ktcanuck
4th Jan 2020, 14:56
There's an interesting dispute going on between Leonardo and Boeing. Leonardo has been supplying 767 slats for many years without incident but recently has had them rejected and repaired by Boeing at Leonardo's expense due to tool marks and tiny swarf that only recently was discoverable due to the use of a high definition bore-scope at Boeing in the closed cell of the slat. It appears that Leonardo produces these as a build to Boeing's prints. According to Leonardo's lawsuit (https://www.scribd.com/document/440969494/Leonardo-vs-Boeing#from_embed) Boeing took it upon the themselves to rework the offending parts at great expense without consulting Leonardo in advance as required by the Contract.
Two question spring to mind:
1. If this production method is faulty, are there recalls (via AD) for the hundreds in service around the world that have not been repaired, and,
2. Why the sudden change of inspection method? I wouldn't mind betting that the US Air Force introduced it for the KC767 and Boeing is sticking Leonardo with the bill.
By all accounts the offending area is finished as a closed cell and there have been no reports of problems that I can find.
Forgive me if this has appeared elsewhere; I did try to find reference.
Two question spring to mind:
1. If this production method is faulty, are there recalls (via AD) for the hundreds in service around the world that have not been repaired, and,
2. Why the sudden change of inspection method? I wouldn't mind betting that the US Air Force introduced it for the KC767 and Boeing is sticking Leonardo with the bill.
By all accounts the offending area is finished as a closed cell and there have been no reports of problems that I can find.
Forgive me if this has appeared elsewhere; I did try to find reference.