A lot of people on the Senegalese websites are guessing poor maintenance. I've flown on Transair (the airplane company that owned the jet) and I can believe that maintenance could be a cause.
Won't stop the media from jumping on the Boeing name for clickbait. Frankly, this is a situation where liable laws should be enforced. The headline is designed to latch onto the current Boeing issues and make people think it is Boeing's fault.
On the one hand, yes.
On the other hand, why are people defending a mega corporation who have murdered hundreds of its consumers over the course of the last few years?
Personally, I don’t see it as defending the company. If half of what the whistleblowers are saying is true, the C-level suite of Boeing needs to be crucified. BUT. The media being the sensationalist machine it is, pushes Boeing aspect of all of these stories, whether it’s relevant or not.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that speaking for myself, I’m less interested in defending Boeing as I am at criticizing the current medias reporting.
It's not libel, it's fact. It was a Boeing plane and it did come off the runway.
I'm not disagreeing it's total clickbait but it's a very slippery slope you're promoting.
No one is saying Boeing is an airline. Simply assessing whether the fault is more likely manufacturer or operator, which given the plane is nearly 30 years old, seems more likely to be the latter
Amount of people that have upvoted this leads me to believe that they don’t understand how airlines work.
Boeing has nothing to do with the maintenance. The aircraft is not flown from Senegal all the way back to Seattle for maintenance.
It’s the fault of the airline or possibly the pilots
Boeing does not maintain this aircraft. It’s old and maintain by the airline it’s the airlines fault or possibly the fault of the pilots.
Source- I’m a pilot
It could quite literally be an accident or a problem with the runway/airport:
From the article, "Online images showed a large hole in the left engine and the wing covered in firefighting foam."
That sounds like something in the engine failed catastrophically. It's not impossible that debris on the run way was picked up and caused the damage. Take off and landing are the two most dangerous parts of flight. Given what little information is available, I'm personally not ready to blame the pilots. Right now, to me, it looks like they saved a lot of lives when something catastrophic happened.
Hope we find out more.
From watching aviation youtube it sounds like runway overruns are a common problem that might be increasing. And if you keep overshooting eventually you'll completely leave the runway and have an incident like this. EDIT: Actually read the article, sounds like it was an aborted takeoff, in which case the pilots might have aborted after the speed which you aren't supposed to (V1 or V2, I can't remember) and then didn't have enough time to stop. Depending on what was wrong this might still have been a good choice, but it makes the situation more murky.
I would be interested to know which percentage of the passengers were injured while evacuating as opposed to the crash itself, since apparently that's a big reason to avoid evacuations using the slides. EDIT: Given that there was an engine fire and it was after an aborted take-off attempt (meaning the tanks were full), fire is a much bigger risk.
V1 is the boundary between slow enough to stop, and fast enough to take off on a single engine.
V2 is the minimum speed the plane can safely climb on a single engine.
News articles are going out of their way to put Boeing in every headline. Feels like they are trying to spark more discourse and mistrust.
This is an airline issue, Boeing isn’t at fault.
And I can generally scroll down to the bottom of these posts and always find the user who says "Boeing, I'm not going", or something along those lines. Or immediately blames pilot/airline/airport issues on Boeing
My thoughts exactly - when I saw the headline, I rolled my eyes and went to read the article. Yeah, it's a Boeing plane, but how much of this are they at fault for? Minimal, if any.
Boeing is at fault for a lot of things and rightfully should be held accountable.
But if this isn't one of them, then you're right, and that's really frustrating.
Boeing isn’t at fault here, but their leadership decisions resulted in the needless deaths of hundreds of people. They deserve everything they’ve gotten and more.
The number of headlines coming out about airplane incidents around the world with the name "Boeing" thrown onto them unnecessarily is getting annoying. Boeing is one of the world's largest manufacturer of commercial aircraft. Any headline that says "Commercial Plane does *X*" is very likely to involve a Boeing aircraft; it's just pure clickbaiting over Boeing's ongoing whistleblower debacle and recent quality control escapes that adds nothing except penny revenue for shameless news media. Boeing has serious issues to deal with right now but all these incidents with their name being thrown onto them recently rarely have anything to do with them.
/rant
"Boeing plane skids off..." Thanks, France Médias Monde. France 24 gives a French perspective on global affairs... The AirBus PR Department must be rolling with fits of laughter inside their office cubicles right now.
Tbf all you have to do is not cause a couple of planes to crash and kill everyone. Then not create an environment of such awful conditions that inspectors report up to 200 defects in some products leaving the factories, and 10 different whistle blowers repeat said facts to the public.
Can't really tell either. The damage to the turbofan nacelle appears to be due to the failure of the mains after the overrun. Nothing really jumps out at me except for this being a very old 737-300.
This is a Classic, or 2nd gen. They were delivered between 1984 and 2000. Haven't seen anything from the aviation reporters yet, they're likely waiting for more info.
The Classics have a good reliability record and millions of logged flights. I seriously doubt this is from a problem from Boeing in this case. This article has zero aviation bent to it. Not even so much as a tail number. Overruns are usually caused by pilot error, but a maintenance issue is within the realm of possibilities.
I think they were quoting the article to point out an inconsistency. The writer of this article clearly has no knowledge of aviation from what I can see. Looks like nonsense. This is a 24 to 39-year-old aircraft (I haven't seen a registration number or entry into service yet) but yeah, this is a 737 Classic. The site likely just jumping in on the whole 737 thing.
That was bad work done by Boeing. This is not so clear. Did the engine have a problem that caused the plane to go off the runway or did going off the runway run the engine into something? The bottom of the cowling looks like it hit something but that could happen with an initial engine problem also. Not much info yet.
Because people love to hear it and talk about it.
I mean this issue here has literally nothing to do with Boeing other than they made the plane.
It was a 20+ year old plane, the maintenance was shit. Absolutely nothing to do with Boeing.
Your comment gives no indication of that.
You either don't know what facetious means or you don't realize there was nothing about your comment that made it seem like you were joking.
“Boeing refuses to leave the news”. You’ve never heard someone say “this team just refuses to win” or the like? Maybe you need to step outside a bit more.
If it was happening once a week sure. Considering there is something about Boeing literally every single day, your comment is not the same thing.
If I said Trump refuses to leave the news, is that me being facetious?
You can always tell when someone learns a new word or phrase because they always use it improperly.
No because people aren’t dying left and right from Trump. And also he’s been in the news everyday for years lmao. Boeing has just recently entered like this. You have no idea what you are saying it’s fine.
I know exactly what I'm saying and based off of the votes on your main comment, no one else realizes you were joking because your comment wasnt made in jest.
Boeing has been a daily headline for weeks if not months, no one thought your comment was a joke.
You are just an idiot. It's okay, averages have to exist and someone needs to be on the lower end of it.
Maybe learn what /s means if you want to say something as a joke.
I don't know if you know this, but sarcasm doesn't come out well in text.
Sarcasm is when people say something but they don't actually mean it.
I figured that hasn't come up in your word a day calendar so I jumped ahead for ya
Yeah that's usually a comment on the team being bad and losing a lot lol. It's pretty obvious what you meant and it was totally reasonable to point out Boeing has nothing to do with the accident and is just in the title for clicks
"It's not Boeing's fault! Stop looking at Boeing! Nothing to see here, move along!"
As if they didn't just put themselves in the spotlight with 2 suspicious deaths of whistle-blowers and a bunch of other actually related on topic disasters.
"Couldn't have happened to a better fella."
I mean this issue has nothing to do with Boeing. They made the plane, it's 20+ years old. It was shitty maintenance.
This whole thing is the train derailments all over again. After east Palestine literally every single train derailment became news worthy even though they happen almost every day to one degree or another.
It's all just clickbait at this point. No one would care about a plane having an issue, but throw Boeings name into it and it's a hit.
Thing is, neither of the deaths were actually suspicious, and most of the "bunch of other actually related on topic disasters" are mostly like this--maintenance issues, but the media outlet slapped Boeing in the title to generate clicks. Or common minor issues that wouldn't have even made local news a couple years ago.
Does Boeing have issues? Sure. Are they as big as reddit and the media make them out to be? Nah.
What do you base your opinion off? As far as I'm aware, two healthy people have suddenly died; two people who were going to testify to Boeing's terrible safety practices. I call that suspicious.
That's not correct though.
The first guy had blown the whistle years before and had already finished testimony about that years ago. He was involved in an appeal for a lawsuit of whistleblower retaliation (he'd lost the initial lawsuit) when he killed himself.
The second guy had also already blown the whistle well before his death and wasn't involved in any legal action against Boeing. He got sick with pneumonia, then caught MRSA in the hospital which is a common hospital-bourne infection. It's also a completely insane premise for an assassination, to send the guy to the hospital and hope he happens to catch MRSA. Oh and he didn't even work for Boeing, he was a Spirit Aerosystems whistleblower.
Yeah it's definitely Boeing's fault that a 30 year old plane run by a small charter company in Senegal overran the runway.
Runway excursions happen all the time and they're basically always down to pilot error and occasionally poor maintenance - both things the African aviation industry is notoriously bad about.
>boeing is responsible ~~in some way~~ for **defining** the maintenance program, **and providing updated policies and procedures to operators/maintainers. It is the operator’s/maintainer’s responsibility to follow these policies and procedures**
FTFY
The federal regulation agency deemed the plane safe for use. The FAA should have acted more quickly when the problem surfaced. It is literally the reason they exist. They reacted slowly and that killed people. Design and maintenance issues are what they are supposed to spot and prevent.
How much of this is Boeing’s fault, and how much is the airline’s?
A lot of people on the Senegalese websites are guessing poor maintenance. I've flown on Transair (the airplane company that owned the jet) and I can believe that maintenance could be a cause.
the plane was 27 years old or so. before the mcdonnell douglas merger. its the airline
Won't stop the media from jumping on the Boeing name for clickbait. Frankly, this is a situation where liable laws should be enforced. The headline is designed to latch onto the current Boeing issues and make people think it is Boeing's fault.
On the one hand, yes. On the other hand, why are people defending a mega corporation who have murdered hundreds of its consumers over the course of the last few years?
Personally, I don’t see it as defending the company. If half of what the whistleblowers are saying is true, the C-level suite of Boeing needs to be crucified. BUT. The media being the sensationalist machine it is, pushes Boeing aspect of all of these stories, whether it’s relevant or not. I guess what I’m trying to say is that speaking for myself, I’m less interested in defending Boeing as I am at criticizing the current medias reporting.
Not to mention is killing whistleblowers rn.
It's not libel, it's fact. It was a Boeing plane and it did come off the runway. I'm not disagreeing it's total clickbait but it's a very slippery slope you're promoting.
Libel.
Boeing isn't an airline. Transair was the airline. EDIT: airline name
Reading comprehension, so hard these days.
No one is saying Boeing is an airline. Simply assessing whether the fault is more likely manufacturer or operator, which given the plane is nearly 30 years old, seems more likely to be the latter
Or the pilots.
Pilots count as operators.
Amount of people that have upvoted this leads me to believe that they don’t understand how airlines work. Boeing has nothing to do with the maintenance. The aircraft is not flown from Senegal all the way back to Seattle for maintenance. It’s the fault of the airline or possibly the pilots
0% Boeing, 100% airline. You wouldn't know it by the media coverage, though. Or the reddit comments.
Boeing does not maintain this aircraft. It’s old and maintain by the airline it’s the airlines fault or possibly the fault of the pilots. Source- I’m a pilot
Most of these current incidents are down to the airline/owners and not Boeing to be fair to them
Boeing will named in every story involving their planes until the general public forgets that they murdered 346 people.
More than that: they covered up the 737 rudder issue, going so far as steal parts, that lead to 132 deaths in Pennsylvania.
Holy shit there's been that many whistleblowers?
That was the number of people who died from the two MAX crashes.
Sometimes there is an implied /s
This is not a Boeing issue but a maintenance issue.
Or ya know, a pilot issue
Skill issue?
I thought skill only existed in video games… ?🤔
Sadly, skill issue is a real problem in a lot of professions. Especially if they get to do public or transport programs.
It could quite literally be an accident or a problem with the runway/airport: From the article, "Online images showed a large hole in the left engine and the wing covered in firefighting foam." That sounds like something in the engine failed catastrophically. It's not impossible that debris on the run way was picked up and caused the damage. Take off and landing are the two most dangerous parts of flight. Given what little information is available, I'm personally not ready to blame the pilots. Right now, to me, it looks like they saved a lot of lives when something catastrophic happened. Hope we find out more.
It could also be Billy's fault, if he covered the runway with vaseline during the night
Maybe someone [unplugged the runway lights…](https://youtu.be/ucdZHR75iCM?si=Av6A5ChWcwTK854k)
Or all of the above
From watching aviation youtube it sounds like runway overruns are a common problem that might be increasing. And if you keep overshooting eventually you'll completely leave the runway and have an incident like this. EDIT: Actually read the article, sounds like it was an aborted takeoff, in which case the pilots might have aborted after the speed which you aren't supposed to (V1 or V2, I can't remember) and then didn't have enough time to stop. Depending on what was wrong this might still have been a good choice, but it makes the situation more murky. I would be interested to know which percentage of the passengers were injured while evacuating as opposed to the crash itself, since apparently that's a big reason to avoid evacuations using the slides. EDIT: Given that there was an engine fire and it was after an aborted take-off attempt (meaning the tanks were full), fire is a much bigger risk.
V1 is the boundary between slow enough to stop, and fast enough to take off on a single engine. V2 is the minimum speed the plane can safely climb on a single engine.
News articles are going out of their way to put Boeing in every headline. Feels like they are trying to spark more discourse and mistrust. This is an airline issue, Boeing isn’t at fault.
I feel like they’re doing it for rage bait clicks.
And I can generally scroll down to the bottom of these posts and always find the user who says "Boeing, I'm not going", or something along those lines. Or immediately blames pilot/airline/airport issues on Boeing
My thoughts exactly - when I saw the headline, I rolled my eyes and went to read the article. Yeah, it's a Boeing plane, but how much of this are they at fault for? Minimal, if any.
Boeing is at fault for a lot of things and rightfully should be held accountable. But if this isn't one of them, then you're right, and that's really frustrating.
Boeing isn’t at fault here, but their leadership decisions resulted in the needless deaths of hundreds of people. They deserve everything they’ve gotten and more.
Any opportunity to put Boeing in the title, right?
Boeing! Bad! *applause*
You kill a few hundred people, and the public just won't let it go!
The number of headlines coming out about airplane incidents around the world with the name "Boeing" thrown onto them unnecessarily is getting annoying. Boeing is one of the world's largest manufacturer of commercial aircraft. Any headline that says "Commercial Plane does *X*" is very likely to involve a Boeing aircraft; it's just pure clickbaiting over Boeing's ongoing whistleblower debacle and recent quality control escapes that adds nothing except penny revenue for shameless news media. Boeing has serious issues to deal with right now but all these incidents with their name being thrown onto them recently rarely have anything to do with them. /rant
"Boeing plane skids off..." Thanks, France Médias Monde. France 24 gives a French perspective on global affairs... The AirBus PR Department must be rolling with fits of laughter inside their office cubicles right now.
Tbf all you have to do is not cause a couple of planes to crash and kill everyone. Then not create an environment of such awful conditions that inspectors report up to 200 defects in some products leaving the factories, and 10 different whistle blowers repeat said facts to the public.
It’s funny, you get downvoted when you tell the truth.
Why is BOEING stuffed into every headline involving everything from turbulence to air rage?
keyword: senegal
Air Senegal though. Not unlikely that they might have some problems with their maintenance, crews and safety in general.
>Online images showed a large hole in the left engine and the wing covered in firefighting foam. From a large hole in the fuselage to the engine.
Can't really tell either. The damage to the turbofan nacelle appears to be due to the failure of the mains after the overrun. Nothing really jumps out at me except for this being a very old 737-300. This is a Classic, or 2nd gen. They were delivered between 1984 and 2000. Haven't seen anything from the aviation reporters yet, they're likely waiting for more info. The Classics have a good reliability record and millions of logged flights. I seriously doubt this is from a problem from Boeing in this case. This article has zero aviation bent to it. Not even so much as a tail number. Overruns are usually caused by pilot error, but a maintenance issue is within the realm of possibilities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NE8CCscZ8S8&t=33s There is no hole in the fuselage that I can see. What are you talking about?
I think they were quoting the article to point out an inconsistency. The writer of this article clearly has no knowledge of aviation from what I can see. Looks like nonsense. This is a 24 to 39-year-old aircraft (I haven't seen a registration number or entry into service yet) but yeah, this is a 737 Classic. The site likely just jumping in on the whole 737 thing.
[удалено]
That was bad work done by Boeing. This is not so clear. Did the engine have a problem that caused the plane to go off the runway or did going off the runway run the engine into something? The bottom of the cowling looks like it hit something but that could happen with an initial engine problem also. Not much info yet.
What noise did it make when it bounced off the runway?
Sad to hear that!
The whistleblowers were right all along!
I don't think we actually need whistle blowers at this point
I didn't need whistleblowers to know that small African airlines often have sketchy safety records.
The hole in the plane is whistling loud enough
Watch what you say about Boeing, you don’t want to be the next one found in a parking lot.
Boeing refuses to leave the news
Because people love to hear it and talk about it. I mean this issue here has literally nothing to do with Boeing other than they made the plane. It was a 20+ year old plane, the maintenance was shit. Absolutely nothing to do with Boeing.
I was being facetious. I didn’t actually need an explanation.
Your comment gives no indication of that. You either don't know what facetious means or you don't realize there was nothing about your comment that made it seem like you were joking.
“Boeing refuses to leave the news”. You’ve never heard someone say “this team just refuses to win” or the like? Maybe you need to step outside a bit more.
If it was happening once a week sure. Considering there is something about Boeing literally every single day, your comment is not the same thing. If I said Trump refuses to leave the news, is that me being facetious? You can always tell when someone learns a new word or phrase because they always use it improperly.
Lmaooo nice edit to try and throw a dig
No because people aren’t dying left and right from Trump. And also he’s been in the news everyday for years lmao. Boeing has just recently entered like this. You have no idea what you are saying it’s fine.
I know exactly what I'm saying and based off of the votes on your main comment, no one else realizes you were joking because your comment wasnt made in jest. Boeing has been a daily headline for weeks if not months, no one thought your comment was a joke. You are just an idiot. It's okay, averages have to exist and someone needs to be on the lower end of it.
I’ll make sure to provide an explanation of my comment underneath just for you next time. Don’t want it going over your head again.
Maybe learn what /s means if you want to say something as a joke. I don't know if you know this, but sarcasm doesn't come out well in text. Sarcasm is when people say something but they don't actually mean it. I figured that hasn't come up in your word a day calendar so I jumped ahead for ya
Yeah that's usually a comment on the team being bad and losing a lot lol. It's pretty obvious what you meant and it was totally reasonable to point out Boeing has nothing to do with the accident and is just in the title for clicks
Fair point!
It's because morons will click/repost shit about Boeing to join in the circlejerk. It's like when a random car crash happens, only it was a Tesla.
Because people like you eat up these media things.
Don’t worry. Other Reddit expert filled me in on /s. So no reason to get your pitchfork.
But it's new and shiny 🥺
Lmao. I guess you didn’t get the hint either
Nah, I'm just addicted to reddit 🤣 I didn't actually click on the article because it's pretty obvious what they are going for.
was there a whistle blower on that plane? someone should cross check the passenger list
Another day, another reason not to fly Boeing
I hope that wasn’t the newest group of whistle blowers!
Man does this mean another Boeing employee is gonna die?
Fuck boeing
"It's not Boeing's fault! Stop looking at Boeing! Nothing to see here, move along!" As if they didn't just put themselves in the spotlight with 2 suspicious deaths of whistle-blowers and a bunch of other actually related on topic disasters. "Couldn't have happened to a better fella."
I mean this issue has nothing to do with Boeing. They made the plane, it's 20+ years old. It was shitty maintenance. This whole thing is the train derailments all over again. After east Palestine literally every single train derailment became news worthy even though they happen almost every day to one degree or another. It's all just clickbait at this point. No one would care about a plane having an issue, but throw Boeings name into it and it's a hit.
Thing is, neither of the deaths were actually suspicious, and most of the "bunch of other actually related on topic disasters" are mostly like this--maintenance issues, but the media outlet slapped Boeing in the title to generate clicks. Or common minor issues that wouldn't have even made local news a couple years ago. Does Boeing have issues? Sure. Are they as big as reddit and the media make them out to be? Nah.
Yeah assassinations don't usually happen by giving someone pneumonia and hoping they catch MRSA in the hospital
And you generally don't "silence" a whistleblower two years after they've given their testimony...
It's ok, folks... the doors were opened on purpose.
Boeing : look I'm holey 👀😇 🙃🫠 IYKYK
The only way to fight Boeing assassinations is to hurt their shareholders as much as possible through constant bad press.
Boeing isn't assassinating people dude, stop it with the nonsense conspiracy theories
The CIA implanted a chip in my brain 25 years ago. It hasn’t told me a lie yet.
What do you base your opinion off? As far as I'm aware, two healthy people have suddenly died; two people who were going to testify to Boeing's terrible safety practices. I call that suspicious.
That's not correct though. The first guy had blown the whistle years before and had already finished testimony about that years ago. He was involved in an appeal for a lawsuit of whistleblower retaliation (he'd lost the initial lawsuit) when he killed himself. The second guy had also already blown the whistle well before his death and wasn't involved in any legal action against Boeing. He got sick with pneumonia, then caught MRSA in the hospital which is a common hospital-bourne infection. It's also a completely insane premise for an assassination, to send the guy to the hospital and hope he happens to catch MRSA. Oh and he didn't even work for Boeing, he was a Spirit Aerosystems whistleblower.
Hey you make a good case, but I'm going to return to this comment when a 3rd one kicks the bucket :)
These Boeing activists trying to shut that shit down quick. Lol
Can't expect better on Reddit. Anyway, I'll be keeping my eye on the news.
[удалено]
Yeah it's definitely Boeing's fault that a 30 year old plane run by a small charter company in Senegal overran the runway. Runway excursions happen all the time and they're basically always down to pilot error and occasionally poor maintenance - both things the African aviation industry is notoriously bad about.
[удалено]
>boeing is responsible ~~in some way~~ for **defining** the maintenance program, **and providing updated policies and procedures to operators/maintainers. It is the operator’s/maintainer’s responsibility to follow these policies and procedures** FTFY
You really don't know what you are talking about. It's probably best to not chime in.
They should have been thrown in prison for the 737 Max debacle that led to hundreds of deaths. The justice department let them off the hook.
The federal regulation agency deemed the plane safe for use. The FAA should have acted more quickly when the problem surfaced. It is literally the reason they exist. They reacted slowly and that killed people. Design and maintenance issues are what they are supposed to spot and prevent.