Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Boeing engine failure: Engine on United Airlines flight was showing signs of metal fatigue, NTSB says
The Pratt & Whitney engine that failed minutes into United Airlines flight 328 showed signs of metal fatigue, investigators with the National Transportation Safety Board said during their first public briefing on Monday. The new finding is perhaps the most significant in the investigation into Saturday's in-flight incident-- one that led United Airlines to ground all of its Boeing 777s powered by PW4000 series engines and prompted federal regulators to re-examine how often the engines… (www.msn.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
The fellow who posted the story titled it wrong. The article itself correctly names the problem by stating that it was a Pratt & Whitney engine and not a Boeing engine.
You are correct.. But most of the public is too stupid to see it.
There is a difference between stupid and uneducated. I am uneducated about a lot of things and people educated in those areas can help me learn. I know that a tomato is a fruit but I don't put it in a fruit salad; the person who titled the article may (1) just have been uneducated or (2) knew that Boeing has been in the news a lot recently and having "Boeing" in the title would be a good 'hook' to get people to read the article, and that's his/her job.
[@Lance] Bullseye on both points.
Calling uninformed people that are outside the aviation arena is really a great way to get their support. Turn your guns on the news media.
Not to offend the many great AME’s out there, but do you think there is a correlation between the uptick in mechanical failures and the influx of new personnel in charge of maintenance? Akin to the same issue with pilots! I would have thought that the reduced flying over the past year, maintenance would have caught up with all the squawks? Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t “on condition” still require x-ray, dye penetration and other non- destructive testing methods to maintain airworthiness or did this engine slip through the cracks......pardon the pun.
From a third part setting, I'd think more of the problem lies in companies struggling with profitability and wanting to 'contain' maintenance costs. It's not cheap to do a complete replacement of a bunch of engines. It's not cheap to take a plane off the line to take its engines off and inspect every blade in both engines.
History is filled with stories of shoddy maintenance being performed by third party maintenance facilities that (cut corners) are priced well. Plus the FAA, as we should all be aware of, was allowing companies to 'self-certify' their repairs.
Who knows who last saw that engine. Who knows how through the inspections at the factory were if it hadn't had any maintenance to this point.
If anything, I'd wonder if United found a 'just as good' maintenance facility that saved them big money, and they bought it. They got what they wanted. Cheap maintenance. Pay now, or pay later?
But the investigators will (hopefully) track down the issues.
History is filled with stories of shoddy maintenance being performed by third party maintenance facilities that (cut corners) are priced well. Plus the FAA, as we should all be aware of, was allowing companies to 'self-certify' their repairs.
Who knows who last saw that engine. Who knows how through the inspections at the factory were if it hadn't had any maintenance to this point.
If anything, I'd wonder if United found a 'just as good' maintenance facility that saved them big money, and they bought it. They got what they wanted. Cheap maintenance. Pay now, or pay later?
But the investigators will (hopefully) track down the issues.