Close Menu
Technology Mag

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

    What's Hot

    Apple ends support for Clips video-editing app

    October 11, 2025

    How The Verge and our readers manage kids’ screen time

    October 11, 2025

    The AirPods 4 and Lego’s brick-ified Grogu are our favorite deals this week

    October 11, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Subscribe
    Technology Mag
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube
    • Home
    • News
    • Business
    • Games
    • Gear
    • Reviews
    • Science
    • Security
    • Trending
    • Press Release
    Technology Mag
    Home » The Real Problem With the Boeing 737 Max
    Business

    The Real Problem With the Boeing 737 Max

    News RoomBy News RoomJanuary 12, 20243 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Reddit WhatsApp Email

    Spirit AeroSystems, the Wichita-based aerospace manufacturer that manufactured the door plug that blew out on the Alaska Airlines flight, declined to comment on the incident. However, in a statement published on its website, Spirit says its “primary focus is the quality and product integrity of the aircraft structures we deliver.”

    The company’s parts have caused issues for Boeing in the past. The Seattle Times reported back in October on defects in Spirit components that contributed to months-long delayed deliveries of Boeing 787 aircraft. Tom Gentile, the then CEO of Spirit, resigned following these and other production errors by the company.

    But Fehrm hypothesizes the blowout may have been due to alleged oversights that happened after Spirit had added the door plug, once Boeing retook ownership of the plane. Fehrm claims Boeing uses the door in question to access parts of the plane during its checks ahead of the aircraft being cleared to fly. And so, in his opinion: “Someone has taken away the bolts, opened the door, done the work, closed the door, and forgot to put the pins in.”

    In other words, he is leaning toward processes being at fault, not the plane’s design. This, though, raises concerns about the way plane safety checks are conducted.

    In theory, in the US the FAA checks aircraft for their airworthiness, granting them certification to fly safely. Aircraft designs are studied and reviewed on paper, with ground and flight tests taking place on the finished aircraft alongside an evaluation of the required maintenance routine to keep a plane flightworthy.

    In practice, these reviews are often delegated to third-party organizations that are designated to grant certification. Planes can fly without the FAA inspecting them first-hand. “You won’t find an FAA inspector in a set of coveralls walking down a production line at Renton,” says Tim Atkinson, a former pilot and aircraft accident investigator and current aviation consultant, referring to Boeing’s Washington state–based 737 factory.

    The FAA relies on third parties because it’s already overstretched and needs to focus on safety-critical new technologies that push forward the latest innovations in flight. “It can’t [check all aircraft itself], because you’re producing 30 to 60 aircrafts a month, and there are 4 million parts in an aircraft,” says Fehrm.

    “Designated examiners have always been part of the landscape,” says Mann, but he believes the latest series of events add to existing questions around whether this is the right approach. On the other hand, there are currently no practical alternatives, he says.

    The plane in the Alaska Airlines incident was granted an airworthiness certificate on October 25, 2023, and issued with a seven-year certificate by the FAA on November 2. FAA records do not include who granted the certificate on behalf of the FAA, and the administration declined to identify the organization or individual who approved the plane’s airworthiness. The plane’s first flight took place in early November.

    With this being a third major and potentially life-threatening incident for Boeing in little over five years—all involving a single type of aircraft—the company’s status has taken a hit.

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Email
    Previous ArticleRabbit, Ballie, and the other gadgets of CES 2024
    Next Article Samsung’s Galaxy Buds 2 Pro have dropped to $130 for the first time

    Related Posts

    How China Is Hoping to Attract Tech Talent

    October 10, 2025

    The City That Made the World Fall for a Monster

    October 10, 2025

    OpenAI Sneezes, and Software Firms Catch a Cold

    October 9, 2025

    Patreon CEO Jack Conte Wants You to Get Off of Your Phone

    October 9, 2025

    Inside Intel’s Hail Mary to Reclaim Chip Dominance

    October 9, 2025

    This Startup Wants to Spark a US DeepSeek Moment

    October 8, 2025
    Our Picks

    How The Verge and our readers manage kids’ screen time

    October 11, 2025

    The AirPods 4 and Lego’s brick-ified Grogu are our favorite deals this week

    October 11, 2025

    Is the Coros Nomad really an adventure watch?

    October 11, 2025

    Chaos, Confusion, and Conspiracies: Inside a Facebook Group for RFK Jr.’s Autism ‘Cure’

    October 11, 2025
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Pinterest
    • Instagram
    • YouTube
    • Vimeo
    Don't Miss
    Security

    How a Travel YouTuber Captured Nepal’s Revolution for the World

    By News RoomOctober 11, 2025

    When Harry Jackson pulled his small motorcycle into Kathmandu on September 8, he had no…

    You can now buy Microsoft’s Windows XP Crocs for $79.95

    October 10, 2025

    You can still get the latest AirPods Max at their Prime Day price

    October 10, 2025

    Bose is yanking key features from its SoundTouch speakers

    October 10, 2025
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of use
    • Advertise
    • Contact
    © 2025 Technology Mag. All Rights Reserved.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.