Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Faulty B737 Slat Tracks: FAA Proposal to Fine Boeing $US 3.7m

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Faulty B737 Slat Tracks: FAA Proposal to Fine Boeing $US 3.7m

Old 7th Dec 2019, 08:58
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Auckland nz
Posts: 111
Faulty B737 Slat Tracks: FAA Proposal to Fine Boeing $US 3.7m

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12291867

Mods: If this has already been covered in the multitude of threads and posts related to Boeing's apparent failures, then please feel free to delete. Otherwise, let's add this the unfortunately increasing list of Boeing's questionable self certifying practices.
Lord Farringdon is online now  
Old 7th Dec 2019, 09:13
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 742
Someone beat you to it L.F.
MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures
Post #4303
KelvinD is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2019, 11:59
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 586
The agency said the weakened components could allow the slats "to depart and potentially strike the aircraft, resulting in injury to aircraft occupants and/or preventing continued safe flight and landing."
Who am I to argue with the FAA, but my biggest worry here would be the asymmetrical lift effect of a leading edge device departing one side of the airplane.
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2019, 18:11
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: leftcoast
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by golfyankeesierra View Post
Who am I to argue with the FAA, but my biggest worry here would be the asymmetrical lift effect of a leading edge device departing one side of the airplane.
For an entirely different reason having to do with a poor design of slat track and lever , on the first or second 767 flight, the LE slats jammed on on side. result was the landing at paine field was at a much higher speed than planned. Due to the production schedule, the first 4 or 5 sets had to be removed from completed aircraft and new tooling and rework was done on a priority basis.

But who in their right mind would put cad plating in contact with titanium especially with long known embrittlement issues.

Titanium is a poor heat conductor and a very poor friction surface under best of conditions - but great for friction welding !


https://www.finishing.com/38/92.shtml

Last edited by Grebe; 8th Dec 2019 at 05:57. Reason: added link on ti cad
Grebe is offline  
Old 7th Dec 2019, 23:43
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Nz
Posts: 339
It appears to me that the Boeing Executive management group has been operating without integrity for some time now.
Have they run a broom through it since the Max debacle or has there just been one or two sacrificial lambs?
73qanda is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 10:31
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 586
For an entirely different reason having to do with a poor design of slat track and lever , on the first or second 767 flight, the LE slats jammed on on side. result was the landing at paine field was at a much higher speed than planned
Hi, not familiar with that one, however typically when a flap/slat problem occurs, the asymmetry protection kicks in, the flap/slat(s) gets frozen together with the set(s) on the other wing resulting in a slight asymmetry, and the approach speed is increased 10 knots or so to improve controllability (more aileron authority) and sometimes compensate for lost lift.

now when you lose the whole leading edge device (especially an outboard slat) and the one on the other wing is still attached, that’s something completely different. Again, who am I to argue with FAA, but personally I would be more worried about uncontrollable roll.
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 13:03
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 0
Looking at it from a slightly different angle, $3.7mil is small change not only for Boeing but even for any of its executives. Punishment for this kind of violations must be MUCH stricter. How about $3.7 billion for each "desgn flaw"?
UltraFan is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 14:17
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 154
Originally Posted by golfyankeesierra View Post
Who am I to argue with the FAA, but my biggest worry here would be the asymmetrical lift effect of a leading edge device departing one side of the airplane.
The failure of any given slat track has the potential to cause release of only the slat section attached by that track. Boeing has shown that the release of one slat section does not cause excessive asymetric lift. If multiple tracks were to fail due to a common cause such as overload of multiple non-conforming tracks from pulling high g's for example, that's another story.
Dave Therhino is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 14:34
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: leftcoast
Posts: 2
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9950025352.pdf




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal-..._embrittlement




https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/...r/AC_43-4B.pdf




3.2.5 Titanium. Titanium is prone to cause severe corrosion of adjacent parts through galvanic corrosion. Titanium parts may be galvanically isolated from adjacent parts through barrier coatings or films. Frequent inspection for degradation of these barrier films and inspection for corrosion of adjacent parts is recommended. Contact with zinc and cadmium-plated parts can promote cracking of the titanium.

Grebe is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 14:52
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: EU
Posts: 586
Boeing has shown that the release of one slat section does not cause excessive asymetric lift
That settles it then, good to know. Thanks!
golfyankeesierra is offline  
Old 8th Dec 2019, 22:11
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Whanganui, NZ
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by UltraFan View Post
Looking at it from a slightly different angle, $3.7mil is small change not only for Boeing but even for any of its executives. Punishment for this kind of violations must be MUCH stricter. How about $3.7 billion for each "design flaw"?
$US3.7M is only a little more than "get me a petty cash docket, Mildred" in Boeing terms, real slap on the wrist with a damp bus ticket territory.


I suspect that some fairly senior Boeing manager decided to just keep the production line going, keep moving the fifty-two airframes a month out the door, and "we'll fix them in a few weeks / months when the new parts come in". KPIs met, bonuses paid: what's a little falsifying of documents between friends?
Boeing fails the ethics test again

Why didn't the FAA suspend the authorisations of the responsible parties for say six or twelve months, and put them on a Final Warning: any repetition and they will never again hold an FAA delegation / authorisation?
FAA fails the spinelessness test again, I'm afraid
kiwi grey is offline  
Old 10th Dec 2019, 02:40
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,971
FAA: Boeing Knowingly Installed Faulty 737 Parts

233 sets of slat tracks made in mid-2018 were effected, the regulator revealed in a civil penalty letter sent to the OEM last week.
Boeing faces a $4 million fine for failing to ensure a supplier was delivering airworthy 737 slat tracks and then not rejecting them once the issue came to light, causing the FAA to issue an airworthiness directive to ensure the defective parts were removed from in-service aircraft, the agency said.A civil penalty letter sent by FAA to Boeing Dec. 6 reveals that a plating process done by Southwest United Industries (SUI) introduced weakness, or hydrogen embrittlement, in 233 sets of slat tracks made in mid-2018. SUI informed slat track manufacturer Kenoca Industries, which told Spirit AeroSystems. Spirit contacted Boeing in September 2018, and recommended the OEM accept the parts “as-is,” the FAA letter said. Boeing rejected this and told Spirit to file a “notice of escapement,” or declaration by a supplier of a problem with its products.During its work, SUI followed the wrong part-marking procedure, which meant a required protective coating was not applied. This caused some of the markings to be “partially or completely obscured,” the FAA said.Despite the issues, the parts ended up on Boeing's 737 production lin in Renton, Wash., and some were apparently installed on 133 737NGs delivered from Aug. 16, 2018, to May 2, 2019—including at least one that went to a military customer. The rest may have ended up on 737 MAXs, Boeing determined.Boeing issued an alert service bulletin on June 4, telling operators to inspect their aircraft for the defective slat tracks. The FAA mandated the checks in a June 10 directive that said the parts could be on 133 NGs and 179 MAXs. The directive did not explain why Boeing could not positively identify which aircraft had the parts. The civil penalty letter said that SUI’s improper coatings made it "difficult to identify the affected parts.”Boeing said in a Dec. 6 statement that “all affected 737NGs have been inspected” and parts replaced where required. "Further, we will ensure that all inspections and any necessary part replacements are performed on all 737 MAXs before they return to service,” it added. “Boeing failed to maintain its quality system by failing to detect improperly marked slat tracks, installing improperly marked slat tracks in aircraft, and not managing supplier quality,” the FAA letter said. Boeing used parts “that should have been rejected and subsequently [certified] that the aircraft were airworthy,” it added.Neither the letter nor Boeing’s statement explain how the parts got into the 737’s production system once the manufacturer realized they did not conform. Boeing has not received any in-service reports of slat track failures linked to the production issue.
https://www.mro-network.com/manufact...ccccb8ef93000b
megan is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.