Remember frequency illusion is a very real thing.
Last week an Airbus had a brake failure on approach in Seattle. Did you hear about that?
https://simpleflying.com/delta-air-lines-airbus-a220-suffers-brakes-failure/
Remember you’re primed to see things that match your biases.
This is exactly it. I’m not making excuses for these companies messing up and being negligent I think it’s fine they get a spotlight on these things. However it’s just like the railroad derailings that were hot recently. After it was news we were seeing huge headlines of derailings like every single day and not anymore. I have family members as engineers in the railroad and I know that there’s derailings literally all the time but it was only reported so much because it was the new hot topic for a while. Again not defending the railroads in the cases where huge disasters were also caused due to negligence fuck them for that too
It’s a thing until it becomes so frequent that it’s just background noise, which is what happened with car crashes. I took specific action to make my next big trip safer, and from everything I could find the most effective way to do that was trading out the drive to the airport for a bus ride.
It’s always been that frequent…
The 737-MAX issues are very high profile and represent an extremely bad issue at Boeing’s core.
But these issues are nothing like that. They’re constant background issues that you were ignoring before now, you’ll just go back to ignoring them.
This is a maintenance issue with the airline, not a manufacturing issue. Big difference. A mechanic doing routine maintaine probably forgot to latch the cowling.
Definitely - that’s why I’m saying this has always been a constant background level of fuckups.
Airplanes are so scrutinized and safe that this level of casual negligence rarely causes issues.
Yeah but it’s funnier when it’s against an American corporate behemoth that already has a poor safety record from even before Airbus became a thing.
Wiki says Airbus was founded in 1970. You think Boeing has had a bad safety record for 55+ years?
Airbus has only really been in competition with Boeing since the 2000s. Boeing’s merger with Mcdonell Douglas was in 1997 and that is when corporate culture shifted hard away from quality and to machinists, mechanics, engineers, everyone being told to think “how can I increase stock value today”.
Yes, but that’s still quite different from what was said. I was only pointing out the ridiculousness of the claim. A lot of Boeing’s current problems point back to that merger.
*brake
Ty fixed
The brakes broke, so I guess technically it could be a “break failure.”
Technically, that would be a break success.
While frequency illusion is a real thing, so is the negligence exhibited by capitalists when they need to report growth quarter after quarter at any cost.
I’ll continue to be primed to see this shit because it’s only going to get worse and worse.
The Boeing merger with Douglas was the end of any “good” corporate culture. Everything for the bottom line - security be damned.
It’s the classic short sighted capitalist maximizing of the now at the cost of the future.
I guess a common factor is they are both being operated by a shitty US airline that probably cut every corner conceivable to save on costs.
To everyone saying it is not an Boeing issue:
We simply don’t know that,yet. It could be a maintenance issue with whoever Southwest contracted. From someone fucking up closing the engine cover properly to the use of counterfeit parts (actually a larger issue than most people know - it has brought down airliners in the past).
It also could be an issue with actual Boeing certified spare parts or maintenance protocols- Something breakers earlier than expected,some spare parts are not as good as expected, the procedure is overly complicated,etc.
And of course it still could be an issue with actual Boeing works - something is built badly and now, after thousands of hours finally kicks the bucket - there have been cases where repairs brought down airliners decades after them being down (badly),the same is absolutely possible for engineering or assembly mishaps. If that is the case Boeing would be really fucked.
Anyways: There is a reason NTSB reports take months to years until they are finished. It is ridiculous how many people “know” what the reason for this was.
The plane is 7 years old. This isn’t a Boeing issue, this is a Southwest maintenance issue. Engine cowlings are regularly removed for maintenance. If a latch or latches aren’t properly secured or suffer from excessive wear then this is the outcome. I get the disdain for Boeing, but it should be based on issues of their negligence, not the negligence of their customers.
Arguably. Reading the comments on avhearld, the cowling latches to each other rather than to the frame and the latches themselves are very low and easy to miss. Airbus has tried to eliminate this potential oversight, whereas Boeing has not. So yes, potentially missed non walk around, but also a possible systematic design failure.
Not arguably, still a maintaine issue with the owner of the plane.
Failures of design can lead to maintenance failures. Where as maintenance failures do not always stem from failures of design.
So not mutually exclusive in this case.
First sentence is true. Last sentence is not. We’ll see.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A Boeing 737 operated by Southwest Airlines had to turn around mid-flight after an engine cover ripped off on Sunday.
Southwest Airlines told Business Insider in a statement that Flight 3695 returned to the Denver International Airport and landed safely after experiencing a “mechanical issue.”
In January, the Federal Aviation Administration grounded 171 Boeing 737 Max 9 planes after a section of an Alaska Airlines fuselage — a plug over what was previously a door — ripped away mid-flight.
The FAA said in a statement at the time that each plane would have to undergo an eight-hour safety inspection before it’s allowed to carry passengers again.
Boeing Chairman Steve Mollenkopf has reached out directly to several airlines following the company’s recent struggles, Bloomberg reported.
Mollenkpf’s move came after Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary said that Boeing showed a “lack of attention to detail.”
The original article contains 336 words, the summary contains 142 words. Saved 58%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary said that Boeing showed a “lack of attention to detail.”
You know… Ryanair throwing shade around about lack of anything is pretty hilarious.
Did that primary buffer panel just fell off my gorram plane for no apparent reason?
Don’t worry cap’n everything’s shiny - honest!
Flew out on an Airbus the entire way to Canada. Unfortunately our trip back is on a Boeing 737. Ooof
From what I understand only the 737 MAX is affected. Older 737 models should be fine.
Thanks for this
That doesn’t look like a serious safety problem to me- but I’m not an expert
