Cracks Found in Boeing 767 Engine Pylons

from 24/7WallStreet:



Cracks Found in Boeing 767 Engine Pylons
Posted: June 22, 2010 at 2:39 pm


Since its introduction in 1982, the 767 from Boeing Co. (NYSE:BA) has accounted for sales of more than 1,000 planes. Recent discovery of cracks in the engine pylons, which attach the engine to the wing, have raised safety concerns and sparked the FAA to inspect 56 767s belonging to American Airlines (NYSE:AMR). So far the inspections have found three planes with cracks in the pylons according to the FAA, although Boeing disputes that number, claiming that only two planes are affected.

FAA regulations require airlines to check the pylons after every 1,500 flights, but one plane with pylon cracks had flown only about 500 flights, according to The Wall Street Journal. Neither the FAA nor Boeing will speculate on the cause of the cracks, but metallurgical tests are currently underway.

Boeing is revising its service bulletin for the planes and is expected to recommend a significantly more stringent inspection regime for all owners of 767s. The FAA is likely to adopt the bulk of Boeing’s revisions and mandate the changed inspection plan.

The addition of new inspection rules could affect the air lines’ maintenance schedule, causing some disruption to flight schedules. More frequent or thorough inspections will also increase operating costs.

A series of cracks found on one plane was different from previous manifestations of the problem. The FAA determined that this combination is a serious hazard.

The FAA and Boeing agree that concerns about the cracks are not due to missed or shoddy inspections. The cracking problem was completely unexpected. Pylon inspection regulations for the 767 were tightened five years ago when the FAA concluded preliminarily that the cracks were caused by small holes where bolts had been installed. However, the WSJ notes that “FAA officials also are examining whether specific maintenance procedures used by American on the ground could have caused or worsened some of the cracking.” ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://247wallst.com/2010/06/22/cracks-found-in-boeing-767-engine-pylons/

a few planes would fall out of the sky before they got to this point.

number of safety inspections that are required by the Obama administration. It is a shakedown, he will say. And Boss Limbaugh will get on the radio the next day and say Joe is right.

:hi:

best to nip this in the bud

In the mid-80s a friend of mine took off from ORD in a Boeing 737-200. There was a pylon bolt failure and an engine fell off the aircraft. He returned to ORD for a safe landing.

On May 25, 1979 (the day John Spenkelink was executed in Stark, Fl - which is how I remember the two events), and American Airlines DC-10 crashed at ORD killing 273. That was an engine pylon (bolt) failure.

Quantum leaps have been made in metallurgical analysis of aircraft components (airframe and engine). The fact that this defect was detected before an accident should be cause for celebration. There will now be Airworthiness Directives, and the like, that will keep this fleet of Boeing 767s flying safely for years to come.

I speak as a former airline captain, a former member of the Air Line Pilots Association's (ALPA) Central Air Safety Committee, and and ALPA-trained airline accident investigator.

What did you fly??

But once a problem pattern is detected some sort of time or cycle based metallurgical inspection might be required.

What did I fly? OK - here goes:

For the airline I was a captain and flew the MD-80 series (takes a DC-9 type rating) and the Boeing 737-200/300/400. As a corporate pilot I primarily flew the Learjet 25/35/55 and the Lockheed JetStar-II.

Other aircraft that I have flown (military and civilian) would fill up this page.

You must be pretty young -- I was expecting maybe DC-8, 707, L-1011. Sometimes I wonder if I'm the oldest person on DU. :7

I certainly have flown aircraft of the vintage you mentioned, and older: Lockheed SP-2Es (close to the P-2Vs) in Viet Nam, C-47s, DH-82 Tiger Moths .. soloed in an Aeronca 7AC.

Maybe you are the oldest fart on DU, but I'm up there. Trof (The Retired Old Fart), a retired TWA B-747 captain, has a few years on me. But I am the oldest geezer in the US Forest Service Newberry Fire Initial-Attack Division - Batallion 31 in the Deschutes National Forest! And not one firefighter has ever called me "POPS".

I'm holding 62. Show 'yer cards, mate!

I was a kid a few miles south of the airport. Huge plume of black smoke.

We wanted to ride our bikes over to look at the crash. Mom would not let us go - wonder why?

When you are a kid you don't get these tragedies - it just seemed like another TV show.

Two engines is another thing, though.

Thrust-to-weight ratios are always better in two-engine jets than three or four, because of engine failure criteria of FAR 25 (? IIRC) certification rules.

But engine failures are very, very rare on modern transport category jets. What is much more common/likely/deadly is an encounter with low-level wind-shear. The higher the T/W ratio the better the chance of flying out of a low-level wind-shear safely. Alternatively stated, I'd rather be in a twin-jet (high thrust-to-weight ratio) Boeing 737-300 attempting a low-level wind-shear escape maneuver than a Boeing 727 (3-motors) or Boeing 747 (4-motors)!

The "2 or 3" referred to the disputed number of aircraft with pylon cracks. The "other hand" did refer to the number of engines. It's psychological -- the more, the better has been ingrained. So, I very much respect your perspective and appreciate you taking the time to share it.

I remember the tragedy at O'Hare where a DC-10 lost it's left wing engine on takeoff, claiming 279 lives. My memory had faded since then: I recalled the loss of the engine, yet I had forgotten that the accident also had sheared control cables, making a recovery in those circumstances almost impossible.

Brave people -- pilots and flight crews. Good, too.

more from the article............

"There are about 360 Boeing 767s in US carriers’ fleets that could be subject to the revised inspection regulations, but the FAA apparently will not require all the jets that belong to other airlines to undergo immediate inspections.

Why ever not? If that’s true, it’s the dumbest thing the federal government is likely to do today."


Indeed..why not????????
That makes no sense whatsoever!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is the way it always happens. The FAA sides with the airlines' management and their mouthpiece, the Air Transport Association (ATA) on K Street in Washington, DC. The airline employee unions (pilots, flight attendants, mechanics) will raise hell and, under a Democratic administration, maybe win.

Otherwise, it will take an accident - perhaps with body count - to get the NTSB in on the unions side. The NTSB almost always sides with the unions' standing or new recommendations.

Case in point: In the mid-80s an American Airlines MD-80 experienced a cargo compartment fire at 35,000 feet. The flight attendants told the captain that the cabin floor was buckling from the heat. The captain did a high-dive into Nashville and evacuated the jet on the runway. The MD-80 burned to a crisp. After the investigation, the NTSB and the pilots' unions (ALPA and APA) recommended cargo compartment fire detection and suppression. The FAA, under pressure from the ATA and the airlines, declared that those remedies where not economically justified!

Segue to May 11, 1996 and the ValuJet 592 crash into the Everglades after departing MIA for ATL. CARGO COMPARTMENT FIRE. BODY COUNT = 110. The body count resulted in the FAA and ATA backing off and regulations being put in place requiring CARGO COMPARTMENT FIRE DETECTION AND SUPPRESSION. Finally!

I would be very "SICK" until all those planes were checked!

This is just "ANOTHER " DISGRACE..and people will die unless Obama and his FAA get every single one of those aircraft checked!

Oh I know..the FAA is now too busy grounding small planes that carry banners mocking Tiger Woods..You know ..the FAA has to protect their boy....a MKULTRA boy....and stopping media small planes from covering the Oil spill in the Gulf!!