Boeing Troubles - One of the world's largest aerospace manufacturers keeps having problems with their planes.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
A Boeing 777 flown by Air Canada suffered numerous compressor stalls shortly after taking off, forcing an emergency landing.


Air Canada has released a statement about a June 5 flight that appeared to be aflame as it took off from Pearson Airport. Videos of the incident have gone viral.
Flight AC872 took off around 9 p.m. with 389 passengers and 13 crew on its way to Paris, when shortly after takeoff, it experienced an engine issue called a compressor stall.
The statement from Air Canada explains: “Video posted to the internet of the incident shows the engine at the point of compressor stall, which can happen with a turbine engine when it’s aerodynamics are affected. This can be caused by various factors, but the result is the flow of air through the engine is disrupted causing fuel to ignite further down the engine, which is why flames are visible in the video. It is not the engine itself on fire.”

According to aircraft traffic control recordings, the tower alerts the pilots of the issue.
“Air Canada 872, You’ve got a lot of fire. I’m not sure where it’s coming from,” said an air traffic control.
The pilot responds with “Roger.”
The crew quickly landed and was met by first responder vehicles as a precautionary measure, before returning to the gate on it own. The passengers flew out on another aircraft later in the evening.

Air Canada said they were taking the 777 Boeing plane out of circulation to further investigate what caused the issue.
 
Last edited:
  • Horrifying
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Vecr, not william stenchever, spiritofamermaid and 14 others
Advanced Garbage said:
A Boeing 777 flown by Air Canada suffered numerous compressor stalls shortly after taking off, forcing an emergency landing.

View attachment 6067551
Air Canada has released a statement about a June 5 flight that appeared to be aflame as it took off from Pearson Airport. Videos of the incident have gone viral.
Flight AC872 took off around 9 p.m. with 389 passengers and 13 crew on its way to Paris, when shortly after takeoff, it experienced an engine issue called a compressor stall.
The statement from Air Canada explains: “Video posted to the internet of the incident shows the engine at the point of compressor stall, which can happen with a turbine engine when it’s aerodynamics are affected. This can be caused by various factors, but the result is the flow of air through the engine is disrupted causing fuel to ignite further down the engine, which is why flames are visible in the video. It is not the engine itself on fire.”

According to aircraft traffic control recordings, the tower alerts the pilots of the issue.
“Air Canada 872, You’ve got a lot of fire. I’m not sure where it’s coming from,” said an air traffic control.
The pilot responds with “Roger.”
The crew quickly landed and was met by first responder vehicles as a precautionary measure, before returning to the gate on it own. The passengers flew out on another aircraft later in the evening.

Air Canada said they were taking the 777 Boeing plane out of circulation to further investigate what caused the issue.
Click to expand...
Thankfully Boeing doesn't make, design, or maintain that engine or any engine
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Vecr, spiritofamermaid and 8 others
I've noticed that everywhere boeing seems to be getting blamed for literally anything that happens on a boeing aircraft even if it isn't remotely their fault. It's getting a bit excessive. Not really trying to throw beef here since I find all this stuff interesting still but a lot of aviation youtube channels even go out of their way to blame boeing for clicks. There was one video about a 25 year old 767 that suffered an escape slide deploying during takeoff due to a maintenance mistake and there were like 20 click bait videos about "3RD BOEING ACCIDENT THIS WEEK GROUNDING IMMINENT???"(The two other accidents were fucking runway over runs which were basically 100% pilot or and maintenance error in like 40 year old planes in 3rd world countries btw) a lot of these channels having previously produced good non-clickbait content too.

At this point if the flight attendants serve you the wrong food on your flight it's boeings fault. I think soon their just going to start misidentifying airbus aircraft as boeing for the clicks. Main Stream Media does it too so I'm pretty sure the next incidient that's actually boeings fault their PR team is just going to distract everyone by claiming how everyone lies about them.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Vecr, spiritofamermaid and 9 others
Sorry for the double post here but this seems like too much text for an edit. While going back through the thread I was surprised no one brought up the eerily similar series of 737 accidents during the 90s caused by a Boeing design flaw, with a boeing cover up. I think too many people think Boeing magically went from wholesome best company ever to psychopathic serial killers. It’s more like if two psychopaths get married they sort of merge into one super psychopath.

In 1991 United airlines 585 a 737-200 (Original Generation) was coming in for a routine landing when it suddenly and without warning flipped upside down and began spinning uncontrollably towards the ground before crashing and killing all 25 on board barely missing an apartment building.


During the 585 investigation in 1992 another United 737 suffered a rudder malfunction on the ground. When this was reported to United airlines, United, Boeing, and a manufacturer for a part of the rudders control system called the PCU started an investigation. During their investigation they discovered that a part called the Dual Servo Valve in the PCU could jam in a certain way where it would reverse all inputs given to it. Tell the rudder to go left and it will go right, right and it will go left.

The 737 also has a system called the yaw dampner which utilizes the rudder to automatically correct the yaw of the aircraft… So the jam occurs, the dampner decides the rudder needs to go left, the malfunction causes it to go right, this commands the dampner to go left more which is actually right. The pilots don’t know whats happening only that their plane is suddenly upside down and falling towards the ground. The only way to recover is to shut off the dampner and stop using the rudder.

1e85b06bd6b7530d5dc9fad14b2f1165.png

Having basically privately solved what brought down united 585 Boeing, United, and the boys decide not to tell the investigators and to instead insist that “Pffff, that crash… Well it was a bit windy that day probably that :)” While internal Boeing documents shown below prove that on the same day their representatives are blaming the accident on weather executives are discussing what to do about this deadly flaw. They write up four solutions and decide to pick the option one step above doing nothing.

166340602282d0728528ed81381ab648.png
Boeing we have a problem

The NTSB eventually finds out about the private Boeing and pals investigation a month later but they can’t prove that the servo caused it so all they do is write an angry letter to United for basically lying to them by omission and write up the crash as weather. United knows what killed those people, Boeing knows, the Government knows and the designer know, but no one really gives a shit.

NTSB being unpleased at united.


Two years later US Air 427, a newer Boeing 737-300(Classic Generation) which inherited the same PCU unit from the previous original generation, is on a routine approach. Without warning the plane flips over and spirals into a park killing all 130 on board. The incident lasted less than 30 seconds and the impact was so violent that due to the amount of exploded body parts investigators required bio-hazard suits.



So with Boeing knowing about this PCU flaw what is Boeing's Response.
  1. Say sorry for fucking up and being greedy piles of shit, compensate the families and force all faulty PCU's to be replaced with the fixed model.
  2. Say nothing and let the government figure it out.
  3. Blame the pilots who just died violently due to their fuck up and claim they just accidentally stomped on the rudder controls like retards and killed themselves.
Obviously they chose option 3. Unions, Families, US Air and pretty much everyone involved were pretty unhappy with this opinion to say the least.

During the 427 investigation in 1996 an East Wind Airlines 737-200 was on approach when their 737 suddenly tried to flip over to the left before leveling out for a few seconds and then trying to kill them once again. The pilots in this flight disabled the yaw dampner system and let off the rudder pedals before landing safely.

When the NTSB investigated this aircraft they found the PCU and aircraft were in perfect condition. Due to the nature of this malfunction it leaves no evidence behind and the recovered PCU's from the two previous crashes showed no signs of failure either. They eventually however cause the failure by basically sticking an unused unit in dry ice and pumping it with boiling hot hydraulic fluid. This caused one of the two slides inside of the servo to jam, reversing the inputs and proving that the failure could also be possible under more normal conditions.

The original 585 report was revised to state that it crashed due to a design flaw and the US Air report was completed to show that it crashed due to the same design flaw. Boeing was forced to finally urgently remove the tube shaped killing machines from their older aircraft and replace them with a corrected design that they had already been implementing at the slowest possible rate and replace them with a fixed model.

This is only one incident of Boeing ignoring known design flaws to save a few bucks if you want another, you can look at United 811 a 747 which lost a giant section in it’s side after a design flaw and short circuit caused the cargo door to open in high altitude. They would blame the accident on ground crew mishandling the door until family members of a victim who was sucked out of the hole and lost did their own investigation. The report finally changed when another United 747’s cargo door just sort of opened itself on the ground despite it being locked and no one around.

crop-22029424-207139251.jpg

TLDR: Before the MD Boeing merger Boeing let older 737s fly with a random near instant death device and despite knowing about the issue just blamed the wind or the pilots who they just brutally murdered.


All of this to say that Boeing has and will always be scum even if they’ve made some cool aircraft.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Vecr, Advanced Garbage, naaaaiiiiillllll!!! and 13 others
Google.com said:
TLDR: Before the MD Boeing merger Boeing let older 737s fly with a random near instant death device and despite knowing about the issue just blamed the wind or the pilots who they just brutally murdered.


All of this to say that Boeing has and will always be scum even if they’ve made some cool aircraft
Click to expand...
If the old 737 design flaw was THAT big of a deal it would have killed hundreds upon hundreds of people.

OG and Classic 737s were built in the thousands. They were ridiculously common airplanes. If the rudder component was a death machine it would have killed a LOT more people, like MCAS. MCAS got two airplanes in less than a year although that was also a pilot training issue as Lion Air was and remains a shit airline and Ethiopian Air was rapidly expanding and putting meh pilots on its airplanes to make pump the government's ego.

That's like blaming Beechcraft for the Bonanza killing people.

Fun fact, Airbus does the exact same thing, all companies do. It's called a cost benefit analysis.

Porsche literally made a car that was/is likely to kill it's drivers but ehh, sold it anyway.

Same with VW, the original Beetle was as explosive as the Pinto and had a shitty suspension system, a swing axle just like Ralph Nader's favorite car, the Chevy Corvair.

Should Boeing have grounded the fleet and rushed replacement parts out? Yeah probably or at least made the replacement a Top priority issue.

Here is Airbus with fucked up flight control software on the A321


Very similar to MCAS's behavior oddly enough.

Edit, a few more instances of Airbus computers and flight control software going insane.



Airbus makes "electric" jets aka fully fly by wire with side stick controls. This means the Pilot and copilot can't really see what each other are you to in regards to the stick. This has probably led to the loss of more than one Airbus in the "pilot error" category. Boeing still uses the big control yokes so your inputs are quite visible.....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Optimistic
  • Informative
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Vecr, spiritofamermaid and 7 others
Falcos_Commisar said:
Fun fact, Airbus does the exact same thing, all companies do. It's called a cost benefit analysis.
Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point, it is more Boeing knew about this flaw and attempted to hide it from the NTSB and deliberately mislead their investigation by proposing alternative theories then what they've already determined internally as the cause.

Falcos_Commisar said:
If the old 737 design flaw was THAT big of a deal it would have killed hundreds upon hundreds of people.
Click to expand...

The malfunctions exact trigger was never fully understood but in all confirmed cases it effected aircraft that were at low altitude and landing. In both the Unit and US Air case the plane went from flying normally to crashed in less than a minute. There is a difference between ignoring a serious issue that might cause some sort of major upset with injuries and a failure that has already killed and has been proven to be nearly impossible to recover from.

During the same time Douglas was getting a lot of shit for sending DC-10s up into the air with cargo doors that they knew were dangerous and had already caused an accident. They got a bunch of shit and along with some other issues the DC10 was known to be a death trap and even went on to get grounded in the US for a short time primarily due to aircrafts terrible public reputation. Compared to that Boeing got off pretty easy for this.

Falcos_Commisar said:
OG and Classic 737s were built in the thousands. They were ridiculously common airplanes. If the rudder component was a death machine it would have killed a LOT more people, like MCAS. MCAS got two airplanes in less than a year although that was also a pilot training issue as Lion Air was and remains a shit airline and Ethiopian Air was rapidly expanding and putting meh pilots on its airplanes to make pump the government's ego.
Click to expand...

An airplane every two years is just as bad when they know the cause and it should be zero. Like the MCAS issues Boeing made the decision that 150 peoples lives every so often isn't worth 0.02% of their revenue to fix the issue.

It is also really worth nothing that pre and most merger Boeing used the same tactics atleast in the US Air crash and the United 747 accident I briefly mentioned, blame the pilots or the ground crew. I wanted to really point out the fact that their behavior hasn't changed much as a result of the merger, a lot of people imply that it has but they have always taken the policy of ignore the issue and blame victims. It is pretty unrealistic to act like Boeing and MD weren't both independently doing the same fucked up shaddy shit. MD had higher profile crashes and that's about it, history seems to have wrote MD as air hitler and Boeing as the best plane company ever before the merger.


Edit:

Falcos_Commisar said:
Here is Airbus with fucked up flight control software on the A321

https://avherald.com/h?article=47d74074
Very similar to MCAS's behavior oddly enough.

Edit, a few more instances of Airbus computers and flight control software going insane.

https://avherald.com/h?article=4d97ca46
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72
Airbus makes "electric" jets aka fully fly by wire with side stick controls. This means the Pilot and copilot can't really see what each other are you to in regards to the stick. This has probably led to the loss of more than one Airbus in the "pilot error" category. Boeing still uses the big control yokes so your inputs are quite visible.....
Click to expand...


I didn't see this. I do not agree at all. I have always found the fly by wire thing extremely shaddy and have been very suspicious but I will defend Airbuses response to incidents.

In the first Lufthansa case you brought up. This seems to have been a very unlikely incident that Airbus had safety features designed to prevent unlike Boeings complete lack of. Their systems compare the value of 3 separate sensors, by chance two of the three froze at very similar angles leading the flight computer to assume that the one that had differing data but was functioning normally was faulty instead of the two faulty units.

The aircraft didn't enter a completely uncontrollable state and had plenty of time to diagnose the issue, eventually deciding to shut off the automated protection systems and continuing the flight to it's destination for another hour. Airbus updated it's procedure book to better help pilots understand the issue.

China Airlines: Had trouble researching this but the final public report seems to imply at the time of the report Airbus had sent out a notice of the issue to operators while they were working on a more long term fix.

Qantas: No one ever figured out what triggered this they had to go as far as investigating cosmic rays to try and figure it out before giving up. The safety software that failed to catch the fault was corrected by Airbus. It is worth noting that a Malaysia airlines Boeing 777 had a somewhat similar incident but the cause was pretty obvious, Boeings software allowed flight computers to fail over to a know faulty component if the backup also failed. A very obvious issue that should have probably been considered in its design.


It's really hard to compare the two especially when Airbus hasn't been around as long so they don't have to deal with a bunch of fucked up history in their closet from when regulations were a lot more lax. But I don't think they have ever had an incident like the 737 PCU failures or 737 Max MCAS incident.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Vecr, spiritofamermaid and 6 others
Google.com said:
It's really hard to compare the two especially when Airbus hasn't been around as long so they don't have to deal with a bunch of fucked up history in their closet from when regulations were a lot more lax. But I don't think they have ever had an incident like the 737 PCU failures or 737 Max MCAS incident
Click to expand...
I still didn't mention the Airbus Air France flight 447 which was a combination of shitty parts, spaghetti code flight control software, mediocre cockpit design and man machine interfaces all combining to kill a planeload of people.


Make no mistake, Airbus is protected by the EU, just like how Boeing is protected by the USA and COMAC will be protected by the PRC.

Douglas got shit because they acted like idiots.
 
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, byuuWasTaken and FrancineCansMcGee
Falcos_Commisar said:
I still didn't mention the Airbus Air France flight 447 which was a combination of shitty parts, spaghetti code flight control software, mediocre cockpit design and man machine interfaces all combining to kill a planeload of people.
Click to expand...

No I completely disagree, Air France 447 crashed after encountering a pretty normal issue that affects many aircraft and the pilots complete mishandling of it.

On the first day of flight school they taught us how to properly respond to a stall. And it wasn't to pull up more. That is how they responded to the aircraft correctly indicating it was stalling by sounding the warning, "Stall Stall"

You could argue that the pilots were over reliant on the a330s protections systems which shut off when the sensors were obstructed. But this is a training issue. In Europe training focuses less on hand flying then the US.

But I don't think it makes any sense to blame Airbus for pilots reacting in the complete opposite way as expected to a weather anomaly and then the complete opposite way than expected to one of the most trained emergencies a stall. The thing is if these automated systems didn't shut off as a result of the ice they would not have allowed the retarded pilots to crash the plane.


Edit:
Falcos_Commisar said:
Make no mistake, Airbus is protected by the EU, just like how Boeing is protected by the USA and COMAC will be protected by the PRC.
Click to expand...
I am not arguing that but if the 737-Max aircraft that crashed were airbus made I think the response would be a lot quicker and better. Maybe the EU is just better at enforcing their safety regulation, maybe Airbus has better company culture I don't know. But despite me hating airbus aircraft (Except the a220 but they basically bought that model at a Canadian garage sale so) I think they care more about safety than Boeing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Optimistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: Silence of the Troons, The Foxtrot, Vecr and 7 others
This is a pretty strange incident. A 737 max experienced severe dutch roll during cruise.
By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jun 12th 2024 17:25Z, last updated Thursday, Jun 13th 2024 16:00Z

A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-8 MAX, registration N8825Q performing flight WN-746 from Phoenix,AZ to Oakland,CA (USA) with 175 passengers and 6 crew, was enroute at FL320 when the aircraft experienced Dutch Roll. The crew was able to regain control and landed the aircraft on Oakland's runway 30 about 55 minutes later. The aircraft sustained substantial structural damage.

The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT EXPERIENCED A DUTCH ROLL, REGAINED CONTROL AND POST FLIGHT INSPECTION REVEALED DAMAGE TO THE STANDBY PCU, OAKLAND, CA." and stated the aircraft sustained substantial damage, the occurrence was rated an accident.

The aircraft remained on the ground in Oakland until Jun 6th 2024, then positioned to Everett,WA (USA), ATS facilities, and is still on the ground in Everett 6 days later.

Dutch Roll is a coupled out of phase movement of the aircraft as result of weakened directional stability (provided by the vertical tail and rudder), in which the aircraft oscillates around its vertical as well as longitudinal axis (coupled yaw and roll).

The PCU is the power control unit, an actuator controlling the (vertical) rudder.

On Jun 13th 2024 The Aviation Herald learned that two ribs, that the stand by PCU is being mounted to, were damaged as well as the mounts of the stand by actuator. A temporary repair was done in Oakland replacing the damaged PCU, the aircraft was then ferried to Everett to replace the damaged ribs.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SWA746/history/20240525/1425Z/KPHX/KOAK​
 
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Vecr, Advanced Garbage, spiritofamermaid and 5 others
Rei is Shit. said:
This is a pretty strange incident. A 737 max experienced severe dutch roll during cruise.
By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jun 12th 2024 17:25Z, last updated Thursday, Jun 13th 2024 16:00Z

A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-8 MAX, registration N8825Q performing flight WN-746 from Phoenix,AZ to Oakland,CA (USA) with 175 passengers and 6 crew, was enroute at FL320 when the aircraft experienced Dutch Roll. The crew was able to regain control and landed the aircraft on Oakland's runway 30 about 55 minutes later. The aircraft sustained substantial structural damage.

The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT EXPERIENCED A DUTCH ROLL, REGAINED CONTROL AND POST FLIGHT INSPECTION REVEALED DAMAGE TO THE STANDBY PCU, OAKLAND, CA." and stated the aircraft sustained substantial damage, the occurrence was rated an accident.

The aircraft remained on the ground in Oakland until Jun 6th 2024, then positioned to Everett,WA (USA), ATS facilities, and is still on the ground in Everett 6 days later.

Dutch Roll is a coupled out of phase movement of the aircraft as result of weakened directional stability (provided by the vertical tail and rudder), in which the aircraft oscillates around its vertical as well as longitudinal axis (coupled yaw and roll).

The PCU is the power control unit, an actuator controlling the (vertical) rudder.

On Jun 13th 2024 The Aviation Herald learned that two ribs, that the stand by PCU is being mounted to, were damaged as well as the mounts of the stand by actuator. A temporary repair was done in Oakland replacing the damaged PCU, the aircraft was then ferried to Everett to replace the damaged ribs.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SWA746/history/20240525/1425Z/KPHX/KOAK​
Click to expand...

I was reading a bit about the 737's newer yaw damper systems here and here. I am not sure if they are still relevant to the max since this focuses on the NG. But from what I read and a few other sources it seems to me that the yaw damper or PCU failing shouldn't on it's own cause damage like that as it's function is not required for dispatch and it should naturally stop oscillating.

I also found this where the FAA was concerned about loose bolts in the rudder control system. But this seemed to turn up nothing.

I then looked a bit further and found the attatch FAA document and starting at the bottom of page 3 the FAA mentions concerns regarding the 737-7(This aircraft was an 8 and the 7 isn't in production yet) where they mention that a failure of part of the yaw damper system induced by lightning or high intensity radiated fields could cause oscillations and a rudder hard over that would exceed structural limits.

A lightning or high-intensity radiated fields (HIRF) induced failure of the SMYD may result in rudder oscillation. As a consequence, this failure could trigger a hardover condition and exceed structural limit loads. This catastrophic failure condition does not comply with §§ 25.1316(a) and 25.1317(a), lightning and HIRF, respectively
Click to expand...

Probably not related? But cold be maybe?
 

Attachments

  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: byuuWasTaken and Sam Losco
Rei is Shit. said:
This is a pretty strange incident. A 737 max experienced severe dutch roll during cruise.
By Simon Hradecky, created Wednesday, Jun 12th 2024 17:25Z, last updated Thursday, Jun 13th 2024 16:00Z

A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-8 MAX, registration N8825Q performing flight WN-746 from Phoenix,AZ to Oakland,CA (USA) with 175 passengers and 6 crew, was enroute at FL320 when the aircraft experienced Dutch Roll. The crew was able to regain control and landed the aircraft on Oakland's runway 30 about 55 minutes later. The aircraft sustained substantial structural damage.

The FAA reported: "AIRCRAFT EXPERIENCED A DUTCH ROLL, REGAINED CONTROL AND POST FLIGHT INSPECTION REVEALED DAMAGE TO THE STANDBY PCU, OAKLAND, CA." and stated the aircraft sustained substantial damage, the occurrence was rated an accident.

The aircraft remained on the ground in Oakland until Jun 6th 2024, then positioned to Everett,WA (USA), ATS facilities, and is still on the ground in Everett 6 days later.

Dutch Roll is a coupled out of phase movement of the aircraft as result of weakened directional stability (provided by the vertical tail and rudder), in which the aircraft oscillates around its vertical as well as longitudinal axis (coupled yaw and roll).

The PCU is the power control unit, an actuator controlling the (vertical) rudder.

On Jun 13th 2024 The Aviation Herald learned that two ribs, that the stand by PCU is being mounted to, were damaged as well as the mounts of the stand by actuator. A temporary repair was done in Oakland replacing the damaged PCU, the aircraft was then ferried to Everett to replace the damaged ribs.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SWA746/history/20240525/1425Z/KPHX/KOAK​
Click to expand...
Blancolirio video on this just dropped.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: byuuWasTaken
Starliner delayed from reentry again!


NASA and Boeing are assuring people the crew are definitely "not stranded".

I am having visions of the Captain of that vessel telling his Boeing paymasters there is absolutely no way in hell he is going to order his crew to attempt orbital reentry in their shitbox. Best ending, SpaceX deploying the Falcon 9 to retrieve the Boeing crew is now in play.
 
  • Like
  • DRINK!
Reactions: Advanced Garbage, spiritofamermaid, Le Pew and 4 others
New Bloomberg piece:


Boeing Lost Track of Up to 400 Bad 737 Parts, Whistleblower Says​


By Allyson Versprille and Julie Johnsson
June 18, 2024 at 10:00 AM UTC



A Boeing Co. quality inspector alleged that the planemaker
mishandled and lost track of hundreds of faulty parts, some of which he said may have been installed on new 737 Max planes, the latest revelation by a whistleblower pointing out possible misconduct at the manufacturer.
The claims were detailed in a June 11 complaint by Boeing inspector Sam Mohawk with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and were made public by a US Senate subcommittee on Tuesday in a memo to members. Boeing said it’s reviewing the claims after receiving the document late on Monday.
As of last year, Boeing had lost as many as 400 faulty 737 Max aircraft parts and deleted records for many of those from an internal cataloging system, according to the complaint. So-called non-conforming parts are damaged or inadequate components that are supposed to be tracked, disposed of or repaired, with meticulous records to ensure they aren’t used in the aircraft manufacturing process.
Mohawk also claimed that Boeing “intentionally hid” improperly stored non-conforming parts — including large components such as rudders and flaps — from the US Federal Aviation Administration ahead of an on-site inspection.

The allegations, which hadn’t previously been made public, add to a series of other whistleblower claims alleging the company has cut corners in its production and quality processes. Some whistleblowers have said they were encouraged to keep silent or were retaliated against for raising concerns.
“We continuously encourage employees to report all concerns as our priority is to ensure the safety of our airplanes and the flying public,” Boeing said in a statement.
Mohawk’s complaint was released by the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations on the same day that it plans to hear testimony from Boeing Chief Executive Officer Dave Calhoun, providing fresh lines of inquiry to pursue the embattled leader. The panel opened a probe into the planemaker following a near-catastrophe in January, when a fuselage panel blew off a 737 Max blew shortly after takeoff.
Read More: Boeing Faces Senate Grilling as CEO Search Gains Momentum (1)
Documents and whistleblower accounts collected by the panel thus far “paint a troubling picture of a company that prioritizes speed of manufacturing and cutting costs over ensuring the quality and safety of aircraft,” staff from the panel said in a memo to members.
The FAA said in a statement late Monday that it’s encouraged Boeing employees to come forward with their safety concerns and has seen an uptick in reports since Jan. 5 as a result. The agency disclosed last week that it received more than 11 times as many Boeing whistleblower reports in the first five months of this year compared to all of 2023.
“The FAA strongly encourages anyone with safety concerns to report them,” the agency said. “We thoroughly investigate every report, including allegations uncovered in the Senate’s work.”
The fresh claims deepen the pressure that Boeing faces from Washington. The company is under investigation by multiple federal agencies including the Justice Department. Prosecutors are also weighing whether to charge Boeing after it found the planemaker violated a deal that allowed the company to avoid charges following two fatal 737 Max crashes in 2018 and 2019.
Mohawk claimed that dozens of defective 737 components were being improperly stored outdoors and that Boeing ordered employees to move the majority of them to another location after receiving a notice from the FAA in June 2023 that the agency would be conducting an on-site inspection. He claims the parts were eventually moved back to the outside location or lost completely.

Once the pride of American aviation, Boeing keeps making headlines for the wrong reasons. Five years ago, two of its new 737 Max planes crashed, killing 346 people. Since then, a series of CEOs have struggled to regain the trust of regulators and the public. After a panel blew off a plane in January, US officials ordered a limit on 737 Max manufacturing. That supply crunch could mean summer travel is in for some turbulence. In this Bloomberg Originals mini-documentary, we explain why.
According to the subcommittee’s memo, non-conforming parts at Boeing are supposed to be marked with a red tag or red paint and held in a secure area of the factory.

The demands on Mohawk’s job monitoring those parts surged after the 737 Max’s worldwide grounding triggered by the two deadly crashes. Mohawk alleged that “the overwhelming number of nonconforming parts eventually led his superiors to direct him and others to eliminate or ‘cancel’ the records that designate a part as nonconforming,” according to the memo.
“Boeing needs to stop thinking about the next earnings call and start thinking about the next generation,” Senator Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut Democrat who chairs the panel, plans to say at the hearing, according to excerpts of his prepared remarks.
Mohawk claims that he tried to elevate the concerns through Boeing’s internal reporting program called “Speak Up,” but that the report was eventually routed to the same managers he had complained about.
The concerns raised by Mohawk bear similarities to allegations previously raised by the late Boeing whistleblower John Barnett about the production of one of the company’s other flagship aircraft, the 787 Dreamliner. Police concluded in May that Barnett’s death, which occurred amid ongoing litigation with the planemaker, was the result of suicide.
Read More: Boeing Safety-Culture Reset Demanded During Senate Grilling (3)
At a previous hearing under Blumenthal in April, Boeing engineer Sam Salehpour also alleged that the company had incorrectly assembled the barrel sections of its 787 model to save time and money, an accusation the company has refuted.
 
  • Lunacy
Reactions: spiritofamermaid and Coo Coo Bird
Peaches the Wonder Cat said:
New Bloomberg piece:


Boeing Lost Track of Up to 400 Bad 737 Parts, Whistleblower Says​


By Allyson Versprille and Julie Johnsson
June 18, 2024 at 10:00 AM UTC



A Boeing Co. quality inspector alleged that the planemaker mishandled and lost track of hundreds of faulty parts, some of which he said may have been installed on new 737 Max planes, the latest revelation by a whistleblower pointing out possible misconduct at the manufacturer.
Click to expand...
""""lost track""""
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back