FAA Orders Boeing MAX Inspections After Cracks Found on Older 737s

Regulators want 471 U.S. jets checked for cracks in a hidden fuselage reinforcement. No groundings — but the inspection clock starts Sept. 10.

Federal aviation regulators ordered inspections of 471 U.S.-registered Boeing 737 MAX jets for cracks in a structural reinforcement near the forward galley door, under a directive that takes effect Sept. 10.

The Federal Aviation Administration published the final airworthiness directive, AD 2026-15-11, in the Federal Register on Aug. 6. It applies to certain Boeing Model 737-8, 737-9 and 737-8200 airplanes identified in a Boeing service bulletin, and it requires operators to examine the fuselage skin and an underlying reinforcing layer known as a bear strap at the forward upper corner of the forward galley door cutout.

“This AD was prompted by reports of cracks in the bear strap at the forward upper corner of the forward galley door cutout,” the agency wrote in the rule.

The FAA did not order any aircraft grounded. The agency said the required actions and compliance times give operators multiple opportunities to find and repair cracking before it reaches a critical length.

Why the Directive Matters Now

The order carries a known structural fatigue problem from the older 737 Next Generation family into the in-service MAX fleet, and it does so before any crack has been reported in the same area on a MAX.

Boeing addressed the condition on the NG fleet with Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1407 RB, dated Dec. 20, 2022. The FAA made those checks mandatory through AD 2024-06-01, which took effect May 22, 2024. Boeing has said it first notified 737NG operators of the issue in 2019.

The MAX has a similar design and build process, the FAA said, making it susceptible to the same cracking. That is the FAA’s stated basis for extending the inspections, and Boeing’s as well.

“This issue has not been observed on the 737 MAX fleet, but Boeing extended the inspections to 737 MAX airplanes as the model shares a similar design and build process,” the company said in a statement.

Door and window cutouts interrupt the continuous structure of a pressurized fuselage. The bear strap is an extra layer of material installed around the opening to spread loads around its edges. Boeing’s investigation, as recounted by the FAA, traced the problem to high operating stresses in the fuselage skin and bear strap caused by the concentration of stress around the door opening.

The consequence, in the agency’s words, is blunt.

“The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracks in the fuselage skin and bear strap, which may lead to the inability of the principal structural element to sustain limit loads and adversely affect the structural integrity of the airplane,” the directive says.

What Operators Must Do

The work begins with an external general visual inspection of the fuselage skin to determine whether an existing repair is already present in the affected area.

Depending on what crews find, on-condition steps follow: a detailed inspection for cracking of the fuselage skin; high-frequency eddy current inspection around fasteners and along the edge of the door corner radius, covering both skin and bear strap; and low-frequency eddy current inspection of the underlying bear strap at specified fastener locations. Repetitive inspections follow at intervals set by Boeing. Cracking must be addressed through an approved repair method.

All of it traces to Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 737-53A1408 RB, dated Dec. 20, 2024, which the FAA incorporated by reference. Compliance times come from the bulletin’s own tables, with one substitution: where the bulletin refers to its original issue date, the AD effective date applies instead. The Seattle Times, citing the FAA, reported those thresholds run from 3,000 to 30,000 flight cycles.

Alternative inspection methods and repairs outside the bulletin require approval through the alternative method of compliance process or Boeing’s Organization Designation Authorization.

The Cost, and What It Leaves Out

The FAA put the initial visual inspection at one work-hour per airplane. At $85 an hour, the FAA’s assumed labor rate for this AD, that is $85 a plane, or $40,035 across the U.S. fleet.

The detailed and eddy current inspections run up to four work-hours per airplane per cycle — $340 apiece, or as much as $160,140 fleetwide each time around.

Those figures cover inspections only. The FAA said it lacked definitive data to estimate the cost of on-condition repairs or alternative inspections.

The 471 figure counts U.S.-registered airplanes. The Seattle Times and other outlets, citing FAA and Boeing data, reported roughly 1,429 airplanes are affected worldwide. Non-U.S. operators are covered by their own regulators; the European Union Aviation Safety Agency routinely issues corresponding directives for FAA actions on Boeing airplanes.

Boeing Backs the Order; A Safety Group Presses on Timing

Boeing raised no objection during the rulemaking. The final rule states that the FAA received comments from The Boeing Company who supported the NPRM without change. The agency had proposed the directive under Docket No. FAA-2025-3985 on Nov. 25, 2025.

The company framed the order as the MAX counterpart to the earlier NG directive. “We support both directives and continue to support our airline customers,” a Boeing spokesperson said.

The company is also working the problem upstream. Boeing is introducing changes to the manufacturing process that address the root cause of the unsafe condition on in-production airplanes, according to the final rule.

Not every comment was supportive. The Foundation for Aviation Safety asked how the root cause would be addressed and why inspections were not required sooner given the potential severity. The FAA replied on the record that the compliance times ensure detection before a crack reaches critical length, and that the manufacturing changes address the root cause on new aircraft.

United Airlines sought clarification on how repair requirements apply when an existing repair turns up during the initial visual inspection, measured against Structural Repair Manual limits. The FAA answered that the condition covers any repair, including blend-out repairs done within allowable damage limits, and that such repairs must be evaluated to see whether the bulletin’s inspection interval remains adequate — possibly requiring a shorter one. The agency did not change the directive in response.

Southwest said it was reviewing the directive.

Background and Related Actions

Fatigue cracking is a routine consequence of the cyclic pressurization loads an airframe absorbs over its life, and door and window corners are classic high-stress locations that maintenance programs already watch. The FAA typically mandates manufacturer-recommended inspections once common findings emerge. This directive is distinct from other 737 structural cracking orders, including the 2019 pickle-fork inspections, which involved a different part of the airframe.

The order falls under ATA Code 53, fuselage. Brian Knaup, acting deputy director of the FAA’s Integrated Certificate Management Division within the Aircraft Certification Service, issued it Aug. 3. Questions go to Luis Cortez-Muniz, an aviation safety engineer at the FAA office in Des Moines, Washington.

The 737-8200, a high-density variant with extra exits, is flown by the Ryanair group — Ryanair, Buzz and Malta Air — and by Allegiant. MAX 8s and 9s are operated by carriers including United and Alaska Airlines. Applicability, however, is set by the Boeing bulletin rather than by model alone, so not every MAX in a given fleet is covered.

The MAX order arrived alongside separate FAA activity the same week: a proposed directive covering fan cowl protection on 787s powered by Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 engines, tied to the risk of dual-engine failure from uncontained intermediate-pressure turbine debris. Only 22 U.S.-registered 787s would be affected; the proposal applies solely to Trent 1000-powered airplanes. It follows a separate proposed AD on MAX seat-track inspections in late July.