Boeing whistleblower raises doubts over 787 oxygen system

Back to Forum

Tagged: 

This topic contains 4 replies, has 4 voices, and was last updated by  cwoodward 8 Nov 2019
at 03:22
.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

  • traveldoc1
    Participant

    More problems for Boeing??
    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50293927


    cwoodward
    Participant

    25% faulty pyrotechnic devices is a major problem and I am told that Boeing and FAA have known about it for at least 2 years.
    There is no visible evidence that they have addressed the issue at all.
    Seem like a familiar scenario ?

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    TerryMcManus24
    Participant

    Ground them now…otherwise one more death.and ..B..in is finish…sad
    .

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    OneA
    Participant

    I was concerned that Boeings response was that they knew about the faulty O2 reservoirs and had not fitted any……do they mean not fitted ANY O2 reservoirs or not fitted any faulty ones?!!!


    cwoodward
    Participant

    This from a ‘pprune’ response adds I feel some dimension:-

    ‘No system based on single use chemical oxygen generators or pyrotechnic valves will undergo a ‘functional check’, meaning an actual check of delivering oxygen in an emergency situation. By functional check they mean the mask is still in one piece, not dried out, the bulkhead hinge opens, and the hoses haven’t fallen off. This does not constitute a ‘functional check’, if so, every test would require a full replacement of the whole SINGLE USE emergency oxygen system, certainly a multi million dollar cost item. That is the reason they are NEVER tested. Also, how often do airlines suffer depressurization with extended high altitude flight, where some failed masks would result in detectable injury to passengers? Luckily very rarely, as most incidents result in immediate expeditious descent to breathable atmosphere, where in such an event a lack of functioning mask would almost be undetectable and its use practically unnecessary, but there are regimes of flight where an emergency descent would be impossible for extended periods, like most of the Chinese highlands. And you’re still surprised Boeing would under-report a major safety issue, after MCAS, 777X doors, pickle forks, trim wheel etc etc. ad nauseum?’

    1 user thanked author for this post.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
BT November cover
BT November cover
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls