What exactly caused the 737MAX Alaska Airlines rapid depressurisation incident?
37
476
2k
Dec 31
98.8%
Improperly secured door plug
94%
Improperly secured bolt or connector
90%
Negligence by Boeing
24%
Negligence by a Maintenance and Repair Contractor other than Alaska/Hawaiian Airlines
17%
Negligence by Alaska Airlines
16%
Negligence by a parts supplier (other than Boeing)
8%
Unspecified general Design Flaw
6%
Excessive cabin pressurization: fault in pressurization system, air pressure sensors or software controlling cabin pressure

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:
Improperly secured bolt or connector

Does this count if the door plug just didn't have the bolts it was supposed to have?

https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/06/business/ntsb-boeing-alaska-door-plug-blowout-faa/index.html

Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board on Tuesday said evidence shows four bolts that hold the door plug in place on the Boeing 737 Max 9 were missing at the time of last month’s blowout on Alaska Airlines flight 1282.

@jack I think that aligns to 5 of these answers

@jack Good question. I think it aligns most "with improperly aligned door plug"

@Yves Yes, that's because I just added that one as a prediction for basically "is the NTSB initial evidence correct?" Doesn't mean the others aren't also going to resolve YES

bought Ṁ20 of Negligence by Alaska... YES

from https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/united-finds-loose-bolts-on-plug-doors-during-737-max-9-inspections/

United confirmed the findings in a statement, saying, “Since we began preliminary inspections on Saturday, we have found instances that appear to relate to installation issues in the door plug – for example, bolts that needed additional tightening. These findings will be remedied by our Tech Ops team to safely return the aircraft to service.”

Negligence by a parts supplier (other than Boeing)

Hmmmm, this one could be disputable around market outcomes. I think the use of Boeing here means the manufacturer, and I don’t think they get to scapegoat it out. Even if the contract manufacturer SpiritAerosystems built the part and completed the assembly, it’s still Boeing’s name on the serial number plate. I think the buck should stop with Boeing, or at least the Boeing + parts supplier market should both evaluate it to yes if the issue “originates” with SpiritAerosystems.

bought Ṁ10 of Negligence by Boeing YES

@AlexGuichet absolutely agree with this, the fact that multiple instances of the same issue are appearing means either the component is badly designed, or it's not built to specifications. In all cases Boeing is at least co-responsible

Excessive cabin pressurization: fault in pressurization system, air pressure sensors or software controlling cabin pressure

https://www.npr.org/2024/01/08/1223427243/boeing-flight-door-plug-alaska-airlines

On three flights prior to Friday's, the plane's auto pressurization fail light came on, Homendy said.

bought Ṁ25 of Unspecified general ... NO

Is negligence criminal, or just a layperson’s understanding of negligence?

bought Ṁ10 of Negligence by Alaska... YES

Since no resolution criteria is listed, could I suggest that causes are pulled from the NTSB report? It is usually fair in pointing to multiple causes but not necessarily pointing the finger at everything either

@AlexGuichet Sounds good

More related questions