3 ms·
These are explicitly not a design issue, but a manufacturing process issue. And I'm not sure if you want current Boeing to do a clean-sheet 737 replacement wit
by _cenw 3y ago
These are explicitly not a design issue, but a manufacturing process issue.
And I'm not sure if you want current Boeing to do a clean-sheet 737 replacement with their current engineering culture. The reason it isn't more unsafe is that a lot of it was designed so long ago (some parts even as far back as the 707).
Then again, the Dreamliner seems to be doing okay-ish now.
- breadwinner 3y ago> These are explicitly not a design issue, but a manufacturing process issue. Not true. The reason MCAS was needed is because of a design issue. Also, if you watch the video, Boeing didn't just outsource manufacturing - they also outsourced the design.
- _cenw 3y agoThe current issue with the plug door is. MCAS is the second sentence. And I'd still consider that a process failure, when engineers only ever tested the upgrade variant AOA indicator and didn't notice the non-upgraded glass cockpit advisory didn't work and nobody is specifically responsible for making sure the code is reviewed. And oursourcing wasn't new. The here praised 737 NG had parts delivered by subcontractor Ducommun in the early 2000s that were allegedly so defective, they had to be rejected entirely. Except the Boeing of the early 2000s caught it, and late 2010s Boeing didn't.
- p_l 3y agoThe Boeing of 2000s was also hell-bent on switching to outsourcing, down to cutting off its own pieces like Boeing Wichita (which became Spirit Aerosystems)