Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   More problems for Boeing. Air Force says their refueleing planes are being delivered with trash and tools left on board. They also lack the new airplane smell   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Strange, Aerial refueling, Aircraft, Jet engine, Foreign object damage, Air Force's top acquisition official, KC-135 Stratotanker, good month, Foreign Object Debris  
•       •       •

535 clicks; posted to Business » on 15 Mar 2019 at 9:50 AM (10 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



34 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2019-03-15 11:08:09 AM  
Once long ago I received a box with a 2U server in it and a pretty nice box cutter.  I wasn't complaining.
 
2019-03-15 11:11:29 AM  
Hey, that's a $20,000 hammer, so consider yourselves lucky.
 
2019-03-15 11:12:45 AM  
Space capsules came with spare nuts and bolts floating around too.

Things never change.
 
2019-03-15 11:17:06 AM  
Be fair!  They got off willingly.
bing.comView Full Size
 
2019-03-15 11:18:54 AM  
there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?
 
2019-03-15 11:19:00 AM  
Hey, this is what happens when you move to SC in order to bust your unions. Experience matters.
 
2019-03-15 11:20:01 AM  
Those planes would be in a lot better shape if we let immigrants build them.
 
2019-03-15 11:20:16 AM  

reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?


There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?
 
2019-03-15 11:25:14 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size

Really old, possibly still relevant
 
2019-03-15 11:31:51 AM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?

There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?


i'm literally repeating what the air force said.
 
2019-03-15 11:43:50 AM  
They're really dog piling poor Dennis Boeing today.
 
2019-03-15 11:52:45 AM  

reagabeast: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?

There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?

i'm literally repeating what the air force said.


I'm a licensed aircraft inspector. Manufacturing inspectors are not required to be licensed. FOD is considered a major hazard in our field and in the Air Force. We did FOD walks and FOD inspections all the time. But it is inevitable that someone will leave something behind. That's why we have recurrent training every year to remind us that when we are looking for damage and wear, we are also looking for the stuff left behind.
 
2019-03-15 11:53:16 AM  
Free tools.  Why are yo complaining
 
2019-03-15 11:54:44 AM  
I'm really not sure, but does Boeing even have competition when it comes to government procurement of aircraft? For space ventures it's Boeing/Lockheed. They could build a Spruce Goose without engines and the DoD would have to buy it, wouldn't they? Do we buy planes from Bombardier, Airbus, or Embraer?

Might as well change their name to THE Airplane Company USA, inc.
 
2019-03-15 11:58:55 AM  

riffraff: reagabeast: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?

There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?

i'm literally repeating what the air force said.

I'm a licensed aircraft inspector. Manufacturing inspectors are not required to be licensed. FOD is considered a major hazard in our field and in the Air Force. We did FOD walks and FOD inspections all the time. But it is inevitable that someone will leave something behind. That's why we have recurrent training every year to remind us that when we are looking for damage and wear, we are also looking for the stuff left behind.


Ah, I remember the days of FOD walks.
 
2019-03-15 12:03:12 PM  

dr_blasto: riffraff: reagabeast: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?

There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?

i'm literally repeating what the air force said.

I'm a licensed aircraft inspector. Manufacturing inspectors are not required to be licensed. FOD is considered a major hazard in our field and in the Air Force. We did FOD walks and FOD inspections all the time. But it is inevitable that someone will leave something behind. That's why we have recurrent training every year to remind us that when we are looking for damage and wear, we are also looking for the stuff left behind.

Ah, I remember the days of FOD walks.


We had the golden bolt award. QA would hide a big orange plastic bolt somewhere on the flightline around the fighters. Anyone that found it would be given a 3 day pass.
 
2019-03-15 12:10:02 PM  

reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?


It could be a sign that their workers don't give a shiat in the area of safety and reliability. Even the smallest stuff counts.
 
2019-03-15 12:24:48 PM  

riffraff: dr_blasto: riffraff: reagabeast: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?

There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?

i'm literally repeating what the air force said.

I'm a licensed aircraft inspector. Manufacturing inspectors are not required to be licensed. FOD is considered a major hazard in our field and in the Air Force. We did FOD walks and FOD inspections all the time. But it is inevitable that someone will leave something behind. That's why we have recurrent training every year to remind us that when we are looking for damage and wear, we are also looking for the stuff left behind.

Ah, I remember the days of FOD walks.

We had the golden bolt award. QA would hide a big orange plastic bolt somewhere on the flightline around the fighters. Anyone that found it would be given a 3 day pass.


we didn't have any rewards stuff sadly.
 
2019-03-15 12:25:45 PM  

riffraff: dr_blasto: riffraff: reagabeast: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?

There's no safety risk? If a company is sloppy enough to leave trash in a product, what else is wrong?

i'm literally repeating what the air force said.

I'm a licensed aircraft inspector. Manufacturing inspectors are not required to be licensed. FOD is considered a major hazard in our field and in the Air Force. We did FOD walks and FOD inspections all the time. But it is inevitable that someone will leave something behind. That's why we have recurrent training every year to remind us that when we are looking for damage and wear, we are also looking for the stuff left behind.

Ah, I remember the days of FOD walks.

We had the golden bolt award. QA would hide a big orange plastic bolt somewhere on the flightline around the fighters. Anyone that found it would be given a 3 day pass.


No golden bolt awards for us, sadly.
 
2019-03-15 12:26:24 PM  
Goddamnit Fark. If you're going to fail to post, at least stay failed.
 
2019-03-15 12:42:35 PM  
Empty whiskey bottle behind a panel with a note saying "You finally found the rattle..."?
 
2019-03-15 12:44:37 PM  

dr_blasto: Hey, this is what happens when you move to SC in order to bust your unions. Experience matters.


Built in WA. Nice try, though.
 
TKM
2019-03-15 12:52:24 PM  
Read Rivethead for a good look at .gov contract compliance.  Also avoid 80s GMC trucks.
 
2019-03-15 01:39:56 PM  

TKM: Read Rivethead for a good look at .gov contract compliance.  Also avoid 80s GMC trucks.


Honestly, I avoid any American made consumer / prosumer work vehicles from the early 80s through to around 95.

I had them until around 2002 when I bought a used Civic (1998) and I've been Honda ever since.  Damn reliable.
 
2019-03-15 05:21:16 PM  

ecmoRandomNumbers: I'm really not sure, but does Boeing even have competition when it comes to government procurement of aircraft? For space ventures it's Boeing/Lockheed. They could build a Spruce Goose without engines and the DoD would have to buy it, wouldn't they? Do we buy planes from Bombardier, Airbus, or Embraer?

Might as well change their name to THE Airplane Company USA, inc.


I'm pretty sure this particular model was the one that the Northrop/Airbus joint venture won fair and square(and cheaper) that caused Boeing to go to Congress and biatch about it until Congress forced the competition to reopen again and Boeing magically won it.

There are other competitors, but the government won't allow them to win projects
 
2019-03-15 05:30:07 PM  

mrmopar5287: Empty whiskey bottle behind a panel with a note saying "You finally found the rattle..."?


This isn't British Leyland.

/ or the 1970s
 
2019-03-15 05:37:10 PM  
Boeing's brown M&M's?
 
2019-03-15 05:51:52 PM  

bhcompy: ecmoRandomNumbers: I'm really not sure, but does Boeing even have competition when it comes to government procurement of aircraft? For space ventures it's Boeing/Lockheed. They could build a Spruce Goose without engines and the DoD would have to buy it, wouldn't they? Do we buy planes from Bombardier, Airbus, or Embraer?

Might as well change their name to THE Airplane Company USA, inc.

I'm pretty sure this particular model was the one that the Northrop/Airbus joint venture won fair and square(and cheaper) that caused Boeing to go to Congress and biatch about it until Congress forced the competition to reopen again and Boeing magically won it.

There are other competitors, but the government won't allow them to win projects


The original contest was the Air Force giving bonus points above and beyond specifications when that wasn't the stated intent of the request for bids. Boeing submitted their KC767 and the Air Force said (example): "The Airbus carries more fuel" when the 767 carried the amount of fuel specified by the request.

It was a rightful protest for that. If you have a request for bids, make the criteria for selection known to all up front.
 
2019-03-15 06:11:45 PM  

mrmopar5287: The original contest was the Air Force giving bonus points above and beyond specifications when that wasn't the stated intent of the request for bids. Boeing submitted their KC767 and the Air Force said (example): "The Airbus carries more fuel" when the 767 carried the amount of fuel specified by the request.

It was a rightful protest for that. If you have a request for bids, make the criteria for selection known to all up front.


Yes, so they went with a worse plane instead of a better plane because Boeing didn't want to submit the 777
 
2019-03-15 06:29:36 PM  

bhcompy: mrmopar5287: The original contest was the Air Force giving bonus points above and beyond specifications when that wasn't the stated intent of the request for bids. Boeing submitted their KC767 and the Air Force said (example): "The Airbus carries more fuel" when the 767 carried the amount of fuel specified by the request.

It was a rightful protest for that. If you have a request for bids, make the criteria for selection known to all up front.

Yes, so they went with a worse plane instead of a better plane because Boeing didn't want to submit the 777


Meh. What would the 777 do that the 767 cannot?
 
2019-03-15 06:35:55 PM  

bhcompy: mrmopar5287: The original contest was the Air Force giving bonus points above and beyond specifications when that wasn't the stated intent of the request for bids. Boeing submitted their KC767 and the Air Force said (example): "The Airbus carries more fuel" when the 767 carried the amount of fuel specified by the request.

It was a rightful protest for that. If you have a request for bids, make the criteria for selection known to all up front.

Yes, so they went with a worse plane instead of a better plane because Boeing didn't want to submit the 777


The 777 will be for the KC-Y program to replace the KC-10 tankers.
 
2019-03-15 08:05:02 PM  
After many years of not bringing in and training new workers, defense contractors have decided to lay off key (read: expensive) design and production personnel and replace them with inexperienced (read: cheap) bodies. Quality has and will continue to suffer.
 
2019-03-16 01:30:25 AM  

reagabeast: there's no safety risk, the air force just doesn't like FOD.
why is this news?


Because its a symptom of a larger problem.

If they leave trash in open and sealed areas, wtf. are they also farking up?
 
2019-03-16 06:50:26 AM  

mrmopar5287: bhcompy: mrmopar5287: The original contest was the Air Force giving bonus points above and beyond specifications when that wasn't the stated intent of the request for bids. Boeing submitted their KC767 and the Air Force said (example): "The Airbus carries more fuel" when the 767 carried the amount of fuel specified by the request.

It was a rightful protest for that. If you have a request for bids, make the criteria for selection known to all up front.

Yes, so they went with a worse plane instead of a better plane because Boeing didn't want to submit the 777

Meh. What would the 777 do that the 767 cannot?


I don't know the first thing about airplanes but I would guess that when you need that extra boost you could turn it up to 777.
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report