Posted on 03/20/2024 7:49:58 AM PDT by Twotone
The inner windshield of a Boeing jet flown by Alaska Airlines cracked as the plane came in for a landing in Oregon on Sunday, according to KPTV. The incident represents the latest in a slew of issues involving Boeing jets.
The Alaska Airlines flight was traveling from Washington, D.C., to Portland International Airport on Sunday when crew members noticed a crack on the inner windshield.
Following the incident, the airline released a statement, writing: “The crew followed their checklists and the aircraft continued safely to its destination as scheduled."
The New York Post reported that the airline said its fleet of Boeing 737-800s have a total of five layers of windscreens, with an outer pane, three inner layers, and then an inner pane.
“If an inner pane cracks, the other pane and layers can maintain cabin pressure," officials with the airline said. There were no injuries reported among the 159 passengers and six crew members aboard the plane.
The Post reached out to Boeing for comment on the situation, but the company reportedly declined to comment.
The Federal Aviation Administration has discovered dozens of issues with Boeing's 737 MAX jet production process. Investigators discovered that mechanics at one of its key suppliers used a hotel key card and dish soap as makeshift tools to test compliance, per reports.
The New York Times reported that Boeing has failed 33 out of 89 product audits. The revelations amounted to 97 counts of alleged noncompliance. However, the FAA reportedly could not release specific details about the audit due to its ongoing investigation into Boeing following a previous episode involving Alaska Airlines.
A more intense spotlight has been put on Boeing following the mysterious death of John Barnett — a former Boeing employee who was in the middle of blowing the whistle on the aircraft company's questionable quality checks.
Barnett was discovered in his truck with a gunshot wound to his head the morning he was to give testimony about Boeing's shortcomings. His death has since been ruled a suicide, but others have questioned whether there could have been foul play.
"John was a brave, honest man of the highest integrity," Barnett's lawyers said in a joint statement.
“He cared dearly about his family, his friends, the Boeing company, his Boeing co-workers, and the pilots and people who flew on Boeing aircraft. We have rarely met someone with a more sincere and forthright character.”
Sources familiar with the case have said investigators have dusted Barnett's truck for possible fingerprints, which is highly unusual in suicide cases.
Boeing 737-800s have a total of five layers of windscreens, with an outer pane, three inner layers, and then an inner pane.
That’s a lot of pane
Sheesh, with that many, one wonders how it cracked?
Pumped a lotta ‘pane down in New Orleans.......................
Just call safelite, so that they can send out a ‘technician’ who will inspect the windshield for over an hour and tell the airline that they found a microscopic pit which means it wasn’t a defect and they don’t have to cover the warranty on their cheap glass.
...
OH!
Sorry, I was talking about something else.
I got a little out of control there.
What was the topic?
That is precisely why there are five layers.
Windows are a consumable item on aircraft. They can be replaced because they crack, get pitted up, and other damage.
And the vendor who used a “hotel key card and soap” to test compliance. What does that have to do with anything about a window crack?
It’s Shark Week, only with airplanes.
Do I get the impression that Safelite might possibly have given you the shaft at some point in the not too distant past?
I’m beginning to suspect someone has preventive maintenance inspection program issues.
“OK, this is rapidly turning into “pile on Boeing” “
That’s all it is. Jet aircraft windows are really complex because of the high pressures they take at high subsonic speeds. Cracks are a problem but they happen all the time to older airplanes in routine use.
All that’s going on here is news organizations are taking ordinary maintenance incidents and conflating them with Boeing QC, which is ridiculous. A 737-800 has been out of the factory for years.
A LOT of these incidents seem to be happening in the Pacific NW, especially Portland
The incident with the door plug was out of Portland, and the same with the Hawaii flight that lost a window
Maybe the possibility of deliberate sabotage should now be considered ... Russia and China both have motive and means to hurt Boeing/the US, and Portland is sorta close to Asia ...
“just saying”
“hotel key card and soap” to test compliance”
Unauthorized makeshift tools are a HUGE no-no in aviation maintenance.
You wouldn’t was a surgeon using a pocket knife on you because a scalpel wasn’t available would you?
Not only were there were no injuries among the 159 passengers and six crew members, none of them even knew about it. Unlike engines in flames and missing door plugs.
Did someone in the media gain access to the FAA incident report system? Ton’s of these stories lately.
Planes, like cars, have things break.
And?
Zactly.
Its like the old Soviet Aeroflot days! Don’t people take care of planes anymore? Does this include the USAF too? We better not get into a shooting war with a real nation with an air force or we are in deep Do do, as a former president once said.
The analogy has merit ... The difference between USA now and USSR then is the aircraft themselves.
The Big Media are currently waving in our face apparent maintenance failures on fundamentally high-quality aircraft. I suspect them of being less than honest, though.
Back in the USSR, it was crap maintenance on crap aircraft and everybody knew it. Aeroflot very quickly ditched all its Soviet Ilyushins and Tupolevs for Boeing and Airbus products after the USSR collapsed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.