Courtesy of FoxNews.com:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191977,00.html
Report: Boeing Used Improper Parts on Planes
Monday, April 17, 2006NEW YORK — Three former Boeing Co. (BA) employees have alleged that the top U.S. planemaker installed improperly fitting parts in hundreds of Boeing 737 commercial jets, the Washington Post reported on Monday.
Boeing has denied the whistle-blowers’ claims, contained in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Wichita, Kansas, insisting that no faulty parts could have slipped past Boeing controls and that there is no safety issue related to the parts, the newspaper said.
Boeing officials could not immediately be reached for comment.
The parts at issue, manufactured by Boeing supplier AHF Ducommun of Los Angeles — a defendant in the lawsuit along with Boeing — were made between 1994 and 2002, the whistle-blowers said.
They claim that Boeing allowed thousands of parts to be installed on the planes even though the aerospace company knew they did not meet specifications. Boeing also retaliated against people who raised questions about the parts, the whistle-blowers claim.
The whistle-blowers initially made the claims in 2002, the newspaper said. A review by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and the Pentagon, which bought some of the planes, found the charges had no merit.
But the Washington Post said it had reviewed the FAA’s probe and found that the agency failed to visit any airplanes to inspect the 200 types of parts questioned by the whistle-blowers.
Ducommun declined to comment on the allegations, beyond referring to the FAA’s previous findings the allegations had no merit, the Post said.
By: pierrepjc - 19th April 2006 at 15:30
ianthefish you are so right!
By: ianthefish - 19th April 2006 at 13:47
Daily Telegraph 18.04.2006 mentions door parts as well (pax door or loo door unclear)
Is it good maintenance to follow the procedure exactly, or should you consider that the procedure is perhaps not the simplest or safest way way to do the job and improvise?
It is also possible that it’s not possible to do the job in ‘text book’ way but you’ll still end up signing for it ‘in accordance with’
You may need to be trained – experienced – and possibly licenced to sign off a job BUT you certainly DO NOT need any experience to write the procedure in the first place…………
By: KabirT - 19th April 2006 at 03:54
“improper fitting parts”…thats a narrow discription, like faulty toilet seats, toilet rolls….?
By: redsquare - 19th April 2006 at 02:02
At Ryanair, we’ve noticed the high number of snags of new aircraft, although usually it’s just Boeing skimping on the interior finishes. It’s quite annoying when lots of panels are smashed into place and the airstairs breaks within the first week so our engineers fix it and it never plays up again. Lazy Boeing:) haha
As Flex35 also states, I’ll say it again the record, Ryanair maintenace is absolutely second to none – it has to be due to the intensity of the operation day in day out.
By: LBARULES - 18th April 2006 at 11:56
Improperly fitting parts? Myself and Tom were on a nice new FR 738 a few weeks ago and an overhead panel wasn’t quite fitted properly. In fact one corner of it sat outside its mountings quite impressively. Does that count?!
Paul
Ah yes…. S****y old EI-DLF, ready for the scrap heap :D.
(Before anyone says anything… Sarcasm!).
By: tenthije - 17th April 2006 at 21:51
What kind of parts does the whistle blower refer to then ? Is it high risk electronic or mechanical parts, or as suggested locker doors and toilet snibs ?
From the Ducommun website (I highlighted some text):
Ducommun AeroStructures designs, engineers and manufactures the largest, most complex contoured aerostructure components in the aerospace industry. Our integrated processes include stretch-forming, thermal-forming, chemical milling, precision fabrication, machining, finishing processes, and integration of components into subassemblies.
We are also the largest independent supplier of composite and metal bond structures and assemblies in the US, including aircraft wing spoilers, helicopter blades, flight control surfaces and engine components.
By: Ren Frew - 17th April 2006 at 21:25
What kind of parts does the whistle blower refer to then ? Is it high risk electronic or mechanical parts, or as suggested locker doors and toilet snibs ?
By: Flex 35 - 17th April 2006 at 20:33
Ryanair’s maintenance procedures are equal and better to many national carriers flying today. Unless you are a qualified engineer and have inspected Ryanair aircraft I wouldn’t pass judgement if I were you. 😉
Flex 35
By: PMN - 17th April 2006 at 20:07
Nah, that’s just typical Ryanair maintenence for you 😉
The plane was 2 weeks old, I don’t really think we can blame maintenance procedures!
Paul
By: HON 1R - 17th April 2006 at 19:57
Improperly fitting parts? Myself and Tom were on a nice new FR 738 a few weeks ago and an overhead panel wasn’t quite fitted properly. In fact one corner of it sat outside its mountings quite impressively. Does that count?!
Paul
Nah, that’s just typical Ryanair maintenence for you 😉
By: PMN - 17th April 2006 at 15:57
Improperly fitting parts? Myself and Tom were on a nice new FR 738 a few weeks ago and an overhead panel wasn’t quite fitted properly. In fact one corner of it sat outside its mountings quite impressively. Does that count?!
Paul
Sign In
April 17, 2006 at 3:42 pm