Boeing quality concerns not fixed years later

More than 904 days after being informed of quality issues at the St Louis plant, Boeing has yet to fix the problems. A Pentagon oversight groupfound issues ranging from backwards fasteners, to out of spec fasteners, over sized holes and the wwrong parts installed on F-18s and F-15s from the plant. Aircraft were also found to have been allowed to roll into maintenance stands, suffering damage.

Boeing said that they have implemented fixes or are awaiting approval for fixes from the Pentagon. This report comes after the Secretary of the Air Force called out Boeing for concentrating more on their commercial products and allowing the defense side of the business to slip.

www.bloomberg.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

I was always under the impression that the F/A-18 was made bigger for its initial operational value and that the F-15 was made exactly for what its intended purpose was/is. I had no idea that Boeing was producing planes on that scale of failed oversight. Does that mean that if Boeing can produce a list of jets that got this type of treatment that they would be grounded and inspected? Can this problem be fixed for jets already made?

a reply to: Allaroundyou

The aircraft that were identified as having quality issues were waiting to be delivered, so it was just a matter of switching parts or fasteners for the most part. It delayed their delivery but didn't prove a huge thing to fix.

Oversized holes means the CNC Routers need tightening in the X and Y axis..That or the drilling jigs are so badly worn out.Excuses dont cut it Boeing

a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaphod58- Although I don't often participate in your threads, I just want to let you know I appreciate you and your knowledge on aircraft's. You are a value to ATS, thank you for being you. S&F per usual.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Zaphod58

I was always under the impression that the F/A-18 was made bigger for its initial operational value and that the F-15 was made exactly for what its intended purpose was/is. I had no idea that Boeing was producing planes on that scale of failed oversight. Does that mean that if Boeing can produce a list of jets that got this type of treatment that they would be grounded and inspected? Can this problem be fixed for jets already made?

If you get the book "Boyd", the F-15 and F-18 creation is discussed. Both planes were destined for the USAF, with the F-15 being the winning design entry. As you can guess, the Navy decided to buy the F-18. When the dust settled, the plane the "fighter mafia" really wanted was the F-16. The book also discusses the creation of the A-10. Not a whole lot of detail though as the intent of the book is to highlight Boyd's life.

en.m.wikipedia.org...(military_strategist)

a reply to: gariac

The F-15 was developed for the F-X program, while the YF-17 was developed for the LWF program. They weren't competing against each other. The YF-17 was competing against the YF-16, and became the F-18 after losing.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yep. Explained a bit better here:
en.m.wikipedia.org...

I really wonder what the deal is. They do not seem to have the same level of issues over on the commercial side of things (don't get me wrong, they have issues but not like this) . Is the perception that government wont care until it cares so they just let things go? I mean 3 years is a ton of time to fix production issues and its not like they are new to this whole airplane thing.

a reply to: FredT

The military side brings in less than half of their profits. I was arguing with someone about this the other day and the difference is pretty noticeable, even including space, missiles, and everything else defense related. It was something like almost $17B to barely over $6B. Granted that's nothing to sneeze at, but you're not going to worry as much about one, especially if government oversight has been laughable in recent years.

Not sure on how F18s are done but here is what they do with F35,s.
Drilling F35 skin