A Boeing piece found near Liège.

[airazurxtror]

Friday afternoon, an inhabitant of Saint Georges sur Meuse, not far from Bierset, found a piece of aircraft in her garden.
The piece, 80 cm long and weighing 5 kg, is from a Boeing 737, probably part of the undercarriage.
The DGTA identified its owner : Tailwind Airlines, based at Istanbul, which fly for Thomas Cook; the aircraft was thus carrying passengers ... nobody was aware of the problem, or at any rate, nobody said anything at the moment !

http://www.rtl.be/info/regions/liege/my ... 43854.aspx

[Conti764]

It doesn't need to mean much for the airworthiness of the plane, but imagine being struck by the piece after it fell from considerable height...

[Passenger]

http://www.rtbf.be/info/regions/detail_ ... id=9047938

"...L'avion, qui a perdu une de ses pièces jeudi dernier dans le jardin d'une habitation de Saint-Georges-sur-Meuse (en province de Liège), a pu être identifié sur base des investigations de la direction générale du transport aérien (DGTA), a indiqué mercredi Christian Delcourt, le responsable de la communication de Liège Airport, à l'Agence Belga. Le jeudi 31 juillet dernier, des riverains du boulevard des Combattants, à Saint-Georges-sur-Meuse, ont retrouvé un morceau d'avion dans leur jardin. "Même si l'enquête se poursuit, la pièce retrouvée est une partie du train d'atterrissage d'un Boeing 737 de la compagnie Tailwind, laquelle met des avions à disposition des tours opérateurs", explique Christian Delcourt, le responsable de la communication de Liège Airport. Il s'agissait bien d'un avion avec des passagers à bord. "L'avion peut voler sans cette pièce, qui n'a pas un fonctionnement important..."

Euh.... jeudi 31 juillet. If I look at my agenda, it says Thursday 30 July, Friday 31 July.

[Acid-drop]

jeudredi then

[Acid-drop]

most likely this flight
http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airpl ... e/#6f8aff7

[Passenger]

most likely this flight
http://www.flightradar24.com/data/airpl ... e/#6f8aff7

Could be, but the aircraft involved should have been taken out of service for repairs soon after 31st July, and this one wasn't. Unless, of course, the airline is unaware of it.

I've read somewhere that it could also have been a flight outgoing from Charleroi.

[Acid-drop]

we have the location of the impact, exactly inline with the track of LGG, and it corresponds with the FR24 info.
But yes this plane is still flying ... i'm not sure the airlines knows about it

[Lysexpat]

the aircraft involved should have been taken out of service for repairs soon after 31st July, and this one wasn't.

An aircraft can be despatched with some pieces missing for up to several months. Usually this results in performance and or fuel penalties.

[KriVa]

Correct. Last week, an aircraft registered in Belgium was flying around with a missing flap track fairing.
There's nothing fancy about it, really. Just write it down in the Tech Log, and make sure the replacement parts are ordered. Dispatch includes a fuel penalty during flight plan calculation, and you're good to go!

[Stij]

Correct. Last week, an aircraft registered in Belgium was flying around with a missing flap track fairing.
There's nothing fancy about it, really. Just write it down in the Tech Log, and make sure the replacement parts are ordered. Dispatch includes a fuel penalty during flight plan calculation, and you're good to go!

I feel a lot unsafer now...

[KriVa]

Forgot to mention this: The flap track fairing did not fall off, but was removed in the hangar.

[Passenger]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're talking here about an object of 5 kgs, 80 cms long, that felt into a domestic garden - a playground actually. It was only pure luck that nobody was injured/killed, but yet it seems to me that some regard it as a non-event.

According to Christian Delcourt (LGG), it is a part of the landing gear of a 737. He reassures civilians with "l’avion peut voler sans cette pièce, qui n’a pas un fonctionnement important". Luckily all the greens and the anti-aviation/anti-airport protesters are on holiday... in Turkey or the Dominican Republic right now.

[Lysexpat]

Passenger- please don't read what is not written!
We were talking about the airworthiness of the aircraft. Will you stop driving your car whenever you loose the little door covering the petrol cap?
Of course the falling part could've caused damage on the ground, luckily it didn happen.

[Passenger]

Passenger- please don't read what is not written! We were talking about the airworthiness of the aircraft. Will you stop driving your car whenever you loose the little door covering the petrol cap? Of course the falling part could've caused damage on the ground, luckily it didn happen.

I read only what is written and I listen only to what it said. Actually, I even copy/pasted the relevant quotes. And although French is not my native language, I understand it good enough to know exactly what happened. Therefore, no need to say "please don't read what is not written".

When this event/incident is only regarded as "about airworthiness", it is probably a minor issue. But the press reports are not about airworthiness only, but also about the safety of people on the ground. The lady said on RTL: "it was pure luck that nobody was hurt". Is that aviation safety: "nobody is hurt, so end of discussion"?

Will you stop driving your car whenever you loose the little door covering the petrol cap?

No. But when my bumper and spare wheel fall off, I would probably stop driving and ask my garage immediately to check if there is perhaps a more serious problem.

[sean1982]

Will you stop driving your car whenever you loose the little door covering the petrol cap?

No. But when my bumper and spare wheel fall off, I would probably stop driving and ask my garage immediately to check if there is perhaps a more serious problem.

Sure, cause stopping an airplane is just as easy
The pilots didnt even know they lost something as there were no indications in the flightdeck and no abnormal vibrations. Further more, you are once again, for god knows what reason this time, blowing this out of proportion.

[Passenger]

Sure, cause stopping an airplane is just as easy.

It was not me but Lysepat who made that comparison with a car. So don't blame me for that remark.

The pilots didnt even know they lost something as there were no indications in the flightdeck and no abnormal vibrations. Further more, you are once again, for god knows what reason this time, blowing this out of proportion.

Once again, a clear example of beroepsmisvorming (professional deformation): "no indications, no vibrations, so no incident. Case closed, shut up passengers". The press reports, the press calls it a serious incident, and you blame them -and those who agree with them- because the airworthiness was not at stake. No sir. It's the damned right of the press to report about aviation incidents that they regard as abnormal and unsafe. Not that long ago, a Dutch court even ruled that the press is indeed the public watchdog for such aviation incidents.

[Acid-drop]

it may be a small incident for the air part
but it's bad enough on the ground part.
We can't exactly afford falling metal.
What if a 8 year old kid was dead because of it ? The noise would be different for sure

[sean1982]

Sure, cause stopping an airplane is just as easy.

It was not me but Lysepat who made that comparison with a car. So don't blame me for that remark.

The pilots didnt even know they lost something as there were no indications in the flightdeck and no abnormal vibrations. Further more, you are once again, for god knows what reason this time, blowing this out of proportion.

Once again, a clear example of beroepsmisvorming (professional deformation): "no indications, no vibrations, so no incident. Case closed, shut up passengers". The press reports, the press calls it a serious incident, and you blame them -and those who agree with them- because the airworthiness was not at stake. No sir. It's the damned right of the press to report about aviation incidents that they regard as abnormal and unsafe. Not that long ago, a Dutch court even ruled that the press is indeed the public watchdog for such aviation incidents.

Sure ROFL
All they do is keep the misconceptions, that you support here so vividly, alive. But hey ... As long as the money from spectacular headlines rolls in ... Right? It has nothing to do with "being a watchdog" or even giving "correct information" (they cant even get the day right on this one), but generating money. Like every other commercial entity

Good example of your watchdog here (and your prime source of info) They call this a serious incident as well

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/trave ... rport.html

And on top of that .. How do you want a pilot to return to an airport if he doesnt even know something is wrong in the first place?

[Passenger]

Good example of your watchdog here (and your prime source of info)...
...dailymail.co.uk/...

The story has not been reported by British tabloids (who by the way, off topic and contrary to what you say are not my prime info source), but by established Belgian press services like RTBf, La Dernière Heure, La Meuse, RTL, L’Avenir, …
http://www.rtbf.be/info/regions/detail_ ... id=9047938
http://www.rtl.be/info/regions/liege/my ... 43854.aspx
http://www.lameuse.be/1347828/article/2 ... a-ete-iden
http://www.dhnet.be/actu/belgique/piece ... a437616f67

All they do is keep the misconceptions, that you support here so vividly, alive. But hey ... As long as the money from spectacular headlines rolls in ... Right? It has nothing to do with "being a watchdog" or even giving "correct information" (they cant even get the day right on this one), but generating money. Like every other commercial entity

Misconceptions? No, all they did, is report a plain fact about aviation safety. Your dislike about their reports proofs that it’s too dangerous to regard aviation safety as an aviation-only problem. Aviation incidents are general safety issues, not trade-only internal matters with airworthiness as guideline. Just a few weeks ago, we had a few excellent (but very sad) examples about the principle that aviation safety is public interest: https://www.aviation24.be/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=56659 or http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33339965

(they cant even get the day right on this one)

Tell us then what is wrong with the press report from RTBf and others: it didn't happen? It was only a piece of 100 gr and not 5 kg? It was not a metal part, but soft plastic that came down softly?

[sean1982]

All they do is keep the misconceptions, that you support here so vividly, alive. But hey ... As long as the money from spectacular headlines rolls in ... Right? It has nothing to do with "being a watchdog" or even giving "correct information" (they cant even get the day right on this one), but generating money. Like every other commercial entity

Misconceptions? No, all they did, is report a plain fact about aviation safety. Your dislike about their reports proofs that it’s too dangerous to regard aviation safety as an aviation-only problem. Aviation incidents are general safety issues, not trade-only internal matters with airworthiness as guideline. Just a few weeks ago, we had a few excellent (but very sad) examples about the principle that aviation safety is public interest: https://www.aviation24.be/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=56659 or http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33339965

You mention 2 accidents, but neither of them are commercial aviation. First one is G/A, other one is military. Both of them far less regulated then commercial aviation. Nobody is denying that aviation safety is public interest, scaremongering (with the point of making money) isnt