34 ms·
United finds loose bolts on plug doors during 737 Max 9 inspections
- hipadev23 3y ago[flagged]
- jefftk 3y agoI don't think glossing "It makes no sense to call for heads to roll without even knowing the root cause" as a Boeing apologist makes sense?
- Night_Thastus 3y agoThose claims that it was maintenance is a bit bizarre considering these were brand new craft, and that panel isn't exactly a wear item. (ofc, some wear with each pressurization cycle, but I digress) It'd be different if it was an engine issue on a 20+ year old plane. But still, this isn't anything like the prior MAX issue - and frankly could have just as easily happened to any manufacturer like Airbus. I don't think it's worth bashing Boeing much about, I doubt they're too happy about it either.
- chatmasta 3y ago> But still, this isn't anything like the prior MAX issue Sure, other than being with a variant of the same model of plane built by the same manufacturer, this latest issue is nothing like the prior issue.
- Night_Thastus 3y agoIf you knew anything about the previous issue, you'd know they aren't much of anything alike. The previous issue: * Was primarily a software issue, not a hardware issue * Was caused by the design of the craft, not an issue with construction * Was known by Boeing in advance and ignored, not discovered later So yes, the two issues aren't very much alike.
- dan_quixote 3y agoOne major difference I recall back when working in the industry is that Airbus didn't rely on contract manufacturing like Boeing adopted after the McDonnell Douglas merger. Spirit was just Boeing Wichita until they divested the operation only to immediately contract work with the new owner at a discount.
- hef19898 3y agoThe Boeing MDD merger was before my time. Airbus sure does rely on contract manufacture for everything from wings over fuselage sections to doors so. Often using the same suppliers Boeing does, the market for these tier 1 manufacturing suppliers is small.
- bilbo0s 3y agoOne of the most disappointing things about this whole issue has been a kind of "fanboy"-ism that's been a bit shocking. Fanboy-ism is for the "We hate Apple", or the "Emacs is better than vi" level arguments. There is no room for fanboy-ism in airliner design. It's a business that should be approached in a manner that is at once, sober and serious. If there are problems with this airliner, let's get them all on the table and start working through them one by one. I thought this is what the FAA and Boeing were meant to do? (Even in the face of monetary losses). But the mounting evidence of a rubber-stamp approval regime is concerning. We really do need to have cooler more dispassionate heads take things back in hand here. I think a move away from the money-men, the fanboys, and the doomsday alarmists is overdue at this point.
- gfodor 3y agoI took a second to check your links, and as I guessed, at least two of those would be unfairly characterized as "apologists." The fact your bad faith, ad hom post is here at the top of HN is a pretty damning indictment of the current userbase's sobriety when it comes to engineering issues and precise reading of claims.
- threeseed 3y agoNone of what you posted were apologising for Boeing. One was rightly pointing out that we should investigate first before jumping to any conclusions and the other two were pointing out that Alaskan had maintenance failures which is also true. And is anything actually proven yet ?
- armada651 3y agoGiven that these are plug-style doors even if these were bolts in the hinges it would not risk the integrity of the fuselage seal.
- CydeWeys 3y agoMaybe the plugs aren't flanged enough? If the walls are mostly flat you could see the bolts being load-bearing.
- samstave 3y agoMy money is on the window. It was compromised and then the plug/bolts/flanges structure was ripped out of the body.
- bell-cot 3y agoHow would compromise of the window encourage the plug to be ripped out?
- samstave 3y agoMy assumption is the decompression event would have put the velocity of that decompression on the door/bolts and they are going to be weaker - and the addition of a window into a plug/door like this adds structural mass to add to that which is being sucked out via the decompression putting them over spec load for that area - but since it was a plug, the surrounding structure was still sound - just that thing couldnt handle the load. EDIT: Maybe the bolts have a really high shearing tolerance, but not as good of a tensile pull?
- tavavex 3y agoI don't think there were any modern cases of airliner windows just being removed like that. They're fairly strong and consist of multiple layers of acrylic that are sandwiched between other components, so the entire window assembly would need to get torn out. Even then, it doesn't seem realistic that the difference in pressure would be big enough to instantly rip a properly-attached door clean off. Of course, only the experts can tell for sure, but my money's on a failure of the whole structure.
- ethanbond 3y agoSoothing to read this while waiting to taxi aboard a different 737 model flown by United!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- partiallypro 3y agoLuckily this seems to only effect one (newer) model of the 737, though you begin to wonder what was missed in the others.
- emeril 3y agoat this point, I'd prefer to be on an older boeing than a newer one...:(
- intunderflow 3y agoAt what point do consumers en-masse refuse to fly on these aircraft, if ever? When there's a few more fatal crashes?
- t0mas88 3y agoUnfortunately consumers don't have much choice, the airline can change which type operates a flight at any time. However longer term if Boeing's reputation keeps getting worse that can motivate buying decisions by the airlines. That change will be a very slow one, because fleet changes cost a lot of money in training crews, changing maintenance etc. For example KLM is changing their short-haul fleet from the 737 NG to the A320neo family, that will take many years to completely roll out.
- neverartful 3y agoTrue, but some airlines probably don't have any in their fleet. If worried consumers find out they could opt to not fly on those airlines.
- bilbo0s 3y agoMost airlines do have MAXs. Delta does not. However, they have ordered some MAXs. So they will have MAXs in the future. That will take quite some time however. So if it's really that big of an issue for a person, then just fly Delta for the time being.
- plopz 3y agospirit doesn't have any of these in their fleet, but it's not the most comfortable flight
- chriskanan 3y agoDelta doesn't have any currently, although they ordered a bunch of the MAX family that will be delivered from 2025 - 2029. It will probably be impossible to avoid them, long-term.
- fullshark 3y ago
- napoleoncomplex 3y agoOn at least 5 airplanes? Of one airline? Are loose bolts a minor issue, or is it as insane as it reads?
- Syonyk 3y agoNo, it's as insane as it reads. It means people were careless and sloppy during assembly. Think of it like seeing "one cockroach in your kitchen." It's not one cockroach. You just haven't opened up the rest of the walls.
- Scoundreller 3y agoOr it means the torque specs were a little too low, or too high and stripped, or the bolt threading was defective/spec’d wrong. Or bad metallurgy. Or the spec didn’t specify which order to tighten the bolts, so which direction you go causes different outcomes. Lots of stuff is assembled consistently and carefully “wrong”, but as specified.
- tuckerpo 3y agoIt seems there's a sense of malaise falling over everything and everyone in the USA. People at large simply cannot be bothered to care about anything, including torque specs for freakin' AIRLINERS
- xcv123 3y ago[flagged]
- aappleby 3y ago[flagged]
- xcv123 3y ago[flagged]
- threeseed 3y ago[flagged]
- xcv123 3y agoThat is not what I said But when you have a quota, then you must ignore better qualified applicants in order to satisfy the quota. It's a mathematical fact. I am not saying this is the reason why Boeing is turning to shit. But it's an interesting observation. I myself am a "minority/POC" and I'm also extremely competent at my job. So I'm not saying that minorities are incompetent, because I am not incompetent. When I interview candidates I give zero fucks about their colour/gender/whatever. If they are morons then I won't hire them.
- throwboatyface 3y ago[flagged]
- zilti 3y ago
- fidelio93 3y agoCould AI help firms like Boeing perform more robust and automated safety checks? I'm curious about how much an issue like this can be chalked up to human error vs. poor, semi-automated QA.
- bell-cot 3y agoGIGO
- pc86 3y agoOh nice this is the first time I've seen the AI equivalent of "Bitcoin fixes this" in the wild.
- consumer451 3y agoThis is hilarious, but I think we might be being a bit unfair. Why couldn't you use something a camera on eyeglasses while doing the work correctly to fine tune a multimodal model, and then infer to a user wearing the same glasses? Audio reply saying "nope, try again." You would need multiple frames per second, so not today, but not that far into the future, right? edit: Zero-shot, I just took photos of me "fixing things" around the house, and here is what ChatGPT told me. It does not suck. Do this with fine tuning, many frames per second, and what am I missing? https://imgur.com/a/H1eSShH https://imgur.com/a/H1eSShH https://imgur.com/a/YXxz8uL https://imgur.com/a/YXxz8uL
- ChatGTP 3y agoBecause those things are a joke ?
- consumer451 3y agoPlease refresh and look at my edit. If a missing some major required component aside from finetuning and frames per sec, which will require a few years for everything to be fast enough... please let me know what it is. Wait, oh it will be understanding of time... the sequencing of the frames. That is missing for now, right?
- raverbashing 3y agoIt is not so clear if the loose bolts are on the door or if they're the bolts that attach the door to the frame. Also given that the door that fell was just found in one piece this makes me suspect the latter But regardless, not looking good for Boeing (*door but of course it's more a plug than a real door, just using the term for ease of understanding) Edit: https://twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1744460136855294106?t=BYuio9BlUX8wF1PORZCoBA&s=19 https://twitter.com/ByERussell/status/1744460136855294106?t=...
- chatmasta 3y agoThis is reassuring news to me, as someone who has opted for Airbus over Boeing (and even paid extra for it) whenever given the choice since the first 737-MAX crashes in 2017.
- WheatMillington 3y agoHow is this reassuring?! Are you sure you don't mean "vindicating" or similar? Hard to understand how anyone could feel reassured by this.
- chatmasta 3y agoIt's "reassuring" in the sense that I'm reassured I've been making the right decision... but yeah, "vindicating" is probably a more appropriate choice of word :)
- thsksbd 3y agoId feel mostly vindicated (which is worse - no one likes that guy), but also reassured. Reassured that I'm not crazy! The decision OP took might have been extreme and costly (time wise and effort mostly). People around him might have lightly whispered to him to be reasonable, or "trust the experts". This wears on you eventually and you start to doubt your own reasonableness. Boeing starts leaving bolts unfastened and all of a sudden you remember the almost weekly stream of pre-pandemic HN articles with new material on Boeing's fall from excellence. Boeing's marketing dept. was capitalizing that everyone had forgotten about the MAX. The few of us who remembered it maybe weirdos, but we're nut nuts!
- jasode 3y agoI found it interesting that Boeing did proactively tell airlines to inspect 737 MAXs for a possible loose bolt in a different part of the plane (rudder section) at least 8 days before the January 5th event. Example story: https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-urges-737-max-inspections-possible-loose-bolt-faa-2023-12-28/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-ur... Unfortunately, Boeing did not know they had other issues with the plug door bolts.
- nolok 3y agoImagine the quality of the manufacturing and QA / final inspection to have that kind of issue.
- ethbr1 3y agoI expect even at its worst, software development could learn a lot from aircraft QA. Especially since most shops have pretty much tossed professional career QA out the window.
- darylteo 3y agosoftware development: what is QA?
- bb88 3y agoThat's where failed software devs / management go to.
- ShadowBanThis01 3y agoExcept, of course, from Boeing's aircraft-software QA... which killed hundreds of people already.
- actionfromafar 3y agoThe problem was not really the software in isolation, but that pilots expected the 737 NG to behave exactly like the old version - because Boeing decided it was too expensive to retrain pilots.
- nritchie 3y agoMakes you wonder if there was malice involved?
- dylan604 3y agoMy grandfather worked for Braniff as a mechanic, and I've heard stories where very strange things would happen that definitely gave merit to some sort of sabotage being a likely explanation. From very specialized tools would be missing not from just one bay, but from all of the bays to other issues that would cause regular maintenance from being able to be completed in a timely turn causing more and more planes to be taken out of service. Lots of things went wrong with that airline, but some of the things just makes you scratch your chin in wonder if it might not be possible.
- flohofwoe 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
- bahmboo 3y agoI really doubt it is but important to keep in mind that foreign governments running active espionage campaigns against Boeing. The French have dozens of agents. This is from a conversation I had with a person who works in a large counter espionage group at Boeing. This was corporate espionage not defense but I'm sure there's a group for that.
- adrian_b 3y agoThere were only 2 possible causes of the incident, either the bolts had been replaced with bolts made from an inappropriate material, so they broke, or the bolts had not been assembled correctly, and they became loose. It appears that the latter is what happened. Perhaps those who did the assembly of the doors at Boeing did not use the right kind of washers that are needed to prevent the unscrewing of the bolts, or they did not apply the correct torque to the bolts. It is extremely surprising if such trivial errors can happen during the assembly of an aircraft.
- lokar 3y agoOr the lock wire was left off or done incorrectly
- someguydave 3y agoAren’t there multiple signoffs & inspections to see if the lock wire was being done correctly?
- shawnz 3y agoNo matter the real root cause, surely multiple layers of precautions must have failed to allow this to happen, right? So given that's a foregone conclusion, how can we discredit a hypothesis based on that?
- zokier 3y agoYou are assuming this is problem in the assembly and not in the design?
- queuebert 3y agoI've seen on Toyotas and also at Universal Studios bolts on rides are marked with paint presumably to indicate that the nut hasn't backed out. Are airliners marked in this way? Is checking the bolts simply a visual inspection, or do the inspectors need to get out a torque wrench?
- hef19898 3y agoWorkers are trained and qualified to sign of on their work. Some work is double checked by a co-worker. Some is again checked by QA. FAL work, and loose bolts falling under FOD absolutely, are checked by QA. Or at least should be. No idea how this can happen, Boeing really has to get its shit together.
- lb1lf 3y agoThis is SOP in manufacturing to indicate that a bolt has been torqued to whatever torque specified in the assembly drawing; as an added bonus, if the mark is applied properly, you can also tell at a glance whether the bolt has worked itself loose.
- chippiewill 3y agoUnlike on a rollercoaster, these bolts are hidden within the fuselage behind the cabin panelling so a regular visual inspection to see if they've been loosening wouldn't be practical. During assembly the bolts should have been torqued and then checked and the bolts would only be reinspected when the panelling is removed after 3 years or so.
- adamweld 3y agoYes aircraft fasteners are often torque marked, and almost all safety critical fasteners have an additional preload locking mechanism. Often these fasteners use mechanical locking features such as cotter pins, safety wire, or safety cable.
- kube-system 3y agoEven better, safety critical bolts on these doors are (supposed to be, at least) pinned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLBGFYl9_o&t=523s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLBGFYl9_o&t=523s
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- blindriver 3y agoDoesn’t this call into question the manufacturing of ALL 737 MAX’s including the 7 and 8 since they must use the same manufacturing process?
- pluc 3y agoYeah this isn't a plane issue, it's a guy holding the drill issue as far as I understand it
- intrasight 3y agoA guy holding an inspection report issue
- myself248 3y agoIf a guy holding the drill CAN cause this issue, that means there's ALSO a drill calibration issue, a bolt inspection issue, an inspection recordkeeping and doublechecking issue, etc. Humans make mistakes. The whole point of modern manufacturing is to make products better than any human can make them, by layering processes and procedures to catch those mistakes before they get out the door, and continually improve the processes to catch ever more.
- jacquesm 3y agoSpot on, this is exactly the problem: you can't have 'just loose bolts', it's a whole raft of other issues.
- mckn1ght 3y agoIn The Design of Everyday Things Donald Norman mentions the swiss-cheese model, whereby multiple layers in a process need to align correctly for a mistake to lead all the way to an incident: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_cheese_model
- jkqwzsoo 3y ago
- tomohawk 3y agoIndustrial sabotage? Grievance sabotage? Quality control? Hopefully they can track down the cause.
- barryrandall 3y agoMetrics that don't give employees enough time to accurately complete their tasks? Management whose first and last priorities are quarterly financial projections? Transitioning from external oversight to self-reporting? I do hope they can track down the cause, whatever it might be.
- pierotofy 3y agoIt might be another fault due to the cultural shift that's been happening at Boeing: https://www.npr.org/2019/10/26/773675393/boeings-cultural-shift https://www.npr.org/2019/10/26/773675393/boeings-cultural-sh... > Safety and quality were taking a second seat to schedule and cost.
- blibble 3y ago"the most scrutinised transport aircraft in history"
- 7e 3y agoNot reassuring.
- nwallin 3y agoNot reassuring indeed. "most scrutinized world leader in history"
- ActionHank 3y agoWell yeah, keep making things that break or cause issues and people will have to scrutinise more and more.
- phkahler 3y ago737 != 737 Max.
- fshbbdssbbgdd 3y agoCheck out this video showing how the plug is supposed to be installed: https://youtu.be/maLBGFYl9_o?t=540 https://youtu.be/maLBGFYl9_o?t=540 Some of the bolts that would be loosened when the plug is opened during maintenance have a pin to prevent them from turning. That pin is present in this photo: https://x.com/byerussell/status/1744460136855294106?s=46&t=soI_22ePcksISc752p6zkw https://x.com/byerussell/status/1744460136855294106?s=46&t=s... However, the same photo shows other critical bolts that hold the whole hinge on the door are loose, and there’s not meant to be a pin on those. I’m curious how the decision is made whether to include that pin in the design. Did they idiot-proof the maintenance of the plug, but not the initial installation?
- fshbbdssbbgdd 3y agoMore rampant speculation! Some quotes from this article: https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spirit-aero-made-blowout-part-boeing-has-key-role-sources-2024-01-07/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spirit-ae... > As part of the production process, Spirit builds fuselages for 737s and sends them by train with the special door assembly “semi-rigged,” one of the people said. > “They are fitted but not completed," the person said. > At its Renton, Washington, plant, Boeing typically removes the pop-out, or non-functioning, door and uses the gap to load interiors. Then, the part is put back and the installation in completed. Finally, the hull is pressurized to 150% to make sure everything is working correctly, the person said. I can imagine a diffusion of responsibility as to whose job it is supposed to be to tighten those hinge bolts. Spirit is installing the plug in a “semi-rigged” state. Boeing is removing the plug to load the interior, then reinstalling it. I’d hazard a guess that Boeing is not removing the hinges, because the plug can be removed without doing so. What if, when reinstalling the plug, Boeing workers just redo the stuff they removed? They tighten the vertical movement arrestor bolt, put the pin through it, and believe they have done their job? If they never messed with those other hinge bolts, they don’t bother tightening them?
- thehappypm 3y agoThere’s no way that this is what happened. They’re not building IKEA furniture, everything is tightly check-listed.
- outside1234 3y agoSuch a crappy aircraft - can we just get rid of these already?
- jlmorton 3y agoAlways refactor
- kube-system 3y agoBolts can be loosened, or fail to be tightened on any aircraft. I suspect this may be a problem with people and/or procedure.
- RomanPushkin 3y agoThe question is not about bolts, but more about what else is hidden there, what else is mechanically neglected that's waiting in there to take lives
- adrian_b 3y agoSince the aircraft with the incident was extremely new, it is pretty certain that the bolts have not been properly assembled at Boeing, so the problem is with their assembly procedures.
- kube-system 3y agoThe fuselage of this plane is not built by Boeing. It could be an issue with the contractor, Spirit AeroSystems, who builds it. It could be an issue with some other final configuration procedure. We'll need to wait for the investigation to conclude.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- thatjoeoverthr 3y agoIf it’s built so sloppily, will you manage to think of literally every mistake they might have made?
- trebligdivad 3y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLBGFYl9_o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maLBGFYl9_o is a good video explaining how the bolts/doors etc are supposed to go together.
- squirtle24 3y agoVery interesting video that shows a clear picture of how the plug is held in place. Some interesting spots in the video, 8:44 shows how the upper two locking bolts lock the roller pins into the upper door tracks, and 10:00 show the lower two locking bolts onto the sliding hinge posts. 13:10 shows how the door blew cleanly off, with very little damage to the roller pins and lower hinge posts. Some comments say the same plug have been used on the 737-900 which didn't have this issue. My armchair speculative guess: there are only 4 bolts effectively holding the door onto the roller pins and lower hinges. Somehow I don't think it's a simple case of someone forgetting to tighten the bolts; since they're using castle nuts, forgetting to torque them down would leave behind extra cotter pins. Those bolts look positively tiny, probably no more than M12 diameter, and are subject to intense shearing forces. In the case of the upper roller pin with locking bolt, they are effectively two cylinders perpendicular and on top of each other, which causes extreme compressive forces to be concentrated on one tiny spot on the bolt. My guess is they cheaped out and switched to an inappropriate/softer bolt, which sheared and/or corroded. If one shears, the load quickly spreads to the remaining 3 bolts which all also shear off. This theory would still jive with OPs article about UA; "loose bolts" may not necessarily mean "untightened nuts and bad QA", but rather, signs that the locking bolts are all beginning to bend or shear.
- yuliyp 3y agoMost of the pressure of the door should be supported by the stop pads, rather than the bolts. The force on the bolts should generally be from vibrations, not from pressure differential pushing the door out.
- albert_e 3y agoother than pressure differential...what about the weight of the plug door itself ... do the bolts support that weight? or if some other mechanism like the springs on hinges below grew weaker over time .. would that in turn put too much weight on the bolts?
- bad_alloc 3y agoHow is Airbus doing meanwhile? I didn't hear about any production quality issues in their aircraft.
- aledalgrande 3y ago> The A320neo family has had four ground fatalities and one hull loss accident as of November 2022. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320neo_family https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320neo_family A320neo is the direct competitor to the MAX. So yeah, they're doing pretty well.
- jacquesm 3y agoAnd that hull loss wasn't on account of a faulty design, assembly or process issues. Crew and passengers were unharmed after a collision with a firetruck crossing the runway while the aircraft was doing its take-off roll.
- aledalgrande 3y agoExactly, as I understand all those occurrencies were due to people on the runway for one reason or another.
- jacquesm 3y agoI am not familiar enough with that incident but I wonder how fast the plane was going and how close it was to actually being airborne, that seems like it must have been quite the impact but given that all crew survived there must be some factor that I'm missing. Blind luck either way. edit: 235 Kph! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBEE7bzatKk&t=47s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBEE7bzatKk&t=47s two 10ths of a second later and it would have been an entirely different story. Ugh.
- disiplus 3y agoi'm not sure are you being sarcastic, there were no fatalities on the airplane. but once motorcycle and another time a firetruck crashed with the plane and people died.
- s5300 3y ago[dead]
- rconti 3y agoSo, about that Max 10 on which you were hoping to get fast-track approval...
- rthkljlkrj 3y ago[dead]
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y agoAirbus must be having a fantastic week.
- squiffsquiff 3y ago[flagged]
- masklinn 3y agoProbably gives them some succor given the engine issues they’ve been having.
- toomuchtodo 3y agoAirbus is sold out on A320s until the 2030s already. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-01-08/alaska-air-blowout-airlines-and-flyers-are-stuck-with-boeing-s-737-max https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-01-08/alaska...
- xtracto 3y agoAirlines should stop buying Boeing airplanes. At this point they are catastrophes waiting to happen. Fortunately, most airlines in my country use Airbus planes.
- dataflow 3y agoHow were these not noticed in proper inspections? Is this the first time these planes have been inspected?
- Kluggy 3y agoThey generally don't disassemble the entire plane every time they get inspected...
- dataflow 3y agoThis required a full disassembly to be noticed?
- janice1999 3y agoThey do disassemble the entire plane for heavy maintenance checks every 6-12 years. The MAX 9 has been in operation for just a few weeks though...
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y agoThat’s pretty incredible. After a heavy maintenance breakdown, what percentage of the plane gets replaced? Or is everything already on a routine maintenance schedule so the intention is to visually identify unexpectedly failing parts?
- HPsquared 3y agoProbably still not every single sub-sub-sub-component.
- iancmceachern 3y agoThings like fasteners all get replaced, other things get replaced or refurbished on defined schedules.
- jupp0r 3y agoIIRC every bolt's torque value needs to be logged any time it's (re)fastened. At least that's true for aircraft engine maintenance, not sure if it applies to the assembly process of the airframe, I'd sure hope so!
- dustedcodes 3y ago[flagged]
- RomanPushkin 3y agoYes, it's within the same family, Boeing MAX.
- dustedcodes 3y agoI will never step foot on a Boeing 737 Max. It seems this plane designed to find new ways to kill you and I'm not having that.
- barryrandall 3y agoBoeing discontinued their widely-panned "Death Plane" after customers learned about a design flaw that causes the plane to crash itself when it encounters atmospheric conditions that Boeing characterizes as "common and entirely predictable." While they promised to fix the problem before the planes were returned to service, company representatives were able to purchase an exemption from several members of congress. The "On-Time, On-Budget, Kinda Safe Plane" took its place in the Boeing lineup last year.
- wnevets 3y agobut shareholders got rich and that's really what is important. > Boeing Co. (BA.N) directors authorized a record US$20 billion share buyback program and boosted the company’s dividend 20 per cent -- a sign the planemaker doesn’t intend to stop showering cash on investors any time soon.[1] [1] https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/boeing-sets-new-20-billion-buyback-plan-raises-dividend-20-1.1184698 https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/boeing-sets-new-20-billion-buyba...
- rmbyrro 3y agoIs the aircraft industry also adopting the "move fast, break things" now?
- molave 3y agoLiterally yes (at least for Boeing). Pray Airbus doesn't do the same.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- avgDev 3y agoFlying in this plane in a few days......a bit uneasy to be honest.
- outside1234 3y agoI think they are grounded - so it will be something else
- mynameisnoone 3y agoYou think. The bigger problem is the engineering and manufacturing processes that went into the 737 MAX is garbage. There will be no end to the problems because it's trying to nail mud to the wall. People who choose to continue flying on them are like people who don't wear seat belts: they know it's dangerous but refuse to act in their own interest of self-preservation.
- exabrial 3y agoI have a dumb question: why "plug" the doors at all? Why not burn a row of seats and have an extra safety door? Was this at request of the airlines to "meet" minimum safety standards or was there a reason why it's "better" to have less exit doors?
- anderber 3y agoIf the regulators don't require the extra exit door, then the airlines would rather put in an extra row for more profits. The extra safety door is only needed depending on seating configuration.
- benhurmarcel 3y agoLess cost and weight, and more rows. Only advantages there.
- Aqueous 3y agoLiterally just flew on a United Airlines 737 MAX 9 one week ago. It seems like the craft I flew on has probably been grounded in the week since. I noticed that we were flying on a MAX before boarding and nearly asked to switch flights, but consoled myself that I was being irrational and that the planes were almost certainly fine now. Guess my confidence was misplaced.
- bobsomers 3y agoFWIW, it's only the Max 9s which have this issue. The Max 7s and 8s don't have an exit in that location (too few seats) and the Max 10s require an exit door to be installed in that location, not the door plug. It's only the Max 9s that have the option of the door plug, if the installed seat count is below the threshold where an additional exit is required.
- ajb257 3y agoI think the concern is more the attitude that allowed this to happen, despite all the issues Boeing has had.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoYes, this seems like a top to bottom culture rot problem at Boeing sacrificing quality control in exchange for reduced costs. A few years ago, I had read that certain airlines demanded planes manufacturered in Washington rather than South Carolina, and I wonder if that information actually ends up being a useful signal for better quality planes. https://www.postandcourier.com/business/airline-surveys-point-to-ongoing-production-problems-at-boeings-sc-plant/article_0e75f53a-b2d6-11e9-9606-0ffafccd055e.html https://www.postandcourier.com/business/airline-surveys-poin... https://www.wsj.com/articles/production-problems-prompt-broad-faa-review-of-boeing-dreamliner-lapses-11599498118 https://www.wsj.com/articles/production-problems-prompt-broa...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- oooyay 3y agoKind of non-sequitur, but am I disconnected from reality if at this point I do not want to fly on a Boeing aircraft?
- outside1234 3y agoIt is really the 737 - not sure what is going on with the MAX design team - but it ain't good The 787 and 757 seem to have been stable platforms.
- maybelsyrup 3y agoI think you're mostly correct but while it's not been as bad as the Max, the 787 has a not-so-short list of controversies, starting with those electrical / battery fires early in the plane's life [1] and going through recently with stray tools, fuselage issues, etc. [2] Not an engineer or a pilot, but like the poster above, I'm a regular person wondering how concerned to be on at least two Boeing platforms these days. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Boeing_787_Dreamliner_grounding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Boeing_787_Dreamliner_gro... [2] https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/new-boeing-787-fix-details-reveal-extent-gap-check-challenge https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/new-boeing-787-fix-de...
- aaronmdjones 3y agoI'm a firm believer that the 777 is the last Good Aircraft that Boeing made.
- heads 3y agoBolts and machine screws are very interesting. One mistake I, an amateur bike mechanic, made for years was not greasing bolts properly before assembly. It sounds counterintuitive but without grease a bolt (or machine screw) will bind early with a high torque well before it is correctly tensioned lengthways. The torque is just a proxy for the tension and it is this tension which is needed to fasten your components together as intended. The grease means that when the torque to turn the bolt reaches the correct value then the bolt is also under the correct tension instead of being because it got stuck in the thread half way.
- NegativeLatency 3y agoI keep a toothbrush covered in grease for just this purpose. It’s also a magnetic one so I can stick it to stuff and it stays put.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago> I keep a toothbrush covered in grease for just this purpose. Speaking from personal experience, this is also useful for brushing a robot's teeth.
- shmeeed 3y agoWhere does one find a magnetic toothbrush?
- NegativeLatency 3y agoIt’s an old Sonicare brush head (a couple of fairly strong magnets are mounted to the bottom), there are also some kinda neat suction cup toothbrush holders you could use
- myself248 3y agoThere are different torque-to-tension equations for lubricated and unlubricated fasteners, of various materials and platings.
- 3y ago
- alistairSH 3y agoLooks like 4 large bolts with castle nuts and cotter pins hold the plug in place. Looking at how the plug is configured, you'd have to really screw up for the panel to fall off. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WhfK9jlZK1o https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WhfK9jlZK1o
- ShakataGaNai 3y agoIf it's Boeing, I ain't going.
- 8bitsrule 3y agoAssuming that it's up to airline's employees (not Boeing) to remove/replace the panel/'plug as needed - and that 'loose bolts' means 'not properly torqued' rather than 'can't be', the logical conclusion is that the problem lies with the airline's employees (not Boeing). IOW, it's far too early to be speculating about blame.
- CamperBob2 3y agoWhy would the airline need to remove/replace the plug? It doesn't appear to be the sort of thing that requires maintenance. They would have to remove the interior wall panels to inspect or work with the hardware involved. In any case the aircraft is only a couple of months old, so it probably hasn't undergone any major work by the airline yet. Arguably it should have, if the reports of pressurization warning lights are accurate and meaningful. But sadly, I can imagine them looking for a problem, not finding this one due to the need to take the whole plane apart ("Unable to replicate"), and concluding that the warnings were spurious.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- splap 3y agofor the history on Boeing's rot and the issues with this plane, this book is great: Flying Blind: The 737 MAX Tragedy and the Fall of Boeing
- mynameisnoone 3y agoLink? Also, the rot didn't start with the 737 MAX. The 737 NG has critical problems that went unaddressed that has contributed to multiple fatalities and equipment damage. Here's a documentary about it: People & Power - On a wing and a prayer (2010) Al Jazeera https://youtu.be/IaWdEtANi-0 https://youtu.be/IaWdEtANi-0 https://www.aljazeera.com/program/people-power/2010/12/15/on-a-wing-and-a-prayer/ https://www.aljazeera.com/program/people-power/2010/12/15/on...
- INGSOCIALITE 3y agoall of this just to eliminate an emergency exit to fit 2 extra fares on each flight
- asdff 3y agoHonestly I'm surprised why airlines aren't being designed for the slumlord airliner at this point. its pretty obvious from the haphazard window placement on any airplane that it was built to have more legroom but they slid the seats narrower on the seat rails. USB ports never work and power outlets are bent loose to not hold anything plugged into them. Might as well narrow the windows accordingly and ship the plane without cabin electric to save a few cents on initial cost.
- dpkirchner 3y agoAnd to avoid retraining 737 pilots, I guess.
- dphidt 3y agoI am curious why the door plug is not a plug door — that is, a design wherein the desired panel would be installed from the inside and sealed by the differential pressure, like a cabin door. This part looks more similar to cargo door; those usually have to open outward for space, but what is the design constraint for this case?
- radu_floricica 3y agoYep, that's the top level design mistake. They should be locked passively by the pressure differential.
- mynameisnoone 3y agoEd Pierson, a former senior manager at the 737 Max factory in Renton, WA, indicated there have been 20 quality/airworthiness issues post-MCAS to date prior to this latest incident that have gone largely unnoticed by the mainstream media. It's also worth noting that other ex-employees of Boeing have also raised concerns about substandard structural components made by Ducommun and Boeing's own manufacturing processes for the 737 NG (737-600 to -900). There is no way to know which ones are defective because an unknown number of these critical parts were manufactured inconsistently and haphazardly by hand when they were supposed to be CNC'ed and Boeing just slapped them in without much care. The net result is an average Boeing 737 NG is variably structurally weaker than previous models, and prone to fuselage breakup on hard landings, runway overruns, and possibly in-flight during extreme turbulence. Level 2 corrosion on structural components only 8 years old is what happens when nonconforming, trash parts are passed off as "conforming". Around 2009, the DOJ made a false statement that the NTSB said the NTSB concluded structural components were "not responsible" for AA 331. These were absolute lies drafted by Boeing's lawyer, Mr. Cole, as no conclusion had been yet reached. In a subsequent sworn video statement, the DOJ official admits they spoke Boeing's words largely verbatim. This is what happens when publicly-traded corporations are run by MBAs who gut a company's core competencies for short-term profits and are allowed to largely regulate themselves as a consequent of regulatory capture and the corrosive influence of elected officials who accept "campaign support" and gold bars.
- consumer451 3y agoThis is the the best update I have seen so far on the incident Alaska Max 9. The presenter is a 777 pilot and A&P mechanic. Released 2hrs ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhfK9jlZK1o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhfK9jlZK1o [13:43]
- rossjudson 3y agoblancolirio is really great at explaining...mishaps. He provides details and an explanation of those details that's accessible. It's the first place I go to "find out what happened" for any kind of air incident.
- AdamJacobMuller 3y agoNot just aviation and not just mishaps, but, almoshaps too! I first started watching his channel during the Oroville dam crisis in 2017 and he had some excellent coverage of that event. He seems to cover "things which interest him" the venn diagram of which which overlaps with mine quite a lot.
- mihaaly 3y agoA scary comment from the video: "I’ve been an aircraft technician for 23 years and we operate the Max9. I’ve opened and closed one of these plugs as well. Keep in mind that other 737 NG’s have these plugs installed in the longer fuselage models, not just the Max. They all work the same way and there’s never been an incident like this. I’m not saying this is what happened, but I can’t see how this could lug could come loose unless the two upper capture bolts, and the two lower bolts through the spring hinges weren’t installed. Even if a set of bolts, either uppers or lowers were missing with the opposites installed, I can’t see how the plug could come loose and depart the airframe. Just my ten cents. " - @jeffropenn
- avidphantasm 3y agoWhy don’t they just replace the plugs doors. Those don’t seem to fail.
- free2023 3y agoWhy are there bolts and machine screws in use in the first place? The seating configurations for United and Alaska, the 2 major customers for this aircraft, don't require this plug-door feature. Structurally, for these large carriers, the plug door serves only as a fuselage weakness and failure point. Why don't they just rivet it permanently to the fuselage and make it non-functional? Per the diagrams shown, it's a complex assembly that serves no purpose at all for these carriers. (Apparently it was used as a cargo door to furnish the interiors, which seems like a trivial use case.)
- local_crmdgeon 3y agoSaves Boeing money by manufacturing 1 frame
- free2023 3y agoYes, certainly. But the carriers could configure it to make it non-functional, since it serves no purpose for them. Or they could spec it as a rivet-it-shut option from Boeing. Just seems crazy to have this big failure point in the fuselage, adding to their maintenance costs, for a thing they don't even use.
- dotancohen 3y agoAnd mass.
- arrakeenrevived 3y agoAircraft are often sold between airlines, or reconfigured even with the same airline. If United ever wants to reconfigure their 737s to be higher density (which is pretty common), they might need to start using that door as a real emergency exit.
- free2023 3y agoYes I see, that makes good sense. Given the course of events, it's still a fair question from a design standpoint: Can this be engineered with a reversible option to switch it from functional to non-functional, depending on the seat configuration? It just seems like a lot of complexity and moving parts, for a feature that's not in use.
- 1-6 3y agoIs union labor shielded from poor QC?
- adolph 3y agoShades of March 2019, below. (CNN) In a blistering attack on Boeing, the Air Force's top acquisition official said the company has a "severe situation" with flawed inspections of its new KC-46 air refueling tanker aircraft, after trash and industrial tools were found in some planes after they were delivered to the Air Force. Edit, remove: What is going on in Everett?
- booleandilemma 3y agoGotta love the "We protect our content to protect our future" pop-up message when you try to copy text from the site.
- mikewarot 3y agoAt this point, I believe Boeing needs to suffer the corporate death penalty, because it no longer operates as a net benefit to the public. It needs to be dissolved, and its assets sold off. Criminal charges should be pursued to the maximum support of the law against all of the corporate officers. Those in the FAA and other oversight agencies who failed to properly oversee them should also be prosecuted. Failing the above, perhaps it's time to revive an apocryphal custom of the Romans. The engineer of a bridge was required to have his home below it, as a means of enticing them to make sure it was well constructed. We should require that Boeing board members, and their immediate family, only fly in Boeing planes of same variety sold to carry paying passengers.
- eYrKEC2 3y agoI agree with Boeing board members flying Boeing, and likely they already do, but have you ever floated beings above the aether in metal machines? Do we not live in the age of magic?
- unethical_ban 3y agoI'll be charitable and assume you suggest "assets sold off" includes divisions to support existing planes and infrastructure.
- mikewarot 3y agoSure, let a more reputable company buy them intact. If there aren't any suitable purchasers, and it's important to national security, then nationalize it.
- shermantanktop 3y agoHow do you feel about car makers? They kill a lot of people. Food poisoning, bathtubs, lightning… I don’t disagree that it appears that Boeing has acted badly here. And I’m frustrated with golden parachutes, out of court settlements, and other ways of evading corporate responsibility. But this is a moment in time, and I think Boeing could redeem itself.
- someonehere 3y agoAre airlines still saving money by “servicing” their airplanes overseas with cheaper labor like my friend told me a few years ago? After 9/11 a friend who I’m close with was laid off as well as many other maintenance people. United began the process of moving their plane maintenance people to southeast Asian locations to cut down on labor. Race to the bottom to save money and now loose bolts?
- graton 3y agoThey now know "what broke": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38922366 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38922366
- FerretFred 3y agoWas there ever an aircraft more cursed than the 737 Max? Sounds like it was designed by a team of accountants.
- anonfromsomewhe 3y agoConcorde ? maybe? it literally changed the industry online to be cancelled later
- alexpc201 3y agoThe Concorde has been one of the safest airplanes in history, with only one accident in 30 years of service. The story is different for the Tupolev Tu-144, also known as Concordoski, a copy of the Anglo-French plane.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoHow was it a copy when it made a maiden flight before first Concorde?
- MarkMarine 3y agoI was responsible for safe for flight inspections on military aircraft and the photo included in that post is completely insane to me. Those bolts being loose (and they are BIG bolts) would mean multiple people in the installation process didn’t do their jobs, and signed their life on the line saying they did. When I did maintenance, there was someone (QA) there to witness every torqued bolt, inspect every safety wire and installed part. There is something rotten in Boeing.
- RF_Savage 3y agoThe management imported from McDonnel-Douglas? The same management that drove it to ground? The fish rots from the head. And these constant problems sure do sound like a new company culture of cutting corners instead engineering first.
- rvba 3y agoLooks like the installer did their job poorly and the QA rubber stamped it without checking. Are the QAs required to make photos to prove that they did their job? Like those food delivery people. Alternative is wrong bolts, or sabotage. But more possible - one lazy QA ghosting.
- radu_floricica 3y agoWere these plug doors mounted by Boeing themselves? Or under Boeing's aegis, which is the same thing. Or were they sold in a different configuration and an external contractor did the modifications?
- wateralien 3y agoI would like Google Flights to be able to filter for aircraft equipment manufacturer.
- londons_explore 3y agoWhich is more likely: * Lazy production line worker hand-tightens bolts and forgets to torque them, faking the results on the electronic torque wrench (which records the tightening of every bolt). * A design flaw causes vibrations which cause these bolts to loosen.
- nikanj 3y ago* A lazy/time-pressured worker skips applying threadlocker before assembly
- justinjlynn 3y agoInsufficient and negligent quality control systems design permits a single point of failure in manufacturing process specifically designed and funded to prevent such things - calling into question the trustworthiness of the manufacturing process compliance for the entire product line.
- arghwhat 3y agoThose are not the only options. * Improper bolt tensioning process where bolt tension is later unintentionally reduced due to tensioning order. * Design or material failure where bolt tension post-installation drops more than design allows. * Miscalibrated or otherwise defective equipment. * Other failure in manufacturing not caused by the worker, e.g. missed a necessary second or third tensioning pass (different torque or rotation angle) without appropriate failsafes or final validation to discover it. Bolt tension validation is normally done with an ultra-sonic scan. Torque only provides a rough approximation of the tension at time of installation, and is only suitable where precision is not a requirement. I suggest https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLzTB4KLCxU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLzTB4KLCxU for those curious about bolts - a very specific, but interesting video.
- legacynl 3y ago> Lazy production line worker Because of your inclusion of the assumed 'lazyness' of the first I assume that you think it's the first? why do you think it's more likely that the line worker is lazy and the one that screwed up? why not the 'lazy' designer who thought it would be strong enough, or 'lazy' supervisors that forget to supervise, or the lazy quality-assurer that forgets to assure quality? Everyone makes mistakes. If your whole organisation relies on nobody ever making a mistake, then your organisation isn't at risk of failing, but is certain to fail. Or alternatively the organisation has already failed in its duties, but the consequences of that failure just haven't popped up yet.
- whywhywhywhy 3y agoGetting to the point where I’d never want to fly a Boeing again after the Max debacle. Completely shocked they haven’t ditched this plane and owned up that cutting safety for fuel savings wasn’t worth it.
- DrScientist 3y agoIs Boeing an example of 'too big' to fail? ie one of the reasons it's not out of business due to the multiple failures over the Max is it's just too important to the US economy?
- hugh-avherald 3y agoNot just the US economy but the US military and the worldwide aviation sector. The Europeans would, if it truly came down to the wire, pay quite a lot to keep Boeing afloat, even though they own its main competitor, such is the danger of a monopoly on large commercial aircraft.
- alexpc201 3y agoSomething strange, isn't it? First, the fuselage panel detaches in the only row of seats with no passengers. What is the probability of this happening? Then, an iPhone is sucked into the hole and is found on the edge of a road after falling 5000 meters in perfect condition with an airline message on its screen. Really weird.
- Zetobal 3y agoThat's what happens if your employees don't care about your company.