FlapsOne
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2019 8:13 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:45 am

Can EU members ground the plane or do they have to wait for EASA?

I’m horrified that UK and Belgian airlines continue to operate the MAX and Norwegian MAX planes fly directly over my house regularly yet they’re all still flying. Having spent a decade at one of the operators I’m shocked and saddened that they’re seemingly playing chicken with people’s lives.
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1920
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:47 am

MileHFL400 wrote:
Here’s what we know so far:

Nothing. And all I can see is people talking about MCAS. So sad.


We know that what limited data we have looks a bit like a MCAS issue repeat.

We also know that the witness statements from farmers near the crash site indicate something else. Problem being how unreliable witness statements tend to be... It does seem there was something visibly unusual going on prior to crashing. It does make me wonder if it was terrorism related with the recent increase of incidents around east africa. ... as horrible as that may be, I think Boeing and their fans in this forum might be relieved. No one has taken "responsibility" yet though making this seem unlikely.
 
ktof
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:31 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:47 am

FlapsOne wrote:
Can EU members ground the plane or do they have to wait for EASA?

I’m horrified that UK and Belgian airlines continue to operate the MAX and Norwegian MAX planes fly directly over my house regularly yet they’re all still flying. Having spent a decade at one of the operators I’m shocked and saddened that they’re seemingly playing chicken with people’s lives.


But they're not.

We have absolutely 0 preliminary information about this crash, nothing.

Nobody is playing chicken, for all we know this could have been a simple pilot error or something completely unrelated.

Maybe save your faux horror for when we have the full details, if it turns out it is an MCAS issue I will happily come back here and apologise to you.
 
vfw614
Posts: 3759
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:54 am

LIJet wrote:
apodino wrote:
I don't want to speculate on what caused the crash. One thing I did find noteworthy from initial reports. Eyewitnesses either reported smoke coming from the plane as it dived, or flames. If this is true, it would suggest that the cause was something other than an MCAS issue, and the two incidents may not be related at all. If only we had that black box data.....


Interesting. I just saw that as well. Two separate people reported seeing smoke coming from the back of the airplane. One person said it rotated twice before it went in. Something to ponder I suppose. We really need to see what that FDR says.

https://nypost.com/2019/03/11/doomed-et ... ore-crash/


From all the reports I have seen so far, the airplane never really got into a proper climb. It did not fall out of the sky from a high altitude. That said, it must have been a matter of seconds until the apparent nose dive resulted in a massive impact. So one has to wonder if all those things that eyewitnesses are reporting could actually have happened in this short time-span.
 
User avatar
intrance
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 6:35 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:58 am

ktof wrote:
But they're not.

We have absolutely 0 preliminary information about this crash, nothing.

Nobody is playing chicken, for all we know this could have been a simple pilot error or something completely unrelated.

Maybe save your faux horror for when we have the full details, if it turns out it is an MCAS issue I will happily come back here and apologise to you.


Maybe MCAS has nothing to with it. Maybe it has. Maybe it's a completely new 737 MAX failure mode. Maybe it's crew error. Until more facts are available the only important facts are that two brand new planes dropped from the skies in good weather conditions. The safest course of action would be to temporarily stop flying the type until more facts about the cause can be established.

Continuing to operate the type is a gamble of sorts. Because if there is a latent issue with the MAX, there's another 150-200 people gone with the next crash.
 
xmp125a
Posts: 196
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:58 am

I have a question regarding MCAS. If I understand correctly, MCAS was added, because the new design (old airframe + extension + larger engines with higher bypass ratio) has different aerodynamics. Boeing wanted 737-certified pilot to fly737MAX airplanes (as there are many many certified 737 pilots there and this is very important element when selling the plane) as well without additional training (or certification?) therefore it had to add MCAS, which makes the plane "feel" as it would be one of the older 737 models, by cancelling the pitch-up tendency of the new model.

Now, say there is a problem with MCAS and Boeing advises that pilots disable MCAS in that case. But, after switching MCAS off, pilots are essentially not certified to fly the plane anymore! Plane without MCAS is not what they have been trained and certified for, right?

I know it sounds a bit silly, but imagine that one would do the following with a new airplane, eg. 787. Let's say old 747 is going out and there are a lot of pilots used to fly intercontinental flights on 747. Why not put 747 cockpit in 787 and use MCAS-like software to make new plane feel like 747 to the pilot? Then you don't need 747-to-787 training, and voila! Money saved!

Why is the second thought ridiculous, and MCAS as pilot re-certification avoidance device itself isn't?
 
User avatar
Carlos01
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:52 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:01 am

ktof wrote:
FlapsOne wrote:
Can EU members ground the plane or do they have to wait for EASA?

I’m horrified that UK and Belgian airlines continue to operate the MAX and Norwegian MAX planes fly directly over my house regularly yet they’re all still flying. Having spent a decade at one of the operators I’m shocked and saddened that they’re seemingly playing chicken with people’s lives.


But they're not.

We have absolutely 0 preliminary information about this crash, nothing.

Nobody is playing chicken, for all we know this could have been a simple pilot error or something completely unrelated.

Maybe save your faux horror for when we have the full details, if it turns out it is an MCAS issue I will happily come back here and apologise to you.


This is the part I still don't understand. Everyone keeps saying "safety first", "safety is our top priority" and all that crap, and yet actions are the complete opposite. You want to save the faux horror, and keep on flying until we know more. Fine. But what if there will be another deadly crash while we wait? Is that seriously "ok"? Shit happens? Human life really means that little to you and other likeminded people?

It seems to me that Boeing, their fanboys, and the FAA are completely indifferent to the fact that hundreds of people have been killed, and it could be their fault! Well ok, not the fanboys, but the other two. Seriously, this so-what attitude is just unbelievable, even racist.
 
RossW
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:39 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:01 am

How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?
 
pugman211
Posts: 462
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:55 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:20 am

MileHFL400 wrote:
Here’s what we know so far:

Nothing. And all I can see is people talking about MCAS. So sad.



Here's what we know, that's a big, deep hole. You dont get that if you're wings level and going slow. Personally, I can only see 4 possibilities:

1 - MCAS involvement that pushes the nose over to an unrecoverable situation
2 - Aerodynamic stall (this could also be pilot error in regards to air speed disagree)
3 - Fire or explosion
4 - Pilot suicide (please understand I'm not remotely stating this as an option, but to get a hole that size and very little pieces of aircraft the nose must be pointing to the ground with lots of speed)

Personally, I can't wait for the results of the FDR and CVR readouts.
 
sadiqutp
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 5:05 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:31 am

MileHFL400 wrote:
Here’s what we know so far:

Nothing. And all I can see is people talking about MCAS. So sad.


Let's not talk about the similarties of both Max accidents and the rumors that the crew reported unreliable airspeed.. Both clues are mere speculations as of now..

What worries me is this... almost HALF of the frames in service are grounded so far. If I am an operator, the last thing I would do is ground a type and incur losses unless I am presented with undeniably worrying signs of potential fatal accident.. At first, I thought the Chinese were probably persuaded by political pressure, but now that the Singaporean and Australian governments announced the ban on the type, I am really wondering what information was passed on to them that made them take such extreme measures.
 
gloom
Posts: 284
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 4:24 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:35 am

ktof wrote:
We have absolutely 0 preliminary information about this crash, nothing.


Wwhat we know (it's more or less confirmed) is that there was some problem with controls, or at least what pilots believed to be. Aircraft departure profile (first two minutes) seems consistent. This would definitely point into contributing factor, even just by having influenced crew to analyze problem instead of flying.

And let me get it right - I agree it's too early to analyze, but I think we already have enough information to know that pilots decisions were at least influenced by what they believed was plane (either design, or mx) problem. Whether it was a real problem, or their belief - it's something to be resolved in investigation.

Cheers,
Adam
 
vfw614
Posts: 3759
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 12:34 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:36 am

Why are so many folks obsessed with the flight hours of the cockpit crew and how the inexperience of the co-pilot has contributed? On a clear day without weather challenges during climb those events that were or were not expertly handled by the crew should never occur in the first place.
 
Delta777Jet
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2000 6:19 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:38 am

RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?


A grounding of the entire 737 Max fleet would cost Boeing hundreds of millions to compensate the airlines and replacement aircraft etc.
Also this would open up potentially a huge liability problems from the victims families of both crashes which would exceed the ones set by ICAO by far, if settled in the U.S.

Right now, the victims families would just get the minimal compensation in SDR's from the airline insurers, who might go after Boeing in a long long procedure or in a out of court settlement agreement and we would see some ADs rolled out in the coming weeks with software updates and so on.
B-717/722/737-200/300/400/500/600/700/800/900/B-747-100/200/400/SP/8i/B-752/3/B-762/3/4/B-772/LR/300ER/B-787-8/-9/DC-10-10/30/L1011-1/500/MD81/82/83/90/A-319/320/321/AB6/312/313/332/333/342/343/346/359/388/TU154/IL18/ATR42/72/DH4/DH3/E145/E170/190/CR2/7/9
 
micstatic
Posts: 727
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2001 10:07 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:44 am

Delta777Jet wrote:
RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?


A grounding of the entire 737 Max fleet would cost Boeing hundreds of millions to compensate the airlines and replacement aircraft etc.
Also this would open up potentially a huge liability problems from the victims families of both crashes which would exceed the ones set by ICAO by far, if settled in the U.S.

Right now, the victims families would just get the minimal compensation in SDR's from the airline insurers, who might go after Boeing in a long long procedure or in a out of court settlement agreement and we would see some ADs rolled out in the coming weeks with software updates and so on.


Boeing's insurers would really be the ones making the big payments. Boeing would have a retention or deductible, but the insurers would pay the big money.
S340,DH8,AT7,CR2/7,E135/45/170/190,319,320,717,732,733,734,735,737,738,744,752,762,763,764,772,M80,M90
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19224
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:45 am

xmp125a wrote:
I have a question regarding MCAS. If I understand correctly, MCAS was added, because the new design (old airframe + extension + larger engines with higher bypass ratio) has different aerodynamics. Boeing wanted 737-certified pilot to fly737MAX airplanes (as there are many many certified 737 pilots there and this is very important element when selling the plane) as well without additional training (or certification?) therefore it had to add MCAS, which makes the plane "feel" as it would be one of the older 737 models, by cancelling the pitch-up tendency of the new model.

Now, say there is a problem with MCAS and Boeing advises that pilots disable MCAS in that case. But, after switching MCAS off, pilots are essentially not certified to fly the plane anymore! Plane without MCAS is not what they have been trained and certified for, right?

I know it sounds a bit silly, but imagine that one would do the following with a new airplane, eg. 787. Let's say old 747 is going out and there are a lot of pilots used to fly intercontinental flights on 747. Why not put 747 cockpit in 787 and use MCAS-like software to make new plane feel like 747 to the pilot? Then you don't need 747-to-787 training, and voila! Money saved!

Why is the second thought ridiculous, and MCAS as pilot re-certification avoidance device itself isn't?


I like your 747/787 thought experiment, since it does highlight the issue. The big difference, in my mind, is that the 787 is a fully FBW aircraft. This features enables control logic differences and changes entirely in software. Thus implementing "747-feel" in a 787 is a matter of programming. Going the other way, on the other hand, would be massively difficult, because the 747 has actual physical cables and such.

The same situation applies to the 737, in its four generations of Jurassic, Classic, NG and MAX. Physical cables and pulleys which cannot just be reprogrammed. And thus we get patches like MCAS.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
ktof
Posts: 37
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 11:31 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:46 am

gloom wrote:
ktof wrote:
We have absolutely 0 preliminary information about this crash, nothing.


Wwhat we know (it's more or less confirmed) is that there was some problem with controls, or at least what pilots believed to be. Aircraft departure profile (first two minutes) seems consistent. This would definitely point into contributing factor, even just by having influenced crew to analyze problem instead of flying.

And let me get it right - I agree it's too early to analyze, but I think we already have enough information to know that pilots decisions were at least influenced by what they believed was plane (either design, or mx) problem. Whether it was a real problem, or their belief - it's something to be resolved in investigation.

Cheers,
Adam


Adam, thank you for your balanced viewpoint.

I think the next 7 days are going to be very interesting for the future of the MAX and I really don't want to take away the severity of the situation and the fact 150 people have lost their lives.
I just get frustrated by mass hysteria and knee jerk reaction - here's hoping a successful outcome of the investigation and closure for the families.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17067
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:46 am

sadiqutp wrote:
I am really wondering what information was passed on to them that made them take such extreme measures.


I doubt very much that anything specific has been passed to them.

It seems some aviation authorities have a lower threshold than others before they decide "You know what, we're going to stop flying those for a while till we know why people are dying."
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
jumbojet
Posts: 2727
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:01 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:49 am

xmp125a wrote:
I have a question regarding MCAS. If I understand correctly, MCAS was added, because the new design (old airframe + extension + larger engines with higher bypass ratio) has different aerodynamics. Boeing wanted 737-certified pilot to fly737MAX airplanes (as there are many many certified 737 pilots there and this is very important element when selling the plane) as well without additional training (or certification?) therefore it had to add MCAS, which makes the plane "feel" as it would be one of the older 737 models, by cancelling the pitch-up tendency of the new model.

Now, say there is a problem with MCAS and Boeing advises that pilots disable MCAS in that case. But, after switching MCAS off, pilots are essentially not certified to fly the plane anymore! Plane without MCAS is not what they have been trained and certified for, right?



Makes you wonder if this is a possible reason why airlines that operate other 737 variants, like Delta, didnt order the MAX. Its entirely possible, yet we might now ever know for sure
 
TheOldDude
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:54 am

RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?


This seems a bit broad. It can be applies to any crash of any aircraft in the time before a cause is identified. I grant that always grounding a fleet after any accident will create a more safe environment, but is the issue absolute safety? I ask that seriously. If the goal is absolute safety above all else, ground ALL aircraft and NONE will crash. If one is allowed to fly the issue becomes risk management, and risk management is how adults make real world decision.

I haven't many arguments in this thread about risk management. Some of those who have reached into the area have been shouted down, accused of being insensitive, and worse. That's sad. Others have presented good arguments. Those comments are gems and very helpful.

I've been slogging through this thread because I've got an open mind. I'd like to see more comments addressing frequency and impact. For example, going back through the jet age, where one type has had two accidents one after another in the same stage of flight, what percentage of the accidents share the same cause? One poster mentioned the Comet; a counter example is UAL 553 and Indian Airlines 440. Once all the data is collected is should be easy to see the percentage of time the cause is shared.
 
Joe2mercs
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:20 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:01 pm

We live in era, thankfully, in which air crashes have become extremely rare events. However we are presented with the situation in which two new 737MAX8 aircraft have each crashed within minutes of taking off. The odds of this happening to two separate “safe” aircraft are extremely small. The Lion Air investigation was hampered by not having early access to the flight recorders. However the Ethiopian Airways investigation is not so encumbered as the boxes have already been recovered and therefore preliminary analysis could be done within 24 hours as speed is now of the essence. If both accidents are MCAS related then Boeing has a major problem and it would be wise for them to ground MAX-8s and 9s until the situation is resolved. Not to do so risks a third accident and Boeing might not recover from that situation too easily.
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:01 pm

tistpaa727 wrote:
A320FlyGuy wrote:

I would love to know more about the back room discussions that went on between Boeing and the FAA pertaining to the 737 MAX8 -


Is it just the FAA that is on the hook here or should we also be calling out the other regulatory bodies in other parts of the world that also allowed the certification process? I agree, grandfathering a plane that is vastly different to what was originally certified 51 years ago makes absolutely no sense unless you truly believe the NG and MAX are just "warmed over" derivatives - which they are not. How is it that no regulatory agency around the world has put up a wall to this practice? They all are culpable.


Well, I think with the exception of a few selected countries, a lot of it has to with certification principles that were drawn up many years ago. I once read in a textbook or it was a lecture....as the US was becoming the dominant supplier of commercial aircraft in the world, it became easier for many countries to draw up parallel certification requirements so as to be able to accept FAA data at face value. There are several countries that will still conduct their own certification but 9 times out of 10, the FAA certification data is accepted.

The issue that I have with the certification process is the use of a DER - a designated engineering representative who is an employee of the airframe manufacturer yet has approval powers granted by the FAA - so it’s a case of the fox guarding the henhouse.

It is unfair for me to refer to the 737 as a warmed over derivative - but the aircraft shares a considerable amount with the aircraft that were built 51 years ago. Every 737 variant that has followed MSN 1 down the flight line is simply a derivative of the original design. Boeing has always been reactionary with the 737 product line. If you look at the development history of the 737, you can see that the product has never been particularly revolutionary - it’s always been a derivative of a derivative.

- The 737 used as many 707/727 components as possible to expedite development since they were considerably behind Douglas and BAC
- When the Classic series were introduced, they were simply a reengining of the original series with interior, flight deck, wing, and length updates
- The NGs were a response to the A320 family

Nothing about the 737 has ever been particularity revolutionary - not in the same vein as the DC-9 and BAC 1-11 and the Caravelle. All three of these aircraft were unique designs that did not rely on existing aircraft. Boeing simply recycled as much as they could from the corporate parts bin. There is nothing wrong with that but they sure as hell have had time to come up with something better.

You could argue on the one hand that Boeing has followed the “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” formula and that it has been good enough. But good enough, isn’t good enough any more. Here’s a perfect example...why is it that the 737 still retains the dated manual girt bar setup when every other aircraft has a one step arming procedure that doesn’t require cabin crew to bend down and snap a bar into clips on the floor. Surely by now Boeing could have a better system

The 737 MAX has been a final attempt to update a 51 year old aircraft design that really should have been put out to pasture - but it is truly at the limits of it’s development potential. When you look at the A320 and CSeries, they really do a much better job than the 737. I’m not saying that because I prefer the A320, I’m saying that based on the facts:

- a wider fuselage
- containerized cargo handling
- more modern aircraft architecture
- choice of engines


I can’t comment on the CSeries because I don’t know a whole lot about it - but every airline that operates it has fallen madly in love with it. Air Baltic has accelerated their plans to dump their 737s because the CSeries is been such a raging success.

Anyway...getting off topic here.
My other car is an A320-200
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17067
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:02 pm

Delta777Jet wrote:
RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?


A grounding of the entire 737 Max fleet would cost Boeing hundreds of millions to compensate the airlines and replacement aircraft etc.
Also this would open up potentially a huge liability problems from the victims families of both crashes which would exceed the ones set by ICAO by far, if settled in the U.S.

Right now, the victims families would just get the minimal compensation in SDR's from the airline insurers, who might go after Boeing in a long long procedure or in a out of court settlement agreement and we would see some ADs rolled out in the coming weeks with software updates and so on.


You didn't really answer the question and it's a pertinent one.

Many people in these threads are complaining that aviation authorities around the World are overreacting and are unjustified in grounding the 737MAX. How many people would have to die in how many more crashes before they (grudgingly) admit that maybe grounding the plane is a good idea and justified?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8357
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:04 pm

tistpaa727 wrote:
A320FlyGuy wrote:

I would love to know more about the back room discussions that went on between Boeing and the FAA pertaining to the 737 MAX8 -


Is it just the FAA that is on the hook here or should we also be calling out the other regulatory bodies in other parts of the world that also allowed the certification process? I agree, grandfathering a plane that is vastly different to what was originally certified 51 years ago makes absolutely no sense unless you truly believe the NG and MAX are just "warmed over" derivatives - which they are not. How is it that no regulatory agency around the world has put up a wall to this practice? They all are culpable.

Other certs are also market bound.
if they go against the FAA even with good cause they may find that next time the FAA will be retaliatory obstructive. ( We've seen that on the A380 in some cert domains.) I still wonder why EASA's 787 path through worked well timed while the FAA apparently hewed and hemmed on their way to A350 path through certification. Brazil potentially had a "care free" environment in view in their hold back on : MCAS must be described in the manual.
Murphy is an optimist
 
ELBOB
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:56 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:06 pm

Perhaps it's time to take testing and international certification out of the hands of commercially-influenced national authorities and fund a non-aligned regulatory group in the ICAO?

It would be interesting to hear what Indian or Icelandic test pilots though of the Max, for example.

Of course the FAA could continue to certificate aircraft for use only in US airspace if it took offence.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1322
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:10 pm

RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?

42
 
TheOldDude
Posts: 108
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:02 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:13 pm

Joe2mercs wrote:
We live in era, thankfully, in which air crashes have become extremely rare events. However we are presented with the situation in which two new 737MAX8 aircraft have each crashed within minutes of taking off. The odds of this happening to two separate “safe” aircraft are extremely small. The Lion Air investigation was hampered by not having early access to the flight recorders. However the Ethiopian Airways investigation is not so encumbered as the boxes have already been recovered and therefore preliminary analysis could be done within 24 hours as speed is now of the essence. If both accidents are MCAS related then Boeing has a major problem and it would be wise for them to ground MAX-8s and 9s until the situation is resolved. Not to do so risks a third accident and Boeing might not recover from that situation too easily.


That is helpful. It brings out the point that the impact on Boeing should be considered. However, I’m still interested in frequency. How would the decrease in accidents overall change the frequency of common cause?
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:18 pm

Joe2mercs wrote:
We live in era, thankfully, in which air crashes have become extremely rare events. However we are presented with the situation in which two new 737MAX8 aircraft have each crashed within minutes of taking off. The odds of this happening to two separate “safe” aircraft are extremely small. The Lion Air investigation was hampered by not having early access to the flight recorders. However the Ethiopian Airways investigation is not so encumbered as the boxes have already been recovered and therefore preliminary analysis could be done within 24 hours as speed is now of the essence. If both accidents are MCAS related then Boeing has a major problem and it would be wise for them to ground MAX-8s and 9s until the situation is resolved. Not to do so risks a third accident and Boeing might not recover from that situation too easily.


It is easy to forget just how far we have come in a relatively short period of time. When you look at the first and second generation jet transport aircraft, their safety records were downright abysmal:

Boeing 707:

1962:
- March 1 - American Airlines Flight 1
- June 3 - Air Frane 007
- June 22 - Air France 117
- November 27 - Varig 810

4 crashes in 8 months with a total of 435 fatalities

Boeing 727:

1965 (First Year of Service)

August 16 - United 389
November 8 - American 383
November 11 - United 227

3 crashes in 87 days with a total of 131 fatalities
My other car is an A320-200
 
WIederling
Posts: 8357
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:19 pm

PlanesNTrains wrote:
A320FlyGuy wrote:
First of all, Qantas 72 and AF447 were very different situations and really share no commonality other than both are A330s.


We ultimately learned that the two incidents/accidents had nothing in common.

But immediately following AF447 we didn't know what caused the crash. We did know, though, about Qantas 72.
But immediately following ET802, we didn't know what caused the crash. We did know, though, about LionAir 610.

RE Qantas 72: "The Australian Transport Safety Bureau investigation found a fault with one of the aircraft's three air data inertial reference units and a previously unknown software design limitation of the Airbus A330's fly-by-wire flight control primary computer (FCPC)." (wiki)

RE AF 447: "On 5 June 2009, the BEA cautioned against premature speculation as to the cause of the crash. At that time, the investigation had established only two facts: the weather near the aircraft's planned route included significant convective cells typical of the equatorial regions; and the speeds measured by the three pitot tubes differed from each other during the last few minutes of the flight." (wiki)

I'm not saying the A330 and MAX incidents are the same, but we didn't know with AF447 what had happened, but we did know that an A330 had previously suffered uncontrolled diving. Was AF447 somehow related? Was there another unknown issue with the airframe? We knew from the 737 hardover issues that sometimes it takes many years for issues to become understood.

Anyhow....


core difference to A330 ( QF72 followed by AF447 ) was that a curative AD was issued 4 month after the QF72 dive ( Oct 5, 2008 ).
https://web.archive.org/web/20090205145 ... 90012E.pdf
( design issue in the ADIRU that the A330 SW could not ameliorate.)
AF447 was another 5 month later. So not the double whammy for unknown reasons.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:21 pm

RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?

There is no authority that can issue a worldwide grounding.
 
afriwing
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:39 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:24 pm

ELBOB wrote:
Perhaps it's time to take testing and international certification out of the hands of commercially-influenced national authorities and fund a non-aligned regulatory group in the ICAO?
(...)
Of course the FAA could continue to certificate aircraft for use only in US airspace if it took offence.


I totally agree with this. Maybe an international certification body made up of both ICAO & IATA. While local CAAs of each country can individually certify within their own airspace.
Afriwings
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:29 pm

For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:32 pm

afriwing wrote:
ELBOB wrote:
Perhaps it's time to take testing and international certification out of the hands of commercially-influenced national authorities and fund a non-aligned regulatory group in the ICAO?
(...)
Of course the FAA could continue to certificate aircraft for use only in US airspace if it took offence.


I totally agree with this. Maybe an international certification body made up of both ICAO & IATA. While local CAAs of each country can individually certify within their own airspace.

And you know that such an international authority would have blocked the certification of the max 8 and prevented these crashes right?
 
HaulSudson
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:38 pm

scbriml wrote:
Delta777Jet wrote:
RossW wrote:
How many aircraft need to crash inexplicably before a worldwide grounding is seen as justifiable?


A grounding of the entire 737 Max fleet would cost Boeing hundreds of millions to compensate the airlines and replacement aircraft etc.
Also this would open up potentially a huge liability problems from the victims families of both crashes which would exceed the ones set by ICAO by far, if settled in the U.S.

Right now, the victims families would just get the minimal compensation in SDR's from the airline insurers, who might go after Boeing in a long long procedure or in a out of court settlement agreement and we would see some ADs rolled out in the coming weeks with software updates and so on.


You didn't really answer the question and it's a pertinent one.

Many people in these threads are complaining that aviation authorities around the World are overreacting and are unjustified in grounding the 737MAX. How many people would have to die in how many more crashes before they (grudgingly) admit that maybe grounding the plane is a good idea and justified?


They don't care. Business interests always prevail.

They'll always find someone else to blame, don't worry.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8357
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:39 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.

causality.
A350 Mk1, XWB were 787 triggered.
Boeing was FUDding continuously about the "right around the corner" super duper NSA replacing the NG
and destroying an A320 NEO by a friendly swing of the rudder.
With the NEO offered things cleared up a bit : Boeing didn't even know what to build as that NSA.
Neither how to build under commercial conditions. The NSA wasn't killed by lack of money. :-)

I am rather keen on seeing what will emerge from the MoM project.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 2531
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:40 pm

A320FlyGuy wrote:
The issue that I have with the certification process is the use of a DER - a designated engineering representative who is an employee of the airframe manufacturer yet has approval powers granted by the FAA - so it’s a case of the fox guarding the henhouse.


DER's take their jobs very seriously and you are on the verge of accusing them otherwise. There are procedures in place for any instances of "undue pressure" that management may be exerting on a DER. It is not a case of the fox guarding the henhouse. DER's are important because they have intrinsic knowledge of the products they're working on. They have a much better grasp and understanding of what they're approving because they're involved in the design from early on in its life.

I don't think I need to remind you that your beloved Airbus product was designed in the exact same manner. Only difference is what Airbus calls it. If I recall its 300 or 400 signature authority. Something like that.

Literally every aerospace company works in this manner.
 
slvrblt
Posts: 354
Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 11:19 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:42 pm

We don't know for sure what caused these two crashes, as yet.

What I find interesting, though.........in the wake of the groundings of the airplane, is the overall ''silence'' from the pilots of the three major US airlines that fly the MAX, AA, UA, WN.
AC, either; they have as many MAXES as AA does.
Pilots are certainly not suicidal types, willing to fly a sketchy airplane just because their company hasn't grounded the aircraft. Neither are the pilot unions shy about expressing doubts and opinions. And, I don't recall hearing or reading anywhere that any of the above airlines have as even experienced 'incidents' with their MAXES.

In other words, it seems to me there's more to this than anyone knows, everyone should keep a more open mind until some concrete facts come out. If this plane was well and truly dangerous to use I don't think AA, UA, or WN would keep flying them - and I feel the ones who use these planes everyday, the pilots, would CERTAINLY know if the aircraft should be grounded.
..everything works out in the end.
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:44 pm

Boeing couldn’t build the 787 AND the 737 replacement at the same time. The fact that there was side by side program made sense to see which was most viable and made most strategic sense for the company. The 787 was complex and difficult enough without a 737 replacement program at the same time
 
HaulSudson
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:02 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:47 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
afriwing wrote:
ELBOB wrote:
Perhaps it's time to take testing and international certification out of the hands of commercially-influenced national authorities and fund a non-aligned regulatory group in the ICAO?
(...)
Of course the FAA could continue to certificate aircraft for use only in US airspace if it took offence.


I totally agree with this. Maybe an international certification body made up of both ICAO & IATA. While local CAAs of each country can individually certify within their own airspace.

And you know that such an international authority would have blocked the certification of the max 8 and prevented these crashes right?


Dream on. With only 2 companies to be regulated, the regulator will immediately be the one being regulated by the companies while the public gets shafted.

Exactly the same as at present.
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 2531
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:47 pm

At the end of the day... Should not every single pilot flying on a Max know about the MCAS at this point and how to cut off the trim as soon as it's acting up? Surely this can not be an issue anymore. Hell, next time I'm on a max I might just ask if they recall their memory items and to hit the trim cutoff switch during uncomannded runaway trim.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19224
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:53 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.


In context, it sounds as if you are saying that Boeing could not afford a clean sheet replacement, and thus they were forced to go with a stopgap involving dodgy design compromises... And this is fine?

If it takes $5bn, it takes $5bn.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 2531
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:45 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 12:59 pm

Starlionblue wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.


In context, it sounds as if you are saying that Boeing could not afford a clean sheet replacement, and thus they were forced to go with a stopgap involving dodgy design compromises... And this is fine?

If it takes $5bn, it takes $5bn.


At the end of the day you have to define what clean sheet is. All airplane designs are just derivatives of some other aircraft before it. They are all design evolutions.

It's amazing how just a few weeks ago we had people talking about how Airbus should do this or that to the A321 to compete with some hypothetical Boeing 797. Guarantee parts on the 797 will be common to other things Boeing has done. It's done for a myriad of reasons because certifying new stuff takes time and is costly.

Some material systems were developed 50+ years ago and we still use them because they are tried and true.

So seriously people, stop with the whole "slapping a bandaid" on it type of discussion. It's a misrepresentation of what really happens in the design and certification process.
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:02 pm

trpmb6 wrote:
A320FlyGuy wrote:
The issue that I have with the certification process is the use of a DER - a designated engineering representative who is an employee of the airframe manufacturer yet has approval powers granted by the FAA - so it’s a case of the fox guarding the henhouse.


DER's take their jobs very seriously and you are on the verge of accusing them otherwise. There are procedures in place for any instances of "undue pressure" that management may be exerting on a DER. It is not a case of the fox guarding the henhouse. DER's are important because they have intrinsic knowledge of the products they're working on. They have a much better grasp and understanding of what they're approving because they're involved in the design from early on in its life.

I don't think I need to remind you that your beloved Airbus product was designed in the exact same manner. Only difference is what Airbus calls it. If I recall its 300 or 400 signature authority. Something like that.

Literally every aerospace company works in this manner.


I’m not on the verge of accusing anyone of anything - although you are on the verge of getting a tad defensive over a simple comment. The DER system is flawed - not the people who are DERs. That’s not my opinion, that is the opinion of US Government Accountability Office who authored a report stating that the FAA needed to both strengthen its oversight of the program and increase the checks and a balances in the system due to the dual mandate that places employees in a position that is a conflict of interest.

DERs are not perfect - the DER that signed off on DC-10 Ship 29 having received cargo door modifications signed off and stamped the paperwork that the door had been modified and...shock of shocks...it wasn’t. That error cost over 300 people their lives. Boeing has had a documented history of issues with DERs at the Ducommon plant that was manufacturing fuselages for the 737 of documenting work being performed that was not completed, certifying parts as airworthy that were not and so on.

Clearly you are in the camp of Boeing can do no wrong - and you have issues with the fact I prefer Airbus. Frankly, I don’t care....Airliners.net has this wonderful little “foe” feature that prevents me from seeing your posts and you from seeing mine...I suggest you use it!
My other car is an A320-200
 
Bobloblaw
Posts: 2370
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 1:15 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:02 pm

Starlionblue wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.


In context, it sounds as if you are saying that Boeing could not afford a clean sheet replacement, and thus they were forced to go with a stopgap involving dodgy design compromises... And this is fine?

If it takes $5bn, it takes $5bn.

We don’t know that the Max is dodgy design. If it takes $X billion and you don’t have it, then what($5b is probably too low)? There is an economic concept called scarcity of resources. 787 AND 737 replacement isn’t possible. Why is this difficult to accept?
 
User avatar
WildcatYXU
Posts: 3043
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 2:05 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:02 pm

slvrblt wrote:
We don't know for sure what caused these two crashes, as yet.

What I find interesting, though.........in the wake of the groundings of the airplane, is the overall ''silence'' from the pilots of the three major US airlines that fly the MAX, AA, UA, WN.
AC, either; they have as many MAXES as AA does.
Pilots are certainly not suicidal types, willing to fly a sketchy airplane just because their company hasn't grounded the aircraft. Neither are the pilot unions shy about expressing doubts and opinions. And, I don't recall hearing or reading anywhere that any of the above airlines have as even experienced 'incidents' with their MAXES.

In other words, it seems to me there's more to this than anyone knows, everyone should keep a more open mind until some concrete facts come out. If this plane was well and truly dangerous to use I don't think AA, UA, or WN would keep flying them - and I feel the ones who use these planes everyday, the pilots, would CERTAINLY know if the aircraft should be grounded.


Well, the silence from North American pilots is deafening. Except for this:

"The Air Canada Pilots Association, the union for Air Canada and Air Canada Rouge pilots, sent out a statement urging Transport Canada "to take proactive action to ensure the safety of the Canadian travelling public.""

This can be found in a CBC article talking about the MAX not being grounded in Canada. What it exactly means is anybody's guess. Perhaps our resident AC pilots could clarify.
Link to the article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ethiop ... -1.5051663
310, 319, 320, 321, 333, 343, 345, 346, 732, 735, 73G, 738, 744, 752, 762, 763, 77L, 77W, 788, AT4, AT7, BEH, CR2, CRA, CR9, DH1, DH3, DH4, E45, E75, E90, E95, F28, F50, F100, MD82, Saab 340, YAK40
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7071
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:02 pm

JT601 impacted mostly one country, Indonesia, ET302 impacted 35 countries and UN.
Business news networks are showing unusual interest.
Average Joe knows one thing, Brand new, same model plane crashed twice within months killing everyone.

If Miles O'Brien and Richard Quest(far ends of av knowledge spectrum) think this is bad on a news channel split screen, you have a problem.

BCA cannot win this war on social media(I know it is unthinkable), but the best option is to be nice (no trolling) to public/critics. Let attornies, investigators, engineers, and suits deal with the issue.
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4576
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:10 pm

Starlionblue wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.


In context, it sounds as if you are saying that Boeing could not afford a clean sheet replacement, and thus they were forced to go with a stopgap involving dodgy design compromises... And this is fine?

If it takes $5bn, it takes $5bn.


Yes, because aerospace engineers just grow on trees, correct? Perhaps they could just have gone to Walmart and hired a few.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
afriwing
Posts: 84
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:39 am

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:13 pm

trpmb6 wrote:
A320FlyGuy wrote:
The issue that I have with the certification process is the use of a DER - a designated engineering representative who is an employee of the airframe manufacturer yet has approval powers granted by the FAA - so it’s a case of the fox guarding the henhouse.


I don't think I need to remind you that your beloved Airbus product was designed in the exact same manner. Only difference is what Airbus calls it. If I recall its 300 or 400 signature authority. Something like that.

Literally every aerospace company works in this manner.



It doesn't matter if Airbus also uses a similar method. The method is flawd, period. You wouldn't let a student mark their own paper in an exam would you? .. no matter how brilliant or honest the examinee is, it's simply a conflict of interest.

It might be acceptable in limited circumstances, but not on a large scale, and most certainly not on such important additions to the flight systems. Yesterday on CNN a former NTSB boss admitted that the FAA allows Boeing to "self-certify" around 85% of their aircraft. I think that's too much for the sake of conflict of interest.
Afriwings
 
BravoOne
Posts: 3321
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:14 pm

Carlos01 wrote:
ktof wrote:
FlapsOne wrote:
Can EU members ground the plane or do they have to wait for EASA?

I’m horrified that UK and Belgian airlines continue to operate the MAX and Norwegian MAX planes fly directly over my house regularly yet they’re all still flying. Having spent a decade at one of the operators I’m shocked and saddened that they’re seemingly playing chicken with people’s lives.


But they're not.

We have absolutely 0 preliminary information about this crash, nothing.

Nobody is playing chicken, for all we know this could have been a simple pilot error or something completely unrelated.

Maybe save your faux horror for when we have the full details, if it turns out it is an MCAS issue I will happily come back here and apologise to you.


This is the part I still don't understand. Everyone keeps saying "safety first", "safety is our top priority" and all that crap, and yet actions are the complete opposite. You want to save the faux horror, and keep on flying until we know more. Fine. But what if there will be another deadly crash while we wait? Is that seriously "ok"? Shit happens? Human life really means that little to you and other likeminded people?

It seems to me that Boeing, their fanboys, and the FAA are completely indifferent to the fact that hundreds of people have been killed, and it could be their fault! Well ok, not the fanboys, but the other two. Seriously, this so-what attitude is just unbelievable, even racist.


Carlos, that was uncalled for.
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:19 pm

Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.


Your logic is a tad flawed here:

With Boeing:

The 737 should have been replaced as it is the volume leader - there is a larger market for single aisle aircraft like the 737 and it should be the focus of the company’s developement resources. Instead of doing a full clean sheet design and creating the 787, it would have made more sense to invest the funds in the 737 replacement and create a 767MAX. Funds that were wasted on the 747-8 could and should have been directed to the 737 since it is the only single aisle aircraft model still in production at Boeing and there is very healthy demand.

With Airbus:

The A320 being a newer design in comparison to the 737 has greater development potential and a clean sheet replacement was not as pressing - Also, Airbus began a program in 2006 known as the A320 Enhanced - a series of improvements that would deliver a 4-6% increase in efficiency. The A320 has benefitted from this program of continuous improvement with incremental modifications and improvements. Also, the A320 benefits from having a very efficient airframe that is now dependent on improvements in engine technology to better the performance of the aircraft.

Airlines have clearly responded to the A320neo as being a superior alternative to the 737MAX based on sales - Airbus has a healthy 1,350 aircraft lead over the 737MAX in terms of sales.
My other car is an A320-200
 
A320FlyGuy
Posts: 257
Joined: Wed May 16, 2012 8:31 pm

Re: Ethiopian Airlines 737MAX crashes enroute to Nairobi

Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:21 pm

Pyrex wrote:
Starlionblue wrote:
Bobloblaw wrote:
For everyone saying Boeing should have made a clean sheet design to replace the 737, do you realize Boeing didn’t and doesn’t have the resources for a 737 replacement AND the 787??? It was one of the other. Clean sheet 737 replacement means no 787, giving away the market to the A350.. btw same thing with Airbus. Either 320 replacement Or 350, both cannot be built.


In context, it sounds as if you are saying that Boeing could not afford a clean sheet replacement, and thus they were forced to go with a stopgap involving dodgy design compromises... And this is fine?

If it takes $5bn, it takes $5bn.


Yes, because aerospace engineers just grow on trees, correct? Perhaps they could just have gone to Walmart and hired a few.


Or at the very least, Target!
My other car is an A320-200

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos