Edit:

  • article title update, bump not bomb jolt’
  • added comma

DENVER — An engine cover on a Boeing 737 operated by Southwest Airlines ripped open just after taking off from Denver International Airport Sunday morning.

The Houston-bound Southwest flight took off from DIA around 7:45 a.m., and returned to the airport 30 minutes later, landing safely. No injuries were reported.

  • snooggums@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s almost like overworking people in the name of profits gets in the way of safety snd reliability.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      7 months ago

      Hey Karl Marx, preventing needless death isn’t profitable! Enough.

      Thank god the wealthy control the courts and government, at least. They’ll keep the lid on this rabble-rousing.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Are there examples of economic theories that better value the worker? The only I’ve ever seen is high unionized social democracies, which are themselves still capitalist in nature

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Looking for “economic theories” is already buying into their bullshit. The economic theory championed by major political parties and media networks the world over is neoliberalism. You know, trickle down, self-regulation, free market will fix it, that kind of shit.

        None of it works and none of it ever did. Maybe, for a brief moment around Thatcher and Reagan, they genuinely thought it might. These days though, they try neoliberalism over and over again because it doesn’t work and they grow richer with every failure. Money didn’t trickle down, they just got a tax break. They didn’t self regulate, they increased their profits by exploiting foreign workers and literal slaves. The free market didn’t fix it, because people were desperately trying to keep their head above water, forcing them to be complicit in the horrors or drown.

        You don’t need economic theories. You just need regulations to stop businesses doing unethical, exploitative things. Politicians could solve most of the issues facing us today with the stroke of a pen. It’s not even complicated policy. “Foreign workers pay and working conditions must meet domestic standards. Failure to do so will result in criminal charges”.

        You’d see industry return to wealthy countries overnight. Consumers wouldn’t be blamed for multi-billion dollar companies using child slaves. Sure, everything would also become more expensive, but that’s your bosses problem now. They’ve been pocketing your wealth for decades, distracting you with cheap junk, subsidised by the misery of foreign workers.

        That’s why the world over, every election has become “red neoliberal” vs “blue neoliberal”. They might pantomime fight over social issues but when it comes to economics, the only disagreement is about whose buddies from school get to be first snout in the trough. Their children are bred for it. The moment a progressive get anywhere near power, watch as these mortal enemies suddenly unite in solidarity to attack them.

        Whatever economic theory you find, there will always be greedy sociopaths trying to murder and manipulate their way to the top.

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Regulations are part of the economic system we want. An economic theory that has strong regulation as a first class tenet is the one we want

    • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      You do know that this has nothing to do with it being a Boeing aircraft, right? The flight was a 737-800 which is from the NG series of 737s. The NG series has one of the lowest accidents per departure of any aircraft ever made and they probably have the most departure of any aircraft series.

      This was 100% on Southwest. This aircraft was built in 2015 and has been flying for a decade. All that happened was a Southwest mechanic didn’t latch the engine cowling properly after an at gate service. This is a problem and should not happen, but has nothing to do with Boeing.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s the Ohio train derailment all over again. Accident happens, people pay more attention to similar accidents, they are shared more on social media (especially if they confirm what people now this is true), people not smart enough to understand that hearing about it more does not mean it’s happening more, and so every accident confirms their belief no matter what.

        It’s a vicious feedback loop.

        • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yeah a couple of these recently return to gate/derversions with non max Boeing’s would have barely made the local news but the word Boeing makes headlines and it doesn’t matter that in the article

      • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Even if you discount the airlines responsibility in this, Boeing don’t make the engines., CFM International do.

        • Smoogs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          Boeing do make the choice in who does their engines. And they do make the choice on the specs. Just as any vehicle manufacturer may use different parts from other manufacturers, they do make a choice with doing business and whether or not they are thorough on their specs.they do put their name on the assembled package as a collection of all their choices.

          So no, while they didn’t make the engine themselves, they employed someone to do it to a spec they themselves determined was enough.

          • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Well first of not sure how that is relevant but just so you know the CFM 56 that is used in the 737NGs is also the engine used in the A320 CEO which is the airbus narrow body and is the direct competitor 737NG family

            • Smoogs@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Wrong argument.

              I’m not arguing class. They do cater to specs for aircraft.

              Irrespective of the engine applications, both aircraft and engine manufacturers work closely during the early design and concept phase to align their requirements.

              If they do not require a spec, that’s on them. If they do, that’s also on them. It’s on the company who make the ultimate choice to strap it on and paint their name on the final decision.

              It’s like that with all products. You will be held responsible regardless of you outsource any assembly and it’s still on your line.

              That’s business 101.

              For example : that is precisely the engine being fuel efficient and angling how it sits or he wing to operate the MCAS system. The infamous system that put Boeing on their back leg. that system to compensate for an engine, the courts didn’t blame the engine in the end. The families of the lost ones do not blame the engine. It’s still the fault of Boeing. This was tried and done already. didn’t work.

              And even humouring this argument: families of the lost will not come after RR, PW or GM. That’s not a fight they can do and you know that. Only the airplane manufacturer can. So They will go after Boeing for strapping it on. And You know that. So go stick that red herring in your pipe and smoke it yourself if you’re that thirsty. Meanwhile I’m stepping aside on your misnomer argument.

              It’s on Boeing. They made the comment about cost of human life. You’re not going to change my mind in this vein.

              • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                Sorry what??? The 737NG and A320 CEO use the same CFM 56 engine. If it was an issue with CFM and the engines it made then Airbus would be as likely to have an issue as Boeing.

                But it isn’t at all. If this was a problem with Boeing then we would have been seeing issues with this for 20 years. This is 100% Southwest’s fault and has nothing to do with Boeing or CFM. Would you blame Ford if the mechanic didn’t tighten your wheel lug nuts?

                You want to say the MAX planes are shit I am right with you, but this plane was made before the MAX planes even came out and the engineering was done in 1990.

                • Smoogs@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  Again: wrong argument on class. I already explained why. Not having this with you.

    • SillyPuppy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Southwest Airlines uses Boeing aircraft exclusively. Lucky me gets to try my luck in two weeks. 🙄

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    7 months ago

    It has been said a lot these last few months, but it is worth repeating untill Boeing stops dicking around…

    “It is Boeing, I ain’t going”

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s also important to try to avoid jumping to conclusions without the facts. If this is a new 737 and there’s a manufacturing issue, then rake Boeing over the coals. They do have problems. But if this is an older plane that had either maintenance issues, then go after Southwest first unless it’s a Boeing responsibility. And of course, things do happen beyond anyone’s control too, and engines that fail for any reason but don’t take out the rest of the aircraft is a bit of a win for design.

    • mercano@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      The story doesn’t mention the age or variant of the plane, but there’s a good chance this is an issue with Southwest maintenance, not Boeing (or their subcontractors) construction.

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Some quick googling got me the details.

        1. The article mentions the flight number.
        2. Since I didn’t know the airline code of Southweast, I googled Southwest and the flight number.
        3. Google flights showed me the full flight number.
        4. Putting that into Flightradar got me a list of the last flights of this flight, one showing a deviation.
        5. Going in there gave me the registration number of the plane that flew that flight and data about the type of plane.
        6. Searching FAA registry gave me all details of the plane.

        It is a Boeing 737-8H4, delivered in 2015, so an alomst decade old plane, meaning it was probably an issue with maintenance this time.

        Doesn’t mean I would fly a Boeing plane untill the stop dicking around.

      • Adderbox76@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        For some reason I read that as “Boeing killed Jon Benet” and was thinking well that’s a conspiracy theory I hadn’t heard before…

  • TheFlopster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    The article doesn’t say “bomb jolt” it says “bump, jolt.” In case no one actually reads the article.

  • Fades@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    goddamn planes are falling apart no matter who the fuck makes or services 'em. I am slowly but surely losing trust in air travel at the moment.

    • thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      I mean, all recent coverage seems to have been about Boeing planes…

      …but stuff like this is likely more due to shoddy maintenance than production faults, right?

      It’s just that everyone is hyper-vigilant currently for anything that goes wrong on a Boeing flight currently.

      • Fades@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        but stuff like this is likely more due to shoddy maintenance than production faults, right?

        yes exactly. you nailed it of course, it’s the same thing like when you buy a car and then you see it everywhere. Human brain likes to connect patterns when possible so anything Boeing is like, ‘there they go again!’ when in reality it’s poor maintenance. Part of why Alaska Airlines has looked real bad with all this stuff, bad maintenance like you said.

    • kerrigan778@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      USA road fatalities in last 10 years: ~400,000 Aviation fatalities in major USA carriers in last 10 years: 3 as far as I can find

      But sure…

  • TripleTed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    Noob question: In this age of connected things, why can’t the plane have a sensor to detect if the engine cover is closed, and show an error if it is not before flying?

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      They absolutely have sensors that say “hey, the engine cover is reporting open” but it comes down to where they are when they get that report. I highly doubt the cover was open when they took off, and there’s not going to be a “the engine cover is going to open soon” sensor for this kind of situation.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Here comes a series of DFEAs related to the scotch tape that holds that part of the engine. I hope they figure out what the problem is with the scotch tape.

    • febra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      They might not make the engines, but they are responsible with certification and checkups.

      • GombeenSysadmin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m sorry but this OSS wrong on so many levels.

        This aircraft is 9 years old. It is a B737-800. Boeing’s responsibility ended when it was delivered. Southwest are responsible for all maintenance and inspection since then.

        There is only one manufacturer of engines for the 737NG type, CFM. The engine itself may go back to them for maintenance as they do run overhaul shops. But they are extremely reliable engines. And this engine didn’t fail, the panels came off.

        This is not an engine failure. This is more likely some poor young fella forgot to clip the cowlings shut after preflight checks.

        • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Yep. The plane was fully operational still and didn’t need the cowling other than it giving it much better fuel mileage. It really didn’t need to turn around but … people get scared.

    • 24_at_the_withers@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Good point, but it’s not that either. I guess most of the people here don’t watch the ground crews at the airport before boarding - it seems these clamshell panels are opened between every flight (or at least very frequent intervals) for engine inspections and probably oil sampling. The far and away most likely cause is the ground crew forgot to latch the panel back up after performing their inspection.

    • eardon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      So? They still put them in their planes.

      “We’re not responsible for putting shoddy parts on our aircraft because we don’t make the parts!”

      Like, seriously, how stupid are you?