Because Boeing were on such a good streak already…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • doctorcrimson@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Between door bolts missing, virgin airlines missing wing bolts, this nose wheel, etc

    It almost feels like some kind of related systemic error in the very thorough maintenance documentation required for aircrafts, or a large scale sabotage of some sort.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • iamjackflack@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

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

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

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

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

      And frankly, they fucking deserve it.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        And frankly, they fucking deserve it.

        Except the suits aren’t going to be the ones hurt by the company going down in flames.

        • pajn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          It never is, but it prevents them from continuing to build new planes were profit has priority over security and “accidentally” killing 100s of people

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

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

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

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

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

      All of those have precedents in aviation history.

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

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

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

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

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

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

  • kingthrillgore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    I feel uncomfortable as a taxpayer having inadvertently supported Boeing and they are literally falling apart.

    You think Airbus is gonna expand its capacity to build even more planes?

    • Synapse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      According the Airbus themselves, they finished 2023 with a backlog of 8598 orders, and they delivered 735 planes that same year. They are occupied for years ahead and it’s probably not so simple to increase production.

      Edit: the source: Orders and deliveries / airbus.com

  • athos77@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Clickbait. The FAA lists the plane number as N672DL and a quick flight registry check says that plane was made in 1992. This is a maintenance issue with Delta.

    • 7heo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Isn’t Boeing QA supposed to inspect the plane and sign it off after maintenance?

      • Aatube@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        No, they make the guides but don’t monitor them, which would be too costly (so much employees needed) and bureaucratic

        • 7heo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          I thought that there were specific “critical” operations that would require them (Delta, Boeing, or both) to record an entry in Boeing’s Collaborative Manufacturing Execution Systems (CMES) database. But I’m discovering this field, so I don’t know if they make a difference in this context between before and after delivery, and if the normal plane maintenance is covered by the same processes or not, and that’s why I’m asking, and not stating.

          However, if one doesn’t know more than me, stating isn’t more correct.

          • Aatube@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 months ago

            Well, they probably register repairs in databases, but they definitely don’t send people to check every single thing. Airlines also might contract Boeing to do some bigger repairs.

            • 7heo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              I don’t see how a repair that causes the nose of a plane to “fall off” would not be considered a “bigger repair”…

              I’m not saying that Boeing would be involved in the replacement of a tire from the landing gear. But something major enough to make the actual nose of the plane to literally fall off? That sounds important enough to me.

                • 7heo@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  OK I’m officially too tired to actually contribute to Lemmy. I’ll be on my way… 😭

    • Deebster@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      The title is “Nose wheel falls off Boeing 757 airliner waiting for takeoff” and that’s exactly what happened. That’s not clickbait, since it’s not deceptive, sensationalized, or otherwise misleading. It’s just news.

      • athos77@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        The only reason it’s being reported is because of the other Boeing incident. And if they were trying to be accurate, the headline would’ve read “Nose wheel falls off Delta airplane waiting for takeoff”. It’s clickbait.

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          I think you overestimate how much the average traveler who may die when parts fall off cares or is parsing whether it’s Boeing’s mistake or Delta’s. What I’m taking from the headline (we need to get our shit together before a bunch of people die) is different than what you seem to be worried about people taking from the headline.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        You say and yet we both know if the headline was “nose wheel falls off Delta jet waiting to take off” it’d be identically accurate but would mean something else entirely

  • Augustiner@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Working for Boeings PR department must be absolute madness right now… imagine having to somehow excuse all those fuck ups and every week there is a new one

    • WHYAREWEALLCAPS@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Except this one isn’t even a Boeing issue - this is a plane Delta has operated since 1992. This is entirely Delta’s maintenance’s fault. Boeing will still get blamed for it, of course.

      • Augustiner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I know, but no one cares who’s responsible at the moment. What people care about is that they read a new article about Boeings planes endangering passengers every 3 days. So while Delta is most likely at fault, Boeing is gonna take the hit to the company image. That’s why I was specifically speaking about the Boeing PR team. Those guys and the crisis managers won’t be able to catch a break for a loooong time.