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
Will 737 ever regain credibility?
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,434
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.
Mr. Burns: Terrible. Charge more, cut pay and change the name to Scenicruiser. But before you go, help me brush my teeth.
#12
New Hire
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 2
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.
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."
--
#13
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.
Mr. Burns: Terrible. Charge more, cut pay and change the name to Scenicruiser. But before you go, help me brush my teeth.
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,374
Will 737 ever regain credibility?
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."
--
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.
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,434
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.
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,883
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?
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?
The Lion Air is understandable, it was the first time. But Ethiopian really screwed the pooch. Both seats were green-on-green.
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,434
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.
The Lion Air is understandable, it was the first time. But Ethiopian really screwed the pooch. Both seats were green-on-green.
Gus didn't blow Mercuries' door. Cruel twist of fate he died behind a locked one.
#18
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"
America: "Profits Over People"
#19
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"
America: "Profits Over People"
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,883
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.
Gus didn't blow Mercuries' door. Cruel twist of fate he died behind a locked one.
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post