Don't fly on a 737-MAX

Headphones

The joyous VC10.  Had its own clouds inside...

TimmyO

Haych said:

I worked very briefly in aviation and what amazes me is that there is no lifespan on aircraft parts. 

At the end of its service life an aircraft can be dismantled and the parts resold to other operators. 

There is usually an inspection and certification process, and traceability is a priority. But it’s kind of scary that an almost brand new aircraft could have parts from a 40+ year old plane used when it needs repair!

The things that need to be, are lifed, either in flight hours or cycles. Others can be subject to NDT (non destructive testing) and reissued.

In an aircraft, loads are well understood and there are a zillion components that aren’t under load, they for the most part hold other things where they need to be, or keep wind out, or open and close with a satisfying click. They can all be safely reused. A 40 year old replacement car bonnet isn’t going to put the chassis at risk of failing. 

TimmyO

Headphones said:

The joyous VC10.  Had its own clouds inside...

They always make my eyes itch - those and the Tristar - “let’s put not-that-reliable engine tech right next to where it’ll destroy important things when it goes bang” 

Of course at the time they were wonders of engineering and were considered reliable. These days not so much. That things like that haven’t been forced to retire tells you where the balance of power is in safety first vs shareholders.

m_c

Boeing in new inquiry over 787 inspection doubts - BBC News

Is Boeing trying to become the poster boy for how not to run an aircraft assembly line?

goldtop

The "Too big to fail" concept is really being stress-tested by Boeing.

Axe_meister

Of course soon all aircraft will pass safety inspection no matter how unsafe for fear of being suesided 

TimmyO

Maybe Rishi could pass a law that SAYS they are safe, so they will be ?