Darren Wilson’s Post

US authority orders safety check of additional Boeing 737s The US Transportation Safety Authority has issued urgent "safety recommendations" for certain Boeing 737 models. The reason is an incident with a blocked rudder at United Airlines. Boeing is once again facing safety problems. New safety concerns with Boeing aircraft The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued urgent safety recommendations for some Boeing 737 aircraft on Thursday. The focus is on the rudder system, which has been identified as being at risk of blockages. The trigger for these recommendations was an incident on February 6, 2024, in which the rudder pedals of a United Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 were "stuck" in the neutral position during landing at Newark Airport in New Jersey. Fortunately, none of the 161 passengers and crew members were injured in the incident. The captain was able to bring the aircraft to a safe stop by controlling the nose wheel. Investigations revealed that a faulty roll guide actuator, a component of the rudder system, was responsible for the blockage. Faulty components and safety risks As reported by Reuters, Collins Aerospace was found to have supplied Boeing with more than 353 faulty actuators since February 2017. These components were installed in some Boeing 737 MAX and older 737 NG aircraft. The NTSB said the affected actuator was vulnerable to moisture, which could freeze and limit the movement of the rudder system. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced it would convene a corrective action review panel on Friday to determine next steps based on the NTSB's recommendations. United Airlines, the only U.S. airline to have the affected components on its aircraft, said it replaced all of the parts in question earlier this year. Ongoing safety issues at Boeing This incident is the latest in a series of safety issues Boeing has faced recently. It was only in January 2024 that an incident involving an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9, in which a door cover came loose during flight, led to increased controls and restrictions for the aircraft manufacturer. The ongoing difficulties have also had personnel consequences. At the end of March 2024, then Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun announced his resignation at the end of the year. Ultimately, his departure was brought forward to August 7, 2024, and Kelly Ortberg took over the position of President and CEO from August 8, 2024

I am not sure what is going on these days but it certainly seems as if the quality of employees and their concern for safety seems to be near bankrupt. When you are working on aircraft or for that matter any type of equipment your mind should be focused on safety. It’s not the CEOs fault - it’s the mechanics fault plain and simple. If your task was to install the wheel on the aircraft then you better darn well be focused on that task and not your break time, lunch, phone calls or whatever. It wasn’t Boeing or Airbus’ fault that you didn’t install the wheel properly. Fire the mechanic. Let’s have some accountability.

What unconventional maintenance methods have you seen? Aircraft maintenance procedures adhere to strict regulations and safety standards, and approved lubricants designed specifically for aviation applications are used to ensure proper functioning of aircraft components, including doors. Using inappropriate lubricants could compromise the integrity of the door mechanisms, potentially leading to malfunctions or safety hazards during flight. #engineeringinnovation #safety #airlinesafety #industrialautomation #dishsoaplubricant #boeing737 https://lnkd.in/eH-WCAar

Hydraulic Failure Leads to 767 Gear-Up Landing On November 1, 2011, LOT Polish Airlines Flight 16, a Boeing 767-35D(ER) en route from Newark, United States to Warsaw, Poland, executed an emergency gear-up landing at Warsaw Chopin Airport due to a complete failure of its landing gear system. The incident, attributed to a hydraulic system failure, ended without fatalities or injuries among the 231 occupants. Investigations pinpointed a hydraulic leak initiated shortly after takeoff, caused by excessive bending of a flexible hose in the center hydraulic system. This leak resulted in the depletion of all hydraulic fluid necessary for operating the primary landing gear system. The flight crew, led by Captain Tadeusz Wrona, a seasoned pilot with extensive experience on the 767, received an early warning about the malfunction but opted to continue to Warsaw. The decision was made to burn fuel and prepare for an emergency landing. Efforts to deploy the landing gear using alternative methods were unsuccessful, prompting the crew to perform a gear-up landing. The aircraft sustained significant damage, leading to its classification as a hull loss. Further examination revealed that the C829 circuit breaker, responsible for protecting multiple systems including the alternate landing gear extension system, had tripped, severing the circuit. It was discovered post-landing that resetting this breaker allowed the landing gear to extend using the alternate system. The final investigation report, released in 2017, cited the root causes of the accident as the hydraulic hose leak, the tripped C829 circuit breaker, and the flight crew's oversight in failing to identify the tripped breaker during their approach. Contributory factors included the lack of measures to prevent accidental tripping of circuit breakers, the placement of the C829 breaker in a position difficult for the crew to observe, insufficient procedures at LOT's operations center, and the airline's failure to apply Boeing's service bulletin aimed at preventing hose bending. The incident led to the scrapping of the aircraft involved two years later and highlighted critical areas for improvement in hydraulic system integrity, circuit breaker accessibility, and procedural adherence within aviation operations management. Subscribe to our Aviation Safety Newsletter NOW and get the hot stuff free and without delay: https://lnkd.in/eGZqhPHR! My accident reviews are short summaries of publicly available accident reviews and reports and do not constitute any interpretation nor express my opinion or the opinion of any organization.

Anyone who knows me from my SMS days will know that I want to understand root cause. In the article below, Boeing speaks about added scrutiny, more inspections, and signage when door plugs are removed. I don’t read that they are trying to understand why the specifications were not followed as a matter of routine in the production process. The inspections may catch the faults of the production process, but I’d want to understand the cause in the first place. https://lnkd.in/gdtnDMbK

Do the safety issues in the US go further than Boeing? That's the uncomfortable question I am asking myself currently. We all know about Boeing issues, from the two MAX 8 crashes to the aircraft door 'butt' on the Alaskan Airways plane. United Airlines have had a series of recent incidents that has seen the FAA increase its presence and scrutiny of their maintenance practises. Now the pilots union at American Have reported a number of issues, which management of AA have listened to and will be involving the Pilots union in the scrutiny process. It does make you wonder if two of the big four US carriers have issues that have become public, are there issues elsewhere? Does the FAA need to take a closer look at other airlines? The last thing we need is to overegg this issue as scaring passengers in advance of the summer season, can have a huge impact on airlines in the US and possibly wider afield. We should look at the number of incidents as a percentage of all flights and it will be Infinitesimally small (does anyone out there have the data?) so flying is still incredibly safe but there is a worrying trend. Would I still fly on United or American right now? Absolutely YES.

Safety/737 max + supply chain Happy new year! Taking this opportunity for a few thoughts on the above … 2023 was a record positive year for the industry with respect to safety. A tribute to the people working directly or indirectly in air transport. Another grounding on a Max variant: seeing the timed reaction of regulators, will this mean that groundings will be inevitable following any event (accident or incident) in the future? (In the past it was different…) Regulators are now scared to be seen not to take action, following the MCAS saga ! More quality issues within Boeing or something else? Either way, work is required to assure swift and safe closure! Boeing stock took a hard hit. Two more points on this : CVR 2 hour capacity has to change (unacceptable limit) and of course … an I-phone survives a 15,000 feet drop from the aircraft … (this is super!). On the supply chain and MRO status, it remains amazing to live and view (said this many times before) the collapse of all efficiency we always assumed as standard. Now, any manufacturing, repair and material supply project/issue, takes a silly amount of time (sometimes it even fails to supply at all!) When in the year 2000 we did a full aircraft D check in 4 weeks or a bit less, it now takes 2 weeks to swap a landing gear ! ( only removal installation). Slots are hard to find and timescales ridiculous… let’s see ! Finally… well done to the industry on the superb A350 evacuation… with a worry about the increased runway incursions and ground incidents.

#Boeing #Whistleblower: #Production Line Has “#Enormous #Volume Of #Defects” #Bolts On #MAX9 Weren’t Installed...The takeaway appears to be that #outsourced #plane #components have so many #problems when they show up at the #ProductionLine that Boeing’s #QualityControl staff can’t keep up with them all…Boeing #outsources a lot of the production of components for its #aircraft because it’s #cheaper as part of an overall shift in #strategy that dates to CEO Harry Stonecipher who had been CEO of #McDonnellDouglas, When people say I changed the #culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so that it’s run like a #business rather than a great #engineering firm. One of the major suppliers is #SpiritAeroSystems, which used to be part of Boeing and was spun out and sold to #PrivateEquity in 2005. That’s whose work is at issue here...suggests that Boeing’s new team of #lobbyists has their work cut out for them. It certainly appears so, but perhaps work needs to start at the #board and C-suite level. #ToxicAltitude #ElectricalForensics #LightForensics #AlaskaAirlines #AAR #FAA #NTSB #Max9 #Boeing737 https://lnkd.in/g_aBRHbk

The incident involving the Alaska Airlines 737 Max 9, where bolts were removed during an inspection at Boeing, highlights a critical issue in the aviation industry: the need to optimize and secure assembly and maintenance processes. This event underscores the risks associated with human errors or procedural faults, which can have serious repercussions on flight safety. In this context, the adoption of kittings throughout the assembly and maintenance chain proves to be a strategic solution to improve reliability and efficiency in aviation. Kittings, which are prepared sets of parts, tools, and materials for specific operations, offer several advantages such as reducing assembly errors, optimizing work time, standardizing processes, and ensuring traceability and compliance. These aspects are crucial to maintaining the quality and safety standards required in the aviation sector. In terms of application in the assembly chain, kittings that structure work on the production line help to reduce errors, speed up construction, and ensure that airplanes comply with quality and safety standards. For maintenance, the importance of kittings is even more pronounced, ensuring that technicians have everything necessary for each intervention, which is vital to maintain the integrity of the aircraft and prevent incidents. Beyond the technical and operational aspect, it is crucial to consider the indirect cost of such incidents. An incident like that of the 737 Max 9 can lead to significant disruptions in operations, delays in deliveries, additional costs in terms of repairs and further inspections, not to mention the impact on the company's reputation. These indirect costs can far exceed the direct costs of the incident, affecting the profitability and market position of the company in the long term. The incident reported by Le Monde highlights the importance of integrating solutions such as kittings to enhance safety and efficiency in the aviation industry. These practices are not limited to improving operations but also contribute to minimizing the risks and indirect costs associated with incidents, playing a decisive role in preserving the reputation and competitiveness of companies in this highly regulated sector.

"Mastering the Fundamentals: A Closer Look at 14 CFR Part 91.417(a)(1)" In the world of general aviation, meticulous maintenance documentation is not just a best practice; it's a requirement. Today, we narrow our focus to 14 CFR Part 91.417(a)(1), detailing the first set of requirements for maintaining and retaining aircraft maintenance records. This regulation is foundational for ensuring the ongoing airworthiness and safety of your aircraft. The Core of 14 CFR Part 91.417(a)(1): This specific section mandates that aircraft owners and operators keep records of all maintenance, preventive maintenance, alterations, and repairs performed on the aircraft. Here’s what you need to know: Detailed Records: Every action taken on the aircraft, no matter how minor it may seem, must be documented. This includes routine maintenance, unexpected repairs, modifications, and even the smallest adjustments. What to Include: For each entry, the record must specify the description of the work performed, ensuring clarity and completeness. It’s not enough to note that maintenance was done; the records must articulate what was maintained or repaired, how it was done, and why. The Importance of Detail: These detailed records serve multiple critical functions. They ensure compliance with FAA regulations, yes, but they also provide a transparent history of the aircraft’s upkeep. This can be invaluable for diagnosing future issues, planning maintenance, ensuring safety, and preserving the aircraft's value. Why Detail Matters: Each maintenance entry is a piece of the aircraft’s story. Accurate and comprehensive records help paint a full picture of the aircraft's health and maintenance history. They're essential for maintaining high safety standards and can significantly impact the aircraft's longevity and performance. Navigating Compliance: Understanding and applying the requirements of 14 CFR Part 91.417(a)(1) is crucial for every aircraft owner and operator. It’s about more than following rules; it’s about embracing a culture of safety and responsibility. Next in Our Series: Stay tuned as we continue to explore the depths of aviation maintenance documentation, offering insights to navigate the complexities of FAA regulations confidently.  #AviationMaintenance #FAARegulations #SafetyFirst #AircraftOwnership #Avolatus How do you ensure your maintenance records meet the detailed requirements of Part 91.417(a)(1)?