Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


View Poll Results: Will Boeing have to rename the 737 Max?
yes 20 47.62%
no 22 52.38%
Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-18-2019, 08:41 AM   #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 589
Default

Smithers: Sir, an unofficial study commissioned three years ago revealed nine of ten passengers on average will board a greyhound bus if parked on a jetway.

Mr. Burns: Terrible. Charge more, cut pay and change the name to Scenicruiser. But before you go, help me brush my teeth.
METO Guido is offline  
Old 10-18-2019, 10:01 AM   #12  
New Hire
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by e6bpilot View Post
You can point to historic events and definitely come to this conclusion. I will add, however, that this was prior to two things:
The internet and the peer to peer spread of (mis)information.
The irresponsible crisis factory reporting by the press, often from dubious sources.

I think it’s gonna be different this time around. It will fly, pax will forget over time, but this is going to be handled way differently. People expect air travel to be 100 percent reliable and safe because that’s the standard over the last decade or so. When two planes from the same model crash like this, there will be some long lasting aftershocks.

The Max is the first airplane grounded by Facebook and Twitter. I highly doubt it will be the last, but this is virgin territory. By the time this thing flies again, it will be the most thoroughly reviewed and scrutinized airplane in history.

These are very important points I think. and now we have this latest news which will not do the aircraft any favors:

The FAA has publicly reprimanded Boeing for failing to turn over instant messages between its employees sent when the Max was originally being certified in 2016.

The FAA did not say what the messages contained except that they "characterised certain communications with the FAA" during the aircraft's certification process.
The FAA said in a statement: "The FAA finds the substance of the document concerning. The FAA is also disappointed that Boeing did not bring this document to our attention immediately upon its discovery. The FAA is reviewing this information to determine what action is appropriate."



--
Flightnews is offline  
Old 10-18-2019, 10:18 AM   #13  
Moderate Moderator
 
UAL T38 Phlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: Uncertain; Negative RNP
Posts: 4,640
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by METO Guido View Post
Smithers: Sir, an unofficial study commissioned three years ago revealed nine of ten passengers on average will board a greyhound bus if parked on a jetway.

Mr. Burns: Terrible. Charge more, cut pay and change the name to Scenicruiser. But before you go, help me brush my teeth.
That is hilarious!!
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg 2FFA9E9E-C325-4E6C-AC7B-814849A0DD99.jpeg (55.0 KB, 170 views)
UAL T38 Phlyer is offline  
Old 10-18-2019, 06:52 PM   #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Position: TACAMO
Posts: 1,631
Default Will 737 ever regain credibility?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flightnews View Post
These are very important points I think. and now we have this latest news which will not do the aircraft any favors:



The FAA has publicly reprimanded Boeing for failing to turn over instant messages between its employees sent when the Max was originally being certified in 2016.



The FAA did not say what the messages contained except that they "characterised certain communications with the FAA" during the aircraft's certification process.

The FAA said in a statement: "The FAA finds the substance of the document concerning. The FAA is also disappointed that Boeing did not bring this document to our attention immediately upon its discovery. The FAA is reviewing this information to determine what action is appropriate."







--


I think that has a lot less to do with recertifying the airplane and a lot more to do with future certifications. The FAA is good at flicking a booger, but the fact is that they cut too deep in budget cuts and decided that the manufacturers didn’t need oversight. Oops. Now they are angry that the manufacturers didn’t properly oversee themselves? The government at work.

I love how the FAA refers to themselves as “the FAA”. Very third person of them.

e6bpilot is offline  
Old 10-19-2019, 02:51 PM   #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 589
Default

Just a name but I hope they don't change it. Aircraft are collaborative people achievements. People shaped by their judgement and actions, rights and wrongs. Apollo flew on to greatness without the crew of three which perished aboard mission one. When the administrator signs off on return to service, this will this will become another of so many hard lessons never to forget. 737 MAX, go flight.
METO Guido is offline  
Old 10-19-2019, 03:58 PM   #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: French Bus Capn'
Posts: 6,853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Two crashes with the same MO in a few months is probably good cause for grounding. Since the second crew was aware of the issue, awareness was obviously not a sufficient fix to the problem. In the past sometimes it took more than two crashes because it was harder for the information to get out and elevate public awareness (which is sometimes necessary to get regulators to move out expeditiously).

Case study: Boeing 737 Rudder Servo. VERY, VERY similar history to MAX/MCAS (2x crashes, plus additional inflight control incidents). 737 was never grounded for that issue. Should it have been?
Reading the preliminary report for Ethiopian, you'll see that despite overspeeding and never moving the throttles back, and with the trim cutoff switches in the appropriate cut off position, when the CA asked the FO to trim manually, the FO did trim. But he manually trimmed it nose down. Fatal mistake. He then reported to the CA he tried to trim it, can't get the nose up "because it's not working." They then re-engaged the stab trim switches in their desperation, and sealed their fate.

The Lion Air is understandable, it was the first time. But Ethiopian really screwed the pooch. Both seats were green-on-green.
ShyGuy is online now  
Old 10-20-2019, 09:37 AM   #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShyGuy View Post
Reading the preliminary report for Ethiopian, you'll see that despite overspeeding and never moving the throttles back, and with the trim cutoff switches in the appropriate cut off position, when the CA asked the FO to trim manually, the FO did trim. But he manually trimmed it nose down. Fatal mistake. He then reported to the CA he tried to trim it, can't get the nose up "because it's not working." They then re-engaged the stab trim switches in their desperation, and sealed their fate.

The Lion Air is understandable, it was the first time. But Ethiopian really screwed the pooch. Both seats were green-on-green.
No airworthiness authority, VP flight ops or safety attributes inadequate crew performance as basis for the groundings. Ever seen anyone trim a rudder in the wrong direction? I sure have. Has industry fallen behind its tech? Would rather argue yes than no at this juncture.

Gus didn't blow Mercuries' door. Cruel twist of fate he died behind a locked one.
METO Guido is offline  
Old 10-20-2019, 11:12 AM   #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
atpcliff's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 2,785
Default

Ralph Nader, and at least one US congressperson, has called for the permanent grounding of the 737 max. I think they are correct, but I believe that Boeing has enough political influence that it will not happen, and none of it's executives will go to prison.

America: "Profits Over People"
atpcliff is offline  
Old 10-20-2019, 11:31 AM   #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
galaxy flyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: Baja Vermont
Posts: 3,924
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by atpcliff View Post
Ralph Nader, and at least one US congressperson, has called for the permanent grounding of the 737 max. I think they are correct, but I believe that Boeing has enough political influence that it will not happen, and none of it's executives will go to prison.

America: "Profits Over People"
Excellent, we eliminate the 737 program, people are safe, Boeing Commercial Airplane gies thru Chap 11. 5,000 plane order book goes up in smoke and numerous airlines and pax are stranded for a decade. People Before Profits.
galaxy flyer is online now  
Old 10-20-2019, 02:01 PM   #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: French Bus Capn'
Posts: 6,853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by METO Guido View Post
No airworthiness authority, VP flight ops or safety attributes inadequate crew performance as basis for the groundings. Ever seen anyone trim a rudder in the wrong direction? I sure have. Has industry fallen behind its tech? Would rather argue yes than no at this juncture.

Gus didn't blow Mercuries' door. Cruel twist of fate he died behind a locked one.
Let’s be honest, even after the second crash the FAA was not going to ground the plane. Their hand was forced as other nations started to ground the plane. Once it became obvious that al the major authorities had grounded the plane, the FAA realized the optics looked back if they remained the one big regulator that did not follow suit. To save face, they put out some BS of “while others grounded the plane right away, we were the first to ground it based on science.”


Regardless, both cases (but especially the Ethiopian) had elements of pilot error. Boeing deserves the bulk of the blame though, for putting this system and withholding its knowledge from the manuals and training.

That said, the length of this grounding has become a political joke. Looks like it will be almost one full year before it takes off again. The software fo has been ready since Summer. It’s hooked up to both AOA sensors, so both sensors would have to read a high alpha in order to fire MCAS, and even then MCAS will be limited to fire one time with a very limited amount of nose down trim.

The MAX will do just fine. There shouldn’t be any more crashes related to MCAS, just as there weren’t any more crashes from rudder hardovers.
ShyGuy is online now  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply

Tags
737, 737 max, boeing, boeing 737, boeing 737 max
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Indonesia to Fault 737 MAX Design... docav8tor Safety 10 09-24-2019 01:20 PM
Ethiopian 737 MAX 8 crash Opakapaka Safety 874 09-02-2019 01:04 PM
The Roots of Boeing’s 737 Max Crisis... docav8tor Safety 6 08-02-2019 08:58 AM
737 Replacement Moves to the Right 1Seat 1Engine Major 11 06-15-2007 06:20 AM
Boeing launches new 737 SWAjet Major 2 07-22-2005 05:51 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:30 PM.