ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:18 am

People really don't get how aviation safety and how certification works here. Those other authorities don't need to have data to exclude aircraft from their airspace. That is entirely within their jurisdiction and rights. It is up to any manufacturer and home country regulator to show that the aircraft being sold is safe to operate, to the satisfaction of those authorities.

And now that there's reports emerging of American pilots warning the FAA of deficiencies, the FAA isn't coming off looking good here. I still maintain that their certification process needs to be audited after this.
 
bob75013
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:23 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
Boeing proved to the FAA that the MAX is safe. That's why the FAA said the aircraft is airworthy and not being grounded. If you know more, please contact the FAA.


I do know more: two new airplanes have crashed within six moths of each other in suspiciously similar circumstances. The CEO of Ethiopian says ET310 experienced flight control issues. And now we have the AP reports that five US pilots (and possibly some in the PRC) have also experienced flight control issues. Boeing itself has said it is deploying new software to address these issues. (This is before we get to Boeing's history of obfuscation on the 737-200/300 rudder issues.) All this new evidence calls Boeing's original proof into question and shift the burden back to Boeing.

As for contacting the FAA, I've tweeted my opinion and dropped a note to my congressional representatives and Sens. Wicker and Cantwell.

#GroundTheMax


Throw snake eyes with dice and it's luck. Throw snake eyes twice in a row and it's what?

At this point, we don't know the cause of the second crash (first either for that matter) and bad luck is not off the table as an explanation.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:23 am

For those of us who are more interested in taking action than yakking ad infinitum on a.net:

I would encourage everyone in the US who is deeply troubled by the FAA's do-nothing attitude to contact your congressional delegation to express your opinion. Ask to speak to the legislative assistant (LA) who handles aviation, rather than just leaving a message with the receptionist. The LA is the person who has clout. I am tempted to work the Hill a bit and see whether one of the Senators who has spoken out on this issue would initiate a dear colleague letter to the FAA.

You should also contact Sens. Wicker and Cantwell, who are chair and ranking member of the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees the FAA. Their counterparts on the House side are Chairman Peter de Fazio and Ranking Member Sam Graves of the House Transportation Committee. These are the committees that have real clout in holding the FAA accountable. They can also call executives from airlines like WN to testify before the committee as to why keeping the 737MAX aloft is justified.

#GroundTheMax
Last edited by SurlyBonds on Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
smartplane
Posts: 968
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:23 am

Finn350 wrote:
smartplane wrote:
How many operators, owners and airworthiness authorities knew until this week Boeing were urgently working on software and hardware changes to make the safe MAX, even safer?

How many knew this work was initiated within 2 weeks of the Lion crash, while Boeing PR, including on this site, pointed at Lion MX and flight crew?


Probably most if not all of them, as it was publicly reported already last December.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... so-454255/

But they weren't briefed on the nature of the changes, which have been, and still are, a moving target.
 
russwatters
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:13 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:26 am

New user here; mechanical/HVAC engineer and student pilot. Take that all for what its worth.

This discussion is pretty rough, but I see a good point here:

Finn350 wrote:
mxaxai wrote:
piedmontf284000 wrote:
A review by FAA has found that there is no basis to ground the 737 Max.

The FAA also stated that other civil aviation authorities have not provided data that would warrant action at this time.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/12/faa-adm ... craft.html

If the FAA has evidence that the concerns of other agencies are unfounded, now would be a good time to share that information. For example, clear indications that MCAS could not have been involved in this crash. Simply stating that everybody else is stupid is not enough.


From the groundings point of view, the root cause of the Ethiopian crash is irrelevant. If the root cause is found to be related to the MCAS, FAA is not going to ground 737MAX. Similarly, if the root cause is found not to be related to the MCAS, other countries are not going to lift the bans. They will be waiting for Boeing to fix already identifed MCAS bugs.

I think you've captured the logical conundrum pretty well, and I mostly agree. I'll elaborate, and add my $.02:

The MCAS issue was identified about a week after LA610 crashed. An airworthiness directive was issued by the FAA 10 days after the accident. In response, pilots - including American pilots - raised holy heck about a feature they hadn't known about being present in their planes. The time to ground the plane - if ever warranted - was then. Nobody did, but everybody had their pilots brush-up on their procedure to deal with a slightly new spin on a decades-old issue. Runaway trim is a non-emergency situation that every pilot trains for and this exact issue was proven to be able to be handled the day before the crash. So just having pilots brush-up on the procedure and toning down the control response in the event of senor failure (hasn't happened yet), seemed like enough.

What has happened in the meantime? Another crash, maybe (probably not) due to similar causes. Does the second crash *actually* change anything if it is the same cause? I don't think it does, particularly from the FAA's standpoint. The effect on the accident rate vs the first accident would be relatively small and the visibility of the issue (and therefore pilots' ability to respond) should have vastly increased in the interim, mitigating the risk. So the logic hasn't changed either way. Either way, consistency of position is the logical approach.

The conundrum for the rest of the world is harder. If the cause is found to be the same, then the grounding should have happened sooner. If it's found to not be the same, the grounding wasn't warranted at all. I tend to agree the rest of the world will probably keep the plane grounded until the software update happens, but that is a faint hope of mitigating the black-eye of a media-driven hysteria snap judgement change.

Arguments for grounding have shifted somewhat from several misleading and illogical ones to the qualitatively pleasing "better safe than sorry" argument. This argument sounds nice, but has no logical foundation as it is totally open-ended and absolute. Humans are faced with dozens if not hundreds of situations a day that carry a non-zero risk of death, and absolute safety would require avoiding all of them in the name of "better safe than sorry". It just doesn't work that way. Real life requires measuring and balancing risk and reward/cost.

So my judgement is that at worst, very little has changed in the risk, and the risk of another crash in the next week (by then we should have a good idea of the cause) is pretty low, so a grounding is overkill. And turning planes around mid-air is hysterical/irrational in that it creates new risk to mitigate an already small risk.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:26 am

bob75013 wrote:
AA 191 crashed and killed over 200 -- yet DC10s weren;t grounded until 16 days later after it became known what caused the crash. The difference: people weren't screaming GROUND IT..


Who knows, maybe if they had grounded it after the Turkish crash there never would have an AA191. And in those 16 days, the flying public quite sensibly refused to fly in what became known as the "death crate 10." If Boeing does not wish the 737 MAX to develop a similar reputation, it should get ahead of the problem.

#GroundTheMax
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:26 am

If after the investigations conclude and Boeing is cleared and the FAA still maintains that the product is safe and airworthy then I imagine it will get the attention of operators pretty quickly when 737's start being repossessed for missed payments. Someone stated earlier that airlines weren't required to continue paying for them since they are grounded. I have no idea whether that is true or not and would appreciate someone who actually working aircraft finance to chime in.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:29 am

TTailedTwat wrote:
If after the investigations conclude and Boeing is cleared...


Obviously you have come here to justify a conclusion rather than form one.

(Otherwise you would have said "If after the investigations conclude Boeing is cleared." That little "and" makes all the difference.)

#GroundTheMax
 
SonomaFlyer
Posts: 2183
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:30 am

While I don't blame you enthusiasts for wanting to see planes fly unless proof positive is provided that there is a reason not to fly, its not that simple. Two new airplanes crashed with hundreds of deaths. We know there is a software issue based on prior reporting and the fact Boeing was given more time to roll out the "fix."

It is possible these airlines haven't given the correct training or refreshers to their pilots but the fact remains both aircraft reported control surface issues. We know from data obtained to date there were issues with climb/decent rates shortly after take-off. We know the Max series required a different engine mounting solution which changed the balance points for the aircraft.

Part of what is at play is the public's confidence in the civil air transport system. Boeing doubled down on a brand new plane which suffered two crashes in a few months after very recently entering service. Grounding an aircraft does cost $ no doubt but its cheaper to ground an aircraft for a week or two rather than lose the aircraft.

This is a cash cow for Boeing so yes they don't want to admit there is any issue but statistically, losing two aircraft of the same type over a short period of time with a total number deployed at a relatively low number is anomalous.

The FAA last December issued an air worthiness directive on the flight control surface issue: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guida ... ection.pdf

It's very possible the pilots of the two fatal flights didn't react properly and/or properly/quickly identify the issue until it was too late. The procedure is spelled out in the document above and is an either one or two step process with a possible step three of continuous manual corrections with the Stab Trim controller on the yoke. This is where it becomes clear which pilots were/were not properly trained on this issue and also the skill of the pilot in flying the aircraft manually, including manually adjusting trim as needed. Some pilots (more in developing countries) are more dependent on autopilot/autoland/autobrake features on aircraft and don't hand fly enough. Until this issue is sorted out, that lack of hand flying with this aircraft can be a big issue.
 
bob75013
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:31 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
AA 191 crashed and killed over 200 -- yet DC10s weren;t grounded until 16 days later after it became known what caused the crash. The difference: people weren't screaming GROUND IT..


Who knows, maybe if they had grounded it after the Turkish crash there never would have an AA191. And in those 16 days, the flying public quite sensibly refused to fly in what became known as the "death crate 10." If Boeing does not wish the 737 MAX to develop a similar reputation, it should get ahead of the problem.

#GroundTheMax


The Turkish crash occurred when an incompletely secured cargo door at the rear of the plane burst open and broke off, causing an explosive decompression.

Gee, I didn't know that's what happened to AA191, too. Fascinating.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:33 am

bob75013 wrote:
THS214 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Don't try and get out of what you said. You said they knew what was on those flight recorders and it "isn't pretty". So tell is what exactly was on them or retract that statement. There is no way you coul possibly have such information.


I don't have the information neither do you. But those who make the decisions do. Thats why they grounded the plane.



I'll call that what it is: B.S.

THEY grounded the plane because people were screaming GROUND IT

AA 191 crashed and killed over 200 -- yet DC10s weren;t grounded until 16 days later after it became known what caused the crash. The difference: people weren't screaming GROUND IT..


AA 191 was the second crash because of the DC10 cargo doors. If the FAA at that time would have done its work, the AA 191 crash would most likely never have happened.
 
flyingisthebest
Posts: 19
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:10 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:34 am

Looks like Fiji Airways / Regulator has grounded their 737MAX’s...
https://www.fijiairways.com/en-fj/fligh ... B2mL5O0XUA
 
eidvm
Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:11 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:34 am

For Info:

Norwegian have ceased selling flights on their Transatlantic 737MAX flights from Dublin to the USA until the end of April, with all flights now down as sold out and flights for the month of May showing exceptionally higher than normal prices (€1,200 return) for economy return tickets, possibly in an attempt to limit purchases they feel they may be unable to fulfill. Would indicate they seem to think this grounding could go on for a number of weeks at a minimum until a satisfactory fix is designed and can be installed.
 
bob75013
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:36 am

mjoelnir wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
THS214 wrote:

I don't have the information neither do you. But those who make the decisions do. Thats why they grounded the plane.



I'll call that what it is: B.S.

THEY grounded the plane because people were screaming GROUND IT

AA 191 crashed and killed over 200 -- yet DC10s weren;t grounded until 16 days later after it became known what caused the crash. The difference: people weren't screaming GROUND IT..


AA 191 was the second crash because of the DC10 cargo doors. If the FAA at that time would have done its work, the AA 191 crash would most likely never have happened.


AA191 had NOTHING TO DO with cargo doors. The left engine pyon had been installed via an unapproved method and the left engine was ripped off the plane during takeoff.

'Please check facts before uttering nonsense.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:36 am

Do nothing Bob wrote:
The Turkish crash occurred when an incompletely secured cargo door at the rear of the plane burst open and broke off, causing an explosive decompression.

Gee, I didn't know that's what happened to AA191. Fascinating.


Obviously it was not the same thing. But perhaps taking it out of service would have led to a bottom-up review of the plane's design. I hardly think that jumping up and down and saying, "see, we waited 16 days to address known design flaws" is a convincing argument, and it is *especially* not convincing when there were earlier, entirely preventable crashes of the plane. The common denominator was that the DC-10 was rushed into production because of Douglas' "fly before they roll" philosophy vis-a-vis Lockheed. When commercial considerations outweigh safety, Bad Stuff Happens.

I am not absolving the FAA here. The FAA's mandate is to promote the aviation industry, whereas the NTSB's is to promote safety. They are behaving in accordance with their respective missions. Maybe that needs to change then next time the FAA is reauthorized.

#GroundTheMax
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1147
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:37 am

mjoelnir wrote:
bob75013 wrote:
THS214 wrote:

I don't have the information neither do you. But those who make the decisions do. Thats why they grounded the plane.



I'll call that what it is: B.S.

THEY grounded the plane because people were screaming GROUND IT

AA 191 crashed and killed over 200 -- yet DC10s weren;t grounded until 16 days later after it became known what caused the crash. The difference: people weren't screaming GROUND IT..


AA 191 was the second crash because of the DC10 cargo doors. If the FAA at that time would have done its work, the AA 191 crash would most likely never have happened.



No, AA 191 crashed due to a faulty engine change procedure that could severe hydraulic lines if the engine was ripped from the wing.
 
RTWin10
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2016 9:15 am

Boeing 737 Max 8 pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:40 am

There was a separate thread that has since been deleted with this article from the Dallas News.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2019/03/12/boeing-737-max-8-pilots-complained-feds-months-suspected-safety-flaw

There were five complaints submitted, but what I found interesting from the article is that the article makes it sound like all five complaints, are from the same pilot.

"The fifth complaint from the captain who called into question the 737 Max 8's flight manual..."
 
NYCVIE
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2016 11:01 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:40 am

Thank you for a long and informed post.
DeltaB717 wrote:
* The question was asked and, as far as I could see, not answered as to whether those with kids [and I'm going to extend that to loved ones of all varieties - partners, spouses, parents, grandparents/grandkids, aunts, uncles, cousins, the works] would feel comfortable putting those people on a 737 MAX. My answer to that is that I, personally and travelling alone, would probably not hesitate to travel on a MAX; but, I would be very hesitant to travel on a MAX with my wife, parents or other family (or to have them travel on one without me). In the latter case, I would try to find alternative flights or routes to avoid the MAX. Just in case. But, just in case, I echo the sentiment of the person who originally posed this question that this is why regulators and operators have, in many instances, chosen to exclude the MAX from the system.


I think a lot of people, including some in the "there's nothing wrong" camp would feel this way. If one would not hesitate to have their family fly on a NG but would on a MAX, then there is clearly a doubt which is why planes are being grounded. It's really simple.

DeltaB717 wrote:
* ... but, of course, there are good reasons for Boeing and the FAA (and, I suspect, for TCCA) to hold off on following suit. If Boeing says all operators should ground their MAX fleets, it will be seen as an admission that something is wrong, the type is flawed, and Boeing will be pursued for compensation for any losses incurred while the type is forcibly out of service. Likewise if the FAA orders a grounding, not to mention the questions that would be directed towards their certification processes. The TCCA could have any number of motives, including I'm sure that if they order a grounding in Canada that would most likely force the FAA's hand, and also wishing to avoid further conflict with Boeing. Of course, and most importantly, I am absolutely positive they genuinely believe (and no doubt for good reason) the MAX is safe. As do I. The very issue of pressure from other jurisdictions is likely to mean the US and Canada won't hold out too much longer, but I suspect the (first) move will come from the operators, not from Boeing or the regulators.


I think this is correct, but it definitely is sad that any of what is bolded would be a factor in the decision since that is more financial/politically motivated than safety minded. At the end of the day though, God forbid something else happens the FAA and TC will point right to Boeing who claims they have no doubts which is why ultimately I think it's in Boeing's best interest to ground the aircraft.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:41 am

SQ789 wrote:
Isn't all MAX now grounded all over the world except for US and Canadian customers?


Ain't American exceptionalism grand?

#GroundTheMax
 
ytz
Posts: 3529
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:31 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:42 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
TTailedTwat wrote:
But Lion Air crashed two airplanes just a couple of months apart.


Do you not grasp that a event, including an airplane crash, can have more than one cause? I have no doubt that Lion Air was negligent in allowing the plane to fly after the reports of its malfunctioning on earlier flights. But that still leaves open the question of what was causing the malfunctions to begin with. And Boeing has ADMITTED it did not tell pilots about MCAS.


He/she sounds like a first year student....just enough knowledge to be dangerous. Hard to believe they actually have a degree in HF. This is why I want to know where they went to school. What kind of aviation program produces this quality of graduate?

Virtually guaranteed that these crashes involve several issues. Probably some in common. And some factors that are unique to each circumstance.

For me, it's not just that they were the same type. It's that both had apparent or reported controllability issues in the same phase of flight. That alone should be enough for a precautionary grounding. Now we have other pilots reporting some other kind of controllability issues. And I expect more of these stories to come forward. But these new stories are truly worrisome.

Do we know if it's a technical fault, human factors issue, training? No. What we we know is that we've had two similar incidents on the same type. Ground the fleet. Take the time to study the issue. And then produce reports that will win back the confidence of regulators. It's not an emotional issue. It's completely logical to take such precaution.

There's some folks worried about damage to Boeing. That's illogical to me. I'd be far more worried about damage to Boeing, FAA and the airlines, if they don't ground and another MAX crash were to happen. At this point, it won't even matter if the circumstances were similar. The public would be absolutely enraged. Insurance companies would hike their rates through the roof. And order cancellations would start flooding in. Boeing C-Suite and FAA's leadership would be getting hauled in front of Congressional committees. Is all that really worth the risk of taking a break of a few weeks to finish investigating these two crashes and conclusively ruling out technical faults or correcting training, etc.? I don't get people who profess to love Boeing, willing to risk that happening to their beloved airplanemaker.
 
bob75013
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:43 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
Do nothing Bob wrote:
The Turkish crash occurred when an incompletely secured cargo door at the rear of the plane burst open and broke off, causing an explosive decompression.

Gee, I didn't know that's what happened to AA191. Fascinating.


Obviously it was not the same thing. But perhaps taking it out of service would have led to a bottom-up review of the plane's design. I hardly think that jumping up and down and saying, "see, we waited 16 days to address known design flaws" is a convincing argument, and it is *especially* not convincing when there were earlier, entirely preventable crashes of the plane. The common denominator was that the DC-10 was rushed into production because of Douglas' "fly before they roll" philosophy vis-a-vis Lockheed. When commercial considerations outweigh safety, Bad Stuff Happens.

I am not absolving the FAA here. The FAA's mandate is to promote the aviation industry, whereas the NTSB's is to promote safety. They are behaving in accordance with their respective missions. Maybe that needs to change then next time the FAA is reauthorized.

#GroundTheMax


"It was obviously not the same thing"and yet you equated the two. Any old nonsense to make a point must be your motto.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:47 am

ytz wrote:
There's some folks worried about damage to Boeing. That's illogical to me. I'd be far more worried about damage to Boeing, FAA and the airlines, if they don't ground and another MAX crash were to happen. At this point, it won't even matter if the circumstances were similar. The public would be absolutely enraged. Insurance companies would hike their rates through the roof. And order cancellations would start flooding in. Boeing C-Suite and FAA's leadership would be getting hauled in front of Congressional committees.


This is ultimately why I come down against tort reform. We need a cudgel to keep companies accountable when they behave irrationally in situations like this. Boeing and WN obviously have no intention of doing the right thing here; so we have to put policy levers in place to coax them into doing so.

#GroundTheMax
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:53 am

Do nothing Bob wrote:
.

"It was obviously not the same thing"and yet you equated the two. Any old nonsense to make a point must be your motto.


On the contrary, my motto is "don't sleep through elementary logic class."

You and TTailed keep misconstruing the nature of causality. What TTailed misses is that events can have multiple causes.

What you miss is that a root cause -- in the case of the DC-10, rushing to production in the name beating the L1011, or "fly before they roll" -- led to numerous different design compromises.

#GroundTheMax
 
max999
Posts: 1093
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:05 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:56 am

The New York Times explains how Boeing and the FAA are on the same page because of Boeing's big political influence over the US government.

Boeing Flights Grounded Across the Globe, but Not in the U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/busi ... unded.html

Here are some sample quotes from the article.

With more countries grounding Boeing jets and with lawmakers, aviation workers and consumers calling on the United States to do the same, the head of the aerospace giant on Tuesday made a personal appeal to President Trump.

Boeing’s chief executive, Dennis A. Muilenburg, called from Chicago and expressed to Mr. Trump his confidence in the safety of the 737 Max 8 jets, according to two people briefed on the conversation

----------------------

Boeing is a major lobbying force in the nation’s capital. Its top government relations official is a veteran of the Clinton White House, and last year, the company employed more than a dozen lobbying firms to advocate for its interests and spent $15 million in total on lobbying, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The company, through its political action committee, funnels millions of dollars into the campaign accounts of lawmakers from both political parties. A list of a year’s worth of political spending on Boeing’s website stretches on for 14 pages, listing campaign contributions to lawmakers ranging from a city councilman in South Carolina to Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who is now the House speaker.

“Boeing is one of the 800-pound gorillas around here,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, who has called for the Max 8 to be grounded. As an example of Boeing’s reach in the highest levels of government, Mr. Blumenthal noted that the acting defense secretary, Patrick M. Shanahan, is a former Boeing executive.
All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening.
 
THS214
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:00 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
THS214 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Let me get this straight. You haven't seen the data nor do you know if any governing bodies have seen it but you say it isn't pretty?


Are you saying that the the plane in grounded without a reason? That different bodies just ground it because they can? They know a lot more than we do and they have grounded the plane.


Don't try and get out of what you said. You said they knew what was on those flight recorders and it "isn't pretty". So tell is what exactly was on them or retract that statement. There is no way you coul possibly have such information.


"Authorities know a lot than we do and its not pretty." I never said I know more. But someone know. Plane grounded for no reason. That is what you are saying.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 3944
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:06 am

THS214 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
THS214 wrote:

Are you saying that the the plane in grounded without a reason? That different bodies just ground it because they can? They know a lot more than we do and they have grounded the plane.


Don't try and get out of what you said. You said they knew what was on those flight recorders and it "isn't pretty". So tell is what exactly was on them or retract that statement. There is no way you coul possibly have such information.


"Authorities know a lot than we do and its not pretty." I never said I know more. But someone know. Plane grounded for no reason. That is what you are saying.
what do you think the aviation agency of Fiji knows? You know this investigation is being run by the NTSB and BOEING for the most part right?
 
787SIN
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:00 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:09 am

EASA has issued Emergency Airworthiness Directive 2019-0051-E on this matter.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:09 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
Do nothing Bob wrote:
The Turkish crash occurred when an incompletely secured cargo door at the rear of the plane burst open and broke off, causing an explosive decompression.

Gee, I didn't know that's what happened to AA191. Fascinating.


Obviously it was not the same thing. But perhaps taking it out of service would have led to a bottom-up review of the plane's design. I hardly think that jumping up and down and saying, "see, we waited 16 days to address known design flaws" is a convincing argument, and it is *especially* not convincing when there were earlier, entirely preventable crashes of the plane. The common denominator was that the DC-10 was rushed into production because of Douglas' "fly before they roll" philosophy vis-a-vis Lockheed. When commercial considerations outweigh safety, Bad Stuff Happens.

I am not absolving the FAA here. The FAA's mandate is to promote the aviation industry, whereas the NTSB's is to promote safety. They are behaving in accordance with their respective missions. Maybe that needs to change then next time the FAA is reauthorized.

#GroundTheMax


AA191 had zero to do with the design of the aircraft. Zero.
Last edited by DL717 on Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:14 am, edited 2 times in total.
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
smittythepirate
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:08 pm

Re: Boeing 737 Max 8 pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:10 am

RTWin10 wrote:
There was a separate thread that has since been deleted with this article from the Dallas News.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/airlines/2019/03/12/boeing-737-max-8-pilots-complained-feds-months-suspected-safety-flaw

There were five complaints submitted, but what I found interesting from the article is that the article makes it sound like all five complaints, are from the same pilot.

"The fifth complaint from the captain who called into question the 737 Max 8's flight manual..."


This is now the 6th or 7th time it has been posted in this thread.
www.jbweather.com
 
superbizzy73
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:43 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:10 am

I can't believe I'm letting myself get caught in this nonsense (I'd fly on a MAX right now, no questions asked), but too much is too much. We now live in a word where a snap decision is usually made via some "expert" on social media, such as this website. Well, lets bring some other facts into the situation.

https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/

If you seriously think the MAX needs to be grounded, then you also should quit driving (or taking any other mode of transportation, for that matter). Look, I'm not trying to say that the live lost were just statistics. But, when you start to take the blinders off and realize the scope of transportation as a whole, the two accidents don't compare to what happens on a daily, if not hourly, basis around the world. I mean, we're talking over 136 deaths an HOUR alone just in vehicle accidents. The problem with aircraft accidents (and, particularly airline accidents) is that there is a much larger loss of life total in one accident. Then, all of a sudden, people (and the media feeding that frenzy) are stating that aircraft should be grounded, they shouldn't be flying, and making nonsensical hashtags and such. If an A380 crashes tomorrow, and 400+ people die in said accident, shouldn't we also make called for Airbus to be accountable and have the A380 grounded? ("#GroundTheA380", right?) I mean, that's more deaths than the two MAX crashes. Or, what about all the deaths in vehicle accidents? Shouldn't we call to Ford and Tesla and General Motors and Honda (the 4 largest automobile manufacturers) and have them put a stop to manufacturing their "killing machines" (as I overheard a person on the street call the MAX)? Machines are not perfect. Us as humans are not perfect, either. Accidents will happen. People are going to die. It's a fact that doesn't need a reference or a link to a website. It's the truth.
 
juliuswong
Moderator
Posts: 1595
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:11 am

At the rate we are going, we most probably be left with only USA and Canada allowing Max to be in operation. This may very well be last update. Lolx

It is 09 00 hrs here in Malaysia, some updates happened over past eight hours while I snoozed, please bear with me. If your country is left out of the list, please feel free to drop me a private message.

Number of 737 MAX in Fleet Status Airline
22 Grounded China Southern Airlines
18 Grounded Norwegian Air
15 Grounded Air China
15 Grounded TUI fly
13 Grounded SpiceJet
11 Grounded Hainan Airlines
11 Grounded Shanghai Airlines
11 Grounded Turkish Airlines
11 Grounded FlyDubai
10 Grounded Xiamen Airlines
10 Grounded Lion Air
9 Grounded Jet Airways (includes 4 being repossessed by lessors due to non-payment)
7 Grounded Shandong Airlines
7 Grounded Smartwings
7 Grounded GOL Airlines
6 Grounded SilkAir
6 Grounded Shenzhen Airlines
6 Grounded Aeromexico
5 Grounded Aerolineas Argentinas
5 Grounded Oman Air
5 Grounded LOT
4 Grounded Ethiopian Airlines
4 Grounded China Eastern Airlines
3 Grounded Air Italy
3 Grounded Lucky Air
3 Grounded Icelandair
2 Grounded Cayman Airways
2 Grounded Enter Air
2 Grounded Fuzhou Airlines
2 Grounded Kunming Airlines
2 Grounded Fiji Airways
2 Grounded Okay Airways
2 Grounded Eastar Jet
2 Grounded Royal Air Maroc
2 Grounded Eastar Jet
1 Grounded 9 Air
1 Grounded Garuda Indonesia
1 Grounded Corendon Airlines
1 Grounded Comair
1 Grounded MIAT Mongolian Airlines


34 In use Southwest Airlines
24 In use Air Canada (Affected by EASA's ban)
24 In use American Airlines
13 In use WestJet
6 In use Copa Airlines
4 In use Sunwing Airlines
2 In use S7 Airlines
1 In use SCAT

1 Unknown Mauritania Airlines

Countries that have banned Max 8 or Max family from operating in their territories:
Malaysia
Australia
Oman
Singapore
China
Indonesia
Europe-wide under EASA governance
New Zealand
Fiji

LATEST UPDATES:
Flydubai grounds Boeing 737 Max fleet
https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/a ... -max-fleet

India's civil aviation ministry grounds Boeing 737 Max plane
http://www.startribune.com/the-latest-c ... 506967542/

The Latest: Air Canada lets attendants avoid 737 Max flights
http://www.startribune.com/the-latest-f ... 507021262/

Fiji Aviation Regulator and Fiji Airways Ground Max operation
https://www.fijiairways.com/en-fj/fligh ... B2mL5O0XUA

NZ's CAA suspends operations of Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft both in and out of NZ
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national ... -out-of-nz

EASA grounds MAX operation
https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and ... ons-europe

LOT uziemia boeingi 737 MAX
https://www.pasazer.com/news/40890/lot, ... 7,max.html
Last edited by juliuswong on Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Life is a journey, travel it well -
 
smartplane
Posts: 968
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:11 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Someone stated earlier that airlines weren't required to continue paying for them since they are grounded. I have no idea whether that is true or not and would appreciate someone who actually working aircraft finance to chime in.

For delivered / in service aircraft, we are into force majeure and condition subsequent clauses, which appear in commercial aircraft sale/purchase and lease agreements.

Leasee's would usually suspend payments to leasor's.

Leasor would/should have business interruption/loss of profits insurance. Ditto for owner/operators (the cover is usually bundled with funding).

Insurers will seek to recover from Boeing. Likelihood will be strengthened if the FAA or Boeing themselves recommend grounding.

For undelivered / aircraft being built, we are into force majeure and condition precedent clauses, which also appear in sale/purchase and lease agreements.

Progress payments will be suspended, and by default, the engine OEM will also become involved.

If we assume the 'fix' scheduled for release in April, is the definitive solution, then it comes down to how quickly software and hardware can be rolled out to existing and under construction aircraft.

What this will reinforce, is the wisdom of airlines and financiers managing supplier risk, by splitting orders, sharing between A & B, and multiple engine OEM's.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:14 am

bob75013 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
bob75013 wrote:


I'll call that what it is: B.S.

THEY grounded the plane because people were screaming GROUND IT

AA 191 crashed and killed over 200 -- yet DC10s weren;t grounded until 16 days later after it became known what caused the crash. The difference: people weren't screaming GROUND IT..


AA 191 was the second crash because of the DC10 cargo doors. If the FAA at that time would have done its work, the AA 191 crash would most likely never have happened.


AA191 had NOTHING TO DO with cargo doors. The left engine pyon had been installed via an unapproved method and the left engine was ripped off the plane during takeoff.


'Please check facts before uttering nonsense.


The DC10 had so many deadly accidents, that I started to mix them up. Turkish Airlines Flight 981 was of course the second cargo door accident and American Airlines Flight 96 the first. So Turkish Airlines Flight 981 accident could have been prevented by the FAA, it was a known failure risk.
Last edited by mjoelnir on Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
chance6
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:38 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:15 am

PacificBeach wrote:
BoeingGuy wrote:
Zaf wrote:
But those were pilot errors and bad maintenance. The MAX keeps diving and pilots can't do anything about it.


Nice intelligent comment that is completely factually incorrect. If it were MCAS, and the rest of the world doesn’t know that yet, the pilots are trained to select the Stabilizer Cutout Switches to OFF. So yeah, even if there were a malfunction of MCAS the pilots can do something about it.



As an engineer, I find the behaviour of the MCAS design not acceptable at all. You can not have a system that repeatedly tries to dive aircraft especially at low altitude. Cut off switches and training can only be considered as a band aid till a proper fix is implemented.

For instance, you can put instructions to perform hand ventilation when an ICU ventilator fails (i.e. what to do in failure) but not keep shipping faulty ventilator machines that display repeated undesired behaviour.


Nail has been hit on head right here. I was thinking the same thing.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 1473
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:16 am

All this finger pointing and no one wants to ask a simple question. Why the hell was a guy with 200 hours sitting in the right seat of a 737?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/busi ... chool.html
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
bob75013
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:17 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
Do nothing Bob wrote:
.

"It was obviously not the same thing"and yet you equated the two. Any old nonsense to make a point must be your motto.


On the contrary, my motto is "don't sleep through elementary logic class."

You and TTailed keep misconstruing the nature of causality. What TTailed misses is that events can have multiple causes.

What you miss is that a root cause -- in the case of the DC-10, rushing to production in the name beating the L1011, or "fly before they roll" -- led to numerous different design compromises.

#GroundTheMax



cute redo of my username. What do you plan to do when you enter 4th grade?
 
zakelwe
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2018 9:36 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:18 am

Which just goes to show things nowadays, progress more quickly than the DC10 investigation did.

People are too impatient on here to let things take their course. Because it is more interesting than the tv on at the moment ... true?
;)
Last edited by zakelwe on Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
maint123
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:19 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Boeing should FIRE their head of PR department.

You mean the guy who is asked to put a positive spin on 2 Boeings crashing within months and killing nearly 350 people.?
Yes it's his fault......
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1705
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:22 am

DL717 wrote:
All this finger pointing and no one wants to ask a simple question. Why the hell was a guy with 200 hours sitting in the right seat of a 737?

That is because it has already been answered 200 times.
There is a search box available. Help yourself.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
maint123
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:23 am

DL717 wrote:
All this finger pointing and no one wants to ask a simple question. Why the hell was a guy with 200 hours sitting in the right seat of a 737?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/busi ... chool.html

The only question that needs to be asked is " why are components in new planes failing, resulting in emergency situations, which might or might not be salvageable"?
 
THS214
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:01 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:25 am

[quote="DL717"]All this finger pointing and no one wants to ask a simple question. Why the hell was a guy with 200 hours sitting in the right seat of a 737?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/busi ... chool.html[/quote

Finnair, Lufthansa, British Airways, SAS Why the hell was 8000h sitting on the left seat?
 
chance6
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 12:38 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:28 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
If after the investigations conclude and Boeing is cleared and the FAA still maintains that the product is safe and airworthy then I imagine it will get the attention of operators pretty quickly when 737's start being repossessed for missed payments. Someone stated earlier that airlines weren't required to continue paying for them since they are grounded. I have no idea whether that is true or not and would appreciate someone who actually working aircraft finance to chime in.


We'll see what happens...but airlines can also cancel orders. And that might get folks' attention.
 
d8s
Posts: 117
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:45 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:30 am

SurlyBonds wrote:
Do nothing Bob wrote:
The Turkish crash occurred when an incompletely secured cargo door at the rear of the plane burst open and broke off, causing an explosive decompression.

Gee, I didn't know that's what happened to AA191. Fascinating.


Obviously it was not the same thing. But perhaps taking it out of service would have led to a bottom-up review of the plane's design. I hardly think that jumping up and down and saying, "see, we waited 16 days to address known design flaws" is a convincing argument, and it is *especially* not convincing when there were earlier, entirely preventable crashes of the plane. The common denominator was that the DC-10 was rushed into production because of Douglas' "fly before they roll" philosophy vis-a-vis Lockheed. When commercial considerations outweigh safety, Bad Stuff Happens.

I am not absolving the FAA here. The FAA's mandate is to promote the aviation industry, whereas the NTSB's is to promote safety. They are behaving in accordance with their respective missions. Maybe that needs to change then next time the FAA is reauthorized.

#GroundTheMax



Do the simple thing SurlyBonds...ride Amtrak.
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 1705
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:31 am

superbizzy73 wrote:
I can't believe I'm letting myself get caught in this nonsense (I'd fly on a MAX right now, no questions asked), but too much is too much. We now live in a word where a snap decision is usually made via some "expert" on social media, such as this website. Well, lets bring some other facts into the situation.

https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/

If you seriously think the MAX needs to be grounded, then you also should quit driving (or taking any other mode of transportation, for that matter). Look, I'm not trying to say that the live lost were just statistics. But, when you start to take the blinders off and realize the scope of transportation as a whole, the two accidents don't compare to what happens on a daily, if not hourly, basis around the world. I mean, we're talking over 136 deaths an HOUR alone just in vehicle accidents. The problem with aircraft accidents (and, particularly airline accidents) is that there is a much larger loss of life total in one accident. Then, all of a sudden, people (and the media feeding that frenzy) are stating that aircraft should be grounded, they shouldn't be flying, and making nonsensical hashtags and such. If an A380 crashes tomorrow, and 400+ people die in said accident, shouldn't we also make called for Airbus to be accountable and have the A380 grounded? ("#GroundTheA380", right?) I mean, that's more deaths than the two MAX crashes. Or, what about all the deaths in vehicle accidents? Shouldn't we call to Ford and Tesla and General Motors and Honda (the 4 largest automobile manufacturers) and have them put a stop to manufacturing their "killing machines" (as I overheard a person on the street call the MAX)? Machines are not perfect. Us as humans are not perfect, either. Accidents will happen. People are going to die. It's a fact that doesn't need a reference or a link to a website. It's the truth.

Heavens above; another hoary old chestnut that was discussed in these threads up-thread. More than once.
There is a search box. Help yourself.

Although based on the random nature of what you wrote above, I do have some concerns that your analysis skills might need an upgrade.

Hint; there is a major difference between public transport, versus private cars where you have absolute control of safety
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
bob75013
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2015 5:05 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:35 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
superbizzy73 wrote:
I can't believe I'm letting myself get caught in this nonsense (I'd fly on a MAX right now, no questions asked), but too much is too much. We now live in a word where a snap decision is usually made via some "expert" on social media, such as this website. Well, lets bring some other facts into the situation.

https://www.asirt.org/safe-travel/road-safety-facts/

If you seriously think the MAX needs to be grounded, then you also should quit driving (or taking any other mode of transportation, for that matter). Look, I'm not trying to say that the live lost were just statistics. But, when you start to take the blinders off and realize the scope of transportation as a whole, the two accidents don't compare to what happens on a daily, if not hourly, basis around the world. I mean, we're talking over 136 deaths an HOUR alone just in vehicle accidents. The problem with aircraft accidents (and, particularly airline accidents) is that there is a much larger loss of life total in one accident. Then, all of a sudden, people (and the media feeding that frenzy) are stating that aircraft should be grounded, they shouldn't be flying, and making nonsensical hashtags and such. If an A380 crashes tomorrow, and 400+ people die in said accident, shouldn't we also make called for Airbus to be accountable and have the A380 grounded? ("#GroundTheA380", right?) I mean, that's more deaths than the two MAX crashes. Or, what about all the deaths in vehicle accidents? Shouldn't we call to Ford and Tesla and General Motors and Honda (the 4 largest automobile manufacturers) and have them put a stop to manufacturing their "killing machines" (as I overheard a person on the street call the MAX)? Machines are not perfect. Us as humans are not perfect, either. Accidents will happen. People are going to die. It's a fact that doesn't need a reference or a link to a website. It's the truth.

Heavens above; another hoary old chestnut that was discussed in these threads up-thread. More than once.
There is a search box. Help yourself.

Although based on the random nature of what you wrote above, I do have some concerns that your analysis skills might need an upgrade.

Hint; there is a major difference between public transport, versus private cars where you have absolute control of safety


You have absolute control when in a private car -- well maybe if you never start it.

What about the drunk who runs a red light and hits you?
 
downdata
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:36 am

DL717 wrote:
All this finger pointing and no one wants to ask a simple question. Why the hell was a guy with 200 hours sitting in the right seat of a 737?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/busi ... chool.html


If history is any guidance, most of the fatal accidents in aviation are flown by very experienced, ex-military pilots.

Maybe we should set a retirement limit for pilot who have >2000 flight hours on all types /s
 
AirCalSNA
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:38 am

From what I've read it sounds like there is a known stall potentiality that has been corrected by new software and that requires a bit more pilot skill. So the situation here is different from the DC-10 or the 787 which had identifiable mechanical issues. Not sure grounding a non defective plane helps when the primary problem appears to the airlines and pilots flying them.
 
User avatar
Jouhou
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 4:16 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:40 am

You know, at least with all the controversy I can imagine the public will be kept well informed of the investigations progress and nothing will be withheld, and whether it was a mcas fault or not i'm sure Boeing is going all in on providing a fix now rather than seemingly twiddling their thumbs.

Only reason for people to get upset about the public backlash is if you're either invested in Boeing or work for Boeing.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7069
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:43 am

DL717 wrote:
All this finger pointing and no one wants to ask a simple question. Why the hell was a guy with 200 hours sitting in the right seat of a 737?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/busi ... chool.html


I know the 200 number is being repeated time and again, and NYT promptly picked up the scent on their cadet program now.

Was the FO PF??

I guess we know nothing rule is not applicable for this lack of hours theory.
 
SurlyBonds
Posts: 324
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:24 am

Re: Should airline regulators consider grounding B737 MAX series

Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:44 am

Do nothing Bob wrote:
What about the drunk who runs a red light and hits you?


In case you hadn't noticed, drunk driving is a major public policy challenge in many places. Only sustained action made a dent in it, and even then, not enough of one. You prescription for drunk driving, if analogous to that for the Boeing 737 MAX, is "do nothing, because reasons." That's not good enough in my book.

We have here a situation where regulators in pretty much the entire world have grounded the B737 MAX not for conclusive reasons, but for strong reasons to suspect that something may be amiss. The FAA, Boeing, WN, and our friend up north evidently disagree, because (North) American pilots are so much smaaaarter than their counterparts elsewhere. If you are so confident that the FAA has made the right call, will you be booking yourself on a 737 MAX tomorrow to show solidarity?

#GroundTheMax

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