they found over a two week period at the
manufacturer’s plant horrified them. They took photographs, “...because nobody
would believe us otherwise.”
The parts were being made not
by the FAA approved process-using high tech machines-but by hand. Templates
were used to draw parts with magic-markers which were then cut with handsaws
and resized by belt sanders in a process reminiscent of cabinet makers in a
carpentry workshop.
This not only violated the conditions
of the aircraft design but the parts created were weakened and already stressed
before being used to construct airframes in which passengers and crew were to
sit for the next 30 years or more.
What followed is like something
from a thriller novel. Threats against the investigating team by Ducommun were
alleged: “We have long arms that reach into Boeing, you will be shot...” “We
will shove 20 of your rejected parts up your....”
An email recommendation by the
team to cease using Ducommun as a supplier stated that, “continued trading…places
the Boeing company at risk.” The email was deleted by Boeing management the
following day.
The investigating team was
told not to divulge any of their findings to anyone but Boeing management or
face a law suit by Boeing.
Gigi Prewit and another
employee, Taylor Smith, had to decide where their loyalties lay—with the safety
of the public or with the company that employed them. In Gigi’s case, her
relatives had worked for Boeing for generations. It seemed that by now there
were so many aircraft flying, that to admit there was a problem could bring
about financial ruin for Boeing as the grounding of 300 Aircraft, or the forced
ongoing inspection and maintenance required would precipitate fatal lawsuits
from airline customers.
Despite warnings of legal
action from Boeing, Prewit and Smith approached the Department of Justice who
were initially horrified by the information. They ordered the FAA to
investigate. Public documents show that the only investigation the FAA carried
out was to look up the Ducommun website and note the address.
A criminal investigation by
the Department of Defense found there were non-conforming parts, saying that
the forced fit of these parts at the Boeing plant could cause problems.
This was all very soon
followed by an order from the US Department of Justice to cease all
investigation into the issue.
Yet still the aircraft rolled
off the lines, and flew, and carried passengers and crew at higher altitudes,
at a higher weight.
Despite promises from the
department of Justice to keep the whistleblowers’ names secret, and to protect
them, Boeing found out who they were.
Now they are out of work and unlikely to find any.
The first inkling that the
Department of Justice was trying to protect Boeing was when the Department
released a statement portraying the NTSB as having indicated that the breakup
of a Boeing aircraft—an American Airlines 737NG that crash-landed in Jamaica on
December 22 nd , 2009—had nothing to do with the allegedly unapproved
parts.
The NTSB denied making this
statement.
And when Boeing lawyers began
drafting statements for the Federal Aviation Administration to announce—for the
very authority whose job it is to regulate Boeing—this put the whistleblowers
in a very lonely place.
The still young 737 NG
aircraft were suffering from fatigue, cracks and structural failures after only
8 years into a 30 year life.
Airlines and military
operators of the aircraft are reporting (to the FAA) mounting problems with
these aircraft.
Former FAA official Dr Michael
Dreikorn is “very seriously concerned about a catastrophic cabin failure at
altitude,” that sooner or later one of these aircraft will lose its ability to
stay together. He believes it will be a 737 NG and it will become, “a smoking
hole in the ground.”
The FAA says it does not
believe there are any issues with the 737 NG. [50] ’ [51] ’ [52]
Other aircraft designs
were allowed to fly even
manufacturer’s plant horrified them. They took photographs, “...because nobody
would believe us otherwise.”
The parts were being made not
by the FAA approved process-using high tech machines-but by hand. Templates
were used to draw parts with magic-markers which were then cut with handsaws
and resized by belt sanders in a process reminiscent of cabinet makers in a
carpentry workshop.
This not only violated the conditions
of the aircraft design but the parts created were weakened and already stressed
before being used to construct airframes in which passengers and crew were to
sit for the next 30 years or more.
What followed is like something
from a thriller novel. Threats against the investigating team by Ducommun were
alleged: “We have long arms that reach into Boeing, you will be shot...” “We
will shove 20 of your rejected parts up your....”
An email recommendation by the
team to cease using Ducommun as a supplier stated that, “continued trading…places
the Boeing company at risk.” The email was deleted by Boeing management the
following day.
The investigating team was
told not to divulge any of their findings to anyone but Boeing management or
face a law suit by Boeing.
Gigi Prewit and another
employee, Taylor Smith, had to decide where their loyalties lay—with the safety
of the public or with the company that employed them. In Gigi’s case, her
relatives had worked for Boeing for generations. It seemed that by now there
were so many aircraft flying, that to admit there was a problem could bring
about financial ruin for Boeing as the grounding of 300 Aircraft, or the forced
ongoing inspection and maintenance required would precipitate fatal lawsuits
from airline customers.
Despite warnings of legal
action from Boeing, Prewit and Smith approached the Department of Justice who
were initially horrified by the information. They ordered the FAA to
investigate. Public documents show that the only investigation the FAA carried
out was to look up the Ducommun website and note the address.
A criminal investigation by
the Department of Defense found there were non-conforming parts, saying that
the forced fit of these parts at the Boeing plant could cause problems.
This was all very soon
followed by an order from the US Department of Justice to cease all
investigation into the issue.
Yet still the aircraft rolled
off the lines, and flew, and carried passengers and crew at higher altitudes,
at a higher weight.
Despite promises from the
department of Justice to keep the whistleblowers’ names secret, and to protect
them, Boeing found out who they were.
Now they are out of work and unlikely to find any.
The first inkling that the
Department of Justice was trying to protect Boeing was when the Department
released a statement portraying the NTSB as having indicated that the breakup
of a Boeing aircraft—an American Airlines 737NG that crash-landed in Jamaica on
December 22 nd , 2009—had nothing to do with the allegedly unapproved
parts.
The NTSB denied making this
statement.
And when Boeing lawyers began
drafting statements for the Federal Aviation Administration to announce—for the
very authority whose job it is to regulate Boeing—this put the whistleblowers
in a very lonely place.
The still young 737 NG
aircraft were suffering from fatigue, cracks and structural failures after only
8 years into a 30 year life.
Airlines and military
operators of the aircraft are reporting (to the FAA) mounting problems with
these aircraft.
Former FAA official Dr Michael
Dreikorn is “very seriously concerned about a catastrophic cabin failure at
altitude,” that sooner or later one of these aircraft will lose its ability to
stay together. He believes it will be a 737 NG and it will become, “a smoking
hole in the ground.”
The FAA says it does not
believe there are any issues with the 737 NG. [50] ’ [51] ’ [52]
Other aircraft designs
were allowed to fly even
Similar Books
