206
submitted 4 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Boeing is having a rough time of it right now, with parts falling off its planes left, right and center. Just last week, a wheel came loose and smashed through a car, and earlier this year the door from a 737 Max aircraft broke off mid-flight. That mid-air disaster sparked an audit from the Federal Aviation Administration, which has gone far from well.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 95 points 4 months ago

The hotel keycard was used to check seals of doors, the dishsoap was used to lubricate the door seals to make them fit better.

The documentation about the steps were vauge and badly documented, neither of which I want in the documentation for building aircraft.

[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago

But tell me if the CEO and shareholders are still getting their bonuses and stock buy backs?!

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 15 points 4 months ago
[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Thank God, for a second there I thought the top 1% were going to be held accountable for their actions.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

No, no, no, no, no, no - the Law is still only for the little people not for important people.

Worry not, everything is still as it's meant to be.

[-] Mac@mander.xyz 21 points 4 months ago

Tbh, I don't see a problem with using Dawn dish soap and hotel key cards.

When another company has already made a product that perfectly suits your needs it's absolutely reasonable to utilize that product.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 45 points 4 months ago

The issue is that if they are doing this, it means that the workers doesn't have the proper tools for the job.

The keycard should be replaces with a go/nogo custom card, and the soap should either be specified by brand in the manual or swapped to a certified lubecricant, that has been tested to work fully with the gasket and not cause deteriation or on any way affect the quallity of the seal.

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

I can't know for certain what is specifically going on there but I do work in contract manufacturing for high end scientific equipment and critical medical electronics so I do know a fair bit about the processes used. For me the dishsoap and keycards on their own don't raise any alarms. It sounds like the main issue is poorly written incomplete manufacturing instructions, which is a big enough issue on it's own and is an absolute monster to try and fix once your production workers have gotten used to working like that.

the soap should either be specified by brand in the manual or swapped to a certified lubecricant, that has been tested to work fully with the gasket and not cause deteriation or on any way affect the quallity of the seal.

  1. The seals used are most likely silicone (it's what we use on environmental chamber doors). If so there are very few chemicals that will harm them let alone dishsoap. We actually use 409 (a bathroom cleaner) spray to lubricate our seals where I work.

  2. The dishsoap is almost certainly something they order and stock with their own internal shop supply number. The instructions most likely reference that number but that number would be meaningless to anyone else so the news article just said dawn dishsoap. It's not going to be any random dishsoap because that's not how industrial supply works. It would be more expensive for them to go pick up random dishsoap than to just keep ordering the same part number (that specific dawn dishsoap) in bulk from their industrial supplier.

The keycard should be replaces with a go/nogo custom card

Why in the world would you make custom tooling when there is a readily available off the shelf solution? You can just buy packs of keycards for dirt cheap and they are going to be a known thickness because they need to be to keep working in the same keycard slots. That thickness should be documented somewhere but it isn't going to be in the manufacturing instructions because the production people don't need it; they just need to know that the go/nogo gauge (the keycard) should fit. The more extraneous information you include on manufacturing instructions the greater the chance you have of someone missing or misreading something. If someone needs that extraneous info or something on the production floor isn't right that's when you bring in the engineer or process support staff who will have access to that info and the authority to make decisions based on it. If your production staff are making critical decisions on their own then something is very wrong with your manufacturing instructions (which sounds like the real problem here).

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Submariner here. After several incidents in which submarines imploded, burned, or otherwise caused death and/or endangered thermonuclear weapons systems, our current procedures specify every single item used down to specific serial numbers, with specific authorized substitutes. If the authorized substitute cannot be found, the procedure is simply not done, and if necessary for ensuring the actual safety and conduct of the submarine's primary mission, the entire multi-million-dollar mission is cut short and the ship surfaces to either receive the requisite supplies or goes back to port. Specific serial numbers for lubricants, specific stress-tested seawater-proof pressure-resistant alloys for bolts, specific serial numbers and part numbers for fuses, specific torque wrenches, even specific serial numbers for indicator lights. Every single maintenance step of certain procedures are read out loud at least three times and re-confirmed and acknowledged by both the worker and supervisor before being conducted, including the opening and closing of maintenance panel doors.

[-] n3m37h@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 months ago

Sounds tedious and like it costs too much, fuck it let's not do that - some asshat at Boeing

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 months ago

If the dishsoap is standardized in the documentation I don't see any issue with it.

The hotel keycard, less so, since it is used to meassure how tight a fit is it will inevitably get worn, so the card needs to be durable with a predictable wear pattern, I have had hotel keycards made put of all kinds of plastic, paper even wood, they all have drasticly different thickness, wear patterns and durability.

If the documentation is too generic it looses it's meaning.

[-] Zitronensaft@feddit.de 1 points 4 months ago

All of the big hotel chains use the same plastic key cards that are credit card sized, they are durable and can be reused many times but also cheap enough to not fret over them if a customer forgets to return it before leaving. As a former aircraft maintainer myself, I don’t personally think it would be an issue if Boeing or its contractor ordered a bunch of standard hotel card blanks for seal testing, but if they were meant to use that as their test device it should be documented , there should be a part number for that card and authorized suppliers, and there should be a specific procedure to follow when using them. The article mentions the lack of documentation, so this was probably an unauthorized improvisation on the fly. I doubt these were being used to measure a specific tolerance, this case was probably something stupid like “the cabin pressurization check failed after we replaced the door, let’s poke a card along the seal to find where the gap is and squeeze extra sealant in that spot.” My specialty was avionics though, so I will admit I don’t really know much about the pressurization checks and seals, I was always at the plane for some other work whenever I encountered them.

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago

I fully agree with you, the keycard itself isn't the main issue, the lack of documentation and standardization is.

I read the article as if it said that the workers at the floor had a bunch of random keycards they used for fit testing.

If it was standardized on specific keycard blanks I would have zero issued with it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Mac@mander.xyz 3 points 4 months ago

That's a big conclusion you're jumping to.

At my old job we used PAM cooking spray and credit cards. It was written into the documentation, btw.
(This was a global company, btw, not a ma and pa shop).

[-] stoy@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

If it was written into the documentation, then I'd expect it to be fine as the company would be liable.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] Binthinkin@kbin.social 51 points 4 months ago

57% is owned by institutional investors who ruined the company.

Scumbag investors have intentionally ruined one of the best companies in America.

JSYK.

[-] fustigation769curtain@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

Hey, but imagine how much their dicks get sucked with all that money?

[-] Neon@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

It's really not the Investors. Boeing had Investors before and it all went fine. It's the McDonnel Douglas leadership that took over that ruined it.

[-] Philharmonic3@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago

Don't forget, they're also killing whistleblowers! Real rough time for Boeing. Boo hoo

[-] skilltheamps@feddit.de 26 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

How does this part (which is what the headline refers to and presumably the most outrageous inspection finding)

At one point during the examination, the air-safety agency observed mechanics at Spirit using a hotel key card to check a door seal [...]. In another instance, the F.A.A. saw Spirit mechanics apply liquid Dawn soap to a door seal “as lubricant in the fit-up process,” according to the document. The door seal was then cleaned with a wet cheesecloth

have anything to do with the opening of the article

Just last week, a wheel came loose and smashed through a car, and earlier this year the door from a 737 Max aircraft broke off mid-flight

???

The article misses the whole point, which is that the audit did not uncover the sources of these incidents.

[-] Bubs@lemmings.world 26 points 4 months ago

The audit was not about finding the exact cause of the previous incidents:

The audit, which is kind of like a quality control inspection for large companies, analyzed 89 aspects of Boeing’s 737 Max production

The audit looks at current production to assess wether or not everything is being done to prevent further hazards (they failed over a third of the inspections). Determining what caused the past incidents would be assigned to the equivalent of crime scene investigators (FAA detectives?).

Determining production line compliance and investigating the cause of a major malfunction are two entirely different beasts.

[-] feannag@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 months ago

To expand on "FAA detectives", a specific incident would be investigated by the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board).

[-] Bubs@lemmings.world 2 points 4 months ago

Neat fact to know. I always love learning new things.

[-] Dettweiler42@lemmyonline.com 19 points 4 months ago

The issue with those items is that they are not in the list of approved materials for Boeing's manuals. It might be normal to see these sort of practices in a line maintenance environment where it's hard to get the proper tooling; but the manufacturer should be abiding by it's own regulated publications. It's just more symptoms of their cost cutting and schedule rushing measures that are leading to their quality issues.

My company has been spending a lot of time and money doing warranty repairs on brand new airplanes that we received from Boeing over the past couple of years. It's very concerning when a customer has to fix things that should have never left the factory floor.

[-] solrize@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

The part about the crappy QA process explains why the delivered planes keep having problems.

[-] skilltheamps@feddit.de 9 points 4 months ago

Not to me. Absence of QA allows faulty parts to make it into a plane, it does not explain why there are faults in the first place. For doors and wheels popping off there have to be either lethal part design mistakes, parts made from play doh instead of aluminium/steel, or the people on the assembly line throwing fasteners in the bin instead of putting them on. It's not like a door pops of because its seal touched soap once and somebody poked an unverified piece of plastic at it. Especially in aviation, where you need to have redundancies.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

I think it's an issue of tolerance. They should be using gauges to test the fit, because hotel keycards can vary in thickness. Gauges are stupid cheap compared to the cost of the plane. It's evidence of cost-cutting bullshit.

Same with using dish soap as a lubricant. It's the wrong material for the job. Soap leaves a residue, and dissolves other lubricants. If there's supposed to be lubricant in the door, the soap is a bad choice. If there isn't supposed to be a lubricant in the door, then soap is a bad choice. It's like Schrodinger's lubricant. You won't know if it's a problem until it's a problem.

No manufacturing process or material design is perfect. You get as close as possible, and then QA catches the mistakes.

For Boeing, it sounds like they didn't try very hard to perfect their processes, and then didn't bother with QA.

[-] evasive_chimpanzee@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

In addition to what the others said, I think the wheel thing was probably not boeing's fault. That plane was delivered to United 22 years ago. It could have been a manufacturing error, but it was probably a maintenance error.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

They should have used Palmolive.

Plane crash into the ocean? You're soaking in it.

[-] DoctorWhookah@sh.itjust.works 10 points 4 months ago

I don’t know why, but that commercial literally popped into my head yesterday when I went somehow found myself in a mental tangent thinking about the product name wondering if they used palm and olive oil. Then of course synthetic palm oil and how would they test that since I haven’t heard about dishpan hands since the 70s.

[-] fustigation769curtain@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

They're experimenting with how to build planes as cheaply as possible, and anyone who dies is just collateral damage.

[-] ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

So long as they save more on the planes than they spend on the lawsuits it's a win according to investors.

[-] turkishdelight@lemmy.ml 11 points 4 months ago

And a 787 had a ooops moment this week.

Boeings are flying coffins.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de 7 points 4 months ago

I can already hear the Behind The Bastards episode about Boeing.

[-] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Hotel card seems like a decent tool for the job not hard enough to cause damange but rigid enough to poke around and test. And soap is a pretty good lubticant but mixing it with the existing lipids wont be doing it any wonders.

[-] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 48 points 4 months ago

The point isn't that the tools were inappropriate, it's that they were used outside the defined assembly and inspection processes - if you need some lubricant to get the door seal in that's fine, but the process docs need to specify that. Similarly, if the testing process defines that you need to check for gaps, it should be specifying the thickness of gauge to use and how much of a gap is permissible, not just grab whatever random card you have lying around and poke it in.

[-] aard@kyu.de 9 points 4 months ago

As they just want it temporarily lubed water based lubricants from the sex shop might be a better option. They don't leave much residue, and are tested for compatibility with various rubbers.

[-] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

It would also make a better funny headline too.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
206 points (96.0% liked)

News

21850 readers
5111 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS