4 ms·

1. [6] happened on 2nd of January. 2. [1] is related to consumables (probably batteries; [2] is an engine shutdown issue, not airframe (criticalities are differ

1. [6] happened on 2nd of January. 2. [1] is related to consumables (probably batteries; [2] is an engine shutdown issue, not airframe (criticalities are different and guards against its failures are far better risk-managed); [3] related to consumables again; [4] systems/airframe issue. The only incident that could a priori be related to the airframe is [4], and funnily enough it happened on a Boeing. What is demanded from Boeing is that 1) they train maintenance personnel properly, or if not in scope release proper documentation for said training, and 2) they design systems so that maintenance is reduced to a minimum and safety is not compromised. It’s not about “Boeing didn’t plug a door properly”, it’s about “this airplane requires you to tighten the bolts every 300h (came-up numbers here)”. There is the technology to make bolts secure so that they don’t pop out, if you defer safety of the system to maintenance accidents are bound to happen.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> if you defer safety of the system to maintenance accidents are bound to happen On a 757 classic? The plane is over 30 years old. Everything about it is maintenance. (To say nothing of a terrific track record.) I'm also not sure which pilot would not prefer a nose wheel detaching, which is a known and limited (albeit expensive and uncomfortable) failure, to something like smoke or steam in the cabin, which could be innocuous or catastrophic. Particularly if it's coming from something like a battery fire, which is both a critical issue and something the manufacturer designed into the plane. Nose wheels shouldn't detach. But it happens, last I believe during Covid on a Turkish Airlines A320. Drawing conclusions about Boeing's current fleet from a 757 Classic is exactly the sort of overfitting I'm talking about.
- trklausss 3y ago
  A nose wheel detaching can also be innocuous or catastrophic, depending on the flight phase you find yourself in (detaches during take-off/landing and damages another system) Every plane is equipped with a fire extinguishing box (for lack of the proper term) where you drop your battery and gets extinguished, air crew are trained on it. If you don’t have any warnings on the cabin, telling you that other systems are failing, you do not declare an emergency, you declare a fault (PanPan) 757 has a stellar record, but as you say, it’s showing its age. And that means more paperwork on Boeing releasing proper maintenance procedures, revising inspection intervals, releasing TNs, etc. which are mostly on program management, an area where Boeing has been lacking lately… At no point I draw any conclusions, I am just putting in doubt (which is nothing bad, is just not assuming something as by default given) that Boeing has been doing everything by the book. And of course that’s something that will be investigated by the FAA, and I hope they have been doing everything well :)

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> if you defer safety of the system to maintenance accidents are bound to happen On a 757 classic? The plane is over 30 years old. Everything about it is maintenance. (To say nothing of a terrific track record.) I'm also not sure which pilot would not prefer a nose wheel detaching, which is a known and limited (albeit expensive and uncomfortable) failure, to something like smoke or steam in the cabin, which could be innocuous or catastrophic. Particularly if it's coming from something like a battery fire, which is both a critical issue and something the manufacturer designed into the plane. Nose wheels shouldn't detach. But it happens, last I believe during Covid on a Turkish Airlines A320. Drawing conclusions about Boeing's current fleet from a 757 Classic is exactly the sort of overfitting I'm talking about.

trklausss 3y ago
A nose wheel detaching can also be innocuous or catastrophic, depending on the flight phase you find yourself in (detaches during take-off/landing and damages another system) Every plane is equipped with a fire extinguishing box (for lack of the proper term) where you drop your battery and gets extinguished, air crew are trained on it. If you don’t have any warnings on the cabin, telling you that other systems are failing, you do not declare an emergency, you declare a fault (PanPan) 757 has a stellar record, but as you say, it’s showing its age. And that means more paperwork on Boeing releasing proper maintenance procedures, revising inspection intervals, releasing TNs, etc. which are mostly on program management, an area where Boeing has been lacking lately… At no point I draw any conclusions, I am just putting in doubt (which is nothing bad, is just not assuming something as by default given) that Boeing has been doing everything by the book. And of course that’s something that will be investigated by the FAA, and I hope they have been doing everything well :)