Bolt falls off plane over SYD

[Yada Yada]

Hitting the roof over jet's dropped bolt

Jano Gibson
October 18, 2006

An international airline is being investigated after an 11-centimetre-long bolt dislodged from a wing shortly after take-off and slammed into an elderly Sydney man's home as he drank his morning coffee.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has confirmed that the bolt, which smashed through tiles on the roof of Angelo Margiotta about 8.30am, was a type used on Boeing 737 and 747 planes.

"It is definitely an aeronautical bolt manufactured by a company in America," CASA spokesman, Peter Gibson, said.

Based on the make of the bolt and this morning's Sydney Airport aircraft take-off schedule, CASA has identified an international airline as the likely source of the bolt, Mr Gibson said.

However, investigations were at too early a stage to name the company, he added.


More...

Lucky no-one was harmed! :shock:

p.s. Should we start a competition to guess which plane it came from?

 

[Mal]

Shouldn't be too hard to work out. Boeing 747/767 landing or taking off @ SYD yesterday morning around 8:30am. A look at the departures and arrivals for SYD today only shows a handful of flights meeting that criteria.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

indeed not to many possibilities, although the last statement has me thinking (3 previous cases of bolts falling out of sky into Sydney homes in last 10 years, none of which came from planes)...

 

[Deeruck]

indeed not to many possibilities, although the last statement has me thinking (3 previous cases of bolts falling out of sky into Sydney homes in last 10 years, none of which came from planes)...

The truth is out there Kiwi Flyer...

 

[ColinP]

indeed not to many possibilities, although the last statement has me thinking (3 previous cases of bolts falling out of sky into Sydney homes in last 10 years, none of which came from planes)...

Hence the term -- "Like a bolt from the blue".

 

[NM]

Shouldn't be too hard to work out. Boeing 747/767 landing or taking off @ SYD yesterday morning around 8:30am. A look at the departures and arrivals for SYD today only shows a handful of flights meeting that criteria.

The media report quoted in the OP says 747 or 737. And there are few 737s operated by International Airlines into or out of Sydney. So I am sure CASA knows just which aicraft it came from.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

Isn't Qantas an international airline?

Why would the bolt be different on say 767 vs 737 vs 747?

 

[NM]

Isn't Qantas an international airline?

Indeed. But I think that CASA and the media would have used a different term if they believed it to have been a Qantas, *Blue or JetStar aircraft.

Why would the bolt be different on say 767 vs 737 vs 747?

I expect there are some components that are used on all three of those Boeing types you mentioned, and there will be some components that are only used on one type. The media report quoted CASA as identifying it as a bolt used on 747 and 737 aircraft. But then again, I don't put a lot of faith in the accuracy of such media reports.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

Indeed. But I think that CASA and the media would have used a different term if they believed it to have been a Qantas, *Blue or JetStar aircraft.

I agree - just making the point re sloppy wording.

But then again, I don't put a lot of faith in the accuracy of such media reports.

Nor do I, hence my question.

 

[kelpie]

Damn, from the title of this thread I was hoping Andrew Bolt might have fallen out of the plane.

 

[JohnK]

Lucky no-one was harmed! :shock:

That is very scary!

All the more reason why aircraft should takeoff and land over water.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

That is very scary!

All the more reason why aircraft should takeoff and land over water.

What makes you think something would only fall off immediately after take-off? They can't stay over water for the whole flight (okay they can for some routes, but not in general).

 

[simongr]

Isnt the reason for non-static runways (i.e. always taking off over water) is because planses should take off into the wind - thus increasing the airspeed over the wings. Taking of ony in onedirection might actually increase the risk by either requiring greater take off speeds or poor piloting leading to more attempts to take off with insufficient lift.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

Isnt the reason for non-static runways (i.e. always taking off over water) is because planses should take off into the wind - thus increasing the airspeed over the wings. Taking of ony in onedirection might actually increase the risk by either requiring greater take off speeds or poor piloting leading to more attempts to take off with insufficient lift.

Yes.

In addition, not a good idea to have aircraft taking off into the path of landing aircraft


There are of course some airports that do have water off both ends, eg WLG, AKL.

 

[simongr]

Gibraltar as well I think Not sure how many commercial flights go through there - it was a military flight for me I think.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

BA flies there from both LHR and LGW. I haven't flown there but have been at the road barrier watching flights both land and take off.

IIRC a recent agreement allows some spanish flights also (there will be a new terminal built straddling the border - like what they have at Basel). Not sure which spanish airline will fly.

 

[NM]

But by having the flight path over houses they are more likely to find the bits that fall off and hence know there may be a piece missing from the aircraft. If it fell off over water nobody would be any wiser to the fact that an important part had fallen off .

There have been plenty of incidents where parts have fallen off departing aircraft, including an engine cowling panel from a QF 747 (departing Brisbane I think from memory), and even an entire engine fell off a a Northwest 727 at 35,000 feet and the pilots didn't know it was gone and kept flying for another 25 mins!

 

[maninblack]

Damn, from the title of this thread I was hoping Andrew Bolt might have fallen out of the plane.

Ditto...unfortunately it was not to be.

 

[Yada Yada]

Ditto...unfortunately it was not to be.

Yes, that certainly would have been cause for celebration. :mrgreen:

 

[serfty]

There's an article in news.com.au: Falling bolt lost from jumbo hits man's home | NEWS.com.au

Falling bolt lost from jumbo hits man's home

By Gemma Jones

October 19, 2006 01:00am
Article from: The Daily Telegraph

A MAN enjoying his morning cup of coffee was jolted when his home was hit by a bolt from a jumbo flying overhead yesterday.

... a 25cm bolt from the plane's wing flap exploded through his roof....

Firefighters found the bolt in the roof cavity, saying a tile had been "obliterated" by the "high speed impact".

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority traced the serial number and said it had come from a Boeing 747 or a 767.

Sydney airport officials yesterday scoured flight records to pinpoint which jet it had come from.

CASA last night contacted several overseas airlines after ruling out Qantas.

...

Peter Gibson, of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, said it was most likely the bolt had been left behind during routine maintenance.

He added no safety alerts would be issued until CASA determined the bolt's origins.