I'm moving some posts about the Alaska airlines safety issue. The issue is bigger and more concerning day by day, as we learn that Boeing made a fleet of planes that had a serious safety flaw. Boeing's focus on profit over airplane integrity has come home to roost.
A few years ago, I had a pop-up vision about an Alaska Airlines flight. I couldn't stop thinking about the vision for years. Now that Alaska Airlines is dominating the news due to a safety flaw in Boeing Max 9 jets, I want to follow this issue.
Thanks for starting this thread.
Boeing is not the only game in town but they are the biggest and most widely used, and while I don't have a specific concern to cite - I have always felt very much like the attitude of the people in the know is that Boeing gets a pass no matter what happens. We have "performance theater" for investigations when something does go wrong, and while much might be made in the short term about the outcome of those investigations, Boeing is still here, untouched (from the standpoint of major ramifications) doing it's thing.
On the one hand, planes are pricey. Airlines share blame for short changing maintenance, ignoring warnings from flight crews like the ones you've already brought to light, etc. On the other, air travel is still the safest way to go. It's tough but at the end of the day, none of the airlines in the world can afford to scrap their fleet and replace them all.
I'm wandering away from a point here. Okay - my point: Boeing, as a business, has always given me the "ick" feeling.
The FAA had a dual mandate in place from its origin. They were to promote air travel, as well as air safety. One part of that mandate was often sacrificing one half to the other. This changed in 1996 after the Valuejet 592 and TWA 800 incidents. The language of their mandates was changed to reflect more safety and less promotion of air travel.
Having sued Boeing personally, it is challenging to bring issues to light. Their NDA provisions in their settlements is thorough. I had to call my aviation attorney to ask how to explain to my accountant why my account balances were higher the year I got my settlement, as I wasn't allowed to disclose settlement terms even to my accountant. In the end, I had to inform the accountant that if there were any tax audits, he was to tell the IRS to call the aviation attorneys directly (even the IRS would need a court order to get terms of the settlement).
Boeing has had considerable sway politically in the past. Clinton had the White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security established after our crash. There were plenty of issues discussed, and resolutions proposed, by both those who were on the commission and those of us who testified before the commission. Ultimately, the commission was put together to satisfy the public before a presidential election. One of the commission's members (widow of a Pan Am 103 victim) even sued Al Gore over the way the commission report was handled. While there were a few issues that were looked at and implemented, you have the power of the lobby of a large corporation with holdings in a number of states. Boeing was founded in Seattle, but also had major offices in places like Chicago (now VA), and plants in other states like SC. The slowness of implementation and loss of scope of those recommendations was noted by the media in the aftermath of 9/11. That's not to say that airlines didn't have their part in watering down changes as well.
To give you an idea of what people are up against, it took time to determine if TWA was brought down by a maintenance issue, design flaw, or terrorism. While it took over two years for the FBI to withdraw from the investigation, it became more and more obvious from early on (within months) that there was no bomb or missile. It was ultimately determined that it was partially a design flaw, and the age of the aircraft. The Boeing engineers knew for decades the tanks in their craft were volatile when empty, but thought they could design around that contingency. Because military craft could be shot at, they designed an inerting system for fuel tanks in military craft in the late 60s, which was put into use in the early 70s. Inerting means they pump a nonflammable gas into empty gas tanks so that if there is a spark, the tank won't blow. TWA 800 blew in 1996, due to damaged wire insulation, allowing high voltage to enter an empty tank through a low voltage wire. The federal register in the fall of 1996 asked for comments on the volatility of tanks, listing 36 previous ignitions-half of which were military (the reason for the inerting systems to be previously developed), one was a McDonnell Douglas plane (a fuel pump on the ground caused the ignition, not the plane), and the rest were Boeing, including the sister plane to TWA 800. It took until 2008 to finally get a mandate from the FAA to mandate inerting on passenger craft. Yes, you read that right. They (airlines, manufacturers, FAA) allowed the general public to fly on craft they knew had explosive tanks for another 12 years. There were even some craft that were going to be exempt from the multi-year phase in of the inerting systems. Craft that were old (and the most likely victims) would be exempt if the craft would meet retirement age before the end of the mandatory installation period.
Why did it take so long? Money. Pure and simple. There is a dollar value assigned to individuals who fly. Back in the 90s, it was around 2.7 million per person. What would the cost of making changes be vs the actual payout for lives lost due to the plane's issue? It was simple math. If it cost more to make changes than pay the families or survivors when there was a problem, you keep your bottom line. This was true for all aircraft manufacturers and airlines.
The other issue you have is the industry itself. Most of the manufacturers in the US are of smaller craft. At one point you had two passenger craft manufacturers-Boeing, McDonnell Douglas. Boeing bought out M-D in 1996. Airbus came along in 2000, but they are headquartered overseas. So really, who do you have with the technical experience to work in the FAA other than former Boeing employees? Yes, there are some from smaller personal craft or military craft manufacturers who also leave their private sector jobs and go to the FAA, but it's a small community, which is why Boeing has such a strong influence.
A member of Al Gore's staff one time forced Boeing engineers to have a conference call with me over the flammability issues just months after the crash. You could hear them choking on their words, not being able to tell me how they figured that designing around a ticking time bomb on every plane was actually doable. How could they possibly come up with every failure scenario was a question they couldn't answer. One of them told me they had no problem putting their kids on a plane given what they knew. I told them to look at their kids in the eye at dinner that night and repeat that to himself, and then to remind himself how lucky he was to be able to eat with them. It was something I would never do again, thanks to that kind of thinking.
I'm no fan of Boeing.
There is a dollar value assigned to individuals who fly. Back in the 90s, it was around $2.7 million per person. What would the cost of making changes be vs the actual payout for lives lost due to the plane's issue? It was simple math. If it cost more to make changes than pay the families or survivors when there was a problem, you keep your bottom line. This was true for all aircraft manufacturers and airlines.
Cindy, I should have known that you, of all people here, could respond first hand to these issues. Thank you for offering this information. My heart goes out to you and your beloved Monica for helping us understand.
You are a force of truth, accountability. justice and wisdom.
Thank you for sharing an additional and important part of your story with us all.
@jeanne-mayell, The FAA has acted in much quicker fashion than in the past. Today, they announced greater FAA oversight of Boeing.
More scary news about how Boeing builds planes. The Atlantic (excellent journalism) just published an expose on Boeing that has me not wanting to fly their planes. I will summarize for those who cannot get past their paywall.
It used to be a company of engineers. Now it's a company of accountants. When they merged with McDonald Douglas 20 years ago, the accountant, bottomline profit-oriented culture took over. It's taken awhile for their planes to start falling apart, but now it's happening and I don't expect that can change, given what I'm learning about how they build planes.
One example:
The two fatal crashes of the 737 Max [374 people died] were the result of a new flight-control system that depended on data from a single sensor that had no backup. In both cases, the sensor failed, giving the flight-control system the wrong information and precipitating disaster.
Wait. They didn't have a back up system for the crucial flight-control system?
I have a back up at all times for this website. I never go without it. In fact, I have back up for the back up.
But Boeing didn't build an inflight back up for their flight-control system.
Also they don't make all the pieces of the plane. They subcontract them then assemble the final parts. Also many of their subcontractors subcontract those parts, even those subcontractors subcontract some of them. Who's monitoring the quality of all those pieces that make up a plane?
I have heard enough about Boeing to find another airline when possible. (And minimize flying). I have a vision for Boeing: more exposes are coming and more mishaps, hopefully minor but revealing.
@jeanne-mayell, The FAA has acted in much quicker fashion than in the past. Today, they announced greater FAA oversight of Boeing.
When I read that article, I thought, "Why do I not believe them?"
Answer: Because the situation at Boeing is far worse than most people realize. They've been getting away with...well, not exactly murder, but, what do you call it when their focus on profit over safety has killed people?
Yesterday, NPR's Mary Louise Kelly, did an 11 minute segment on this problem, that I just happened to turn on my car radio and hear. It's worth a listen (you can click and listen or read). https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1198910044
Essentially, Boeing has had the public sector in its pocket for so long that the federal government that is supposed to oversee air safety has delegated that oversight to Boeing. That's right. Boeing oversees itself.
I know it's hard to hear another story about how much we need to have a government by the people, for the people, but first we do need to realize what is going on. I for one, am going to think twice before flying in another Boeing plane.
The good news is that if fewer people fly in airplanes, then, it will save megatons of fossil fuel.
An Atlas Air Boeing 747-8 cargo plane has been filmed on fire above the US city of Miami, where it made an emergency landing late on Thursday, local time, shortly after take-off.
Regards
Matildagirl
@matildagirl Oh man, the chickens are coming home to roost at Boeing.
Hilarious SNL satire on Alaska Airlines. Fly Alaska Airlines!
Alaska Airlines CEO: " We found 'many' loose bolts on Boeing 737 Max 9 planes".
I don't want my family flying on Boeing planes. I wonder if the public realizes how many Boeing planes are flying. Thanks for finding that article which said, “Given the previous tragic crashes of Boeing 737 Max aircraft, we are deeply concerned that the loose bolts represent a systemic issue with Boeing’s capabilities to manufacture safe airplanes,” Sens. Ed Markey, J.D. Vance and Peter Welch wrote to Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun earlier this month.
SNL made the joke about Alaska airlines. But the fault is Boeing and their sloppy cheap manufacturing.
The nose wheel fell off a Boeing craft Tuesday before takeoff. Are we surprised?
As suspected, the FAA says they will tighten scrutiny and oversight even more, has halted the expansion of their Max line, but has set inspection requirements to get current planes back in use.
As noted, Boeing has a corporate culture that is all about the bottom line, the stockholder's and upper management's profits. As the public gets fed up with it, it could signal some major issues for the company.
Boeing is an absolute disaster. They were the gold standard and maybe the tin standard.