Still sounds like a clear case of an unbelievable amount of bad quality from Spirit, and Boeing not pressing the issue until something finally slips through the cracks
[0] (not that they would for what is claimed to be literally just painting over the plugs, without installing anything. that's just dumb, it's not something you can just get away with, it would've been visible from the very first flights and would he basically a world's first)
As I read it, it's kind of the opposite. The records show a repair that required removal of the bolts, but there is no record of replacement of the bolts. And there is a record of discussion of if the repair required a formal inspection, which (I think) would have involved recording the status of the bolts.
This is taken as clear evidence that the bolts were not there, but IMHO, if the bolts were missing, that's where they went, but it might not be enough to show they were missing. Also, there's some clear process problems.
I'd sure like to know about the inspections on the other plug doors.
How are they in any sense whatsoever still working with a company or process that would 'paint over the plugs'? That was the warning sign.
I'm sure the answer is money somehow but is that even accurate? Surely this is more costly? Different budget maybe?
Because there is no alternative supplier that could supply the same components in a shorter-than-years timeframe. And they don’t want to halt all production as it would bankrupt the company.
To the HN crowd, this is like AWS becoming broken and unreliable, but your entire build and architecture has AWS baked in. Moving to Azure or Google or whatever would take years of engineering and data migration. So you paper over the holes as best you can to keep the lights on.
Even if there were alternatives, it might irk them to acknowledge that outsourcing most (all?) of their manufacturing didn't end well.
As for buying them back, see [1].
Doing so would reduce their return on net assets.....
[1] https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/boeing-rules-out-buying-t...
Raw meat can happen, you catch it before you start eating it. In this case, it's more like you got a pack of used needles instead (pretty much equivalent to a non installed door in an airplane) because the chef didn't want to wait 5mins for the meat to cook, you basically just acknowledge the needles and start eating. That what is hard for me to believe. The original 737max controversy made sense, shortcuts were taken, and it made sense why that sort of disfunction would slowly creep into the design process. It also makes sense that some believed that the redesign would still work since hey, pilots just have to handle the errors if they happen! But in this case? The motivations don't make sense, especially since it apparently wasn't just a mishap or a failure, but intentional fraud.
