The crashes—Lion Air Flight 610 in October 2018, and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March 2019—killed 346 people.

In January 2021, Boeing entered into a $2.5 billion settlement to avoid prosecution on a charge of fraud for misleading federal regulators who approved the aircraft for operations. On Tuesday, DOJ officials told a federal judge that Boeing had failed to make safety changes called for in the agreement.

The crashes were blamed in part on the aircraft’s maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS), a new automated flight control system. The pilots had not been informed that the system had been installed on the aircraft nor were they trained on its use. Shortly after takeoff, the MCAS activated and pushed the nose of the jet down in an unrecoverable dive.

• READ MORE: NTSB, Ethiopian Investigators Clash Over 737 Max Accident Report

After the second crash, the FAA ordered an immediate grounding of the 737 Max. 

During the investigation, Boeing downplayed the role of the MCAS, then later blamed two employees for misleading the FAA on the MCAS prior to certification.

During negotiations, the government agreed not to prosecute the aerospace manufacturer on a charge of defrauding the United States by deceiving authorities about the flight system. The agreement shielding Boeing from prosecution was contingent on the company developing and implementing policies and programs to improve its safety culture, quality assurance, and compliance programs.  

According to the Seattle Times, the settlement also included a $243.6 million fine, $500 million fund for victim compensation, and nearly $1.8 billion to airlines whose Max jets were grounded for nearly two years.

• READ MORE: Alaska Airlines Grounds 737 Max Fleet Following Explosive Decompression

Boeing was given three years to develop and apply the programs and had to prove it had made the changes. The deadline was the second week of January—days after a midair blowout of a door plug on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282, a Boeing 737-9 Max. No one was seriously hurt in that event, although several lawsuits have been filed on behalf of the passengers.

“We can confirm that we received a communication…from the Justice Department, stating that the department has made a determination that we have not met our obligations under our 2021 deferred prosecution agreement, and requesting the company’s response,” a spokesperson for Boeing told FLYING. “We believe that we have honored the terms of that agreement and look forward to the opportunity to respond to the department on this issue. As we do so, we will engage with the department with the utmost transparency, as we have throughout the entire term of the agreement, including in response to their questions following the Alaska Airlines 1282 accident.”

Meanwhile, family members of the 346 crash victims are hoping Tuesday’s development will open the door for prosecution against Boeing.

Boeing has until June 13 to respond to the government’s allegation, at which time the Justice Department will decide if prosecution should be pursued.

The post DOJ Accuses Boeing of Violating 737 Max Crash Agreement appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Most certainly you still remember it—particularly for the salacious detail that said pilot had partaken in psychedelic mushrooms 40-some hours before his ill-timed psychotic episode. Already, “Had any ’shrooms lately, cap’n?” has supplanted the long-standing “Been drinking lately, cap’n?” as a moronic joke of choice among our more comedically impaired passengers. For much of our empathy-deficient, terminally online general public, a sad case of crumbling mental health that destroyed a family man’s life is little more than darkly humorous grist for the dank meme mills.

To those of us who make our living as professional pilots, though, and to others in this industry for which safety is religion but discussions of mental health have remained frustratingly taboo, this felt like something much more serious, another foreshock to an earthquake that’s been decades in the making.

This event hit particularly close to home for me because the pilot in question and I crossed paths when we both flew for Horizon Air. The name didn’t ring a bell until Horizon friends sent me photos from back in the day: “Oh, that Joe!” Furthermore, I flew several times with the quick-acting captain who subdued the renegade jumpseater, and after leaving Horizon I ran into him on a layover. It’s a very small industry.

It’s rare that intentional pilot actions cause accidents or serious incidents like this one—but not unknown. The most infamous is 2015’s GermanWings 9525, which was an open-and-shut case of pilot murder-suicide. Most are not so clear. EgyptAir 990 and SilkAir 185 were ruled suicides by the National Transporation Safety Board (NTSB) but are still disputed by Egyptian and Indonesian authorities, respectively. It’s the leading theory for the 2014 disappearance of Malaysia 370 but is unlikely to be proven absent recovery of the wreckage and black boxes. The final report on 2022’s China Eastern 5735 crash has yet to be issued, but media sources report that investigators believe it resulted from intentional action by one of the pilots.

• READ MORE: On the ‘Bax’ Foot: A Lifelong Writer Tackles the Spoken Word

At a time when every other facet of airline flying has become astonishingly safe, these events have started to stick out. Just as Air France 447, Colgan 3407, and other loss-of-control accidents prompted aviation regulators to ask, “Are airline pilots forgetting how to fly?” now mental health events—including many that go unpublicized because they involve pilots on layover or at home—are prompting industry leaders to ask, “Are airline pilots mentally well enough to fly?” To which the more cynical among us respond smartly: “Sure we are— just ask us!”

Because that’s essentially the system that is in place. Every six or 12 months, we fill out FAA Form 8500-8 (Application for Airman Medical Certificate) and state whether we have ever in our lives been diagnosed with, had, or presently have any one of 23 potentially disqualifying conditions, notably including “mental disorders of any sort; depression, anxiety, etc.” It is well known that checking yes to this box will shunt your application into an opaque, byzantine process involving significant time and expense for evaluations and interminable delay by the FAA’s understaffed Aerospace Medical Certification Division (AAM-300), and that after a year or two in limbo, you may be brusquely informed that you are not fit to fly for pleasure or profit.

Additionally, you are required to list all visits to health professionals in the last three years, and listing anyone even nominally connected with the health of your noggin is most certain to invite additional questions.

If your healthcare was provided by the Department of Defense or Veterans Affairs, there’s no hiding anything. The FAA has access to your records. The rest of us are on the honor system. Most of us are truthful, particularly for physical defects (Crohn’s disease, in my case, for which there is a fairly easy, well-known special issuance process). The system, however, definitely incentivizes concealing mental issues. I have personally encountered three major airline pilots who openly told me they have diagnoses of anxiety or depression that they’ve kept hidden from the FAA and the airline. I’m sure I’ve flown with others who keep their cards closer to their chests.

But they are the exceptions. Most of us don’t hide mental conditions from the FAA because most of us have nothing to hide—and we make damned sure it stays that way by never getting within speaking distance of anyone qualified to make any sort of troublesome diagnosis. Mind you, pilots already tend to be the sort of folks who deny the possibility of any human weakness in their mettle, who tough it out and rub some dirt on it and grit their teeth while shoving the pain deep, deep down. When it comes to mental or emotional health, this innate reluctance to seek help is greatly reinforced by the professional consequences of doing so.

• READ MORE: Allure of International Flying Lies Across the Glittering Sea

And so, for the vast majority of working pilots, mental healthcare simply does not exist. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, companies have invested in wellness resources for their employees, and my airline has been at the forefront. A while back, I flew with a new first officer who was feeling stressed over her personal finances and, seeing a blurb on our internal website for wellness coaching, thought, “Why not? It’d be nice to talk to someone about this.” That lasted for about two minutes before she was informed that, because of aeromedical-legal issues, the program was not available to pilots. Instead, we commiserate over layover beers—the only acceptable form of therapy available to us.

I’ve previously written about my experience moving off of Windbird and across the country to Seattle, sleeping in my own bed for three nights in a busy, 60-day period, and how I was in a rather dark place mentally. This raised some eyebrows, and I received several emails expressing concern—not over my mental health but regarding my honesty about it in print. The reality is that I was not suffering from depression, and I never have. But there have been periods in my life where financial, career, or life stress clouded my usual optimistic disposition, and friends and family noticed. The fact that it is considered taboo for a professional pilot to admit even this is disheartening.

We are apparently expected to be superheroes, or to at least play the part. What of those whose internal struggles greatly eclipse my own? Most suffer in silence, and every year we lose a few of these, the company email announcing their untimely passing with no reference to cause of death. A brave few seek professional help, either on the sly or at great risk to their career.

And then there are those who take the DIY approach. There is a significant body of recent clinical research to suggest that Psilocybin is effective in many individuals for treating anxiety and affective disorders. It’s now legal in several states and tolerated in others. Why wouldn’t a depressed person who has denied themselves professional treatment give magic mushrooms a try?

Alas, amateur dosing in a less-than-clinical setting will yield uneven results, and there may be unexpected side effects, notably including insomnia. I’m sure most of us believe we’d never attempt to gain access to an airline cockpit after several days without sleep—but few of us really know what we’d do in that state.

Industry leaders know there’s a problem. The FAA knows there’s a problem, having recently established a Mental Health and Aviation Medical Clearances Rulemaking Committee, which will be advisory but is expected to recommend major changes. There have been some small tweaks already, such as expedited approval of those with a childhood diagnosis of ADHD but no recent history.

But our industry and regulators have a great deal of institutional momentum and a fair amount of outdated thinking about mental health to overcome. It is my sincere hope that the recent Horizon Air incident provides the impetus and political cover required for our leaders to make the sea change that our system so very badly needs.

This column first appeared in the January-February 2024/Issue 945 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Pilot Mental Health Remains the Last Taboo in Aviation appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Calhoun’s departure was not the only leadership change, according to the company.

Board chair Larry Kellner will not seek reelection at the upcoming shareholders meeting and will be succeeded by Steve Mollenkopf. Stan Deal, who serves as president and CEO of commercial airplanes, has retired effective immediately, and Stephanie Pope has been named the CEO of the division.

• READ MORE: ‘Changes…Need to Happen,’ Boeing Official Says

The company said its board has picked former Qualcomm CEO Mollenkopf to replace Kellner as independent board chair and lead the search for Calhoun’s replacement.

Calhoun and Boeing have been under intense scrutiny since Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 lost a door plug shortly after takeoff from Portland International Airport (KDPX) in Oregon on January 5. Investigators said bolts that are supposed to keep the door plug secure were missing after repair work at the Boeing factory in Renton, Washington.

• READ MORE: Boeing Changes Leadership of 737 Program

Rapid decompression led to injuries on the flight, and several of the passengers are part of a lawsuit against Boeing and the airline.

Following the incident, the FAA grounded all 737 Max 9 aircraft for several weeks amid a National Transportation Board (NTSB) investigation and initiated an audit of Boeing’s production practices. The audit found Boeing deficient in several areas, and the agency put a limit on production of 737s and gave the company 90 days to come up with a plan to address the deficiencies and show improvement.

• White Paper: Boeing’s Troubles May Crash Its Market Share

Since the door plug blowout, even minor incidents involving Boeing aircraft have attracted a great deal of attention.

In a letter to employees, Calhoun called the event a “watershed moment for Boeing.”

“We must continue to respond to this accident with humility and complete transparency,” Calhoun wrote. “We also must inculcate a total commitment to safety and quality at every level of our company. The eyes of the world are on us, and I know we will come through this moment a better company, building on all the learnings we accumulated as we worked together to rebuild Boeing over the last number of years.

“As we begin this period of transition, I want to assure you, we will remain squarely focused on completing the work we have done together to return our company to stability after the extraordinary challenges of the past five years, with safety and quality at the forefront of everything that we do.”

Calhoun has held the position of CEO at Boeing since January 2020, when Dennis Muilenburg was fired in the aftermath of two 737 Max crashes that killed 346 and resulted in the grounding of the aircraft for more than a year, resulting in thousands of canceled flights. 

The post Boeing CEO to Step Down, President to Retire appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Several passengers aboard that aircraft—operating as Alaska Airlines Flight 1282—have received letters from the FBI, the Seattle Times reported.

Last week the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched a criminal investigation into the January 5 door plug blowout. The FBI serves as the principal investigative arm of the DOJ.

• READ MORE: Additional Passengers Sue Alaska Airlines, Boeing

Mark Lindquist, a Seattle area attorney who represents 26 of the 177 people who were on board the airliner in litigation against Boeing and Alaska Airlines, confirmed the passengers have been contacted by the FBI because they have been identified as a possible victim of a crime. The FBI letter warned the passengers that the investigation could take several months.

“In an event like this, it’s normal for the DOJ to be conducting an investigation,” anAlaska Airlines spokesperson told FLYING. “We are fully cooperating and do not believe we are a target of the investigation.”

• READ MORE: NTSB Hearings Set in Boeing Door Plug Failure Probe

Said Steve Bernd, a spokesperson for the FBI’s Seattle field office, told FLYING: “The FBI does not confirm or deny the existence of an investigation.” 

According to the Washington Post, the FBI letter did not name Boeing.

The aircraft manufacturer did not respond to FLYING’s  request for comment.

The door plug blowout occurred  shortly after takeoff from Portland International Airport (KPDX) in Oregon. There were no serious physical injuries, and the aircraft was able to return to the airport for landing.

The event prompted the immediate grounding of all 737 Max 9 aircraft, pending inspection of the door plugs. The Max 9s remained on the ground while Alaska Airlines and  United Airlines—the two carriers who operate the aircraft—conducted inspections of the door plugs.

The preliminary investigation conducted by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) revealed the four bolts that were supposed to be installed to keep the door plug in place were missing. 

• READ MORE: ‘Changes…Need to Happen,’ Boeing Official Says

The Max 9 had performed more than 150 takeoffs and landings since it was delivered to Alaska Airlines in October 2023. The month preceding the incident, there were three reports of problems with the pressurization system. The airline restricted the aircraft from overwater routes and was allegedly preparing to bring it in for maintenance at the end of its duty day on January 5— the day of the blowout.

The FAA has since conducted an audit of Boeing and has given the manufacturing giant 90 days to demonstrate improved quality control procedures. According to Boeing, changes are already underway to improve the oversight of the production process.

The post FBI Contacts Passengers Aboard Door Plug Blowout Flight appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

“There’s changes that need to happen,” Brian West, Boeing’s chief financial officer, said Wednesday in addressing the Bank of America Global Industrials Conference in London. “There’s no doubt about it. But we’re going to do so diligently and expeditiously.”

In remarks, West acknowledged repercussions had followed a recent incident where a door plug dislodged from a Boeing 737 Max 9 passenger jet mid-flight, leading to rapid decompression.

“The events of January 5, and Alaska Airlines Flight 1282, and everything we’ve learned since, we acknowledge that we need to improve upon safety and quality and conformance,” West said.

• READ MORE: Boeing Changes Leadership of 737 Program

As a result of the event, which triggered a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation and FAA audit, Boeing is taking a careful look at its processes, West told the forum.

“There are changes that need to happen,” he said. “[We’re] deliberately going too slow to get this right. We’re the ones who made the decision to constrain rates on the 737 program below 38 per month until we feel like we’re ready, and we’ll feel the impact of that over the next several months.”

No More Travel Work

In late February, the FAA said it was giving Boeing 90 days to identify ways to improve safety culture and address compliance issues. One of the first changes the company identified as necessary was putting an end to “traveled work,” West said.

“Traveled work has existed for a very long time, and in recent years, we tried to get ahead of it,” he said. “Turns out it wasn’t enough. For years, we prioritized the movement of the airplane through the factory over getting it done right, and that’s got to change. The leadership team got it in the immediate aftermath of January the 5th. We control how this happens, and it’s about our resolve to get ahead and get after traveled work.”

• READ MORE: FAA Gives Boeing 90 Days to Improve

West noted that Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun is in the factory “personally making sure that we do get control of it, because once you do reduce travel to work, your quality gets better, your stability gets better, and probably most importantly, the work of the mechanic gets better.”

On March 1, for example, the company announced it would no longer be traveling work between contractor Spirit AeroSystems in Wichita, Kansas, which manufactures fuselages, and the Boeing plant in Renton, Washington.

“We will only accept a fully conforming fuselage from Spirit, which means in the near term, there might be variability of supply,” West said.  “But long term the predictability that we’re going to get is dramatically better, and the nonconformances dropped significantly in our factory because it takes those nonconformances and it pushes them upstream where they belong to get actioned.”

West stressed that production is continuing at Boeing, and it has aircraft scheduled for delivery through 2028.

Impact on Customers

West acknowledged that the slowdown is impacting Boeing’s customers.

“[But] they have been supportive of everything we’re trying to do to enhance safety and quality for the industry,” he said. “We are in regular, very transparent communications, and they know precisely where we stand and the progress that we’re making, and we, at the same time, have to understand what their needs are as they think about their flight schedules and their passengers.

“Ultimately, our job is to make sure that we can execute on behalf of our customers in a way that’s more predictable, more dependable, with the highest quality in mind, and we’re going to do that one airplane at a time, and our customers are hanging with us and we’re appreciative of that.”

The post ‘Changes…Need to Happen,’ Boeing Official Says appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

With a scowl on his face, Captain Dave turned to our wet-behind-the-ears flight engineer and said, “Call maintenance. The radar is spoking in the video band.”

Staring at the unit, I saw nothing but a green scan sweeping across the display. Hmm. What the heck was a video band? Thinking this seasoned captain could impart some valuable knowledge, I made the biggest mistake of the three-day trip. I asked the question out loud.

Dave’s response was curt and combative: “Look it up.” Despite my diplomatic efforts to explain that my question wasn’t challenging his authority, but rather an innocent attempt at an understanding, the cockpit temperature became icy cold. Various other benign interactions invoked similar results. The flight engineer and I determined it was best to follow the rule of speaking only when spoken to.

One of the layovers on the trip took us to Seattle, where I had the opportunity to visit with a friend who had been hired by Alaska Airlines after we had both been furloughed by now-defunct Wien Air Alaska. My friend became a therapist after I described bits and pieces of the Captain Dave experience. At pickup time, my friend got a glimpse of our boss as he descended to the hotel lobby in the glass elevator. His bright, white uniform shirt was starched with razor-edge creases, hat perfectly straight, and patent leather shoes shined to squint-worthy brightness.

The astonished expression on my friend’s face was confirmation that he understood my pain. He simply said, “No one ever loops a Bausch and Lomb sunglass case through their belt.”

• READ MORE: Kentucky Bourbon Trail Proves Worthy of a Flying Adventure

On the last leg of the trip to New York, our illustrious captain landed long on Runway 13 at LaGuardia (KLGA). Another arrival landed within seconds of our turn off the runway behind us. It was a dark night and, within an instant, I realized that the other arrival was about to exit via a high-speed taxiway, presenting a potential ground collision as we taxied from the opposite direction.

Keying the mic, I asked ground control if it wanted us to hold short of the high-speed taxiway that the other airplane was exiting. Unfortunately, the transmission was blocked. Captain Dave seemed unaware of the pending disaster, so I did my best to “suggest” that he stop the airplane. His wrath emerged, admonishing me for having the audacity to attempt communication with ATC without his approval. I was berated until the brakes were parked at the gate.

When the parking checklist was complete, I promptly picked up my flight bag, said goodbye to the flight engineer, and never spoke a word to Captain Dave as I exited the cockpit. I enjoyed a restless night’s sleep. Still on probation status with the airline, it seemed best to be preemptive and report my insubordinate discretions to our New York chief pilot, guilty or not. Perhaps he would have mercy on my soul.

With patience and a sympathetic ear, my chief pilot listened to the entire story of the trip from hell. I resisted revealing the name of the captain until he compelled me to utter it at the conclusion of my diatribe. After hearing the name, a brief moment of silence followed. My chief said, “Enjoy the rest of your career. Call me anytime.” To this day, the “video band” is still a mystery.

For those of us that began our careers with captains who never heard of the concept of CRM (crew resource management) or dismissed the idea entirely, it wasn’t unusual to fly with a four-striper who wouldn’t exactly be invited to Mom’s dinner table. Despite the pain of surviving a trip with such captains, it was a learning experience. The captain described earlier silently demonstrated some 727 flying techniques with which I wasn’t familiar, so all was not lost.

Or there was Captain Jack, who was genuinely a decent guy, but his people skills were sorely lacking. On almost every trip, he managed to tweak the ire of the ground crew or flight attendants. I was often the buffer between his potential demise at the hands of a fellow employee and survival. Somehow, I remained on his good side, most likely because of my attempts at diplomacy. Except for one night.

After being rebuffed by our No. 1 flight attendant who was busy with passengers, Jack had wanted a face-to-face discussion that involved seat belt strategy in anticipation of turbulence ahead over the Rockies. Even in the darkened Boeing 767 cockpit, I watched his complexion transform toward a deeper shade of red.

• READ MORE: So, You Can Actually Fly to Lunch?

Frustrated, Jack stabbed a button on his radio panel. Before I realized he had pressed the No. 1 VHF button and not the intended PA button (which is rarely used to summon a flight attendant anyhow), he transmitted on center frequency: “Lisa, come to the cockpit. I need you now!”

I cringed in anticipation of the inevitable. For a long minute, the frequency was alive with stand-up comics. “Lisa, I need you first!” “Lisa, come over here when you’re done!” “Lisa, don’t leave me!” And so on.

Although I was sympathetic to Captain Jack’s blunder, a smirk escaped from my face. To Jack’s credit, he smiled and bowed his head in resignation. He accepted the punishment and bought the first beer on the layover.

The experiences with all types of captain personalities were part of an informal but valuable mentoring process that helped define my own leadership skills. Good or bad, I filed away the best and worst. When it came time for me to add the fourth stripe, a switch in my brain activated that said I was ready, not only because of my level of comfort flying the airplane but because of the leadership traits experienced.

As of April, all Part 121 carriers are required to have in place a leadership and command program in addition to mentor training for captains. Back in the day, my airline offered a program dubbed “charm school.” We all received a leather-bound notebook with our names embossed, a vague idea on how to be a captain, and a lot of airline cheerleading. Most of us had already been flying in the left seat for a year, so it was easy to stick our chests out as “seasoned” captains. That said, charm school was a well-intended program. A version of it still exists.

With the airline industry now upgrading copilots to captains at warp speed, the opportunity for these pilots to experience all types of leadership remains limited. It is my hope that the leadership and command training, alongside the mentoring program, will be a sufficient supplement in filling our cockpits with adept captains.

A well-rounded copilot makes for a well-rounded captain.

This column first appeared in the December 2023/Issue 944 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Like Copilot, Like Captain: The Importance of Left-Seat Mentoring appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The flight had originated from Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (KDCA) in Arlington, Virginia.

• READ MORE: Additional Passengers Sue Alaska Airlines, Boeing

The incident is the latest for the airline operating a Boeing aircraft. In January, a door plug installed on an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 blew out during a flight, prompting the airline to temporarily ground its fleet of the aircraft.

The crack was minor, according to a spokesperson for Alaska Airlines: “The crew followed their checklists, and the aircraft continued safely to its destination as scheduled.” 

• READ MORE: NTSB Chief Testifies That Boeing Is Stonewalling on 737 Door Plug Blowout

There was no danger to the flight crew or passengers, as Alaska Airlines’ 737 fleet is equipped with five-layer windscreens that have an outer pane, three inner layers, and an inner pane, the spokesperson added.

• READ MORE: NTSB Hearings Set in Boeing Door Plug Failure Probe

“If an inner pane cracks, the other pane and layers can maintain cabin pressure. Our maintenance team inspected and repaired the windshield, and the aircraft is back in service,” the spokesperson said.

The post Alaska Airlines’ Boeing 737 Windscreen Cracks During Landing appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The aircraft, operating as Alaska Airlines Flight 1282, was forced to make an emergency landing at Portland International Airport (KPDX) in Oregon on January 5 after the left midexit door plug dislodged, leading to rapid decompression.

• READ MORE: Alaska Airlines Grounds 737 Max Fleet Following Explosive Decompression

According to the NTSB, the hearings are designed to assist the agency to obtain information necessary “to determine the facts, circumstances, and probable cause of the transportation accident or incident under investigation.” The information is then analyzed, and the agency uses it to make recommendations to improve transportation safety.

The investigative hearing is open to the public, however, only NTSB board members, investigators, scheduled witnesses, and parties to the hearing are allowed to participate. The NTSB has an accident investigation webpage that includes links to video of media briefings, photos, the preliminary accident report, and other related materials.

The hearing will be livestreamed, and details about the time and location will be announced in coming weeks, the agency said.

• READ MORE: FAA Boeing Audit Illuminates 737 Production Issues

Due for Maintenance

On the heels of the NTSB announcement of the hearing, documents obtained by The New York Times indicate that on January 4—a day before the door plug blew out of the Alaska Airlines flight—airline engineers and technicians wanted the aircraft to come out of service on January 5 for maintenance.

As noted in the NTSB preliminary report, a warning light that activates when there is a problem with the airplane’s pressurization system had come on twice in the previous 10 days. The flight crews reported the pressurization issue light to maintenance.

• READ MORE: Boeing Subcontractor Scrutinized Over Door Plug Failure

Donald Wright, Alaska Airlines’ vice president for maintenance and engineering, told the Times that the airline considers taking more aggressive action if the warnings are triggered three times in 10 days.

The aircraft remained in service, as the pressurization system is a triple redundancy. However the airline did restrict the aircraft from flying long-haul overwater trips until the pressurization system could be thoroughly inspected. The maintenance was allegedly supposed to have happened the evening of January 5, the same night of the door plug blowout.

When asked if the airline should have grounded the aircraft sooner, an FAA spokesperson said, “Airlines must follow their FAA-approved maintenance programs to ensure their aircraft meet the agency’s airworthiness requirements.” 

• READ MORE: NTSB Chief Testifies That Boeing Is Stonewalling on 737 Door Plug Blowout 

According to the NTSB preliminary report, the four bolts meant to secure the door plug  were missing before the panel came off the airplane. The report outlined a series of events that occurred at Boeing’s factory in Renton, Washington, that may have led to the airplane being delivered to the airline in October 2023 without those bolts being in place.

The door plug allows the aircraft to be configured with an extra emergency exit. From inside the fuselage, the door plug looks like a bulkhead and window. The outline of the door is only visible from the outside.

Last week NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy told reporters the aircraft flew 154 flights without the bolts in place, and there was evidence of small upward movements of the door plug that possibly created a gap between the door and fuselage.

According to Alaska Airlines, however, its visual inspection of the door plug in the days prior to the event did not reveal movement.

“We’re immensely grateful for the safe return of Flight 1282 on January 5 and commend the crew and all our employees for their actions every day to ensure the highest level of safety,” Alaska Airlines told FLYING. “We remain confident in our maintenance and safety actions leading up to the incident. We look forward to continuing our participation in a robust investigation led by the NTSB to ensure something like this never happens again.”

The post NTSB Hearings Set in Boeing Door Plug Failure Probe appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

According to the preliminary report by the Nation Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the four bolts that were supposed to hold the door plug in place were not installed. The investigation revealed the door plug had been removed for maintenance because of improperly installed rivets. 

In a Senate hearing Wednesday, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said Boeing had stonewalled the safety agency’s request for documentation. 

• READ MORE: NTSB Chief Testifies That Boeing Is Stonewalling on 737 Door Plug Blowout

Since the door plug blowout, the FAA has increased its oversight of Boeing and its contractor, Spirit AeroSystems, which makes the fuselage of the Boeing 737 Max.

“As part of its aggressive oversight of Boeing and its suppliers in the wake of the January 5th plug door incident involving a Boeing 737 max 9, the FAA recently concluded an audit of Boeing’s production line that went above and beyond FAA’s standard inspection process,” the FAA told FLYING. “The FAA identified noncompliance issues in Boeing’s manufacturing process control, parts handling and storage, and product control.”

The audit of Boeing noted the manufacturer failed 33 of 89 product audits, while Spirit underwent 13 audits and failed six.

One area of audit failure was related to the door plug.

• READ MORE: FAA Critical of Boeing Safety Culture

According to The New York Times, among the issues noted by auditors included failure to follow “approved manufacturing process, procedure, or instruction,” as well documenting the order the work was done and subsequent quality control.

According to the report, at one point auditors observed technicians at Spirit using a hotel key card to check a door seal, an action that was not “identified/documented/called out in the production order.” Dawn dish soap was also used as a lubricant in the door seal fit- process, for which the instructions were “vague and unclear on what specifications/actions are to be followed or recorded by the mechanic.”

“We have received preliminary findings from the FAA’s special audit of 737 production, on which we will work with our customer to address and incorporate lessons identified through the process,” a spokesperson from Spirit AeroSpace Systems told FLYING. “Meanwhile, we continue multiple efforts undertaken to improve our safety and quality programs. These improvements focus on human factors and other steps to minimize nonconformities. We recognize there is more to do, and any findings from the FAA will serve as a guide as we pursue additional opportunities to increase our precision and reduce opportunities for error. In so doing, as we have stated, our goal is zero defects.”

Following the January 5 incident, the FAA halted production expansion of the Boeing 737 Max and is exploring the use of a third party to conduct independent reviews of quality systems.

• READ MORE: Boeing Changes Leadership of 737 Program

The FAA on-site presence at Boeing’s facility in Renton, Washington, and Spirit AeroSystems’ facility in Wichita, Kansas, will continue, the agency said. The FAA has also mandated a comprehensive action plan from Boeing to address its production issues, giving the company 90 days to complete this critical plan. 

In a press conference Monday, FAA Administrator Mike Whitaker noted that the agency expects Boeing to have a plan in place in 30 days that will list milestones to strive for on the path to achieving better quality control. Whitaker has stated that Boeing “must commit to real and profound improvements. Making foundational change will require a sustained effort from Boeing’s leadership, and we are going to hold them accountable every step of the way.”

Boeing said it is on track to do that.

“Based on the FAA audit, our quality stand-downs and the recent expert panel report, we continue to implement immediate changes and develop a comprehensive action plan to strengthen safety and quality, and build the confidence of our customers and their passengers,” a Boeing spokesperson told FLYING. “We are squarely focused on taking significant, demonstrated action with transparency at every turn.”

In addition, at a press conference Monday Whitaker noted “the FAA has issued a letter of investigation (to Boeing) over the incident.” One of the questions being raised by federal agencies is if the failure to reinstall the door plug with the required bolts was a one-off event or symptom of a larger problem.

Door Plug Blowout

Several passengers aboard Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 were injured in the sudden decompression. The oxygen masks dropped from the ceiling, parts of the seats and interior cabin directly adjacent to the hole, and loose objects, including cellphones, were sucked out into the night sky.

The flight crew declared an emergency and returned for landing at Portland International Airport (KPDX) in Oregon. Within hours Alaska Airlines and the FAA grounded all 737 Max 9s. 

The door plug and debris from the cabin were found on the ground in a Portland neighborhood.

For the better part of two weeks the aircraft remained grounded until they could undergo detailed inspections to check the security of the door plugs.

The NTSB investigation noted there had been three warnings of pressurization issues with the jet that had been documented by other flight crews prior to the accident. But since pressurization is a triple-redundant system, it was determined that the aircraft could remain in operation but was restricted from flying over the ocean.

Since the accident there have been multiple lawsuits filed against Alaska Airlines and Boeing on behalf of the passengers on board, and the Department of Justice is investigating Boeing.

In a press conference Monday, U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigeig said  “we expect Boeing to fully cooperate with the NTSB and DOJ.”

The post FAA Boeing Audit Illuminates 737 Production Issues appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Testifying before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chair Jennifer Homendy said that despite numerous requests, NTSB has not received the names of 25 people working at the company’s Renton, Washington, facility responsible for opening, closing, and removing the door plug involved in the January 5 event or documentation supporting their work.

“Wow,” responded the committee’s ranking member, Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who asked for the update. “Are you telling us that even two months later you still do not know who actually opened the door plug?”

“That’s correct—and it’s not for lack of trying,” Homendy said, pointing out that it’s not unusual when critical information is not provided immediately after an investigation.

“But for this one, we know for a fact that there is a team that deals with the doors in Renton. The manager has been out on medical leave, so we’ve not been able to interview that individual. We’ve asked for the names of the other 25 people and have not received the names. We’ve asked for the records with respect to what occurred. We asked what shift did it occur on. It’s absurd that two months later we don’t have that.”

• READ MORE: FAA Gives Boeing 90 Days to Improve

When asked by committee chair Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) whether Boeing has a policy of maintaining documents on work such as installing or removing doors and door plugs, Homendy said the NTSB has not been able to verify that with Boeing.

“And without that information, that raises concerns about quality assurance, quality management, and safety management systems within Boeing,” Homendy said.

Said Cantwell: “It’s beyond disappointing. We have an entire economy that depends on people getting this right, and it seems like this…is stymying your investigation.”

Shortly after the hearing ended, Boeing responded to FLYING’s request for comment with a statement asserting that the company “early in the investigation” provided NTSB with names of employees, including door specialists, that it believed had relevant information.

“We have now provided the full list of individuals on the 737 door team, in response to a recent request. With respect to documentation, if the door plug removal was undocumented there would be no documentation to share. We will continue to cooperate fully and transparently with the NTSB’s investigation.”

Spirit AeroSystems Called Out

Homendy also testified to transparency problems with Spirit AeroSystems, the Wichita, Kansas-based manufacturer of fuselages for the Boeing 737. Spirit has also been part of the investigation.

Referring to individuals that NTSB believed were employed by Spirit, “we were just informed last week that they’re actually not Spirit employees, they’re contractors,” she told the committee. “All three people work for three different entities.”

NTSB was not informed of that by Spirit. “That information was told to us through the individuals being interviewed that contacted us directly. We have engaged our attorney on this matter, just so that you’re aware,” she said.

Spirit representative Joe Buccino told FLYING that, as a party to the NTSB investigation, “we are unable to comment on any matters associated with the investigation. We are coordinating with the NTSB to address the chair’s comments regarding this matter.”

• READ MORE: Boeing Confirms Discussions About Acquiring Spirit AeroSystems

Cruz, who called the lack of response from Boeing “utterly unacceptable,” asked Homendy to inform the committee in writing whether or not the aerospace giant provides the information requested by NTSB by March 13.

“This investigation needs to get to the bottom of what occurred, and what caused the accident,” Cruz said.

The post NTSB Chief Testifies That Boeing Is Stonewalling on 737 Door Plug Blowout appeared first on FLYING Magazine.