Hacker News Reader

Comment by dvno42 | Hacker News Reader

Could just be a retention thing. Unless legally mandated, why retain video footage longer than required?

This was my initial reaction as well, but in these work environments record keeping is USUALLY extensive by design: parts, tools, even minor acts like tightening a screw or bolt is logged.

The fact that they can't reproduce _ANY_ records of this work, including who would've done the work, is suspicious.

Any HN'ers here have experience in these types of environments to either validate / refute?

I do not know aerospace. But even in electronics manufacturing for general industrial use one has protocols for documenting repairs (be it Return To Manufacturer or site work), and missing would be considered a deviation. I don't think one could be compliant with a under a standard quality manager system like ISO9000 either. I would consider the lack of traceability a serious failure in itself.

According to other sources[0] Boeing says they retain surveillance footage for 30 days, and the accident was months after the work was done, so it would presumably have been overwritten before anyone knew it would matter. That being said, if you're going to use surveillance footage as a fallback to deal with missing documentation, then 30 days of retention is woefully innadequate.

[0] https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/boeing-security-footage-...

It’s incredible, I’ve installed camera systems for pizza parlors and they wanted footage saved for up to 6 months! Boeing is just malicious

Agreed, but to have NO documentation about the work, at all?

That would have made a better headline

It’s a neat trick, since Boeing claims they can’t find any record of the work and don’t know who did it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com