A Boeing whistleblower claims that internal quality standards were violated on the 787 “Dreamliner” model. He gets a big stage in the US Senate. Boeing denies the allegations.
Did Boeing make mistakes? The quality controls at the American aircraft manufacturer will be the focus of a hearing in the US Senate this Wednesday. A Boeing employee, who is now acting as a whistleblower, is expected to testify in the investigations subcommittee.
The man claims that when Boeing manufactured the 787 “Dreamliner” model, it tolerated errors in assembling fuselage parts, which could shorten the aircraft’s lifespan. The company emphatically rejected the allegations. Boeing is under pressure to improve quality controls after a near-miss in January in which a 737-9 Max aircraft lost a fuselage part in flight.
The US aviation authority FAA is demanding a detailed plan for this and is refusing to allow Boeing to expand production of the 737 series. The senators now also want to delve deeper into the topic. The most important witness at the hearing in Washington is Sam Salehpour, who, as a Boeing engineer, previously worked on the 787 and the widely used long-haul 777 model.
Boeing offers a number of counterarguments and denies the allegations
According to him, Boeing allowed the gaps between the individual fuselage sections on the 787 to be too large, which could lead to faster wear. Boeing vehemently contradicts this representation. Chief engineer Steve Chisholm points out that 671 aircraft of the type have completed their inspections after six years of operation and no problems have been found with any aircraft.
A 787, in which the stress of 165,000 flights was simulated from 2010 to 2015, also showed no signs of material fatigue on the fuselage. The FAA approved the results of the investigation. At the same time, Boeing manager Lisa Fahl emphasized that the aircraft manufacturer was extremely careful when developing the 787.
The specification for the distance between the fuselage parts was set at 0.005 inches (0.127 millimeters) – about the thickness of a human hair – because it was the first aircraft with a fuselage made of composite materials. With more data, however, it was found that larger distances were also permissible. New production methods did not lead to problems with the 777 either, Boeing asserts, citing inspection data.
Fuselage fragment broke out of a Boeing 737-9 Max
In the incident at the beginning of January, which brought Boeing many unpleasant headlines, a fuselage fragment broke out of an Alaska Airlines 737-9 Max shortly after takeoff while climbing. The more than 170 people on board got off lightly, although by a lucky coincidence the two seats near the hole in the fuselage remained empty. In addition, the aircraft was still at a relatively low altitude.
According to previous investigations, the accident investigation authority NTSB assumes that four fastening bolts were missing from the broken fuselage part. All other aircraft of the type were initially shut down for several weeks, but were allowed to fly again after inspections.
The Boeing problems also affect US airlines. The failure of several dozen 737-9 Max aircraft in the flight schedule in January cost United Airlines around 200 million dollars (188 million euros). As a result, the airline posted a loss of $124 million in the last quarter. In addition, the lack of production expansion at Boeing means that the airline will receive fewer new aircraft than planned. United now wants to book 35 aircraft from Boeing rival Airbus from leasing companies in 2026 and 2027. The A321neo aircraft compete with the 737.
Read at stern+: With the Lufthansa Group, passengers can fly more sustainably with just one click. For this purpose, a new tariff class is being offered for flights in Europe and Africa, the so-called “Green Fares”. How does green flying work and how much do the tickets cost? Ten questions and answers.
Source: Stern
