I remember watching a DASH landing at an airshow, both wings fell off, a small fire broke out, and Raymond Baxter saying "....well thats what we call a heavy landing".

Reminded me of another time and place on another Boeing plane which suffered from a mysterious fire which caused the odd crash or two , but after the unit was no longer used and removed a refurbishment overhaul avionics updates or two later that ended that particular problem and the US Air Force still wants the old bomb truck on it's flying inventory until about 2025 or there about !

I wish people would stop bringing up the Heathrow crash-landing in relation to this when talking about the 777's safety record.

The 777 has a great safety record, this grounding is not because of something unsafe on the 777 but because United cut corners on their maintenance. ANY aircraft will become unsafe if you dont perform the necessary maintenance to keep it airworthy.

I think the biggest story here is that an airline actually admitted a mistake and grounded its fleet in order to do the repair, rather then a) trying to cover it up and do a piecemeal inspection or b) being ordered to ground the fleet by the FAA. Also, ive read elsewhere that the FAA had grounded a number of other United aircraft on an unrelated matter (also failing to do some maintenance I've heard but i cant confirm that). My question is why the hell didnt the FAA do a complete audit of United once they found them cutting corners on ANY aircraft maintenance!

Thanks - was going to say exactly the same.

@ Tim - If they published within a month, do you really think you'd trust their results? Or would you be crying "Coverup" at the top of your lungs?

I did work experience at the AAIB for 4 weeks while studying Aeronautical Engineering. If you want to see the type of investigation the AAIB publish, go look at their website, and try to imagine how many manhours go into each report - all are publicly available at http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/index.cfm

Japanese 747 falls out the sky because the rear bulkhead cracked due to stress caused by routine flight operations (ie take-off and landing).

737 crashes onto motorway at Kegworth because crew pulled wrong fire handle after wrong (incorrectly wired) warning light warns of engine fire.

Just two examples of where superior Boing design and craftsmanship have led to the loss of life, but the fleets were not grounded for even a single day.

Contrast that with the Air France Concorde incident (all Concordes grounded at the FAA's demand, even the BA ones that had had the anti-fire tank liners fitted) and the demand from Boeing that *all* Airbus be grounded following an American Airlines A300 crash.

One rule for Boing, one for everyone else (and don't get me started on Uncle Sam's "gift" of NASA research to the American airliner manufacturers whilst whinging that the EU should not be allowed to assist Airbus in any way, shape or form. And as for the "Open Skies" travesty...)

Paris, cos it looks like she's got about as much of a clue...