3 ms·
Boeing delays some 737 MAX deliveries after new quality defect
- JoyfulTurkey 3y agoWhen will airlines charge an upgrade fee to book a flight on an Airbus plane?
- SlightlyLeftPad 3y agoHeh, you should delete this comment, please don’t give an MBA this idea, at least not for free.
- applied_heat 3y agoDefect is related to the positioning of holes on the window frame and known as “short edge margin”
- abracadaniel 3y agoCould this be seen as kind of a good thing? If they really are trying to improve their quality, I would expect to see a flurry of new things being caught and stopping the line.
- trklausss 3y agoIt is a priori a good thing, but long delays may obviously cause also reputational damage… They just have to walk on eggshells for a while.
- ChatGTP 3y agoI guess it’s good depending on how many QA issues they actually find bike they’re being more diligent ? Feels like management is being extra careful but if the plane is a dog and has been optimised to keep the bean counters happy. Maybe these quality issues will crop up for years ?
- riffraff 3y agoI am not sure, notice this was found by someone at a supplier not by Boeing itself. It's better than nothing, but it looks to me it should have been flagged _by Boeing_ when they received the parts.
- fransje26 3y ago> Could this be seen as kind of a good thing? At face value, absolutely. The cynic in me sees it slightly differently: once more under the scrutiny of the FAA (still trying to cover its own ass ever since the MAX crash debacle they contributed to), Boeing scrambled to find the most obvious problems that would show up in the up and coming investigation. Miss-drilled rivets would be the first one, as it was, according to some internal source, the original production problem with the Alaska Airlines MAX. And instead of having the FAA do the obvious thing of ordering a delivery stop, (tanking the share values even further) they put on a big show of internal investigation and overly cautious preemptive delivery stop to mitigate their share value loss. Language elements such as "While this potential condition is not an immediate flight safety issue" (spoiler alert: it is, see that Alaska Airlines flight) and minimizations such as "two holes may not have been drilled exactly to our requirements", should immediately trigger your BS detectors. It's bad, and they know it. And as internal sources are pointing out, it has been bad for a long time, and they have know it for a long time. So, in short, no, there is no reason to believe, at present, that they are drastically going to change their ways. Link to the previous HN thread and article mentioning the rivet holes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111494 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111494
- dbg31415 3y agohttps://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merger-led-to-the-737-max-crisis https://qz.com/1776080/how-the-mcdonnell-douglas-boeing-merg... If they charged me $200 a flight premium to not fly on Boeing planes I’d pay that at this point.
- reacharavindh 3y agoAt what point does it become cost prohibitive to Boeing to keep making fixes to this plane and axe the production of it entirely? Sure, the planes that are already delivered need to be serviced and operated to reasonable life time, but given the reputation damage, wouldn’t anybody at Boeing bring up “how about we go back to the drawing board and actually do things right on a new plane that will save our future”?
- fred_is_fred 3y agoI would guess the time to fix is O(days) and a cost of thousands to tens of thousands and the time to design a new plane is like a decade with a cost of 10+ Billion.
- euroderf 3y agoBoeing has reached the limits of piano wire and chewing gum.
- belter 3y ago"Boeing in ‘last chance saloon’, warns Emirates boss" - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68201371 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68201371