Boeing 737 Max 9: Alaska Airlines' breakdown plane was scheduled for inspection on the same day

Enlarge image

Hole in the fuselage of the Boeing 737 Max 9: safety concerns even before takeoff

Photo: National Transportation Safety Board / AP

After the near-miss of an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 in January, new details are coming to light: According to a report in the New York Times, the airline's experts had already scheduled a safety inspection of the plane the day before the incident because there were problems with the cabin pressure system.

But the jet remained in service until the planned visit to the workshop - and only narrowly avoided a catastrophe.

The newspaper cites interviews and documents that show "airline engineers and technicians were so concerned about the growing signs of a problem that they planned to take the plane out of service the next evening and have it serviced."

A comprehensive check was planned for the evening on the day of the accident.

But until then the jet remained in passenger service.

A few minutes after takeoff from the airport in Portland, Oregon, a part of the fuselage broke out of the plane.

The crew and passengers largely escaped with horror - probably also because the seats near the hole in the fuselage remained empty during the flight.

So far, the question of guilt after the incident has primarily revolved around Boeing.

The American aircraft manufacturer has plunged into an unprecedented crisis due to a series of safety defects in its jets.

But now the question also arises as to whether Alaska Airlines may have reacted too late to warning signs on the affected aircraft.

It became known shortly after the accident that Alaska Airlines had concerns about the use of the jet.

Accordingly, Alaska Airline decided to no longer use the aircraft for long-haul flights following warnings from the cabin pressure system.

However, it was not yet public that the airline had already scheduled a safety check for the plane.

According to the New York Times, the airline decided to keep the plane in service instead of sending it to its maintenance facility without passengers.

Alaska Airlines confirmed the sequence of events to the newspaper.

The airline said the warnings did not meet the threshold for conditions that require the aircraft to be removed from service immediately.

Apparently a warning light from the cabin pressure system came on twice within ten days - but aggressive intervention was only planned when it came on three times.

mic