WTF?!? Yet another United Airlines incident........
- Thread starter mzkitty
- Start date
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
Yeah, wouldn't you think the plane should be meticulously inspected?
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
There are various levels of inspections at various (FAA defined) intervals. The heavy checks practically tear the plane down to the Primary Structure. So ya, The operator should have an inspection record.
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
Boeing better come clean on that, seems they failed already on those records. This is getting out of hand.
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
Why do you assume Boeing performed the maintenance on a 25 year-old plane?
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
I assume when you build a product that flies at 35,000 feet with the lives of people depending on the plane Boeing built that Boeing would make sure that plane lands safely and everyone can walk away. Boeing (and all the others) need to keep in constant contact and constantly find any flaws and repair them. If for no other reason than the stock price and the investors.
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
If that was the agenda than wouldn't just crashing the planes be more effective? They want us and our carbon dead anyhow.
Griz3752
Retired, practising Curmudgeon
In theory I think that was the original scope/plan but, I'm sure lawyers arguing interpretations of language and intent plus whining about increased costs/lost revenue & profts have all managed to roil the waters a bit.
And we should never forget the effectiveness of lobbyists and reverse bagmen (those are the ones who deliver the bribes).
Betting some well-experienced air frame/engine tech could review the current regs as compared to the original and point out where the security /integrity of the system has veered off course.
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
Don't look now, but the plane flew and landed safely.
Boeing doesn't operate that plane, United does (apparently, since the Clinton administration). Do you blame Ford or GM for maintenance you did or didn't perform on your personally owned vehicle?
I'm all for calling people to account, but I'm gonna make an educated guess that the Big B has nothing to do with this event.
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
If you call that flying and landing safely can I assume you work for the Dept. of Transportation? I have a hunch the passengers felt otherwise.
Dunno...crashes get VERY expensive, especially if the airline or manufacturer is found to be at fault...
But I suspect these incidents have a much simpler explanation... DEI, older (conscientious and reliable) workers retiring, problems finding enough competent, younger hires who want to work the job, ESPECIALLY when combined with DEI... and cost cutting.
Just more devolution as we spiral down to 3rd world nation status.
Summerthyme
pauldingbabe
The Great Cat
United does the maintenance on the aircraft they own. Not the company who built the planes.
I would think this is a united and a NTSB problem?
Anyone want to lay odds that United Airlines will be the next up on the auction block?
I would think this is a united and a NTSB problem?
Anyone want to lay odds that United Airlines will be the next up on the auction block?
packyderms_wife
Neither here nor there.
Agreed, but it does seem like someone has it out for both united and Boeing. What other airlines are flying Boeing planes?
ainitfunny
Saved, to glorify God.
A lot of airlines also get their planes repaired in
Third world countries to save money!
Third world countries to save money!
1911user
Veteran Member
Southwest only flies Boeing 737's.
packyderms_wife
Neither here nor there.
Does seem like this is possible
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
Your comment is emotionally driven, and hyperbolic.
At what point did the plane stop flying?
At what point did the crew lose control of the aircraft?
At what point were the passengers in danger?
Who onboard was injured?
At what point was the landing in jeopardy?
When all is said and done, the aircraft performed as it was designed to in the event that a piece of non-structural sheet metal departed the plane... It flew back to base to get that sheet metal replaced.
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
At what point does a plane flying that loses parts while in operation become only hyperbole?
packyderms_wife
Neither here nor there.
And yet they’re not having problems with their planes.
Mark D
Now running for Emperor.
Now you're just trying to save a losing position.
You are wrong, and you make me sigh.
Feel free to continue along in your agitation; I hope it serves you well.
Buh Bye.
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
See yah
WildDaisy
God has a plan, Trust it!
If a product came off a manufacturing line with 99.9% quality rating, we'd all say that was pretty good. But in the airline industry, that means if they were 99.9% perfect, 1000 planes a day would crash. But they dont. Way less than that do. So as far as quality of maintenance - they have a 99.99999999999999% quality rating and that seems pretty good to me. Obviously, not for the people on the flight that has an issue, but over all, you are safer flying than you are driving.
Mongo
Veteran Member
It DID fly.
It DID land safely.
Cacheman
Ultra MAGA!
I guess, a guy I once knew that flew in the Pacific during WW2 always said 'If you walk away from the crash it was a good landing', not sure I totally agree though.
Last edited:
Blacknarwhal
Let's Go Brandon!
Kinda funny that this is all after Lina "Everything Is a Monopoly Because I Say So!" Khan had a few words about Boeing...
seekingalpha.com
Boeing (NYSE:BA) became “too big to fail” after buying domestic rivals to become the country’s biggest maker of commercial aircraft, U.S. Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan said in a speech Wednesday.
Khan, who has led the Biden administration’s antitrust enforcement, cited Boeing (BA) as an example of how a company can attain too much power. She spoke at an event hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a think tank in Washington. Bloomberg News first reported about her speech.
Boeing (BA) is grappling with multiple investigations into its safety practices after a panel used in place of an unused emergency exit blew out from 737 Max 9 while in flight. The Justice Department this week convened a grand jury as part of a criminal probe into the incident.
Khan said Boeing (BA) grew into a monopoly in 1997 after acquiring McDonnell Douglas, the only other U.S. producer of commercial jetliners.
“Boeing effectively became too big for fail, and a point of leverage for countries seeking to influence U.S. policy making,” she said. “Relying on a national champion creates supply weaknesses and taxpayer liabilities, but it also creates geopolitical vulnerabilities that can be exploited both by global partners and rivals.”
Boeing (BA) also is a major supplier of military equipment to the United States and allies as the producer of the F-15 fighter jet, the Apache attack helicopter, E-7 radar plane, Chinook helicopter, Pegasus tanker and various missile systems.
The phrase “too big to fail” typically describes companies, especially banks, that merit government bailouts to avoid failure because they're so big and integral to the broader economy that their collapse would be ruinous.
Boeing is ‘too big to fail’ monopoly, FTC’s Khan says (NYSE:BA)
Boeing's acquisition of domestic rivals has made it too big to fail, says FTC Chair Lina Khan, as the company faces safety investigations.
seekingalpha.com
Boeing is ‘too big to fail’ monopoly, FTC’s Khan says
Mar. 14, 2024 12:59 PM ETThe Boeing Company (BA) StockBy: Rob Williams, SA News Editor71 CommentsBoeing (NYSE:BA) became “too big to fail” after buying domestic rivals to become the country’s biggest maker of commercial aircraft, U.S. Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan said in a speech Wednesday.
Khan, who has led the Biden administration’s antitrust enforcement, cited Boeing (BA) as an example of how a company can attain too much power. She spoke at an event hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a think tank in Washington. Bloomberg News first reported about her speech.
Boeing (BA) is grappling with multiple investigations into its safety practices after a panel used in place of an unused emergency exit blew out from 737 Max 9 while in flight. The Justice Department this week convened a grand jury as part of a criminal probe into the incident.
Khan said Boeing (BA) grew into a monopoly in 1997 after acquiring McDonnell Douglas, the only other U.S. producer of commercial jetliners.
“Boeing effectively became too big for fail, and a point of leverage for countries seeking to influence U.S. policy making,” she said. “Relying on a national champion creates supply weaknesses and taxpayer liabilities, but it also creates geopolitical vulnerabilities that can be exploited both by global partners and rivals.”
Boeing (BA) also is a major supplier of military equipment to the United States and allies as the producer of the F-15 fighter jet, the Apache attack helicopter, E-7 radar plane, Chinook helicopter, Pegasus tanker and various missile systems.
The phrase “too big to fail” typically describes companies, especially banks, that merit government bailouts to avoid failure because they're so big and integral to the broader economy that their collapse would be ruinous.
bw
Fringe Ranger
And Sears once defined marketing genius. Big whoop.
Shadow
Swift, Silent,...Sleepy
A friend who flew in WWII said it was amazing how much could be shot off of a plane and it would keep flying and come back to land. Engines, parts of wings, one side of a horizontal stabilizer, part of a rudder and holes thru lots of places and still they flew till they landed.
The part missing here is a panel behind the left main gear. It soothes the air flow in that area but is obviously not absolutely needed for flight. It's absence would have created vibration and some noise in the cabin. That said, it should not have come off.
The airline operating the aircraft is responsible (and liable) for it's condition, even if it contracted someone else to do the work. You cannot delegate accountability. There will be a fine to the airline, probably to the mechanic. Their will be an investigation. they will get to the bottom of it and correct whatever led up to this.
Shadow
The part missing here is a panel behind the left main gear. It soothes the air flow in that area but is obviously not absolutely needed for flight. It's absence would have created vibration and some noise in the cabin. That said, it should not have come off.
The airline operating the aircraft is responsible (and liable) for it's condition, even if it contracted someone else to do the work. You cannot delegate accountability. There will be a fine to the airline, probably to the mechanic. Their will be an investigation. they will get to the bottom of it and correct whatever led up to this.
Shadow
Shadow
Swift, Silent,...Sleepy
This is a good thumbnail sketch of Boeing, and many other companies. Sad how our country once led in industry.
Shadow
Quiet Man
Nothing unreal exists
They certainly want to 'recycle our carbon', so to speak.
IMO, they always do things incrementally. They may well start crashing planes at some point, but I would say they want it to seem 'natural' at this point. Most people are not giving events the attention that we do.
SageRock
Veteran Member
Fair use cited.
www.zerohedge.com
Boeing 737 With 139 Passengers Loses External Panel Mid-Air | ZeroHedge
SATURDAY, MAR 16, 2024 - 01:59 AM
Literally, not a day goes by without Boeing suffering some major incident, whether it is doors and tires falling off, runway excursions, engine fires, hydraulic leaks, pilot seats flailing around the cockpit and slamming the yoke and, OH YEAH, a "suicided" whistleblower who told a close friend if anything happened to him, it most certainly wasn't suicide. Well, we can now add one more: a United Airlines flight - because it's never American or Delta... always United - that took off from San Francisco International Airport Friday morning landed in Oregon with a missing external panel, abc7 reported citing to officials.
As the NY Post notes, United Airlines Flight 433 departed from San Francisco around 10:20 a.m. local time and landed safely at its intended destination, Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport, about 70 minutes later, according to airport officials and flight data.
Once the plane reached the gate, an external panel was found to be missing, halting operations at the airport while a runway safety check was conducted, airport director Amber Judd told The NY Post.
Amazingly, there was no indication of a problem and no emergency was ever declared during the flight, which had 139 passengers and 6 crew members on board, according to United.
Airport staff searched for the missing panel on the airport premises, but were unable to locate it.
“After finding no debris on the airfield, normal operations at MFR resumed a few minutes later,” she said.
United Airlines said it plans a “thorough examination” of the 25-year-old plane and will “perform all the needed repairs before it returns to service.” Who knows, maybe another whistleblower will "commit suicide" too.
“We’ll also conduct an investigation to better understand how this damage occurred,” the airline added.
The Federal Aviation Administration will also investigate the incident, a spokesperson said.
Incidents have plagued Boeing airplane in the past few weeks: on Monday, a United Airlines Flight heading from Sydney to San Francisco, was forced to turn around mid-flight due to a hydraulic leak. The Boeing 777-300 plane, which was carrying 167 passengers and 16 crew member, landed safely back in Sydney.
Hours earlier, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner en route Sydney to Auckland, New Zealand experienced a technical issue that resulted in injuries to 50 passengers. Then, a United Airlines flight from San Francisco to Japan diverted to Los Angeles International Airport on March 7 after a tire on the Boeing 777-20 fell off after takeoff, damaging cars in a parking lot on the ground.
Boeing told its employees in a memo Tuesday that the company is implementing weekly compliance checks for every 737 work area and additional equipment audits to reduce quality problems.
It isn't quite clear what is behind the recent surge in incidents which are just too many to keep track of at this point...
... but one thing is certain: more are coming, which one can only hope won't be fatal.
Boeing 737 With 139 Passengers Loses External Panel Mid-Air | ZeroHedge
ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com
Boeing 737 With 139 Passengers Loses External Panel Mid-Air | ZeroHedge
SATURDAY, MAR 16, 2024 - 01:59 AM
Literally, not a day goes by without Boeing suffering some major incident, whether it is doors and tires falling off, runway excursions, engine fires, hydraulic leaks, pilot seats flailing around the cockpit and slamming the yoke and, OH YEAH, a "suicided" whistleblower who told a close friend if anything happened to him, it most certainly wasn't suicide. Well, we can now add one more: a United Airlines flight - because it's never American or Delta... always United - that took off from San Francisco International Airport Friday morning landed in Oregon with a missing external panel, abc7 reported citing to officials.
As the NY Post notes, United Airlines Flight 433 departed from San Francisco around 10:20 a.m. local time and landed safely at its intended destination, Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport, about 70 minutes later, according to airport officials and flight data.
Once the plane reached the gate, an external panel was found to be missing, halting operations at the airport while a runway safety check was conducted, airport director Amber Judd told The NY Post.
Amazingly, there was no indication of a problem and no emergency was ever declared during the flight, which had 139 passengers and 6 crew members on board, according to United.
Airport staff searched for the missing panel on the airport premises, but were unable to locate it.
“After finding no debris on the airfield, normal operations at MFR resumed a few minutes later,” she said.
United Airlines said it plans a “thorough examination” of the 25-year-old plane and will “perform all the needed repairs before it returns to service.” Who knows, maybe another whistleblower will "commit suicide" too.
“We’ll also conduct an investigation to better understand how this damage occurred,” the airline added.
The Federal Aviation Administration will also investigate the incident, a spokesperson said.
Incidents have plagued Boeing airplane in the past few weeks: on Monday, a United Airlines Flight heading from Sydney to San Francisco, was forced to turn around mid-flight due to a hydraulic leak. The Boeing 777-300 plane, which was carrying 167 passengers and 16 crew member, landed safely back in Sydney.
Hours earlier, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner en route Sydney to Auckland, New Zealand experienced a technical issue that resulted in injuries to 50 passengers. Then, a United Airlines flight from San Francisco to Japan diverted to Los Angeles International Airport on March 7 after a tire on the Boeing 777-20 fell off after takeoff, damaging cars in a parking lot on the ground.
Boeing told its employees in a memo Tuesday that the company is implementing weekly compliance checks for every 737 work area and additional equipment audits to reduce quality problems.
It isn't quite clear what is behind the recent surge in incidents which are just too many to keep track of at this point...
... but one thing is certain: more are coming, which one can only hope won't be fatal.
Profit of Doom
Dismember
Sayeth Quiet Man.
Profit of Doom
Dismember
Hyperbole. Not the same.