Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bpw

Think Twice Before Boarding A 737

Recommended Posts

I posted this as a warning in December 2010:

Boeing Coverup

The recent news is VERY worrying for those buying a 737, and downright scary for anyone traveling in one. The gist of the news report is that Boeing used computer numerically controlled (CNC) manufacturing methods as justification for the reducing strength, weight and thus the cost of their aircraft. According to whistle blowers in Boeing, critical airframe components are still being made by hand, in bucket shop manufacturing companies. We now see this:

BBC

This BBC article suggest the new 737's may be a flying death trap - in fact, all new generation Boeings are made this way. Watch the Al Jezeera news report and then consider the implications! If it's true that these planes were not manufactured using the methods specified by the engineers then heads should be rolling in Boeing. Likewise, you should think twice about getting in a 737 before the issues raised by the Al Jezeera report are thoroughly, and publicly, investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority (and not the FAA who covered this up).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this as a warning in December 2010:

Boeing Coverup

The recent news is VERY worrying for those buying a 737, and downright scary for anyone traveling in one. The gist of the news report is that Boeing used computer numerically controlled (CNC) manufacturing methods as justification for the reducing strength, weight and thus the cost of their aircraft. According to whistle blowers in Boeing, critical airframe components are still being made by hand, in bucket shop manufacturing companies. We now see this:

BBC

This BBC article suggest the new 737's may be a flying death trap - in fact, all new generation Boeings are made this way. Watch the Al Jezeera news report and then consider the implications! If it's true that these planes were not manufactured using the methods specified by the engineers then heads should be rolling in Boeing. Likewise, you should think twice about getting in a 737 before the issues raised by the Al Jezeera report are thoroughly, and publicly, investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority (and not the FAA who covered this up).

I've found myself thinking more about the consequences of skyrocketing commodity prices and impact on manufacturing processes lately. That sounds like one of them and an ugly one at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Narrator: "Take the number of vehicles in the field "A", multiply it by the probable rate of failure "B", then multiply the result by the average out of court settlement "C" "A x B x C..."...equals "X", If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully Ken the public have the final say in this. I would urge others to copy my post wherever it makes sense in order to ensure an impartial investigation is publicly carried out. Frankly its going to be scary getting on an 737 if this is not thoroughly investigated.

Narrator: "Take the number of vehicles in the field "A", multiply it by the probable rate of failure "B", then multiply the result by the average out of court settlement "C" "A x B x C..."...equals "X", If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boeing went through a major outsourcing process a few years back. Part would be manufactured by third parties and Boeing would become just an assembler. They thought it would save them billions.

Then they discovered all the problems of managing outsourcing, of quality assurance and of getting two components manufactured in two separate plants to fit together let alone thousands of parts made in thousands of different plants to fit together.

They also failed to realise that the profit and the power is in making the parts and not being the box assembler.

It has, so I read, been an expensive mess for Boeing who is apparently now bringing it all back in-house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankfully Ken the public have the final say in this. I would urge others to copy my post wherever it makes sense in order to ensure an impartial investigation is publicly carried out. Frankly its going to be scary getting on an 737 if this is not thoroughly investigated.

No what will happen is that Boeing will bribe the impartial investigators, who will then say there is absolutely no problem at all. People will die and more coverups will occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this as a warning in December 2010:

Boeing Coverup

The recent news is VERY worrying for those buying a 737, and downright scary for anyone traveling in one. The gist of the news report is that Boeing used computer numerically controlled (CNC) manufacturing methods as justification for the reducing strength, weight and thus the cost of their aircraft. According to whistle blowers in Boeing, critical airframe components are still being made by hand, in bucket shop manufacturing companies. We now see this:

BBC

This BBC article suggest the new 737's may be a flying death trap - in fact, all new generation Boeings are made this way. Watch the Al Jezeera news report and then consider the implications! If it's true that these planes were not manufactured using the methods specified by the engineers then heads should be rolling in Boeing. Likewise, you should think twice about getting in a 737 before the issues raised by the Al Jezeera report are thoroughly, and publicly, investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority (and not the FAA who covered this up).

I posted this on Friday under "Economics" - I guess the two are connected:

Don't Fly in a Recession

Nothing against the Finns, this is something I've suspected for a long time about travel in general and air travel in particular:

Finnair to cut 450 jobs in maintenance

Just as one might be tempted to defer that pricey car service when money's a bit tight, and just as a factory might trim the maintenance budget, you might be tempted to save a few quid with a couple of extra flights between services.

Would be interesting to see the stats for air accidents, and maybe sea and rail and long haul coach travel too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The gist of the news report is that Boeing used computer numerically controlled (CNC) manufacturing methods as justification for the reducing strength, weight and thus the cost of their aircraft. According to whistle blowers in Boeing, critical airframe components are still being made by hand, in bucket shop manufacturing companies."

A carefully placed "but" is required in this sentence to make it make sense.

I don't know about the failure. Maybe it was the panels. Maybe it was the rivets/fastners. Neither would use CNC manufacturing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly its going to be scary getting on an 737 if this is not thoroughly investigated.

It's going to be scarier driving home on the A64 tonight.

With respect, this is an overrreaction. For one thing, manufacturers' and airlines' ability to cover up a major design or manufacturing fault is virtually zero, because civil aviation incidents and accidents are almost guaranteed to be major media events. The two fatal crashes on the A64 last week didn't make it any further than the local rag, but this plane incident - which didn't even cause any injuries - is on the front page of the nationals. Furthermore, it's in their interests to identify and solve the problem. When a succession of DC-10s dropped out of the sky shortly after the plane entered service in the 1970s, it acquired such a bad reputation that people would walk into travel agents asking to buy a plane ticket to New York or wherever ... but not on a DC-10. It took many years for that negative publicity to die down. My sister, who is a pilot (though admittedly only on 50-seat turboprops), opined when the A380 was launched that in today's media-dominated climate, if one plane is lost with all on board within the first year or two, then that's that as far as any future orders from passenger airlines are concerned. So if there is a fatigue issue with older 737-300s, Boeing is going to want to get a fix in place ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's going to be scarier driving home on the A64 tonight.

True, I don't know why people are so incredibly risk adverse these days..... tbh if the 737 you are on disintegrates while you're onboard at 34000ft you'll black out from lack of oxygen in a little over 20 seconds. And the 34000ft fall will take approximately 2.5 minutes. Since you are knocked out you won't feel a thing. And if you are conscous then you won't really notice the 34000ft as humans have difficulty measuring altitude over 2500ft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect, this is an overrreaction. For one thing, manufacturers' and airlines' ability to cover up a major design or manufacturing fault is virtually zero, because civil aviation incidents and accidents are almost guaranteed to be major media events.

I am afraid that does not follow. They cannot conceal that a plane they made turned into a smouldering cemetery for some reason, but the cause is something else entirely. There seems to be a tradition of blaming the crew, especially if they are dead and unable to defend themselves. You only need to go back to the 90s to see what Boeing might do to protect the bottom line. You can google something like "737 rudder reversal". Their take on the second accident of two that both resulted in a high-speed ground impact that instantly killed everyone on board was ( http://www.b737.org.uk/rudder.htm ):

The company points to pilot error in the Pittsburgh crash, suggesting the pilots may have mishandled the plane in reaction to the turbulence, with the first officer inadvertently holding the left rudder pedal to the cockpit floor as he and the Captain pulled back on the control stick to break their plunge.

I don't think anyone seriously believed even at the time that a pilot would be so inept as to command full left rudder when exactly the opposite input was required, particularly as this was the second such incident affecting a 737. Neither US Air or ALPA seem to have accepted that as a likely explanation. It was only later that Boeing agreed the pilot was almost certainly correctly applying full right rudder, it's just that the plane deflected the rudder in precisely the opposite direction. Interestingly, Boeing seemed to avoid the sort of treatment later afforded to Toyota for a substantially less serious alleged product defect.

I take worse risks with my life than getting on a 737, and the chances are that the airlines operating them cause more deaths than the design of the plane. Nevertheless, I remain to be convinced that Boeing are a shining example of an honest corporation putting the flying public first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's just that the plane deflected the rudder in precisely the opposite direction. Interestingly, Boeing seemed to avoid the sort of treatment later afforded to Toyota for a substantially less serious alleged product defect.

It's what always happens when accountants get promoted ahead of engineers.

The Toyota system for optimizing mass-production has a lot to answer for in my opinion. It works well at the start when costs are high and productivity and quality are low; these three things are all easily improved by using the Toyota system.

The problems come later in the product cycle when costs are as low as they can be without compromising quality and productivity but employees are incentivised to find "improvements" to the system and thus, costs are reduced and quality and efficiency both suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Aljazeera link is about the NG series.

The BBC story is about the 300 series.

+1

The fact is that these two aircraft are not related, in fact they are totally different. This point is being missed by most posts on this thread.

What might be of concern is that Boeing's inspection schedule will need to be reviewed. In the short term the on going worries regarding the 737NG remains. This together with the 300 series problem highlighted here will have a negative effect on their share price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate flying enough as it is. That little hole in the roof doesn't inspire confidence. ohmy.gif

Me too. I take at least 2 flights in 737's each month through work alone....

Are Embraer's any safer???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I flew on a 737 yesterday. I was fine. Apart from a little shit who shouted for the entire flight without their parents telling them to shut the ****** up. I would have liked a hole in the roof to open up and suck the little **** out away from earshot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to 'BLOD', the pictures in the press show the 737 has winglets. See the link below.

LINK

I assumed it was an NG because the plane clearly has winglets. According to Wikipedia winglets these were introduced with the NG series.

Wiki

Or does someone have proof they were retrofitted. The livery is also consistent with Southwests more recent purchases.

INTERESTING EH!

+1

The fact is that these two aircraft are not related, in fact they are totally different. This point is being missed by most posts on this thread.

What might be of concern is that Boeing's inspection schedule will need to be reviewed. In the short term the on going worries regarding the 737NG remains. This together with the 300 series problem highlighted here will have a negative effect on their share price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to 'BLOD', the pictures in the press show the 737 has winglets. See the link below.

LINK

The only pictures I can see on that page are interiors.

I assumed it was an NG because the plane clearly has winglets. According to Wikipedia winglets these were introduced with the NG series.

Wiki

Or does someone have proof they were retrofitted. The livery is also consistent with Southwests more recent purchases.

Note the not-quite-round shape of the intakes on the engine nacelles in the picture in this story. It's a -300 that has been retrofitted. Southwest had their -300s upgraded during 2009, and although that press release doesn't mention winglets, I presume they were put on then, as well as a new paint job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to scroll the images and then click on the blue one.

The only pictures I can see on that page are interiors.

Note the not-quite-round shape of the intakes on the engine nacelles in the picture in this story. It's a -300 that has been retrofitted. Southwest had their -300s upgraded during 2009, and although that press release doesn't mention winglets, I presume they were put on then, as well as a new paint job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to scroll the images and then click on the blue one.

Doesn't show the engines. But the photo in the Wail does clearly show the 'hamster pouch' intake, which were only fitted to the -300s. So unless that's a stock photo, the plane involved in this incident was a retrofitted -300.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, I don't know why people are so incredibly risk adverse these days..... tbh if the 737 you are on disintegrates while you're onboard at 34000ft you'll black out from lack of oxygen in a little over 20 seconds. And the 34000ft fall will take approximately 2.5 minutes. Since you are knocked out you won't feel a thing. And if you are conscous then you won't really notice the 34000ft as humans have difficulty measuring altitude over 2500ft.

Cheers, thanks for that, I feel totally reassured! :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.