Ot, does this mean that they're handbuilt like the

[Bill R.]

m cars or does this mean that its the BFH school of assembly?
Here (http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/nation/14360680.htm)

[632 Regal]

sounds like a lack of communication to me.

[Jeff N.]

Being from Seattle...these stories pop up now and then.

I think the proof's in the pudding - Boeing aircraft are about as safe of ride as you can have. Sure, there has been problems over the year's, most notably the rudder control issue on the 737. But, all things considered, I'd get on a Boeing plane before any other manufacturer's airliner.

Side bar - I was once in a project management class with a bunch of Boeing folks. We were discussing quality and how to determine what level your project requires. Common discussion is around '5 9's' - or 99.999%. I recall one of the Boeing members commenting as that wouldn't be acceptable for them - it means one airplane a day crashes. :)

[Robin-535im]

Since we're OT... If they're ISO certified (9001 I think) then every motion of every assembler needs to be scripted and documented in a manual (on-line or paper).

I would think the issue would be whether or not the process for that assembly step allows rework without a change request document... I can't imagine that it does.

However, that has no direct correlation with safety, only with variability. But for manufacturing, variability is the devil! I like the 5 9's comment - puts things in perspective for sure.