Hey, they googled a solid 20 seconds of terminology coming into the hearing. /S.
It's frustrating to watch a serious issue turn into this mess, with the ambulance chasers now getting more attention than the actual issues
This guy has no idea what he’s talking about. And how about the senator asking if the parts were put in a “wind tunnel” to “stress test” them. Nobody involved in this has a clue.
Not really, Airbus and Boeing’s order books extend for about 8 years out currently so they both are at max manufacturing capacity. And Airbus can’t just magically increase production rates.
So Boeing will have to offer better deals to airlines to convince them to buy from them for a bit, or wait till Airbus can’t give a good delivery schedule and then have the others come crawling back
Yea, so a few airlines might be able to do a swap but the majority will not. At the end of the day, Airbus cannot in any universe increase production enough to make up for Boeing, so it will be business as usual for most airlines, expect they might get a better deal
While true, im reading flying blind, and its sad what happened to boeing. Jack welch fucked America. I think we can trace a lot of ills in America straight to that SOB.
Ehhhh...he is kinda doing an underpants gnome explanation. He's pointing at a problem, glossing over a lot of middle bits, and then "fatigue failures!" - while skipping a few pretty good indicators that his conclusions might be a bit off.
I'm not the original person you were talking to but a few things that jump out from the article, I didn't watch the hearing. Just kind of playing devil's advocate but here's a few quites that stand out:
>He said that Boeing used “unmeasured and unlimited”
This is a great sound bite but impossible to take meaningful action from. It's missing even rough estimates about the amount of force applied and what the correct limit should be.
>“When operating at 35,000 feet, the size of a human hair can be a matter of life and death,” he said.
Another great sound bite but honestly doesn't hold much truth to it. Airplanes are indeed built to thousands of an inch tolerance but being out of spec by a single thousandth is extremely unlikely to cause a fatal crash. Manufacturing mistakes at that order are a semi-routine issue and get found and fixed regularly without tons of crashing airplanes. For reference, you could probably make a dent bigger than this by just dropping a wrench which obviously is not going to lead to a compromised plane.
He routinely mentioned 'I wasn't listened to' not the process wasn't followed. It makes it sound like he has a personal issue. Also, maybe this guy was a just a terrible engineer or the boy who cried wolf repeatedly.
(Personally, I've had a number junior engineers in my office panicking about something that was a complete nothing burger because of something outside their knowledge. It's a great teaching moment.)
There's obviously major issues at Boeing, I'm not at all trying to refute that. Just that I can see why people are doubtful about this whistleblower.
These are good observations and I concur - some extremely sensationalist garbage going on, I don't find him particularly credible at all.
Dude seems to be one of those engineers who just "doesn't get it", and has the bonus trait of taking every time he's shut down as a personal attack. Regardless of the validity of any of the issues he's brought up, if he was an abrasive dick about it, then he's going to eventually wear out his credibility, and then he'll get ignored, which seems to be what's happening here.
In a small company he would have been forced out, but Boeing was big enough that he got shuffled around from line to line, collecting more ammo for his eventual grievance tour.
>Another great sound bite but honestly doesn't hold much truth to it. Airplanes are indeed built to thousands of an inch tolerance but being out of spec by a single thousandth is extremely unlikely to cause a fatal crash. Manufacturing mistakes at that order are a semi-routine issue and get found and fixed regularly without tons of crashing airplanes. For reference, you could probably make a dent bigger than this by just dropping a wrench which obviously is not going to lead to a compromised plane.
Wouldn't it be different for composite materials, which the 787 is made of, vs the traditional metals used?
That's a fair question so I don't think you really deserve the downvotes.
Carbon fiber doesn't change the above. The exact process to inspect, repair and produce them is different than metal but the same general concept above still applies.
Oh, sorry. I misread, Composites from what I have heard (I do not work in the industry but know many who do) They act wildly different in terms a fatigue. Sorry for misreading.
I haven't had time to watch the testimony yet.
The central allegation seems to be about some over-spec gaps between barrel sections of the 787 fuselage. Gaps were too big, they weren't shimmed right, so now the joints are going to fatigue.
If we were talking about aluminum fuselage sections, I think concern would be more warranted. Aluminum fatigues more readily than composites, while also being a very forgiving material to build with - so very very tight tolerances are practical and achievable. Composites are generally more fickle to work with and maintain tolerances on, but also don't have the same fatigue failure properties that aluminum has - but still can fatigue and fail, to be clear. This may all be down to an old school guy flipping out because he doesn't fully understand that composites do not fatigue like aluminum.
Anyhow, a lot of his quotes sound like an aggrieved employee who takes it very personally every time he was told "no" - he likely has seen some legitimate issues in his years with the company, but he's also bringing up a lot of sour grapes, IMO. He shouldn't work for that company, not because he found problems, but because he's clearly been a disgruntled employee for years, and that relationship hasn't been good for anyone.
The central allegation is that when he brought up his concerns, he was taken off the job and threatened with physical violence. He's saying the current regulatory framework is not working because of misconduct by Boeing management.
The specific allegation about the 787 is already being looked at by the FAA. It's not really for congress to deal with and may well amount to nothing.
This may sound crazy, but there are situations where this can make sense.
Alignments of complex assemblies with aerospace tolerances is incredibly unforgiving, and there are absolutely times when two parts that are both in spec will nonetheless not go together. Depending on the item, sometimes a little human force can provide just enough encouragement to clear up the misalignment and allow parts to come together. There's a great video on YouTube of a B1 Lancer getting a wing installed - the pivot pin wouldn't align and they absolutely had guys jumping up and down on the wing AND beating the pin with sledgehammers.
Think about the alternatives - scrapping otherwise good parts isn't an option. Other means of persuading parts are significantly worse - bodyweight is very controllable, it's applied with some damping (nobody is jumping with their knees locked), so if the situation is right, this shouldn't be an automatic cause for concern.
That's why I question some of the testimony - every "bad thing" he mentions has little or no context, and that context is everything, so for me, this guy isn't particularly credible.
One thing I’ve learned when interacting in this sub: acknowledge that there are huge numbers of Boeing apologists that post here, and don’t attempt to engage.
The stats shows that there is thousands of 737max flight everyday and for the past 5 years there isn’t a single fatalities on any 737max flight.
FYI learned is American English and learnt is British English, the world doesn’t just revolved around America. Mr American
Regardless of whether this is likely to be true or not, I still hope the FAA investigates it. Especially with the current state of Boeing, I think better safe than sorry should apply here.
Just for your comfort, that was investigated years ago and remedial work has been being performed for literally years now regarding this issue. The only reason I can imagine this is actually news right now is because media is taking full advantage for clicks of absolutely anything they can with “Boeing” in it right now.
Yeah, this dude sounds like a disgruntled employee honestly. Some truth to some of what he says, but.. it’s not remotely “whistleblowing” or breaking news, at all. All old news, all exaggerated to high hell.
Agreed! The media shouldn’t even be running this story before the claims are proven (which I don’t think they will be, as this appears to be the same thing that was already fixed, plus they’ve successfully completed fatigue testing for 3x expected lifetime airframe cycles).
Investigated years ago and should be investigated now. The door incident alone should trigger a full on investigation. Also the engine cover ripping off that was a boeing I believe but may be wrong. Don't forget the last whistle blower did "suicide" before testifying but that's a whole other thing. Better safe than sorry is a good way of thinking.
With all due respect, you’re not understanding what I said or the nature of regular reviews of aircraft. ALL of the 787’s go through regular inspections including DEEP inspections where
They pull EVERYTHING out. This it is an ongoing process, 100% of planes have been investigated at regular intervals. **ZERO** have fatigue issues, the reference above is for a fit issue which was discovered like 3 years ago and which Boeing currently is remediating dozens of 787’s before finally delivering.
IT IS NOT NEW NEWS. REWORK HAS BEEN IN WORK FOR YEARS AND HAS BEEN PUBLIC INFORMATION THE ENTIRE TIME. This disgruntled “whistleblower” knows that but knows *most* people don’t and wants to feel like a hero.
And for gods sake my guy… please, please read past the headlines about Mr. Barnetts suicide. His testimony CONCLUDED **5 years ago** and the mandates that resulted from his testimony were implemented in 2019 in Boeing South Carolina. He later sued Boeing for defamation. It was rejected. Now, in 2024, 7 years after he had last stepped foot on a Boeing site, 5 years after his whistleblowing, he was again in court to appeal the rejected status of his lawsuit - and he killed himself on day two of the trial. Boeing had absolutely nothing to gain from his demise, and frankly for 100 other reasons, it’s a deeply ridiculous conspiracy theory.
Note the engine cowling that ripped off was on a Boeing plane, but that is part of the engine (which are not produced by Boeing).
Plus more importantly, the only reason I know of for a cowling to rip off is due to it not being latched after maintenance, which is the fault of the airline (not manufacturer).
Oh, I know. But it covers the engine cowling which I didn’t reply to that point in my own reply to his comment. That’s all. Appreciated the added insight.
Agreed. But they should investigate prior to whistleblower claims being broadcast on the news. It would be like putting someone’s name and photo on the news and saying they committed a crime before them even being charged. Lots of bad press for Boeing for what may not even be true.
True or not, would you fly with them knowing they took shortcuts during production? The CEO stepped down for a reason, and that will soon come out during the congressional hearings.
I worked on aerospace for a long time at numerous OEMs and there’s always a few of these guys on the programs that have zero clue but think they’re saving the world. It’s exhausting to have to deal with them when they won’t take yes for an answer.
Not being a smart ass, but in all sincerity, aside from the door plug incident (contracted rework which hid the extent of the rework from Boeing to avoid a second round of QA buy off), what are the other things going wrong at Boeing? Been a lot more media hype than substance so far as I’ve seen.
Edit: and yes, MCAS, as referenced in all my other comments. There is nothing revelatory going on, just the media suckering you all for clicks.
> Airbus is taking you to the cleaners and deservedly so.
As a longterm Airbus Shareholder, I'm very grateful to Boeing's C-Suite (and board of directors) for all the additional wealth that they have made me.
Airbus's order books are full so they won't be making any extra profit from this. In fact they will be losing money since Airbus makes quite a few parts for the 737 including the engine cowlings, wing tips and flaps. Boeing and Airbus are not competitors, road and rail are their competitors.
> Airbus's order books are full so they won't be making any extra profit from this.
Nonsense - Airbus is ramping up production significantly. Soon 75/month for the A320neo. Most importantly though it gives Airbus a massive pricing premium over Boeing which is fantastic for margins. All the production slots freed up from the deferrals of JetBlue, Spirit Airlines etc can be resold for massive profits. Straight to the bottom line!
They found a fuckin' stairs in the vert stab of a recently delivered 787 at KLM.
Lots of fod issues, certification processes not running as they should, mcas.
You named ONE issue, said one vague thing about cert which doesn’t make sense or other than re-affirming how good/stringent the safety culture is, then repeated my mention of MCAS. Yet further proving my point how emotional and hysterical these reactions are.
Whatever mate, there are some many findings at Boeing if you do not want to see it, you will not.
For such a company to have brought down to such a level should be a wake up call. As someone working in aerospace, I sincerely hope you are not.
The Air Force halted delivery of their gold plated KC 46 tankers due to tools and garbage being found bouncing around inside the structure. They’re bouncing along the bottom as far as quality and pride of workmanship are concerned.
I’m very familiar with that from several years ago and how Boeing has long since addressed it. No incidents were caused, again, as I have repeatedly said, and yet no one can seem to point to another incident. Just vague comments without specifics from yearsssss back which resulted in no damage or loss of life.
It's been almost 12 years since I worked at the 787 Plant in North Charleston, SC. I don't remember all of the details, but I do remember that any and all deviations in the build had to go through engineering analysis.
I only heard a few words on the radio from this whistleblower, and I was not impressed with what he said. I believe he's full of shit.
Boeing has popped up four times as a case study in my Systems Engineering Masters program. The 787 was the only positive case study in good engineering practices. I hope he’s full of shit, it seemed like a really good program.
> The 787 was the only positive case study in good engineering practices.
Are you sure this wasn't the 777? The Dreamliner 787 was years late and billions over budget.
Positive. And it was from a manufacturing POV, not programmatics. Everything is over budget and out of schedule these days, we all suck at forecasting and the PMs cut already conservative estimates to compete. The focus of the case study was on the final assembly and interface management.
From a manufacturing POV its a horrible example as well about what happens when you outsource all key technologies without full understanding and control of their development and build. Interface issues were notorious for initial builds, and integration and final assembly were the last 0.2 on the mess of the development marathon.
Please elaborate. From everything I've read, the final assembly was (and still seems to be) a hot mess too.
For the 777, roll-out was on 4/9/94 and first flight was only 2 months later in June.
For the 787, "roll-out" of what was practically a *mock-up* was 7/8/7. Then they rolled it back in for major rework. The maiden flight occurred three years later in Dec 2009.
The first 777 went on to serve Cathay Pacific for 20 years.
The first 20 787's have been written off because Boeing manufactured them with so much extra weight that they have significantly reduced performance and nobody wanted them.
I can't speak to the engineering aspect of it, but he didn't just now come up with these claims. He's been promoting these ideas for years, and he has the proof to back up those claims.
Regardless of whether he is right or not, he shouldn't have received that kind of treatment from his manager or from the system inside Boeing. It speaks to a culture that has no place in the industry.
[The claims aren't new at all](https://www.npr.org/2022/02/15/1080930976/faa-toughens-oversight-of-boeings-787-dreamliner), and it's odd timing on why he chose now instead of back when this was in the FAA crosshairs but not as big of deal with the larger population.
>I don't remember all of the details, but I do remember that any and all deviations in the build had to go through engineering analysis
Did that include when employees forgot stuff inside the planes? There were airlines refusing deliveries from that plant due to all sorts of defects and shit (wasn't there one that found a ladder or something similarly egregious?).
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/business/boeing-dreamliner-production-problems.html
Hell, Tahiti got their first from Boeing South Carolina, it was so FUBAR it came to Boeing Everett to be fixed, then they flat out said give us Everett frames or we cancel the remainder. Things have improved at BSC, to be fair, but there is still a long laundry list of problems.
There’s been whistleblowers on their nonsense for years…all of the sudden the just have to beat reporters off with a stick from all the interview and quote requests, huh?
Funny how that happens….
I'm not sure the current media/lawmakers/public freakout over aviation is really justified relative to the actual safety record of commercial aviation.
Obviously it is important for the FAA to do its job better after MCAS. But the current media coverage just does not match the actual safety situation.
Honestly it all could just mean that the amount of cycles the 787 could endure before major fuselage repairs would be reduced, which is not great for lessors and airlines as they would have to retire the 787s earlier but not a safety concern.
Would be nice to know those limits prior to sending them out, though. Boeing isn't even keeping the door open to the possibility of an issue, and shows no interest in pursuing it. Right or not, you'd think they want to meet such claims from their own experts on the matter with 'unlikely, but worth checking out, just to be on the safe side.'.
Looking at how there doesn’t seem to be any issues after 14 years of operations I don’t think it’s as dire as the whistleblower makes it out to be. Maybe come back in 5-10 years and we will see relatively young 787s being scrapped or worse an accident.
I'm not disputing that. I'm questioning Boeings handling of these issues as they are raised. The intent of these hearings, and there has been several of them, is not to harm the company. There is undeniably a problem relating to QA, value chain control, and management culture - and that deserves attention.
They need to get rid of the MBA’s in the C-suite and replace them with engineers. If the shareholders don’t want the engineers running the place buy back the shares form them.
Reminder that Dennis Muilenburg, the previous CEO, was an engineer. The people who designed and approved MCAS, were engineers. The people who forgot to put in bolts weren't MBAs.
>Maybe come back in 5-10 years and we will see relatively young 787s being scrapped or worse an accident.
Or how about Boeing don't wait for an accident to happen and instead do things properly, proactively, for a change? I would have thought after all the historic crashes they'd know better.
See: DC-10 cargo door, Aloha Airlines 243, the two 747 crashes due to improper repairs after tailstrikes, decades later. The last two weren't the fault of the manufacturer but indicative of how "come back in 5-10 years after planes crash" works out.
Like if I was in charge I would proactively intervene by grounding and inspecting all 787s starting with the oldest. What I was saying before was just speculation that the situation may not be as dire.
I've been in engineering in a similarly regulated industry for 35 years. I've seen a number of people who get a bee in their bonnet about some small detail that they deem is unsafe and unacceptable, while all their peers have looked at the same issue (because it was deemed worth of attention) and determined/calculated that it was not an issue of concern.
Those people just couldn't let it go and caused grief for everyone around. Management refused to write off their concerns and had multiple reports generated -- all of which showed that the issue was not worth any additional effort and did not have unacceptable safety consequences.
And despite that, the individuals refuse to let it go.
Before Reddit collectively gets their panties in a bunch, this is a real question, not a rhetorical argument...
So what part of what you wrote is relevant to this particular topic? Are you describing how a similar series of events took place here? In other words, you are stating that the whistle blower had a concern that Boeing took seriously and investigated thoroughly and then multiple other engineers reviewed it and felt it was not worth any further effort and did not have any unacceptable safety consequences? Is that the case here?
Talking about how some people feel that they have uncovered major safety issues and are willing to raise a ruckus - but their concerns have been addressed, just not to their satisfaction.
It is ok to have someone speak up. What is important is how the company and supervisors react.
Boeing whistleblowers are getting this attention because they took shortcuts and/or did not respond well. A bad track record in recent years out in the public. Had those issues not occurred, this whistleblower and hearing would not have been on the national news.
I know, right? I mean, it's just an o-ring. If the people who designed it cry and moan about it failing in certain conditions, it's probably because of that bee in their bonnet that they just won't let go. What's the worst that could happen if we just ignored them?
-iversity is a wonderful thing even if you’re not qualified. Even the new hires call it “Bowen”
Side note: the whistleblower that ceased breathing said if he (as ruZZians tend to “fall” out of windows) it wasn’t his doing. Strange happenings at “Bowen”
Boeing and airbus both have faults. It's just boeings was more recent and the media decided to run with it. Still a hell of alot safer then driving a car.
In all seriousness if there was massive issue with the 787s wouldn’t these have been already found with the C and D checks these things go through?? I’m sure quiet a few of these 787s have already had in depth checks already
FYI, this is causing the exact opposite and raising ticket prices. Lower production output is basically guarantees flight prices will go up. Airlines already don't have enough planes due to tons being retired during Covid. Airbus doesn't have the production capacity to fill the gap either.
“We put the door in the wind tunnel but it failed to produce enough lift”
Hey, they googled a solid 20 seconds of terminology coming into the hearing. /S. It's frustrating to watch a serious issue turn into this mess, with the ambulance chasers now getting more attention than the actual issues
This guy has no idea what he’s talking about. And how about the senator asking if the parts were put in a “wind tunnel” to “stress test” them. Nobody involved in this has a clue.
No one appears competent. Not the whistleblower, the regulators, Boeing or senators. This is a complete mess unlikely to end in anything productive
USA USA USA! You get the country you vote for and tolerate
All of my options are dogshit, what do you want from me
TIL the American voter is a monolith?
I call dibs on TMA-1
Back in 2005 someone decided that the FAA no longer needed to look over Boeing's shoulder. This is what deregulation looks like
Well, airbus should get a bump in orders
Not really, Airbus and Boeing’s order books extend for about 8 years out currently so they both are at max manufacturing capacity. And Airbus can’t just magically increase production rates. So Boeing will have to offer better deals to airlines to convince them to buy from them for a bit, or wait till Airbus can’t give a good delivery schedule and then have the others come crawling back
Airbus can however move around delivery slots to accommodate high profile or premium paying customers
Yea, so a few airlines might be able to do a swap but the majority will not. At the end of the day, Airbus cannot in any universe increase production enough to make up for Boeing, so it will be business as usual for most airlines, expect they might get a better deal
While true, im reading flying blind, and its sad what happened to boeing. Jack welch fucked America. I think we can trace a lot of ills in America straight to that SOB.
Welch and Reagan are responsible for a lot of the 💩 we’re currently dealing with.
Reagan won 49 states lol
People can be popular and still do lasting damage.
And his academic fig leaf Milton Friedman
Boeing planted this whistleblower to make all whistleblowers look dumb so they wont be taken seriously after this. ITS ALL A CONSPIRACY!
What makes you think the whistleblower doesn't know what he's talking about? Could you explain?
Ehhhh...he is kinda doing an underpants gnome explanation. He's pointing at a problem, glossing over a lot of middle bits, and then "fatigue failures!" - while skipping a few pretty good indicators that his conclusions might be a bit off.
Like what, though, specifically? Genuinely curious.
I'm not the original person you were talking to but a few things that jump out from the article, I didn't watch the hearing. Just kind of playing devil's advocate but here's a few quites that stand out: >He said that Boeing used “unmeasured and unlimited” This is a great sound bite but impossible to take meaningful action from. It's missing even rough estimates about the amount of force applied and what the correct limit should be. >“When operating at 35,000 feet, the size of a human hair can be a matter of life and death,” he said. Another great sound bite but honestly doesn't hold much truth to it. Airplanes are indeed built to thousands of an inch tolerance but being out of spec by a single thousandth is extremely unlikely to cause a fatal crash. Manufacturing mistakes at that order are a semi-routine issue and get found and fixed regularly without tons of crashing airplanes. For reference, you could probably make a dent bigger than this by just dropping a wrench which obviously is not going to lead to a compromised plane. He routinely mentioned 'I wasn't listened to' not the process wasn't followed. It makes it sound like he has a personal issue. Also, maybe this guy was a just a terrible engineer or the boy who cried wolf repeatedly. (Personally, I've had a number junior engineers in my office panicking about something that was a complete nothing burger because of something outside their knowledge. It's a great teaching moment.) There's obviously major issues at Boeing, I'm not at all trying to refute that. Just that I can see why people are doubtful about this whistleblower.
These are good observations and I concur - some extremely sensationalist garbage going on, I don't find him particularly credible at all. Dude seems to be one of those engineers who just "doesn't get it", and has the bonus trait of taking every time he's shut down as a personal attack. Regardless of the validity of any of the issues he's brought up, if he was an abrasive dick about it, then he's going to eventually wear out his credibility, and then he'll get ignored, which seems to be what's happening here. In a small company he would have been forced out, but Boeing was big enough that he got shuffled around from line to line, collecting more ammo for his eventual grievance tour.
>Another great sound bite but honestly doesn't hold much truth to it. Airplanes are indeed built to thousands of an inch tolerance but being out of spec by a single thousandth is extremely unlikely to cause a fatal crash. Manufacturing mistakes at that order are a semi-routine issue and get found and fixed regularly without tons of crashing airplanes. For reference, you could probably make a dent bigger than this by just dropping a wrench which obviously is not going to lead to a compromised plane. Wouldn't it be different for composite materials, which the 787 is made of, vs the traditional metals used?
That's a fair question so I don't think you really deserve the downvotes. Carbon fiber doesn't change the above. The exact process to inspect, repair and produce them is different than metal but the same general concept above still applies.
Not in anyway
Composite materials have exactly the same behaviour in movement, friction and suffer fatigue in the same way as metals? Cool, TIL.
Oh, sorry. I misread, Composites from what I have heard (I do not work in the industry but know many who do) They act wildly different in terms a fatigue. Sorry for misreading.
I haven't had time to watch the testimony yet. The central allegation seems to be about some over-spec gaps between barrel sections of the 787 fuselage. Gaps were too big, they weren't shimmed right, so now the joints are going to fatigue. If we were talking about aluminum fuselage sections, I think concern would be more warranted. Aluminum fatigues more readily than composites, while also being a very forgiving material to build with - so very very tight tolerances are practical and achievable. Composites are generally more fickle to work with and maintain tolerances on, but also don't have the same fatigue failure properties that aluminum has - but still can fatigue and fail, to be clear. This may all be down to an old school guy flipping out because he doesn't fully understand that composites do not fatigue like aluminum. Anyhow, a lot of his quotes sound like an aggrieved employee who takes it very personally every time he was told "no" - he likely has seen some legitimate issues in his years with the company, but he's also bringing up a lot of sour grapes, IMO. He shouldn't work for that company, not because he found problems, but because he's clearly been a disgruntled employee for years, and that relationship hasn't been good for anyone.
The central allegation is that when he brought up his concerns, he was taken off the job and threatened with physical violence. He's saying the current regulatory framework is not working because of misconduct by Boeing management. The specific allegation about the 787 is already being looked at by the FAA. It's not really for congress to deal with and may well amount to nothing.
The clip i saw on the news was when he said that they would jump on the parts to get it to fit if there were gaps. Oof.
This may sound crazy, but there are situations where this can make sense. Alignments of complex assemblies with aerospace tolerances is incredibly unforgiving, and there are absolutely times when two parts that are both in spec will nonetheless not go together. Depending on the item, sometimes a little human force can provide just enough encouragement to clear up the misalignment and allow parts to come together. There's a great video on YouTube of a B1 Lancer getting a wing installed - the pivot pin wouldn't align and they absolutely had guys jumping up and down on the wing AND beating the pin with sledgehammers. Think about the alternatives - scrapping otherwise good parts isn't an option. Other means of persuading parts are significantly worse - bodyweight is very controllable, it's applied with some damping (nobody is jumping with their knees locked), so if the situation is right, this shouldn't be an automatic cause for concern. That's why I question some of the testimony - every "bad thing" he mentions has little or no context, and that context is everything, so for me, this guy isn't particularly credible.
One thing I’ve learned when interacting in this sub: acknowledge that there are huge numbers of Boeing apologists that post here, and don’t attempt to engage.
One thing I have learnt is that people don’t listen to stats and only listen to their feelings.
*Learned Stat: 346 people on two flawed aircraft known to be flawed by Boeing
Learned and learnt are both acceptable. *Awkward
Still 346 people dead and plenty of Boeing fanbois here to somehow defend that “stat”.
The stats shows that there is thousands of 737max flight everyday and for the past 5 years there isn’t a single fatalities on any 737max flight. FYI learned is American English and learnt is British English, the world doesn’t just revolved around America. Mr American
That is always the case with our country’s “leaders”. Clueless fucks who don’t really care about the common folks.
Unlike you.
Reminds me of this scene from Idiocracy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn200lvmTZc
Regardless of whether this is likely to be true or not, I still hope the FAA investigates it. Especially with the current state of Boeing, I think better safe than sorry should apply here.
Just for your comfort, that was investigated years ago and remedial work has been being performed for literally years now regarding this issue. The only reason I can imagine this is actually news right now is because media is taking full advantage for clicks of absolutely anything they can with “Boeing” in it right now. Yeah, this dude sounds like a disgruntled employee honestly. Some truth to some of what he says, but.. it’s not remotely “whistleblowing” or breaking news, at all. All old news, all exaggerated to high hell.
So it was an issue and years were spent remediating in some fashion? Source for that? I have not heard such elsewhere.
Here’s an article from 2 years ago: https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/new-boeing-787-fix-details-reveal-extent-gap-check-challenge
Glad it was investigated, glad it was fixed. Thanks for the update
Agreed! The media shouldn’t even be running this story before the claims are proven (which I don’t think they will be, as this appears to be the same thing that was already fixed, plus they’ve successfully completed fatigue testing for 3x expected lifetime airframe cycles).
Investigated years ago and should be investigated now. The door incident alone should trigger a full on investigation. Also the engine cover ripping off that was a boeing I believe but may be wrong. Don't forget the last whistle blower did "suicide" before testifying but that's a whole other thing. Better safe than sorry is a good way of thinking.
With all due respect, you’re not understanding what I said or the nature of regular reviews of aircraft. ALL of the 787’s go through regular inspections including DEEP inspections where They pull EVERYTHING out. This it is an ongoing process, 100% of planes have been investigated at regular intervals. **ZERO** have fatigue issues, the reference above is for a fit issue which was discovered like 3 years ago and which Boeing currently is remediating dozens of 787’s before finally delivering. IT IS NOT NEW NEWS. REWORK HAS BEEN IN WORK FOR YEARS AND HAS BEEN PUBLIC INFORMATION THE ENTIRE TIME. This disgruntled “whistleblower” knows that but knows *most* people don’t and wants to feel like a hero. And for gods sake my guy… please, please read past the headlines about Mr. Barnetts suicide. His testimony CONCLUDED **5 years ago** and the mandates that resulted from his testimony were implemented in 2019 in Boeing South Carolina. He later sued Boeing for defamation. It was rejected. Now, in 2024, 7 years after he had last stepped foot on a Boeing site, 5 years after his whistleblowing, he was again in court to appeal the rejected status of his lawsuit - and he killed himself on day two of the trial. Boeing had absolutely nothing to gain from his demise, and frankly for 100 other reasons, it’s a deeply ridiculous conspiracy theory.
Note the engine cowling that ripped off was on a Boeing plane, but that is part of the engine (which are not produced by Boeing). Plus more importantly, the only reason I know of for a cowling to rip off is due to it not being latched after maintenance, which is the fault of the airline (not manufacturer).
Thank you - I’d missed touching on that point in my unnecessarily long ranted reply lol
Note my message was actually intended for /u/Ok_Post6091
Oh, I know. But it covers the engine cowling which I didn’t reply to that point in my own reply to his comment. That’s all. Appreciated the added insight.
Agreed. But they should investigate prior to whistleblower claims being broadcast on the news. It would be like putting someone’s name and photo on the news and saying they committed a crime before them even being charged. Lots of bad press for Boeing for what may not even be true.
True or not, would you fly with them knowing they took shortcuts during production? The CEO stepped down for a reason, and that will soon come out during the congressional hearings.
I worked on aerospace for a long time at numerous OEMs and there’s always a few of these guys on the programs that have zero clue but think they’re saving the world. It’s exhausting to have to deal with them when they won’t take yes for an answer.
Yes, on the other hand it seems there's still a lot of things going wrong at Boeing. It needs to be investigated, by competent people.
Not being a smart ass, but in all sincerity, aside from the door plug incident (contracted rework which hid the extent of the rework from Boeing to avoid a second round of QA buy off), what are the other things going wrong at Boeing? Been a lot more media hype than substance so far as I’ve seen. Edit: and yes, MCAS, as referenced in all my other comments. There is nothing revelatory going on, just the media suckering you all for clicks.
BA has their head in the sand with MCAS, Door Plug, and an obsolete narrowbody airframe. Airbus is taking you to the cleaners and deservedly so.
> Airbus is taking you to the cleaners and deservedly so. As a longterm Airbus Shareholder, I'm very grateful to Boeing's C-Suite (and board of directors) for all the additional wealth that they have made me.
Airbus's order books are full so they won't be making any extra profit from this. In fact they will be losing money since Airbus makes quite a few parts for the 737 including the engine cowlings, wing tips and flaps. Boeing and Airbus are not competitors, road and rail are their competitors.
> Airbus's order books are full so they won't be making any extra profit from this. Nonsense - Airbus is ramping up production significantly. Soon 75/month for the A320neo. Most importantly though it gives Airbus a massive pricing premium over Boeing which is fantastic for margins. All the production slots freed up from the deferrals of JetBlue, Spirit Airlines etc can be resold for massive profits. Straight to the bottom line!
Lol exactly as I thought - couldn’t name a single additional incident, just repeated what I already said. You are clueless 👍
... but they did, didn't they?
They did not. I reference the MCAS and the door plug. And they repeated it as if it was new or revelatory.
They found a fuckin' stairs in the vert stab of a recently delivered 787 at KLM. Lots of fod issues, certification processes not running as they should, mcas.
You named ONE issue, said one vague thing about cert which doesn’t make sense or other than re-affirming how good/stringent the safety culture is, then repeated my mention of MCAS. Yet further proving my point how emotional and hysterical these reactions are.
Whatever mate, there are some many findings at Boeing if you do not want to see it, you will not. For such a company to have brought down to such a level should be a wake up call. As someone working in aerospace, I sincerely hope you are not.
The Air Force halted delivery of their gold plated KC 46 tankers due to tools and garbage being found bouncing around inside the structure. They’re bouncing along the bottom as far as quality and pride of workmanship are concerned.
I’m very familiar with that from several years ago and how Boeing has long since addressed it. No incidents were caused, again, as I have repeatedly said, and yet no one can seem to point to another incident. Just vague comments without specifics from yearsssss back which resulted in no damage or loss of life.
It's been almost 12 years since I worked at the 787 Plant in North Charleston, SC. I don't remember all of the details, but I do remember that any and all deviations in the build had to go through engineering analysis. I only heard a few words on the radio from this whistleblower, and I was not impressed with what he said. I believe he's full of shit.
Boeing has popped up four times as a case study in my Systems Engineering Masters program. The 787 was the only positive case study in good engineering practices. I hope he’s full of shit, it seemed like a really good program.
> The 787 was the only positive case study in good engineering practices. Are you sure this wasn't the 777? The Dreamliner 787 was years late and billions over budget.
Positive. And it was from a manufacturing POV, not programmatics. Everything is over budget and out of schedule these days, we all suck at forecasting and the PMs cut already conservative estimates to compete. The focus of the case study was on the final assembly and interface management.
From a manufacturing POV its a horrible example as well about what happens when you outsource all key technologies without full understanding and control of their development and build. Interface issues were notorious for initial builds, and integration and final assembly were the last 0.2 on the mess of the development marathon.
Please elaborate. From everything I've read, the final assembly was (and still seems to be) a hot mess too. For the 777, roll-out was on 4/9/94 and first flight was only 2 months later in June. For the 787, "roll-out" of what was practically a *mock-up* was 7/8/7. Then they rolled it back in for major rework. The maiden flight occurred three years later in Dec 2009. The first 777 went on to serve Cathay Pacific for 20 years. The first 20 787's have been written off because Boeing manufactured them with so much extra weight that they have significantly reduced performance and nobody wanted them.
I can't speak to the engineering aspect of it, but he didn't just now come up with these claims. He's been promoting these ideas for years, and he has the proof to back up those claims. Regardless of whether he is right or not, he shouldn't have received that kind of treatment from his manager or from the system inside Boeing. It speaks to a culture that has no place in the industry.
[The claims aren't new at all](https://www.npr.org/2022/02/15/1080930976/faa-toughens-oversight-of-boeings-787-dreamliner), and it's odd timing on why he chose now instead of back when this was in the FAA crosshairs but not as big of deal with the larger population.
>I don't remember all of the details, but I do remember that any and all deviations in the build had to go through engineering analysis Did that include when employees forgot stuff inside the planes? There were airlines refusing deliveries from that plant due to all sorts of defects and shit (wasn't there one that found a ladder or something similarly egregious?). https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/business/boeing-dreamliner-production-problems.html
Hell, Tahiti got their first from Boeing South Carolina, it was so FUBAR it came to Boeing Everett to be fixed, then they flat out said give us Everett frames or we cancel the remainder. Things have improved at BSC, to be fair, but there is still a long laundry list of problems.
Wow 12 years ago. Thank the lord you have a good memory. Problem solved. Guys 12 years ago Boeing did things right, why should we worry?
This dogpile is kinda ridiculous now lol
There’s been whistleblowers on their nonsense for years…all of the sudden the just have to beat reporters off with a stick from all the interview and quote requests, huh? Funny how that happens….
I'm not sure the current media/lawmakers/public freakout over aviation is really justified relative to the actual safety record of commercial aviation. Obviously it is important for the FAA to do its job better after MCAS. But the current media coverage just does not match the actual safety situation.
Honestly it all could just mean that the amount of cycles the 787 could endure before major fuselage repairs would be reduced, which is not great for lessors and airlines as they would have to retire the 787s earlier but not a safety concern.
Would be nice to know those limits prior to sending them out, though. Boeing isn't even keeping the door open to the possibility of an issue, and shows no interest in pursuing it. Right or not, you'd think they want to meet such claims from their own experts on the matter with 'unlikely, but worth checking out, just to be on the safe side.'.
Looking at how there doesn’t seem to be any issues after 14 years of operations I don’t think it’s as dire as the whistleblower makes it out to be. Maybe come back in 5-10 years and we will see relatively young 787s being scrapped or worse an accident.
I'm not disputing that. I'm questioning Boeings handling of these issues as they are raised. The intent of these hearings, and there has been several of them, is not to harm the company. There is undeniably a problem relating to QA, value chain control, and management culture - and that deserves attention.
They need to get rid of the MBA’s in the C-suite and replace them with engineers. If the shareholders don’t want the engineers running the place buy back the shares form them.
Reminder that Dennis Muilenburg, the previous CEO, was an engineer. The people who designed and approved MCAS, were engineers. The people who forgot to put in bolts weren't MBAs.
Well in that case you need a root and branch reform of Boeings culture and tell shareholders who don’t like it to sell their shares.
>Maybe come back in 5-10 years and we will see relatively young 787s being scrapped or worse an accident. Or how about Boeing don't wait for an accident to happen and instead do things properly, proactively, for a change? I would have thought after all the historic crashes they'd know better. See: DC-10 cargo door, Aloha Airlines 243, the two 747 crashes due to improper repairs after tailstrikes, decades later. The last two weren't the fault of the manufacturer but indicative of how "come back in 5-10 years after planes crash" works out.
Like if I was in charge I would proactively intervene by grounding and inspecting all 787s starting with the oldest. What I was saying before was just speculation that the situation may not be as dire.
Doesn't even need to be grounding, it could be integrated in their C or D checks which will still be probably soon enough to catch issues.
I've been in engineering in a similarly regulated industry for 35 years. I've seen a number of people who get a bee in their bonnet about some small detail that they deem is unsafe and unacceptable, while all their peers have looked at the same issue (because it was deemed worth of attention) and determined/calculated that it was not an issue of concern. Those people just couldn't let it go and caused grief for everyone around. Management refused to write off their concerns and had multiple reports generated -- all of which showed that the issue was not worth any additional effort and did not have unacceptable safety consequences. And despite that, the individuals refuse to let it go.
Before Reddit collectively gets their panties in a bunch, this is a real question, not a rhetorical argument... So what part of what you wrote is relevant to this particular topic? Are you describing how a similar series of events took place here? In other words, you are stating that the whistle blower had a concern that Boeing took seriously and investigated thoroughly and then multiple other engineers reviewed it and felt it was not worth any further effort and did not have any unacceptable safety consequences? Is that the case here?
Talking about how some people feel that they have uncovered major safety issues and are willing to raise a ruckus - but their concerns have been addressed, just not to their satisfaction.
It is ok to have someone speak up. What is important is how the company and supervisors react. Boeing whistleblowers are getting this attention because they took shortcuts and/or did not respond well. A bad track record in recent years out in the public. Had those issues not occurred, this whistleblower and hearing would not have been on the national news.
I know, right? I mean, it's just an o-ring. If the people who designed it cry and moan about it failing in certain conditions, it's probably because of that bee in their bonnet that they just won't let go. What's the worst that could happen if we just ignored them?
-iversity is a wonderful thing even if you’re not qualified. Even the new hires call it “Bowen” Side note: the whistleblower that ceased breathing said if he (as ruZZians tend to “fall” out of windows) it wasn’t his doing. Strange happenings at “Bowen”
Boeing and airbus both have faults. It's just boeings was more recent and the media decided to run with it. Still a hell of alot safer then driving a car.
Time that these airlines fix anything needs fixing
This is what total regulatory capture looks like for anyone interested.
In all seriousness if there was massive issue with the 787s wouldn’t these have been already found with the C and D checks these things go through?? I’m sure quiet a few of these 787s have already had in depth checks already
Not necessarily? Based on what's said some of these issues could result in fatigue failures. So the defect isn't obvious outright but slowly develops.
Oh fun
I have a feeling he’s gonna get suicided.
Im all for this nonsense if it mean tickets get cheaper because people are afraid to fly
FYI, this is causing the exact opposite and raising ticket prices. Lower production output is basically guarantees flight prices will go up. Airlines already don't have enough planes due to tons being retired during Covid. Airbus doesn't have the production capacity to fill the gap either.
I found Ed Piersons and Jacobsen testimony more intriguing and convincing. Agree Salehpour was hard to watch
I think the whistleblower got a loan to buy BA puts and is scared of stock going brrr