3 month old 737-9 Max depressurisation incident

[YorkRailFan]

It’s beginning to sound that way, isn’t it? I don’t know much about the rudder issue, was that discovered as a result of some sort of routine maintenance or was there another “issue” somewhere?

Quality assurance issue.

Boeing is urging airlines to inspect its 737 Max airplanes for a possible loose bolt in rudder control systems.

The airplane maker called for the inspections after an international operator discovered a bolt with a missing nut, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said.

An airplane's rudder is used to control the aircraft while in flight.

"The issue identified on the particular airplane has been remedied," Boeing said.

"Out of an abundance of caution, we are recommending operators inspect their 737 Max airplanes and inform us of any findings. We informed the FAA and our customers and will continue to keep them aware of the progress."

The FAA said it was "closely monitoring targeted inspections of Boeing 737 Max airplanes to look for a possible loose bolt in the rudder control system".

Boeing has recommended that the checks - which take only about two hours - happen within the next two weeks.

Any problems involving a faulty rudder would likely be identified in a pre-flight check, as crews routinely examine the rudder system before flying, Boeing said.

Anthony Brickhouse, an air safety expert at the Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, said that airlines "need to take it seriously".

"But as a member of the flying public, I don't see this as an issue to be concerned about," he told Reuters news agency.

Boeing shares were down 1% in midday trade.

Boeing's 737 Max was cleared to fly passengers again by US regulators in 2020 having been grounded for 20 months worldwide after two catastrophic accidents killed 346 people in Ethiopia and Indonesia.

Boeing urges 737 Max inspections for possible loose bolt

The airplane maker is urging airlines to inspect rudder control systems on the planes.

www.bbc.co.uk

Have bolts been found to be loose or missing anywhere other than the plug door [discounting the presumably unrelated issue with the rudder control]? If bolts are missing here then do other bolts need to be checked? Right up to every bolt on every plane?

Not as far as I know but who knows what Boeing, Spirit AeroSystems and the FAA will discover next.

This incident should never have happened and it cannot happen again. FAA formally notified Boeing that it is conducting an investigation to determine if Boeing failed to ensure that completed products conformed to approved design and were in a condition for safe operation in compliance with FAA regulations. This investigation is a result of an incident on a Boeing model 737-9 MAX where it lost a "plug" type passenger door and additional discrepancies. Boeing's manufacturing practices need to comply with the high safety standards they're legally required to meet. The letter is attached.

The safety of the flying public, not speed, will determine the the timeline for returning the Boeing 737-9 MAX to service.

The letter is not attached by the FAA in the next tweet. This is really unexpected, this will be fascinating to watch as onlookers. I would not want to be a Boeing board member or a Spirit AeroSystems board member, I'd even be worried if I were an employee at the two aforementioned companies working on the 737. This identifies that the FAA is happy to take it slow to recertify the 737-9, its a long road ahead for Boeing.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2024 ==

One group of passengers has already launched a lawsuit against Boeing. Alaska Airlines will offer each passenger onboard Flight 1282 last Friday compensation of $1,500. Passengers were also given a full flight refund and will have access to counseling sessions following the harrowing incident.
The airline emailed all passengers onboard the flight this week, offering them cash compensation of $1,500, a full refund and other support services.

Alaska said in a statement to PEOPLE,

"Alaska Airlines provided a full refund to each guest on Flight 1282. As an immediate gesture of care, within the first 24 hours, we also provided a $1,500 cash payment to cover any incidental expenses to ensure their immediate needs were taken care of."

The carrier added that passengers will have access to 24/7 mental health resources and counseling services. Last Friday, 171 passengers received the shock of their lives after the plug door onboard a Boeing 737 MAX 9 suddenly blew out while the aircraft was at 16,000ft. Miraculously, everyone survived, but things could have been a lot worse if the plane was above 30,000ft and passengers were not buckled up.

A terrifying ordeal​

Stories from passengers onboard the flight have begun to emerge. Some have recounted sending final messages to loved ones, and feel that minor compensation isn't enough for the experiences they went through. One traveler, Evan Smith, said he saw a young passenger whose shirt was "sucked off him and out of the plane" while his mother desperately held onto him. Other items, including multiple smartphones, were sucked out of the plug door gap, some of which have since been discovered on the ground. According to a Seattle Times report, six passengers who were onboard the flight have filed a class-action lawsuit against Boeing in King County Superior Court in Seattle - the group claim they are owed compensation for injuries sustained during their ordeal.
Attorney Daniel Laurence from The Stritmatter law firm, representing the passengers, commented in a statement,

"Although everyone is glad that the blowout occurred while the crew could still manage to land the aircraft safely, this nightmare experience has caused economic, physical and ongoing emotional consequences that have understandably deeply affected our clients, and is one more disturbing mark on the troubled 737-MAX series aircraft."

Fortunately, while no passengers on the flight suffered any kind of major injuries, some were treated for nonlife-threatening injuries once the plane had touched back down in Portland. Laurence added that passengers will be able to seek compensation for "emotional distress," adding that "$1,500 per passenger, for what could have been a death experience and might even be described… as a near-death experience, is inadequate."

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has now grounded all 737 MAX 9s with these plug doors as Boeing revises its inspection guidelines following industry feedback. Authorities have since found the missing door plug, discovered in someone's backyard near Portland.

Alaska Airlines Offering $1,500 In Compensation For Boeing 737 MAX 9 Incident

One group of passengers has already launched a lawsuit against Boeing.

simpleflying.com

Not sure if this amount will cut it for people, especially considering that people lost devices (phones, tablets, laptops, Bluetooth, etc), but the additional counselling is a good touch.

“We will cooperate fully and transparently with the FAA and the NTSB on their investigations.”

Boeing President and CEO Dave Calhoun addressed the importance of trust and transparency at a recent all-employee safety meeting on Jan. 9, 2024. Here are two excerpts:

• On transparency: “We’re going to approach it with 100% complete transparency every step of the way.”
• On trust: “We’re going to have to demonstrate it by our actions, by our willingness to work directly and transparently with them (customers). And to make sure they understand that every airplane that Boeing has its name on that’s in the sky is in fact safe.”

737-9 Updates

www.boeing.com

Boeing's statement regarding the FAA's investigation into Boeing.

WICHITA, Kansas – Jan. 10, 2024 - Spirit AeroSystems has been working closely with our customer since the event with Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 on Jan. 5. A Spirit team is now supporting the NTSB’s investigation directly. As a company, we remain focused on the quality of each aircraft structure that leaves our facilities.

Spirit AeroSystems, Inc. ("Spirit"), is a subsidiary of Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. [NYSE: SPR] (“Spirit AeroSystems”).

Spirit AeroSystems Statement on NTSB Investigation | Spirit AeroSystems

Spirit AeroSystems partners with NTSB to investigate Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 event, emphasizing aircraft structure quality.

www.spiritaero.com

No mention whatsoever of the FAA at all which is disappointing.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2024 ==

After taking decisive and immediate action to ground approximately 171 Boeing 737-9 MAX planes, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) today announced new and significant actions to immediately increase its oversight of Boeing production and manufacturing. These actions come one day after the FAA formally notified Boeing that the FAA has launched an investigation into the company as a result of last Friday’s incident on a Boeing Model 737-9 MAX in which the aircraft lost a passenger door plug while in flight.

The actions announced today include the FAA conducting:

• An audit involving the Boeing 737-9 MAX production line and its suppliers to evaluate Boeing’s compliance with its approved quality procedures. The results of the FAA’s audit analysis will determine whether additional audits are necessary.
• Increased monitoring of Boeing 737-9 MAX in-service events.
• Assessment of safety risks around delegated authority and quality oversight, and examination of options to move these functions under independent, third-party entities.

"It is time to re-examine the delegation of authority and assess any associated safety risks," FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker said. "The grounding of the 737-9 and the multiple production-related issues identified in recent years require us to look at every option to reduce risk. The FAA is exploring the use of an independent third party to oversee Boeing’s inspections and its quality system."

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-increasing-oversight-boeing-production-and-manufacturing

Good move on inspecting the 737-9 production line, nothing on when and how the 737-9 will re-enter service though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2024 ==

Alaska Airlines began reviewing Boeing’s production quality and control systems this past week, and announced Saturday the company will “enhance” oversight of planes manufactured by the airline’s decadeslong partner.

Federal officials last week grounded most Boeing 737 MAX 9 aircraft until they are inspected after an Alaska Airlines plane suffered a blowout that left a gaping hole in the side of the fuselage. And the planes won’t return to the skies soon: the Federal Aviation Administration said the model would remain grounded until Boeing provides data that will take days to collect.

The incident has led to passengers on the terrifying flight filing a lawsuit, Alaska Airlines canceling hundreds of flights, and a public relations nightmare for the airline, Boeing and the FAA.

Alaska Airlines to review Boeing production, welcomes FAA audit

The airline plans to enhance its oversight of Alaska aircraft on the Boeing production line after a lawsuit and hundreds of cancelled flights.

www.seattletimes.com

Hoping United follows suit.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2024 ==

In a message to employees, Boeing Commercial Airplanes President and CEO Stan Deal announced immediate actions the company is taking to bolster quality assurance and controls in 737 production.

"As we continue to respond to the Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 accident, our team has been working with the five affected airlines to inspect their 737-9 fleet. They have been examining and collecting measurements around the mid-exit door plugs to ensure they are installed per specifications.

While we complete these tasks to earn Federal Aviation Administration approval to unground the affected 737-9s, our team is also taking a hard look at our quality practices in our factories and across our production system.

We have taken important steps in recent years to strengthen our Quality Management System’s (QMS) foundation and its layers of protection. But, the AS1282 accident and recent customer findings make clear that we are not where we need to be. To that end, we are taking immediate actions to bolster quality assurance and controls across our factories.

More quality inspections: We are planning additional inspections throughout the build process at Boeing and at Spirit. These checks will provide one more layer of scrutiny on top of the thousands of inspections performed today across each 737 airplane, and build on the reviews we have implemented to catch potential non-conformances. Since 2019, we have increased the number of Commercial Airplanes quality inspectors by 20% and we plan to make more investments in the Quality function.
Team sessions on quality: We are planning additional sessions for our teams to gather and refocus on the fundamentals of our QMS, take advantage of our expanded training programs, and recommit to improving quality and compliance.
Boeing review of Spirit work: We have deployed a team to work alongside Spirit AeroSystems to complement the existing teammates on the ground. Our team is now inspecting Spirit’s installation of the mid-exit door plug and approving them before the fuselage section can be shipped to Boeing. We are also inspecting more than 50 other points in Spirit’s build process and assessing their build plans against engineering specifications.
Airline oversight inspections: We are opening our factories to 737 operators for additional oversight inspections to review our production and quality procedures. Spirit will do the same and we will learn from our customers’ insights and findings.
Independent assessment: An outside party will be brought in to thoroughly review the Quality Management System at Commercial Airplanes and suggest further improvements.
And as we prepare new 737-9s for delivery, we will conduct the same thorough inspections of the mid-exit door plugs as mandated by the FAA. Customer representatives will continue to have access to anything they want to see onboard their airplane before delivery.

These actions are separate from the FAA’s investigation and the agency’s plan to increase oversight of 737-9 production. We will cooperate fully and transparently with both as we work to restore trust with our regulator and our customers. And as the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation proceeds, we will take additional steps to improve our practices as the facts and findings dictate.

Everything we do must conform to the requirements in our QMS. Anything less is unacceptable. It is through this standard that we must operate to provide our customers and their passengers complete confidence in Boeing airplanes. Let each one of us take personal accountability and recommit ourselves to this important work."

737-9 Updates

www.boeing.com

Good to see Boeing do this, but they should have done this after the first MAX grounding.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2024 ==

Boeing has tapped retired U.S. Navy Admiral Kirk Donald, a former director of the branch’s nuclear propulsion program, to lead an independent review of the company’s quality system and supplier oversight.

The review, announced Jan. 15 in a company-wide message from Boeing Commercial Airplanes President Stan Deal, will examine Boeing’s commercial airplane quality management, including “quality programs and practices in Boeing manufacturing facilities” as well as its supplier quality oversight. The team’s report and recommendations will go to Boeing’s top management and board, the company said.

Donald is no stranger to high-profile investigations. During his tenure as Director of Navy Nuclear Propulsion, he was tasked with leading a 2008 U.S. Defense Department probe into the mistaken shipments of four Tomahawk missile nose cones to Taiwan.

The Donald-led review is one of several steps Boeing is taking to ease both customer and regulatory concerns in the wake of the Jan. 5 Alaska Airlines 737-9 in-flight loss of an exit door plug and subsequent grounding of similarly configured 737-9s. Boeing will also bring customers in for inspections of its 737 production process, both at Boeing and major supplier Spirit AeroSystems, which builds the 737 fuselage sections and exit door plugs.

While the NTSB has yet to release any information to explain the Jan. 5 occurrence, statements out of Boeing and the FAA suggest both believe mistakes by Spirit that led to the broader 737-9 groundings may have played a role in the Alaska accident.

Boeing also is stepping up its own quality inspection efforts, both internally and at Spirit. A separate review of Spirit’s exit door plug work is also underway, as is scrutiny of “more than 50 other points in Spirit’s build process,” Deal wrote, with special attention being paid to “assessing their build plans against engineering specifications.”

As part of the increased focus on Spirit, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun will head to Wichita to join Spirit AeroSystems CEO Pat Shanahan and other Spirit executives in a meeting with 737 program employees Jan. 17. The event will include Boeing employees who work in Wichita or are assigned there as part of the stepped-up scrutiny, sources with knowledge of the plans confirmed to Aviation Week.

Boeing’s moves come on the heels of FAA’s stepped-up scrutiny of the 737-9 program. The agency on Jan. 12 said it would audit the 737-9 production line and suppliers “to evaluate Boeing’s compliance with its approved quality procedures.” The findings “will determine whether additional audits are necessary,” the agency said. It is also stepping up monitoring of 737-9 in-service events.

Bigger picture, the agency said it will consider whether certain aspects of Boeing’s delegation program and quality oversight granted by the FAA would benefit from being under “independent, third-party entities” instead of agreed-upon leaders within Boeing and other applicants.

“It is time to re-examine the delegation of authority and assess any associated safety risks,” FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker said. “The grounding of the 737-9 and the multiple production-related issues identified in recent years require us to look at every option to reduce risk. The FAA is exploring the use of an independent third party to oversee Boeing’s inspections and its quality system.”

Meanwhile, the FAA and Boeing will evaluate inspection results from 40 737-9s to determine what steps operators must take to ensure door plugs are safe to operate. It is not clear when the inspections and review will be done or when affected 737-9s will be cleared to return to service.

“After reviewing Boeing’s proposed inspection and maintenance instructions, the FAA determined it needed additional data before approving them,” the agency said as part of announcing its plan to evaluate data from the 40 checks. “The FAA is encouraged by the exhaustive nature of Boeing’s instructions for inspections and maintenance. However, in the interest of maintaining the highest standard of safety the agency will not approve the inspection and maintenance process until it reviews data from the initial round of 40 inspections.”

Boeing Names Independent Quality Review Leader As 737-9 Crisis Expands | Aviation Week

The review led by retired U.S. Navy Admiral Kirk Donald will examine Boeing’s commercial airplane quality management as well as its supplier quality oversight.

aviationweek.com

Good move, in addition, Ryanair is doubling the amount of engineers used when inspecting the 737. Waiting for the FAA to appoint there's.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Jan 2024 ==

On Friday, the FAA announced requirements for a rigorous inspection and maintenance process as a new and necessary step before the FAA contemplates any further steps in the process to return the Boeing 737-9 MAX to service. The first 40 inspections that are now complete, and the FAA will thoroughly review the data from them.

All 737-9 MAX aircraft with door plugs will remain grounded pending the FAA's review and final approval of an inspection and maintenance process that satisfies all FAA safety requirements. Once the FAA approves an inspection and maintenance process, it will be required on every grounded 737-9 MAX prior to future operation. The safety of the flying public, not speed, remains the timeline for returning this aircraft to service.

All eyes are on Boeing to come up with a maintenance procedure for these aircraft and for the FAA to approve.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jan 2024 ==

After taking decisive action to ground 171 Boeing 737-9 MAX airplanes, the FAA is now investigating Boeing’s manufacturing practices and production lines, including those involving subcontractor Spirit AeroSystems, bolstering its oversight of Boeing, and examining potential system change.

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/updates-grounding-boeing-737-max-9-aircraft

Spirit AeroSystems hasn't responded at the time of writing this comment. This is a great move from the FAA to investigate Spirit given that Spirit supplies the fuselage to Boeing and used to be a part of Boeing until the 2000's, and has had heaps of QC issues in the past few years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jan 2024 ==

Adita Irawati, Indonesia's Transportation Ministry spokesperson, told Xinhua News that the aircraft are now safe to fly. He said, "The door system is apparently different from the Alaska Airlines's. We have inspected it and communicated with Lion Air and Boeing. They are allowed to fly again."


However, the FAA has yet to clear the model. Over 40 aircraft have been inspected, and the watchdog is reviewing the data to determine if the aircraft is safe to return to the skies.

MAX Mishaps​

Though the investigation is in its infancy, inspections by United Airlines have found several loose bolts that are used to hold the door plug to the aircraft. The issue stems from Boeing's abysmal quality control system, allowing such a flaw to pass unnoticed. The lessons learned from previous incidents have been forgotten just four years later.


The manufacturer examines grounded aircraft and collects measurements around the door plugs to ensure they are installed correctly. It hopes the move will speed up the FAA's decision to unground the aircraft.

Following the incident's fallout, Boeing is increasing the frequency of quality inspections during the manufacturing process and making other changes to its Quality Management System (QMS).Airlines have been cautious with the Boeing MAX 737 ever since it came to light that Boeing has been cutting corners with safety and quality, which led to the loss of two aircraft, 346 people, and billions of dollars in losses due to the subsequent global grounding of the type. The type has been called "the most scrutinized transport aircraft in history."

Lion Air Resumes Boeing 737 MAX 9 Flights Following Alaska Airlines Incident

The Indonesian carrier is giving the aircraft the all-clear, although the FAA has kept the model grounded.

simpleflying.com

Not surprising as Lion Air flies the 737-9 with an active emergency exit, the type was grounded as a precaution by the Indonesian regulator following the crash of JT610 in October 2018 which was flown with a 737-8.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jan 2024 ==

As an added layer of safety, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is recommending that operators of Boeing 737-900ER aircraft visually inspect mid-exit door plugs to ensure the door is properly secured. The Boeing 737-900ER is not part of the newer MAX fleet but has the same door plug design.

In accordance with their Safety Management Systems, operators conducted additional inspections on the Boeing 737-900ER following the loss of a mid-cabin door plug on a Boeing 737-9 MAX airplane on January 5th.

Read the Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) regarding the Boeing 737-900ER here.

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/updates-grounding-boeing-737-max-9-aircraft

This raises multiple questions, the FAA hasn't approved an inspection procedure for the 737-9 meaning which procedure would airlines use to inspect the 737-900ER? Will the FAA ground the 737-900ER whilst they await Boeing's recommendations for an inspection procedure? This really raises more questions than it answers.

 

[najaB]

This raises multiple questions, the FAA hasn't approved an inspection procedure for the 737-9 meaning which procedure would airlines use to inspect the 737-900ER? Will the FAA ground the 737-900ER whilst they await Boeing's recommendations for an inspection procedure? This really raises more questions than it answers.

I wonder if it's just badly reported?

 

[YorkRailFan]

I wonder if it's just badly reported?

Its not included in the FAA's mandate linked to in the press release, it only says to follow the manufacturing manual.

 

[edwin_m]

BBC is now reporting the extra checks on the 9090ER.

Boeing 737-900ER: Second model to be inspected after 737 Max 9 blowout

The US regulator says the 737-900ER fleet uses the same door design as the grounded 737 Max 9s.

www.bbc.co.uk

On Sunday, the agency said airlines should also inspect older 737-900ER models, which use the same door design. ... The FAA did not order the older model to be grounded while the visual inspections are carried out by operators.

I think it was stated upthread that the inspection takes some hours, as the interior panel needs to be removed to get access to the bolts. But hopefully it can be done while the aircraft is receiving some other maintenance, without disrupting service. Considering the fault appeared quite quickly on a new MAX 9 and the 900ER has been in service for some time without such faults, this seems a reasonable compromise. What is of probably more concern is whether the bad practice seen in the fitting (or not) of the bolts on the MAX 9 also affected other bolts on other aircraft around the same time.

 

[dosxuk]

FAA have reported the checks on the 737-900ER's is because some operators have done them anyway and found issues.

Discussion: The Boeing 737-900ER mid-exit door plugs have an identical door plug design to the 737-9 MAX. As part of their Safety Management Systems, some operators have conducted additional inspections on the 737-900ER mid-exit door plugs and have noted findings with bolts during the maintenance inspections.

https://www.faa.gov/media/74751

 

[Bletchleyite]

FAA have reported the checks on the 737-900ER's is because some operators have done them anyway and found issues.

It seems fairly rational that if another type of aircraft has the same arrangement by the same manufacturer that that will have the same issue. Indeed it seems negligent of the FAA etc not to have mandated checks on the -900ERs as well, plus any others with the same arrangement.

 

[dosxuk]

It seems fairly rational that if another type of aircraft has the same arrangement by the same manufacturer that that will have the same issue. Indeed it seems negligent of the FAA etc not to have mandated checks on the -900ERs as well, plus any others with the same arrangement.

Not if you're the manufacturer in question and you're really hoping this was a Friday afternoon one-off mistake and can be easily fixed by firing the person who forgot the bolts.

 

[YorkRailFan]

It seems fairly rational that if another type of aircraft has the same arrangement by the same manufacturer that that will have the same issue. Indeed it seems negligent of the FAA etc not to have mandated checks on the -900ERs as well, plus any others with the same arrangement.

Especially as the 737-900ER and 737-9 have production overlap (ie, the 737-900ER was still being produced by Boeing when Boeing began producing the 737-9).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not if you're the manufacturer in question and you're really hoping this was a Friday afternoon one-off mistake and can be easily fixed by firing the person who forgot the bolts.

Of course if this happened at 35000ft and somebody died in the meantime, Boeing's reputation would be even more in tatters.

To paraphrase - if it's not Airbus I'm going to make a fuss

 

[najaB]

It seems fairly rational that if another type of aircraft has the same arrangement by the same manufacturer that that will have the same issue.

Not necessarily. They stopped making -900ERs about three years ago so if there had been a process change it might not affect older models.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not necessarily. They stopped making -900ERs about three years ago so if there had been a process change it might not affect older models.

Possibly, but you don't know unless you check.

 

[najaB]

Possibly, but you don't know unless you check.

Indeed, but there's a difference between "will have the same issues" (your words) and could have the same issues - given that we're apparently dealing with manufacturing defects in the Alaska Airlines incident.

 

[YorkRailFan]

United Airlines
is weighing fleet plans without the Boeing
737 Max 10 after a series of delays and most recently, the grounding of a smaller variant of the plane, the carrier’s CEO said Tuesday.

The Max 10 is the largest model of the plane and hasn’t yet been certified by the Federal Aviation Administration.
United CEO Scott Kirby said the plane is already “best case” about five years delayed and expressed frustration at Boeing for the most recent manufacturing problem in which a door plug blew out during an Alaska Airlines
737 Max 9 flight on Jan. 5, prompting the FAA to ground those planes.

United has 79 of the 737 Max 9 aircraft in its fleet, more than any other carrier. The ongoing grounding will drive a first-quarter loss, the airline said Monday while reporting its fourth-quarter earnings.I think the Max 9 grounding is probably the straw that broke the camel’s back for us,” Kirby said in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday. “We’re going to at least build a plan that doesn’t have the Max 10 in it.”

In August 2018, Kirby, then United’s president, outlined cabin plans for the some 100 Max 10s the company had ordered, saying at the time the carrier expected to fly them in 2020. The planes would help replace some older jets, he said.

Last week, Delta Air Lines
CEO Ed Bastian told CNBC last week that he is confident moving forward with his airline’s order of Boeing Max 10s.Boeing didn’t immediately comment. The company is scheduled to report quarterly results on Jan. 31.

United CEO casts doubt on 737 Max 10 order after Boeing's recent problems

CEO Scott Kirby said the Max 9 grounding after a door plug blew on an Alaska Airlines flight is the "straw that broke the camel's back."

www.cnbc.com

Ouch, this is really bad for Boeing. United is one of Boeing's biggest customers and United expressing plans to dump the 737-10 would be a massive blow to the program. The 737-9 is really making Airlines rethink their fleet plans. Additionally, Alaska Airlines is set to inaugurate their 737-8 on Seattle-Tacoma-Los Angeles International, likely to increase capacity following the 737-9 groundings as the 737-8 wasn't meant to fly with Alaska Airlines until Febraury 2024.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Boeing and its Seattle-area machinists union have delayed the opening of contract negotiations until early March as the company deals with the grounding of the 737 MAX 9.

Formal negotiations were set to begin in early February and were pushed back at Boeing's request, said the union on its website.

Both Boeing and its largest union — District 751 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers —have been named as parties of an ongoing National Transportation Safety Board investigation into midair cabin panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines MAX 9 earlier this month.

"While we focus on the 737-9 and the actions we’re taking on quality, we look forward to bargaining in good faith later this year," Boeing said.

IAM District 751's contract agreement with Boeing ends on midnight on Sept. 12. The union represents about 31,000 workers in the area around Puget Sound, Washington.

Boeing and Seattle-area union delay start of contract negotiations

Formal negotiations were set to begin in early February and were pushed back at Boeing's request, said the union on its website. Both Boeing and its largest union — District 751 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers —have been named as parties of an ongoing...

finance.yahoo.com

The union doesn't exactly have another choice at the minute.

 

[DanNCL]

United CEO casts doubt on 737 Max 10 order after Boeing's recent problems

CEO Scott Kirby said the Max 9 grounding after a door plug blew on an Alaska Airlines flight is the "straw that broke the camel's back."

www.cnbc.com

Ouch, this is really bad for Boeing. United is one of Boeing's biggest customers and United expressing plans to dump the 737-10 would be a massive blow to the program. The 737-9 is really making Airlines rethink their fleet plans. Additionally, Alaska Airlines is set to inaugurate their 737-8 on Seattle-Tacoma-Los Angeles International, likely to increase capacity following the 737-9 groundings as the 737-8 wasn't meant to fly with Alaska Airlines until Febraury 2024.

My understanding is that United are making plans to cancel 270 aircraft from the 737 MAX family, as well as all remaining options.

If Boeing doesn’t manage to convince United to change their minds then this is perhaps one of the biggest blows they’ve ever had. Losing United as a customer is as significant as losing Ryanair would be. Basically there’s four airlines who operate the 737 in such large quantities - United, American, Southwest and Ryanair. Losing any one of those four is effectively a vote of no confidence in Boeing from their largest customers.

There’s also the risk of a Domino effect, could other airlines follow suit?

 

[YorkRailFan]

My understanding is that United are making plans to cancel 270 aircraft from the 737 MAX family, as well as all remaining options.

If Boeing doesn’t manage to convince United to change their minds then this is perhaps one of the biggest blows they’ve ever had. Losing United as a customer is as significant as losing Ryanair would be. Basically there’s four airlines who operate the 737 in such large quantities - United, American, Southwest and Ryanair. Losing any one of those four is effectively a vote of no confidence in Boeing from their largest customers.

There’s also the risk of a Domino effect, could other airlines follow suit?

Delta has said that they're confident about the 737-10, both American and Southwest haven't ordered the 737-10 and Ryanair is Ryanair. The real issue for United is that Airbus has a backlog stretching into the 2030's for more A321neos, United's best option is to change their A350 slots into A321neo slots, that's if United no longer wants the A350 of course. If I were Boeing, I would be worried about Southwest, they currently have over 200 737-7s on order and did consider the A220 during the MAX groundings, a single cancellation from Southwest for the 737-7 would be very bad.

 

[najaB]

There’s also the risk of a Domino effect, could other airlines follow suit?

Perhaps. Though it's worth keeping in mind that cancelling a firm order isn't a cheap thing for the airline either. Both in the cancellation fees and the fact that they then go to the back of the queue with Airbus.

 

[edwin_m]

Delta has said that they're confident about the 737-10, both American and Southwest haven't ordered the 737-10 and Ryanair is Ryanair. The real issue for United is that Airbus has a backlog stretching into the 2030's for more A321neos, United's best option is to change their A350 slots into A321neo slots, that's if United no longer wants the A350 of course. If I were Boeing, I would be worried about Southwest, they currently have over 200 737-7s on order and did consider the A220 during the MAX groundings, a single cancellation from Southwest for the 737-7 would be very bad.

I don't really see how swapping A350 orders for A321 helps United - it won't cause Airbus to divert production capacity, United still go to the back of the queue for A321 and is there any reason to believe they don't want the A350s any more? Maybe Airbus could start steering potential A320 customers towards the A220 to free production capacity for more A321s.

Basically there’s four airlines who operate the 737 in such large quantities - United, American, Southwest and Ryanair. Losing any one of those four is effectively a vote of no confidence in Boeing from their largest customers.

Are there similar sized users in the eastern hemisphere? The new Chinese C919 jet could be a competitor, there in particular.

 

[najaB]

Maybe Airbus could start steering potential A320 customers towards the A220 to free production capacity for more A321s.

They're still working out production issues for the A220. They didn't manage to hit 6 a month for most of last year so any significant ramp will be challenging.

 

[YorkRailFan]

I don't really see how swapping A350 orders for A321 helps United - it won't cause Airbus to divert production capacity, United still go to the back of the queue for A321 and is there any reason to believe they don't want the A350s any more? Maybe Airbus could start steering potential A320 customers towards the A220 to free production capacity for more A321s.

As @najaB said, Airbus can't get A220 production up to the production levels of the A320, additionally, the A220 is exclusively powered by the PW1500G which has had a string of reliability and durability issues. On the A350 hand, United has continually pushed back their A350 order until 2030, despite ordering it in the 2010's and often ordering 787s.

 

[DustyBin]

I don't really see how swapping A350 orders for A321 helps United - it won't cause Airbus to divert production capacity, United still go to the back of the queue for A321 and is there any reason to believe they don't want the A350s any more? Maybe Airbus could start steering potential A320 customers towards the A220 to free production capacity for more A321s.


Are there similar sized users in the eastern hemisphere? The new Chinese C919 jet could be a competitor, there in particular.

I believe the Embraer E195-E2 can be configured with up to 146 seats, which makes it a potential MAX 7 competitor.

 

[YorkRailFan]

I believe the Embraer E195-E2 can be configured with up to 146 seats, which makes it a potential MAX 7 competitor.

There's also the SSJ-100, a Russified version and a non-Russified version to be built by a Joint Venture between Leonardo and the UAE. There's also the MC-21 which is yet to be certified and will be extremely hard for Western airlines to purchase it due to it being Russian.

 

[Bungle965]

I believe the Embraer E195-E2 can be configured with up to 146 seats, which makes it a potential MAX 7 competitor.

I was about to suggest could this be an outsiders gain with Embraer, although haven't they themselves still got issues with the P&W engines?

 

[YorkRailFan]

I was about to suggest could this be an outsiders gain with Embraer, although haven't they themselves still got issues with the P&W engines?

Yes, the PW1500G powers both the E2 and A220 and has had several durability and reliability issues, it's part of the GTF family along with the PW1100G which is an option for the A320neo family along with the LEAP 1A from CFM. The PW1500G has particular difficulties when operating in harsh hot and dusty environments.

 

[DanNCL]

Delta has said that they're confident about the 737-10, both American and Southwest haven't ordered the 737-10 and Ryanair is Ryanair. The real issue for United is that Airbus has a backlog stretching into the 2030's for more A321neos, United's best option is to change their A350 slots into A321neo slots, that's if United no longer wants the A350 of course. If I were Boeing, I would be worried about Southwest, they currently have over 200 737-7s on order and did consider the A220 during the MAX groundings, a single cancellation from Southwest for the 737-7 would be very bad.

Ryanair have considered walking away from the 737 many times before and they have now got A320s in their fleet through Lauda. Alternatively Michael O’Leary has hinted before that if they were offered a good enough deal they’d consider the C919. Ryanair’s custom is something Boeing shouldn’t be taking for granted.

As for Southwest, I think that would be the biggest shock if they walked away. The combination of Southwest and United walking away if it happened would probably be enough to finish the 737 MAX.

Delta doesn’t have as many 737s as the other large US operators of the type. So whilst they may have confidence in the MAX, their order alone won’t sustain it.

Cancelling their A350s wouldn’t help United get A321s quicker as they’re built on different production lines. It would just mean that Delta got their A350s quicker instead, something United no doubt would rather avoid!

I don't really see how swapping A350 orders for A321 helps United - it won't cause Airbus to divert production capacity, United still go to the back of the queue for A321 and is there any reason to believe they don't want the A350s any more? Maybe Airbus could start steering potential A320 customers towards the A220 to free production capacity for more A321s.

Any A321s for United would presumably be built in Mobile rather than in Toulouse or Hamburg so that could help them get A321s quicker than many other airlines could, but there’s still a long queue that United would be at the back of.

Are there similar sized users in the eastern hemisphere? The new Chinese C919 jet could be a competitor, there in particular.

Many Chinese airlines have large 737 fleets but most of them already have the C919 on order and will probably switch to the C919 long term for political reasons.

Other operators not already mentioned with large 737 fleets are Gol, WestJet, Alaska, Lion Air and Jet2.
Of those, Alaska and Lion Air have both had accidents with the 737 MAX, whilst Jet2 have already walked away from the 737 for future orders and gone to Airbus instead.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Ryanair have considered walking away from the 737 many times before and they have now got A320s in their fleet through Lauda. Alternatively Michael O’Leary has hinted before that if they were offered a good enough deal they’d consider the C919. Ryanair’s custom is something Boeing shouldn’t be taking for granted.

As for Southwest, I think that would be the biggest shock if they walked away. The combination of Southwest and United walking away if it happened would probably be enough to finish the 737 MAX.

Delta doesn’t have as many 737s as the other large US operators of the type. So whilst they may have confidence in the MAX, their order alone won’t sustain it.

Cancelling their A350s wouldn’t help United get A321s quicker as they’re built on different production lines. It would just mean that Delta got their A350s quicker instead, something United no doubt would rather avoid!

O'Leary knows he has no other real option apart from Boeing.

"We would not initiate talks with Airbus until such time as Airbus wants to initiate talks with us," he said in an interview.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-ryanair-hldgs-airb/ryanair-cools-on-airbus-moves-back-towards-all-boeing-fleet-idUSKBN22O1IZ/

O'Leary also said this about Airbus as O'Leary walked away from a deal with Airbus in 2001. O'Leary is like Sir Tim Clark at Emirates, they both moan about certification delays but they can't pull out.

Of those, Alaska and Lion Air have both had accidents with the 737 MAX, whilst Jet2 have already walked away from the 737 for future orders and gone to Airbus instead.

Ethiopian Airlines also had one of their 737-8s crash in 2019. Qantas and KLM also walked away from the 737 and ordered the A321neo.

 

[YorkRailFan]

The fuselage panel that blew off an Alaska Airlines jet earlier this month was removed for repair then reinstalled improperly by Boeing mechanics on the Renton final assembly line, a person familiar with the details of the work told The Seattle Times.

If verified by the National Transportation Safety Board investigation, this would leave Boeing primarily at fault for the accident, rather than its supplier Spirit AeroSystems, which originally installed the panel into the 737 MAX 9 fuselage in Wichita, Kan.

That panel, a door plug used to seal a hole in the fuselage sometimes used to accommodate an emergency exit, blew out of Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 as it climbed out of Portland on Jan. 5. The hair-raising incident drew fresh and sharp criticism of Boeing’s quality control systems and safety culture, which has been under the microscope since two fatal 737 MAX crashes five years ago.

Last week, an anonymous whistleblower — who appears to have access to Boeing’s manufacturing records of the work done assembling the specific Alaska Airlines jet that suffered the blowout — on an aviation website separately provided many additional details about how the door plug came to be removed and then mis-installed.

“The reason the door blew off is stated in black and white in Boeing’s own records,” the whistleblower wrote. “It is also very, very stupid and speaks volumes about the quality culture at certain portions of the business.”

The self-described Boeing insider said company records show four bolts that prevent the door plug from sliding up off the door frame stop pads that take the pressurization loads in flight, “were not installed when Boeing delivered the airplane.” the whistleblower stated. “Our own records reflect this.”

NTSB investigators already publicly raised the possibility that the bolts had not been installed.

The account goes on to describe shocking lapses in Boeing’s quality control process in Renton.

The work of the mechanics on the door plug should have been formally inspected and signed off by a Boeing quality inspector.

It wasn’t, the whistleblower wrote, because of a process failure and the use of two separate systems to record what work was accomplished.

Boeing’s 737 production system is described as “a rambling, shambling, disaster waiting to happen.”

If that account of what happened is indeed fully documented in Boeing’s system it should be readily verified by the investigation.The Seattle Times offered Boeing the opportunity to dispute the details in this story. Citing the ongoing investigation, Boeing declined to comment. Likewise, so did Spirit, the FAA, the Machinists union and the NTSB.

A convincing account
Passengers on Flight 1282 were traumatized when a door-sized section of the 737 MAX 9 fuselage exploded out 16,000 feet over Portland.

The door plug that blew out is a panel used to seal a fuselage cutout for an optional emergency exit door that is installed only by a few airlines with high-density seating. To a passenger seated at that location, it looks like just another cabin window.

Errors by Boeing at Renton plant led to Alaska Airlines MAX 9 blowout, industry source says

The piece that blew off an Alaska Airlines jet this month was removed and re-installed improperly by Boeing mechanics in Renton, according to a person familiar with the details of the work.

www.seattletimes.com

Lots of questions here. Did Boeing discover loose bolts whilst testing the pressurisation on the aircraft? This obviously points more fingers at Boeing and that this is an installation issue. Spirit AeroSystems shouldn't think that they're getting scot-free though, as the FAA investigation isn't only surrounding the recent incident surrounding AS 1282, but also regarding recent QA issues at both Boeing and Spirit AeroSystems.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Boeing’s 737 factory teams will hold a “Quality Stand Down” in Renton, Wash., this Thursday, Jan. 25. During the session, production, delivery and support teams will pause for a day so employees can take part in working sessions focused on quality. This is part of the immediate actions recently shared by Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Stan Deal.

Here are excerpts from the internal communication to all Commercial Airplanes employees:

“The first of the stand downs will be held Thursday for the 737 program. Production, delivery and support efforts will pause for a day so teammates can take part in working sessions focused on quality.

The sessions allow all teammates who touch the airplane to ‘pause, evaluate what we’re doing, how we’re doing it and make recommendations for improvement,’ said Stan Deal, BCA president and CEO.

Over the next couple weeks, Quality Stand Downs will take place at other factories and fabrication sites to include all of Airplane Programs. During the stand downs, teammates will participate in hands-on learning, reflection and collaboration to identify where quality and compliance can be improved and create actionable plans that will be tracked to closure.”

737-9 Updates: Boeing to hold Quality Stand Downs

www.boeing.com

One day likely isn't enough to bring all employees up to speed with QA. It will take time for Boeing to bring employees up to date with QA, one day just isn't enough.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Are there similar sized users in the eastern hemisphere? The new Chinese C919 jet could be a competitor, there in particular.

However, it remains to be seen how long it will take for the C919 to be delivered in larger volumes.
Additionally, no Chinese airline seems to have anything older than a 737-700, so most aren't in urgent need of replacement.
I think we might see quite a few Embraer orders for full-service airlines in the West though

 

[YorkRailFan]

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Wednesday, Jan. 24, approved a thorough inspection and maintenance process for the 737-9 MAX aircraft. Alaska Airlines is ready to perform these detailed inspections of our planes.

Each of our aircraft will only return to service once the rigorous inspections are completed and each aircraft is deemed airworthy according to the FAA requirements. We have 65 737-9 MAX in our fleet. The inspections are expected to take up to 12 hours for each plane.

Following these inspections by our skilled Alaska Maintenance technicians, we expect to bring our first few planes back into scheduled commercial service on Friday, Jan. 26.

At the request of the FAA, our Maintenance technicians completed preliminary inspections on 20 of our 737-9 MAX aircraft two weeks ago. The data we collected was provided to the FAA for further analysis. Those findings informed the FAA’s final orders for thorough inspections of the door plug on each of our 737-9 MAX aircraft. We are now ready to implement those final orders.

The first of our 737-9 MAX will resume flying on Friday, Jan. 26, with more planes added every day as inspections are completed and each aircraft is deemed airworthy. We expect inspections on all our 737-9 MAX to be completed over the next week.

We greatly appreciate the FAA’s diligence and commitment to safety to get the 737-9 MAX safely back in the air.

Information about Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 and our 737-9 MAX fleet - Alaska Airlines News

Latest updates & information can be found here.

news.alaskaair.com

“We will continue to cooperate fully and transparently with the FAA and follow their direction as we take action to strengthen safety and quality at Boeing. We will also work closely with our airline customers as they complete the required inspection procedures to safely return their 737-9 airplanes to service.”

737-9 Updates

www.boeing.com

Seems like good news unless something else is uncovered. The FAA will continue to overview Boeing QA and is of course still conducting an investigation into Boeing and their supplier, Spirit AeroSystems. Haven't seen United Airlines say anything though or from EASA.