737-800 Flies With Partially Open Door

[Model-Junkie]

Jin Air 737 flies for 40 mins before discovering partially open door

Seeing as cars all have sensors indicating when a door is not shut properly, I would have imagined that an aircraft costing millions of dollars would have similar sensors. If there are such sensors in place, I am concerned how the flight crew did not notice prior to taxiing and take-off

[Bob Beary]

Another thing that strikes me as a bit out of the ordinary is that after 40 minutes into the flight they were only at 10,000 feet. Most flights would be at cruising altitude...up in the 30,000' plus altitude.

Bob

[martin_sam_2000]

Not an expert in any way but...

My gut feeling is that they closed the door, the sensors all showed a closed door. During the climb they got a pressurisation warning and leveled off at 10000 feet to investigate. They then heard the noise and found that part of the door was not sealing properly causing the air to leak out.

There are sensors that tell you the door is not shut. I would chalk this up to the media over-simplifying and/or sensationalising the story.

Sean

[streetstream]

I would chalk this up to the media over-simplifying and/or sensationalising the story.

Sean

I just looked at the aviation herald (and the video posted in the original post) and it has a picture included which shows a door that is partually openend, so in this case it isn't the media.

http://avherald.com/h?article=491ca351&opt=0

Edited January 4, 2016 by streetstream

[jester292]

Sometimes pressurization issues aren't noticed on the ground because the aircraft isn't pressurized on the ground. Sometimes it gets triggered at a specific differential value; then all the bells and whistles go off. Know how I know? Departed O'Hare a few years ago, climbing at 250kias at about 2800 feet per minute, then as we went through 11000 feet altitude BANG! Main cabin door blew partially off one of the 4 locks, and created an air gap between the seal and the door. The jet I was flying at the time had a pressurization memory in that it would remain at departure field elevation until either 6 minutes, or 10000 feet, whichever came first. 10000 came first, pressurization starting pumping and bam, blew a hole in the door seal. We returned to ORD and canceled the flight. So, it's not always a door indication.

Aaron

Edited January 4, 2016 by jester292

[82Whitey51]

Not an expert in any way but...

My gut feeling is that they closed the door, the sensors all showed a closed door. During the climb they got a pressurisation warning and leveled off at 10000 feet to investigate. They then heard the noise and found that part of the door was not sealing properly causing the air to leak out.

There are sensors that tell you the door is not shut. I would chalk this up to the media over-simplifying and/or sensationalising the story.

Sean

^ Yup

[Jennings]

I just looked at the aviation herald (and the video posted in the original post) and it has a picture included which shows a door that is partually openend, so in this case it isn't the media.

It's the media blowing something out of proportion. It's not "partially opened", it's improperly shut - big difference.

That said, there is no reason on earth why one of the minimum of two people (the one on the outside and the flight attendant) whose job it is to ensure every door is closed didn't do their job. And the people on the flight deck should have noticed it as well. I can't even begin to imagine why it took them 40 minutes to figure it out and get back on the ground.

[streetstream]

It's the media blowing something out of proportion. It's not "partially opened", it's improperly shut - big difference.

No it's not the media blowing things out of proportion.

Nowhere in the article of the link in the original post is there any mention of a partially opened door.

Here is a quotes from the article and the title

Quote: "...one of the plane's doors was not completely shut."

Title:"Open door forces passenger plane to turn back"

Nowhere does it say the door opened.

Also, the term 'partially opened' does not imply that the door was closed and then opened. It states that it is not fully closed.

If i start closing a door and leave it opend just a bit, that door is partially open.

Edited January 5, 2016 by streetstream

[Scooby]

No it's not the media blowing things out of proportion.

Nowhere in the article of the link in the original post is there any mention of a partially opened door.

Here is a quotes from the article and the title

Quote: "...one of the plane's doors was not completely shut."

Title:"Open door forces passenger plane to turn back"

Nowhere does it say the door opened.

Also, the term 'partially opened' does not imply that the door was closed and then opened. It states that it is not fully closed.

If i start closing a door and leave it opend just a bit, that door is partially open.

Yes, it is the media blowing things out of proportion. I've worked on pressurization issues on many aircraft in the military, from fighters to transports. I am a Human Factors In Aviation Facilitator too, I see reports on many pressurization incidents.

The media is saying the door was not properly closed, that is pure speculation. They say it turned back as the door was open. That isn't true, they turned back as the jet wouldn't pressurize properly and they could hear a leak at the door.

I highly doubt that jet left the ground without the door properly sealed. The locks are designed to contact sensors that indicate the door isn't properly closed and locked. You can't partially close the door and typically there are more than one sensor and all have to be activated to get the caution light.

Here is what I speculate occurred, I think the cabin pressure relief valve didn't release pressure and the cabin over-pressurized. That is why the passengers had ear pain. The door is like a plug, it won't open in flight, it can't. A door that size would have roughly 20,000 lbs of force pushing on it during a proper pressurization. With no pressure relief there would be more than 20,000 lbs of force. The seal isn't designed for over pressurization and likely blew, which caused the noise the crew could hear.

There is a gauge that shows the pressure inside the cabin, there is also a warning system for cabin pressurization. The crew remained at 10k to troubleshoot this fault.

I actually had this occur once during a test flight in a Herc. We couldn't stop the over-pressurization so we returned to base, remained below 10 k, and stopped pressurization so as to not damage the aircraft.

The ear pain was the first thing we noticed and it was awful.

As for the picture you posted, the cabin insulation that surrounds the door may be pushed in from over-pressurization or that may be what the door normally looks like when closed. The noise insulation padding doesn't always sit flush with doors.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Scooby

[streetstream]

Yes, it is the media blowing things out of proportion. .

The media is saying the door was not properly closed, that is pure speculation. They say it turned back as the door was open. That isn't true, they turned back as the jet wouldn't pressurize properly and they could hear a leak at the door.

You saying that they turned back because of pressurzation problems instead of the door is like me driving my car, suddenly have a very hard vibration on the steering wheel and discovering i have a flat tire. What is the reason for me stopping? The vibrations or the flat tire. That is just an argument of naming the cause of the failure or the symptoms. If somebody asked me why i was stopped, i would say because of a flat tire, not because my steering wheel is vibrating. You can choose either way, it does not mean the media is blowing things out of proportion.

I highly doubt that jet left the ground without the door properly sealed. The locks are designed to contact sensors that indicate the door isn't properly closed and locked. You can't partially close the door and typically there are more than one sensor and all have to be activated to get the caution light.

Just because you doubt it doesn't mean it can happen. United flight 811 is a great example of a door that wasn't locked in which the sensor indicated it was locked.

The door is like a plug, it won't open in flight, it can't.

First of, let me say that i never said (and the media in the article didn't either) the door opened. It is stated that it was open.

Here is what I speculate occurred, I think the cabin pressure relief valve didn't release pressure and the cabin over-pressurized. That is why the passengers had ear pain. The door is like a plug, it won't open in flight, it can't. A door that size would have roughly 20,000 lbs of force pushing on it during a proper pressurization. With no pressure relief there would be more than 20,000 lbs of force. The seal isn't designed for over pressurization and likely blew, which caused the noise the crew could hear.

Look, i'm not saying that your theory can't be what happend, but one problem with that is the crew wouldn't not have a failure to pressurise to start with. They would have seen the overpressure first. Also, if they overpressured and then blew a seal, i bet that the oxygenmask would have dropped as they do with an explosive decompressure. I never read any comment about the mask dropping/

Edited January 5, 2016 by streetstream

[okthree]

Seeing as cars all have sensors indicating when a door is not shut properly, I would have imagined that an aircraft costing millions of dollars would have similar sensors.

As a pilot of the 737-800 I can give a little insight.

Yes there is a bank of lights that indicates the status of the entry/service, cargo, equipment, etc, doors. If the door is open an amber light is illuminated. The light will be illuminated even if the door is closed but the handle that open and closes the door is not in the fully closed and locked position. Most of the captains that I fly with will brief the flight attendants to make sure the handle is fully down after the agent closes the door. One of the last items on our Before Starting Engines checklist is the confirm "doors and windows...closed and locked".

On the 737 glare shield there is a recall button that when pressed will illuminate the master caution light if an amber light is illuminated. In the before taxi checklist SOP is to press the recall button. Had a door light been illuminated the master caution light would have illuminated at "recall" giving them a second chance to notice the open door.

The Boeing QRH states that if a door light illuminates in flight and the airplane is pressurized then the door is closed and to continue. If the airplane is not pressurizing, then the procedure is to land at the nearest suitable airport. At a cabin altitude of approx.10,000 feet the cabin altitude horn sounds. At 14,000 feet the rubber jungle drops.

Since they leveled off at 10,000 leads me to think that they did have a pressurization problem. It is possible that they flew around for 40 minutes to burn off fuel to get the weight below the maximum landing weight. Not sure why they wouldn't immediately return for a landing.

The media likes to over sensationalize anything aviation. Most reporters who report stories about aviation know nothing about airplanes

I think I would have a hard time at the hearing explaining why I flew around for,40 minutes. .

Edited January 6, 2016 by okthree

[streetstream]

Yes there is a bank of lights that indicates the status of the entry/service, cargo, equipment, etc, doors. If the door is open an amber light is illuminated. The light will be illuminated even if the door is closed but the handle that open and closes the door is not in the fully closed and locked position.

One question about that. Is it possible that the only sensor(s) to confirm if a door is closed are located at the handle. I mean, that confirmation on the status of the door only comes from the handle and that if a handle is forced close even with an open door it still indicates that the door is closed?

[jester292]

No, pins and handle required.

[okthree]

What Aaron said.

To be truthful I'm not sure if the handle can be moved with the door open. Never have tried it. I'll have to check on my next flight. But to get the lights to extinguish the door would need to be closed.

[Scooby]

What Aaron said.

To be truthful I'm not sure if the handle can be moved with the door open. Never have tried it. I'll have to check on my next flight. But to get the lights to extinguish the door would need to be closed.

The door has to pivot in order for the handle to be moved. It won't move unless the door is moving. The handle is linked to both the pivoting movement and the locking pins. I confirmed it today when an engineer that works on 737s came for lunch with me at our hangar.

As most of us agree, this was a pressurization problem.