Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet
Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - FAA Calls for Closer Inspection of Grounded 737s
The recent incident involving an Alaska Airlines 737 has refocused attention on the grounded Boeing 737 MAX fleet and raised fresh concerns about the safety of the workhorse aircraft. Following reports that a 737-900ER plane violently shook in flight, the FAA has called for increased scrutiny of the grounded MAX planes through enhanced inspections.
While the harrowing experience of Alaska Airlines Flight 448 did not involve the controversial MAX model, it has nonetheless cast doubt on Boeing’s attempts to fix issues with the MAX and return it to service. According to passengers’ accounts, Flight 448 encountered severe turbulence that caused the plane to shake aggressively from side to side for around a minute. Oxygen masks deployed in the cabin while unsecured items flew through the air, leaving passengers and crew rattled.
Although the FAA concluded the plane was likely hit by wake turbulence from another aircraft, they have mandated immediate inspections of fan blades on certain 737s, including the MAX. This measure seems intended to reassure the public that rigorous oversight is being applied following a series of troubling incidents over the years.
The FAA said its directive for enhanced engine inspections comes after the agency reviewed recent safety reports and maintained that “the risk to an airplane from damage to adjacent fan blades is higher than previously known”. Boeing has complied by examining affected aircraft across airlines’ fleets. Still, confidence in aviation authorities and Boeing continues to suffer.
Many pilots and industry experts have long held doubts about Boeing’s design choices for the 737 MAX models. In particular, they’ve cited the flight control system MCAS as dangerously flawed and questioned the hurried software fixes approved by regulators. News of the latest 737 incident has bolstered the view that deep-seated issues continue to lurk within the 737 program.
While the FAA maintains there are currently no safety concerns specific to the 737 MAX, analysts say Boeing’s reputation has taken a severe battering. Between the MAX saga and numerous quality control problems over the years, consumers perceive Boeing products as less safe. For an aircraft manufacturer, public trust is difficult to regain once lost.
What else is in this post?
- Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - FAA Calls for Closer Inspection of Grounded 737s
- Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Cracks Found in Critical Part of 737 Airframe
- Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Pilots Voice Renewed Worries Over 737 MAX Design Flaws
- Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Boeing's Reputation Takes Another Hit with Latest Incident
- Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Alaska Airlines Passengers Rattled by Violent Shaking in Flight
- Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Aviation Authorities Under Pressure to Guarantee 737 Safety
Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Cracks Found in Critical Part of 737 Airframe
The discovery of cracks in a critical part of the 737 airframe has amplified worries over the structural integrity of Boeing's workhorse jet. During recent enhanced inspections mandated by the FAA, cracks were detected in the "pickle fork" component that attaches the plane's fuselage to the wing structure. Multiple airlines found cracking in this vital area that enables wings to withstand aerodynamic forces during flight.
The pickle fork cracks were located in one percent of older generation 737NG planes inspected. However, the fact these weaknesses surfaced in the 737NG model, which has a stellar safety record, makes the findings all the more concerning. If cracks are turning up in the proven 737NG, that certainly does not bode well for the problematic 737 MAX variant.
Aviation safety expert John Goglia warned that the cracked pickle fork problems could well spread to the MAX fleet once those planes return to service. He cautioned that cracks emerging in the NG plane's structure so soon did not align with engineering assumptions about the component's lifespan. This suggests deeper issues with the 737 design that Boeing has yet to get fully get a handle on.
For passengers, implications of the pickle fork cracks are unnerving. This is a critical structure that attaches the body of the plane to the wings. Failure of this part could result in a wing separating from the aircraft in mid-air. Understandably, fliers do not wish to imagine such terrifying scenarios while jetting through the skies at 500 mph.
Yet that is what Boeing now asks of the public - to trust that their planes are airworthy despite growing evidence to the contrary. Cracks compromised a vital piece connecting the 737's essential components. How can passengers feel truly secure until Boeing proves these safety issues are not just patched over, but resolved for good?
Trust between airlines and aircraft makers stems from transparency regarding known issues. However, Boeing has drawn criticism for an overly opaque stance throughout the 737 MAX crisis and subsequent problems like the pickle fork cracks. A lack of transparency shakes consumer faith in the aviation industry and the regulatory process intended to safeguard passenger safety.
Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Pilots Voice Renewed Worries Over 737 MAX Design Flaws
The pickle fork cracks are just the latest issue to stoke pilots' ongoing worries regarding the 737 MAX's design. As the primary operators of these aircraft, pilots have an intimate understanding of the plane's flaws and vulnerabilities. Throughout the MAX crisis, their expertise and firsthand experiences have sounded alarms over deep-rooted problems in the jet's architecture.
Recently, the President of the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association stated his apprehension that "Boeing may be underestimating the potential for the pickle forks to develop cracks in the 737NG fleet”. Coming from a pilots’ union president, this carries weight. The pilots’ role is unique - they are the ones assuming the physical risks inherent in flying the MAX. Their lives depend on Boeing getting this right.
Unions like Southwest have been highly critical of Boeing's design choices on the MAX models. In particular, pilots have vehemently opposed the flawed MCAS flight control system that was implicated in two deadly MAX crashes. Pilot complaints that Boeing management rushed MCAS into service without sufficient testing have proven all too prescient.
These same pilots are now expressing renewed doubt regarding the MAX’s airworthiness based on recurrent issues like the pickle fork cracks. Amid Boeing’s push to return the MAX fleet to the skies, cockpit crews across multiple airlines remain skeptical. They maintain Boeing has yet to fully acknowledge and amend the original flaws in their design.
The pickle fork saga compounds pilots’ distrust in Boeing leadership’s assurances. Once bitten, twice shy. Boeing breached pilots’ trust when they initially dismissed concerns over MCAS, with devastating consequences. This makes aircrews understandably dubious regarding the company’s claims about minimizing new issues like the structural cracks now arising.
Pilots carry not just their own safety but hundreds of passenger lives in their hands whenever they operate a flight. This enormous responsibility means they must have complete confidence in the airworthiness of their aircraft. Recent revelations make that confidence hard to come by for 737 pilots.
Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Boeing's Reputation Takes Another Hit with Latest Incident
The recent incident with Alaska Airlines Flight 448 has dealt another blow to Boeing's already battered reputation. While the plane involved was not the controversial 737 MAX model, the fact that yet another 737 encountered major mid-flight problems does not inspire confidence. Coming on the heels of the MAX crisis, quality control issues, and structural cracks, this latest occurrence reinforces the narrative that Boeing has lost its way when it comes to safety and innovation.
According to passenger accounts, Flight 448 was suddenly hit with extreme turbulence which caused the aircraft to violently shake from side to side. Oxygen masks deployed and unsecured items flew through the cabin. Understandably, this left passengers and crew badly shaken even after the plane safely diverted.
Although investigations attributed the shaking to wake turbulence from another aircraft, that's hardly reassuring for the average flier. To John Q. Public, one 737 encounter with extreme turbulence seems to blend into the next, creating an impression that Boeing has systemic issues across models.
Combine these incidents with the disclosures about production problems and structural weaknesses, and Boeing's reputation sinks lower each month. The pickle fork cracks especially emphasized that the MAX's issues cannot be viewed in isolation - bigger questions have emerged about the 737's basic design and structural integrity.
Each subsequent issue chips away at public confidence. According to consumer surveys, the once sterling Boeing brand has become synonymous with corner cutting and obfuscation. The flying public simply does not believe that management has been fully transparent about known risks with the 737 program.
Rightly or wrongly, social media spreads images of oxygen masks dangling in cabins, fuselages split open and grounded planes parked in desert boneyards. This shapes perceptions that Boeing has lost control of quality in their zeal to maximize 737 production.
Unlike an iPhone with a glitchy app, when a flight system malfunctions at 35,000 feet the results can be catastrophic. Recent crashes showed just how intolerant aerospace engineering is of design flaws. Understandably, it takes the public far longer to regain lost trust in aviation safety.
Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Alaska Airlines Passengers Rattled by Violent Shaking in Flight
The recent mid-flight incident aboard Alaska Airlines Flight 448 gave passengers a terrifying jolt that has left many reluctant to fly the carrier. According to firsthand accounts, the plane encountered severe turbulence that caused it to shake aggressively from side to side for around a minute. Unsecured items flew through the cabin as oxygen masks deployed from overhead compartments. Understandably, this left passengers and crew badly shaken even after the plane safely diverted.
For those onboard, it was a harrowing experience that undermined confidence in Boeing's 737 line amid the ongoing MAX crisis. Passenger Erich Schrock described the plane "shuddering back and forth" and feeling like it "was about to fall from the sky." Others feared the wings would snap off as the aircraft rocked violently. Photos surfaced on social media showing the chaotic scene with loose items strewn about the aisle.
The FAA concluded the likely cause was wake turbulence from another aircraft. But try telling that to the rattled passengers who feared for their lives when the plane pitched about without warning. For fliers already apprehensive in light of the 737 MAX scandal, this incident only amplified concerns over the workhorse jet's airworthiness.
Whether deserved or not, Boeing now struggles against a perception that shortcuts have led to systemic issues impacting safety. In the court of public opinion, the once sterling Boeing name has become tarnished. According to surveys, consumer trust has cratered amid revelations about production pressures, design flaws and defective parts.
So when news broke of another in-flight disruption aboard a Boeing 737, it seemed to fit a narrative that their engineering standards have slipped. Incidents like the violent shaking on Flight 448 may sometimes be chalked up to rare instances of turbulence. But uneasy fliers see events conspiring that point to compromises in how Boeing has managed the 737 program.
While investigations ultimately absolved the aircraft, the damage was already done from a public relations standpoint. Boeing leadership has lost the benefit of the doubt. Recent crashes taught consumers that aerospace has little margin for error. Thus, any in-flight event linked to perceived corner cutting renews doubts.
Turbulence Troubles: Alaska Airlines 737 Incident Renews Safety Concerns for Grounded Boeing Fleet - Aviation Authorities Under Pressure to Guarantee 737 Safety
The Federal Aviation Administration and other aviation regulators worldwide face immense pressure to restore public confidence in the 737's safety. After two fatal MAX crashes were linked to flawed flight control software, the FAA's certification process has come under intense scrutiny. Critics contend regulators gave Boeing too much leeway, allowed companies to self-certify features, and failed to apply proper oversight.
In the wake of scalding reports detailing cozy relationships between Boeing and the FAA, regulators now feel compelled to reassure skeptical fliers. However, efforts to demonstrate renewed vigilance have at times backfired. When the FAA called for increased 737 inspections after the latest inflight incident, it paradoxically heightened worries the agency was responding to undisclosed risks.
Aviation authorities walk a tightrope balancing airline interests with demands for greater regulation. Airlines expect regulators’ cooperation introducing new planes, features and flight routes. But the MAX crashes exposed how this cooperative stance can cross ethical lines and drift into lax controls. The FAA now seeks to check every 737 design aspect without needlessly delaying the MAX’s return.
Yet full recertification crawls along as reviewers scrutinize Boeing’s flight control software fixes, sift through wiring configurations, and demand strengthened pilot training. Critics lambaste these as long overdue measures the FAA should have insisted on originally. The longer delays stretch on, the more regulators’ credibility suffers.
Frustrated fliers ask how apparently serious flaws escaped notice the first time around. Boeing contendsionErrors only surfaced with millions of MAX flight hours, but many question whether profit-driven haste overrode safety concerns during certification. Even minor 737 defects now draw outsized attention amid suspicions that deeper issues persist unresolved.
Pressures weigh heaviest on the FAA as the agency that originally certified the MAX as airworthy. Foreign regulators subsequently followed the FAA’s lead, only to regret doing so after the deadly crashes. The FAA now consults extensively with peer agencies, aware global unanimity is needed to restore the 737’s reputation worldwide.