Now you’re just making up regulations that don’t exist.
Now you’re just making up regulations that don’t exist.There's a principal within humans where we tend to attribute the quality of a good based on who claims to be responsible for it, rather than who we provide responsibility to. You see this with cars as well as aircraft. In the case of these aircraft, I blame the mfg for a lack of proper enforcement of QC and maintenance protocols. Latam should not be permitted to operate on Boeing aircraft if they fail to implement a service bulletin from a year ago, much less 7.
But that's just me.
The manufacturer has absolutely zero ability to manage or enforce maintenance on aircraft once they are turned over to the customer. The OEMs provide a maintenance program, its on the airlines to follow it and on their certificate offices to ensure compliance.There's a principal within humans where we tend to attribute the quality of a good based on who claims to be responsible for it, rather than who we provide responsibility to. You see this with cars as well as aircraft. In the case of these aircraft, I blame the mfg for a lack of proper enforcement of QC and maintenance protocols. Latam should not be permitted to operate on Boeing aircraft if they fail to implement a service bulletin from a year ago, much less 7.
But that's just me.
.. I know? They should exist. I never said they did.Now you’re just making up regulations that don’t exist.
The mfg can say 'not my problem' until they're blue in the face, still won't stop people from refusing to fly on their aircraft if they choose not to, which will eventually hit them financially (which I guess is the only way they feel the pain).The manufacturer has absolutely zero ability to manage or enforce maintenance on aircraft once they are turned over to the customer. The OEMs provide a maintenance program, its on the airlines to follow it and on their certificate offices to ensure compliance.
I have been upfront that Boeing has problems, and management by spreadsheet has been a disaster for them.Some folks seem to have forgotten the 737 MAX's MCAS flight control software systems, which killed nearly 350 people, due to Boeing not wishing to train pilots on this system, much lessen even mention this software's mere existence, in order to maximize profits.
There was no Maintenance (or lack of) that could be conveniently blamed on the purchasers; try as Boeing might, or to blame it on "Pilot Error".
Further recent events, red herring, small potatoes and "both-siding" aside, there is a documented culture of profit over safety at the "new" Boeing.
You might want to look a bit closer as that panel didn't come unfastened rather it blew apart while the plane was in flight.Can we please stop freaking out about everything that happens to a Boeing plane? This is about as useless as complaining about issues with landing gear wheels that are replaced every few hundred landings.
I can see you did not bother to read the rest of thread before responding .You might want to look a bit closer as that panel didn't come unfastened rather it blew apart while the plane was in flight.
No shit. MCAS was Boeing's fault and a major fuck up. A tire falling of an 18 year old plane due to poor maintenance is not Boeing's fault. Just because some things are Boeing's fault be it poor design or poor build quality doesn't mean everything that happens in the in 10,000 Boeing flight hours a day is Boeing's fault.Some folks seem to have forgotten the 737 MAX's MCAS flight control software systems, which killed nearly 350 people, due to Boeing not wishing to train pilots on this system, much less even mention this software's mere existence, in order to maximize profits.
There was no Maintenance (or lack of) that could be conveniently blamed on the purchasers; try as Boeing might, or to blame it on "Pilot Error".
Further recent events, red herring, small potatoes and "both-siding" aside, there is a documented culture of profit over safety at the "new" Boeing.
So you think Ford should be able to come into your garage and force you to do maintenance on your car, then be in complete control of how you operate it? Far more people are killed by improperly maintained and operated cars than commercial airlines... I know? They should exist. I never said they did.
The mfg can say 'not my problem' until they're blue in the face, still won't stop people from refusing to fly on their aircraft if they choose not to, which will eventually hit them financially (which I guess is the only way they feel the pain).
No, but I'm a private owner of a personal vehicle. If I personally owned a 747 and maintained it and the shit exploded midair, I wouldn't expect to blame Boeing for it.So you think Ford should be able to come into your garage and force you to do maintenance on your car, then be in complete control of how you operate it? Far more people are killed by improperly maintained and operated cars than commercial airlines.
At that point Boeing and Airbus would be the only airlines in the world.
Further airlines are allowed to purchase FAA "approved" aftermarket parts or build their own. Airline made parts require no FAA approval and after market parts generally require the thinnest of evidence that they are "equivalent." I wouldn't be shocked to find out this panel was aftermarket because the airline I used to work for bought similar panels aftermarket. Boeing has zero say in this process.
So maybe you should focus your attention to not just boeing but to the FAA for their lack of oversight.
What can they do? Why do think the FAA hasn't certified the max 7 and 10 yet?Boeing Employees Mocked F.A.A. and ‘Clowns’ Who Designed 737 Max (Published 2020)
The company expressed regret at the embarrassing communications it sent to investigators on Thursday, which included a comment that “this airplane is designed by clowns, who are in turn supervised by monkeys.”www.nytimes.com
What can the FAA do when Boeing employees are deliberately misleading them?
Is there any other form of management today?I have been upfront that Boeing has problems, and management by spreadsheet has been a disaster for them.
Unfortunately it's rare to see exceptions. So we cluster towards mediocrity and shitty work environments for people.Is there any other form of management today?
Yeah, I think Boeing has made several huge mistakes in recent years like with MCAS and clearly a lack of quality control with some of their subcontractors like with the door plug issue. I see no indication those tire/panel issues are the fault of Boeing.No shit. MCAS was Boeing's fault and a major fuck up. A tire falling of an 18 year old plane due to poor maintenance is not Boeing's fault. Just because some things are Boeing's fault be it poor design or poor build quality doesn't mean everything that happens in the in 10,000 Boeing flight hours a day is Boeing's fault.
The United 737 with the missing panel is past the designed service life of that aircraft. The panels are supposed to be inspected at C-checks. And there are very good instructions for the proper installation of those panels. That specific panel design has tens of millions of flight hours on it, and similar panel designs are well over a billion commutative flight hours. If it was the original panel on that aircraft is likely has over 90,000 flight hours on that specific panel.
Regardless, if there does prove to be an issue with panel, either in design or recommended mx practices Boeing will issue a service bulletin. The FAA can then decide whether to issue an airworthiness directive for it
What can they do? Why do think the FAA hasn't certified the max 7 and 10 yet?
Regardless, my point is just because an incident happened to a particular manufacturer doesn't automatically mean the manufacturer is at fault.
With the door plug blow out I believe Alaskan deserves some scrutiny along with Boeing because they knew there was a pressurization problem but didn't ground the plane to fix it. Airlines will constantly defer work and release aircraft with maintenance issues for revenue flight just for profits.
What I'm basically getting at is you can just blame Boeing for some of these issues. There's plenty of blame to go around.
-Yep, going to Hawaii. United was cheaper but 737 Max, Hawaiian airlines was A330.
Paid more to fly Hawaiian.
How do you know your A330 won't crash into the ocean like Air France 447 and your body might never be recovered ?-Yep, going to Hawaii. United was cheaper but 737 Max, Hawaiian airlines was A330.
Paid more to fly Hawaiian.
How do you know your A330 won't crash into the ocean like Air France 447 and your body might never be recovered ?
Anyway, I've flown ua 737 and ha a330 to hnl and I'll always take the A330 over a 737.Air France Flight 447 - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
It's been on and off dozens of times, and those fastener locations wear out. Even if the bulk of the panel passes NDT, the corners were probably getting shot.is likely has over 90,000 flight hours on that specific panel.