DieselDragRacer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2006
- Posts
- 11,056
Come on, really, a 737 breaking up after an over run...wow. Which over runs are you referring to? I would be shocked if the NTSB came back and confirmed your theory. Since a 737 takes off and lands every minute why would those three over runs constitute a conspiracy?
A plane that breaks up after a hard landing or severe turbulence would be one thing, but after running off of the paved surface is another. Applying newtonian physics to the energy involved in such an accident, one would find that even an aircraft fashioned from recycled battleship steel and german tiger tanks probably wouldn't survive departing the paved surface with sufficient speed. Not trying to be too harsh....sorry.
Although, it is a good point to bring up, you don't want your overseers getting too cozy with your manufacturers.
The conspiracy they were getting at was all 3 planes that broke into 3 pieces last year were 8 years old NG's and these planes were are built around the time Boeing had known problems with this supplier.
All 3 planes broke in critical areas where said supplier made parts by hand that were certified only to be made by CNC. When the parts arrived at Boeing notes of irregularities were initially made (until mgnt told the workers not to). Instead of rejecting critical structural fuselage parts missing corrosion coating, parts with mis-drilled holes and parts that were out of shape, Boeing employees drilled additional holes in the fuselage section, used aersol paint to mimic corrosion coating and beat the fuselage sections into place when they didn't fit.
Last edited: