Because Boeing were on such a good streak already…

  • iamjackflack@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    110
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    How is this Boeings issue? This is a maintenance problem with the airline. Tires get replaced by maintenance staff. That plane isn’t brand new.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Well, if proper maintenance was done and the part still failed due to a design or quality issue that was improperly QC’d (missed, skipped, etc) then yeah it could be Boeings fault.

      They’re getting extra scrutiny right now because of all the incidents recently, and all the anecdotal stories of former employees talking about how a bunch of suits are destroying it from the inside to make a quick buck.

      And frankly, they fucking deserve it.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Careful. Boeing already tried the “but it’s not our job” excuse on a few major incidences with an executive now locked behind bars after pushing bribes to cover it up . They’d be best backing off on taking an attitude about where to assign blame. They got a lot of red spots that will never come out.

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      11 months ago

      If I recall correctly, the aircraft manufacturer writes the maintenance guidelines.

      This could be a Boeing issue, if it’s due to something that happened at the time the aircraft was built, or due to a foreseeable gap in the maintenance guidelines.

      It could be a Delta issue, if they weren’t following the maintenance guidelines, or a maintenance contractor working for them wasn’t following them and they didn’t catch it.

      It could also have been (very small but nonzero chance) the result of physical trauma to the plane that wasn’t foreseen, back in the 1990s when it was built, as something that might cause an issue of this magnitude. I haven’t yet seen any information on whether this particular aircraft has a history of hard landings or running over debris on the runway. Freak accidents do happen.

      All of those have precedents in aviation history.

    • Copernican@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I remember watching this PBS Frontline segment on plane maintenance 10 years or so ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sw0b020OFj4

      I imagine we still have those problems and the recent news of counterfeit parts entering the market is scary.

      Good thing these recent incidents ended up with no serious injuries or death. Perhaps this timing is good in some really weird way as the Supreme Court starts considering powers of regulatory agencies and concerns around government funding to highlight the importance and need for this government role.

    • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think the first two repliers have never heard of Ockham’s razor. I mean a micro meteorite could have struck some part of the wheel and knocked it off too, but probably not. Though that would be boeing’s fault to, because they didn’t make it micro meteorite tolerant.

      • Nelots@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        11 months ago

        No, no, no, no, it’s being towed BEYOND the environment. It’s not in the environment.

        • thenextguy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          11 months ago

          There’s nothing out there. There’s nothing but leaves and grass and rocks.

          And?

          And a tire.

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          No, no, no, no, it’s being towed BEYOND the environment. It’s not in the environment.

          Real life wall clip hack, any% boeing speedrun, impossible?

          Edit: Quoted the wrong comment

          • wikibot@lemmy.worldB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Here’s the summary for the wikipedia article you mentioned in your comment:

            The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. Systems similar to the Boeing 737 MCAS were previously included on the Boeing 707 and Boeing KC-46, a 767 variant. On the 737 MAX, MCAS was intended to mimic the flight behavior of the previous generation of the series, the Boeing 737 NG. During MAX flight tests, Boeing discovered that the position and larger size of the engines tended to push the nose up during certain maneuvers. Engineers decided to use MCAS to counter that tendency, since major structural redesign would have been prohibitively expensive and time-consuming.

            to opt out, pm me ‘optout’. article | about

      • Welt@lazysoci.al
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The front fell off, so just tow it outside the environment

      • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes but probably management saw that as a problem limiting the future wheel assembly purchases. I mean you can land without the wheel right?

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      11 months ago

      Any regulatory agencies that enforce this sort of stuff being defunded, understaffed, or de-toothed in the last 4-8 years?

      That’s what this smells like, and we should really be getting ourselves ready for more of this in other industries.

      • Eranziel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        I don’t know about the regulatory side, but Boeing gutted their experienced engineering corps starting about 10 years ago. In the pursuit of profit of course. I think we’re seeing the effects of that finally coming to the fore.

        My understanding of the role of the regulatory agencies for stuff like this is that they can ground a model of plane if they believe there’s a systemic issue. Like we saw with the MAX.

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Maybe Delta should’ve gotten the input of the focus group from I Think You Should Leave when trying to determine what they should do with their maintenance dollars.

  • Shadywack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The old saying, “If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going”, it just needs slightly tweaked to be accurate today XD

    • derf82@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      In fairness, the 757 was designed when Boeing was still engineering focused and is one of the best commercial aircraft ever produced. This airframe, N672DL, is 32 years old, so it was almost certainly an issue with Delta’s maintenance. It was also quickly repaired and returned to service the next day.

      No one was criticizing Airbus when one of their aircraft was found the other day missing fasteners before a flight: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/nyc-bound-flight-canceled-passenger-31941807.amp

      • Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        All kidding aside, the passenger experience is a lot better anyway. Overhead storage bins on the newer airbus planes is a hell of a lot better, not to mention the infotainment systems that airlines seem to opt for. The way they integrate and function vs the Boeing dreamliners is a pretty stark contrast.

        • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I dunno, the 777ER is a great long distance plane, but the A320 is also a good experience. I really think Boeing fucked up with keeping that old workhorse the 737 around at the behest of pilots and customers. Especially since the 777 is (knocking on wood) as safe as it gets, no hull losses from internal factors as of today.

          Boeing’s mismanagement is not just a 737 problem: It’s a USA problem, they are the ones that make our jets, missiles, and manage our first strike capacity. These are things that much like our planes, cannot fail. EVER.

  • pachrist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    11 months ago

    On some Boeing aircraft, the nose wheel will actually come off when the autopilot system overcompensates during takeoff and crashes the plane straight into the ground. There were aome small news stories about it a few years back.

    • SevenProvinces@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s even known that the nose itself can come off if the autopilot overcompensates while in flight and crashes the plane into the ground.

      • Tangent5280@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Are you sure? This makes it sound like every time the plane crashes into the ground because of autopilot overcompensation, its a good bet to assume the nose itself has already come off.