I used to work for Boeing. As soon as I pointed out the SAFETY Flaws (many), I was let go. They even told me "Don't Be So Nitpicking" and asked me to revise the document. IF I was asked to testify in the Congress, I would. Lack of Leadership at Boeing. There are so many Managers .. a Manager has his manager and his manager has another manager to report to. 3 freaking steps to report to 3 different managers. Red Tapes at Boeing !!
It used to be said, "If it isn't a Boeing, I'm not going." Now it is said, "If it is a Boeing, keep your seat belt fastened. You never know if the door plug is properly attached." I worked for a small commuter airline in the early 1980's. I NEVER heard of a plane that was released to fly that had "loose" bolts.
You must have missed the bulletin about lose bolts on Boeing 737 rudder mechanism. Hope I didn't scare you further! Now, where could those other lose or missing bolt be?
Just wondering since this incident happened in US mainland and US airlines.. What would happen if this incident happened in third world country, let's just say Indonesia with Lion Air or Ethiopia... I believe Boeing will just accuse lack of maintenance and improper handling...
Maybe with other faults. But not this one. These plugs are installed by Boeing and are never touched by maintenance crew. You can't even access them unless you rip out the permanent interior panels.
Quality out of control. I would question the integrity of the remainder of the entire aircraft. There are probably thousands of other loose bolts throughout the structure.
Typical corporate bullcrap pretending to empathize. CEO if had any intention to improve processes after last 2 major incidents would have set stricter and highest possible standards in manufacturing and maintenance. Plus take training customer staff throughly.
I would never fly on boeing. It’s a cultural problem of profit before people. No way is your life worth it for these guys, I’ll drive around the nation thanks.
@@JohnSmith-yv6eqI tip my hat to Europe. The EU is the only one willing to regulate companies and stick it to them. Here in America we need to take notes.
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq To a large extent the shareholders are the masses. If you own a mutual fund or a 401K then you are a shareholder. So, that makes you one of those people who wants Boeing to build more airplanes in a shorter period of time so you can make more money.
@@Mr_Beans1900 boeing is used so much by European companies. In fact one of the biggest boeing operators in the world is Ryanair and it amazingly has a clean safety record with no crashes and they fly so much
Team of Boeing's best engineers determined that even with the panoramic view, the plane still had perfect structural integrity but the passenger's nerves were shattered beyond repair.
The plane was OK, but the mental health of all aboard will never be the same. Living with Mental health problems is horrific. I would never wish that on anyone. Think of the kid that lost his shirt or the mom that held him so he wouldn't fly out of the plane. That kid got 60 or 70 more years of their life. So sad.
Time to retire this plane for a new model (ie repackaging under the 777 digital manufacturing process and QA digital (photo imagery archiving ) and introducing the 800 line.
Normally the doors slide into roller bearings,. Because these are plugs, not doors, they put a bolt through each point where the plug. slides onto a roller bearing. It's about 8 or 10. The bolts would prevent the plug from moving during turbulence a possible coming out. You are correct, the bolts should have been wired, or in this case, split pins, (Sometimes incorrectly called cotter-pins.) Now, if the bolts were correctly installed and fitted with pins, it is impossible for all the split pins to fail and the bolts come lose after ten weeks in service or even in the life of the aircraft. Even if the split pins were all missing, but the bolts were tight, it wouldn't come out Something has gone seriously wrong at Boeing.
@@ThatBoomerDude56 That is a very valid point. I would try to put your mind at rest by saying that there is tighter quality control at that stage. These doors had already been fitted but then removed during the interior fit out. I assume to aid access. They are then refitted after the interior is installed. The problem seems to be the quality control at the interior stage, not the manufacturing stage. Edit: You have just made me think, what if they weren't removed during the interior fit and so fitted back with bolts and pins? What if they were in the transportation stage, ie; no bolts.
CBS, great job and professional journalism research. You properly used the term, "door plug". It is not a "plug door". That is an often misused term. Refreshing journalism. Great job!
@@gorillaau I thought the same. Should be a "Door", with the usual door locking mechanism, with the release handle removed and a double securing bolt to prevent rotation of the mechanism.
At any given time there is over 6500 Planes above the US on a busy day!! The Max series has almost 7 million hours of flight time!! Don't get carried away- they will fix this issue!!
@@brandonbrown4819 They're dangerously close to a boycott in countries though. There has been too many problems, one after another, with these Boeing planes the last couple of years. Not to mention the ex-employees speaking out about the sloppy standards in manufacturing, which is evident to anyone at this point.
@@Joppi1992 Well we will have to see- there is almost 1500 flying, and 5000 or more on backorder!! It saddens me because the original MCAS disaster that killed so many, and this Door plug issue were factors that Boeing had complete operational control over to get it right!! MCAS now with two sensors is no longer a problem, but this plug issue was the last thing they needed. 2024 was supposed to be their turn around year for a return to profitability!!
@@Joppi1992those problems are miniscule or extremely rare when looking from the perspective of beoing flights in general. They simply don't crash. For example dreamliners are the safest Air craft out there with zero crashes.
@@dreamthedream8929 And the dreamliners are from 15 years ago. Meanwhile, the relatively new aircrafts being pumped out from Boeing, are causing fatal incidents or what could've been fatal incidents if not for sheer luck. But sure, Boeing got lots of past laurels. Their record the last couple of years though, not that great.
They've been using door plugs like this for years on many different airplanes and this is the first time one has blown out. If you install them correctly, which means putting in all the necessary hardware, then they won't blow out. In this case it appears that the four bolts that hold the door plug down to hold it in place were not installed. This boils down to some sort of process problem at Boeing, not the design of the door plug.
You don't have to have any maintenance experience to know what a simple job installing this door plug and four bolts is. If they can't get that right, what are they going to do with the difficult stuff.
They may have to go to a system on critical installs- that the mech has his work signed off by two RII inspectors- at least until they get a handle on this problem!!
Well the wiring for a "loose door" sensor is right there... in case an emergency exit is installed later in the life of the aircraft. So maybe a sensor can be installed to connect to that wiring???
you mast have a maintenance experience to conduct this "simple" task, maintenance experience and be aware of wath are you doing and what could happen if you do it improper. This is called aviation culture and you have to be trained to get it. MCAS is a clarly example of lack of aviation culture Ciao.
What else is wrong with the aircraft? They’re now finding the same problems on older planes this doesn’t look good at all. The aviation authorities ought to strip one of these planes down nut and bolt by nut and bolt. They found this problem because of the very near catastrophic accident What’s next find another problem after two or three aircraft have come down If there’s problems on the assembly line or the production line, it needs to be sorted now before anyone else dies Perhaps Bowen ought to start working for the travelling public rather than their shareholders
I’m surprised a plug wouldn’t be designed to seat with cabin pressure. For something that needs to be opened periodically pulling the plug into the airframe wouldn’t make sense but if not why not make it so that it would seat even with no hardware installed, like a boiler door.
It IS designed to seat with cabin pressure. If the door was positioned correctly at takeoff (when there is no differential air pressure) then there is no way that anything is going to shift the door out of position once the aircraft is at a few thousand feet altitude with the cabin air pressurised. The problem is that before the flight started, when the aircraft was on the ground, the door was already lifted up about 20mm from its fully closed position so that the 12 lugs on the door plug are way out of alignment with the 12 lugs on the door frame, so the door was barely hanging on and 6 minutes into the flight the lugs slipped past each other allowing the door plug to blow out. You may have seen Jennifer from NTSB illustrating her "high five" analogy of the door lugs being in alignment or not. I'd say the lugs are more like a clenched fist going into a cupped hand. (Not two flat surfaces). So long as the fist is no more than say 40% out of alignment with the cupped hand then if it moves at all when force is applied to it then the movement can only be towards better alignment. That is what the situation has been on the millions of flights on Boeing aircraft that have this type of lug system on their doors. However, before the start of this flight where this plug door was already lifted by about 20mm before takeoff, so the 12 pairs of lugs are all about 80% uncentered with each other, the centre of the dome of the fist is already outside the edge of the cupped hand. Increasing force from the differential air pressure is now certainly not going to make the fist self centre in he cupped hand, it's going to make the domed fist slip off the edge of the cupped hand. This plug is using the same door frame fittings (12 frame lugs, 2 bottom edge hinge tubes, 2 guide rollers) that an emergency exit door would use. It would be regarded as a significant disadvantage in an emergency exit door design for it to have to be opened inwards. In an emergency, if you have 100 people pushing into the exit door area they will NEVER be able to open a true plug door that you suggest, where the inside of the door is truely bigger than the outside hole in the aircraft. Obviously the cabin crew try to keep passengers seated while they decide what doors are safe to open and actually open them. This worked fairly well for Japan Airlines but I certainly wouldn't count on things always going like that. The 12 lug design is a very good solution to all the different design requirements. This is a problem of quality control, far more than one of design. Your door that's bigger than the hole can have a weakness due to quality control. You will never create a design that can't fail due to poor quality control.
@@alexanderSydneyOz Hi, I didn't see it anywhere. It's something that must be the case! The force of the cabin air pressure pushing against the inside of the door plug is resisted by 12 pins on lugs at the sides of the door which push against 12 pads that are on lugs fixed to the door frame. The pins have a slightly domed end and the pads have a slightly concave surface. At 15,000ft with normal cabin pressurisation, each of these pins will be pressing against its matching pad with a force of about 400 pounds. If the domed pin is practically anywhere on the concave surface of the pad, then the pressure will make the pin want to move towards the center of the pad. If you tried to open an Boeing emergency exit at that altitude (or higher) you would be trying to slide 12 of these domed pins away from the centre of their pads while each of those pins is pushing against its concave pad with 400 pounds force which is strongly making the pin move to the centre of the pad. You will get nowhere in attempting to open such a door. However, if before cabin pressurisation starts, the door is slightly raised (guess about 20mm), the 12 door pins are right on the edge of the 12 pad so the centre of the domes are just touching the edge of the pads. As the domed end of the pin is no longer on the concave part of the pad there will be no tendency for the pin to move towards the centre of the pad. Basically, as the aircraft climbs and the differential pressure on the door increases, each of the 12 pins is balancing on the edge of the pad. (You might say balancing on a knife edge). It just takes a jolt from turbulence or just reaching a high enough altitude for the pins to slip of the edge of the pads and bang, the door has blasted open. If the door hadn't been lifted that 20mm or so, before pressurisation starts there is no way it could be opened once the cabin is pressurised.
@@alexanderSydneyOz Hi, I didn't see it anywhere. It's something that must be the case! The force of the cabin air pressure pushing against the inside of the door plug is resisted by 12 pins on lugs at the sides of the door which push against 12 pads that are on lugs fixed to the door frame. The pins have a slightly domed end and the pads have a slightly concave surface. At 15,000ft with normal cabin pressurisation, each of these pins will be pressing against its matching pad with a force of about 400 pounds. If the domed pin is practically anywhere on the concave surface of the pad, then the pressure will make the pin want to move towards the center of the pad. If you tried to open an Boeing emergency exit at that altitude (or higher) you would be trying to slide 12 of these domed pins away from the centre of their pads while each of those pins is pushing against its concave pad with 400 pounds force which is strongly making the pin move to the centre of the pad. You will get nowhere in attempting to open such a door. However, if before cabin pressurisation starts, the door is slightly raised (guess about 20mm), the 12 door pins are right on the edge of the 12 pads, so the centre of the domes are just touching the edge of the pads. As the domed end of the pin is no longer on the concave part of the pad there will be no tendency for the pin to move towards the centre of the pad. Basically, as the aircraft climbs and the differential pressure on the door increases, each of the 12 pins is balancing on the edge of the pad. (You might say balancing on a knife edge). It just takes a jolt from turbulence or just reaching a high enough altitude for the pins to slip of the edge of the pads and bang, the door has blasted open. If the door hadn't been lifted that 20mm or so, before pressurisation starts there is no way it could be opened once the cabin is pressurised.
@@alexanderSydneyOz Hi, I didn't see it anywhere. It's something that must be the case! The force of the cabin air pressure pushing against the inside of the door plug is resisted by 12 pins on lugs at the sides of the door which push against 12 pads that are on lugs fixed to the door frame. The pins have a slightly domed end and the pads have a slightly concave surface. At 15,000ft with normal cabin pressurisation, each of these pins will be pressing against its matching pad with a force of about 400 pounds. If the domed pin is practically anywhere on the concave surface of the pad, then the pressure will make the pin want to move towards the center of the pad. If you tried to open an Boeing emergency exit at that altitude (or higher) you would be trying to slide 12 of these domed pins away from the centre of their pads while each of those pins is pushing against its concave pad with 400 pounds force which is strongly making the pin move to the centre of the pad. You will get nowhere in attempting to open such a door. However, if before cabin pressurisation starts, the door is slightly raised (guess about 20mm), the 12 door pins are right on the edge of the 12 pads, so the centre of the domes are just touching the edge of the pads. As the domed end of the pin is no longer on the concave part of the pad there will be no tendency for the pin to move towards the centre of the pad. Basically, as the aircraft climbs and the differential pressure on the door increases, each of the 12 pins is balancing on the edge of the pad. (You might say balancing on a knife edge). It just takes a jolt from turbulence or just reaching a high enough altitude for the pins to slip of the edge of the pads and bang, the door has blasted open. If the door hadn't been lifted that 20mm or so, before pressurisation starts there is no way it could be opened once the cabin is pressurised.
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq if I was Boeing- for any critical installs/maint- I would have two Inspectors RII the work of any mech! At least for a couple of years!!
Boeing must be cursing the day Airbus fit new engines on the A320 Neo, which took them down the road of taking short cuts and rushing the Max 8 production
A friend sent me a photo of a bathroom and it had been teepeed, toilet paper everywhere, hanging off of walls, captioned: grown men work here. I can’t agree everyone at Boeing is incompetent, but when people don’t have etiquette for the restroom, I question what kind of people are working on these planes
Defective and shoddy work at Boeing is no suprise to anyone. Back in 2019 a report of the Boeings South Carolina plant "The paper said a review of "hundreds of pages of internal emails, corporate documents and federal records," as well as interviews with more than a dozen current and former employees of the North Charleston plant, revealed "a culture that often valued production speed over quality." According to the paper, plant employees described defective manufacturing, debris left on planes and pressure to not report violations across "nearly a dozen whistle-blower claims and safety complaints" filed with federal regulators."
Incompetence on all levels. FAA have shown incompetence since they have not picked up on this. FAA are even so incompetent that they have stuck with the 2 hour rule for CVRs when the rest of the world use 25 hours. Boeing have shown incompetence is failing to assemble and secure these plug doors correctly. Last time, a lot of innocent people lost their lives because of the incompetence of Boeing and FAA. Nobody went to jail for that. This time, nobody died and as usual, nobody will be held accountable. It's just so typical American. It seems cowardice is a national treasure in America.
The door plug was simply not installed properly. Someone forgot to do something. This is not unheard of, but there should be a detailed checklist and a double check of each detail that someone signs off on.
The corporate culture at Boeing is counter productive to building safe aircraft. My son is set to travel in July. I’m already ruling out any airline who uses Boeing equipment. This is very sad to see. I used to be such a Boeing fan.
The Boeing plant in Renton turns out 31 737's every month and they want to increase that to 38/month. MORE PRODUCTION! FASTER! MORE AIRPLANES!!....and then? MORE MISTAKES!!
Thank god the door held on the previous flights, and didn’t hold on to 30-35,000 feet on this flight and blew at 16,000 feet. This will have been way, way worse if it blew at cruising altitude.
I’ve actually looked into the designs and fittings of these plug doors. They are meant to have bolts AND cotter pins to secure the plug door. They are saying “loose bolts” so that would imply the cotter pins were missing entirely. You simply couldn’t install the cotter pins, if the bolts were loose.
So much misinformation from those who don’t understand fastener types. It is not unusual for castle nuts with cotter pins to be “loose” - that is by design. My guess is the real problem is missing fasteners, not loose fasteners.
I agree. Looking at the photos, I would imagine the castle nuts to be lightly torqued (though not loose in the usual sense), but the cotter pins, *if in place* 100% prevent the nuts coming off. Which would prevent the bolt coming out, and door flying off. I note that *which* bolts UA and Alaska have found to be "loose" is unclear, and what exactly that means. Possibly nothing more than 'not torqued to spec'. Elsewhere it was reported that the "loose bolts" were not the same ones that lock the door in a vertical position anyway, in which case it is irrelevant. Yet, the desire to sensationalise news leads to swathes of stories about 'loose bolts' as if that is significant for this incident.
@@alexanderSydneyOz you’re quite right. It could be something as simple as not torqued to spec, whilst is an issue, it may not be related to this issue of the plug door. Regardless, some serious event has occurred, that very, very easily have put lives in danger. Thank god it was only at 16,000ft and it was just a large decompression. At 35,000ft, it could have been so much worse.
@@jdmather5755 as someone else said in these replies, these “loose bolts” could be anywhere on the aircraft. As you say, the missing fasteners are likely the issue. It will be very interesting at the results of the investigation.
Also Boeing admitted that they omitted from the manual that the entire Cockpit door was designed to swing open in a depressurizing event. (The cockpit door slammed open and was stuck wedging the lavatory shut. After the MCAST crashes Boeing was on notice to never omit anything from the manual again. The fact that they again omitted from the manual shows systemic issues & everything needs to be looked at. We also know the Boeing employees have been quitting and blowing the whistle for years over QC/Safety issues.
If it was just the one I'd be thinking it's the team that plugged it but the fact there is 5 more planes with loose fittings now just makes me think that the process is bad and that it wasn't a mistake that led to it. Maybe not good enough bolts, maybe not enough lock tight in the process or such. I doubt the same person/team made all 5
I have a question for an aviation person. Why not make these door plugs, actual real plug doors so there is no way for one of these plugs to blow out, instead the internal pressure presses the plug more firmly into the airframe? Edited to reflect rhe correct terminology. Hope i have it right now.
You can't design the door plug so that the cabin pressure pushes it into the door frame. There is a reason why the door plug wasn't designed to open inward. Remember that the reason the opening is there in the first place is to accommodate an escape door that has to open outward. As such, the fuselage is designed to accommodate an outward opening door. Therefore, the design of both the door plug and the escape door must be very similar so that both will fit into the same standard opening in the fuselage. If you wanted to make one open inward and the other open outward, you'd need to have two different fuselage designs. The problem here wasn't the design of the door plug. It's a manufacturing error.
Can you imagine if someone at Boeing didn't tighten two or three screws of a fixed door properly, how could a hydraulic system or a tail bar be half-assembled? The door gave way early and its effect on depressurization was enough to alarm other pilots... but what day will something start to fail on a 737Max that doesn't send an alarm?
They have a plane, a door both in good shape .and they canbusses we say ,Japan fixes there problems in two years ,the Germans in seven years ,and the Americans
Has the opinion of those who fly been collected on how they feel about flying again after hearing this report? You'd think with something so important they'd take a bit more care building these things.
As usual all the pilots, Boeing engineers, shuttle engineers etc are in the comments bragging about how long they worked, what they worked on and all just to say that this shouldn't have happened.. STOP BRAGGING 🙄🙄🙄
Airplane doors open inward. Therefore, during a flight at altitude, it is impossible for a person to open it. A huge pressure difference presses the door against the frame. Now Boeing says that the door should fall out during sudden decompression, which is complete nonsense. This is the same jamb as roofing from top to bottom. Some manager took over the engineer's job.
Not all airplane doors open inward. The escape doors have to open outward. These door plugs take the place of an outward opening escape door, so they have to be designed to open outward as well. Otherwise you would need to have two different fuselage designs, one to accomodate an outward opening escape door and another to accomodate an inward opening door plug. The designs of the escape doors and the door plugs are actually very similar. The problem here was that somehow the four bolts that are designed to hold the door plug in place were never installed.
This is all about Risk Management. For example, if an interior item in the plane is secured by six bolts and one bolt missing, this will probably not result in a catastrophic failure. The airframe fuselage and the door plug are life and death components and failure to properly install can result in a catastrophic failure of the aircraft.. I will guarantee you in the written and established assembly process, there is a separation-of-duty function where a person (separate of the initial installer) is tasked to verify the proper securing of the door plug and the torquing of the bolts BEFORE interior panels are put in-place (with signed off checklist). Boeing knows what happen for the plane assembly and has the documents (as these things are audited) internally and externally. The reason the planes are still grounded is likely because a pattern of not following the assembly process has been identified. I think it will all be revealed shortly as the Boeing CEO is hinting the workers must do better and the whistleblowers are saying we tried to warn you but Boeing retaliated against us. While the investigation is underway Boeing is NOT allowed to comment to the press about of the specific of the incident.
I wonder where are the QA photos from the Boeing Smartphone....Before it was a symbol barcode scanner with camera hookup to VOIP telephony line and that was in 2000.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp There are numerous outlets claiming difference as to what secures the door/panel to the fuselage. 1) Some used the term bolt along with torque specifications 2) Others refer to a bolt secured by a Cotter key There is a Internet site with diagrams on the aperture but have not had time to visit.
Just learned the MAX was first plane to switch from STATIC assembly stations, to DYNAMIC assembly as in automobiles, OOPS! It was to speed delivery, and reduce cost. Now look at their stock.
How terrifying is it operating new aircraft with 100's of thousands of parts, most you can't see, just with the hope they are installed correctly. Especially something so simple.
@@dreamthedream8929 your right. Even after incidents over the last few years, I have and will continue to get on any us airline in the future without concern. But if I was a pilot, air crew, even mechanics it would still be in my mind when its not just my life but the hundreds I'm responsible for. Its stuff like that door plug, that would scare me. You say the airlines go over everything, and I feel certain they generally do to the limits of what they can without disassembling them regularly. Short of that, if you a capable and experienced pilot the unknown things that you cannot easily test, they are something you put faith into. But given your level of responsibility, those kind of faith based assumptions will always be a concern. Seeing that understanding and trust broken in such an obviously negligent way will always make you think if they cant do that right, what else is lurking around.
Boeing needs to pinpoint how many single point failure bolts are there in an airplane and they need to be looked at. Do they meet the margin of safety? Are the installation procedures adequate?
Probably not. The old door plug fell 16,000 feet and then hit the ground. The fuselage will need to be inspected for any damage and then they will install a new door plug.
They said 5 other planes were also found to have loose doors in a similar way this is. I don't think it will be down to one individual, rather just the process they follow not being good enough. I wonder how many it would be if they checked everyone around the world.
At this point it’s a terrorist attack.. whoever fixed that door might have been someone that’s been planning this.. went through school for this particular type of work n u never know might’ve been involved in this ..
There have been rumours that along with the fired 900 QA controllers the torque wrenches are no longer being calibrated at set intervals. As always safety costs money. It's the money. Always follow the money.
"Safety is our first priority" is the same as "thoughts and prayers"
Sounds nice, costs nothing and makes no difference.
More like “money is our first priority” 😅
What else is loose or missing?
I used to work for Boeing. As soon as I pointed out the SAFETY Flaws (many), I was let go. They even told me "Don't Be So Nitpicking" and asked me to revise the document. IF I was asked to testify in the Congress, I would. Lack of Leadership at Boeing. There are so many Managers .. a Manager has his manager and his manager has another manager to report to. 3 freaking steps to report to 3 different managers. Red Tapes at Boeing !!
Be prepared to back that up with the original document you submitted..
You did keep a hard copy after all these years didn't you?
It's spelled "nitpicking".
AIR21 Whistleblower Protection Program?
Used to support Boeing until 5 years ago. If it’s Boeing, I ain’t going.
dont lie, u never worked😂😂😂
"When one door closes another door opens!" - Boeing
"A drop in share price isn't the end of the world, I can buy more at a cheaper price" - Boeing institution share holder.
@@gorillaau Breaking news: Boeing stock price soars after Airbus purchases controlling interest.
It used to be said, "If it isn't a Boeing, I'm not going."
Now it is said, "If it is a Boeing, keep your seat belt fastened. You never know if the door plug is properly attached." I worked for a small commuter airline in the early 1980's. I NEVER heard of a plane that was released to fly that had "loose" bolts.
You must have missed the bulletin about lose bolts on Boeing 737 rudder mechanism.
Hope I didn't scare you further!
Now, where could those other lose or missing bolt be?
Boeing seems to have a problem with profit before safety.
Nah, west coast made Marijuana use mandatory, people forget what they are doing when Marijuana is part of their life.
The result of Boeing's "Cost, Schedule, & Shareholder Value over Quality and Safety!
Boeing has Lean manufacturing, continuous improvement, and statistical process control. What could possibly go wrong?
The CEO is a liar.
Just wondering since this incident happened in US mainland and US airlines.. What would happen if this incident happened in third world country, let's just say Indonesia with Lion Air or Ethiopia... I believe Boeing will just accuse lack of maintenance and improper handling...
Maybe with other faults. But not this one. These plugs are installed by Boeing and are never touched by maintenance crew. You can't even access them unless you rip out the permanent interior panels.
I'm not sure about that. The plain is practically new.
They apparently did that in the past after the crashes on the Max 8s
Boeing changed when the headquarters moved out of Washington state.
Not even comparable. At least Apple's HQ is still in Cupertino. Moving across the country to Chicago is an entirely different thing.
Quality out of control. I would question the integrity of the remainder of the entire aircraft. There are probably thousands of other loose bolts throughout the structure.
Typical corporate bullcrap pretending to empathize. CEO if had any intention to improve processes after last 2 major incidents would have set stricter and highest possible standards in manufacturing and maintenance. Plus take training customer staff throughly.
I would never fly on boeing. It’s a cultural problem of profit before people. No way is your life worth it for these guys, I’ll drive around the nation thanks.
It's the American philosophy.
Don't care about the masses..
I need profit for me and my shareholders.
900 QA inspectors fired 2019 to 2021 ??
@@JohnSmith-yv6eqI tip my hat to Europe. The EU is the only one willing to regulate companies and stick it to them. Here in America we need to take notes.
Then your risk of getting killed will 1,000 times more!
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq To a large extent the shareholders are the masses. If you own a mutual fund or a 401K then you are a shareholder. So, that makes you one of those people who wants Boeing to build more airplanes in a shorter period of time so you can make more money.
@@Mr_Beans1900 boeing is used so much by European companies. In fact one of the biggest boeing operators in the world is Ryanair and it amazingly has a clean safety record with no crashes and they fly so much
if this is a typical boeing cost cutting measure, then there would seem to be a good chance it applies to the entire portfolio, not just the max 9.
Possibly. And the "cost cutting" seems to be generally lax quality assurance. So what other components of all the Boeing aircraft are affected?
Team of Boeing's best engineers determined that even with the panoramic view, the plane still had perfect structural integrity but the passenger's nerves were shattered beyond repair.
The plane was OK, but the mental health of all aboard will never be the same. Living with Mental health problems is horrific. I would never wish that on anyone. Think of the kid that lost his shirt or the mom that held him so he wouldn't fly out of the plane. That kid got 60 or 70 more years of their life. So sad.
Not true
Yeah right....of course they would say that. The blind leading the blind.
And what else did the "quality assurance" system fail to notice. That is the real issue and question.
Time to retire this plane for a new model (ie repackaging under the 777 digital manufacturing process and QA digital (photo imagery archiving ) and introducing the 800 line.
Downfall of Boeing documentary, anyone? We know why this happened.
And everyone involved ducking and diving while lawyering up. What a sad world we live in
Who is?
I agree whole heatedly. I blame the Internet for this affect: TMI. I don't want to know how the sausage is made. I miss being blissfully ignorant
They get probably trillions in government contracts and can’t make secure commercial planes?
Big money in military contracts. Commercial stuff, not so much.
Boeing went downhill after buying MacDonnell Douglas...
then all the Boeing executives that knew and practiced excellent Boeing philosophy
left....
Nope, gotta make record breaking profits to please their shareholders. Capitalism is a mess when unregulated.
They have to make up the losses on the new Air Force 1 someplace.
They don’t get trillions in contracts.
I wish they would clarify "loose bolts". These should have safety wire running through them so did they miss the safety wire and the nuts came loose?
buba working night shift forgot to put bolts in , Buba inspector was sleeping
Normally the doors slide into roller bearings,.
Because these are plugs, not doors, they put a bolt through each point where the plug. slides onto a roller bearing. It's about 8 or 10.
The bolts would prevent the plug from moving during turbulence a possible coming out.
You are correct, the bolts should have been wired, or in this case, split pins, (Sometimes incorrectly called cotter-pins.)
Now, if the bolts were correctly installed and fitted with pins, it is impossible for all the split pins to fail and the bolts come lose after ten weeks in service or even in the life of the aircraft.
Even if the split pins were all missing, but the bolts were tight, it wouldn't come out
Something has gone seriously wrong at Boeing.
@@harveysmith100 And the real problem is: If these bolts were installed incorrectly, then what about bolts on the elevators, ailerons, spoilers, etc.?
@@ThatBoomerDude56 That is a very valid point.
I would try to put your mind at rest by saying that there is tighter quality control at that stage.
These doors had already been fitted but then removed during the interior fit out. I assume to aid access.
They are then refitted after the interior is installed. The problem seems to be the quality control at the interior stage, not the manufacturing stage.
Edit: You have just made me think, what if they weren't removed during the interior fit and so fitted back with bolts and pins? What if they were in the transportation stage, ie; no bolts.
Right?!?! I was asking the same thing. They are meant to have cotter pins through them! It isn’t just “loose bolts”. It’s missing fittings.
CBS, great job and professional journalism research. You properly used the term, "door plug". It is not a "plug door". That is an often misused term. Refreshing journalism. Great job!
Easy mistake to make. Perhaps these door plugs should be real plug doors to ensure that they stay confined to the inside surfaces of the the airframe.
Indeed worst I was was a headline saying... Side of fuselage torn off...
@@critical_always That's the neatest tear that I have seen. Some engineers would be proud of that precision.
@@gorillaau
I thought the same.
Should be a "Door", with the usual door locking mechanism, with the release handle removed and a double securing bolt to prevent rotation of the mechanism.
NO BOLTS INSTALLED, PERIOD
bolts r expensive!
Who inspects the plug doors?? My God, who inspects the whole aircraft? Who inspects all Boeing aircraft?
Just one more reason I'll never fly again
At any given time there is over 6500 Planes above the US on a busy day!! The Max series has almost 7 million hours of flight time!! Don't get carried away- they will fix this issue!!
@@brandonbrown4819 They're dangerously close to a boycott in countries though. There has been too many problems, one after another, with these Boeing planes the last couple of years. Not to mention the ex-employees speaking out about the sloppy standards in manufacturing, which is evident to anyone at this point.
@@Joppi1992 Well we will have to see- there is almost 1500 flying, and 5000 or more on backorder!! It saddens me because the original MCAS disaster that killed so many, and this Door plug issue were factors that Boeing had complete operational control over to get it right!! MCAS now with two sensors is no longer a problem, but this plug issue was the last thing they needed. 2024 was supposed to be their turn around year for a return to profitability!!
@@Joppi1992those problems are miniscule or extremely rare when looking from the perspective of beoing flights in general. They simply don't crash. For example dreamliners are the safest Air craft out there with zero crashes.
@@dreamthedream8929 And the dreamliners are from 15 years ago. Meanwhile, the relatively new aircrafts being pumped out from Boeing, are causing fatal incidents or what could've been fatal incidents if not for sheer luck.
But sure, Boeing got lots of past laurels. Their record the last couple of years though, not that great.
Door plugs should be banned. Boeing should be required to replace the panels with welded panels.
They've been using door plugs like this for years on many different airplanes and this is the first time one has blown out. If you install them correctly, which means putting in all the necessary hardware, then they won't blow out. In this case it appears that the four bolts that hold the door plug down to hold it in place were not installed. This boils down to some sort of process problem at Boeing, not the design of the door plug.
You don't have to have any maintenance experience to know what a simple job installing this door plug and four bolts is. If they can't get that right, what are they going to do with the difficult stuff.
They may have to go to a system on critical installs- that the mech has his work signed off by two RII inspectors- at least until they get a handle on this problem!!
someone needs to look into what level of horseplay the night shift is up to again
Maybe they forgot loctite lol
Well the wiring for a "loose door" sensor is right there...
in case an emergency exit is installed later in the life of the aircraft.
So maybe a sensor can be installed to connect to that wiring???
you mast have a maintenance experience to conduct this "simple" task, maintenance experience and be aware of wath are you doing and what could happen if you do it improper. This is called aviation culture and you have to be trained to get it.
MCAS is a clarly example of lack of aviation culture
Ciao.
Another quality product from Boeing!
Switch to airbus.
Its a garbage and a dangerous aircraft model
my god something that can bring down an airplane without a manufacturing redundancy check-off just sounds unbelievable
What else is wrong with the aircraft? They’re now finding the same problems on older planes this doesn’t look good at all. The aviation authorities ought to strip one of these planes down nut and bolt by nut and bolt. They found this problem because of the very near catastrophic accident
What’s next find another problem after two or three aircraft have come down If there’s problems on the assembly line or the production line, it needs to be sorted now before anyone else dies
Perhaps Bowen ought to start working for the travelling public rather than their shareholders
Want to do that to every Tesla on the road because a battery or two have caught fire?
Boeing is Building JUNK Max Planes ✈️ .
I’m surprised a plug wouldn’t be designed to seat with cabin pressure. For something that needs to be opened periodically pulling the plug into the airframe wouldn’t make sense but if not why not make it so that it would seat even with no hardware installed, like a boiler door.
It IS designed to seat with cabin pressure. If the door was positioned correctly at takeoff (when there is no differential air pressure) then there is no way that anything is going to shift the door out of position once the aircraft is at a few thousand feet altitude with the cabin air pressurised.
The problem is that before the flight started, when the aircraft was on the ground, the door was already lifted up about 20mm from its fully closed position so that the 12 lugs on the door plug are way out of alignment with the 12 lugs on the door frame, so the door was barely hanging on and 6 minutes into the flight the lugs slipped past each other allowing the door plug to blow out.
You may have seen Jennifer from NTSB illustrating her "high five" analogy of the door lugs being in alignment or not. I'd say the lugs are more like a clenched fist going into a cupped hand. (Not two flat surfaces). So long as the fist is no more than say 40% out of alignment with the cupped hand then if it moves at all when force is applied to it then the movement can only be towards better alignment. That is what the situation has been on the millions of flights on Boeing aircraft that have this type of lug system on their doors.
However, before the start of this flight where this plug door was already lifted by about 20mm before takeoff, so the 12 pairs of lugs are all about 80% uncentered with each other, the centre of the dome of the fist is already outside the edge of the cupped hand. Increasing force from the differential air pressure is now certainly not going to make the fist self centre in he cupped hand, it's going to make the domed fist slip off the edge of the cupped hand.
This plug is using the same door frame fittings (12 frame lugs, 2 bottom edge hinge tubes, 2 guide rollers) that an emergency exit door would use. It would be regarded as a significant disadvantage in an emergency exit door design for it to have to be opened inwards. In an emergency, if you have 100 people pushing into the exit door area they will NEVER be able to open a true plug door that you suggest, where the inside of the door is truely bigger than the outside hole in the aircraft. Obviously the cabin crew try to keep passengers seated while they decide what doors are safe to open and actually open them. This worked fairly well for Japan Airlines but I certainly wouldn't count on things always going like that.
The 12 lug design is a very good solution to all the different design requirements.
This is a problem of quality control, far more than one of design. Your door that's bigger than the hole can have a weakness due to quality control. You will never create a design that can't fail due to poor quality control.
@@alanm8932 Hi. Where did you see it said the door was already out of position prior take off? thanks
@@alexanderSydneyOz Hi, I didn't see it anywhere. It's something that must be the case!
The force of the cabin air pressure pushing against the inside of the door plug is resisted by 12 pins on lugs at the sides of the door which push against 12 pads that are on lugs fixed to the door frame. The pins have a slightly domed end and the pads have a slightly concave surface. At 15,000ft with normal cabin pressurisation, each of these pins will be pressing against its matching pad with a force of about 400 pounds. If the domed pin is practically anywhere on the concave surface of the pad, then the pressure will make the pin want to move towards the center of the pad. If you tried to open an Boeing emergency exit at that altitude (or higher) you would be trying to slide 12 of these domed pins away from the centre of their pads while each of those pins is pushing against its concave pad with 400 pounds force which is strongly making the pin move to the centre of the pad. You will get nowhere in attempting to open such a door.
However, if before cabin pressurisation starts, the door is slightly raised (guess about 20mm), the 12 door pins are right on the edge of the 12 pad so the centre of the domes are just touching the edge of the pads. As the domed end of the pin is no longer on the concave part of the pad there will be no tendency for the pin to move towards the centre of the pad. Basically, as the aircraft climbs and the differential pressure on the door increases, each of the 12 pins is balancing on the edge of the pad. (You might say balancing on a knife edge). It just takes a jolt from turbulence or just reaching a high enough altitude for the pins to slip of the edge of the pads and bang, the door has blasted open.
If the door hadn't been lifted that 20mm or so, before pressurisation starts there is no way it could be opened once the cabin is pressurised.
@@alexanderSydneyOz Hi, I didn't see it anywhere. It's something that must be the case!
The force of the cabin air pressure pushing against the inside of the door plug is resisted by 12 pins on lugs at the sides of the door which push against 12 pads that are on lugs fixed to the door frame. The pins have a slightly domed end and the pads have a slightly concave surface. At 15,000ft with normal cabin pressurisation, each of these pins will be pressing against its matching pad with a force of about 400 pounds. If the domed pin is practically anywhere on the concave surface of the pad, then the pressure will make the pin want to move towards the center of the pad. If you tried to open an Boeing emergency exit at that altitude (or higher) you would be trying to slide 12 of these domed pins away from the centre of their pads while each of those pins is pushing against its concave pad with 400 pounds force which is strongly making the pin move to the centre of the pad. You will get nowhere in attempting to open such a door.
However, if before cabin pressurisation starts, the door is slightly raised (guess about 20mm), the 12 door pins are right on the edge of the 12 pads, so the centre of the domes are just touching the edge of the pads. As the domed end of the pin is no longer on the concave part of the pad there will be no tendency for the pin to move towards the centre of the pad. Basically, as the aircraft climbs and the differential pressure on the door increases, each of the 12 pins is balancing on the edge of the pad. (You might say balancing on a knife edge). It just takes a jolt from turbulence or just reaching a high enough altitude for the pins to slip of the edge of the pads and bang, the door has blasted open.
If the door hadn't been lifted that 20mm or so, before pressurisation starts there is no way it could be opened once the cabin is pressurised.
@@alexanderSydneyOz Hi, I didn't see it anywhere. It's something that must be the case!
The force of the cabin air pressure pushing against the inside of the door plug is resisted by 12 pins on lugs at the sides of the door which push against 12 pads that are on lugs fixed to the door frame. The pins have a slightly domed end and the pads have a slightly concave surface. At 15,000ft with normal cabin pressurisation, each of these pins will be pressing against its matching pad with a force of about 400 pounds. If the domed pin is practically anywhere on the concave surface of the pad, then the pressure will make the pin want to move towards the center of the pad. If you tried to open an Boeing emergency exit at that altitude (or higher) you would be trying to slide 12 of these domed pins away from the centre of their pads while each of those pins is pushing against its concave pad with 400 pounds force which is strongly making the pin move to the centre of the pad. You will get nowhere in attempting to open such a door.
However, if before cabin pressurisation starts, the door is slightly raised (guess about 20mm), the 12 door pins are right on the edge of the 12 pads, so the centre of the domes are just touching the edge of the pads. As the domed end of the pin is no longer on the concave part of the pad there will be no tendency for the pin to move towards the centre of the pad. Basically, as the aircraft climbs and the differential pressure on the door increases, each of the 12 pins is balancing on the edge of the pad. (You might say balancing on a knife edge). It just takes a jolt from turbulence or just reaching a high enough altitude for the pins to slip of the edge of the pads and bang, the door has blasted open.
If the door hadn't been lifted that 20mm or so, before pressurisation starts there is no way it could be opened once the cabin is pressurised.
They had to know days ago- the mech who installed the plug, and the Inspector who RII the work!!
Of course they do.
They are now arguing about who will pay and how much
plus who will supervise all the inspections???
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq if I was Boeing- for any critical installs/maint- I would have two Inspectors RII the work of any mech! At least for a couple of years!!
Welcome to capitalism. Profits above anything.
Boeing must be cursing the day Airbus fit new engines on the A320 Neo, which took them down the road of taking short cuts and rushing the Max 8 production
Just saw an old video titled "How Boeing Builds a 737 Plane in Just 9 Days," it's pretty interesting to see the manufacturing process.
Why should boeing not maintain video images of contents of interior space before the space is closed up with pic of mechanic and date. and time.
They have checklists of exactly that.
They are arguing with the NTSB, FAA, Govt and the airlines who is paying for what and who cops the blame...
If it's Boeing, I ain't flying 😁
ain't going...
Untill Scarebus has an issue with their planes.
I still can't get over how stupid boeing is, or the people in it
A friend sent me a photo of a bathroom and it had been teepeed, toilet paper everywhere, hanging off of walls, captioned: grown men work here. I can’t agree everyone at Boeing is incompetent, but when people don’t have etiquette for the restroom, I question what kind of people are working on these planes
Defective and shoddy work at Boeing is no suprise to anyone. Back in 2019 a report of the Boeings South Carolina plant
"The paper said a review of "hundreds of pages of internal emails, corporate documents and federal records," as well as interviews with more than a dozen current and former employees of the North Charleston plant, revealed "a culture that often valued production speed over quality." According to the paper, plant employees described defective manufacturing, debris left on planes and pressure to not report violations across "nearly a dozen whistle-blower claims and safety complaints" filed with federal regulators."
Incompetence on all levels.
FAA have shown incompetence since they have not picked up on this. FAA are even so incompetent that they have stuck with the 2 hour rule for CVRs when the rest of the world use 25 hours.
Boeing have shown incompetence is failing to assemble and secure these plug doors correctly.
Last time, a lot of innocent people lost their lives because of the incompetence of Boeing and FAA. Nobody went to jail for that.
This time, nobody died and as usual, nobody will be held accountable.
It's just so typical American. It seems cowardice is a national treasure in America.
They always seem to get away with it don't they?
The door plug was simply not installed properly. Someone forgot to do something.
This is not unheard of, but there should be a detailed checklist and a double check of each detail that someone signs off on.
There is a similar door plug on the other side of the plane across the aisle. Did anyone open it up to see the contents of the unfailed door plug.
no way. pencil pushing accountants wont approve the expense!
It’s already in the preliminary findings.
I'm sure they have. That would be the most obvious second step to investigating this incident.
There’s only one solution to this problem, raise taxes.
In Seattle it's pronounced "Boings"
The corporate culture at Boeing is counter productive to building safe aircraft. My son is set to travel in July. I’m already ruling out any airline who uses Boeing equipment. This is very sad to see. I used to be such a Boeing fan.
That door that came off could have hit the which probably would have led to a crash. Besides being swept out, they are vey lucky.
Tail control surfaces?
Explosive ejection from the aircraft would have sent the plug out quite a distance?
Do any of you realize how many Boeing aircraft take off and land safely all over the world every single day??
What other aircraft has this much reputation to crash ?
Boieng is responsible - Simple
Wonder if Boeing shortcuts affect military planes?
apparently one of the military jets based off the 737 had similar issues.
The Poseidon Adventure....oh wait...
@@Wha2les
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq yea that one.
I’m sure. If they’re penny pinching in one department they’re penny pinching in others
Boeing used to be such a rock solid company. The merger with mcd just destroyed that all.
Looks like the bean counters have full control over Boeing now and not the engineers.
The shareholders control the bean counters and the bean counters control both the engineers and the production workers.
The Boeing plant in Renton turns out 31 737's every month and they want to increase that to 38/month. MORE PRODUCTION! FASTER! MORE AIRPLANES!!....and then? MORE MISTAKES!!
Thank god the door held on the previous flights, and didn’t hold on to 30-35,000 feet on this flight and blew at 16,000 feet. This will have been way, way worse if it blew at cruising altitude.
If this was missed during production, what else have they missed that's yet to show up . Let's hope anything else missed doesn't take more lives.
I’ve actually looked into the designs and fittings of these plug doors. They are meant to have bolts AND cotter pins to secure the plug door. They are saying “loose bolts” so that would imply the cotter pins were missing entirely. You simply couldn’t install the cotter pins, if the bolts were loose.
When you say cotter pin - is that a tapered pin - or do you mean a split pin ?
So much misinformation from those who don’t understand fastener types. It is not unusual for castle nuts with cotter pins to be “loose” - that is by design. My guess is the real problem is missing fasteners, not loose fasteners.
I agree. Looking at the photos, I would imagine the castle nuts to be lightly torqued (though not loose in the usual sense), but the cotter pins, *if in place* 100% prevent the nuts coming off. Which would prevent the bolt coming out, and door flying off.
I note that *which* bolts UA and Alaska have found to be "loose" is unclear, and what exactly that means. Possibly nothing more than 'not torqued to spec'. Elsewhere it was reported that the "loose bolts" were not the same ones that lock the door in a vertical position anyway, in which case it is irrelevant.
Yet, the desire to sensationalise news leads to swathes of stories about 'loose bolts' as if that is significant for this incident.
@@alexanderSydneyOz you’re quite right. It could be something as simple as not torqued to spec, whilst is an issue, it may not be related to this issue of the plug door. Regardless, some serious event has occurred, that very, very easily have put lives in danger. Thank god it was only at 16,000ft and it was just a large decompression. At 35,000ft, it could have been so much worse.
@@jdmather5755 as someone else said in these replies, these “loose bolts” could be anywhere on the aircraft. As you say, the missing fasteners are likely the issue. It will be very interesting at the results of the investigation.
Hot tip: I just spotted a AD for Torque wrenches 1/2 off at Harbor Fright this weekend. Just saying.
Also Boeing admitted that they omitted from the manual that the entire Cockpit door was designed to swing open in a depressurizing event. (The cockpit door slammed open and was stuck wedging the lavatory shut. After the MCAST crashes Boeing was on notice to never omit anything from the manual again. The fact that they again omitted from the manual shows systemic issues & everything needs to be looked at. We also know the Boeing employees have been quitting and blowing the whistle for years over QC/Safety issues.
If it was just the one I'd be thinking it's the team that plugged it but the fact there is 5 more planes with loose fittings now just makes me think that the process is bad and that it wasn't a mistake that led to it. Maybe not good enough bolts, maybe not enough lock tight in the process or such. I doubt the same person/team made all 5
I have a question for an aviation person. Why not make these door plugs, actual real plug doors so there is no way for one of these plugs to blow out, instead the internal pressure presses the plug more firmly into the airframe?
Edited to reflect rhe correct terminology. Hope i have it right now.
Weight and cost
@@critical_always That sounds very plausible. Let see what this grounding costs Boeing and the airlines.
You can't design the door plug so that the cabin pressure pushes it into the door frame. There is a reason why the door plug wasn't designed to open inward. Remember that the reason the opening is there in the first place is to accommodate an escape door that has to open outward. As such, the fuselage is designed to accommodate an outward opening door. Therefore, the design of both the door plug and the escape door must be very similar so that both will fit into the same standard opening in the fuselage. If you wanted to make one open inward and the other open outward, you'd need to have two different fuselage designs. The problem here wasn't the design of the door plug. It's a manufacturing error.
the bolts and stop fittings are clearly an insufficient design for “permanent closure”
Lucky this door plug did not hit and damage the vertical stabilizer. It would end in a crash 100%.
Can you imagine if someone at Boeing didn't tighten two or three screws of a fixed door properly, how could a hydraulic system or a tail bar be half-assembled? The door gave way early and its effect on depressurization was enough to alarm other pilots... but what day will something start to fail on a 737Max that doesn't send an alarm?
Late stage capitalism. Great work!
Is the mom ok?
If it's a Boeing, I aint going.
Engineer: bolts, what bolts?? We never use them anyway.... We use pieces of cardboard, so much cheaper.
The 777 was the last good plane built by Boeing.
And dreamliner with a clean safety record, never has had a crash in all of its operational history
They have a plane, a door both in good shape .and they canbusses we say ,Japan fixes there problems in two years ,the Germans in seven years ,and the Americans
Is not about the 737s is about Boeing. How can you keep trusting Boeing.
I just fixed my Cadillac door listening to Drake
I’m certain this had nothing to do with affirmative action at the factory…
Has the opinion of those who fly been collected on how they feel about flying again after hearing this report?
You'd think with something so important they'd take a bit more care building these things.
Family Guy predicted the future to this
As usual all the pilots, Boeing engineers, shuttle engineers etc are in the comments bragging about how long they worked, what they worked on and all just to say that this shouldn't have happened.. STOP BRAGGING 🙄🙄🙄
Airplane doors open inward. Therefore, during a flight at altitude, it is impossible for a person to open it. A huge pressure difference presses the door against the frame. Now Boeing says that the door should fall out during sudden decompression, which is complete nonsense. This is the same jamb as roofing from top to bottom. Some manager took over the engineer's job.
Not all airplane doors open inward. The escape doors have to open outward. These door plugs take the place of an outward opening escape door, so they have to be designed to open outward as well. Otherwise you would need to have two different fuselage designs, one to accomodate an outward opening escape door and another to accomodate an inward opening door plug. The designs of the escape doors and the door plugs are actually very similar. The problem here was that somehow the four bolts that are designed to hold the door plug in place were never installed.
@@joevignolor4u949 completely agree with all of that
This is all about Risk Management. For example, if an interior item in the plane is secured by six bolts and one bolt missing, this will probably not result in a catastrophic failure. The airframe fuselage and the door plug are life and death components and failure to properly install can result in a catastrophic failure of the aircraft.. I will guarantee you in the written and established assembly process, there is a separation-of-duty function where a person (separate of the initial installer) is tasked to verify the proper securing of the door plug and the torquing of the bolts BEFORE interior panels are put in-place (with signed off checklist).
Boeing knows what happen for the plane assembly and has the documents (as these things are audited) internally and externally. The reason the planes are still grounded is likely because a pattern of not following the assembly process has been identified. I think it will all be revealed shortly as the Boeing CEO is hinting the workers must do better and the whistleblowers are saying we tried to warn you but Boeing retaliated against us. While the investigation is underway Boeing is NOT allowed to comment to the press about of the specific of the incident.
These bolts are not torq'd. Finger tight is OK, as long as the split pin is done properly.
I wonder where are the QA photos from the Boeing Smartphone....Before it was a symbol barcode scanner with camera hookup to VOIP telephony line and that was in 2000.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp There are numerous outlets claiming difference as to what secures the door/panel to the fuselage.
1) Some used the term bolt along with torque specifications
2) Others refer to a bolt secured by a Cotter key
There is a Internet site with diagrams on the aperture but have not had time to visit.
Duct tape and plastic wrap looks like a good fix for an airplane. Lol
Just learned the MAX was first plane to switch from STATIC assembly stations, to DYNAMIC assembly as in automobiles, OOPS!
It was to speed delivery, and reduce cost. Now look at their stock.
Culture problem. More failures are coming.
Boeing needs to go back to school and learn about greed
Add another reason on the pile to make C suite face jail time when this kind of crap happens
How terrifying is it operating new aircraft with 100's of thousands of parts, most you can't see, just with the hope they are installed correctly. Especially something so simple.
I means it's not like that, they don't worry because before starting work with an airline company they go through all sorts of testing
@@dreamthedream8929 your right. Even after incidents over the last few years, I have and will continue to get on any us airline in the future without concern. But if I was a pilot, air crew, even mechanics it would still be in my mind when its not just my life but the hundreds I'm responsible for. Its stuff like that door plug, that would scare me. You say the airlines go over everything, and I feel certain they generally do to the limits of what they can without disassembling them regularly. Short of that, if you a capable and experienced pilot the unknown things that you cannot easily test, they are something you put faith into. But given your level of responsibility, those kind of faith based assumptions will always be a concern. Seeing that understanding and trust broken in such an obviously negligent way will always make you think if they cant do that right, what else is lurking around.
Boeing needs to pinpoint how many single point failure bolts are there in an airplane and they need to be looked at. Do they meet the margin of safety? Are the installation procedures adequate?
Boeing: fly fast, inside and outside....!
It's more about making more money. Not about safety, so they cute corners where they can. Your safety doesn't matter profits do.
Boeing won't do much since the plane didn't crash. And we all know they're known for waiting for a plane to crash before making changes!
These news shows always find retired pilots to comment. They need to bring on aircraft mechanics.
Theres a SERIOUS issue at Boeing.
We already know what happened and why.
I wonder if they will re attach the old door? I would think the guy who inspected these door plugs is getting fired.
Probably not. The old door plug fell 16,000 feet and then hit the ground. The fuselage will need to be inspected for any damage and then they will install a new door plug.
They said 5 other planes were also found to have loose doors in a similar way this is. I don't think it will be down to one individual, rather just the process they follow not being good enough. I wonder how many it would be if they checked everyone around the world.
Will Boeing be making up for the airlines losses their incompetence caused ?
At this point it’s a terrorist attack.. whoever fixed that door might have been someone that’s been planning this.. went through school for this particular type of work n u never know might’ve been involved in this ..
I stopped flying before 9/11 and won't step foot onto another one.
Statistically flying is safer then driving to the airport
News channels now will need a year to get over the damn door…. what a joke…
Easy when its not your mistake............be proactive stop condemning duh
"Made in America 🇺🇸" 😂😂😂
The installers are the problem
There have been rumours that along with the fired 900 QA controllers the torque wrenches are no longer being calibrated at set intervals.
As always safety costs money.
It's the money.
Always follow the money.
@@JohnSmith-yv6eq I would think that on an AIRCRAFT EVERY BOLT IS TORQUED WITH A CERTIFIED TORQUE WRENCH. It is not a bicycle.
Sounds to me like they have a horrible maintenance crew.
A hole appeared in an aircraft. Experts are looking into it.
The inspectors toilets were stolen. They have nothing to go on.
Is it a half hole or a whole hole?
(The Monkees digging on the beach sketch 196?)
@@JohnSmith-yv6eqLOL... Well we aren't going to fix a half hole, leave it untill we dig ourselves into a whole hole
Now that the plane has a gaping hole in the centre should they be re-named the 737 Doughnut?
@@sushimamba4281 737 Max Doughnut, the plane made by Homer.