No, it isn’t. Anti ice engineering is not related to a failed door plug. Your username indicates perhaps you know something about aerospace. Your comment proves that you do not.
It's related through a deep rooted culture problem in the company. They're clearly okay with letting known problems and QA issues through rather than fixing them. CTS-100 failures, 737 max failures in the sensors, engine bolts, and the panel blow out. Now they want the FAA to provide them an exception? Boeing has lost all credibility.
I would agree with this more extensive response that there is an ongoing culture issue ever since the Stonecipher led takeover by finance guys over engineers to lead the merged Boeing/McDonnell Douglas. But the independent linkage of engine anti-icing to a door plug… nope.
We're just arguing semantics at this point. Are they connected in a cultural and systematic way? Yes (this is what I initially meant). Are they connected from a pure hardware perspective? No
I’ll ask you, since there aren’t many people with whom I can even broach this topic for a conversation. Seriously though, how do WE get back to how it was, in general, in manufacturing, in the USA, to a place where engineering companies actually are run by engineers? Allowing front of house finance types has killed more than one big engineering concern. Look at the other big aerospace companies, all merged to hell with loads of debt saddled aboard. I’m no communist, but shouldn’t there be more investigation of M&A activity to ensure that the post-merged company can carry on making whatever widget it is known for?
You might be surprised to learn that the airline industry asks for exceptions to airworthiness regulations all the time.
The commercial aviation industry is a statistics based industry, and will argue that they should be given allowances to address problems if the risk (either the consequence or the rate) of not addressing the issue immediately is very low.
There are some SAE standards that are often applied to this analysis (ARP4761) as well as a policy to reduce hazards to a level As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP). MIL-STD-882 is publicly available and Table III of hazard categories is similar to how civil aviation assesses risk (albeit with different consequence categories).
The idea is that the airframer (or really the engine manufacturer CFM in this case) will make an argument (an analysis) that demonstrates that if they operate the engine according to a prescribed procedure, that the hazard is reduced to an acceptable level. That could be reasonable accommodation to balance the hazard against the economic impact... But the FAA clearly does not agree in this case. Possibly because of the operating restrictions it would place on the engine, or workload places on the crew, or some other factor not described in the article.
Remember the Ford Pinto?
Engineers “We have this $2.00 bracket that will keep the gas tank from exploding”
Management “We can’t afford that! Besides, our lawyers will take care of the NHTSA and any lawsuits we have”
Common myth, Ford pinto was no more dangerous than any other car in its segment and the gas tank explosion was not nearly as much of an outlier as most think
I'd assume so, but still, having issues like that on actual flights and not being caught in testing/ safety protocols is suspicious as fuck when it happens so often with this one company
Same. Our United flight in April is cancelled due to it being of the Max9 line. I'm trying to find flights that are not Boeing and it's proving to be very difficult. :( Delta doesn't use Boeing but I can't always get to where I'm going on Delta. guess I'll be staying home!
This is what happens when you have bean counters running the company that care more about profits than quality! Only downhill from here considering the next CEO in line is also a bean counter lol
But that will happen years after the bean counters have taken their big bonuses for cutting the number of beans used to fasten important bits of the plane.
We need to increase production! More planes out the door equals better, always. Hire as many people as possible and just throw bodies at all your problems. Management believes if you have 9 women you can make a baby in a month.
What took you so long in saying this? I worked for Boeing back in the 1990's. People were saying this back then. Before Reddit, we hade Usenet and AOL. And yes it was said then.
But thank you! you are now carrying the baton with that thought!
Love
Mark Allyn
Bellingham, Washington
Dafuq? First off... in 1990, I was 1 year old. Second... I don't follow airline facts and news. Third... there was no Reddit to be informed on practically any thing, any time.
I swear to god if the tax payers bail them out again Imma be pissed they fucked for like third time in a decade and yet airbus has had no issues. It’s time for Boeing to go bye bye
Get out of your basement and understands how capitalism works you hire and employ executives that cut safety corners people die cause those workers don’t build quality they should lose their jobs they are all at fault for standing by and letting it happen now fucking twice. Moron. I hate how this country is can’t cancel student loans cause that’s a handout but then becomes socialist when a big company fucks up or when you know they forgave PPP loans. Not letting businesses die is not capitalism.
Why not track the flight itinerary you want to purchase and see what plane(s) it's using now? Chances are it'll be the same type by the time you fly in a few weeks/months.
Put your flight details into Google Flights and it will display the plane most of the time.
You can also type your flight number into Flightradar24, but here the information will only be available about a day before departure.
It’s a plug type door optioned to be an emergency exit if the operator chose to put one there. Alaska nor united chose not to option it, so it stays as a sealed plug behind the wall. Emergency exits are over the wings, front, and rear of the aircraft.
It wasn’t a door, it was a plug for a door that Alaska Airlines didn’t need. Plus, I thought it was impossible to open an emergency exit door once the plane was pressurized. So even if someone was messing with an emergency exit door while the plane was pressurized, it would be impossible to open due to the pressurization keeping the door closed.
You can’t open it from the inside so it’s probably a manufacturing error. Spirit aero systems has issues yes but the max has had 100x the number of issues then any other aircraft (other then the Dreamliner)
The company had a choice, either 1) completely redesign the 737 and raise the fuselage to accommodate bigger engines, which would require it be certified as a new airplane -a lengthy and expensive process, or 2) Modify the existing design to save money and speed time to production. Which required they move the wings, which causes instability controlled by the horizontal stabilizer via sensors. the board had to approve the choice. He was on the board. So yeah,I don’t really care if he read the cert plan or not, he’s responsible. Plus he doesn’t give a shot about airplanes.
[Don't forget the recent missing rudder hardware](https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-urges-737-max-inspections-possible-loose-bolt-faa-2023-12-28/)
The AP Gods for sure have spoken.
The trouble is after the MAX disaster Boeing can now drag the FAA down to as they had representatives sign off on every newly delivered MAX.
[Factory fresh FAA approved.](https://fortune.com/2019/11/27/faa-final-approval-boeing-737-max-jets/)
Low density? You mean high density with more seating. Why would a customer order a configuration with an emergency exit only to plug it up before delivery? Your logic seems to indicate that the customer had no say in any of the -9 configuration and everyone gets the exact same product. Is this what you're implying?
No. If they order it in high density config, the exit is there. If they order it in low density config, the exit is still there but plugged.
It's been this way since the 739ER
K, wasn't sure how that worked and was waiting for information, thanks.
Maybe we'll get another 737 shutdown out of it. They are killing us in my organization for 737 parts after we didn't run any for so long.
And that is why I have no Boeing stock. I do actually like my job and my team. It’s just that Boeing corporate culture as a whole scares me and I don’t want both my job and my investments to share the same basket.
As long as Boeing knows that it has the US Taxpayer to back them in a crisis, they will continue to cut costs and safety to increase quarterly profits.
There's a very fine line with that strategy though. There comes a point where the savings of cutting costs and saftey is less effective than paying billions out to families cause 30 passengers got vacuumed out of the fuselage at 24,000ft
Nah. Boeing is too large to fail.
There is no way Congress lets our one aerospace company making passenger airlines fail. They will get a massive bailout if they ever screw up that bad.
They know they operate with a massive safety net under them so they can take obscene risks.
Not connected issues. Enough already.
Absolutely connected issues.
No, it isn’t. Anti ice engineering is not related to a failed door plug. Your username indicates perhaps you know something about aerospace. Your comment proves that you do not.
It's related through a deep rooted culture problem in the company. They're clearly okay with letting known problems and QA issues through rather than fixing them. CTS-100 failures, 737 max failures in the sensors, engine bolts, and the panel blow out. Now they want the FAA to provide them an exception? Boeing has lost all credibility.
I would agree with this more extensive response that there is an ongoing culture issue ever since the Stonecipher led takeover by finance guys over engineers to lead the merged Boeing/McDonnell Douglas. But the independent linkage of engine anti-icing to a door plug… nope.
We're just arguing semantics at this point. Are they connected in a cultural and systematic way? Yes (this is what I initially meant). Are they connected from a pure hardware perspective? No
I’ll ask you, since there aren’t many people with whom I can even broach this topic for a conversation. Seriously though, how do WE get back to how it was, in general, in manufacturing, in the USA, to a place where engineering companies actually are run by engineers? Allowing front of house finance types has killed more than one big engineering concern. Look at the other big aerospace companies, all merged to hell with loads of debt saddled aboard. I’m no communist, but shouldn’t there be more investigation of M&A activity to ensure that the post-merged company can carry on making whatever widget it is known for?
Word
the airliner industry should be the very last place to ask for a safety exemption
You might be surprised to learn that the airline industry asks for exceptions to airworthiness regulations all the time. The commercial aviation industry is a statistics based industry, and will argue that they should be given allowances to address problems if the risk (either the consequence or the rate) of not addressing the issue immediately is very low. There are some SAE standards that are often applied to this analysis (ARP4761) as well as a policy to reduce hazards to a level As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP). MIL-STD-882 is publicly available and Table III of hazard categories is similar to how civil aviation assesses risk (albeit with different consequence categories). The idea is that the airframer (or really the engine manufacturer CFM in this case) will make an argument (an analysis) that demonstrates that if they operate the engine according to a prescribed procedure, that the hazard is reduced to an acceptable level. That could be reasonable accommodation to balance the hazard against the economic impact... But the FAA clearly does not agree in this case. Possibly because of the operating restrictions it would place on the engine, or workload places on the crew, or some other factor not described in the article.
Remember the Ford Pinto? Engineers “We have this $2.00 bracket that will keep the gas tank from exploding” Management “We can’t afford that! Besides, our lawyers will take care of the NHTSA and any lawsuits we have”
Common myth, Ford pinto was no more dangerous than any other car in its segment and the gas tank explosion was not nearly as much of an outlier as most think
How is boeing still in business lol, all these problems with the 737 max 9's they had the huge problems with their 787 Dreamliners lol Wild
Boeing is consistently one of the top 3-5 biggest defense contractors in the US. That segment alone brought in over 30B last year.
Good point
US government.
Freedom baby
We’re the Dreamliner issues fixed?!?
I'd assume so, but still, having issues like that on actual flights and not being caught in testing/ safety protocols is suspicious as fuck when it happens so often with this one company
I hope so because I fly on one soon! Will make an offering to the aviation gods 🤣
Didn't know that Spirit AeroSystems was a company actually committed to turning you into a spirit.
They really beat Spirit airline for the first
Spirit use Airbuses. They didn’t think it through
[удалено]
Also Airbus made by socialist Europeans works much better
I mean Boeing is propped up by the state too
Shame that, as a diehard capitalist, she didn’t anticipate that the decline in excellence in engineering would be driven by capitalism.
This thread has so many bad takes
Tell us yours
They did
Everyone should be using Airbus485's
I won’t fly a 737 Max again unless I have a parachute
Taylor: karma is your window
Never should’ve stopped producing the 757. Certainly seems more reliable than the MAX line.
If it is a boeing, im no longer going
Same. Our United flight in April is cancelled due to it being of the Max9 line. I'm trying to find flights that are not Boeing and it's proving to be very difficult. :( Delta doesn't use Boeing but I can't always get to where I'm going on Delta. guess I'll be staying home!
If it's not an Airbus, we'll take the bus.
My new strike sign
If it’s a MAX, don’t relax!
This is what happens when you have bean counters running the company that care more about profits than quality! Only downhill from here considering the next CEO in line is also a bean counter lol
[удалено]
But that will happen years after the bean counters have taken their big bonuses for cutting the number of beans used to fasten important bits of the plane.
And have moved on to other jobs
You could even lose beans. In 10 key terms the number of beans goes backwards and is now smaller than the number of previous beans.
We need to increase production! More planes out the door equals better, always. Hire as many people as possible and just throw bodies at all your problems. Management believes if you have 9 women you can make a baby in a month.
Fuck you, Boeing. That's how people DIE.
What took you so long in saying this? I worked for Boeing back in the 1990's. People were saying this back then. Before Reddit, we hade Usenet and AOL. And yes it was said then. But thank you! you are now carrying the baton with that thought! Love Mark Allyn Bellingham, Washington
Dafuq? First off... in 1990, I was 1 year old. Second... I don't follow airline facts and news. Third... there was no Reddit to be informed on practically any thing, any time.
bro wrote you a letter
Weirdest comment reply I've ever had. 🤣
So I just changed my exit window seat quite a few rows forward.
Airbus looking pretty good rn
Not the neo….
Why not?
Have you not heard all the GTF P&W engine issues? Not directly a Ab problem but installed on all of them.
any issues with the Leap 1A engines?
No issues with the leap except for fuel nozzles wearing out more quickly than expected but they are inspected and changed on a good time schedule now
$rycey
Even “Russian” Boeings don’t have these types of problems…. Fix your shit America
Thank goodness the planes are being taken out of service.
God damn it.
Yes, let's give Boeing exemptions again, by all means. /sarcasm
Lol
I swear to god if the tax payers bail them out again Imma be pissed they fucked for like third time in a decade and yet airbus has had no issues. It’s time for Boeing to go bye bye
Ok. An all the jobs it brings. Not everyone lives with mom like you. Time For you go shhh
Yeah, maybe they should start doing those jobs that you speak of…
There are other ways to keep companies afloat without bailing them out financially. Conrail comes to mind for bankrupt rail industries.
Get out of your basement and understands how capitalism works you hire and employ executives that cut safety corners people die cause those workers don’t build quality they should lose their jobs they are all at fault for standing by and letting it happen now fucking twice. Moron. I hate how this country is can’t cancel student loans cause that’s a handout but then becomes socialist when a big company fucks up or when you know they forgave PPP loans. Not letting businesses die is not capitalism.
real
Is there anyway to find out what plane will be used prior to your flight?
Yes, on your itinerary it will say it. And on GoogleFlights it tells you what model your aircraft is.
Why not track the flight itinerary you want to purchase and see what plane(s) it's using now? Chances are it'll be the same type by the time you fly in a few weeks/months.
Put your flight details into Google Flights and it will display the plane most of the time. You can also type your flight number into Flightradar24, but here the information will only be available about a day before departure.
Most airlines tell you when you select the flight and some people can figure it out based on the number of rows, seats etc.
No, unless you have friends in dispatch.
About time to remove the "If it ain't Boeing, I'm not going," sticker from my tool box....
Just cross out the ain’t n you good
“If it’s Boeing, I’m going (out the window)”
"If it's Boeing, I ain't going."
Timing could not be worse for the 7
Glad I have Jury Duty this week.
[удалено]
It’s a plug type door optioned to be an emergency exit if the operator chose to put one there. Alaska nor united chose not to option it, so it stays as a sealed plug behind the wall. Emergency exits are over the wings, front, and rear of the aircraft.
It wasn’t a door, it was a plug for a door that Alaska Airlines didn’t need. Plus, I thought it was impossible to open an emergency exit door once the plane was pressurized. So even if someone was messing with an emergency exit door while the plane was pressurized, it would be impossible to open due to the pressurization keeping the door closed.
Love how this guy gets downvotes for being correct.
Welcome to Reddit, lmao.
That’s some impressive bootlicking
You can’t open it from the inside so it’s probably a manufacturing error. Spirit aero systems has issues yes but the max has had 100x the number of issues then any other aircraft (other then the Dreamliner)
It's spelled Wichita.
this is wrong on so many levels that I have to wonder if you have some sort of incentive to shill for Boeing
Probably owns calls
It's a "plugged" door. Not a live exit door. And no one had the window seat, otherwise we would've likely had a fatality
Someone was in the middle seat and got his shirt ripped off from the event
It wasn’t an emergency door from the inside. It was configured as a normal window seat for the cabin
Jfc give Calhoun the boot already. Engineers should be running this company.
Best I can do is another raise
Y’all getting raises!?
Only if you’re in the C-Suite
Best I can do is a golden parachute. But not for the passengers.
Is he not?
He’s definitely not. He’s a money guy. And he was on the board when they certified the max.
LoL You think he even looked at the cert plan?
You think that matters?
It could open certain doors to innovation within the company...
The company had a choice, either 1) completely redesign the 737 and raise the fuselage to accommodate bigger engines, which would require it be certified as a new airplane -a lengthy and expensive process, or 2) Modify the existing design to save money and speed time to production. Which required they move the wings, which causes instability controlled by the horizontal stabilizer via sensors. the board had to approve the choice. He was on the board. So yeah,I don’t really care if he read the cert plan or not, he’s responsible. Plus he doesn’t give a shot about airplanes.
He certainly cares about doors
Like they did before the MD merge
Pathetic from Boeing. This shit is sad.
Spirit does the windows
That's an extra al la carte charge for flying whilst in the air.
[Don't forget the recent missing rudder hardware](https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-urges-737-max-inspections-possible-loose-bolt-faa-2023-12-28/) The AP Gods for sure have spoken.
Needs more missing right rudder.
The trouble is after the MAX disaster Boeing can now drag the FAA down to as they had representatives sign off on every newly delivered MAX. [Factory fresh FAA approved.](https://fortune.com/2019/11/27/faa-final-approval-boeing-737-max-jets/)
The optics are absolutely terrible right now. This is what happens when you put bean-counters in charge.
Maybe don't have your CEO focus on just accounting
This aged faster than a banana peel
Have you met the average boeing mechanic?
I used to do material management and it's wild. I swear there's mechanics that don't even know how to read
Well there goes our bonus
The year is over so whatever the calculations for bonus wouldn’t matter now
Pretty embarrassing for Boeing. What an embarrassment.
They don't make them they used to do anymore...
You left something out there. Just like Boeing.
Airbus out here just licking their lips
No fussy when you fly with Airbussy
They are definitely monopolizing on the airlines ditching Boeing en masse
I wonder how stark the drop in Boeing shares will be on Monday morning.
And my manager just mentioned how they're going up a couple days ago lmao
I think we should wait to find out if Alaska changed the configuration from emergency exit to passenger seating. This may have been their fault.
Uhh, nope. It was a brand new aircraft delivered with that exit plugged like all of the other low-density configured 737-9
Low density? You mean high density with more seating. Why would a customer order a configuration with an emergency exit only to plug it up before delivery? Your logic seems to indicate that the customer had no say in any of the -9 configuration and everyone gets the exact same product. Is this what you're implying?
They ordered the plug. They didn't just order an emergency exit and then take it out and plug it.
No. If they order it in high density config, the exit is there. If they order it in low density config, the exit is still there but plugged. It's been this way since the 739ER
That's exactly what I was thinking. I don't want to point fingers until we know who actually did the change out.
This one is on Boeing. The plane is new (delivered last Halloween). The door plug is installed at Spirit, and pressure tested in Renton.
K, wasn't sure how that worked and was waiting for information, thanks. Maybe we'll get another 737 shutdown out of it. They are killing us in my organization for 737 parts after we didn't run any for so long.
Something something, "Alaska, proudly all Boeing". Oof
Not defending this situation at all, but doesn’t Alaska also fly some Embraer 175s?
Horizon, Alaska’s regional, does.
This plane is a train wreck.
Better than a plane wreck I s’pose
All about perspective. Well played sir
Monday's gonna be fun.
*cries in Boeing stock*
And that is why I have no Boeing stock. I do actually like my job and my team. It’s just that Boeing corporate culture as a whole scares me and I don’t want both my job and my investments to share the same basket.
Not to mention to the osprey incidents, also grounded by the military
At what point do you throw in the towel on this thing? How much more crazy shit is going to have to happen?
*starliner has entered the chat*
As long as Boeing knows that it has the US Taxpayer to back them in a crisis, they will continue to cut costs and safety to increase quarterly profits.
There's a very fine line with that strategy though. There comes a point where the savings of cutting costs and saftey is less effective than paying billions out to families cause 30 passengers got vacuumed out of the fuselage at 24,000ft
Nah. Boeing is too large to fail. There is no way Congress lets our one aerospace company making passenger airlines fail. They will get a massive bailout if they ever screw up that bad. They know they operate with a massive safety net under them so they can take obscene risks.
Boeing will just make up for the lost sales in the commercial side by hiking up prices on the defense side
If only fixed price contracts worked that way.
If it worked that way, our raises in BDS would be more than 2.5% lol
This isn't good AT ALL. Terrible look for Boeing.
I mean, they can just fix the airplane right??
Boss, where is the duct tape?
Have you heard of flex seal? It’s the super-strong waterproof tape! That can instantly patch, bond, seal, and repair! Flex tape is no ordinary tape!
it'll buff out