Mesabah

The defense stuff is all still in house for security reasons, but I'm sure they put an in house team on this MCAS issue.

Douglas89

Hahaha. This was hilarious.

Dr Dran Drungle

Yeah, I'm glad how literal you took "burnt cables" because that's what a normal person, whose totally not trying to deflect at all, would do. Do you work for Boeing, by the way? Or perhaps, an aviation software company?

Anyway, a few other lines from people on the previous flight of the 737-8 MAX that eventually crashed off of Indonesia:

"Two passengers on board said they had been concerned about problems with the air-conditioning system and cabin lighting before the plane departed almost three hours late."
https://news.sky.com/story/lion-air-...crash-11539864

"Another passenger, Alon Soetanto, told TVOne the plane dropped suddenly several times in the first few minutes of its flight.

'About three to eight minutes after it took off, I felt like the plane was losing power and unable to rise. That happened several times during the flight,' he said. 'We felt like in a roller coaster. Some passengers began to panic and vomit.' "
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rs/1816401002/

And from the 2016 FAA query (or an article about the query) about Boeing's use of a large lithium battery in the 737-8:
(and here's the link again:https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...ithium-battery)
"Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Boeing Model 737-8 airplane will incorporate non-rechargeable lithium batteries.

A battery system consists of the battery and any protective, monitoring, and alerting circuitry or hardware inside or outside of the battery. It also includes vents (where necessary) and packaging. For the purpose of these special conditions, a “battery” and “battery system” are referred to as a battery."

And about Boeing's response in 2016:
"Boeing commented that they fully support AIA's comments.
Boeing requested that the FAA provide adequate time before non-rechargeable lithium battery special conditions become effective to support validation activities by foreign civil airworthiness authorities (FCAA) and to not adversely impact future airplane deliveries by all applicants. The FAA considered this same comment from Boeing for special conditions no. 25-612-SC and provided a detailed response in that document. We determined the effective date for these Boeing 737-8 special conditions based on Boeing's comment and other factors stated in special conditions no. 25-612-SC."

baseball

I don't think he really had a choice.

The FAA has too much pressure to promote aviation for dollars and cents. The FAA is still an organization that is very close to the aviation lobby. They are easily influenced by manufacturers and vendors.

The prudent and cautious thing to do is to encourage Boeing to figure it out. The grounding should give Boeing a good opportunity to figure it out. The FAA did certify this thing. Their noses are bloodied too. They have some blame on their plate as well.

pangolin

The news is saying the decision is based on data analyzed today.

oo7kerpow

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/03/13/politics/donald-trump-boeing-faa/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

dckozak

Very doubtful something really meaningful came to light today that would suggest today vs yesterday (or Monday, when the Chinese first grounded the jet) we are any closer to knowing exactly why both these aircraft crashed.

The FAA, Boeing and any and all airlines still flying the MAX are putting themselves way out if, God forbid, another accident were to happen. The first crash got everyones attention to a possible problem with a new (redesigned) aircraft and (to layman) information about systems they know nothing about. The second crash could be totally coincidental, but even non aviation media can see a trend that suggests a problem unsolved.

A lot of bellyaching from the peanut gallery about the non aviation press reporting and speculating on the MAX crashes. I'd be curious what some of these professionals aviators would think or do if a new car they recently purchased started have multiple (similar) problems that put at risk their families and themselves when they drove it?

Boeing has a problem on their hands, I don't believe anyone there wants the bad press, or an unsafe aircraft with their name attached. In good time these accidents will be solved. Let's hope the answers come quick, correct and improves the safety for all, user and rider alike.

rickair7777

I heard that it wasn't information they got, but rather info they didn't get. Specifically no evidence of terrorism. I think they may have been holding out due to eyewitness reports of flames or explosions and rumors of terrorism. Eyewitness accounts are of course worth a warm bucket of pee.

Absent some imagery or physical evidence to the contrary, Ocam's Razor applies.

FlyF35

I want to ask a candid question here, what exactly is the new info that made Canadian and FAA reverse their decision?

We have NASA and best military bases in the world and I would guess the satallite tracking info of any flight is at finger tips if FAA wants it for analysis. It takes 3 days to come to a conclusion? Thanks.

sgrd0q

Fox News probably made something up.