324
submitted 2 years ago by FirstCircle@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml

The FAA has opened an investigation into Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner after the company disclosed that employees in South Carolina falsified inspection records on work done where the wings are joined to the fuselage body.

Boeing informed the Federal Aviation Administration in April that, despite records indicating completion of required inspections, workers had not performed some of those inspections to confirm adequate bonding and electrical grounding at the 787 wing-to-body join.

“The FAA is investigating whether Boeing completed the inspections and whether company employees may have falsified aircraft records,” the federal safety agency said via email.

Boeing said its engineers have established that this newly discovered lapse does not create “an immediate safety of flight issue.”

all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] walter_wiggles@lemmy.nz 92 points 2 years ago

I like how it's "Boeing employees" and not just "Boeing" that falsified inspection records.

[-] Audrey0nne@leminal.space 50 points 2 years ago

It’s going to trickle down further, next it’s going to be employees at outsource facilities falsified records. I know someone who worked in the QA department for a company involved with the design and manufacture of certain parts of the fuel system and they are all currently shitting themselves.

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 34 points 2 years ago

It's going to trickle down further

Passengers boarded a plane without first checking for falsified inspections

[-] walter_wiggles@lemmy.nz 16 points 2 years ago

Critical flaws found in plane which was apparently assembled by a group of persons inside a Boeing facility.

[-] littlebluespark@lemmy.world 31 points 2 years ago

And this is the company about to launch actual humans into space, officially? No, I mean astronauts this time, not unwitting airplane passengers. This is the timeline we're in? Just checking.

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

On a capsule that failed to deploy all three parachutes during its first abort test. And then also failed during its first real launch. Made it to orbit at least but it wasn't able to dock with the ISS as planned due to failures, just deorbited instead. Third launch was originally scrubbed due to valve issues, and wasn't tried again until 9 months later. Clearly wasn't just a simple valve issue.

And that's just the actual launch issues.

[-] over_clox@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Oof. Welp, lemme make some popcorn...

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago

Welp, scrubbed. Oxygen relief valve issue with the Centaur upper stage. Not actually a capsule issue this time... But that's still a little bit concerning since the Centaur isn't exactly a new rocket, it's quite a mature vehicle. Issues like that should normally be caught before they have astronauts loaded onboard.

[-] over_clox@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

Did they forget to bolt the valve in? 😂

Meh, par for the Boeing course huh? At least the astronauts are safe.

[-] over_clox@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

In another hour and a half, yeah, apparently.

I just hope they don't suffer "rapid disassembly"...

[-] Feyr@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah at this point it's rapid disassembly, because it's scheduled

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 23 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago
[-] AtariDump@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

They bought Boeing with their own money.

[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago
[-] AtariDump@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago
[-] HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Ah, they brought boeing with boeings own money. That makes more sense.

[-] Sc00ter@lemm.ee -5 points 2 years ago

That video provides literally no value. "Spend money on share holders and cut corners." Examples?

A big part of what's going on is a reverb of covid. The whole aerospace industry got hammered during covid, which forced a lot of experienced people to retire. We are now seeing what happens when a company with has a ton of tribal knowledge loses a lot of experienced all at once

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 9 points 2 years ago

Buybacks were illegal throughout most of the 20th century because they were considered a form of stock market manipulation. But in 1982, the Securities and Exchange Commission passed rule 10b-18, which created a legal process for buybacks and opened the floodgates for companies to start repurchasing their stock en masse.

The SEC's decision to make this shift came against the backdrop of President Ronald Reagan's era of deregulation and coincided with the rise of 'free market' economists preaching a new type of social responsibility for business: increasing profits.

So, uh, yeah, it's more of that sweet #1 bullshit from Reagan. It's true the loss of experienced people hurt the company, there have been numerous reports on that aspect. That doesn't have anything to do with cheating on quality inspections.

[-] Chuymatt@beehaw.org 7 points 2 years ago

Nope. You are wrong. It is all about the move to force actual aerospace engineers out of management. Then it was the long hard drive to the bottom. Move away from a fairly strong union state, make ‘companies’ that make parts all over the US, assemble by non union workers (who have no power, poor training, and are expendable). Further, those folks NEARING retirement get nit picked to oblivion to quit before they are supposed to retire or are fired for mounting minor infractions. QA folks have been undermined constantly during this time.

All to save money in the short term. This is a story I have been hearing in the Puget Sound area for a decade at least. It is now finally catching up to them, but they are going to try to make the little folks eat it. These are C suite decisions, purely.

[-] OpenStars@discuss.online 2 points 2 years ago

There was a LOT more to it than that, reportedly.

Jesus fucking christ they are doing this on a plane that we don’t have any industry-wide long-term real-world durability data on because that’s the first fully composite airliner ever manufactured. Nobody really knows what long-term high-hour failure modes will look like.

We can simulate and guess, but when they cut corners like that, it introduces all kinds of horrifying possibilities involving cascading structural failures. Like, maybe the bonding surfaces between the fuselage and wing box starts to delaminate and, oh, I don’t know, the wing separates from the fuselage or something like that.

Perhaps I’m being sensationalist - I don’t know all the ins and outs of their manufacturing process. But I’m going to remain pretty fucking concerned until Boeing can conclusively prove it’s either not a problem, or that it can be correctly repaired back to original specs.

[-] itsonlygeorge@reddthat.com 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
[-] Shameless@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Planning on a holiday later this year, safe to say I'll be going out of my way to not be on a boeing.

this post was submitted on 06 May 2024
324 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

8714 readers
59 users here now

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS