Gremlinzzzz wrote:enzo011 wrote:As Boeing engineers comb through records to identity planes with possible flaws, the FAA already has learned what prompted one of the defects: The plane maker didn’t test how it produces shims, or material that fills gaps between barrel-shaped sections of the jets’ fuselages, to ensure they meet requirements, according to the FAA memo. The shims are produced at Boeing’s Dreamliner factory in North Charleston, S.C.
Boeing’s process to generate shims was “not validated prior to implementation into the production process” and lacked a quality check to verify the final product “meets the engineering requirements,” according to the FAA memo. “Boeing has acknowledged a process that produces nonconforming products” and is working to change that, the memo adds.
Wait, there are untested components on the 787? I get that it may not be a problem, but there are items on the 787 they declined to test before using them in production. This seems very serious. What else have they neglected to test before using it in production?Revelation wrote:Dominic Gates ( https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... cellations ) has updated his article to explain the HTP issue:
The fix procedure itself is relatively straight forward: undo the clamp, redo it with force less than or equal to the specified force, verify gap is not wider than spec. It's not clear how difficult it is to access the components or redo the clamping.
I know Boeing is trying to downplay the seriousness of this, but if the silver lining is that the aircraft isn't old enough to be a immediate issue, well then I guess you have to cling to what you can.
Reading through this makes for a chilling experience.
I cannot think of a factory, plant or lab that I have ever been to, where process was not the key area where attention to detail was paid. This is why you have an added layer to automation so that repetitive tasks are done in a standardized manner and in that automation, processes to ensure that set standards are met.
After that, you have quality control individuals to ensure that everything went according to plan before you deliver the plane to the customer for inspection because there is only so much that they can inspect i.e. mainly cabins and outside appearance before flight tests.
It is shocking to read. It looks like the 737 Max was simply a continuation of poor standards.
2010 to 2020 for Boeing was really a reap what you sew story. All the “cost efficiencies” that they attributed to the 787 and MAX have all come to bite them at various stages.
My hope is that they have now seen what that means for their business specifically the bottom line that they care so much about and try to protect.
I am of the belief that hopefully the ship is turning, slowly but surely. Who knows Boeing of 2018 may not have reported these issues or even done anything about it. But that doesn’t mean they don’t have a long way to go but I appreciate the transparency