Yeah, that about sums it up.So far we have a lethal software defect, insufficient training, a wiring harness flaw, and now a grounding failure?
So far we have a lethal software defect, insufficient training, a wiring harness flaw, and now a grounding failure?
It's getting really hard to continue to support Boeing these days
Not to mention the SLS, which if it actually launches this year will be 5 years late and billion over budget.Boeing has had problems with getting their passenger spacecraft certified too of late.
Do we know which planes out of the 800 odd require grounding? What is the difference between those that do and those that don't? Something changed at some point, so that change ought to have been discovered / investigated/ prevented. The sky may not be falling, but as an airline user, this sort of large scale deviation from the norm in an aircraft back up system , not just in one plane, is not something to just gloss over?To be fair to Boeing, the recall involves about 60 out of the 800-some 737 Maxes already built, and the flaw is in a backup system. The flaw was discovered in normal inspections, not via accident . . . the system is working as it should. It is an area of concern but the sky is not falling.
From I read, the problem with this new tanker is with a remote sensing device on the refilling boom. This seems to be installed so that the boom operator can now sit up front in the cockpit rather than in the back of the plane where he or she can directly see the boom in real time. If that was a capability insisted on by the Air Force, perhaps Boeing isn't the only one at blame, here.Boeing's military aircraft production hasn't done that much better than its civilian aircraft production. Look at the KC-46A Pegasus. 10 years after the contract was awarded we are still a couple years from full operational capability. There have been a litany of widely varying problems but they all come down to poor corporate leadership.
One other thing about the article I link to, notice how seldom Boeing is named? What is up with that?
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...lemon-that-its-trying-to-make-lemonade-out-of
From I read, the problem with this new tanker is with a remote sensing device on the refilling boom. This seems to be installed so that the boom operator can now sit up front in the cockpit rather than in the back of the plane where he or she can directly see the boom in real time. If that was a capability insisted on by the Air Force, perhaps Boeing isn't the only one at blame, here.
Sounds like what comes out of the Chicago Amtrak Yards! LolMARC Rider, the boom issue was one of 4 Category 1 problems the Pegasus has had. The others were the inability for the aircraft to refuel A-10's, the boom randomly scraping refueling aircraft and the fuel leaks that have been detected on half the KC-46's delivered so far.
The most embarrassing one, though not a Cat 1 issue, is the fact that several of the KC-46's have been delivered with trash, rags, tools and debris left inside the fuselage lining, out of sight but possibly in a place that could sever wiring or contribute to fires. One aircraft was actually delivered with a ladder and a string of lights behind a bulkhead.
The aircraft itself can probably be made safe with enough corrections, but the system that created it remains largely intact, so even if they started over they could potentially fall into the same trap again.Time to stop production of this model. All planes of this model being scrapped, with the metal turned into material and used to make a new plane that will be carefully, thoroughly well designed and tested.
By this logic a car that stalls on Monday but runs on Tuesday is "working as it should" despite lacking dependability.To be fair to Boeing, the recall involves about 60 out of the 800-some 737 Maxes already built, and the flaw is in a backup system. The flaw was discovered in normal inspections, not via accident . . . the system is working as it should. It is an area of concern but the sky is not falling.
How many of those directives resulted in dozens of grounded aircraft?If one were to look at the FAA database, one would note over 100 Airworthiness Directives in just the past 60 days, and 25 or so for this month alone. A good number of them apply to Airbus planes. But because it’s the 737MAX, it makes the news.
Were not talking about the same 737 max that became un flyable with Boeing not able to give a reasonable answer for are we, or is this is a new issue on top of all the old problems. Small scale. Really!The max problem of grounding sounds like an easy inspection and repair process if necessary for the latest issue. I bet turnaround time could be a few hours per plane tops and is only a fraction of the 737 Max out there so should be back in service quickly. There are always small scale issues that occur which are normally resolved in the regular maintenance intervals.
I guess grounding 100+ aircraft and suspending new deliveries is a minor event to some folks. Happens all the time don't ya know. He also estimated a few hours of effort "tops" but the actual estimate is a few days per aircraft.Were not talking about the same 737 max that became un flyable with Boeing not able to give a reasonable answer for are we, or is this is a new issue on top of all the old problems. Small scale. Really!
Democrats on the House Transportation Committee are launching a fresh review of Boeing’s 737 Max, seeking records from the company and the Federal Aviation Administration about a manufacturing issue that recently led to dozens of the jets being grounded.
Deliveries of the 737 MAX have resumed following regulator approval of the proposed fix but increased oversight remains a priority in Congress.
https://www.reuters.com/business/ae...ies-following-latest-issue-source-2021-05-19/
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2021/05/18/faa-boeing-737-records
but my cursory studies seem to indicate that most of the larger problems have their origins a few years after the corporate HQ was moved from Seattle to Chicago. It seems like the leadership emphasis has moved from engineering excellence to improving the bottom line. To this outsider it seems like the engineers in Boeings leadership team have lost their dominant role to the MBA's. Just my two cents.
She is an EE
Enter your email address to join: