Maint. damaged Boeing aircraft investigated
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing aircraft investigated
Some food for thought!
Source: The Australian
Damage that occurred recently with two Qantas jumbo jets has encouraged an urgent worldwide examination of Boeing aircraft that has so far uncovered similar problems in more than 40 planes. Qantas grounded the Boeing 747s last year after engineers discovered a potentially devastating 70cm crack in one aircraft's fuselage during maintenance.
The crack was in a strap used to knit sections of the fuselage together during manufacturing and could have led to a serious structural failure if left unrepaired. Marks on the damaged plane indicated the crack had grown from damage caused by the use of metal tools during repainting by previous owner Malaysia Airlines. Similar metal tool marks had now been found worldwide on 32 Boeing 737s, four 747s and seven 757s.
Source: The Australian
Damage that occurred recently with two Qantas jumbo jets has encouraged an urgent worldwide examination of Boeing aircraft that has so far uncovered similar problems in more than 40 planes. Qantas grounded the Boeing 747s last year after engineers discovered a potentially devastating 70cm crack in one aircraft's fuselage during maintenance.
The crack was in a strap used to knit sections of the fuselage together during manufacturing and could have led to a serious structural failure if left unrepaired. Marks on the damaged plane indicated the crack had grown from damage caused by the use of metal tools during repainting by previous owner Malaysia Airlines. Similar metal tool marks had now been found worldwide on 32 Boeing 737s, four 747s and seven 757s.
Too mean to buy a long personal title
No, that's not the news. The news is the additional "32 Boeing 737s, four 747s and seven 757s" on which similar damage has been found. And a good thing too.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: wales (new south)
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wishing to start any war here, but I'm just wondering how many replies would have fallen onto this thread if it was Company A instead of B ?
Self Loathing Froggy
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: elsewhere
Age: 18
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you not think that this is worth discussing on a professional pilots forum?
And I do think that as an SLF, safety matters also to me.
The point I wanted to make is that I am surprised that no discussion started at all.
I'm still thinking that if it had been company A, a heated discussion (to say the least) would have started.
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a maintenance issue, not an aircraft issue. That is why there has been no disccussion of it.
The companies in question chose to use a substandard paintshop, and they have reaped what they sown.... The perils of contract maintenance. (not a slam on ALL contract maint, but the very real risks when costs become your number one prioirity)
Sooner or later someone will find an Airbus that visited that shop and it to will be a scratch...
A better title on the thread would most likely have drawn more comments and discussion as this is a maint issue, not an aircraft issue.
Cheers
Wino
The companies in question chose to use a substandard paintshop, and they have reaped what they sown.... The perils of contract maintenance. (not a slam on ALL contract maint, but the very real risks when costs become your number one prioirity)
Sooner or later someone will find an Airbus that visited that shop and it to will be a scratch...
A better title on the thread would most likely have drawn more comments and discussion as this is a maint issue, not an aircraft issue.
Cheers
Wino
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I know the design is different between the bus and the boeing which is why this is only affecting boeing planes. Someone mentioned that the paint shops were following boeing procedures/tooling - can anyone confirm that?
You're right that this may be maintenance companies looking for a quick $$$ but this is certainly something that all of us in the industry need to be aware of as people's lives are possibly at stake which will cost us all many $$$$$ across the industry if planes start breaking up.
Cejk
You're right that this may be maintenance companies looking for a quick $$$ but this is certainly something that all of us in the industry need to be aware of as people's lives are possibly at stake which will cost us all many $$$$$ across the industry if planes start breaking up.
Cejk
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And from the original thread the maintainence was questioned and the firm who did it allegedly no more
by Direct Anywhere
and from Lambeth1
So if the 73's are additional ones, then it is new news.
Ryanair is removing six 737's - all from the same source as the two QF -400's. Other operators who bought second hand Malaysian aircraft are also quite concerned. It appears Malaysian - who were required by the contract of sale to do the repainting - may have used an incorrect stripper and metallic tools resulting in dissimilar metal corrosion and subsequent fatigue cracking.
and from Lambeth1
the outfit involved has done many a/c for many airlines,there last stuff up (carried out the same method of sealent removal) was 3 x 777's for an American carrier.which have been subsequently written off.The outfit question is no longer around.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Wilmington
Age: 47
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not wishing to start any war here, but I'm just wondering how many replies would have fallen onto this thread if it was Company A instead of B ?
A flame war is the only logical result of your hypothetical question. So, I guess, *flame*.
Everyone else: Feel free to interupt with pertinent facts and on-subject comments at any time. We'll be over here in the sandbox throwing things and making faces.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I may be wrong but I was abouring under the impression that one of the RYR 200's that suffered this probem was the Jaguar aircraft...I have flown that STN-DUB recently....Are they operating under a concession from the IAA?
Flight also quotes MO'L as saying that FLS wil pay an est $10M compensation package to RYR for the damage...Interesting as the last I heard FLS were trying to sue MO'L for damages reating to his comments implicating them in the problem - a climb down or MO'L stirring again?
Flight also quotes MO'L as saying that FLS wil pay an est $10M compensation package to RYR for the damage...Interesting as the last I heard FLS were trying to sue MO'L for damages reating to his comments implicating them in the problem - a climb down or MO'L stirring again?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: western europe
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
could someone give a Technical summary of how the problem occurred and its effects on the Aircraft?
thanks .....
ps. to think it could cause the Write-off of three 777's is mind boggling!
thanks .....
ps. to think it could cause the Write-off of three 777's is mind boggling!
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What ever they were doing and what ever machinery they were using there was contact with the aluminum skins of the aircraft. If you scratch it you weaken it. and create a weak point that will crack.
Do it in enough places and you total the aircraft because you would be faced with reskinning the whole aircraft, which is practically impossible.
I suspect they had some sort of automated machinery that was miscalibrated or something similar.
There are many ways of stripping paint off an aircraft, some chemical (with fierce envirnmental problems if you are in a country that cares about that) some via impact. sandblasting,( which leaves a contamination problem) I've seen CO2 (dry ice) beads used as well which later evaporate eliminating the contamination problem, but causes other problems. The impact ones are the cleanest, but improper technique will have you cutting metal. You can also have contact from the spray nozzles
Cheers
Wino
Do it in enough places and you total the aircraft because you would be faced with reskinning the whole aircraft, which is practically impossible.
I suspect they had some sort of automated machinery that was miscalibrated or something similar.
There are many ways of stripping paint off an aircraft, some chemical (with fierce envirnmental problems if you are in a country that cares about that) some via impact. sandblasting,( which leaves a contamination problem) I've seen CO2 (dry ice) beads used as well which later evaporate eliminating the contamination problem, but causes other problems. The impact ones are the cleanest, but improper technique will have you cutting metal. You can also have contact from the spray nozzles
Cheers
Wino
UkEng
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: England
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wino, it's more simple than that. It was the use of metal scrapers (hand tools) removing sealant from lap joints that caused the damage (allegedly).
Not a cause of cost cutting IMO but more of poor training/ignorance.
Not a cause of cost cutting IMO but more of poor training/ignorance.