Boeing 737 Max operators told to check fuselages for cracks
The US Federal Aviation Administration has ordered operators of Boeing 737 Max aircraft to inspect fuselage components for possible cracks. Although none have been found on Max planes so far, the directive matters because similar flaws were identified in older 737 models and could weaken an aircraft’s structural integrity if left unaddressed.
The inspections, due to begin in September, are expected to cover about 471 aircraft and focus on “bear straps” supporting the fuselage around exit doors. Boeing said it supports the checks and is developing engineering changes, amid continued scrutiny of the 737 Max following two fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019 and a mid-air panel blowout in 2024.
- FAA orders crack inspections on about 471 Boeing 737 Max aircraft.
- No cracks found yet, but older 737s had similar faults.
- Checks begin in September amid ongoing Boeing safety scrutiny.
New here? Start with this
The 737 Max is a family of passenger aircraft made by Boeing, a US aircraft manufacturer. Airlines around the world use the planes for short and medium-distance flights.
The fuselage is the main body of an aircraft, and bear straps are structural supports around its exit doors. Cracks in these parts could weaken the aircraft over time, which is why inspections can help identify problems before they affect safe operation.
The 737 Max has faced close scrutiny since two fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019 and a panel came loose during a flight in 2024. The Federal Aviation Administration is the US body responsible for setting and enforcing aviation safety rules.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The FAA's precautionary inspection represents sound regulatory practice. Given the 737 Max's history of two fatal crashes and a recent mid-air structural failure, coupled with documented cracking in related 737 models, proactively inspecting for potential fuselage defects is a proportionate response. Structural integrity failures are catastrophic; identifying and addressing issues before they manifest in service protects passengers and crew more effectively than reactive measures after incidents occur.
The case against
The directive imposes burden on operators without concrete evidence of risk to the 737 Max specifically. No cracks have been found on any Max aircraft to date, and extending inspections based on problems in older models may reflect regulatory overreach rather than technical necessity. Effective regulation should respond to documented evidence in the aircraft type at issue rather than speculative extension from related models, ensuring measures remain proportionate to actual demonstrated risk.