Replies to post #6466 on Boeing Company (BA)

[Jetmek_03052]

I might remind those who are slamming Boeing over this news about the tail attachment issue -

This problem was not done AT Boeing. It is a problem created by a Boeing VENDOR.

Will Boeing have to deal with it? Yes.

But Boeing did not cause this problem.

I will add that I believe the problem is most likely a smaller issue, dealing with the WAY the tail attachment fittings were installed. Any manufacturing issue that caused difficulty with the final installation of the tail feathers (I.E. fittings in the wrong place) would have been caught right away.

I believe that probably, Boeing engineers are going over the faulty procedure used by the vendor, to try to determine if any stress or damage was done to the area in question. It may very well be determined that very little needs to be changed. Possibly only an inspection of the area (dye penetrant, Zyglow or X-ray) to determine if there are any cracks in the area.

Time will tell.

Years ago, I remember an incident about a procedure being used when engines were being removed on the DC-10 (whether for maintenance or overhaul). Mechanics doing the removal/installations were not strictly following the manual and were employing a small short cut that made the job faster and easier. At the time, nothing was thought of it. It wasn't until the engines began falling off the wing that attention was paid to HOW the engines were being taken off the wing. It was found that the small "short cut" was causing stress to be applied in a certain way, and that stress led to structural failure in the engine mount area.

This tail attachment install problem may very well lead to nothing but an inspection of the area in question.