Boeing Jets Part Scare
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing Jets Part Scare
Doesn't sound too good - if true 
-Sky News
Families are flying off on their summer holidays on potentially dangerous aircraft, Sky News has learned.
In an exclusive report our US correspondent Andrew Wilson examines claims by two former auditors of Boeing that the aircraft manufacturer built some of its aircraft in the knowledge that certain parts were defective.
Wilson's six-month investigation has unearthed allegations that parts were wrongly made, had holes drilled in the wrong positions or did not fit properly on the aircraft.
The parts were used in assembling the Boeing 737NG between 1994 and 2002.
EasyJet is among the British airlines who have bought the 737, without knowing of the claims.
Boeing said the allegations were "without merit" and stressed a multi-tiered control process in place for decades has been effective in maintaining quality and safety.
Former auditors Taylor Smith and Jeannine Prewitt told Sky that Boeing accepted defective parts for 737s and other jets from Ducommun, a Californian supplier, and installed them even though they knew them to be faulty and potentially dangerous.
The components - which are crucial to the safety of an aircraft's fuselages - are alleged to have had incorrectly drilled holes and other physical defects that make them more likely to fail.
Ms Prewitt said safety was compromised by "so many manufacturing and quality discrepancies", building the planes should have stopped immediately but did not.
Ducommun did not return any calls to Sky.
In an exclusive report our US correspondent Andrew Wilson examines claims by two former auditors of Boeing that the aircraft manufacturer built some of its aircraft in the knowledge that certain parts were defective.
Wilson's six-month investigation has unearthed allegations that parts were wrongly made, had holes drilled in the wrong positions or did not fit properly on the aircraft.
The parts were used in assembling the Boeing 737NG between 1994 and 2002.
EasyJet is among the British airlines who have bought the 737, without knowing of the claims.
Boeing said the allegations were "without merit" and stressed a multi-tiered control process in place for decades has been effective in maintaining quality and safety.
Former auditors Taylor Smith and Jeannine Prewitt told Sky that Boeing accepted defective parts for 737s and other jets from Ducommun, a Californian supplier, and installed them even though they knew them to be faulty and potentially dangerous.
The components - which are crucial to the safety of an aircraft's fuselages - are alleged to have had incorrectly drilled holes and other physical defects that make them more likely to fail.
Ms Prewitt said safety was compromised by "so many manufacturing and quality discrepancies", building the planes should have stopped immediately but did not.
Ducommun did not return any calls to Sky.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old News - Misleading charge
The bits in question where inspected and signed off by the build guys.
Holes and spacing were within tolerance thanks to the over-engineered original specs.
Holes and spacing were within tolerance thanks to the over-engineered original specs.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 464
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vapilot2004
The bits in question where inspected and signed off by the build guys.
Originally Posted by vapilot2004
Holes and spacing were within tolerance thanks to the over-engineered original specs.
... and that doesn't include the infamous rudder actuator problems ...
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 55 North
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A piece of classy SKY reporting!!!! One shot showed one of the doomed Airbus 737's on approach!!!
I particularly liked the comment that a passenger could be sucked out of a gap an inch wide!!!
I'm not surprised Boeing or the FAA wouldn't talk to them. Whatever you say will be reported inaccurately and sensationalised.
A lack of confidence in Boeing? More like a lack of confidence in SKY news reporting. If there is a story here lets have it told dispassionately and with some attention to detail and the facts.
Well done to Capt Moody though. I thought he was very tactful and the consumate professional
I particularly liked the comment that a passenger could be sucked out of a gap an inch wide!!! I'm not surprised Boeing or the FAA wouldn't talk to them. Whatever you say will be reported inaccurately and sensationalised.
A lack of confidence in Boeing? More like a lack of confidence in SKY news reporting. If there is a story here lets have it told dispassionately and with some attention to detail and the facts.
Well done to Capt Moody though. I thought he was very tactful and the consumate professional
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by morroccomole
The quotes from the 'whistle blowers' and 'auditors' tend to discredit the story in my view. They talk of 'bear straps'. The items in question are actually called 'tear straps'.
Actually the items in question are 'Bear Straps' - not to be confused with 'Tear Straps' which serve a different purpose altogether.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bear straps are extra layers of skin, generally around openings (cargo door cut-outs etc.) to transmit loads away from the weakened opening into the rest of the fuselage.
Tear straps are a reinforced doubler on the inside of the fuselage skin, that give a fail-safe area that contains any fatigue cracking.
Tear straps are a reinforced doubler on the inside of the fuselage skin, that give a fail-safe area that contains any fatigue cracking.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I may have found the offending components(s) being peddled through ebay! Won't be long before Sky gets hold of this information so just for the record, I got there first!
http://www.ebay.com.my/viItem?ItemId=300015872322
http://www.ebay.com.my/viItem?ItemId=300015872322
mis-manufactured parts?
I don't think it's uncommon for parts that have been mis-manufactured to have their condition re-assessed for suitability of use.
When drilling or machining so many holes, in anything to do with an aircraft, some mistakes are made; some are recoverable, and some are not.
I would assume it would be uncommon for an airplane to be delivered from manufacture without some form of manufacturing concession, or variation from an intended state (my phrase - not a manufacturers).
Holes in the wrong places are not uncommon. It's the ones without legal concessions that are the problem!
When drilling or machining so many holes, in anything to do with an aircraft, some mistakes are made; some are recoverable, and some are not.
I would assume it would be uncommon for an airplane to be delivered from manufacture without some form of manufacturing concession, or variation from an intended state (my phrase - not a manufacturers).
Holes in the wrong places are not uncommon. It's the ones without legal concessions that are the problem!
Pilots' Pal
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: USA
Age: 63
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Morrocomole,
I thought everyone knows what "bear straps" are
Although a humble avionics man, I even know what freeze plugs are (bet a few are used to cover production mistakes!).
I thought everyone knows what "bear straps" are
Although a humble avionics man, I even know what freeze plugs are (bet a few are used to cover production mistakes!).
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jet II
Bear straps are extra layers of skin, generally around openings (cargo door cut-outs etc.) to transmit loads away from the weakened opening into the rest of the fuselage.
Tear straps are a reinforced doubler on the inside of the fuselage skin, that give a fail-safe area that contains any fatigue cracking.
Tear straps are a reinforced doubler on the inside of the fuselage skin, that give a fail-safe area that contains any fatigue cracking.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by glhcarl
Worked in aircarft structures for over 40 years and I have never heard of "External Doublers" being called "Bear Straps". I learn something new everyday?
who said they were external? - most 737 bear straps are internal - don't know about every other make of aircraft.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SEA (or better PAE)
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello.
All Boeing programs have "bear straps". No, they are not external neither on 37 nor on other programs (47,57,67).
Bear straps were more used on older programs when sheet metal was the preferred forming (ever heard of quintupler?!?!?!)..
Today, with NC machining you can generally avoid layers.
Tears straps were mostly, as explained by JET II, used as a fail-safe parts, therefore used on 37 and 47 programs.
However, since FAA will probably bring the fail-safe criteria back in FARs (in addition to damage tolerance) we can see more of that stuff.
Boeing (or any other) QC report what they see as imperfection (sort of speak). In general it is up to Stress to evaluate and get the final call if the part should be replaced.
I seriously doubt that Stress would accept a problematic part (at least I wouldn't).
Cheers,
All Boeing programs have "bear straps". No, they are not external neither on 37 nor on other programs (47,57,67).
Bear straps were more used on older programs when sheet metal was the preferred forming (ever heard of quintupler?!?!?!)..
Today, with NC machining you can generally avoid layers.
Tears straps were mostly, as explained by JET II, used as a fail-safe parts, therefore used on 37 and 47 programs.
However, since FAA will probably bring the fail-safe criteria back in FARs (in addition to damage tolerance) we can see more of that stuff.
Boeing (or any other) QC report what they see as imperfection (sort of speak). In general it is up to Stress to evaluate and get the final call if the part should be replaced.
I seriously doubt that Stress would accept a problematic part (at least I wouldn't).
Cheers,
