737 Max : Des vis desserrées. Mauvaise qualité de construction

My friends, good evening. Let's imagine today that people at Airbus are watching the news.

Okay?

Their direct competitor, the American manufacturer Boeing, is in the midst of a meltdown, a complete debacle. You know, around 2020, there were internal Boeing emails that came out, and in them there were technicians who said, I will never fly this plane. Another said, may God forgive me for what I have hidden. Another said that this plane was designed, if I remember the words used correctly, was designed by idiots, managed by monkeys. These are not words that came from Mora. These are words that came from inside Boeing. This is a company that is really struggling, no pun intended. So they supplied an aircraft that has quality issues. That is to say, last month, for example, well, before this story, last month, we had a rudder problem. This means that the rudder was not properly secured. And this could mean that the pilot would not be able to control it. If there is an engine failure during takeoff and the pilot cannot control the rudder, the plane could easily spin, go upside down, or crash. Because the pilot cannot do anything with the ailerons, he will not be able to recover. So these are very recurring situations, even on their military program. For example, the KC46, which is a tanker, is an aircraft that can be used to refuel other aircraft in flight. Well, they found that this blocked the program for a while. It blocked the commissioning, it delayed it, it even blocked deliveries because they found metal parts inside closed compartments. That means that at the Boeing factory, it arrived with metal scraps or tools or other things left inside a closed compartment. So you see, there's a real problem, a quality or quality assurance problem image that I found today. We can see at the bottom of the door, there is a company, because all the companies today, whether in India, Mexico, Indonesia, all that in the United States, are in the process of checking their planes. And what I told you yesterday seems to be confirmed. What I told you yesterday conditionally is confirmed today. It means that they did indeed find that certain screws, certain bolts were either missing or not tightened properly or not stopped. And in an image that I found, it is quite impressive. We can see at the bottom of this panel, it is not a door. Once again, I insist, there are people who said in the comments, yes, but if it's an emergency door, it's an emergency exit. If it's bolted, we won't be able to open it. No, no, no, it's not an emergency exit. It's a panel that never opens. No, neither in normal situations nor in an emergency. It doesn't allow for evacuation or anything. It's permanently fixed, and there's no way to replace it with something else. It depends on the configurations that come out of the factory. Instead of having this panel in this location, we have an emergency exit. But at Alaska Airlines, it was closed by a panel, and this panel remains there. In fact, Boeing had warned customers who chose to put this panel there and not an emergency exit, telling them not to dream about it later, not to come and ask to change this configuration because it would be excessively expensive. So this is really a panel that is there to completely close this area. So as I described it to you yesterday, it is a panel that is held in place by, let's say, 12 metal tabs, six on each side. In fact, that's how it is. Look at my hands. There are some. There are some. When there is pressure inside the plane, it pushes like this on its tabs. It is these tabs that work. Okay, Here I have five on each side. Do you understand me? I don't have 12 fingers. But in the real system, there are six and six. So what happens is that it pushes in this way. So it is Cenjet that works. The screws and bolts that were forgotten do not work against the pressurization pressure in the plane. It does not work like that at all. But it does stabilize the system. That means, for example, here, my hands. Look, if this one slides, well, here it is. It's lost.

Okay?

The force is lost and the door comes out. So these are the screws and bolts. I was saying that actually secure the system and ensure that the door stays exactly where it needs to be. In the absence of this, it slid and went. The NTSB through its very delightful boss also stated that in the days leading up to this accident, there were several depressurization alarms on this plane. It would seem that there were alarms. Well, with their legendary caution, of course, they say that we have not yet established a cause and effect relationship between this panel that blew off and the depressurization alarms that had been going on in the previous days. Of course we understand them. At this stage, there is no connection. We will see later if there was a connection. But potentially, potentially, I'm not the tsb, so I'm going to take less semantic precautions. Potentially this door had moved slightly in the previous days, or it barely fit in its housing and it started to leak, which probably justified the alarms in the cockpit on numerous occasions. And then finally it blew open miraculously. I was saying there was no one sitting next to the door. There was a kid, it seems, sitting in the Middle seat, his T shirt was ripped off. He has a mobile phone that was ripped off. Probably the kids who was found, by the way. So I'm a little shocked because I dropped my phone, my iPhone. I dropped it from my height, as the firefighters say. So I was walking, it fell. The window broke, by the way. I didn't replace it at the price it costs. While the guy lost his phone at 16,000ft, torn from his hands by the blast of a depressurization, he falls along a highway and the screen is intact. Oh, no problem. There you go. So I was saying that the seat near this sign was unoccupied. If it had been occupied, the passenger who was there could have been ejected or seriously injured or killed. A piece of advice for you. I'll give you a piece of advice. 1. When I travel by plane, always fasten my seatbelt 100% of the time. Okay, 100% of the time. Except when they're refueling the plane. They say it on the ground, but the rest of the time, fasten it. If I want to sleep or something, I can leave it a little loose, but still fasten it. The reason is that it's not because I'm afraid of panels jumping. That's not really it. It's just that very often there is turbulence, sometimes very sudden, and sometimes it can happen from 1 second to the next. You're in very calm air. So I'll tell you about a very serious case that happened on an Airbus 330. I'll tell you about that in a video or two, where from one second to the next, they found themselves in turbulence that exceeded 2G. And those who weren't wearing seat belts jumped to the ceiling.

Okay?

That's why I always keep my seatbelt on. Another thing I don't do, I have a few things I don't do. For example, recently when I came back from Egypt, my wife gave me a little bag like this. She said to me, look, there are some nuts. Do you want to eat some? I said, no, I never eat nuts on a plane. The reason is that I never eat nuts on a plane. I never eat them during rush hour when the traffic is too heavy, simply because it sent me to the hospital. A long time ago. About 20 years ago, it sent me to the hospital. So since then I've been wary. I don't eat on planes or during rush hour when an ambulance could potentially get stuck in traffic. The rest of the time it's not a problem. So for me, in any case, I'm not saying I'm not trying to encourage. There's no encouragement at all. Um, it's just that I've reconciled myself to the thing, but not completely.

Okay.

So I was saying that Boeing has failed in its mission to send well built, fully built aircraft. One of the problems we have today, and I'll tell you what it is, is that the entire industry is now focusing on these famous doors, okay? They're going to Inspect all the 737 Maxs, find any loose balls, tighten them, stop them and all that. I'm happy for them to fix the problem. I don't anticipate another similar incident on a 737 Max in the near future. But that's not what worries me. What worries me is that we've had the rudders, we've had the doors. Now the next question is, what else is wrong? Okay, Tomorrow we could have a plane. It's at a fixed point, the guys put the throttle on and suddenly they see something rolling in front of them. It's a jet engine that blew up because it wasn't properly attached.

Okay?

Because at this rate, you can think of anything. You lower the landing gear and it comes out, it opens and it falls. Anything is possible. Now look at the British car industry when it was struggling towards the end, they had a lot of quality problems. For example, you were putting the car in reverse, it wouldn't go through. You try, you try. And suddenly you have the gear lever in your hand while you're driving, you brake, there's a wheel that jumps off, it's yours, you see it rolling, it's gone, right? There were people who braked hard at a red light. Both headlights fell off in front of them. It was really, towards the end, honestly, it was like Mr. Bean, okay? That's why the British car industry, those who weren't bought out, when, for example Mini, the famous mini, was bought out by BMW, well, the rest, they're gone for good. If we look at the competition, Boeing, Airbus, Boeing, to tell you, it's Boeing. It's. Its shares have increased by 10% in the last two days. It's gone from $250 a share to $225. I say this because I think it's super important to them. I have the impression that it's more important to them than squeezing. Than squeezing. Squeezing, squeezing. I'll tell you something, I'm no better than anyone else. I've worked in IT companies where we ship crappy stuff, okay? We shipped software with bugs, stuff like that. Yeah, I know that. Except we didn't risk having doors blow off in mid flight and passengers being sucked into the void.

Okay?

You see what I mean? Boeing can't see itself as a company that has to work in a very high security environment. But something else happened this year, 2024 and the news seems to be really going crazy in the aeronautics news. Look at the beginning of the year, an Airbus 350 crashed in Neto, Japan and Tokyo.

Okay?

It arrived and it crashed into another plane and completely veered off the Runway. It was intact. Everyone was safe and sound. You know what? Before this story, the only plane we had first hand experience with, let's say, we had feedback and we knew that it could be a real tank that could withstand this kind of impact was the Boeing T7. We crashed some in San Francisco, we crashed some in London, we crashed some in Dubai. I even think that the crash in Dubai was the most violent of all.

Huh?

Remember, go around without throttle. That means they hit the stick with the levers still at idle and then they crashed further away. The plane remained intact with the passengers who were unharmed. Today in this yard, the Airbus 350 came back in which has a very special construction compared to the 777 which is a plane made of composite and all that. And it's true that we hadn't crashed one before. That means we had no idea how it would withstand a crash of this nature. Well, in the end it's very solid. So today we have this Boeing issue which I would say is on the subject and personally I'm starting today. I wasn't like that before. I won't lie. I was even very pro Boeing when I was a kid. You know, my first contact with aviation was with BOEINGS Noisy Boeing 737,000, two hundreds, the Airbus jets that take off, noisier Boeing 727s with four, three more engines, you know, the practical ones there with a low level of illusion. It's a hell of a book when it takes off. So when you like planes, it's true that it's fun, but it's a bit annoying. Now I had this relationship with Boeing today. I won't hide from you that when I get on a plane and I see the Airbus logo, I feel a little more reassured.

Okay?

A new Boeing plane can be a bit risky. And I'll tell you something to prove that I'm not really anti Boeing. You know the two crashes of the 737 Max. I can do some cheap Boeing bashing by telling you that. Well, they put the MCs on. They didn't warn the pilots and everything. Okay, I can do that. And it's free too. Everyone will agree with me. Everyone. However, I don't believe that. I think that the pilots who crashed the 737 Max had absolutely no business being in an airplane cockpit. I'll tell you this clearly straight away, okay? The tricycle wheels unrolling, you can hear them, you can see them right away. You can see them by counting to three. How do you stop them? There are several methods. The easiest is with your hand. Instinctively, we grab them with our hands. They stop turning the trim motor, whether the order it receives comes from the MK or from a manual system or something else. This motor is not powerful enough to withstand a human over.

Okay?

Normal human strength. That means that on the Lyonnais and the Ethiopian, all the pilots would have had to do would have been this. Okay, I grabbed a spinning wheel. And this is something that every 737 pilot knows. They could have landed without any problems. We wouldn't have had the 350 deaths, we wouldn't have had the worsening lag, we wouldn't have had all that.

Okay?

So I have mixed feelings about the Mack story about the Leon Air and Ethiopian crashes. I think the fault lies half with the pilots and half with Boeing. But there are screws and everything that are missing and all that. I can tell you. I was looking just now, I don't know if I have it there. I was looking under my desk and I found a screw that had fallen out of my chair. Okay, that could happen on an office chair bought on Amazon. But for it to happen on a structural element of a Boeing is completely unimaginable. And today I'm worried about other elements. I'm wondering, are the rudders okay, we know that the rudders are not attached. We know that they've had problems. Are the elevators installed correctly? The landing gear, the engines, the adjustable horizontal stabilizer, the flight controls. Does the pilot pull back on the stick to take off and then have the stick in his hands? I don't know. I don't know anything anymore. Will there be a pilot tomorrow? He. He wants to lower the flaps, takes the lever and then feels it in his hands. Do I know anything more about it now? We don't know anything more about this manufacturer, okay? It seems to be in a situation of complete debacle. And if it continues like this, there will be another incident or two like this. And we'll talk about Boeing in the past tense.

Okay? Okay.

Well, here we have to Tell you that we have a new challenger coming. The challenger for Boeing and for Airbus. It's the Chinese comac. Okay, It's. Well, it's a vast program, huh? That too, huh? We'll talk about it in due course. So there you have it, my friends. Another detail, a detail that struck me in this story and that struck everyone else, is the cockpit door that opened. Sorry. You know that they have secure cockpit doors. These are cockpit doors that have been installed since the beginning of the September 11, 2001 story. Stories that we barely talked about. Well, they installed secure doors in the cockpits. And the problem was that during this depressurization, the cockpit door opened violently. Okay, it didn't just open. The door opened. The pilots helmets were ripped off their heads, their checklists were gone. They had trouble communicating, they had trouble speaking, their papers flew off. Well, there was still some chaos in the cockpit, but the door opened. So, you know, later on the NTSB said that it was discovered that they were designed to open. Why? To avoid a huge pressure differential between the body and the cabin that could, for example, bend important panels or tear off structural elements. So what we do is if there is a pressure difference on either side, the door is designed to open. At some point, it opened suddenly and hit the toilet.

Okay?

So they were lucky that there were no passengers in there who were getting in, because it could have hurt someone very badly. And by the way, the opposite is also true. That means that if you are in an airliner and then suddenly there is a loss of pressure that reaches the cockpit, for example, there is a nub that jumps or something. You can have this door that will go in the other direction and at that moment it can still knock out a pilot. Right? It is also planned in the other direction. But in fact, what is. I was going to say funny is that it was not documented. That means that everyone discovered the pilots on tsb, that Boeing designed this door to open in this way, but did not inform anyone. Okay, we know that on the MC they did not inform anyone. There is no document on the door. We wonder what other surprises they have planned. Another thing, I will end on this. When I heard this story about the door that opened suddenly in this way, you know who I thought of right away? I thought of the German wing. I have not on this channel yet. The German wing, you know, the pilot who had lost his mind and locked the captain outside. The captain had gone out to go to the bathroom. He did not want to open it for him. When he came back, he deliberately crashed the Plane into a mountain. You know, I thought to myself, couldn't the guys have opened the door by depressurizing it? Well, I know that's easy to say, especially since you need a huge depressurization. In fact, you need a rapid depressurization. That means a small depressurization or rather slow, slow depressurization wouldn't have caused the Delta P needed to tear the cockpit door off. It would have taken a fairly sudden depressurization of the cabin to achieve that. But then how? Well, you can't get that by kicking a window. You can't open the emergency exits because given the pressure there is, well, the pressurization. They are fixed by forces of several tons against their housing. You can't remove them in flight. Okay, so yeah, it wouldn't have changed at all. The boss, the last comment I wanted to give you, the boss of the NTSB said that the pilots, she criticized the pilots a little bit by saying that yes, they did not pull the fuse when they landed. They did not pull the fuse of the cvr. That means the cockpit voice recorder in the cpit, they did not pull it. So it was rewritten because it has a two hour tape, it seems and in fact it is a tape that. Well, it is a tape. It is, it is electronic, but I use the terminology of tape. It turns and so it starts to rewrite and after a while, well, it erases everything. Now, well, in the, in the rules of the. It is written somewhere. I will find the exact article, I will put it in the montage that fuses cannot be used as a primary means of controlling a system. That means if a system needs to be stopped and started, it would need to have an off button so that the fuses would either blow on their own when there is an overload. That's what they're designed for. Pilots use them in an emergency to urgently shut down a system, even if the system has an off button. But sometimes we need to remove the power from it. But the fuses are not, they cannot be considered as a natural and normal element of device control in an aircraft. So this criticism from the NTSB quite early in this process is quite unwelcome. In any case, thank you for watching this video so far. Thank you for your support. 90,000 subscribers. That's pretty extraordinary. I can't believe it. Thank you very much and I'll see you in a next video.