This quote is also from my addendum (supplement) to my first report:
I guess this fits somewhat into the intentional incompetence of our QA Planning department and corruption of our QA Management, but please investigate the sequencing of our plans. For an example: (Job, unit, and area I.D.) 777 struts. The shakedown inspection was sequenced after the operation 30 access door and blanket installation. If the job was inspected that way, and not revised, the question is this: What did the inspector look at during the shakedown? Just the exterior of the strut, as all the access panels were installed? You should be able to answer that question by just looking at the plan, not by questioning the inspector who did the shakedown. As our QA Planning department has a "hands off" policy when it comes to steering the M.E. (Manufacturing Engineering) department in which direction they should be going in the adding of inspections to the plans or the sequencing of inspections on the plans, and us line inspectors are chastised for "not working with shop" or "not supporting the delivery schedule" or browbeat with comments such as "Is it critical!?" by our QA Supervision when we attempt to write up planning problems, no one can fix this problem but you.
The Last Inspector