Southwest Rapid Rewards - hole in Fuselage - Landing at Charleston WV (flight 2294)

Rapid decompression event and divert to Charleston. A hole in the fuselage opened up during flight.


http://www.wsaz.com/news/headlines/50675862.html

Snippet: Passengers onboard say Flight 2294 was forced to land at Yeager Airport just after 6:00 p.m. after a hole the size of a football formed in the fuselage.

The flight took off from Nashville at 4:15 p.m. Monday and was on it's way to Baltimore-Washington International Airport.

Airport officials say there were 133 people onboard the plane and no one was hurt during the incident.

Hey everyone, here is our official statement:

SOUTHWEST AIRLINES PROVIDES INFORMATION REGARDING FLIGHT 2294

Scheduled Nashville-Baltimore Flight Diverts to West Virginia



DALLAS, TX—July 13, 2009--Southwest Airlines confirms its flight 2294, the 4:05 pm Eastern scheduled departure from Nashville to Baltimore/Washington diverted into Yeager Airport in Charleston, W. Va at approximately 6:10 pm Eastern today after a cabin depressurization. All 126 passengers and crew of five onboard landed safely and are awaiting a replacement aircraft in Charleston that will take them to Baltimore Washington International Airport later this evening.



The aircraft cabin depressurized approximately 30 minutes into the flight, activating the passengers’ onboard oxygen masks throughout the cabin. Medical personnel in Charleston assessed passengers and no injuries are reported. Southwest is sending its maintenance personnel to Charleston to assess the aircraft, and the airline will work with the NTSB to determine the cause of the depressurization. According to initial crew reports, the depressurization appears to be related to a small hole located approximately mid-cabin, near the top of the aircraft.

I noticed in a pic online they used an AirTran gate at CRW. Guess their strategy going after places like Milwaukee hasn't upset them too much :)

Kudos to the Crew (and Customers) for getting on the ground safely without a single injury. ^

Better get Fred Taylor to go ahead and open a word doc, and put 126 sheets of paper in the copier.

I'm glad to see nobody was seriously injured, and I see Southwest got a plane to Charleston and they left at 9:50 PM, scheduled to arrive in Baltimore at 10:21 PM.

Considering the situation a three hour diversion to Yeager is pretty remarkable.

News picture of fuselage (http://www.wvgazette.com/mediafiles/thumbs/450/322.5/planehole_I090713220136.jpg)

A view from inside. (http://twitpic.com/a9vk8)

Considering the situation a three hour diversion to Yeager is pretty remarkable.

I agree.. the incident occurred just after 6pm, and the replacement a/c was in the air at 7:44pm. (WN8514)

Flight Aware indicates WN2284 BNA-CRW was a 737-300. I would have been very surprised if it had been a -700.

Be interesting to know the age/history of this particular 737-300.

That "hole" sure looks like it's a panel that came off based on its uniform shape ...

Flight Aware indicates WN2284 BNA-CRW was a 737-300. I would have been very surprised if it had been a -700.

Be interesting to know the age/history of this particular 737-300.

We'd have to know the tail number for that.

Charleston Daily Mail article: http://www.dailymail.com/News/Kanawha/200907130735

[The passengers] were seated in the secure boarding area of the airport terminal and treated to beverages and free pizza from Gino's Pizzeria.

Something tells me they'll end up with a little bit more than that.

Oh my! This could have been disasterous - especially it is so close to the tail (Is it mid cabin? The photo seems to show it is really close to the tail)! Remember that Aloha 737? I am glad it landed safely and no one got hurt!

the airline will work with the NTSB to determine the cause of the depressurization. According to initial crew reports, the depressurization appears to be related to a small hole located approximately mid-cabin, near the top of the aircraft.

Based on the outside and inside pictures, I'm going to engage in armchair accident investigation and not wait for the official NTSB report: the gaping hole in the roof and the cabin depressurization are definitely related.

That "hole" sure looks like it's a panel that came off based on its uniform shape ...

More specifically, it looks suspiciously about the shape of and about at the same location of the new antennas being installed for in-flight Internet access:

http://www.shephard.co.uk/news/1717/row-44-airborne-at-last-with-southwest-airlines/

But that's just my speculation at this point.

The second page of the Charleston Daily Mail has the following qoute:

"Passengers had about a two-hour wait at Yeager before a Southwest Airlines Boeing 747 landed at 8:30 p.m. to take them the rest of the way to Maryland."


I didn't realize SWA was branching out on the types of aircraft it flys :)

More specifically, it looks suspiciously about the shape of and about at the same location of the new antennas being installed for in-flight Internet access

I highly doubt it has anything to do with the WiFi bubble. I don't believe WN has started putting WiFi on anything other than a handful of 737-700s.

This photo here (http://twitpic.com/a9vk8) shows it's right around row 21.

More specifically, it looks suspiciously about the shape of and about at the same location of the new antennas being installed for in-flight Internet access:No, it really doesn't, the "hole" in this case is further aft than the entire antenna and looks nothing like the "shape" of a huge circular antenna, the hole is rectangular.

Truly an odd incident. I can't recall seeing anything like this. Very different from the Aloha accident, as it seems like a "panel" was removed, rather than a structural failure due to repeated pressurization. Every once in a while, you hear of a cargo door or something "blowing off," but this one is obviously different.

While it seems like it's not that wi-fi antenna, a logical guess is that there is "something" attached there that was improperly secured.

Glad to hear that everyone made it OK on this flight!

Random question: in situation like this, where WN doesn't have a presence at the airport, who perform the ground crew/gate duties?

http://www.murfreesboropost.com/news.php?viewStory=18143 http://www.dailymail.com/News/Kanawha/200907130775

Glad to hear that everyone made it OK on this flight!

Random question: in situation like this, where WN doesn't have a presence at the airport, who perform the ground crew/gate duties?

Since it is an emergency situation and safety is key most airlines work together in these types of cases. We do know that they were sent to a secure area so that would ensure to no one was able to filter in or out of the group so re boarding would have been quite easy. Since they appear to be using an AirTran gate I would imagine that the AirTran personnel would have stepped up and assisted as needed.

A big good slap on the back goes to the crew and passengers for a safe landing under pressure (or without for that matter).

Ha! Good question. Probably crew that were supposed to work on a flight on some other airline, which was likely delayed....a lot longer than the WN flight.

Actually, was just going to comment on this thought:

Considering the situation a three hour diversion to Yeager is pretty remarkable.

Was just telling a friend that I'm not sure I'd ever move to an area without WN, and not the least reason is the fact that, anecdotally, I feel my chances of a significantly delayed flight are an order of magnitude less. Just really helps that they're not running a billion kinds of aircraft all over the country and stranding you every time there's a weather event 1500 miles away.

All this is to say - glad to hear nothing serious transpired. I could easily have been on that flight, being a BNA transplant from BWI a few years back. Good job, flight crew.

Oh my! This could have been disasterous - especially it is so close to the tail (Is it mid cabin? The photo seems to show it is really close to the tail)! Remember that Aloha 737? I am glad it landed safely and no one got hurt!

IIRC, the Aloha plane's fuselage was subjected to extremely salty conditions causing corrosion (Hawaii) and numerous changes in pressure (going up to altitude and coming down) due to inter-island flights.

While Southwest doesn't fly its aircraft in areas where there is a lot of salt exposure in the air, I do believe I heard the -300's are used mostly in Texas where the routes are shorter (even taking into account the size of Texas).

It will be interesting to see what the NTSB determines what was the cause.

Great job by the pilots and crew to get the bird down safe. Great job by the passengers not to panic.

Actually, was just going to comment on this thought:

"Considering the situation a three hour diversion to Yeager is pretty remarkable."

Was just telling a friend that I'm not sure I'd ever move to an area without WN, and not the least reason is the fact that, anecdotally, I feel my chances of a significantly delayed flight are an order of magnitude less.

To be fair to other airlines, while that's definitely good, it's not 'an order of magnitude' better than others. I was in a similar (though far less scary!) situation on NW a few years ago (midflight mechanical diversion to a small nonserved airport) and they got us going with a five-hour delay. Plus, the time from landing to dispatch of the replacement aircraft was similar -- it's just that NW sent us a plane from MSP to New Hampshire, whereas WN just had to send one from BWI to West Virginia.

As for compensation, we were offered a choice of $100 voucher or 12,500 miles -- these guys will get more for their emotional distress given that the masks deployed, but a free RR roundtrip is probably where it'll start. Some people may push for more, and WN may or may not give it to them...

More specifically, it looks suspiciously about the shape of and about at the same location of the new antennas being installed for in-flight Internet access:

(with tongue firmly in cheek) if that's the case, they had better find a new place to mount the antenna, so as to avoid further failures of infight wifi :D

(with tongue firmly in cheek) if that's the case, they had better find a new place to mount the antenna, so as to avoid further failures of infight wifi :D

Yeah, I would be really miffed if there was actually something worth posting to twitter and the WiFi didn't work.

I agree that it looks as if a panel or repair section failed at the fasteners. If that's the case, there is a little risk of direct injury. Most of the danger would be from passengers over-reacting. To some extent the FAs can influence that, although there is always that small percentage that will panic about anything.

MCO Emerg. Landing of Flight 3238 STL-MCO (http://www.wesh.com/news/20049963/detail.html)

Looks like this totally unrelated to yesterday's event. Since the aircraft flew all the way from STL to the MCO area and then got an APU fire warning, it is most likely (speculation) that it was a false indication. Especially since the APU would not normally be on during flight.

Still, this second story is enough to get the media folks fired up about SWA safety.

[QUOTE=kerflumexed;12064844
Still, this second story is enough to get the media folks fired up about SWA safety.[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, you may be right. Just like the way they got people all riled up about A330's.

DOH!! Glad no one was hurt. Cool visitor to CRW, though.

Another forum says it was N387SW delivered in 1994.

MCO Emerg. Landing of Flight 3238 STL-MCO (http://www.wesh.com/news/20049963/detail.html)

Looks like this totally unrelated to yesterday's event. Since the aircraft flew all the way from STL to the MCO area and then got an APU fire warning, it is most likely (speculation) that it was a false indication. Especially since the APU would not normally be on during flight.

Still, this second story is enough to get the media folks fired up about SWA safety.

It's not uncommon to turn on the APU during the approach, which is when the article indicated the fire warning occurred. The APU is actually a safety buffer, as it provides an extra source of electrical power and bleed air in the event of a problem. Main reason, especially at MCO in the summer, is providing cool air on the ground. Any potential inflight fire issue, though, is treated as a serious matter, as it should be.

Grainy... but here is an onboard video of 2294

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9c1_1247611117

NTSB releases photos of damage. (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1417-full.html#200744)

http://cbs11tv.com/local/Southwest.Airlines.NTSB.2.1867850.html

CBS 11 obtained a new report by the National Transportation Safety Board on Southwest flight 2294.

Investigators say it was a fatigue crack nearly 14 inches long. The NTSB says the skin on certain Boeing 737's is thinner and more susceptible to wear near the tail section of the aircraft.

The FAA says the problem was unanticipated.

Last September, Boeing issued a service bulletin calling for repeated inspections in the rear roof area of the planes In January, the inspections were made mandatory by the FAA.

http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief2.asp?ev_id=20090714X83900&ntsbno=DCA09FA065&akey=1

The longitudinal fatigue crack was 13.7 inches long from approximately BS 831 to BS 844. Highly magnified inspections of the longitudinal crack revealed continuous fatigue thumbnail cracks propagating outward (through-thickness) from multiple origins at the inner surface of the skin. The visual depth of the fatigue regions varied along the crack length. Near the middle of the longitudinal crack, the fatigue crack appeared to completely penetrate the skin thickness for a distance of approximately 3 inches. Scanning electron microscope examinations clearly showed microscopic features typical of fatigue progression, including areas of striations, in the longitudinal crack region.

Unfortunately, you may be right. Just like the way they got people all riled up about A330's.

The A330/A340 problem (freezing speed pitots) was a very real problem experienced by both NW over the Pacific and (apparently, the telemetry was consistent w/ the problem) by the AF plane that crashed in the South Atlantic. Speed pitots are essential for the safe operation of aircraft at high altitudes, where you have a narrow velocity window in which to fly the plane airborne.

Here is our statement about the NTSB release

We are in full compliance with all new Safety regulations developed by Boeing and the FAA and we thank the NTSB for its thorough investigation. We worked closely with investigators throughout this process and we concur with their conclusions. We've taken aggressive measures to incorporate additional maintenance inspections, additive to existing programs, in response to what was learned from flight 2294. Immediately after the accident, we increased our ongoing maintenance inspections in the impacted area to include recurring detailed visual inspections and non-destructive tests (NDT) – with a goal to not only meet but exceed known Safety standards.

At Southwest Airlines, everything is secondary to Safety, which is the core of our operation. Southwest continues to improve its maintenance program for the continued Safety of U.S. air travel and our own excellent Safety record.

Last September, Boeing issued a service bulletin calling for repeated inspections in the rear roof area of the planes In January,

Somehow, I don't think the word "roof" appeared anywhere in the Boeing service bulletin. :p