was splices in bunches instead of double spliced staggered, as I was taught. Also the left engine generator wiring was also in same area. A/C wiring on the DC 9 was fiberglass (melts) covered and as usually carried more current /circular mil than house wiring, which is common practice in this industry
4:56 clearly it was the giant spider that caused the trouble, Air Canada obviously did not have a rigorous enough SOP for dealing with large arachnoid-mediated damage
This comments TICKS me off, because it’s not a spider.
I love this channel 💜
Love you too viewer
Hello mr mini or crash investigation, it’s your mat from 30k subs SYDNEY Australia, keep up the good work 😅
You nailed it!.
Love this livery too.
I found the volume a little too low. Could you push it up a notch.
I love M.A.C.I. I reckon you do a great job. Please keep them coming. Thank you.
Fixing that right now!
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation Make the last step in your audio process to normalise to 0dB, or whatever equivalent your video editing software uses (I'm assuming in your cleanup phase when you removed background noise that you also compressed the audio, I do it all in audacity, this'll do most of the work for you). This last step will make sure your audio track is at the max level possible without clipping.
The. You just have to adjust the final output audio for that channel to bring it up in the project so it peaks close to the max, but not quite there. The whole process including noise removal, etc, should only take you 5 minutes, so don't worry about it impeding your workflow :-)
Or use Reaper, pretty simple to add compression to master track and then render it.@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation There always tends to be a slightly muffled quality to the sound - an absence of mid and high frequencies. Certainly not terrible, but room for improvement. I still enjoy your videos though, and appreciate your efforts in producing interesting and entertaining content.
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation Much better audio level, thank you Aaron,
5:07 Should that giant spider be there? Maybe it made the cracks o.o
Great video!
God I didn't realise how much I missed these
There was one peculiarity of the DC-9/MadDogs that greatly contributed to its survivability here. When a pressure vessel bursts the resulting force will follow the closest path of structural weakness for any subsequent barriers. The DC-9 family were the last planes to have “Air Stairs” in the tail of the aircraft. So there is a clear passage and an intentional weakness in the hull in the form of the rear door/fold down staircase. So when the rear pressure bulkhead failed, the force ripped through this clear passage, and thus bypassed all of the flight controls and engine systems located above it. The phrase “ the pilot looked back from the cockpit and could see daylight through the tail” was not unusual for a DC-9 on the ground. It’s how the pilots and service crews more often than not entered the jet to start it up in the morning.
This is also likely why you can’t find any photos of the outside of the plane. Externally all you saw was the Air Stairs were blown off. So a missing door.
The Air Canada DC-9s didn't have aft air stairs. It did have a rear pressure bulkhead door and the tail cone would fall off, to use as an emergency exit.
Thanks for the story
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh no wonder when I searched for air Canada flight 680, I was getting air canada flight 797 search results.
3:50 why is there another jet on the runway 😱
Was about to ask just the same question!
people also playing that just happen to be at that location when he was recording
Noticed it too
Good eye.
Controller told it to line up and wait then forgot about it :P
FYI: A bolt is a fastener. Fasteners is a broad category, including screws, nuts, nails, etc. There's a whole aisle of them at your local Home Depot.
Back in 79 I too had a crack in my aft bulkhead (It's still there!)....
Wow, what a coincidence, I did as well …. and it’s still there too!
@@MegaSunspark And I bet they're both still spewing out decompression products too.
I hope the drink cart survived.
My favourite part is that the only casualty was the beverage cart. R.I.P AC680 beverage cart. On a serious note could you please do a video on AC797 it's always been a sad one for me because Canadian folk singing Stan Rogers unfortunately died in that incident and not enough people know about it.
This DC9 is the very one that burnt down 4 years later as Air Canada 797, perhaps you can found some images of the aircraft there.
And ACI Crew from Cineflix even had a video of damaged flight 680 landing from their 797 epsiode tho I couldn't know where that came from.
Do Air Canada 621. Pilot and co-pilot didn’t agree on when spoilers should have been deployed. Also, you’d get to use this livery again. 😊
The recent 737 Max unscheduled door release was NOT a structural failure. Currently it seems that the bolts that retain the door were left out. That's a lot different than a crack slowly developing over numerous pressurization cycles.
I am very enthusiastic about buying American products over imports. However, as a frequent flyer, I prefer the comfort and technology of Airbus and Embraer. I think it's obvious that when Boeing's self-aggrandizing C-suite occupants decided they were too good to remain in the same state as the factory, that revealed a lot about the direction of the corporate culture.
I am using my memory here but to the best of my memory a hostess was sucked down the cabin on the way on being sucked out the back and a passenger managed to catch her and prevent her from going out.
Yes, please make a video on AC797.
@@threeparots1 Yes that's what he said. I did watch the video.
Air Canada 680, go around, traffic on the runway!
Years ago, pre-Boeing, a DC9 landing in Louisville had its' tail cone fall off on the runway. Years later, when I started flying for work and for vacations, every time I was on a DC9/MD80 I used to think about that day back home at SDF. Of course, I thought about it again while watching this video. Crazy what we remember.
Agree about the livery!
Thanks
I recall this incident, I remember that a drink.cart and a flight attendant were sucked out of the opening when the tail structure failed. The DC9's tail was designed with a rear door with built in stairs for boarding and exiting but more important the tail was designed to be a emergency exit and was designed for the crew to cause the entire tail cone to fall away from the aircraft but this was not mentioned in this video. The tail cone could have failed even without the cracks because it was designed as an emergency exit.
There were zero fatalities, so that flight attendant must have had a parachute. 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦♂️🤦🏻♂️
@@sludge8506 i don't agree or accept your statement of no fatalities. I will run some searches on FAA and NTSB findings and let you know what I find. One thing I never accept in these instances are media reports, they are very seldom accurate when reporting initial findings, interims and final reports.
Yolanda was the flight attendant. I worked with her many flights after that!
@@dobiefankw my apologies for confusing two incidents.
@@sludge8506 my apologies for confusing two incidents.
Have you got a new sim? The graphics are looking great, very sharp and detailed.
sim?
the tool you use for rendering the planes!@@K1OIK
I always knew giant man eating spiders existed. Will be filing this video in my evidence folder!!!
5:00 Is that a giant spider? They really don't inspect these do they?
Spider IS the inspector but is only looking for spare change fallen from pax pockets.
I think this story sounded more like JAL123 who also had a rapid decompression after a “fixed” rear pressure bulkhead failed. But as we know, they were not as lucky.
Oh I believe Boeing is in a heap of trouble. But this is what you get when you take over a failing company and put it’s profit driven board members in top positions. The FAA has been WAY too easy on them. As a fan of the Boeing company, I am bothered by this development that really started with the Dreamliner.
Yes, it made me think of JAL123 too. That did end very badly.
The Mad Dog takes a lickin and keeps on ticking. 😊
The 737Max door plug blow out was not a loose bolt. The bolts were not refitted after the door plug was hinged out to refit a seal. They used a simplified system to book the work, rather than the main system. The main system would have insisted on an inspection check. The system they used to avoid bureaucracy did not force that check.
Awesome
I think Boeing intentionally got rid of its engineering prowess in order to maximize profits. Management chooses their course of action and has suffered the problems that are associated with choosing greed over care. This is the same equation as brought down McDonnell Douglass and Boeing has chosen the same course and Boeing is suffering the same fate.
It wasn’t an exit door but a door plug…more to the point of similarity, many 738MAX rear pressure bulkheads have been found to be faulty and led to inspections. As for the subsequent fire on this DC9 was more severe than you allude to.
Great to see you back. Been watching since you were at about 8k was just thinking about the Max, Boeing has moved its engineering focus onto diversity….
That was my point exactly. FYI: I'm a bean-counter, too. As an insider, why do you think that I have less respect for bean-counters than I have for shysters?
Lookout! There's a plane in the way at 3:50!
Correction: The Alaska 737 did not lose an emergency exit door- it lost a door PLUG- Which is basically a door-delete panel, which is a "permanent" non-operable door filler that cannot be opened at any point in operation.
From Air Crash Investigation, it seems this plane had a lot of issues before this, even before this and later fire. The log for this plane were full of complaints, including the one that caught fire. Also, as captain said, they made a heck of work to repair the bulkhead
There's a video on youtube that shows old footage of this plane missing the tail right after it landed in Boston.. the video itself is about the deadly fate of this plane when in 1983 a fire started on board that resulted in over 20 people dying after the plane landed in Cincinnati. The 1979 footage starts at 34:26.
Air Canada flight 797
I remember that fire... Wasn't the lav motor jammed or something like that?
Maybe the reason that "Boeing can't seem to catch a break" is that anybody building passenger jets should never be looking for "luck" in the first place. If anything can go wrong, it will. The physical forces involved in aviation aren't tolerant of design, manufacturing, or maintenance errors.
Was this the same DC-9 as flight 797 diverted to CVG with smoke and fire?
Yes.
Canadian singer Stan Rogers was killed in that subsequent crash.
So was Curtis Mathes the president of the television manufacturer of the same name.
Eyyyy you’ve turned the volume up a bit! Thank you, it’s easier to listen now, but if you could still put it up a bit more and consider speaking a bit slower, it would be even better 😊 thanks for another video!
But in the case of the Boeing 737 Max… it’s not a case of loose bolts… it’s a case of NO bolts. The bolts were never fastened to the plane.
Wow another bulkhead failure, and so many had the same issue! The most infamous of rear bulkhead failure was Japan Airlines 123, of 1983. it was a 747Sr 46. When the bulkhead failed, it completely destroyed the entire tail section , the pilots completely lost hydraulics, and all manner of control but were heroically iable to fly it on throttles, unfortunately it crashed into a mountain killing all 15 crew and 505 passengers 4 actually survived the crash!
There's a couple of frames from a news cameraman on this incident in the Air Crash Investigation's episode on Air Canada flight 797 if you want to find a better look of the damage this plane suffered
Those Bolts, nothing has changed
i would like to suggest a video on REX Flight 768 happend back in 2017
I’m interested in the links between the two accidents. The 797 fire started in the rear. How close was it to the repaired areas ? This element seems underdone to me but it does require some speculation and hypothesis. Interested in a video and thanks .
4:52 what's that insect on the bulk head ?
A little over-dramatized opinion (mine), but getting that plane down revealed the problem and, no doubt, prevented the crash of another plane. Good one
a little? lol
"This was very bad." Ya gotta laff.
I don't think the acquisition of McDonnell Douglas hurt Boeing engineering, but I do think the lack of competition in the industry has. Airbus might be winning market share, but Boeing knows that being the only American company building large passenger jets gives them a protected position. They got complacent.
Flight 811 also reminds me of the current 737 Max issue too, the use of plug doors that don’t seal with cabin pressure is a big engineering design issue to me, as the door has hardware to push the door out without human intervention installed.
Flight 811 was the 747s with the (surprise) fastening issues with their outward opening cargo doors that caused a rapid decompression and blew a hole in the side of the plane. Boeing kept blaming the technicians and the maintenance people for the cargo door problems and the NTSB backed them up until one of the victims fathers lifted some documents from a meeting and ran an independent investigation to find the cause.
The end result was bad engineering, insufficient fixes and no fail safe, all things that mirror this incident exactlty.
You can blame quality control all you want but if you don’t design at least 2 independent layers of failsafes on something this dangerous it’s a miracle that there wasn’t a load of these accidents earlier.
Yes! A retro 777/737/A330/A320!
Fantastic video as always! Boeing quality control is not there. That is what it boils down to. They can and will improve i believe
The 'Q' in Boeing stands for quality.
@MiniAirCrashInvestigation The accident aircraft in this story, CF-TLU, was repaired and returned to service. Sadly, it was then involved in a much more serious accident - fire onboard at altitude. They captain was slow to respond to the emergency, after being given conflicting information, and delayed an immediate emergency landing. While he was eventually able to land the jet, 23 people died do to being overcome by the smoke and fumes and not being able to exit the burning airplane.
I remember hearing complaints, 5+ years back, from what was said to be to be Boeing engineers, that Boeing had with MD gotten too many of their people in higher positions with a profit over safety mentality and that it was becoming the same in Boeing that concerns from engineers were not taken seriously.
I still fly Boeing, but I dont trust them nor the FAA.
8:15 - the MAX has ALREADY followed in the steps of the DC-10... This is not a string of bad luck, it's bad management and greedy investors.
A great analogy I heard for Boeing's latest business strategy is "trying to be a Michelin Star restaurant with a fast-food mindset"
So background, I worked on both the DC9/MD80 and DC10. The DC10 is a much better airframe. Although a much bigger aircraft it assembles easier and parts fit together better. The DC9/MD80 parts and assemblies were more inconsistent (my opinion). Regarding Boeing they have a culture problem. Typically after a major incident/issue the manufacturer issues a statement indicating a plan is fix problem. That is great and the expectation is they do a deep dive and develop plan to keep it from happening again. We are seeing that Boeing has systematic quality problems. Additionally Boeing has been aware of the Spirit quality problem for years and didn’t handle them. There are other suppliers to Boeing who also have problems.
Personally I think It was rushing the 737 max in order to still be a contender on the market when they should have focused on making a brand new product...
Follow the money trail. It will usually lead you to the answer that you are looking for.
The Max been flying for a while now, so a couple crashed because of software they did not bother telling pilots to save cost, and a quality omission, which the root cause is also cost. In the larger picture, the basic airframe design is still well done. They did not make any mistakes there that surfaced so far. However, when I fly, I still do not like to sit anywhere near an engine. I do not want to get hit by sharpnels.