There is supposed to be enforced the design doctrine that aircraft systems must fail safely or must fail to a benign state... Something that instead has to be actively turned off to avoid deadly catastrophe for normal flight is an inherently deadly design...

Your example there of a fuel shut-off is a very good safety feature that is only ever to be used either only whilst safely on the ground or only until AFTER some catastrophe has already happened...

Indeed, there is a world of difference in the expense of merely training a pilot to fly vs the extra time needed training a pilot to fly for other than normal conditions...

When it fails it will do so with whatever pitch, roll and yaw inputs it last had

Really...? There are no prior warnings that the autopilot is having to work far too hard and is outside of safe (recoverable) margins?...

Boeing is slowing 787 production in order to address a new manufacturing issue that the company says involves an issue with the jet’s forward pressure bulkhead.

The airframer has also slashed the number of Dreamliners it expects to deliver in 2021, now predicting it will hand over about half of the roughly 100 787s it holds in inventory.

Previously, Boeing told investors it would deliver the majority of those jets this year.

News of a new 787 manufacturing problem came to light on 12 July when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said a “manufacturing quality issue near the nose” of some of Boeing’s undelivered 787s had been identified.

WASHINGTON, July 15 (Reuters) - The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Thursday issued a directive to operators of all Boeing Co (BA.N) 737 series airplanes to conduct inspections to address possible failures of cabin altitude pressure switches.
The directive requires operators to conduct repetitive tests of the switches and replace them if needed. The directive covers 2,502 U.S.-registered airplanes and 9,315 airplanes worldwide.
It was prompted after an operator reported in September that both pressure switches failed the on-wing functional test on three different 737 models.
The FAA said failure of the switches could result in the cabin altitude warning system not activating if the cabin altitude exceeds 10,000 feet (3,050 m), at which point oxygen levels could become dangerously low.

Boeing initially reviewed the issue, including the expected failure rate of the switches, and found it did not pose a safety issue.

Subsequent investigation and analysis led the FAA and Boeing to determine in May that "the failure rate of both switches is much higher than initially estimated, and therefore does pose a safety issue."

...It was prompted after an operator reported in September that both pressure switches failed the on-wing functional test on three different 737 models.
The FAA said failure of the switches could result in the cabin altitude warning system not activating if the cabin altitude exceeds 10,000 feet (3,050 m), at which point oxygen levels could become dangerously low.

Boeing initially reviewed the issue, including the expected failure rate of the switches, and found it did not pose a safety issue.

Subsequent investigation and analysis led the FAA and Boeing to determine in May that "the failure rate of both switches is much higher than initially estimated, and therefore does pose a safety issue [of the pilots losing consciousness]."

Boeing fluffs the design-and-test-and-QA-checks;
Operator reports faults/concerns;
Boeing denies any problem;
FAA chases up long after the event to too late declare a real problem;
Work-around minimum cost 'fix' agreed;
Pilots and passengers fly on their prayers...

Fly safe folks!
Martin

Another problem for the 737.
FAA orders checks on 9,300 Boeing 737 planes for possible switch failures

WASHINGTON, July 15 (Reuters) - The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on Thursday issued a directive to operators of all Boeing Co (BA.N) 737 series airplanes to conduct inspections to address possible failures of cabin altitude pressure switches.
The directive requires operators to conduct repetitive tests of the switches and replace them if needed. The directive covers 2,502 U.S.-registered airplanes and 9,315 airplanes worldwide.
It was prompted after an operator reported in September that both pressure switches failed the on-wing functional test on three different 737 models.
The FAA said failure of the switches could result in the cabin altitude warning system not activating if the cabin altitude exceeds 10,000 feet (3,050 m), at which point oxygen levels could become dangerously low.

Boeing initially reviewed the issue, including the expected failure rate of the switches, and found it did not pose a safety issue.

Subsequent investigation and analysis led the FAA and Boeing to determine in May that "the failure rate of both switches is much higher than initially estimated, and therefore does pose a safety issue."

My question, who builds the switches? Are they in other airplanes? Spacecraft?

My question, who builds the switches? Are they in other airplanes? Spacecraft?

No idea, but have they been 'grandfathered in' and therefore could be late 50's or early 60's design and that there are better more reliable alternatives available.

My question, who builds the switches? Are they in other airplanes? Spacecraft?

No idea, but have they been 'grandfathered in' and therefore could be late 50's or early 60's design and that there are better more reliable alternatives available.

In the world of certified aircraft, once a design is blessed, er certified, no one dares make a big improvement because obtaining a new certification will bankrupt the investors.

There have been a number of biz jets that have obviously depressurized and flown until they run out of fuel over the years. A shared bad part or part design?

My question, who builds the switches? Are they in other airplanes? Spacecraft?

No idea, but have they been 'grandfathered in' and therefore could be late 50's or early 60's design and that there are better more reliable alternatives available.

In the world of certified aircraft, once a design is blessed, er certified, no one dares make a big improvement because obtaining a new certification will bankrupt the investors.

There have been a number of biz jets that have obviously depressurized and flown until they run out of fuel over the years. A shared bad part or part design?

But no doubt they would have no problem with introducing newer designs if it came with a significant weight and size reduction in the item.

... The CST-100 Starliner will launch from Florida at some point to showcase how it can ferry crews to and from the International Space Station (ISS).

It will be the second test flight, and conducted with no people aboard. The previous demonstration in 2019 encountered software problems that very nearly caused the loss of the capsule...

... Controllers had been targeting Tuesday for the launch, but scrubbed the countdown with two-and-a-half hours left on the clock.

The reason was not immediately clear. However, Tory Bruno, the CEO of United Launch Alliance, which operates the Atlas rocket, tweeted that his team would recycle for an attempt on Wednesday...

... while SpaceX is now two crewed operational flights into this privatised era, Boeing has yet to run a single crewed mission in a Starliner. And that's because Boeing's first unpiloted "Orbital Flight Test" in December 2019 went seriously awry...

... Boeing's director of Starliner mission operations, said the company had run full-mission duration simulations of the new software on the capsule. The new code, he added, had implemented every correction recommended by the review. "We fixed every one, we addressed every one. We want this next flight to be as clean as it could possibly be," he told reporters...

... we need an alternative to Starliner... no matter the cost.

2 The Future

A few days on and not looking good...

[...]

I would imagine that the thrusters valves, ALL of 'em, are ALL 'Safety Critical'... Or why have them?...

...

Teams continue to work on Starliner's service module propulsion system inside of ULALaunch's Vertical Integration Facility. BoeingSpace has been able to command seven of 13 valves open that previously were in the closed position... August 9, 2021

Seven of 13 valves that stayed shut when they should have opened during a pre-launch test have now been opened by engineers, but they have yet to track down what is keeping them closed [or what is not opening them...]. Boeing has been able to rule out external physical or chemical damage or corrosion to the affected valves.

NASA said that the Starliner will remain in the VIF [Vertical Integration Facility] until engineers have been able to isolate the root problem, correct the issue, and verify "repeatable system performance."...

... A new defect on Boeing’s Dreamliner aircraft surfaced in July, the latest in a series of issues that arose late last summer. Deliveries of the popular plane are now halted, pressuring Boeing’s profits. WSJ’s Andrew Tangel explains how Boeing got here...

Oxygen levels could become "dangerously low" if switches fail over 10,000 feet...

... But the crew and maintenance personnel are not alerted of switch failures...

... "A latent failure of both pressure switches could result in the loss of cabin altitude warning, which could ... result in incapacitation of the flight crew due to hypoxia (a lack of oxygen in the body), and consequent loss of control of the airplane,"...

... The FAA order affects around 2,500 planes in the U.S. including the Boeing 737 Max and 737 NextGen...

... The concern was prompted by a test in September when an operator reported that both switches had failed on three different models of the Boeing 737...

... The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said all Boeing MAX planes and some other 737 models were affected by the precautionary measure...

... the aircraft may have a failed electronic flow control in the air conditioning packs that vent air into the hold...

... The airworthiness directive impacts 663 airplanes registered in the United States and approximately 2,204 worldwide, the FAA said.

It potentially means that operators would be unable ... to take passenger baggage in the hold at the height of the holiday season...

Aug 12 (Reuters) - Boeing Co's (BA.N) Starliner space capsule launch could be delayed by several months as it will likely need to be removed from atop a rocket for repairs, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter.

Earlier this month, Boeing scrubbed the launch of its much awaited CST-100 Starliner to the International Space Station after discovering a glitch in its propulsion system valves during pre-launch checks.

Boeing declined to comment...

... Boeing said late on Thursday it fixed nine of its 13 CST-100 Starliner propulsion system valves and the remaining four still remained closed...

With that many valve failures, you have to say there is either a fundamental design fault or faulty construction.
Either way Boeing should initiate investigations into both scenarios and not even consider a launch until the cause has been rectified, at their own expense.