nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Boeing 737 NG Pickle Fork issues

Irish Steve

In view of the increasing level of discussion about what is a separate issue to the MAX MCAS issues, I have split some messages out of the 737 MAX thread, and merged those messages into an earlier existing thread, and hope that all involved will use this thread to continue the discussion about the NG issue

The following link was posted earlier on AV Herald, and refers to an article that's been published about some unexpected cracking being found in 737NG family aircraft, which of course relates to the Ryanair Fleet.

I hope this is not going to cause even more problems than are already happening. I would have to admit to more than a little nervousness right now, given the issues that are already ongoing with the MAX issues, hopefully, this new issue will receive the attention that it needs to ensure ongoing safety.

https://komonews.com/news/local/exclusive-unexpected-cracking-found-on-critical-boeing-737ng-equipment

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

STB.

IE 222 wrote: »

The article says they are in the process of testing aircraft under 30,000 cycles while the over 30,000 have been completed. So far they haven't found anything else.

They haven't denied it, they clearly stated a small number were found and stated more than once the issue wont have an effect on their operations and fleet availability. I think the paper were looking for Ryanair to tell them x amount were grounded instead of been told they're in the process of been repaired.

Depending on what the question put to them was, the answer doesn't seem to suggest their not been up front in my opinion.

They weren't upfront. They were silent.

When the story broke about the problems with the NG series, and in particular Quantas who released a lot of detail about their tests, RyanAir said it does not expect flights it operates to be affected. That is despite 3 of their planes already in the US being fixed for this very issue.

It is only when the guardian contacted them with internal engineering reports that they finally confirmed that some of their planes were affected.

They still have not confirmed how many cycles those planes had (raises a lot more questions) and how many more planes they have inspected. They are using the FAA's suggested testing regime, yet the FAA have no standing in Ireland. Quantas have pointed out the importance of looking at anything over 22k.

Despite the averages being quoted of their fleet, there are 70 planes that are at least 13 years old. By their very business model, they have a lot of short haul flights which may also result in higher than average cycles.

FishOnABike

Bob24 wrote: »

Especially since the simple fact of not being able to use the plane while it is being repaired is probably costing the airline money in the first place.

Do we know how long the plane is unavailable for and how much of a financial impact that might have?

I've read one article that indicated that in the US the loss in revenue could be in the region of USD$150,000 per air frame per day. What that translates into in loss of profit would depend on the margins the airline operates.

The daily cost to lease a replacement air frame if available would be in the region of USD$12,000 per day.

With approx 5% of the aircraft examined to date needing remedial work now and assuming most other aircraft will need remedial work at some stage during their lifetime I can see Boeing having to set aside a substantial sum against future costs of fixing this.

Bob24

FishOnABike wrote: »

Agreed. At approx. €250,000 per air frame I doubt the carrier is going to pick up the tab for a design / manufacturing flaw.

Especially since the simple fact of not being able to use the plane while it is being repaired is probably costing the airline money in the first place.

Do we know how long the plane is unavailable for and how much of a financial impact that might have?

FishOnABike

GM228 wrote: »

If it is supposed to last the lifetime of the air frame (i.e not the usual wear and tear issue) which the pickle fork is or there is a design fault than it's not just a case of Boeing contributing towards the cost, rather Boeing would be fully liable for the cost.

Agreed. At approx. €250,000 per air frame I doubt the carrier is going to pick up the tab for a design / manufacturing flaw.

GM228

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Would it be correct to presume that Boeing are going to have to contribute towards the cost of replacing a major structural part this far in advance of its design life?

If it is supposed to last the lifetime of the air frame (i.e not the usual wear and tear issue) which the pickle fork is or there is a design fault than it's not just a case of Boeing contributing towards the cost, rather Boeing would be fully liable for the cost.

Bob24

ElNino wrote: »

Typical Ryanair. They have released a statement to RTE stating that the Guardian pickle fork story was rubbish while at the same time confirming that it is true!

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/1106/1089049-ryanair-boeing-737/

To be fair, since RTÉ doesn’t publish the full statement (unless I have missed it), it could also be their journalist quoting the word rubbish out of context.

But yeah - having said that it does sound like Ryanair talk :-D

ElNino

Typical Ryanair. They have released a statement to RTE stating that the Guardian pickle fork story was rubbish while at the same time confirming that it is true!

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2019/1106/1089049-ryanair-boeing-737/

Comhrá

Same story has appeared in The Irish Times just now.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/ryanair-grounds-three-planes-due-to-cracking-between-wing-and-fuselage-1.4074196

IE 222

STB. wrote: »

Are the guardian reading boards.ie ? They have found a third eh. But they only tested those over 30000 cycles. That's not what quantas were doing as they are testing anything over 22700 cycles as they found some under 30k.

From reading that article it is clear that Ryanair are not being upfront. It had to be dragged out of them with leaked logs. Aviation Authority need to step in here and do some checks.

The article says they are in the process of testing aircraft under 30,000 cycles while the over 30,000 have been completed. So far they haven't found anything else.

They haven't denied it, they clearly stated a small number were found and stated more than once the issue wont have an effect on their operations and fleet availability. I think the paper were looking for Ryanair to tell them x amount were grounded instead of been told they're in the process of been repaired.

Depending on what the question put to them was, the answer doesn't seem to suggest their not been up front in my opinion.

lfc200

STB. wrote: »

Are the guardian reading boards.ie ? They have found a third eh. But they only tested those over 30000 cycles. That's not what quantas were doing as they are testing anything over 22700 cycles as they found some under 30k.

From reading that article it is clear that Ryanair are not being upfront. It had to be dragged out of them with leaked logs. Aviation Authority need to step in here and do some checks.

Why? Ryanair have the planes grounded and for repair. Why do the aviation authority need to step in?

STB.

Thirdfox wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/06/boeing-737-cracks-ryanair-grounds-three-planes-due-to-cracking-between-wing-and-fuselage

The pickle fork story appears to be hitting mainstream news too.

Are the guardian reading boards.ie ? They have found a third eh. But they only tested those over 30000 cycles. That's not what quantas were doing as they are testing anything over 22700 cycles as they found some under 30k.

From reading that article it is clear that Ryanair are not being upfront. It had to be dragged out of them with leaked logs. Aviation Authority need to step in here and do some checks.

Thirdfox

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/nov/06/boeing-737-cracks-ryanair-grounds-three-planes-due-to-cracking-between-wing-and-fuselage

The pickle fork story appears to be hitting mainstream news too.

billie1b

STB. wrote: »

Interestingly, two ryanair planes went to Boeing in Seattle on 26th October and remain there. One 15, the other 16 years old.

https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/EI-DAL

https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/EI-DCL

That seems to be where the repairs are being carried out in the US for affected planes.

Are RyanAir playing down possible disruptions ?

Both planes went to Victorville VCV for their repairs

VivaLasBegas

Things going from bad to worse for Boeing with all these issues. It's going to cost them an absolute fortune, an eye watering sum of money when all is said and done. Serious questions need to be asked and they could do with a management clearout instead of one sacrificial lamb.

Inquitus

737-800 deleveries only started in 1999 pretty much:

Commercial Jets Total Unfilled Total 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997
737-600 69 — 69 — — — — — — — — — — — — — 10 3 3 6 5 4 6 24 8 —
737-700 1,128 — 1,128 — 2 4 6 7 11 12 7 43 23 51 61 101 103 93 109 80 71 85 75 96 85 3
737-700C 22 — 22 2 — — 3 — 2 — — 1 2 — 1 — 1 — 2 — 2 3 3 — — —
737-700W 17 3 14 — — — — — — — — — 2 2 — — 5 2 1 1 1 — — — — —
737-800 4,991 9 4,982 23 269 397 411 396 386 347 351 292 323 283 190 214 172 104 78 69 126 168 185 133 65 —
737-800A 157 35 122 13 18 17 18 15 13 8 9 5 1 3 2 — — — — — — — — — — —
737-900 52 — 52 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 6 6 11 8 21 — — — —
737-900ER 505 — 505 22 34 37 52 73 70 67 44 24 15 28 30 9 — — — — — — — — — —
Total 6,941 47 6,894 60 323 455 490 491 482 434 411 365 366 367 284 324 291 208 199 167 213 281 269 253 158 3

STB.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Would it be correct to presume that Boeing are going to have to contribute towards the cost of replacing a major structural part this far in advance of its design life?

275,000 dollars per plane......

2/3 weeks to repair one......

Can you see where this is going ?

I think Boeing know they are going to have to set up a European repair centre. I just hope that Ryan Air do the right thing here. Assuming the cycle calcs above are correct - Are they willing to inspect that many planes, and how long would they be out of commission for these inspections ? And what if they discover its prevalent more in their fleet ???

Everyday those planes are in the air, the more stress can be put on what is meant to be a practicably indestructible part.

Hotblack Desiato

Would it be correct to presume that Boeing are going to have to contribute towards the cost of replacing a major structural part this far in advance of its design life?

STB.

Interestingly, two ryanair planes went to Boeing in Seattle on 26th October and remain there. One 15, the other 16 years old.

https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/EI-DAL

https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/EI-DCL

That seems to be where the repairs are being carried out in the US for affected planes.

Are RyanAir playing down possible disruptions ?

STB.

@Blut if that is the case, at the rates you have quoted and adopting what Qantas has implemented in investigating those with a lifetime over 22k cycles (apx 13.75 years @ 1600 cycle pa) then RyanAir need to be looking least at apx 70 of their planes (or one sixth of their fleet using 2006 as a cut off).

These ones.

29938 1240 737-8AS 02/12/2002 EI-DAC
33544 1249 737-8AS 03/12/2002 EI-DAD Stored 10/2010 to 11/2010
33545 1252 737-8AS 09/12/2002 EI-DAE Stored 10/2010 to 11/2010
29939 1262 737-8AS 09/01/2003 EI-DAF
29940 1265 737-8AS 17/01/2003 EI-DAG
33546 1269 737-8AS 22/01/2003 EI-DAH
33547 1271 737-8AS 03/02/2003 EI-DAI
33548 1274 737-8AS 04/02/2003 EI-DAJ
33717 1310 737-8AS 18/04/2003 EI-DAK
33718 1311 737-8AS 22/04/2003 EI-DAL
33719 1312 737-8AS 23/04/2003 EI-DAM
33549 1361 737-8AS 02/09/2003 EI-DAN
33550 1366 737-8AS 06/09/2003 EI-DAO
33553 1372 737-8AS 12/09/2003 EI-DAS
33552 1371 737-8AS 13/09/2003 EI-DAR
33551 1368 737-8AS 19/09/2003 EI-DAP
33804 1529 737-8AS 01/07/2004 EI-DCF
33805 1530 737-8AS 02/07/2004 EI-DCG
33566 1546 737-8AS 03/08/2004 EI-DCH
33567 1547 737-8AS 03/08/2004 EI-DCI
33564 1562 737-8AS 01/09/2004 EI-DCJ
33565 1563 737-8AS 01/09/2004 EI-DCK
33807 1578 737-8AS 02/10/2004 EI-DCM
33808 1590 737-8AS 01/11/2004 EI-DCN
33809 1592 737-8AS 01/11/2004 EI-DCO
33810 1595 737-8AS 01/11/2004 EI-DCP
33811 1613 737-8AS 02/12/2004 EI-DCR
33568 1631 737-8AS 14/01/2005 EI-DCW
33569 1635 737-8AS 21/01/2005 EI-DCX
33570 1637 737-8AS 26/01/2005 EI-DCY
33815 1639 737-8AS 26/01/2005 EI-DCZ
33571 1642 737-8AS 02/02/2005 EI-DHA
33573 1655 737-8AS 17/02/2005 EI-DHC
33572 1652 737-8AS 23/02/2005 EI-DHB
33816 1657 737-8AS 26/02/2005 EI-DHD 23/12/09 : Skidded off icy taxiway at Glasgow Preswick airport, United Kingdom.
33574 1658 737-8AS 03/03/2005 EI-DHE
33575 1660 737-8AS 06/03/2005 EI-DHF
33576 1670 737-8AS 18/03/2005 EI-DHG
33817 1677 737-8AS 15/04/2005 EI-DHH
33577 1782 737-8AS 01/09/2005 EI-DHN
33578 1792 737-8AS 14/10/2005 EI-DHO
33579 1794 737-8AS 21/10/2005 EI-DHP
33822 1798 737-8AS 25/10/2005 EI-DHR
33580 1807 737-8AS 07/11/2005 EI-DHS
33581 1809 737-8AS 14/11/2005 EI-DHT
33582 1811 737-8AS 14/11/2005 EI-DHV
33823 1819 737-8AS 26/11/2005 EI-DHW
33585 1824 737-8AS 06/12/2005 EI-DHX
33824 1826 737-8AS 08/12/2005 EI-DHY
33583 1834 737-8AS 19/12/2005 EI-DHZ
33584 1836 737-8AS 19/12/2005 EI-DLB
33586 1844 737-8AS 13/01/2006 EI-DLC
33825 1847 737-8AS 13/01/2006 EI-DLD
33587 1864 737-8AS 09/02/2006 EI-DLE
33589 1869 737-8AS 14/02/2006 EI-DLG
33588 1867 737-8AS 14/02/2006 EI-DLF
33590 1886 737-8AS 06/03/2006 EI-DLH
33591 1894 737-8AS 22/03/2006 EI-DLI
34177 1899 737-8AS 28/03/2006 EI-DLJ
33592 1904 737-8AS 29/03/2006 EI-DLK
33595 1926 737-8AS 24/04/2006 EI-DLN
34178 1929 737-8AS 25/04/2006 EI-DLO
33596 2057 737-8AS 25/09/2006 EI-DLR
33598 2063 737-8AS 01/10/2006 EI-DLV
33599 2078 737-8AS 17/10/2006 EI-DLW
33600 2082 737-8AS 18/10/2006 EI-DLX
33601 2088 737-8AS 26/10/2006 EI-DLY
33603 2112 737-8AS 21/11/2006 EI-DPB
33623 2123 737-8AS 06/12/2006 EI-DPD
33604 2120 737-8AS 06/12/2006 EI-DPC

Blut2

Google is telling me the average for an airline airframe is approx 1200 cycles per year. I'd assume FR work their aircraft significantly harder than "average" though, given their more efficient routes/timings/general operations. Someone with more knowledge than me can probably answer - given that, would 1600~ cycles p.a. be a reasonable estimation for FR?

If so, and anything over 22k is a problem, they're probably going to have to do some checking on their older planes.

STB.

TomSweeney wrote: »

Do Ryanair have any NGs?
Or are they still using -800s only ?

RyanAir have about 420 NG's. Average age is 8 years. Thought I saw something about 2 recently returned to Seattle by them for this reason.

This issue now with the NG series is what the expose on Boeing broadcast many years ago warned of.

The main structural parts (bear straps and chords) were meant to be computer designed and assembled using ATA (and were accordingly certified for higher gross weight and alt). Following problems reported by Boeing assemblers, they went into the people contracted to make these parts (Ducommun) and discovered lads with angle grinders. Boeing management buried the whole thing. Its posted earlier in this thread. The QA mannager left and they took a court case. That was also buried when heard ten years later. There is a documentary on it (here). Tip of the iceberg stuff.

Here is the email sent to all its customers at the end of September by Boeing, with pictures of the problems etc

Interesting that Ryanair claim that it wont affect them. How can they be so sure ? Quantas are looking at anything over 22k cycles. Anyone got an idea of average cycles per year on FR?

Here is Ryanair's fleet in detail including year of delivery. Whilst they say the average is 8 years. There are are a lot of planes in the fleet that are 17 years old.

https://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/Ryanair-active-b737ng.htm

cnocbui

Qantas have found a couple cracked 737s and there are calls by some suggesting they ground the whole fleet.

Captain_Crash

TomSweeney wrote: »

Do Ryanair have any NGs?
Or are they still using -800s only ?

The 737-600/700/800/900 series is the 737NG, so all of Ryanair's fleet including the sole 700 they have are NG's

Inquitus

TomSweeney wrote: »

Do Ryanair have any NGs?
Or are they still using -800s only ?

From here

Ryanair operates a fleet of over 450 Boeing 737-800 series aircraft, with orders of up to 210 new Boeing 737 aircraft, this includes 135 new Boeing 737 MAX 200s, and options for 75 more MAX 200s, which will enable Ryanair to grow its fleet to 585 by 2024, further lower its fares and grow traffic from 142m customers last year to 200m p.a. in 2024. The average age of the Ryanair fleet is approximately 6.5 years, and is set to get younger with the latest aircraft order.

Aircraft In service Orders Passengers Notes
Boeing 737-700 1 — 149 Used for training and as a replacement aircraft.
Boeing 737-800 418 — 189 Largest Boeing 737-800 operator
Boeing 737 MAX 200 — 135 197
Total 419 135

TomSweeney

Do Ryanair have any NGs?
Or are they still using -800s only ?

Rawr

TomSweeney wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50244699
Qantas grounding one of it's 737 NG planes, are the NG 737-800s ?

Or is it another name for the MAX?

NG or Next Generation is a whole sub-set of 737s.

I think thery started with the 737-600, then introduced the 737-700 & 737-800 (The Ryanair workhorse) and finally the longer 737-900.

Anything earlier than NG might be referred to as 737 Classic, and the MAX is the newest 737 variant but is not part of the NG family.

Inquitus

TomSweeney wrote: »

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50244699
Qantas grounding one of it's 737 NG planes, are the NG 737-800s ?

Or is it another name for the MAX?

No its the previous version and it had the cracks at 27,000 cycles when boeing only recommends checking after 30,000 cycles.

TomSweeney

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-50244699
Qantas grounding one of it's 737 NG planes, are the NG 737-800s ?

Or is it another name for the MAX?

banie01

L1011 wrote: »

NG production has officially ended, only the KLM mistake frame (and some military varients) is left to be made. Would be slightly embarrassing to resume sales and production

Oh I know the civil production has ended.
I was merely musing on a likely contingency that Boeing may consider to ensure that they can keep customers flying.

L1011

NG production has officially ended, only the KLM mistake frame (and some military varients) is left to be made. Would be slightly embarrassing to resume sales and production