Even companies that manufacture yoghurt cups are better organized. But the paperwork is so much work....and I would preferably keep sitting on my ass and watch TikTok. I am done with Boeing and will avoid flights operated with Boing planes. Nothing will change without the personal accountability of Boeing managers on every level.
At 01:41, that sounds like a "single point of failure" if the factory has only one person who knows how to work on all the doors. Others should have been trained to do the same work so that if he's on vacation, or retires, or whatever, another person can do the job. That alone is a big problem in the factory.
It's a drop in the bucket when put against the entire big picture of 'what safety' we're seeing from Boeing. Not to minimize how bad it is, but to emphasize how horrific the overall issue is.
IMHO, the search for the individual who fitted the plug is a red herring. The main issue is the whole quantity control process. Just nailing some poor sap to the wall will not solve the problem.
I disagree. As noted in this video it would likely have taken multiple hands to manhandle that door plug back into the closed position. Someone on the repair crew needs to accept responsibility for the work done and the corner cutting QC in a rush to get the plane off the assembly line.
I broadly agree, it's the system that's at fault, not the poor folk on the shop floor. Also, I have said it before, and will say again, and will probably be shouted down again. They need to look at Lean. Lean is about reducing waste, in Lean the biggest, most evil waste is time. When Toyota developed lean, their biggest waste at the time was re-work. It was slowing production, and worst of all causing quality issues that their customers could see. The root issue was the rivets, it should have been discovered at spirit and fixed there. How many more quality issues are there because shop floor workers were diverted from the "day job", and if it didn't, it would have been slowing production. And before you say, these are planes, not cars. I know. But the same principles apply. Doesn't matter if you are making Christmas crackers or nuclear missiles. Reducing waste improves both production and quality.
@@BlueSpruce2 Bull s..... None of the repair crew will just pick up a door and put it back in place, because it was laying around. If the company had procedures that worked well, only qualified people will touch those parts. But the issue is probably that a middle manager was pushing his crew to work on things that they are not qualified to do. And the middle manager was being pushed by the top manager to find creative solutions and solve the problem. And the top manager was being pushed by the top bosses in HQ to have those planes rolling out the door. Don't go after the one or two guys that did what they were asked to do. They probably didn't know what they may work on or not. At the end, it is the company culture that is broken - very broken.
@@todortodorov6056 As you say, we need those 1 or 2 guys low down on the totem pole to start talking before we can get to the bottom of the failure or root cause of it. Evidently there was a push to get that particular aircraft off the assembly line. Also let's not forget we are likely dealing with a Union that will protect their own...
As 45 years as a retired Crew Chief at a major helicopter company, I am appalled! The whole failure hinges upon the fact the door was not on “Removal,” with no entries indicating that the door was removed. Also the concept of a “Door Guru,” is crazy. What happens when that someone goes home, goes on vacation, retires, dues or is in the hospital? There should have been at least three entrees for reinstalling that door. The technician that reinstalled the door, the QA inspector that okayed the job and the option for the government or the customer sign off. In my opinion, where I used to work, we had great managers, ok managers and Terrible managers, in the end it was the crew keeps things safe. Boeing seems to be going out of their way to screw over the floor crews and insure that Executive Compensation Job One!
While I was in the Navy, an issue like this would be called a Chinese Fire Drill, and heads would roll at the upper levels on down. The rule would be (essentially) if you don’t know how to do a job, inform your manager immediately. It’s their job to get the right people on the job who know exactly what they are doing. And update all the needed paperwork so that there’s proof the job was done correctly. It blows my mind that there’s one person at Boeing who knows how to reinstall a door plug. Really? REALLY? It’s a miracle that nobody was sucked out of that plane. And a good thing. Quality Management System (QMS) at Boeing is so broken.
If only one guy knew how to open and close a door - sounds laughable when stated this way - and was on vacation, then whoever opened the door should have been the ones closing and buttoning it up as well. They would know which seat pocket they left the retaining bolts in... 😂
In the last couple of flights, Alaska obviously knew there was a problem with that door plug. Passengers had no doubt commented about the air leak noise and perhaps the way the window rocks around & makes a knocking noise on landing! That's why in a full aircraft, those are the only 2 empty seats. I guess Alaska had to keep flying it rather than fix it - their one & only door plug guy must have been on holiday too! (Or they don't have a door plug guy).
@@alanm8932 I have always thought Alaska is just as liable as Boeing for flying an aircraft that was having pressurization issues - at least 3 times - before the door finally came off.
I worked in aviation production and maintenance for over forty years. I cannot understand why Boeing uses particular mechanics for doors alone. A good well-trained mechanic should have been able to use engineering drawings and process sheets to enable him or her to fit the door plug safely. As for the inspection department, I am at a loss to understand their negligence
Yes, a competent mechanic can figure out the drawings but this was a traveled Spirit job that only a few people at Boeing had previously done. If in doubt, stop and ask for help.
This is just my own semi-uneducated speculation, but... Needlessly specific union rules? I work with someone that used to work at a unionized small aircraft manufacturing plant and he's told us stories about how hard it was to get things done because every little task was assigned to different people as defined by union rules. He made it sound like even minor procedures ended up more complicated than "How many (Polish people - trying to keep it PC) does it take to change a light bulb.
@@ressljs Yep that's the correct answer, you hit the nail right on the head. Needless union protectionism prevents employees from being cross trained and hold multiple certifications to work at different points along the fabrication and manufacturing processes because that might eliminate jobs. Your coworker has very keen insights and observations into this very specific union made problem. The absolute worst employees you can ever hire are those who know they can't be fired so they have ZERO incentive to increase their productivity and expand their skill set so they in turn become extremely complacent.
This can all be laid at the feet of "Neutron" Jack Welch. Dave Calhoun was a protégé of his. And the management of McDonell-Douglas, which later became the management of Boeing were acolytes of his as well.
Totally agree. Don't understand why he's worshipped in some circles. He really destroyed American corporate management culture. GE is now a shell of its former self thanks to Welch.
Thankfully Ortberg seems to be more influenced by the likes of Alan Mulally. I hope it's not too late to take Boeing back to basics, and back to being an engineering led company again.
@@cjmillsnun I'm afraid that the entire C-Suite would need to be purged and replaced with individuals with aerospace experience. Hopefully I'm wrong...
I just about fell off my couch when you mentioned "Milton and the Red Stapler." Do you think Milton did it as revenge? LOL Not many people remember the movie "Office Space." Thanks for the laugh!
Imagine gaving all those people wirking on an airplane with no documented work processes and nobody said a word All of thise Boeing workers and the FAA inspectors should ve in jail - A complete indictment of Boeing so called Safety Culture - who works on an aircraft without a documented work process Boeing aircraft are unfit to fly under such construction processes
So, if we have an FAA inspector flagging items as unacceptable... Where was that guy's confirmation all required remedial work was taken of and parts had passed FAA re-inspection? Nothing ought to be leaving the factory until FAA inspectors formally re-inspect and sign off on issues they themselves had previously raised.
Quite right Bluestreak. Where is this guy now? Where is his follow up to the problem that he himself raised? He spotted it wasn’t satisfactory, made a decision that it needed rectifying and then what ?
I guess the FAA inspector can inspect only things that Boeing (and suppliers) told him that they worked on and that he should inspect. As there is no documentation on the door, I guess the FAA inspector had no idea they open it.
Such a complex story so well and expertly explained. Thank you Maximus. P.S. From now on I'm going to not just leave my troubles on the ground but my whole body. Can't wait for Amtrak to build a bridge to Europe!
Fly on a reputable airline with quality hiring standards and training, avoid newer Boeing products, and you'll be fine. Statistically, flying on a US carrier is still safer than driving. Even with the questionable qualification folks and Boeing's problems.
Amtrak will never come to Hawaii but now we have JetBlue. I trust Delta and their maintenance. But would love to see America by rail. I'm never going on a modern Boeing.
It’s not an accident - it was intentional. They called it “opening” the door instead of removing it to avoid having to do a formal inspection afterwards. It’s “get-there-itis” but for quality systems and production. They had to get it done. Calling it opening a door instead of removing a door let them skip steps. This is the same kind of “creativity” that led to MCAS being undocumented on the 737 max, and not listing the angle of attack indicators as crucial risk control measures for safe flight. They would have required multiple AOA indicators but if they were listed, then they would have had to list MCAS, which means it would have needed a possible new type rating, which was too expensive. Saving money by finding creative ways around the process is unsafe.
Those trainees didnt decide to do that themselves, a manager told them to do it and they know what happens to former Boeing employess that go to court.
You really can see the same management style has come over from the team that brought you the DC10 cargo door. The contractor warned that the door locking design was fatally flawed but management told them to build it anyway. After one blow out and a miraculous landing the FAA had a “gentleman’s agreement” with MD to get it fixed (does this sound familiar ?) and only forced the fix after the horrific Paris crash. Management absolutely to blame for creating the environment where quality and safety are ignored to enable output.
Now the question is: is it an isolated incident, or are every Boeing built the same way, by the wrong unqualified people, without paper trail and lack of QC? If so each recent Boeing should be grounded and inspected. Front to tail.
The door was isolated incident. The FAA know that the bolts may be missing and told airlines to inspect their planes. The quality chaos at Boeing is a systemic nightmare that no airline can fix with a simple or thorough inspection. You need to check every rivet, every bolt. It is probably cheaper to just buy new planes.
Flying 777 in a few weeks, asking two guys from local McDonald’s to give it once over before we fly…………. Should now be ‘as it’s a Boeing, I’m certainly not going’
This is a function of electronic aircraft maintenance documentation. When I put my initials over a red X or a red -- to clear a deficiency, I always was 100% sure it was done correctly. I knew if it wasn't, I would go to prison! Too many cooks in the kitchen on this one = no accountability. That door plug did not hang itself back on the airframe. Whoever took it off obviously did not put it in the electronic forms. There is no mystery here, only coverup.
2:59 first "try" was to paint over the rivets that weren't to spec! Presumably they repainted them because at Spirit that would have got them an inspection "pass"! How often is that kind of _solution_ being used when items are out of spec? As I understand it... The tail of the rivet is squashed down, shortening the tail and increasing its diameter. If you started with the correct length of rivet tail and squashed it the right amount, then the squashed tail height and diameter will be within spec. I suspect they started with a rivet a little short, so when it's squashed down to the correct height, the diameter isn't big enough to meet spec. So they've painted around the outside to make the diameter big enough. WOW! In what world would that even be discussed as a solution, let alone to actually do it on 5 rivets. (Obviously it's the metal of the rivet whose diameter is supposed to be within spec. Adding paint to make the diameter within spec... what?)
I can't believe the fuselages are shipped via rail, with absolutely "No" protection from the elements and or vandalism!! WOW". Auto mobiles shipped via rail are much more protected!!
For those of us who fly this specific aircraft, as well as all of the other various makes and models, we are listening. Thank you for contributing to the conversation to improve safety.
A safety culture requires every individual employees, at every level, to possess and enforce a technical mindset and understands as well as appreciates the consequences of non-compliance. Otherwise you end up with seat-of-the-pants hackers breaking rules and improvising their way around problems and obstacles - like Stockton Rush in his ill-fated OceanGate submarine who was shockingly also once a test engineer at McDonnell Douglas.
Been with Boeing since 2011 and they love to hire people to build the planes that have no prior experience. I got my A&P in 1991. When I started in Charleston and my first Lead started telling me something that I shouldn't be doing because the FAA wouldn't like it, blah blah blah, I realized he was full of it. I said to him that I only had one question, what does FAA stand for (the acronym). He had no clue. Tried to make something up. Found out he previously came from a fast food chain. Now their main priority is putting women, or those that identify as female, and gay people in high places. Its all rainbows and sunshine. 🙂
Max, great report thanks, I think the cuts to stock idiots reaction shots (not you your not an idiot) spoils and devalues your efforts. Thanks for the time you take to put this content together.
Sounds like they have good systems in place to make sure things are done correctly. Unfortunately, they also have people who know how to bypass the systems when they are in a hurry. All is well until someone is in a hurry.
Sounds like Boeing has a very brittle system that can fail at the slightest anomaly. It always amazes me when you read about what happens after a crash, and what the FAA finds out, that usually the solution is just a piece of paper, a bulletin. Like, "We told ya, so it's ur problem now". They should try a little harder. I'm sure there is a phone book of bulletins and recommendations on all the crap that goes on an airplane. Im a software developer, and it would be like me just updating the help file about how the software can crash and do things wrong, instead of actually fixing the software. What else on these airplanes has gotten messed up because of crap like this, the scary part being eventually, we will find out, the hard way.
WOW! Thank you, Maximus. Only you got the goods. Spooky wonderful information. It just confirms my feelings about Boeing. Never going and never trusting.
Boeing has for a long time relied upon semi-skilled workers which is why their performance standard specs are so comprehensive and detailed. However you need to read them to benefit from them.
Nobody saw nothin’ nobody did nothin’ nobody said nothin’. That’s the Boeing way, it’s on our t-shirts! Excellent coverage, worked there 15 years, this only scratches the surface, chaos everyday. It needs to change
Another reason Amtrak needs to get its act together, but it seems they have the same type of managers as Boeing does. At least chances of falling out of the sky is non-existent.
This is a typical workflow at Boeing for a plane that makes it's way to the end of the line, with critical leftover work. The system they use to communicate information is very poor and leaves a lot of room for things to just happen without much documentation.
Lets put this CORRUPTION into context. Boeing make aircraft and secretly fit MAX computer systems to hide control of the aircraft from the pilots - for profit. Boeing make aircraft and only have 1 man trained and able to work on the door plug bolts so when he is abscent, boeing hire a KFC apprentice to remove and replace the door with no paperwork or record or supervision. Boeing sent an autonomous uninhabited capsule to the ISS for test purposes and when it returned to Earth, boeing then SECRETLY removed the autonomous de-docking software and sent the capsule back to the ISS with 2 humans aboard; boeing knowing it was leaking gas and had many other serious problems, resulting in its inbility to undock from the ISS autonomously and with a known imminent capsule expirary date, causing the crew to need a 3rd party rescue mission (from SpaceX) with all the costs and delays that will create. vs. The regulators look at SpaceX Starship on the launchpad, finished and awating a launch licence for FT5 that takes hundreds of days to sign, and then they prosecute and fine SpaceX for discharging some "human rated DRINKING water" into a natural swamp. The obvious question is who in government are boeing paying?
In the first NTSB press conference on this, Jennifer Homendy made much of how serious the threat to passengers lives was and how that threat could have been even more serious had the altitude been greater. That being said, why doesn't anyone, including the NTSB and Maximus actually mention the only thing in this incident that resulted in the endangerment of passenger lives? That's the white plastic zip tie that can be seen in this video at 15:30. It's on the right hand side of the door (as viewed in photo) wrapped around the 2nd pair of lugs up from the bottom of the door. It's clamping the door lug pin and the frame lug pad firmly together, preventing the door from rising up to the unlocked position where the door & frame lugs can pass each other. The zip tie held the door in the locked position for 150 flights, until it broke or slipped off the lugs, probably during a landing jolt. (When pressurisation is minimal). The springs then lift the door to where the door lug pins are right on the edge (possibly beyond) of the frame lug pads. On the next (final) flight, as pressurisation starts, the pressure normally locks the pins in place on the pads but with the pins starting the flight, right at the top edge of the pads, the pins eventually slip off the edge of the pads leaving the door just secured by the hinges at the bottom and the roller guides near the top of the door. The roller guides are not designed for anything like that amount of force and at 15,000 ft the guide rollers break through the roller guides, releasing the door plug. Without the zip tie, the loose door bouncing on its springs isn't going to pass any ground based cabin pressurisation test. (If they perform one). If it gets that far, it will cause pressurisation problems and/or blow out on the first test flights. It isn't going to get as far as being delivered to Alaska and it certainly won't get as far as carrying any passengers. Therefore, if it didn't have the zip tie fitted, no passenger's lives would ever have been put at risk. Jennifer, doesn't that make it worth a mention in an investigation, if you're so concerned about the risk to passengers lives? The photo at 15:30 is actually figure 16 in the NTSB preliminary report. So the NTSB have certainly seen the photo but did they really look at it? Another clue as to there being no way the plug is remaining closed without something holding it closed: Video at 12:55 _It didn't seem to fit well. Nothing to hold it. So somebody found a strap to hold it closed._ - So a strap was needed to hold the door closed in preparation for the aircraft to be rolled outside! How is anyone thinking it stayed closed for 150+ flights with the 4 locking bolts missing and nothing else holding the door down in the locked position with the lift assist springs compressed? (That strap was removed and the door opened again, when the new rivets were fitted the next day).
A typical example of the systems and processes becoming the purpose, and the real purpose -- to build safe aircraft -- being forgotten in the day-to-day push to satisfy them systems and processes.
I love your little chanal thanks Max so pass the buck and let's go flying WOW that door plug was trouble from the beginning and she just got more angry my my my sounds like SNAFU. Strikes again 💪😎!!!
Who would have thought that even building aircraft gets reduced to boring repetitive tasks that are impossible to stay focused on long term . At the end of the day the real problem is we are all dumbing down to the god of efficiency.
for me this only reinforces and solidifies the if it's Boeing, I ain't going. I am not going to gamble my life on a plane with such shoddy manufacturing.
Surprise, surprise, surprise. LOL! Pay peanuts, get monkeys. No doubt the former taco bell guy could be trained to do the job right, if there was a critical mass of people who already know the job and appreciate why things have to be done, even if that day it's not strictly their issue.
Incredible. My worry is, if this happened this one time, how many other potential accidents are out there waiting to happen because of this shoddy work and quality control? I will likely be avoiding flying on newer Boeing planes for a while, until they've had time to sort their sh*t out and inspect/service those planes. I would hope that older ones, like the 777 or 737NG would be generally OK though. It's mainly the 787 and 737 MAXs that concern me.
Yes the new ones are the problem. The older ones will have either gone down or the problem will have been sorted by now. Design deficiencies are another can of worms.
This is happening at major airlines where we get Taco Bell trainees plus StarBuck trainees management doesn’t care who they hire as long the quota is filled
No paperwork with signatures = no certification = criminal liability
Those employees sound like Sargent Shultz from Hogan's Heroes. "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing"
Yeah, they indeed knew nothing.
😂 😂 😂
I'd imagine school bus manufacturers probably have a more organized and better tracked assembly process than Boeing. What a cluster.
Never assume anything. Assumptions tend to make an ass out of u and me.
ass u me
SNAFU..
Even companies that manufacture yoghurt cups are better organized. But the paperwork is so much work....and I would preferably keep sitting on my ass and watch TikTok. I am done with Boeing and will avoid flights operated with Boing planes. Nothing will change without the personal accountability of Boeing managers on every level.
@@Uxoriouslyit's not AFU if that's the SN. And it sounds like it is.
Yup. As they say in the Marines, "This is FUBAR man!!"
At 01:41, that sounds like a "single point of failure" if the factory has only one person who knows how to work on all the doors. Others should have been trained to do the same work so that if he's on vacation, or retires, or whatever, another person can do the job. That alone is a big problem in the factory.
It's a drop in the bucket when put against the entire big picture of 'what safety' we're seeing from Boeing.
Not to minimize how bad it is, but to emphasize how horrific the overall issue is.
Failure of management on so many levels. Clown show.
@@Cemi_Mhikku Agreed. It's only a small part of an overall systemic lack of concern for safety.
IMHO, the search for the individual who fitted the plug is a red herring. The main issue is the whole quantity control process. Just nailing some poor sap to the wall will not solve the problem.
I disagree. As noted in this video it would likely have taken multiple hands to manhandle that door plug back into the closed position. Someone on the repair crew needs to accept responsibility for the work done and the corner cutting QC in a rush to get the plane off the assembly line.
I broadly agree, it's the system that's at fault, not the poor folk on the shop floor. Also, I have said it before, and will say again, and will probably be shouted down again. They need to look at Lean. Lean is about reducing waste, in Lean the biggest, most evil waste is time. When Toyota developed lean, their biggest waste at the time was re-work. It was slowing production, and worst of all causing quality issues that their customers could see.
The root issue was the rivets, it should have been discovered at spirit and fixed there. How many more quality issues are there because shop floor workers were diverted from the "day job", and if it didn't, it would have been slowing production.
And before you say, these are planes, not cars. I know. But the same principles apply. Doesn't matter if you are making Christmas crackers or nuclear missiles. Reducing waste improves both production and quality.
@@BlueSpruce2 Bull s..... None of the repair crew will just pick up a door and put it back in place, because it was laying around. If the company had procedures that worked well, only qualified people will touch those parts. But the issue is probably that a middle manager was pushing his crew to work on things that they are not qualified to do. And the middle manager was being pushed by the top manager to find creative solutions and solve the problem. And the top manager was being pushed by the top bosses in HQ to have those planes rolling out the door.
Don't go after the one or two guys that did what they were asked to do. They probably didn't know what they may work on or not. At the end, it is the company culture that is broken - very broken.
@@todortodorov6056 As you say, we need those 1 or 2 guys low down on the totem pole to start talking before we can get to the bottom of the failure or root cause of it. Evidently there was a push to get that particular aircraft off the assembly line. Also let's not forget we are likely dealing with a Union that will protect their own...
@@BlueSpruce2 i was probably some unqualified tranee forced to do it by some high level manager, who is to blame?
"Just get it done"....words that managers use to motivate employees, but allowing them to avoid blame if something goes wrong.
Time to start jailing negligent Boeing managers
And not only these. A lot of FAA personel too.
Please, don't flood the correctional facilities. There is a limit to how many people they can handle.
@@todortodorov6056 There are tens of thousands in jails and prisons for stupid shit like weed. There would be plenty of room if they were released.
Yesterday’s burger flipper are today’s aircraft builders. Holy moly!! We’re in big trouble . . .
and e coli anyone..?? get ya coming or boeing..
As 45 years as a retired Crew Chief at a major helicopter company, I am appalled! The whole failure hinges upon the fact the door was not on “Removal,” with no entries indicating that the door was removed. Also the concept of a “Door Guru,” is crazy. What happens when that someone goes home, goes on vacation, retires, dues or is in the hospital? There should have been at least three entrees for reinstalling that door. The technician that reinstalled the door, the QA inspector that okayed the job and the option for the government or the customer sign off. In my opinion, where I used to work, we had great managers, ok managers and Terrible managers, in the end it was the crew keeps things safe. Boeing seems to be going out of their way to screw over the floor crews and insure that Executive Compensation Job One!
While I was in the Navy, an issue like this would be called a Chinese Fire Drill, and heads would roll at the upper levels on down. The rule would be (essentially) if you don’t know how to do a job, inform your manager immediately. It’s their job to get the right people on the job who know exactly what they are doing.
And update all the needed paperwork so that there’s proof the job was done correctly.
It blows my mind that there’s one person at Boeing who knows how to reinstall a door plug. Really? REALLY?
It’s a miracle that nobody was sucked out of that plane. And a good thing. Quality Management System (QMS) at Boeing is so broken.
Or the door striking the tail assembly, which could have rendered the airplane uncontrollable.
Frightening!!
If only one guy knew how to open and close a door - sounds laughable when stated this way - and was on vacation, then whoever opened the door should have been the ones closing and buttoning it up as well. They would know which seat pocket they left the retaining bolts in... 😂
In the last couple of flights, Alaska obviously knew there was a problem with that door plug. Passengers had no doubt commented about the air leak noise and perhaps the way the window rocks around & makes a knocking noise on landing! That's why in a full aircraft, those are the only 2 empty seats.
I guess Alaska had to keep flying it rather than fix it - their one & only door plug guy must have been on holiday too! (Or they don't have a door plug guy).
@@alanm8932 I have always thought Alaska is just as liable as Boeing for flying an aircraft that was having pressurization issues - at least 3 times - before the door finally came off.
@@BlueSpruce2 And what do you get from summing 2 + 2?
That it's whole WASP world and not just Boeing which is falling apart in pieces
I worked in aviation production and maintenance for over forty years. I cannot understand why Boeing uses particular mechanics for doors alone. A good well-trained mechanic should have been able to use engineering drawings and process sheets to enable him or her to fit the door plug safely. As for the inspection department, I am at a loss to understand their negligence
It's pay grades. Only those paid to touch the door touch it.
Yes, a competent mechanic can figure out the drawings but this was a traveled Spirit job that only a few people at Boeing had previously done. If in doubt, stop and ask for help.
This is just my own semi-uneducated speculation, but... Needlessly specific union rules? I work with someone that used to work at a unionized small aircraft manufacturing plant and he's told us stories about how hard it was to get things done because every little task was assigned to different people as defined by union rules. He made it sound like even minor procedures ended up more complicated than "How many (Polish people - trying to keep it PC) does it take to change a light bulb.
@@ressljs Yep that's the correct answer, you hit the nail right on the head. Needless union protectionism prevents employees from being cross trained and hold multiple certifications to work at different points along the fabrication and manufacturing processes because that might eliminate jobs. Your coworker has very keen insights and observations into this very specific union made problem. The absolute worst employees you can ever hire are those who know they can't be fired so they have ZERO incentive to increase their productivity and expand their skill set so they in turn become extremely complacent.
This can all be laid at the feet of "Neutron" Jack Welch.
Dave Calhoun was a protégé of his. And the management of McDonell-Douglas, which later became the management of Boeing were acolytes of his as well.
Yupper!! How's that "rank and yank" working for ya, Calhoun!!
Totally agree. Don't understand why he's worshipped in some circles. He really destroyed American corporate management culture. GE is now a shell of its former self thanks to Welch.
Thankfully Ortberg seems to be more influenced by the likes of Alan Mulally. I hope it's not too late to take Boeing back to basics, and back to being an engineering led company again.
@@cjmillsnun I'm afraid that the entire C-Suite would need to be purged and replaced with individuals with aerospace experience.
Hopefully I'm wrong...
"Boeing's Senior Vice-President of Quality". The jokes just write themselves. I leave them as an exercise for the reader.
I just about fell off my couch when you mentioned "Milton and the Red Stapler." Do you think Milton did it as revenge? LOL Not many people remember the movie "Office Space." Thanks for the laugh!
Imagine gaving all those people wirking on an airplane with no documented work processes and nobody said a word
All of thise Boeing workers and the FAA inspectors should ve in jail - A complete indictment of Boeing so called Safety Culture - who works on an aircraft without a documented work process
Boeing aircraft are unfit to fly under such construction processes
Perfect timing,.will listen to this during drive home. Great stuff Maximus
So, if we have an FAA inspector flagging items as unacceptable... Where was that guy's confirmation all required remedial work was taken of and parts had passed FAA re-inspection? Nothing ought to be leaving the factory until FAA inspectors formally re-inspect and sign off on issues they themselves had previously raised.
Plenty of incompetent government workers in the FAA as well. Regulatory capture as RFK Jr would say.
Quite right Bluestreak.
Where is this guy now?
Where is his follow up to the problem that he himself raised?
He spotted it wasn’t satisfactory, made a decision that it needed rectifying and then what ?
This is criminal! Even for the FAA.
I guess the FAA inspector can inspect only things that Boeing (and suppliers) told him that they worked on and that he should inspect. As there is no documentation on the door, I guess the FAA inspector had no idea they open it.
@@todortodorov6056 Yes. He probably only inspected the rivet repair work that was flagged as unacceptable.
The Door Master stated about specific doors “I don’t mess with them”. This guy must have been hired directly by the Boeing management team 🤦🏼♂️
Does Boeing have their own special version of the three wise monkeys: "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil"?
See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil!
Nothing to see here, boss! Keep um moving!
Such a complex story so well and expertly explained. Thank you Maximus.
P.S.
From now on I'm going to not just leave my troubles on the ground but my whole body. Can't wait for Amtrak to build a bridge to Europe!
Fly on a reputable airline with quality hiring standards and training, avoid newer Boeing products, and you'll be fine. Statistically, flying on a US carrier is still safer than driving. Even with the questionable qualification folks and Boeing's problems.
Amtrak will never come to Hawaii but now we have JetBlue. I trust Delta and their maintenance. But would love to see America by rail. I'm never going on a modern Boeing.
🤣
It’s not an accident - it was intentional. They called it “opening” the door instead of removing it to avoid having to do a formal inspection afterwards. It’s “get-there-itis” but for quality systems and production. They had to get it done. Calling it opening a door instead of removing a door let them skip steps.
This is the same kind of “creativity” that led to MCAS being undocumented on the 737 max, and not listing the angle of attack indicators as crucial risk control measures for safe flight. They would have required multiple AOA indicators but if they were listed, then they would have had to list MCAS, which means it would have needed a possible new type rating, which was too expensive. Saving money by finding creative ways around the process is unsafe.
Those trainees didnt decide to do that themselves, a manager told them to do it and they know what happens to former Boeing employess that go to court.
Oh great point. I dont blame them. If they refused they would have been inn trouble.
You really can see the same management style has come over from the team that brought you the DC10 cargo door. The contractor warned that the door locking design was fatally flawed but management told them to build it anyway. After one blow out and a miraculous landing the FAA had a “gentleman’s agreement” with MD to get it fixed (does this sound familiar ?) and only forced the fix after the horrific Paris crash.
Management absolutely to blame for creating the environment where quality and safety are ignored to enable output.
Now the question is: is it an isolated incident, or are every Boeing built the same way, by the wrong unqualified people, without paper trail and lack of QC?
If so each recent Boeing should be grounded and inspected. Front to tail.
I would say probably not.
The door was isolated incident. The FAA know that the bolts may be missing and told airlines to inspect their planes.
The quality chaos at Boeing is a systemic nightmare that no airline can fix with a simple or thorough inspection. You need to check every rivet, every bolt. It is probably cheaper to just buy new planes.
For sure an isolated 1 in a million incident.
😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣 🤡👞👞
Boeing hires a meat butcher to do the job of a surgeon.
What could possibly go wrong?!
More like a manicurist
Flying 777 in a few weeks, asking two guys from local McDonald’s to give it once over before we fly………….
Should now be ‘as it’s a Boeing, I’m certainly not going’
Excellent reporting Maximus.
NTSB redacting the document is chickenshit and just exemplifies that they still work for Boeing and don’t serve as safety enforcers
Wow! How do you keep all of these details straight? I couldn't!
Not easy lol.
@@maximusaviationchannel It made my head spin!
Thanks Maximus. Very understandable explanation!
Glad to hear that. i was afraid it would be information overload.
Great job Maximus
Thank you.
Max, WOW! What a bucket of bolts! er....or...lack thereof .....
Excellent reportage, Maximus!!!
Yes I stayed to the end. Great video.
Sweet!
Brilliant investigative work Maximus, thanks, the world of aviation needs you. Stay healthy!!!!. (satire)
This is a function of electronic aircraft maintenance documentation. When I put my initials over a red X or a red -- to clear a deficiency, I always was 100% sure it was done correctly. I knew if it wasn't, I would go to prison! Too many cooks in the kitchen on this one = no accountability. That door plug did not hang itself back on the airframe. Whoever took it off obviously did not put it in the electronic forms. There is no mystery here, only coverup.
2:59 first "try" was to paint over the rivets that weren't to spec!
Presumably they repainted them because at Spirit that would have got them an inspection "pass"!
How often is that kind of _solution_ being used when items are out of spec?
As I understand it...
The tail of the rivet is squashed down, shortening the tail and increasing its diameter. If you started with the correct length of rivet tail and squashed it the right amount, then the squashed tail height and diameter will be within spec. I suspect they started with a rivet a little short, so when it's squashed down to the correct height, the diameter isn't big enough to meet spec. So they've painted around the outside to make the diameter big enough. WOW!
In what world would that even be discussed as a solution, let alone to actually do it on 5 rivets. (Obviously it's the metal of the rivet whose diameter is supposed to be within spec. Adding paint to make the diameter within spec... what?)
Nicely done. Cheers
I can't believe the fuselages are shipped via rail, with absolutely "No" protection from the elements and or vandalism!! WOW". Auto mobiles shipped via rail are much more protected!!
If I were to, based on looks, make an assumption on the amount of weed Maximus smokes, I’d say we’d get along splendidly.
For those of us who fly this specific aircraft, as well as all of the other various makes and models, we are listening.
Thank you for contributing to the conversation to improve safety.
A safety culture requires every individual employees, at every level, to possess and enforce a technical mindset and understands as well as appreciates the consequences of non-compliance. Otherwise you end up with seat-of-the-pants hackers breaking rules and improvising their way around problems and obstacles - like Stockton Rush in his ill-fated OceanGate submarine who was shockingly also once a test engineer at McDonnell Douglas.
You finally got it. From a spirit contractor
:"From birth to blow out" love it! Well said!
Excellent content M.
thank you for the update.
Been with Boeing since 2011 and they love to hire people to build the planes that have no prior experience. I got my A&P in 1991. When I started in Charleston and my first Lead started telling me something that I shouldn't be doing because the FAA wouldn't like it, blah blah blah, I realized he was full of it. I said to him that I only had one question, what does FAA stand for (the acronym). He had no clue. Tried to make something up. Found out he previously came from a fast food chain. Now their main priority is putting women, or those that identify as female, and gay people in high places. Its all rainbows and sunshine. 🙂
Stayed to the end. Thank you for your analysis. Clear and informative.
Its Mr Nobody again ! great video many thanks
Thank you for the great video dear Maximus, stayed till the end..
Hard to digest and believe the timeline .. that too explains the triple X setbacks …
If it's Boeing I'm not going... full stop
Yes, I stayed till the end, very well done.
Back to work, Maximus......ATL plane collision.
Yep.
Max, great report thanks, I think the cuts to stock idiots reaction shots (not you your not an idiot) spoils and devalues your efforts. Thanks for the time you take to put this content together.
Ok boss, ...do you want hot sause with that?
Sounds like they have good systems in place to make sure things are done correctly. Unfortunately, they also have people who know how to bypass the systems when they are in a hurry. All is well until someone is in a hurry.
Sounds like Boeing has a very brittle system that can fail at the slightest anomaly. It always amazes me when you read about what happens after a crash, and what the FAA finds out, that usually the solution is just a piece of paper, a bulletin. Like, "We told ya, so it's ur problem now". They should try a little harder. I'm sure there is a phone book of bulletins and recommendations on all the crap that goes on an airplane. Im a software developer, and it would be like me just updating the help file about how the software can crash and do things wrong, instead of actually fixing the software. What else on these airplanes has gotten messed up because of crap like this, the scary part being eventually, we will find out, the hard way.
Make sure to firmly hold up your jaw while watching this, or else it may drop to the floor!
Sad for the poor chaps having to fly these crates.
WOW! Thank you, Maximus. Only you got the goods. Spooky wonderful information. It just confirms my feelings about Boeing. Never going and never trusting.
IMHO it wasn't Boeing's fault. It was Taco Bell for not properly training their former employees to close a door, meow.
🌮
Boeing has for a long time relied upon semi-skilled workers which is why their performance standard specs are so comprehensive and detailed. However you need to read them to benefit from them.
Nobody saw nothin’ nobody did nothin’ nobody said nothin’. That’s the Boeing way, it’s on our t-shirts!
Excellent coverage, worked there 15 years, this only scratches the surface, chaos everyday. It needs to change
Another reason Amtrak needs to get its act together, but it seems they have the same type of managers as Boeing does. At least chances of falling out of the sky is non-existent.
Playing darts, With a blind fold and in the wrong building.
Wow, what a convoluted mess.
Too many managers, too many levels, no engineers.
4 AM in Bangkok coffee with Maximus
Makes me feel "so safe" about flying anywhere!
Stayed to the end to hear your jazz piano that I always appreciate ..Retired ASNT QA iii.♥︎
This is a typical workflow at Boeing for a plane that makes it's way to the end of the line, with critical leftover work. The system they use to communicate information is very poor and leaves a lot of room for things to just happen without much documentation.
Sounds like they were in a rush to get the plane out the door 😂 and bypassed the necessary QC inspections for last minute work done on the aircraft.
Great report, Max. Hats off to all the DEI hires and the special one from KFC/Taco Bell. Any updates on Starliner? BTW that live podcast was a hoot😂
Thanks
Maximus, How you got through reading all that I'll never know! But, thanks!
What a mess !!
Sounds about right for Boeing.
Rube Goldberg type of thing. IMHO they train you not to look or care.
WOW!
"It's unknown who did this" = punish the uncooperative, forgetful members of the crew.
Nice question at 12:08 Do you want hot or mild sauce with that? 🤣🤣🤣
It could have claimed a lot more people..
Everything is NOT Gucci, except that one guy.
Lets put this CORRUPTION into context.
Boeing make aircraft and secretly fit MAX computer systems to hide control of the aircraft from the pilots - for profit.
Boeing make aircraft and only have 1 man trained and able to work on the door plug bolts so when he is abscent, boeing hire a KFC apprentice to remove and replace the door with no paperwork or record or supervision.
Boeing sent an autonomous uninhabited capsule to the ISS for test purposes and when it returned to Earth, boeing then SECRETLY removed the autonomous de-docking software and sent the capsule back to the ISS with 2 humans aboard; boeing knowing it was leaking gas and had many other serious problems, resulting in its inbility to undock from the ISS autonomously and with a known imminent capsule expirary date, causing the crew to need a 3rd party rescue mission (from SpaceX) with all the costs and delays that will create.
vs.
The regulators look at SpaceX Starship on the launchpad, finished and awating a launch licence for FT5 that takes hundreds of days to sign, and then they prosecute and fine SpaceX for discharging some "human rated DRINKING water" into a natural swamp.
The obvious question is who in government are boeing paying?
AL Scott: This sounds like Abbott and Costello "who's on First?" routine"
🤣
I stayed to the end.
Quite fascinating and disturbing in equal measure.
Glad to hear that. Thanks.
In the first NTSB press conference on this, Jennifer Homendy made much of how serious the threat to passengers lives was and how that threat could have been even more serious had the altitude been greater.
That being said, why doesn't anyone, including the NTSB and Maximus actually mention the only thing in this incident that resulted in the endangerment of passenger lives?
That's the white plastic zip tie that can be seen in this video at 15:30. It's on the right hand side of the door (as viewed in photo) wrapped around the 2nd pair of lugs up from the bottom of the door. It's clamping the door lug pin and the frame lug pad firmly together, preventing the door from rising up to the unlocked position where the door & frame lugs can pass each other.
The zip tie held the door in the locked position for 150 flights, until it broke or slipped off the lugs, probably during a landing jolt. (When pressurisation is minimal). The springs then lift the door to where the door lug pins are right on the edge (possibly beyond) of the frame lug pads. On the next (final) flight, as pressurisation starts, the pressure normally locks the pins in place on the pads but with the pins starting the flight, right at the top edge of the pads, the pins eventually slip off the edge of the pads leaving the door just secured by the hinges at the bottom and the roller guides near the top of the door. The roller guides are not designed for anything like that amount of force and at 15,000 ft the guide rollers break through the roller guides, releasing the door plug.
Without the zip tie, the loose door bouncing on its springs isn't going to pass any ground based cabin pressurisation test. (If they perform one). If it gets that far, it will cause pressurisation problems and/or blow out on the first test flights. It isn't going to get as far as being delivered to Alaska and it certainly won't get as far as carrying any passengers. Therefore, if it didn't have the zip tie fitted, no passenger's lives would ever have been put at risk.
Jennifer, doesn't that make it worth a mention in an investigation, if you're so concerned about the risk to passengers lives?
The photo at 15:30 is actually figure 16 in the NTSB preliminary report. So the NTSB have certainly seen the photo but did they really look at it?
Another clue as to there being no way the plug is remaining closed without something holding it closed: Video at 12:55 _It didn't seem to fit well. Nothing to hold it. So somebody found a strap to hold it closed._ - So a strap was needed to hold the door closed in preparation for the aircraft to be rolled outside!
How is anyone thinking it stayed closed for 150+ flights with the 4 locking bolts missing and nothing else holding the door down in the locked position with the lift assist springs compressed? (That strap was removed and the door opened again, when the new rivets were fitted the next day).
pretty much how I imagined what happened
A typical example of the systems and processes becoming the purpose, and the real purpose -- to build safe aircraft -- being forgotten in the day-to-day push to satisfy them systems and processes.
Nothing will ever get done with this tragedy because Boeing and the ntsb are hand in hand.
I love your little chanal thanks Max so pass the buck and let's go flying WOW that door plug was trouble from the beginning and she just got more angry my my my sounds like SNAFU. Strikes again 💪😎!!!
I did stay... and I left schocked
Who would have thought that even building aircraft gets reduced to boring repetitive tasks that are impossible to stay focused on long term . At the end of the day the real problem is we are all dumbing down to the god of efficiency.
for me this only reinforces and solidifies the if it's Boeing, I ain't going.
I am not going to gamble my life on a plane with such shoddy manufacturing.
All I can say is "Airbus ya beauty"
Gob smacked in South Africa
Airbus parts built in the Spirit Factory are better than the Boeing parts built in the Spirit Factory?
Can you prove that?
@@michaelmccotter4293 This door thing sounds like a Boeing issue though...
I repeat myself:Why aren't people - especially Boeing Executives Not in Jail?
Surprise, surprise, surprise. LOL! Pay peanuts, get monkeys. No doubt the former taco bell guy could be trained to do the job right, if there was a critical mass of people who already know the job and appreciate why things have to be done, even if that day it's not strictly their issue.
So much Corruption is the part of the problem, and not liability that all, every imconpetent mecanic and managers do what ever they want !!!
I knew it was a voice for radio and a face for radio
Incredible. My worry is, if this happened this one time, how many other potential accidents are out there waiting to happen because of this shoddy work and quality control? I will likely be avoiding flying on newer Boeing planes for a while, until they've had time to sort their sh*t out and inspect/service those planes. I would hope that older ones, like the 777 or 737NG would be generally OK though. It's mainly the 787 and 737 MAXs that concern me.
Yes the new ones are the problem. The older ones will have either gone down or the problem will have been sorted by now. Design deficiencies are another can of worms.
I watched through to the end of the video video. It is evident that Crap № 1 was not given about the door plug.
This is happening at major airlines where we get Taco Bell trainees plus StarBuck trainees management doesn’t care who they hire as long the quota is filled