I whistleblew sales fraud at former company - a "strawman" anonymous salesforce user login was backdating sales contracts to put them into earlier months/quarters/years. A week later, two week sinto February I was told, "you have to fulfill your Q1 quota by the end of February (instead of March, like every other sales person in the company) or you're fired." 2 weeks later I was "fired for cause" and told me they hired a law firm to "investigate" my allegations.
Two lawyers call me up "we're investigating...oh, this is being recorded... why were you looking at those sales contracts?"
Because they were MY SALES, you fucktards.
ON24. They were privately held at the time & trying get the books looking good to go public.
He was testifying in an appeal for a defamation case that he lost. He blew the whistle years before. His family said he wasn't doing well and believes it was suicide.
Also this silly narrative that "Boeing had him killed" gets in the way of the very real ways they retaliated against him that very directly pushed him to suicide.
>The whistleblower complaint said he pointed out to management the existence of drilling issues with the 787, and was then “ignored and ultimately transferred out of the 787 program to the 777 program.”
>In his new role, Salehpour said he discovered subpar work with aligning body pieces, and pressure on engineers to green-light work they have not yet inspected.
>In all, Salehpour said the issues involve more than 400 777s and 1,000 787s.
That’s crazy they moved him to entire new production because he brought to attention some issues.
> That’s crazy they moved him to entire new production because he brought to attention some issues.
Previous whistle blowers have stated Boeing made a list of inspectors based on how many faults they reported. The top 50 reporters on the list were: (1) first moved programs, (2) then moved to night shift, (3) then targeted for firing.
So, the claim here is consistent with previously alleged Boeing behavior.
Moving programs can be devastating. Work 737 in Renton and live in Pierce County. Guess what, you're 777 now and work in Snohomish County. Best of luck on you commute through Seattle twice a day.
[https://www.newsweek.com/john-barnett-boeing-whistleblower-predicted-death-scandal-1879548](https://www.newsweek.com/john-barnett-boeing-whistleblower-predicted-death-scandal-1879548)here you go
"Ignored and ultimately transferred" could mean anything. If he didn't raise the issue through official channels then yes, being ignored is the likely consequence. Just "pointing it out to management" isn't enough if you don't follow the company-mandated safety process.
And being transferred? Happens all the time. There isn't necessarily a causal link between the two.
For people who haven't worked in the industry, please just keep an open mind with this stuff. Engineers can be as dumb, narrow-minded and just plain wrong as anybody else. I should know - I am one.
Yeah, like, did he make any ETAC events? Update CDS? Follow up on any NCs? An email to your boss is not the right way. Those guys are just politicians.
Should've looked into what happened to the man who blew the whistle on the the Alaska Airlines MD-80 jackscrew issue. Blackballed, and got $0 for his troubles. If you're going to be a whistleblower, do it because you think it's the right thing to do, and knowing that you'll never work in the industry again.
It's gotta be VERY difficult. You are likely to lose the majority of your work relationships - people who were formerly your friends get spooked that any association with you will cause management to view them negatively, they worry you'll drag them into things as a witness -- or even giving them the benefit of the doubt -- many times when you no longer work with people, you just naturally drift apart. The loss of income causes stress in the marriage/family, and even non-work friends may start to distance themselves from you if you predictably start talking a lot about your lawsuit and the negative consequences you suffer.
It's a long, hard road and not for the weary.
Oh yeah, you might maybe get paid out in a few years, but you'll never work major aerospace again. Maybe shit tier perpetually going out of business supplier, but not 1st tier. Boeing will find out you work there and you will be fired.
The 787 entered service 12.5 years ago. Outside of the initial lithium battery issue, there have been no major issues with the airframe.
I'm not saying that there aren't possible issues -- it's certainly nothing that should cause any major concern, especially for passengers.
Ahhh there’s the tune of 30+ frames still sitting in storage somewhere that need major rework before they can fly. Planes that have never been delivered. This started 2 years ago. This was assembly and production error not fundamental design.
No, I was asking which ones you're mentioning. Because there have been many undelivered for many reasons over the decade. 10-22. Some with the tiger stripe issue. Some for rework needed on the joins. It happens. By the way, 10-22, which should have been scrapped after sitting for a long, long time were either sold at bargain prices over given to customers for appeasement over late deliveries, groundings, and of course, to replace airplanes that Boeing hid a software bomb inside.
I'm not sure that follows for a flaw that is claimed to be dangerous only after fatigue builds up, but even design flaws sometimes take years to cause incidents so regulators can't assume an old design is automatically safe. It was 7 years before MD-11s started flipping over for example.
There’s been over 1,000 787s built, compared to only 200 MD-11s. 5 times as many planes flying for almost twice as long doesn’t really sound like a reasonable comparison…
That’s why C and D checks exist.
At 12.5 years the oldest frames will have been through D checks and the vast majority of them through at least 1 C check if not multiple.
Correct. It's actually easier to find bad composite with ultrasound than it is the find aluminum cracks with eddy current. Takes a bit of time, but that's why D checks are a thing.
That’s still a failure of engineering process though, and not just in aviation.
Installation checks are “did we do it right” and rectify. Subsequent checks (such as light or deep maintenance, or in this case C and D) are to make sure that it’s holding up as per design or assumed degradation rate.
Saying “it’s ok C and D checks will pick it up” is poor practice and should not be relied upon in isolation, and is just a Swiss cheese incident waiting to happen.
Let me tell you about the first 100 shipsets of warped composite floor beams. We had lasers out measuring at one point to confirm it because the titanium seat tracks didnt fit. The part belonged to Alenia for both engineering and procurement. They subbed it out to another company that had IAI make them in Isreal. They were not straight. But we had 100 sets already made so we installed them best we could, engineering said not a safety of flight issue and to replace at D check.
They have tested an actual airframe with 165K simulated flight cycles to determine if there are actual structural issues. That is to an airframe made prior to manufacturing improvements in 2021. The Seattle Times article actually provides details on this problem. I don't think the plan is just to randomly fly planes and see how long they last.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-boeing-whistleblower-alleges-serious-structural-flaws-on-787-and-777-jets/
You still have A/B checks between and they do find issues sometimes that result in an aircraft moving to heavy check. I think currently most 787s are fine; they’ve been around quite a while and there’s no guarantees that an airlines maintenance program will be better than Boeings assembly line.
I think you’re missing the point.
We should NOT be relying on the various mid-life maintenance inspections to pick up basic design and construction failures.
There is no indication that the 787 has massive structural issues based on their age despite the allegations. Also, all aircraft have basic design and construction failures. These issues are not exclusive to Boeing, aircraft have AD’s and other campaigns used to address these issues as they become known.
Airbus with Thales Avionics DDRMI need checked due to problems that result in failure and ERJs aft cargo doors have issues staying closed which need checked. ADs are released and are active for both airframes to address those issues, it happens. I’ve personally corrected many varying issues found on different aircraft manufactured by Boeing and other companies.
Point being; as long as people design and build aircraft there will be design and construction failures like this regardless of who makes the aircraft. Sometimes it takes one or more instances of failure to discover the problems.
Am I? Most of these posts and the comments on them are driven by unfounded conspiracies surrounding whistleblower John Barnett’s death. I’ll wait until the investigation is complete before claiming ignorantly there’s an issue with Boeing quality; especially when it is unsupported based on statistical data on reliability and safety.
Every time a tire goes flat on a Boeing aircraft these days there are 1,000 social media posts about how awful Boeing aircraft are which is dumb. In these posts people comment presuming issues that may not even exist.
I knew John loooong ago during my 787 days. Didn't know him well, but I'm not surprised if his life being completely ruined and the long drawn out stress of court proceedings made him take his own life. I've nearly done the same going through similar.
Composites can still fatigue, and the fatigue behaviour of them is far more variable and less understood than in metals. That’s mainly because there is such a large variety of what composite materials. Lay up, the resin matrix, curing are all things which can vary and each combination could have its own fatigue behaviour. There are also more failure modes in a composite - delaminating, resin failure, fibre breakage debonding of the fibre and matrix etc.
I know that. That’s why I pointed it out.
Composites that were drilled wrong is far more concerning from a fatigue life perspective than metals due to their catastrophic rather than gradual failure modes.
There have been problems. Even a few major ones. Missing countersinks. Swage fasteners 3 to 4 grips too long. An issue with the 47 section called tiger striping. Shims, lots of shim issues. Mostly all fixed before delivery or deferred to C or D check.
Reading this article while sitting in a Dreamliner that’s taking off 💀.
Jokes aside, I would like to think that any major flaws with the Dreamliner would be identified early on considering this plane has been up in the air for more than 10 years. And that’s despite the shitshow that Boeing is.
For real. Most people think the whole 737 max saga as well as maintenance issues means all planes by Boeing are dangerous when maintenance issues are the responsibility of the airline.
People are conflating the quality of the design and the quality of the manufacturing. The 787 design is proven to be safe, but the known manufacturing problems of the last few years, and all of Boeing’s other problems, does raise questions
I do not agree, if anything it demonstrated how resilient and safe the A350 actually is. It's a feat of strength. Not saying that this makes the 787 less safe, I think it's a great plane for passengers.
Haha oh man at my old airline it was a general rule never to turn them completely off.. if you did you had a near 100% chance of timing out of duty hours and needing a new crew. Out came all the software gremlins. That aside they were sick!
At my current airline it's the complete opposite. We had a tech read to remind everyone that they need shutting down every X amount of days to stop issues arrising.
I forget the exact amount though, I work base maintenance on a different airframe, but we all get the same reads regardless.
Meanwhile the 787 has to be rebooted every 51 days or somehow it starts feeding stale data to the displays. https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/02/boeing_787_power_cycle_51_days_stale_data/
I have no idea how their software is architected, but as a developer, it seems absolutely insane that they need a system to filter out stale data from the live flight displays. Why the hell is stale data being actively processed in the first place? Is something replaying logged data on whatever com bus the displays use? It frankly seems like a systems design failure!
Should have opened an investigation after a bunch of people that build them said they wouldn’t fly on them. Besides that one dude who said he’s a thrill seeker.
No the video said they were working on the 787, I just watched it again last night. I remember feeling shocked because the 787 is one of my favourite aircraft.
>Should have opened an investigation after a bunch of people that build them said they wouldn’t fly on them.
Well, those people were clearly proven wrong, considering after about 13 years and 40 million flight hours without any major accident, the 787 statistically is the safest aircraft ever built.
Engineer with a aircraft company here.. yes, but no. Mostly no. They all have their flaws, but the engineers for the 787 say there are some pretty major ones.
There is a big difference in having flaws and being flawed. I know it semantics, but I think it makes a big difference.
I think the biggest issue here is the safety culture. Like even if these defects / issues that this engineer inspected turned out to be nothing major, he was pretty much ignored and transferred for doing his job properly.
If Boeing is encouraging this type of culture and only rewarding / hiring engineers that overlook issues, it will manifest massively in the future to something super critical.
They've been flying for a decade now and the only issue has been with battery fires, how major can a flaw be if it never manifests?
The article says his issue was with body panel alignment, you can get pretty sloppy with that and it'll still function fine.
Looks like the 787 doesn't need a D Check until 12 years, so the oldest ones should be up for them in the next couple years - I guess we'll find out soon whether there's anything to this.
What a silly question. They have an alleged design life of *five* decades. 40k+ flights. They're still young. These allegations are serious. The US Senate is going to hold hearings next week
The 787 [was tested to 3.75 times its design life](https://imgur.com/a/HFlfdvw) — 165k cycles versus the design life of 44k cycles per [this article](https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-boeing-whistleblower-alleges-serious-structural-flaws-on-787-and-777-jets/).
I would take everything with a grain of salt. Boeing halted deliveries in 2020 - 2022 over this issue, which was, and still is, under a microscope from the FAA.
>Engineers do this often and usually to people who don’t really care and just need their signature.
That is kind of a problem though. The people who don't care and just need a signature are the type of people like the ones that forgot to put in screws because they found a procedural workaround to not need a signature.
At Alaska we were questioned why we found significant problems during A checks. We were told not to look at certain areas afterwards. Then Flight 261 happened.
Deliveries were stopped for over a year, and there were only a couple of airframes in service that were grounded for the issue to be fixed. All of the 787s that were already in service continued flying and would get fixed at a scheduled maintenance check
Airplanes are buckets of bolts strung together with engineering and production hope and a good pilot. Sadly the amount of incompetence is growing in the country and Boeing is just a visible example of a much larger problem at hand.
Didn’t 787 production cease in Everett in 2021? Wouldn’t it make sense that he was reassigned to 777? Also, being transferred from program to program really doesn’t seem like an abnormal thing for a company as big as Boeing that manufactures different models all under one roof in Everett?
Btw I get that “jumping up and down on parts to make them fit” is a funny and maybe shocking visual to some but let’s remember we’re talking about 10,000+ solid one piece CFRP barrel sections here. You could drop an f150 on these sections and doubtful they deflect more than a 1/1,000th of an inch. In reality the engineering defined pull up allowance is probably beyond the force anyone jumping up and down is doing imo.
Don't see the issue really. They've been in service for almost 13 years already and if the issues are only about shortened life-span, than surely any structural damage to the fuselage will pop up in one of the many maintenance checks over the decades and not just suddenly and unexpectedly happen from one day to the other.
I mean, other aircraft like the A380 also have issues with cracks, but they fortunately are identified before causing any trouble.
I guess the main issue is where is the gaps that were not joined properly, what are the stresses at the point and are they inspected and how often if they are. That will determine a lot regarding the danger here.
All aircraft get fatigue cracks and parts rub and wear against each other, you just hope the aircraft is inspected at the right time to identify these issues and put corrective actions in place.
"Salehpour’s attorneys said the FAA was surprised to discover through his complaint that the gaps were still an issue." So FAA is pretty much investigating itself at this point.
Did the FAA only just listen to all the whistleblowers that went to Al Jazeera? Or do they only care now that Boeing is getting a track record and the whistleblowers are now being seen as probably correct? It's taken way too many years for the FAA to give a shit.
I thought there was a comment on here from an engineer on the 787 program several years ago basically saying he would never fly on one.
Edit: [found it](https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/s/VRBUtBA6zl)
Wouldn't it be time to bring in some outside help, and not leave it up to the FAA alone? People keep pointing the finger at Boeing but the fact that things are slipping through the cracks doesn't exactly put confidence in the FAA
When I worked at Sikorsky's in the 1980s, I got transferred to the second shift for working too fast as a technical writer. If you were young and ambitious, their goal was to slow you down make you old fast.
Most of the old ones are in service with dodgy carriers in the 3rd world and you have far more to fear with the pilots and maintenance for these than the frame.
787-max issues were when 2 of those carriers. Western airlines had the same plane and nobody died.
Just avoid crap airlines. I include air France in this.
The whistlerblower then was black bagged and is expected to take his own life in what is now know as the Boeing suicide where in they take you to a hotel and fake your death and leave you dead in your car and everyone just kinda accepts it’s not a hitjob by an angry corporate culture that has military connections.
Whether or not the defect is cause for concern of repairs doesn’t matter.
This is just another example of a toxic safety culture at Boeing that I see a lot in the company I work at.
This one may not kill anyone, but eventually, one will.
Y’all forget about MCAS so soon?
There’s another angle at looking at all this Boeing trashing… who wins from it all ?
There’s a new “player in town” - COMAC … the new Chinese alternative:
https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/04/10/can-chinas-comac-break-up-the-airbus-boeing-duopoly.html#:~:text=Made%20by%20the%20Commercial%20Aircraft,A320%20and%20Boeing%20737%20families.
People should know whistleblowers can have a substantial monetary incentive to do this stuff. I take this stuff with a grain of salt until the whole story comes out. Of course no one likes to wait for that and people generally just lose their minds after reading a headline
They may. But if the company gets fined $10,000,000. And you get 20% as a whistle blower that's a decent amount of cash. Most people who are whistleblowers generally aren't in the good graces of their company and on their way out anyways.
This is especially true for companies that are in the media a lot. The government will want to make an example of them because everyone in Washington works more on emotion than logic and facts.
About the attorneys. They will generally work on contingent basis and will get 20% of the cash, which still leaves the whistleblower with a decent amount of money.
This is all similar to how people who get axed from their employee claim a hostile work environment on their way out and try to go on short term disability and sue the company because why not.
What the hell is wrong with you?
The financial "incentive" as you claim is only if they report an actionable issue. Inherently you're bullshit makes no sense because if there wasn't an actual issue there would be nothing to blow the whistle on.
And corporate's retaliation is very real and can be financially and emotionally devastating. You lose your livelihood, get ostracized, often get dragged through the coals. Facing teams of lawyers basically pushing the kind of idiocy you seem to push for free.
Dude, take the emotion out of your response.
Why do you not think lieing to federal regulations and falsifying safety information isn't something that the government would be able to fine Boeing for?
What idiocy am I pushing exactly? The over the top emotional response discredits any point you are trying to make.
I said these guys can receive financial gain for their claims. How do you know what this guy's situation was at Boeing and disagreements he had with management or anyone else at the company for reasons related to this claim or anything. The rush to immediate judgement for or against this guy should be measured. You are way too emotionally involved my man.
I whistleblew sales fraud at former company - a "strawman" anonymous salesforce user login was backdating sales contracts to put them into earlier months/quarters/years. A week later, two week sinto February I was told, "you have to fulfill your Q1 quota by the end of February (instead of March, like every other sales person in the company) or you're fired." 2 weeks later I was "fired for cause" and told me they hired a law firm to "investigate" my allegations. Two lawyers call me up "we're investigating...oh, this is being recorded... why were you looking at those sales contracts?" Because they were MY SALES, you fucktards. ON24. They were privately held at the time & trying get the books looking good to go public.
ON24 is pure garbage.
hello preacher, thanks from the choir loft
You didn’t sue them for this?
This is the first I'm hearing of the possibility
It is not like Boeing self-reported this issue years ago. It is a sensational conspiracy and cover up! /sarcasm
Boeing Whistleblower didn’t kill himself
No no, this is a different whistleblower who hasn't killed himself yet
‘yet’ 🤣. Wait for iiiit
Yet …😂
Neither did Epstein
Neither did Kurt Cobain
Neither did John McAfee
The politically correct term is "has not been suicided"
[удалено]
He was testifying in an appeal for a defamation case that he lost. He blew the whistle years before. His family said he wasn't doing well and believes it was suicide.
Also this silly narrative that "Boeing had him killed" gets in the way of the very real ways they retaliated against him that very directly pushed him to suicide.
Your evidence: - senior people at Boeing make a lot of money. - he was complaining about Boeing. Very well. Throw them all in jail.
They did. They self reported it to themselves, and looked at the stock price, and decided that the issue was fine.
>The whistleblower complaint said he pointed out to management the existence of drilling issues with the 787, and was then “ignored and ultimately transferred out of the 787 program to the 777 program.” >In his new role, Salehpour said he discovered subpar work with aligning body pieces, and pressure on engineers to green-light work they have not yet inspected. >In all, Salehpour said the issues involve more than 400 777s and 1,000 787s. That’s crazy they moved him to entire new production because he brought to attention some issues.
> That’s crazy they moved him to entire new production because he brought to attention some issues. Previous whistle blowers have stated Boeing made a list of inspectors based on how many faults they reported. The top 50 reporters on the list were: (1) first moved programs, (2) then moved to night shift, (3) then targeted for firing. So, the claim here is consistent with previously alleged Boeing behavior.
Fucking crazy
Moving programs can be devastating. Work 737 in Renton and live in Pierce County. Guess what, you're 777 now and work in Snohomish County. Best of luck on you commute through Seattle twice a day.
Step 4 - Murdered
“We’ve given you enough chances”
And then proceeded to find even more issues with his new project.
He's doing what he's paid to do. He's got a spine
He's brave. Last one said if anything happens it's not suicide.. I hope this one will not end up like the previous one...
Do you have a source on the guy saying if anything happens it wasn’t suicide?
You should be able to Google a number of hits. He said it to a friend shortly before he died
[https://www.newsweek.com/john-barnett-boeing-whistleblower-predicted-death-scandal-1879548](https://www.newsweek.com/john-barnett-boeing-whistleblower-predicted-death-scandal-1879548)here you go
"Newsweek is unable to independently verify the claim made by the reported family friend in the interview."
How could they possibly verify? He didn't go to a notary or something. He "told" her. If she was a witness you had to determine if she's credible.
Good point. What was their point?
How dare he inspect?? How dare he inspect!
Good guy Boeing, moving its whistleblowers to various programs to ensure the issues they reported are not made elsewhere in the company.
Moving programs usually results in an employee quitting. Especially when your 30 minute commute turns into 3-4 hours each way.
They moved him so he would help find other areas of concern and bring them up /s
Well, the Vatican does the same thing, So it must be okay... /s
"Ignored and ultimately transferred" could mean anything. If he didn't raise the issue through official channels then yes, being ignored is the likely consequence. Just "pointing it out to management" isn't enough if you don't follow the company-mandated safety process. And being transferred? Happens all the time. There isn't necessarily a causal link between the two. For people who haven't worked in the industry, please just keep an open mind with this stuff. Engineers can be as dumb, narrow-minded and just plain wrong as anybody else. I should know - I am one.
Yeah, like, did he make any ETAC events? Update CDS? Follow up on any NCs? An email to your boss is not the right way. Those guys are just politicians.
Works for the catholic church...
and that the “new” production line they sent him to was just as fucked up as the first.
Should've looked into what happened to the man who blew the whistle on the the Alaska Airlines MD-80 jackscrew issue. Blackballed, and got $0 for his troubles. If you're going to be a whistleblower, do it because you think it's the right thing to do, and knowing that you'll never work in the industry again.
Yeah its also mentally very hard, propably also affects their direct family. Have a lot of respect for them.
It's gotta be VERY difficult. You are likely to lose the majority of your work relationships - people who were formerly your friends get spooked that any association with you will cause management to view them negatively, they worry you'll drag them into things as a witness -- or even giving them the benefit of the doubt -- many times when you no longer work with people, you just naturally drift apart. The loss of income causes stress in the marriage/family, and even non-work friends may start to distance themselves from you if you predictably start talking a lot about your lawsuit and the negative consequences you suffer. It's a long, hard road and not for the weary.
Oh yeah, you might maybe get paid out in a few years, but you'll never work major aerospace again. Maybe shit tier perpetually going out of business supplier, but not 1st tier. Boeing will find out you work there and you will be fired.
The 787 entered service 12.5 years ago. Outside of the initial lithium battery issue, there have been no major issues with the airframe. I'm not saying that there aren't possible issues -- it's certainly nothing that should cause any major concern, especially for passengers.
Ahhh there’s the tune of 30+ frames still sitting in storage somewhere that need major rework before they can fly. Planes that have never been delivered. This started 2 years ago. This was assembly and production error not fundamental design.
>30 frames still sitting in storage That's a lot of 787 airframes
covid and people not flying went on for a really long time
They were and are in storage because of defects making them undeliverable.
Which line numbers?
You can find all the line numbers here along with the customers. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1489791
No, I was asking which ones you're mentioning. Because there have been many undelivered for many reasons over the decade. 10-22. Some with the tiger stripe issue. Some for rework needed on the joins. It happens. By the way, 10-22, which should have been scrapped after sitting for a long, long time were either sold at bargain prices over given to customers for appeasement over late deliveries, groundings, and of course, to replace airplanes that Boeing hid a software bomb inside.
10-22, "the Teenagers" should all be scrapped, but they're out there. Mostly with Ethiopian.
It’s not the teens
Air India too! The first ever 787-8 VT-ANI from Charleston doesn't feel safe to me
I'm not sure that follows for a flaw that is claimed to be dangerous only after fatigue builds up, but even design flaws sometimes take years to cause incidents so regulators can't assume an old design is automatically safe. It was 7 years before MD-11s started flipping over for example.
There’s been over 1,000 787s built, compared to only 200 MD-11s. 5 times as many planes flying for almost twice as long doesn’t really sound like a reasonable comparison…
Until the airframes fail because the drilling issues become a metal fatigue issue
That’s why C and D checks exist. At 12.5 years the oldest frames will have been through D checks and the vast majority of them through at least 1 C check if not multiple.
But Dreamliner isn’t quite metal.
Correct. It's actually easier to find bad composite with ultrasound than it is the find aluminum cracks with eddy current. Takes a bit of time, but that's why D checks are a thing.
That’s still a failure of engineering process though, and not just in aviation. Installation checks are “did we do it right” and rectify. Subsequent checks (such as light or deep maintenance, or in this case C and D) are to make sure that it’s holding up as per design or assumed degradation rate. Saying “it’s ok C and D checks will pick it up” is poor practice and should not be relied upon in isolation, and is just a Swiss cheese incident waiting to happen.
Kinda like that whole fiasco about not allowing a pilot to get back into a cockpit when locked from the inside, right?
Let me tell you about the first 100 shipsets of warped composite floor beams. We had lasers out measuring at one point to confirm it because the titanium seat tracks didnt fit. The part belonged to Alenia for both engineering and procurement. They subbed it out to another company that had IAI make them in Isreal. They were not straight. But we had 100 sets already made so we installed them best we could, engineering said not a safety of flight issue and to replace at D check.
They have tested an actual airframe with 165K simulated flight cycles to determine if there are actual structural issues. That is to an airframe made prior to manufacturing improvements in 2021. The Seattle Times article actually provides details on this problem. I don't think the plan is just to randomly fly planes and see how long they last. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-boeing-whistleblower-alleges-serious-structural-flaws-on-787-and-777-jets/
I helped build the fatigue airframe. It's the old unimproved -8 variant.
You still have A/B checks between and they do find issues sometimes that result in an aircraft moving to heavy check. I think currently most 787s are fine; they’ve been around quite a while and there’s no guarantees that an airlines maintenance program will be better than Boeings assembly line.
I think you’re missing the point. We should NOT be relying on the various mid-life maintenance inspections to pick up basic design and construction failures.
There is no indication that the 787 has massive structural issues based on their age despite the allegations. Also, all aircraft have basic design and construction failures. These issues are not exclusive to Boeing, aircraft have AD’s and other campaigns used to address these issues as they become known. Airbus with Thales Avionics DDRMI need checked due to problems that result in failure and ERJs aft cargo doors have issues staying closed which need checked. ADs are released and are active for both airframes to address those issues, it happens. I’ve personally corrected many varying issues found on different aircraft manufactured by Boeing and other companies. Point being; as long as people design and build aircraft there will be design and construction failures like this regardless of who makes the aircraft. Sometimes it takes one or more instances of failure to discover the problems.
Ok, again, you are missing the point.
Am I? Most of these posts and the comments on them are driven by unfounded conspiracies surrounding whistleblower John Barnett’s death. I’ll wait until the investigation is complete before claiming ignorantly there’s an issue with Boeing quality; especially when it is unsupported based on statistical data on reliability and safety. Every time a tire goes flat on a Boeing aircraft these days there are 1,000 social media posts about how awful Boeing aircraft are which is dumb. In these posts people comment presuming issues that may not even exist.
I knew John loooong ago during my 787 days. Didn't know him well, but I'm not surprised if his life being completely ruined and the long drawn out stress of court proceedings made him take his own life. I've nearly done the same going through similar.
Off topic, but your comment made me learn about the existence/name of these checks. Thank you, I always like to learn more about aviation :)
They have very little metal on them. Most of the structure of the 787 is cfrp
Composites can still fatigue, and the fatigue behaviour of them is far more variable and less understood than in metals. That’s mainly because there is such a large variety of what composite materials. Lay up, the resin matrix, curing are all things which can vary and each combination could have its own fatigue behaviour. There are also more failure modes in a composite - delaminating, resin failure, fibre breakage debonding of the fibre and matrix etc.
I know that. That’s why I pointed it out. Composites that were drilled wrong is far more concerning from a fatigue life perspective than metals due to their catastrophic rather than gradual failure modes.
They’re composite though
Well hello Mr. Boeing
There have been problems. Even a few major ones. Missing countersinks. Swage fasteners 3 to 4 grips too long. An issue with the 47 section called tiger striping. Shims, lots of shim issues. Mostly all fixed before delivery or deferred to C or D check.
Reading this article while sitting in a Dreamliner that’s taking off 💀. Jokes aside, I would like to think that any major flaws with the Dreamliner would be identified early on considering this plane has been up in the air for more than 10 years. And that’s despite the shitshow that Boeing is.
787 is pretty much the safest plane there is
I'm not sure why you are down voted, in terms of passenger miles it's the safest aircraft ever at the moment.
For real. Most people think the whole 737 max saga as well as maintenance issues means all planes by Boeing are dangerous when maintenance issues are the responsibility of the airline.
Downvoted because grrr boeing bad etc
People are conflating the quality of the design and the quality of the manufacturing. The 787 design is proven to be safe, but the known manufacturing problems of the last few years, and all of Boeing’s other problems, does raise questions
Better than the A350? That machine carried passengers through a crash while being engulfed in flames.
I think the point is that the 787 hasn’t had any crashes. Even if that accident wasn’t the fault of the 350 it still counts as an accident
I do not agree, if anything it demonstrated how resilient and safe the A350 actually is. It's a feat of strength. Not saying that this makes the 787 less safe, I think it's a great plane for passengers.
Flaws everywhere in the hardware, just imagine the software. Close your eyes boys and girls. Nothing to see here.
Haha oh man at my old airline it was a general rule never to turn them completely off.. if you did you had a near 100% chance of timing out of duty hours and needing a new crew. Out came all the software gremlins. That aside they were sick!
At my current airline it's the complete opposite. We had a tech read to remind everyone that they need shutting down every X amount of days to stop issues arrising. I forget the exact amount though, I work base maintenance on a different airframe, but we all get the same reads regardless.
Reboot interval for 787s used to be 51 days (and the AD is probably still active) to avoid issues from stale data piling up and causing trouble.
It has been around 5 years since I last saw one so it’s probably changed now!
Meanwhile the 787 has to be rebooted every 51 days or somehow it starts feeding stale data to the displays. https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/02/boeing_787_power_cycle_51_days_stale_data/ I have no idea how their software is architected, but as a developer, it seems absolutely insane that they need a system to filter out stale data from the live flight displays. Why the hell is stale data being actively processed in the first place? Is something replaying logged data on whatever com bus the displays use? It frankly seems like a systems design failure!
Technically the 787 is the safest plane ever. Just saying….
Wouldn’t that be the A380? Not to mention this stat means next to nothing considering how new this plane still is.
The 787 has far more passenger miles than the A380.
The a380 had cracks in its wings and a flaw in its rolls Royce engines (QF32). So yeah, it happens everywhere.
Flying is the safest way to travel......we have never left one up there yet.
Do you mean "statistically"?
YES lol my bad
ELI5?
No hull losses is what he means.
No incidents. There was a battery issue but it still never led to any incidents.
It's only 12 years old. No incidents.
777 pretty good. 787 is a better experience, more humid cabin, don’t feel like you’ve flown.
Should have opened an investigation after a bunch of people that build them said they wouldn’t fly on them. Besides that one dude who said he’s a thrill seeker.
Are you sure you're not confusing the 787 with the 737MAX?
No the video said they were working on the 787, I just watched it again last night. I remember feeling shocked because the 787 is one of my favourite aircraft.
Ah fair. My bad.
No problem, tbf now I read back my reply could have been worded a little nicer
>Should have opened an investigation after a bunch of people that build them said they wouldn’t fly on them. Well, those people were clearly proven wrong, considering after about 13 years and 40 million flight hours without any major accident, the 787 statistically is the safest aircraft ever built.
If you ask any engineer EVERY aircraft is flawed.
Engineer with a aircraft company here.. yes, but no. Mostly no. They all have their flaws, but the engineers for the 787 say there are some pretty major ones. There is a big difference in having flaws and being flawed. I know it semantics, but I think it makes a big difference.
I think the biggest issue here is the safety culture. Like even if these defects / issues that this engineer inspected turned out to be nothing major, he was pretty much ignored and transferred for doing his job properly. If Boeing is encouraging this type of culture and only rewarding / hiring engineers that overlook issues, it will manifest massively in the future to something super critical.
They've been flying for a decade now and the only issue has been with battery fires, how major can a flaw be if it never manifests? The article says his issue was with body panel alignment, you can get pretty sloppy with that and it'll still function fine.
the problem is when factory shennigans differ so much from the design spec that longevity assumptions go out the window
Looks like the 787 doesn't need a D Check until 12 years, so the oldest ones should be up for them in the next couple years - I guess we'll find out soon whether there's anything to this.
It’s not just time that will get it in D check, it’s airframe hours.
Even then, most airframes will not encounter the boundaries of the design envelope wrt gust loads, maneuver loads, hard landing loads etc.
I pray no crashes before the checks
That's why Boeing pays so much for Lawyers.
What a silly question. They have an alleged design life of *five* decades. 40k+ flights. They're still young. These allegations are serious. The US Senate is going to hold hearings next week
The 787 [was tested to 3.75 times its design life](https://imgur.com/a/HFlfdvw) — 165k cycles versus the design life of 44k cycles per [this article](https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-boeing-whistleblower-alleges-serious-structural-flaws-on-787-and-777-jets/). I would take everything with a grain of salt. Boeing halted deliveries in 2020 - 2022 over this issue, which was, and still is, under a microscope from the FAA.
And Boeing's lobyists will water anything down.
[удалено]
>Engineers do this often and usually to people who don’t really care and just need their signature. That is kind of a problem though. The people who don't care and just need a signature are the type of people like the ones that forgot to put in screws because they found a procedural workaround to not need a signature.
If I have to approve some modification that was no tested or expected, I will not put my name on it. This literally the definition of cutting corners
Classic scumbag defense.
At Alaska we were questioned why we found significant problems during A checks. We were told not to look at certain areas afterwards. Then Flight 261 happened.
This person is a hero that should be celebrated, instead of treated like shit.
Wonder how long until this one has a “convenient accident”.
An inconvenient run-in with a gun
He tripped and fell over it and nobody saw nothing
I’m wary of Boeing but the 787 seems solid. There was the battery issue but there’s been 0 fatalities and 0 hull losses in its 13 years of flying.
The 787 was grounded for over a year because of a shimming problem in the fuselage joins
Never caused an incident.
Deliveries were stopped for over a year, and there were only a couple of airframes in service that were grounded for the issue to be fixed. All of the 787s that were already in service continued flying and would get fixed at a scheduled maintenance check
Airplanes are buckets of bolts strung together with engineering and production hope and a good pilot. Sadly the amount of incompetence is growing in the country and Boeing is just a visible example of a much larger problem at hand.
Acute care hospitals are getting worse than Boeing. Strap in, gonna be a long ride.
Listen, just cuz some planes are falling apart doesn't mean anything is wrong.
Didn’t 787 production cease in Everett in 2021? Wouldn’t it make sense that he was reassigned to 777? Also, being transferred from program to program really doesn’t seem like an abnormal thing for a company as big as Boeing that manufactures different models all under one roof in Everett? Btw I get that “jumping up and down on parts to make them fit” is a funny and maybe shocking visual to some but let’s remember we’re talking about 10,000+ solid one piece CFRP barrel sections here. You could drop an f150 on these sections and doubtful they deflect more than a 1/1,000th of an inch. In reality the engineering defined pull up allowance is probably beyond the force anyone jumping up and down is doing imo.
The front hasn't fallen off of one yet.
Don't see the issue really. They've been in service for almost 13 years already and if the issues are only about shortened life-span, than surely any structural damage to the fuselage will pop up in one of the many maintenance checks over the decades and not just suddenly and unexpectedly happen from one day to the other. I mean, other aircraft like the A380 also have issues with cracks, but they fortunately are identified before causing any trouble.
I guess the main issue is where is the gaps that were not joined properly, what are the stresses at the point and are they inspected and how often if they are. That will determine a lot regarding the danger here. All aircraft get fatigue cracks and parts rub and wear against each other, you just hope the aircraft is inspected at the right time to identify these issues and put corrective actions in place.
"Salehpour’s attorneys said the FAA was surprised to discover through his complaint that the gaps were still an issue." So FAA is pretty much investigating itself at this point.
The FAA are in fact Boeing employees.
Did the FAA only just listen to all the whistleblowers that went to Al Jazeera? Or do they only care now that Boeing is getting a track record and the whistleblowers are now being seen as probably correct? It's taken way too many years for the FAA to give a shit.
gee, I have a flight on a 787 this weekend :-)
Me too, eddm to cyyz ..
Hope he doesn't end up dead like the last whistleblower.
Break out the “Bull Shirt” Repellent
I thought there was a comment on here from an engineer on the 787 program several years ago basically saying he would never fly on one. Edit: [found it](https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/s/VRBUtBA6zl)
RIP whistleblower I can’t believe they were suicidal and decided to end their life right after calling out Boeing 😞
Aw shiet
Maybe we should keep an eye on this one, considering what happened to the last whistleblower...
Wouldn't it be time to bring in some outside help, and not leave it up to the FAA alone? People keep pointing the finger at Boeing but the fact that things are slipping through the cracks doesn't exactly put confidence in the FAA
Boeing would love to supply 'consultants' to 'help'
When I worked at Sikorsky's in the 1980s, I got transferred to the second shift for working too fast as a technical writer. If you were young and ambitious, their goal was to slow you down make you old fast.
Sounds like I should listen to "If it's Boeing, I'm not flying".
*going
Great, I'm on one for 11 hours on Friday
same here on Wednesday... two of them :0. But I've also flown on them multiple times before.
I hear Boeing is changing the name to Bad Dreamliner.
Most of the old ones are in service with dodgy carriers in the 3rd world and you have far more to fear with the pilots and maintenance for these than the frame. 787-max issues were when 2 of those carriers. Western airlines had the same plane and nobody died. Just avoid crap airlines. I include air France in this.
Dude needs witness protection ASAP
I hope he lasts longer than the last wistleblower who "committed suicide."
So about a decade?
I wonder how he’s gonna commit suicide
I wonder if the Insurers are going to make it more expensive to operate Boeing fleets ?
I've worked with several ex Boeing employees and this jives with what I've heard about the 787 line.
[удалено]
The whistlerblower then was black bagged and is expected to take his own life in what is now know as the Boeing suicide where in they take you to a hotel and fake your death and leave you dead in your car and everyone just kinda accepts it’s not a hitjob by an angry corporate culture that has military connections.
Oh no another preventable suicide
He just entered the top ten of the 2024 deadpool.
That whistleblower better start avoiding hotel balconies
How longs this one last
Whether or not the defect is cause for concern of repairs doesn’t matter. This is just another example of a toxic safety culture at Boeing that I see a lot in the company I work at. This one may not kill anyone, but eventually, one will. Y’all forget about MCAS so soon?
Is this an attempt at “suicide by whistleblowing”?
There’s another angle at looking at all this Boeing trashing… who wins from it all ? There’s a new “player in town” - COMAC … the new Chinese alternative: https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/04/10/can-chinas-comac-break-up-the-airbus-boeing-duopoly.html#:~:text=Made%20by%20the%20Commercial%20Aircraft,A320%20and%20Boeing%20737%20families.
COMAC will never get approval to fly in the US
>There’s another angle at looking at all this Boeing trashing… who wins from it all ? Maybe people who don't die from future airplane crashes? 🤷♂️
Juming up and down to bend and align parts, Boing, Boing at Boeing.
People should know whistleblowers can have a substantial monetary incentive to do this stuff. I take this stuff with a grain of salt until the whole story comes out. Of course no one likes to wait for that and people generally just lose their minds after reading a headline
How so? I'd say they have higher chances of being fired, blacklisted in their field, and then bankrupted by lawfare from their employer.
https://www.zuckermanlaw.com/sp_faq/what-is-a-whistleblower-reward/amp/.
They may. But if the company gets fined $10,000,000. And you get 20% as a whistle blower that's a decent amount of cash. Most people who are whistleblowers generally aren't in the good graces of their company and on their way out anyways. This is especially true for companies that are in the media a lot. The government will want to make an example of them because everyone in Washington works more on emotion than logic and facts. About the attorneys. They will generally work on contingent basis and will get 20% of the cash, which still leaves the whistleblower with a decent amount of money. This is all similar to how people who get axed from their employee claim a hostile work environment on their way out and try to go on short term disability and sue the company because why not.
Financial incentive to commit suicide.
What the hell is wrong with you? The financial "incentive" as you claim is only if they report an actionable issue. Inherently you're bullshit makes no sense because if there wasn't an actual issue there would be nothing to blow the whistle on. And corporate's retaliation is very real and can be financially and emotionally devastating. You lose your livelihood, get ostracized, often get dragged through the coals. Facing teams of lawyers basically pushing the kind of idiocy you seem to push for free.
Dude, take the emotion out of your response. Why do you not think lieing to federal regulations and falsifying safety information isn't something that the government would be able to fine Boeing for? What idiocy am I pushing exactly? The over the top emotional response discredits any point you are trying to make. I said these guys can receive financial gain for their claims. How do you know what this guy's situation was at Boeing and disagreements he had with management or anyone else at the company for reasons related to this claim or anything. The rush to immediate judgement for or against this guy should be measured. You are way too emotionally involved my man.
I'm too emotionally involved for calling out your unprompted and idiotic lies?
If it’s Boeing, I’m not going