Debris found in fuel tanks of 70% of inspected 737 Max jets

  • Boeing
  • Thread starter mfb
  • Start date
  • Featured
  • #1
36,243
13,294
TL;DR Summary
Debris found in 35 out of 50 inspected new airplanes at Boeing
Yes, that 737 Max. News. It's unclear if these airplanes were supposed to be delivered to customers already if the 737 Max wouldn't be grounded for other reasons, but foreign objects in more than half of the inspected planes is certainly nothing customers want to see. There are 350 more aircraft waiting they have to check.
A Boeing spokesman cautioned against applying the 70% to all 400 jets, saying there’s no way to know how many have the same problem until they’re all inspected.
There would be a way to know if you would check the airplanes more carefully...
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Likes Omega0 and Lnewqban

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Lnewqban
Homework Helper
Gold Member
2,622
1,422
It seems not to be a big deal if they have properly inspected the fuel filters. :H :oops:o_O
 
  • #3
Dr Transport
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
2,589
747
Any FOD is bad, this is just another example of issues coming up wrt the 737-MAX. The tanker program was gounded last year multiple times for manufacturing debris in not only the fuel tanks, but other places on the aircraft (wrenches being dropped and not retrieved etc...)
 
  • #4
Nik_2213
908
322
Given every last one will have had documented inspections, got to hope there was an honest mix-up rather than being signed off by 'J. D~e', 'D. D~~k', 'M. M~~~e' or the eponymous 'P.P. Squiggle'...
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes russ_watters and Tom.G
  • #5
Nik_2213
908
322
Tom, I jest but, long ago and far away, I nearly lost my job over such. Late on a Friday, I'd refused to sign off on an urgent bulk batch of cough syrup as the samples were slightly the wrong colour. Production Supervisor swore the stuff was okay, swore my eyes were wrong, took incomplete documents away...

Monday morning, I found a lynch-mob posse waiting. The filling line's in-process checks had caught it on the Saturday, shift sent home, my head to be put on a stake...

But, as I pointed out, I'd only signed for the failures.

And, on the Saturday morning, my usual optician had found me waiting on his doorstop when he opened up. Situation explained, he did me a full check-up, broke out the colour-vision flash-cards, deployed tint-strips and tint-wheels just in case. No, corrected by the prescription spectacles I'd worn, my vision was excellent. I had trouble naming subtle shades, but I could match them very, very well. Better than him. He kindly wrote me a 'repeat' prescription confirming these findings. Which I produced in my defence.

Ah ? Hmm. Execution stayed, they looked at the batch documents again.

I'd come at that complex colour mix three different ways, each from above and below, found every result out of spec. Some near, some not so near. Not even one 'acceptable'...

Some-one else had added one (1) 'acceptable' result, signed for the batch. The illegible 'dead spider' was recognised as 'resembling' that of the Production Supervisor who'd taken the incomplete documents. Exit posse, stage-right...

The consequences were mostly 'above my pay-grade', but rumours abounded. That 'Production Supervisor' was certainly 'promoted sideways'. We were told an urgent eye-test had revealed he'd developed just enough astigmatism to see that batch's wonky colour as okay, so now required spectacles...

Yeah, right. Pull the other leg, there's bells on it ! But, given he'd been very, very active in our powerful staff union, we made quiet jokes about 'diplomatic astigmatism'...
 
  • Like
  • Wow
  • Haha
Likes ChemAir, Not anonymous, Tom.G and 4 others
  • #6
Dr. Courtney
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
3,333
2,517
Some time ago I was in charge of the automated test systems for many of Cisco Systems' wireless networking products. When the test system occasionally began failing too many units, I usually got pinged on to adjust the testing so passing rates would increase. My practice was to review the test code and ensure it was functioning properly, and once that was confirmed, hold firm and tell them to "fix the products, not the test."

When I became a physics professor, the process repeated when too many students earned Ds, Fs, or Ws in my intro algebra-based physics course. Guidance counselors were placing way too many students in the course without appropriate math prerequisites. Most of the faculty who taught the course before me simply dumbed down the course enough to pass them. I held the line and eventually got the math prerequisites fixed, and success rates (A, B, or C) more than doubled.

It's easy to criticize product quality issues that are the responsibility of others. We all need to own our product responsibilities first. The vast majority of math and science teachers students have had before getting to me were woefully remiss in owning their quality responsibilities. And I'd venture to surmise, low product quality in education contributed to the attitudes and actions relating to the 737 woes. Students either learn that mediocre efforts are not good enough or that they are "good enough."
 
  • Like
Likes Janosh89, anorlunda, Not anonymous and 3 others
  • #7
anorlunda
Staff Emeritus
Insights Author
11,188
8,579
It's easy to criticize product quality issues that are the responsibility of others.
That's oversimplified. Every person has to make decisions in life. Who to trust? Who to distrust? Trust in an airliner is high on the list of importance.

Boeing can't have it both ways. They can't say, "Trust us based on our long history of quality, excellence, and safe operation," then cry foul if people look at the recent history as indicative of a sea change in Boeing's culture.

In a corporation, it takes only a few employees in powerful positions to poison the culture. I am reminded of the infamous conference call in 1986 where NASA and Thikol management bullied the engineers, resulting in the Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster. It was a cultural problem to allow management to participate in the call at all. The issues were technical and the decision should have been technical. "The specifications say 50 degrees F. The temperature is below 50. No go. Period."

In 1970, the top 10 Fortune 500 were: General Motors, Exxon, Ford, GE, IBM, Chrysler, Mobil, Texaco, ITT, Gulf Oil. Only Exxon remains on today's top 10 list. It is my opinion that all the non-oil companies on that list declined because the company culture did not keep up with the times. It is also my opinion that Boeing is at risk of similar decline.

For a more in-depth look at the problem of company culture contributing to decline, I recommend this excellent book from 1993. Computer Wars:: The Fall of IBM and the Future of Global Technology
 

Suggested for: Debris found in fuel tanks of 70% of inspected 737 Max jets

Replies
75
Views
4K
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Last Post
20
Replies
673
Views
44K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
630
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
285
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
960
Replies
3
Views
688
Top