@@Easterhazyfunny how that’s not what the public thought when - a tire fell off a United 777 - a loose switch cover was found to be the culprit for LA800 etc.
@@Easterhazy For a part to fail this quickly after QC means it was likely missed during quality control. These things can happen to any manufacturer, not just Boeing. Planes are complicated machines. Airbus dropped the ball on this one and they owned it, so good on them.
Well how come those problems were not sorted out in the delivery process? With the aircraft so new these issues should have been identified in the delivery check-ups.
So, maybe short staffing, quality control vs. profit issues and such are NOT just Boeing problems after all? Perhaps the worldwide effects of flawed management practices over the past decades are catching up on these companies that have been squeezing out profits by understaffing and under-training front line employees? This development is worth watching.
Its standard across the world. All companies thrive for profit and forget about quality. there are flawed management companies that aim for profit profit profit. How about all those products you buy online. Do they last a long lifetime or do they get made cheap and last a couple of years if not months?
@@nickolliver3021 Most of this issue is probably just a once in a while slip up like any companies… it only becomes a major issue when you have airplanes crashing because of intentional design flaws… Boeing wasn’t just a slip up on quality production on the manufacturing line but a total failure of it’s airplane design the resulted into airplanes crashing… The next would be airplanes door blowing off because of intentional negligent behaviors… Basically those things were overlooked by supervisors…. When building airplanes mistake does happen when it comes from the manufacturing line but such failure shouldn’t result in the airplane crash, as was the problem for Boeing…
@@aviatorsound914 Yeh but they will keep on making that mistake for profit. They dont just make the one mistake. It happens from time to time. Boeing did not fail of its aircraft design. A system was designed not to what it was supposed to have done. Airbus has slipped up on Quality production on the manufacturing line which has resulted groundings for a number of hours maybe a few days even. Those door blow offs were due to human error and were forgotten. Someone was not there to double check they were installed. Yes airplanes crash when not built right and just pushed out the door for profit hence what we saw in 18 and 19, but pilot training can also be the problem too!
@@nickolliver3021 The irony is that when it comes to pilot training, as you specifically mentioned, didn't Boeing conceal the existence of MCAS from the pilots or the FAA? Tell us more about this interesting fact. ❤
@@alvinloh9068 We love how you debunked the clunk's long-written, repetitive rubbish without offering anything substantial or useful. Oh, right. He even said the A321neo has the same MTOW figure as the A321XLR; I wouldn't be surprised, though.
Erm....more questions than answers. I always thought when a new aircraft was delivered to a customer, the airline did Test Flights and inspections!! Who signed off the aircraft on Delivery??
So this shows the more planes are pushed out to customers more problems are found. Slow down or you will follow Boeing for a shutdown and follow safety and assembly issues.
Not that Issues don't happen, but what about the Acceptance Process? I mean he mentions Hydraulics as one Example. That's not like the Toilet Towel Holder is off Center. Of course, if it isn't right, it needs to get fixed, but "unspecified" Problems is a bit vague.
@ Worked for United airlines in the parts department. Parts is big problem if you don’t have it the plane doesn’t fly. Theirs thousands of parts on the plane you can’t stock all the parts it could take hours or days to get it.
And so what ? What did we learn from this video ? Nothing ! The plane is back in service, which, apparently, nullifies all concerns regarding "safety", mentioned during this video. The art of speaking about something we know nothing about... But make the buz out of it.
I think Rolls Royce are to be blamed for the Trent 7000 issues. This aircraft's delivery was delayed for several months and Airbus was under pressure to deliver before the end of the year. Their second A330 Neo delivery was also delayed due to Rolls Royce not being able to supply the engines on schedule. Rolls Royce really need to buck up as it is causing a lot of incovenience for its customers.
@@stevesmoneypit6137 If you had received a good education, you would have known that licence built RR Merlins used in USAF Mustangs during WW2, saved many US bomber crews from the might of the Luftwaffe..........
@@stevesmoneypit6137 Your education was obviously pretty rubbish, as thought. It was 81 years ago that the Mustang entered USAF service!! Thanks for the laughs in 2024 Steve, and my New Year wish is to receive many more from you in 2025...🥲...
Legit quality was mostly better back in the 1970s, when airline part manufacturers actually cared about their quality and didn’t just get into political union scandals and bankruptcy and whatnot.
Normally, an airline gets aircradt delivered and will run it on local domestic short hauls for a while for many goals, Find out any bugs and fix them, familiarize crew and maintenance wrokers as well as airport workers. And then once satisfied will depooy on the intended long hauls. If they got delivery and put in it Melbour service the next day, they were begging for trouble. So knowing when they got delivery and how many short haulst they ran before the "photo op" launch to Melbourse becomes very important.
Sooooo the push for "efficiency" has its costs !!! Over complicated systems rushed to delivery, supply chain pushed beyond capacity and ability to deliver a quality, and all this technical stuff for efficiency is just more parts to fail !!! On time delivery is a great idea for the bean counters but if something happens in the chain all hell breaks loose !!!!
Problems was apparently linked to engine. So, blaming Airbus or Boeing is an usual exercise familiar to fans more interested by controversy than the difficulty of aircraft construction.
I‘d like to know which business seat type Malaysia Airlines installed? Looks great in the footage- Collins? It reminds me of the BA seat-just in light colours.
When a double standard is maintained, Airbus will eventually catch on and get complacent. Boeing has been blamed for things that Airbus hasn’t been blamed for, ranging from engine issues, turbulence incidents, incidents caused by crew/maintenance error, etc, and the issues with this A330NEO is a result of the complacency that results from the double standard.
Why a Boeing decline would be bad. Airbus will not be able to keep up with demand and quality will suffer. Or Airbus can set their own prices while not keeping quality up at the same time.
Every new aircraft has teething problems it normaly takes a month to iron out Boeing are just the same I remember going to Renton to bring back a new aircraft it had 18 faults Everytime it went for a test flight something went wrong it's a complicated piece of kit and has to be given a little time to settle down On bringing the aircraft to the U.K. We arrived with 6 tec issues all of which were cleared by the following day once in operation it had nine tec problems in a month after those the aircraft settled into schedule operations so it's not just an Airbus problem it affects every manufacturer Be a little more realistic with your reports and remember everything has to settle an aircraft is always flexing and therefore can be susceptible to leaks etc Eventually it settles
I always love the over reaction these videos bring. Who signed if off, how could this happen, heads should roll.......and so on. Humans and QC are not perfect.
This would have to be a minor issue because the aircraft is back into the air unlike Boeing who was grounded for months so still hats 🧢 off to Airbus 😊😊😊😊😊😊
Ok, aviation is more than happy to have received the first unit of the Airbus A330-900 Neo, which has already been delivered and will be good for the airline.✈️
Wow unfortunate for Airbus, but great news for Boeing. Airbus manufacturing will be under a microscope now. I wonder if this will affect their sales in the 350 models as hasn't Emirates got 700 on order ?
That is the price you pay when there is no competion in the worldwide aviation market, which is characterized as a duopoly, and perhaps the Chinese will break the taboo and fill the gap in the near future.
A non issue , the plane was soon back into service and Malaysian should have spent more time doing proper PDI checks. Perhaps "Good" news for Airbus would have been appropriate.
In 5 years comac will dominate the civilian aircraft market. Airlines can choose. Pay Usd135m for b737 or A320 or usd90m for C919 comac. Airlines buy a fleet of aircrafts so savings can be substantial.
Why is it always "bad news" on your TH-cam titles and descriptions? Bad news for Boeing, Bad News for Airbus, Bad News for Embraer...
You see, bad news is always interesting for news consumers.
Typical click baiter. What do you expect. Wouldn't spend a bell at any time.
Bad news sells better than good news !!!! simple fact of jouralism !!!!!
Maybe minor glitchy style bad news. At least it’s not a grounding where the plane grow roots and glues itself to the ground.
The aircraft has now been put back into service for those who are wondering.
Oh? That was quick.
He was a bit late at the news it was grounded days ago or maybe a week ago
@@Dumb-as-bricks1 ok really, that's a bit slack
Of course Malaysia looking for kick back
@@rod_at_adelaide5766he's always super late, standard minimum 5 day delay to news
Interesting how quality control issues can happen anywhere isn’t it?
Ever thought that the issued part broke after QC? Even new parts sometime give up work shortly.
@@Easterhazyfunny how that’s not what the public thought when
- a tire fell off a United 777
- a loose switch cover was found to be the culprit for LA800
etc.
@Blank00 fr
@@Easterhazy For a part to fail this quickly after QC means it was likely missed during quality control. These things can happen to any manufacturer, not just Boeing. Planes are complicated machines. Airbus dropped the ball on this one and they owned it, so good on them.
Minor ones yes
Wow imagine that Airbus has Quality issues
The crazy part is that the World’s eyes have been locked in on Boeing….when Airbus’ been having their fair share too!1
Airbus are garbage aircraft
@@TJBellamy99 FAR from the same
@@michaelshore2300 Right, wrong, or indifferent. QC issues are QC issues. This can become a chain reaction at the snap of a finger.
Plane is back in service
Well how come those problems were not sorted out in the delivery process? With the aircraft so new these issues should have been identified in the delivery check-ups.
So, maybe short staffing, quality control vs. profit issues and such are NOT just Boeing problems after all? Perhaps the worldwide effects of flawed management practices over the past decades are catching up on these companies that have been squeezing out profits by understaffing and under-training front line employees? This development is worth watching.
Its standard across the world. All companies thrive for profit and forget about quality. there are flawed management companies that aim for profit profit profit. How about all those products you buy online. Do they last a long lifetime or do they get made cheap and last a couple of years if not months?
@@nickolliver3021
Most of this issue is probably just a once in a while slip up like any companies… it only becomes a major issue when you have airplanes crashing because of intentional design flaws…
Boeing wasn’t just a slip up on quality production on the manufacturing line but a total failure of it’s airplane design the resulted into airplanes crashing… The next would be airplanes door blowing off because of intentional negligent behaviors… Basically those things were overlooked by supervisors….
When building airplanes mistake does happen when it comes from the manufacturing line but such failure shouldn’t result in the airplane crash, as was the problem for Boeing…
@@aviatorsound914 Yeh but they will keep on making that mistake for profit. They dont just make the one mistake. It happens from time to time.
Boeing did not fail of its aircraft design. A system was designed not to what it was supposed to have done. Airbus has slipped up on Quality production on the manufacturing line which has resulted groundings for a number of hours maybe a few days even. Those door blow offs were due to human error and were forgotten. Someone was not there to double check they were installed.
Yes airplanes crash when not built right and just pushed out the door for profit hence what we saw in 18 and 19, but pilot training can also be the problem too!
@@nickolliver3021 The irony is that when it comes to pilot training, as you specifically mentioned, didn't Boeing conceal the existence of MCAS from the pilots or the FAA? Tell us more about this interesting fact. ❤
@@alvinloh9068 We love how you debunked the clunk's long-written, repetitive rubbish without offering anything substantial or useful. Oh, right. He even said the A321neo has the same MTOW figure as the A321XLR; I wouldn't be surprised, though.
Erm....more questions than answers. I always thought when a new aircraft was delivered to a customer, the airline did Test Flights and inspections!! Who signed off the aircraft on Delivery??
All fairness things don’t always show up at first
What? Quality issues on a plane built by Airbus?
So this shows the more planes are pushed out to customers more problems are found. Slow down or you will follow Boeing for a shutdown and follow safety and assembly issues.
Not that Issues don't happen, but what about the Acceptance Process?
I mean he mentions Hydraulics as one Example.
That's not like the Toilet Towel Holder is off Center.
Of course, if it isn't right, it needs to get fixed, but "unspecified" Problems is a bit vague.
@ Worked for United airlines in the parts department. Parts is big problem if you don’t have it the plane doesn’t fly. Theirs thousands of parts on the plane you can’t stock all the parts it could take hours or days to get it.
Oh my god... I never would have imagined that Airbus would have these problems... NOT!
Congratulations, Airbus.
Thankfully the aircraft is back in service, still serving the same Kuala Lumpur-Melbourne route
And so what ? What did we learn from this video ? Nothing ! The plane is back in service, which, apparently, nullifies all concerns regarding "safety", mentioned during this video. The art of speaking about something we know nothing about... But make the buz out of it.
Rolls Royce said they identified a faulty component and replaced it
I think Rolls Royce are to be blamed for the Trent 7000 issues. This aircraft's delivery was delayed for several months and Airbus was under pressure to deliver before the end of the year. Their second A330 Neo delivery was also delayed due to Rolls Royce not being able to supply the engines on schedule. Rolls Royce really need to buck up as it is causing a lot of incovenience for its customers.
RR can’t build anything good
@@stevesmoneypit6137
If you had received a good education, you would have known that licence built RR Merlins used in USAF Mustangs during WW2, saved many US bomber crews from the might of the Luftwaffe..........
Funny how Norwegian and Virgin Atlantic weren’t blaming RR for he Trent 1000 issues
@ My good education said that was 60 years ago. Boeing McDonald Douglas made great planes back then 🤷♂️
@@stevesmoneypit6137
Your education was obviously pretty rubbish, as thought. It was 81 years ago that the Mustang entered USAF service!!
Thanks for the laughs in 2024 Steve, and my New Year wish is to receive many more from you in 2025...🥲...
MAS is one airline known for poor maintenance, but this being a brand new airplane it's all on airbus
Are we going to have a vid on every new individual aircraft that has an delivery issue? You won't be doing anything else for a long time...
Legit quality was mostly better back in the 1970s, when airline part manufacturers actually cared about their quality and didn’t just get into political union scandals and bankruptcy and whatnot.
Boeing: breaks out popcorn
Come on 🙄 Now all the popcorn 🍿 is on the floor 🙄
Unfortunately the Boeing stove is broken so...😂
Normally, an airline gets aircradt delivered and will run it on local domestic short hauls for a while for many goals, Find out any bugs and fix them, familiarize crew and maintenance wrokers as well as airport workers. And then once satisfied will depooy on the intended long hauls.
If they got delivery and put in it Melbour service the next day, they were begging for trouble. So knowing when they got delivery and how many short haulst they ran before the "photo op" launch to Melbourse becomes very important.
Cancelling a flight because 1 airplane has issues? So no replacement?
the flight has been replaced with another plane
I fail to see why this is bad news. Good on Malaysian airlines for actually managing their fleet to the standard they have been lead to anticipate.
Who from the airline is getting fired for doing a poor acceptance inspection for this aircraft?
If nobody from Alaska Airlines got fired for failing to catch issues with the plane involved in AS1282, then this is not a relevant question.
Thai Airways ordered the 787 because it came wirh GE engine options rather than A350 which came with only a single engine Rolls Royce option.
Sooooo the push for "efficiency" has its costs !!! Over complicated systems rushed to delivery, supply chain pushed beyond capacity and ability to deliver a quality, and all this technical stuff for efficiency is just more parts to fail !!! On time delivery is a great idea for the bean counters but if something happens in the chain all hell breaks loose !!!!
Airbus shows solidarity with Boeing... 😀
This is rather weird. There have been no complaints from its larger operators: Delta and Tap Air Portugal. Is Airbus' quality control losing control?
Larger operators are use to the flaws and fix them
Rolls Royce issue, faulty component that was replaced
Unbelievable, producing so much hot air with no information at all, it is a shame for you and youtube!
Problems was apparently linked to engine. So, blaming Airbus or Boeing is an usual exercise familiar to fans more interested by controversy than the difficulty of aircraft construction.
So what was the problem?
I was just going to ask that myself- so WHAT was the problem??
I‘d like to know which business seat type Malaysia Airlines installed? Looks great in the footage- Collins? It reminds me of the BA seat-just in light colours.
A faulty component in the Rolls-Royce engine, replaced in a 48h window. Plane returned to service.
@@toms5996Thanks
@@toms5996Thanks
Watched it a second time, miss it at the first time
AB fanboys….it’s definitely Boeing’s fault for creating an atmosphere of complacency!!!!!!!
So it is not just Boeing :)
Yes, minor issues. Plane is back in service. No door blowouts as of yet
rolls royce problem
When a double standard is maintained, Airbus will eventually catch on and get complacent. Boeing has been blamed for things that Airbus hasn’t been blamed for, ranging from engine issues, turbulence incidents, incidents caused by crew/maintenance error, etc, and the issues with this A330NEO is a result of the complacency that results from the double standard.
You’re doing well keeping the videos coming. Yes, take time off because you deserve it! Thanks DJ!
If it’s going to go wrong chances are that will happen when new , I understand that it was a computer fault , electrics go when new or not at all
It looks good on the ground! Wouldn’t be interested in riding in it 🤷♂️
Amazing how much video you can build around so little information. Why not make a 10 sec video when there are some facts ..
Are these persific problems occurring has occurred in other 330neo ?
Air Calin had some trouble with one of their new A339 in the past. As far as I know they returned their plane to Toulouse.
Kuwait Airways has had an a330-8 grounded for months awaiting replacement engine parts !!
Why a Boeing decline would be bad. Airbus will not be able to keep up with demand and quality will suffer. Or Airbus can set their own prices while not keeping quality up at the same time.
Every new aircraft has teething problems it normaly takes a month to iron out
Boeing are just the same I remember going to Renton to bring back a new aircraft it had 18 faults
Everytime it went for a test flight something went wrong it's a complicated piece of kit and has to be given a little time to settle down
On bringing the aircraft to the U.K. We arrived with 6 tec issues all of which were cleared by the following day once in operation it had nine tec problems in a month after those the aircraft settled into schedule operations so it's not just an Airbus problem it affects every manufacturer
Be a little more realistic with your reports and remember everything has to settle an aircraft is always flexing and therefore can be susceptible to leaks etc
Eventually it settles
I always love the over reaction these videos bring. Who signed if off, how could this happen, heads should roll.......and so on. Humans and QC are not perfect.
no daily mail page?
oh wait,daily mail is owned by airbus.oops!
@thetruthbehindplanes shocking
hope there not like boeing
Thank you Dj!!
Great Video And Info
Airbus is taking a page out of Boeing’s book, I see.
well its in the air again.. its not grounded..
Ur videos are becoming more and more predictable to what ur gonna talk about. I guessed what u were gonna say in the vid.
Old news ,it was out of service for a couple of days that's all ,
😂
How much did boeing slip in the envelope bud?
They can’t afford to bribe anyone
Rolls Royce reacted to this saying that it was a faulty electrical component.
This would have to be a minor issue because the aircraft is back into the air unlike Boeing who was grounded for months so still hats 🧢 off to Airbus 😊😊😊😊😊😊
Unlike Airbus to release a new aircraft not in fully serviceable condition. Gotta pull their socks up!
Sounds like engine problems to me. (satire)
Ok, aviation is more than happy to have received the first unit of the Airbus A330-900 Neo, which has already been delivered and will be good for the airline.✈️
Relax Airbus haters, it is above all a problem with the engines and it is RR that is causing the problem.
It's nothing to spill my beer over.
This notice have days in internet
What companies are responsible for these production issues. RR for the engines (assuming), but who makes the hydraulics in question?
Bad news DJ you never mention Airbus was the manufacturer of this brand new a330neo aircraft.
Yeah, because people might mistake it for the Boeing A330NEO
Not AB
Nothing is perfect, but sill better than Boeing. There are also other planes like tupolev, yakovlev, ilyushin, etc that airlines could order.
Wow unfortunate for Airbus, but great news for Boeing. Airbus manufacturing will be under a microscope now. I wonder if this will affect their sales in the 350 models as hasn't Emirates got 700 on order ?
That is the price you pay when there is no competion in the worldwide aviation market, which is characterized as a duopoly, and perhaps the Chinese will break the taboo and fill the gap in the near future.
At least they have not disappeared.
Just a joke, chill
Another Boeing issue, again!
A grounded A339 is a Boeing issue. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The aircraft has now been put back into service
Unlike boeing the problem has been identified and fixed by Airbus
It was actually fixed by Rolls Royce
Teething problems, still under warranty, big deal😂
Safer than a Tesla!
I would never fly in a Tesla. Not yet anyway.
A non issue , the plane was soon back into service and Malaysian should have spent more time doing proper PDI checks. Perhaps "Good" news for Airbus would have been appropriate.
In 5 years comac will dominate the civilian aircraft market.
Airlines can choose. Pay Usd135m for b737 or A320 or usd90m for C919 comac. Airlines buy a fleet of aircrafts so savings can be substantial.