3 ms·

A convincing explanation I saw is that usually all doors are loosely attached by the subcontractor, since Boeing needs to remove them to build the interior. The

by Adrig 3y ago

A convincing explanation I saw is that usually all doors are loosely attached by the subcontractor, since Boeing needs to remove them to build the interior. Then puts them back to specs. A miscommunication probably happened where the plug doors were not tightened to specs same as every other doors, but Boeing didn't touch them (or checked) for their usual interior setup.

yread 3y ago
The whistleblower said they don't usually do that but had to open this door (not remove it) and merely opening the door doesnt require someone to signoff on the bolts being put back in place
andix 3y ago
Sounds plausible. But what if this is only one of many miscommunications with subcontractors?
specialist 3y ago
You may have seen my comment. I was quoting my neighbor's speculation, who was career QA/QC at Boeing. Since then, we have the whistleblower's account. TLDR: A bureaucratic snafu where the record keeping didn't match the actual work. The repair of the plug's air seal was miscategorized ("reopen" vs "removal") in the system, so did not trigger the required post-repair inspection, which would have (most likely) spotted the missing nuts. My neighbor said he'll look into the whistleblower's account, though he admitted it was plausible. Also: IIRC, castle nuts, which use cotter pins, are used for the plug's bolts. Meaning no tightening or torquing. The pressure differential keeps the plugs sealed. The bolts just keep the plug in place. If I'm wrong on that, please correct me.
- Adrig 3y ago
  You probably know more about these details than me, I was referencing Real Engineering's video [0] on the subject. If the whistleblower's information is true, then it's an even bigger fuckup than expected. But I'm worried it could lead to the management throwing a random worker under the bus to cover their dangerous practices. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhT4M0UjJcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhT4M0UjJcg
  - specialist 3y ago
    Yup. IIRC, Identify Scapegoat is step #5 in the modern engineering process methodology.

by Adrig 3y ago

yread 3y ago

The whistleblower said they don't usually do that but had to open this door (not remove it) and merely opening the door doesnt require someone to signoff on the bolts being put back in place

andix 3y ago

Sounds plausible. But what if this is only one of many miscommunications with subcontractors?

specialist 3y ago

You may have seen my comment. I was quoting my neighbor's speculation, who was career QA/QC at Boeing. Since then, we have the whistleblower's account. TLDR: A bureaucratic snafu where the record keeping didn't match the actual work. The repair of the plug's air seal was miscategorized ("reopen" vs "removal") in the system, so did not trigger the required post-repair inspection, which would have (most likely) spotted the missing nuts. My neighbor said he'll look into the whistleblower's account, though he admitted it was plausible. Also: IIRC, castle nuts, which use cotter pins, are used for the plug's bolts. Meaning no tightening or torquing. The pressure differential keeps the plugs sealed. The bolts just keep the plug in place. If I'm wrong on that, please correct me.

Adrig 3y ago
You probably know more about these details than me, I was referencing Real Engineering's video [0] on the subject. If the whistleblower's information is true, then it's an even bigger fuckup than expected. But I'm worried it could lead to the management throwing a random worker under the bus to cover their dangerous practices. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhT4M0UjJcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhT4M0UjJcg
- specialist 3y ago
  Yup. IIRC, Identify Scapegoat is step #5 in the modern engineering process methodology.