I used to frequently go London-Dubai on emirates. They only had A380s and 777s. 777 had more space inside but that’s just how the airline had it configured, A380 was more quiet and comfortable except for take off - The A380 all rattled like a mofo, you’d think every bit of trim was going to fall off!
“Speaking at a news conference, Ms Homendy said pilots reported pressurisation warning lights on three previous flights made by the specific Alaska Airlines Max 9 involved in the incident.”
“Boeing 737 Max 9: United Airlines finds loose bolts during inspections”
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2024 7:40 pm
by Marv
Interesting vid from Juan Brown regarding the company Boeing get to fabricate the fuselage (Spirit Aerospace), sounds like a toxic work environment has contributed to cutting corners in quality control.
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2024 10:10 pm
by nuttinnew
The whole set up is full of wrongness for that industry.
In a similar vein to the "unforgiving" poster are these couple of snippets from the comments;
"As a now retired mechanic, from Boeing/McDonnell Douglas, we all knew, that moving to “self inspection”, for many tasks that had required second set of eyes, was not a good idea. Even the most conscientious person, can miss seeing their own mistakes. Doing the same tasks, day in and day out…. "
"Motivating and training pride in excellence to new hires is a difficult process. Aircraft assembly requires personal pride. In my days in the aircraft industry the motto was: "We do not sell airplanes, we sell confidence". There has to be a culture of pride in the finished product that starts at the top and has to be taught to every new employee."
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 8:30 am
by V8Granite
Self inspection on anything safety critical on that scale is ridiculous. It’s why quality control departments were invented.
Dave!
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Mon Jan 15, 2024 10:11 am
by scotta
Another point the Jaun Brown made was around the cockpit door opening. Type regulation states that it should vent a pressurisation change not open. Boeing said it worked as designed but they didnt document that on the type regulation. This will be a problem.
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2024 7:46 am
by IanF
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Wed Jan 24, 2024 8:13 am
by DeskJockey
That's brilliant.
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2024 8:19 pm
by IanF
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2024 8:46 pm
by mik
I only heard about that (ie the original 'shroom event) recently.
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2024 8:56 pm
by nuttinnew
I hadn't to search it;
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Thu Jan 25, 2024 9:00 pm
by mik
nuttinnew wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2024 8:56 pm
I hadn't to search it;
Very well covered/explained (as usual) by MentourPilot
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2024 7:36 am
by jamcg
A 777 rather than a 737, but why is it always a Boeing?
Re: 737 Max
Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2024 8:04 am
by Jobbo
Blimey, the amount of conspiracy theory nonsense posted in response (that this is to scare us into agreeing to travel restrictions and staying in our 15 minute cities) is incredible. Are all bots conspiracy theorists or is this actual people?