A Boeing 737 mechanic has weighed in a helpful way that provides insight as to why United Airlines now finds itself under FAA scrutiny.
Veteran Boeing 737 Mechanic Offers Opinion On Why Increased Scrunity Over United Airlines Is Justified
The context of the statement below is a recent United flight in which a panel detached from a Boeing 737 mid-flight. This incident was part of the collection of recent mechanical incidents at United Airlines that have invited a new level of FAA scrutiny that could undermine the carrier’s growth plans.
> Read More: How Did External Panel Detach On United Airlines 737-800?
As shared by Enilria, we have one (seemingly well-informed) theory as to why incidents like this, alone perhaps not concerning but a concern in the context of the many other incidents of late, have triggered this sudden FAA scrutiny:
I am a licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer specializing in composites from Scandinavia. I’ve been in this industry for 10 years I’ve worked on hundreds of 737s…Needless to say I’m extremely familiar with this aircraft.
I’ve repaired the exact panel dozens of times. And this happens naturally in other aircraft as well. The fairing that seemingly exploded mid-flight is one of many 737 wing fuselage panels that suffer from elongated holes due to excessive vibration, the steel countersunk screws are fastened to the far softer fiberglass emanate, which in time will vibrate and expand the holes to the point where the panel will simply not be attached anymore.
Once the whole elongation starts, the screws which are fastened to the floating nut plates will start to erode the original hole diameter. From what I can gather from the photo in the article an excessive amount of the fasteners were simply installed, but not holding the panel in place. At a certain point during the flight the airflow would have lifted an edge and the panel would have become shredded at the fiberglass and Nomex Honeycomb core.
I could go on further about this particular accident but it simply comes down to piss poor maintenance by United. Anyone with a set of eyes can see elongated holes on panels. The visual cues are impossible to miss. Usually black streaks from the fastener holes follow the airstream hope this brings you some insight.
(bolding mine)
Note the blame does not fall on Boeing. It also does not fall on the media. It’s so easy to blame the media for hyping up all the issues that United has had lately. After all, we are in an incredible era of safe flying…I don’t think flying has ever been safer. But media sensationalism aside, it seems like obvious signs were missed…and that is a problem.
Even as it continues to take delivery of new aircraft, United has a “mature” fleet of both Boeing and Airbus planes, with many more than 20 years old. As United now faces more FAA scrutiny, hopefully, the culture of “safety first” will become more important than ever before.
Because flying is still incredibly safe…but even though it is, it seems that incidents like panels or wheels falling off airplanes simply should not be happening, no matter how old an airplane is.
hat tip: View From The Wing
Awe that is good to know. I will be flying on three of United’s aging aircraft on Thursday and I am heartened by United’s deep consideration for safety.
That and the pronoun name tags.
We get it. You don’t like pronouns & diversity. Can you find another blog to comment where that is the topic? Your snark adds nothing to the conversation, whereas, say someone who knows something (an airplane mechanic or former) may give us a reason to read the comments & learn.
You read and commented. I’ll take that as a sign you’re interested and keep doing it.
He is a bigoted hateful troll who needs to vent his idiot views somewhere.
America’s changing demographics must truly terrify him.
Awe it’s little Aaron. How are you? And to be clear, diversity does not terrify me, but forced diversity and imaginary genders and the rest of the leftist garbage annoys me. Not enough to ruin my day of course, especially because much of it is rather funny, and also because little leftists like you get so defensive whenever anyone criticizes or ridicules it (An increasingly common phenomenon, I might add).
Nah, it clearly terrifies you to no end, given the comments you have made in the past. Masking it with stupid and hateful comments. You seem to enjoy offering nothing to most conversations on here besides your asinine bigotry and hatred for others. Being an ahole like this isn’t funny, it cheapens the comments section of this site.
Forced diversity is problematic if it disenfranchises certain groups of hardworking people who lose out on opportunities for advancement due to quotas that need to be met. Quite simply, it represents the complete opposite of what diversity was initially intended to achieve. There is such a thing as takung something too far and in many instances, this has been the case. These situations are what annoy the dickens out of people more so than the use of pronouns. In my opinion, at least in the way of using pronouns, to each their own.
A friend of mine is an Engineer at Boeing and he tells me that legacy UA has for a while not had a safety first attitude, way way before diversity became a buzz word.
I get your point about diversity and to some degree I agree, it isn’t necessary, but it didn’t cause this failure either.
Diversity IMHO is marketing at some level, which is what it is, fluff. It does not in my experience really affect things all that much.
You get name tags with pronouns, big deal, it is silly, but if it makes an employee happy, it is whatever to me.
More concerning is if UA maintenance missed a maintenance issue which should have been caught. My friend at Boeing was telling me that it is easy to spot the elongated screw holes due to dirt catching around the screw holes and streaming along the panel, it is the tell tale sign according to him.
I get your point about diversity and it being unnecessary, but it didn’t cause this, lack of a safety first culture did. My buddy said Boeing is having a similar issue and it too has nothing to do with diversity and all to do the with the McDonell Douglas merger and the Boeing culture of safety first falling to the Douglas culture of profits first, which also occurred way way before diversity became a buzz word.
As United now faces more FAA scrutiny, hopefully, the culture of “safety first” will become more important than ever before.
Except there was NEVER a culture of “safety first”. It’s been “profit first” for decades, and safety a distant second. Arguably since regulation…but that’s a different argument.
de-regulation*
I think the most important thing to UA is 100 brand new 787’s and diversity. Clearly the hallmarks of the biggest and best and safest airline in the galaxy.
Oh shut up about your dislike of diversity.
Why don’t you make us little Aaron?
Why don’t you guys find the nearest wall and run into it? Headfirst and repeatedly?
Grow up
Haha
No
Having owned, operated and maintained over 60 aircraft and having been the chief inspector and accountable manager of an FAA Approved Repair Station for over 50 years, I can tell you that recent issues show that the FAA no longer has a “safety first” agenda either. Unfortunately, it now is comprised mostly just a bunch of employees working toward their pensions. It is too bad that they, the FAA, are perceived to still be the incredible organization they once were instead of now having turned into a reactive organization rather than a proactive one.
While promoting safety, encouraging more pride in the work being accomplished would be useful. The scope of this scrutiny, along with maintenance, should include interior cleaning and preservation to keep aging aircraft both fresh and healthy. United is already paying for this service, why not make sure the work is top notch? Little things go a long way.
@Matthew do you recommend avoiding United for the time being?
Not at all. Just had an amazing experience that I cannot wait to share.
Considering Boeing quality went down after the McDonnell-Douglas merger, older aircraft are better just as Nissans were made better 20 years ago. My auto mechanic says to avoid newer Nissan, VW, and Mercedes. I’m that way with appliances: If something lasted 20 years and needs a minor fix, it’s better that than something new.
It comes down to two important factors. The first is hiring the most qualified person available. The second is training. Does UAL properly train thier technicians on every fleet type? If you go through a generic training class that has a one size fits all approach that is a big problem.
The people that make/assembled these airplanes should be highly reprimanded too. They are the first in line when it comes to product readiness and quality. The management staff certainly didn’t make the airplanes but of course will get all the blame. Nothing will change unless things change with the people that build these aircraft.