Boeing737airframe-

Photo credit: DaveWilliams-WichitaEagle

Orig WashPost Mon17April06 caption
For nearly 40 years, Boeing 737 airframes have been built in Wichita.
In 2005, Boeing sold the plant to a Canadian company, which does that work under
contract.

By Florence Graves and Sara Kehaulani GooReporter Sara Kehaulani Goo is a staff writer at the Washington Post.   
Florence Graves is director of the Brandeis University Institute for Investigative
Journalism.


AS SUMMARIZED IN
http://www.legitgov.org/
(Citizens for Legitimate Government)
Three whistle-blowers contend that Boeing officials knew from their own audits about
thousands of parts that did not meet specifications, allowed them to be installed and
retaliated against people who raised questions. They say the parts, manufactured from
1994 to 2002, fit the Federal Aviation Administration's definition of "unapproved"
because they lack documentation proving that they are airworthy.


EXTRACT FROM ARTICLE:
    ...Cindy Wall, a company spokeswoman [for Boeing says,] "Our planes are safe."

    The three whistle-blowers, however, contend that Boeing officials knew from their
    own audits about thousands of parts that did not meet specifications, allowed them
    to be installed and retaliated against people who raised questions. They say the
    parts, manufactured from 1994 to 2002, fit the Federal Aviation Administration's
    definition of "unapproved" because they lack documentation proving that they are
    airworthy. Moreover, they say, forcing a part into place could shorten its
    lifespan...

    After the whistle-blowers notified federal authorities in 2002, the FAA and the
    Pentagon looked into their charges. Each said its investigation cleared the
    airplane parts... The Department of Transportation's inspector general also
    dismissed the charges.

    The Post's review, however, found that the FAA did not assess many of the whistle-
    blowers' key allegations. FAA inspectors examined only a small number of parts in
    the plants and did not visit any airplanes to inspect the roughly 200 types of
    parts questioned by the whistle-blowers.

    The Pentagon and Transportation Department, in turn, relied on the FAA's work,
    documents show.

    One reason the FAA chose not to pursue the whistle-blowers' claims, officials said,
    was that... [t]here has never been a crash caused by such a failure, the agency
    said.

The reaction from  
http://gidblog.blogspot.com/2006/04/profits-before-people.html
(Gideon Starorzewski's blog)
"Oh well, by all means, let's wait until people die before addressing a potential and
very serious problem; we don't want to ruffle the feathers of of Boeing's stockholders,
do we?"

BOEING HAS VIOLATED NATIONAL SECURITY EXPORT REGULATIONS
and sent a gyroscope guidance chip used in military missiles out of the country.  
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=4939

The reaction from:
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=5042
I hope someone at Boeing kicks some serious QC ass over at AHF Ducommun, or we won’t
have a commercial aircraft industry soon. How many such reports do airlines (especially
foreign) need to see before they exclusively buy Airbus?
--John C Dvorak 

Call me unadventurous, but I would rather not be looking down from above the clouds,
knowing I was on a plane respec’ed during assembly with Elmer’s, duct tape or ad hoc
holes drilled in ANYTHING related to keeping it in the air.  If you can’t trust outsourced, low bid subcontractors working for giant military
industrial corporations, who can you trust?
Comment by Ballenger on "Dvorak Uncensored" blog

I used to work on the 737 line at the Boeing plant in Renton, Washington, and this
doesn’t surprise me. Shoddy work is fairly common. Sadly, Boeing is still the best of
the bunch. While working on Airbus planes I’ve found structural and casting defects
hidden with body filler (Bondo-type material for you car guys). I fly if I have to, but
I prefer to take the train.
Comment by Mike on "Dvorak Uncensored" blog