Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
speedking
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:00 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:18 pm

Cdydatzigs wrote:
speedking wrote:
I don't trust in any corporation or need any government to tell me what to do. Do you?
In the end only the ones who know how to think for themselves, survive.


Let me guess: You're a doomsday prepper. :bored:


Yes, you could say that. If that unfortunate day arrives, it is easy for me though, luckily, to just switch my business to an airline with planes from other manufacturers. How about you?
 
smartplane
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:04 am

dakota123 wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
dakota123 wrote:

Not a lawyer, but from UAL’s 2010 purchase of A350s that would seem to be the case — and it’s blanket, not for various situations. Boeing’s agreements read basically the same, except that I did see a couple that imply negotiated, confidential terms.

SELLER HEREBY WAIVES, RELEASES AND RENOUNCES ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, OBLIGATIONS, GUARANTEES AND LIABILITIES OF THE SELLER AND ALL OTHER RIGHTS, CLAIMS AND REMEDIES OF THE BUYER AGAINST THE SELLER, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED BY CONTRACT, TORT, OR STATUTORY LAW OR OTHERWISE, WITH RESPECT TO ANY NONCONFORMITY OR DEFECT OR PROBLEM OF ANY KIND IN ANY AIRCRAFT, COMPONENT, EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORY, PART, SOFTWARE, DATA OR SERVICE DELIVERED BY THE SELLER UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND/OR FITNESS FOR ANY GENERAL OR PARTICULAR PURPOSE;
ANY IMPLIED OR EXPRESS WARRANTY ARISING FROM COURSE OF PERFORMANCE, COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE;
ANY RIGHT, CLAIM OR REMEDY FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT;
ANY RIGHT, CLAIM OR REMEDY FOR TORT, UNDER ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, HOWEVER ALLEGED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ACTIONS AND/OR CLAIMS FOR NEGLIGENCE, GROSS NEGLIGENCE, INTENTIONAL ACTS, WILLFUL DISREGARD, IMPLIED WARRANTY, PRODUCT LIABILITY, STRICT LIABILITY OR FAILURE TO WARN;
ANY RIGHT, CLAIM OR REMEDY ARISING UNDER THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE OR ANY OTHER STATE OR FEDERAL STATUTE;
ANY RIGHT, CLAIM OR REMEDY ARISING UNDER ANY REGULATIONS OR STANDARDS IMPOSED BY ANY INTERNATIONAL, NATIONAL, STATE OR LOCAL STATUTE OR AGENCY;
ANY RIGHT, CLAIM OR REMEDY TO RECOVER OR BE COMPENSATED FOR:
LOSS OF USE OR REPLACEMENT OF ANY AIRCRAFT, COMPONENT, EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORY OR PART PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT;
(i) LOSS OF, OR DAMAGE OF ANY KIND TO, ANY AIRCRAFT, COMPONENT, EQUIPMENT, ACCESSORY OR PART PROVIDED UNDER THIS AGREEMENT;

53
(ii) LOSS OF PROFITS AND/OR REVENUES;
(iii) ANY OTHER INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGE.
THE WARRANTIES AND SERVICE LIFE POLICY PROVIDED BY THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE EXTENDED, ALTERED OR VARIED EXCEPT BY A WRITTEN INSTRUMENT SIGNED BY THE SELLER AND THE BUYER. IN THE EVENT THAT ANY PROVISION OF THIS CLAUSE 12 SHOULD FOR ANY REASON BE HELD UNLAWFUL, OR OTHERWISE UNENFORCEABLE, THE REMAINDER OF THIS CLAUSE 12 WILL REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT.
FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CLAUSE 12.5, “SELLER” WILL BE UNDERSTOOD TO INCLUDE THE SELLER, ITS AFFILIATES AND SUPPLIERS

You can find this particular agreement here; there are many others on the SEC site as well. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data ... ex1027.htm


Is this a US thing, being able to demand that a client waives a right to recompense against criminal activity? (hence the wording of my original question to include negligence).

It could well be a different between B2B and B2C contracts and I could just be plain wrong, but I'm pretty sure that in Europe the law trumps a contract.


Elsewhere I believe the agreement states that the parties agree that the contract has been fully negotiated and agreed to, specifically including liability limits. (If it’s not in this one, it’s definitely in some of the others I looked at.). But yes, law trumps contracts, and there’s a statement somewhere that if a particular clause is contrary to law, all other provisions remain in effect.

In any case, this being the good ole’ USA, anybody can sue anybody at any time for any reason. Cue Wiederling in 3, 2, 1... ;-)

The devil is in the detail. All the relevant parts are covered by side agreements, of which there may be upwards of 40, none of which are disclosed. For example, there is no reference to retrospective credits.
 
dakota123
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:03 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:24 am

Definitely true with several of the Boeing contracts readily found. This one is pretty devoid of references to side agreements.
“And If I claim to be a wise man, well surely it means that I don’t know”
 
AvFanNJ
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 9:47 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:46 am

maint123 wrote:
737 Max in Mr wonderful's words should be 'taken behind the barn and shot'.

I wish the mods would just delete pointless and unhelpful comments such as this. A big fat zero.
 
ELBOB
Posts: 331
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 6:56 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 6:47 am

dampfnudel wrote:
Ferry flights are allowed.


If the aircraft is genuinely unsafe it should not fly at all, because it poses a risk to the crew and to people on the ground.

So is it unsafe? Or just partially unsafe? Or not sufficiently unsafe that airlines shouldn't be inconvenienced by having their fleet dispersed? Money talks.
 
dampfnudel
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:15 am

ELBOB wrote:
dampfnudel wrote:
Ferry flights are allowed.


If the aircraft is genuinely unsafe it should not fly at all, because it poses a risk to the crew and to people on the ground.

So is it unsafe? Or just partially unsafe? Or not sufficiently unsafe that airlines shouldn't be inconvenienced by having their fleet dispersed? Money talks.

I guess after the proper risk assessment, the risks involved were deemed acceptable. Of course money talks, but money also talks loudly when it comes to the potential consequences of legal liability.
A313 332 343 B703 712 722 732 73G 738 739 741 742 744 752 762 76E 764 772 AT5 CR9 D10 DHH DHT F27 GRM L10 M83 TU5
 
WIederling
Posts: 9346
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:23 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Surely by now Boeing would have found a copy of their e-mail or hard correspondence detailing the increase from 0.6deg to 2.5deg, and showing a named person at the FAA who would have received it? That would definitely put the FAA on the spot.


Showing that eMail conversation around could pop the lid on another tin of this time really evil worms.
( i.e. showcasing how the back forth over detail works between FAA and Boeing. Too much "yes Baas" ? :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 2751
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 9:10 am

Tui have announced 737MAX grounding will cost them €200m..

Stock has sunk 10% today on the news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745431
 
Paolo18
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:37 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 9:13 am

Richard28 wrote:
Tui have announced 737MAX grounding will cost them €200m..

Stock has sunk 10% today on the news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745431


Tui also warned if the 737 Max remains grounded by July, it could cost the firm another €100m.


Summons the lawyers...
 
StTim
Posts: 3732
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:38 am

The BBC is reporting that the preliminary ET accident report is stating that MCAS was activated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745191
 
smartplane
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:42 am

dakota123 wrote:
Definitely true with several of the Boeing contracts readily found. This one is pretty devoid of references to side agreements.

When both A & B are trying to sell using generic contracts, the very existence of side agreements is commercially sensitive. Part of the reason so much is omitted in your sample.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24599
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:43 am

StTim wrote:
The BBC is reporting that the preliminary ET accident report is stating that MCAS was activated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745191

... and the MAX is still grounded, so maybe we should discuss this in the ET thread instead?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
jollo
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:47 am

XRAYretired wrote:
jollo wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/faa-h ... 019-03-27/
FAA head Elwell: "Flight training was not needed"

"...And there was by the recommendation of the Flight Standardization Board -- understand this is a board that has been used dozens and dozens of times -- their unanimous opinion was flight training was not needed, and they didn't flight test the MCAS per say because the MCAS is a device that is supplement to another system."


Can someone please explain this to me? I'm not a native English speaker... is "per say" a misspeling of latin "per se", meaning they didn't specifically test MCAS while deciding if flight training was needed?


Correct. it should be per se. Some people at CBS not so good at latin?

Ray


Thanks for the confirmation. Well, FAA's head using latin buzzwords in interviews does little to convey the feeling he's trying to clarify things...

However, it's the meaning of the sentence that troubles me: he's saying that a Board charged with evaluating whether flight training was going to be needed for pilots transitioning from NG to MAX did not evaluate the single new flight envelope protection system on the plane? What did they discuss and test, before coming to their unanimous decision, if not the differences between NG and MAX?

Also, the reason given for not specifically testing MCAS ("because it's a supplement to another system") is surprising: assuming the "other system" he's talking about is STS, differences vs. MCAS are so fundamental (intended effect, control logic, limited vs. unlimited authority, limited vs. unlimited intervention cycles... basically STS and MCAS only share the same input channels and the same actuator) that I can't understand how calling it a "supplement" makes any sense.

Can someone explain this interview to me, please?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:50 am

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethi ... SKCN1RA0DP

Regulators knew before crashes that 737 MAX trim control was confusing in some conditions: document

quote: The European Aviation and Space Agency (EASA) certified the plane as safe in part because it said additional procedures and training would “clearly explain” to pilots the “unusual” situations in which they would need to manipulate a rarely used manual wheel to control, or “trim,” the plane’s angle.


It specifically noted that at speeds greater than 230 knots (265mph, 425kph) with flaps retracted, pilots might have to use the wheel in the cockpit’s center console rather than an electric thumb switch on the control yoke.

One can read the whole article. It is to long to quote.

IMO the regulators knew about the danger. It had been agreed upon that it would need special training. Whereas Boeing did not even mention the new system to pilots, as far as possible from doing special training for this situation.
IMO the MAX should have been grounded after the LION Air crash.
IMO the next step should be criminal proceedings against the responsible persons at the FAA, EASA and Boeing.
IMO the MAX should be not aloud to fly again, before there would be a revue and rework on the complete 737MAX trim system.
 
StTim
Posts: 3732
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 11:40 am

Revelation wrote:
StTim wrote:
The BBC is reporting that the preliminary ET accident report is stating that MCAS was activated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745191

... and the MAX is still grounded, so maybe we should discuss this in the ET thread instead?


To be fair with so many threads I wasn't sure of the best one to use. I thought it was relevant to both the ET thread and this one as we have had claims on this thread that it was not known if the ET crash had anything to do with the MCAS system.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:04 pm

jollo wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
jollo wrote:

Can someone please explain this to me? I'm not a native English speaker... is "per say" a misspeling of latin "per se", meaning they didn't specifically test MCAS while deciding if flight training was needed?


Correct. it should be per se. Some people at CBS not so good at latin?

Ray


Thanks for the confirmation. Well, FAA's head using latin buzzwords in interviews does little to convey the feeling he's trying to clarify things...

However, it's the meaning of the sentence that troubles me: he's saying that a Board charged with evaluating whether flight training was going to be needed for pilots transitioning from NG to MAX did not evaluate the single new flight envelope protection system on the plane? What did they discuss and test, before coming to their unanimous decision, if not the differences between NG and MAX?

Also, the reason given for not specifically testing MCAS ("because it's a supplement to another system") is surprising: assuming the "other system" he's talking about is STS, differences vs. MCAS are so fundamental (intended effect, control logic, limited vs. unlimited authority, limited vs. unlimited intervention cycles... basically STS and MCAS only share the same input channels and the same actuator) that I can't understand how calling it a "supplement" makes any sense.

Can someone explain this interview to me, please?


You may suspect that the whole sorry story is anchored in the commercial imperative that the MAX should not require a separate type approval to the other 'variants' of the 737 and the FAA statement is continuing to obfuscate and delay this finding being made. I couldnt possibly comment.

Ray
 
majano
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:14 pm

Revelation wrote:
StTim wrote:
The BBC is reporting that the preliminary ET accident report is stating that MCAS was activated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745191

... and the MAX is still grounded, so maybe we should discuss this in the ET thread instead?

Would you rather suggest that the mods close this thread and only open it when the MAX is ungrounded?
 
Jamie514
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu May 18, 2017 4:36 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:56 pm

[photoid][/photoid]
ELBOB wrote:
dampfnudel wrote:
Ferry flights are allowed.


If the aircraft is genuinely unsafe it should not fly at all, because it poses a risk to the crew and to people on the ground.

So is it unsafe? Or just partially unsafe? Or not sufficiently unsafe that airlines shouldn't be inconvenienced by having their fleet dispersed? Money talks.


Regulators frequently allow operators to undertake one-off maintenance related ferry flights for single airframes, without paying passengers. In those cases the individual plane has an airworthiness issue that needs maintenance before the plane can be signed off for commercial flights.

This is no different except for the fact the airworthiness problem in question is a newly discovered manufacturer defect and affects all in service examples. Since it is a new problem and not a known one with an easy approved repair, the manufacturer is still finalizing their solution and obtaining regulatory approval.

A good example of "money talks" would be when Boeing told the world the plane was still fully airworthy, while already quietly rewriting the critically flawed system (associated with at least one of the two crashes) they now find themselves under FBI, Senate and DoT investigation for willfully non-disclosing.
 
jollo
Posts: 396
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 2:47 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
jollo wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:

Correct. it should be per se. Some people at CBS not so good at latin?

Ray


Thanks for the confirmation. Well, FAA's head using latin buzzwords in interviews does little to convey the feeling he's trying to clarify things...

However, it's the meaning of the sentence that troubles me: he's saying that a Board charged with evaluating whether flight training was going to be needed for pilots transitioning from NG to MAX did not evaluate the single new flight envelope protection system on the plane? What did they discuss and test, before coming to their unanimous decision, if not the differences between NG and MAX?

Also, the reason given for not specifically testing MCAS ("because it's a supplement to another system") is surprising: assuming the "other system" he's talking about is STS, differences vs. MCAS are so fundamental (intended effect, control logic, limited vs. unlimited authority, limited vs. unlimited intervention cycles... basically STS and MCAS only share the same input channels and the same actuator) that I can't understand how calling it a "supplement" makes any sense.

Can someone explain this interview to me, please?


You may suspect that the whole sorry story is anchored in the commercial imperative that the MAX should not require a separate type approval to the other 'variants' of the 737 and the FAA statement is continuing to obfuscate and delay this finding being made. I couldnt possibly comment.

Ray


Ok. Meaning it doesn't make sense to you, too, right? And, unless someone can come up with a reasonable interpretation for us, the FAA's Administrator talking nonsense to journalists (who cannot be expected to discern a valid technical explanation) is *really* worrying. After all, Elwell is an ex-military and commercial pilot, and should know better.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 3:09 pm

jollo wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
jollo wrote:

Thanks for the confirmation. Well, FAA's head using latin buzzwords in interviews does little to convey the feeling he's trying to clarify things...

However, it's the meaning of the sentence that troubles me: he's saying that a Board charged with evaluating whether flight training was going to be needed for pilots transitioning from NG to MAX did not evaluate the single new flight envelope protection system on the plane? What did they discuss and test, before coming to their unanimous decision, if not the differences between NG and MAX?

Also, the reason given for not specifically testing MCAS ("because it's a supplement to another system") is surprising: assuming the "other system" he's talking about is STS, differences vs. MCAS are so fundamental (intended effect, control logic, limited vs. unlimited authority, limited vs. unlimited intervention cycles... basically STS and MCAS only share the same input channels and the same actuator) that I can't understand how calling it a "supplement" makes any sense.

Can someone explain this interview to me, please?


You may suspect that the whole sorry story is anchored in the commercial imperative that the MAX should not require a separate type approval to the other 'variants' of the 737 and the FAA statement is continuing to obfuscate and delay this finding being made. I couldnt possibly comment.

Ray


Ok. Meaning it doesn't make sense to you, too, right? And, unless someone can come up with a reasonable interpretation for us, the FAA's Administrator talking nonsense to journalists (who cannot be expected to discern a valid technical explanation) is *really* worrying. After all, Elwell is an ex-military and commercial pilot, and should know better.

Actually, it is a formal statement by the FAA to the Congressional Ovesight sub-committee on aviation. Even more worried?

Ray
 
starrion
Posts: 1023
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:19 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 3:45 pm

ELBOB wrote:
dampfnudel wrote:
Ferry flights are allowed.


If the aircraft is genuinely unsafe it should not fly at all, because it poses a risk to the crew and to people on the ground.

So is it unsafe? Or just partially unsafe? Or not sufficiently unsafe that airlines shouldn't be inconvenienced by having their fleet dispersed? Money talks.


They are not allowed to carry passengers. As commercial aircraft, they are 'grounded' but they are allowed to do ferry flights with no passengers. There is nothing that would prevent the aircraft from safely going from point A to B, given that the pilots know exactly what system is suspect of causing the problem and how to disable it. That system is not required for the pilots to properly fly the aircraft. Money has nothing to do with it.
Knowledge Replaces Fear
 
starrion
Posts: 1023
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:19 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:02 pm

WIederling wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Surely by now Boeing would have found a copy of their e-mail or hard correspondence detailing the increase from 0.6deg to 2.5deg, and showing a named person at the FAA who would have received it? That would definitely put the FAA on the spot.


Showing that eMail conversation around could pop the lid on another tin of this time really evil worms.
( i.e. showcasing how the back forth over detail works between FAA and Boeing. Too much "yes Baas" ? :-)


Even if they did, Legal would put a stop to it. The absolute last thing Boeing wants to do is get into a pissing match with the FAA when the FAA can make Boeing's life hell with a sideways glance. Boeing's legal team is probably 'extreme vetting' every single word that is going out the door with the FBI investigating, Aviation authorities around the world deciding if their key aircraft can fly again, and the FAA being hammered for not being tough enough. This is exactly when even the 'no comments' will get no comment.
Knowledge Replaces Fear
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:04 pm

RogerMurdock wrote:
spinotter wrote:
Yes, but do you really believe that the knowledge and training Boeing provided was sufficient? And the implementation - seems that it needs a fix or two, right? We have to use our discernment to view reality.


Of course, the training and implementation of MCAS (and certification) were woefully insufficient. I'm just saying that with a better implementation and better training, MCAS is basically a FBW-like envelope protection.


And it seems as if the very conception of MCAS was off the mark. I'm wondering whether the rewrite will be sufficient. Of course after ET, every future MAX pilot will be drilled into being familiar with its eccentricities and we will hope for no more JT/ET incidents (fingers crossed), but I think a total rethink might be better.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2681
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:07 pm

PW100 wrote:
morrisond wrote:
vfw614 wrote:
How is the fix really a fix?

If MCAS is switched off automatically, we have an aircraft without MCAS. Apparently MCAS is good for something in the first place, otherwise it would not be there. So the aircraft will then be operating at the brink of a stall and the pilots need to keep it in the air? Sounds as relaxed as running at high speed balancing an egg on a teaspoon....


I've copied my response from above. A MAX will fly absolutely fine without MCAS - it just helps prevent a stall - however if a plane get's in a stall (which it should never if the pilot is half competent) it's not really a big thing - spins are a different matter though.

My Repsonse:

What problem exactly are you talking about? That a MAX can obtain an AOA that it stalls like all other airplanes ever built or certified? That is absurd. Yes the design of the MAX may cause it to pitch up more in certain flight regimes (take off when fully loaded at high AOA's) but that doesn't make it unsafe or unique. MCAS was designed to help the MAX never get in that situation - maybe because Boeing (as well as Airbus) apparently are concerned about declining pilot standards. However exiting a stall is the most basic thing a pilot is taught to do.

As long as the pilot can maintain a consistent climb AOA in Manual mode (this should not be considered a difficult skill in any plane - if you can't do that you should not be in a cockpit) MCAS will never be activated. This will never happen when the Autopilot is active as the AP does a pretty good job at maintaining a consistent climb.

If MCAS fails again (which it can again even with two sensors as two sensors can go bad at the same time - but they seemed to have dumbed it down so it can't put the plane in a nose down situation so crashes should be avoided and no pilot should have missed the memo on to hit the trim cut-off switches if MCAS or Electric Trim starts doing weird things again) and does nothing to limit the flight envelope and the plane enters a stall then that is no big problem - lower the nose or add power to exit the stall - the plane will not fall out of the air - there will be lots of warnings (stick shakers etc..) that will alert the pilot that they are about to enter a stall.

If the pilots are so incompetent to allow a plane that is in a stall to enter a spin yes then it could crash - but then you would be talking about Pilot incompetence so bad that they should not have even passed basic flight training or be allowed to even fly a Cessna.

I have no way of knowing for sure - but I would have to guess that the more forward COG of the Max would help it exit the stall sooner as it would help to pull the nose down.

The MAX will be fine after this fix - no better or worse than any other Commercial airplane out there. In fact I will feel safer on a MAX due to the fact that it actually has physical connections to it's primary flight surfaces in the case of a full electric failure.


I thank you for your detailed response. I had read it before, and found it useful to read it again.
It corrected my thinking that the 737 AMX was an unstable plane at those parts of the flight envelope, which it is not. The “issue” is that the natural stability is somewhat reduced (compared to 737NG), where a relatively minor stick force could unintentionally bring it into stall territory.

However I do have some questions with bringing in the ” concern about declining pilot standards”.
It was my understanding (and that I may be incorrect) that main driver for MCAS were some specific FAR requirements, stipulating the amount of stick force at those situations, and more specific the trend of stick force as a function of speed and AoA. Apparently, because of the reduced stability (for reasons mentioned), the MAX would not conform to those FARs, and Boeing had to come up with MCAS to improve the handling characteristics in terms of stick force at that part of the flight envelope. If stick force changes with speed and AoA, than maintain a certain AoA would become (more) difficult.

That said, it may be that those FARs were created to cope with declining pilot standards, but that would be a somewhat odd way to cope with that. FAA must also have regulations on pilot standards, staring and licenses; surely, those would be more appropriate to handle declining pilot standards?


Airbus (publically) has called out pilot training standards as being enough of a concern to start their own flight schools and certification program for pilots. There is a thread here on it and they are pretty harsh in their public statements. The FAA (and EASA) have to certify planes that fly all over the world. Not everyone is as good (according to Airbus) at training pilots as Europe and North America. (and before I get called a racists, or biggot, I am just going off what Airbus has said, if you take issue with it, take it up with them).
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:08 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-regulator-insight/regulators-knew-before-crashes-that-737-max-trim-control-was-confusing-in-some-conditions-document-idUSKCN1RA0DP

Regulators knew before crashes that 737 MAX trim control was confusing in some conditions: document

quote: The European Aviation and Space Agency (EASA) certified the plane as safe in part because it said additional procedures and training would “clearly explain” to pilots the “unusual” situations in which they would need to manipulate a rarely used manual wheel to control, or “trim,” the plane’s angle.


It specifically noted that at speeds greater than 230 knots (265mph, 425kph) with flaps retracted, pilots might have to use the wheel in the cockpit’s center console rather than an electric thumb switch on the control yoke.

One can read the whole article. It is to long to quote.

IMO the regulators knew about the danger. It had been agreed upon that it would need special training. Whereas Boeing did not even mention the new system to pilots, as far as possible from doing special training for this situation.
IMO the MAX should have been grounded after the LION Air crash.
IMO the next step should be criminal proceedings against the responsible persons at the FAA, EASA and Boeing.
IMO the MAX should be not aloud to fly again, before there would be a revue and rework on the complete 737MAX trim system.


EASA just as guilty as the FAA, bowing to the big players in commercial aviation.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2681
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:15 pm

StTim wrote:
Revelation wrote:
StTim wrote:
The BBC is reporting that the preliminary ET accident report is stating that MCAS was activated.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47745191

... and the MAX is still grounded, so maybe we should discuss this in the ET thread instead?


To be fair with so many threads I wasn't sure of the best one to use. I thought it was relevant to both the ET thread and this one as we have had claims on this thread that it was not known if the ET crash had anything to do with the MCAS system.


And we still don't. MCAS activated... doesn't mean it caused the crash. Given the flight profile we HAVE seen from ADS-B data, it's entirely possible MCAS was trying to the right thing in this instance. Please note the wording in the article. It doesn't say MCAS caused the issue. It says it activated. It goes on to state it was involved in the Lion Air crash. It then goes on to say the cause of either crash is not known yet (as the final reports haven't been released). MCAS likely contributed to Lion Air (that is ABUNDANTLY clear). We do not know if it contributed at all to this crash or maybe was doing its job and helped prevent/delay a crash. If the pilots got into a stall condition MCAS would be EXPECTED to activate. That is what it does. Without more data it is impossible to know if it contributed or delayed the eventual crash and the leak provides insufficient data (as published) to make that call.
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:16 pm

speedking wrote:
Cdydatzigs wrote:
speedking wrote:
I don't trust in any corporation or need any government to tell me what to do. Do you?
In the end only the ones who know how to think for themselves, survive.


Let me guess: You're a doomsday prepper. :bored:


Yes, you could say that. If that unfortunate day arrives, it is easy for me though, luckily, to just switch my business to an airline with planes from other manufacturers. How about you?


On that real Doomsday, there will be no airplanes left.
 
osiris30
Posts: 2681
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:20 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-regulator-insight/regulators-knew-before-crashes-that-737-max-trim-control-was-confusing-in-some-conditions-document-idUSKCN1RA0DP

Regulators knew before crashes that 737 MAX trim control was confusing in some conditions: document

quote: The European Aviation and Space Agency (EASA) certified the plane as safe in part because it said additional procedures and training would “clearly explain” to pilots the “unusual” situations in which they would need to manipulate a rarely used manual wheel to control, or “trim,” the plane’s angle.


It specifically noted that at speeds greater than 230 knots (265mph, 425kph) with flaps retracted, pilots might have to use the wheel in the cockpit’s center console rather than an electric thumb switch on the control yoke.

One can read the whole article. It is to long to quote.

IMO the regulators knew about the danger. It had been agreed upon that it would need special training. Whereas Boeing did not even mention the new system to pilots, as far as possible from doing special training for this situation.
IMO the MAX should have been grounded after the LION Air crash.
IMO the next step should be criminal proceedings against the responsible persons at the FAA, EASA and Boeing.
IMO the MAX should be not aloud to fly again, before there would be a revue and rework on the complete 737MAX trim system.


Holy crap, or maybe, just maybe in a huge complex system someone, somewhere checked a box and it got missed. Sounds impossible I know, but it really does happen. This nonsense about criminal proceedings is just foolishness. And it flies in the face of the methodology that has helped make aviation as safe as it is. Launching criminal proceedings against anyone is just going to make all parties MORE secretive, not less. The lack of fear of criminal proceedings encourages openness, so when a mistake is made it can be identified and corrected.

Also "Boeing did not even mention..."... Maybe they didn't, but the documentation was there from EASA a long time ago, MAYBE we need to start criminal proceedings against every airline and pilot too, because they should know what the hell they are operating and RTFM. This isn't a scooter we are asking these guys to drive around. Every airline should have their own department to review these things too. So basically everyone who was involved should face criminal charges...

Or... maybe no one realized it was that bad/a big deal.. like leaded gas or paint.. or asbestos... or all the other stupid in hindsight mistakes man as made (I used three examples but there are literally ... at least millions that someone could cite)
I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
 
User001
Posts: 1086
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 2:18 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:59 pm

cainanuk wrote:
Driving by MAN today, I watched a Max-8 depart at around 1530.. it was a TUI aircraft.. Was definitely a Max-8. What gives, I thought they were all still grounded.


Definitely wasn't a max, neither of the 5 at MAN have flown since they were grounded and FR24 data backs this up. They are all parked near the end of 23R.
 
mwmav8r01
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:22 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 6:05 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
morrisond wrote:
As long as the pilots know to turn off the electric trim.... ....assuming pilots know that one basic thing - which if they don't know by now they do not belong in a cockpit.


This is still assuming that they can diagnose any issue is trim related in the first place within a few seconds, then flip down the locking t-bars and flip the switches, then get out the manual crank handle and crank that unwanted trim back to reality, potentially with lots of other stuff going on in the cockpit.

As has been mentioned before, there is no visual indication that trim is moving except for the trim wheels, which one 737 driver (and no others have yet to contradict) says is just not in his field of vision.

Now moving forward, all 737 drivers are probably going to be giving the trim wheels a lot more attention than before. Is that a good thing?

If I get a chance to get back into a Level D sim in the next few weeks I'm going to make a video of a level flight at 2000ft, then manually trim to full nose down, then flick those switches, then manually crank and see if altitude is still on my side.



Im sorry. I have to chime in. It is not that hard when you are hand flying to know that trim is not where it should be. Controls get heavy. Its not that hard. We are professionals. And if you cant see or HEAR the trim wheel moving or get the trim switches off in quick fashion there is a HUGE problem. But hey what do i know. Lets fix the problem or in actuality add more safety nets and move on.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1026
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 6:45 pm

jollo wrote:
Also, the reason given for not specifically testing MCAS ("because it's a supplement to another system") is surprising: assuming the "other system" he's talking about is STS, differences vs. MCAS are so fundamental (intended effect, control logic, limited vs. unlimited authority, limited vs. unlimited intervention cycles... basically STS and MCAS only share the same input channels and the same actuator) that I can't understand how calling it a "supplement" makes any sense.

Can someone explain this interview to me, please?

In can't explain the interview, but others contributors have show that the MCAS command was added aside of the STS commands on the CPU#1 of the FCC. The STS command is executed in a context where only the AoA senors on the same side of the active FCC is used in manual flight mode, probably for historical "split side design" concept. The MCAS command was added in the same context because this was the simplest thing to do, and we know now that this was the only way Boeing have found at that time to pass the same type rating certification and to the not require additional training. The last objective was obviously too high, to the point to kill peoples.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 6:50 pm

osiris30 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-regulator-insight/regulators-knew-before-crashes-that-737-max-trim-control-was-confusing-in-some-conditions-document-idUSKCN1RA0DP

Regulators knew before crashes that 737 MAX trim control was confusing in some conditions: document

quote: The European Aviation and Space Agency (EASA) certified the plane as safe in part because it said additional procedures and training would “clearly explain” to pilots the “unusual” situations in which they would need to manipulate a rarely used manual wheel to control, or “trim,” the plane’s angle.


It specifically noted that at speeds greater than 230 knots (265mph, 425kph) with flaps retracted, pilots might have to use the wheel in the cockpit’s center console rather than an electric thumb switch on the control yoke.

One can read the whole article. It is to long to quote.

IMO the regulators knew about the danger. It had been agreed upon that it would need special training. Whereas Boeing did not even mention the new system to pilots, as far as possible from doing special training for this situation.
IMO the MAX should have been grounded after the LION Air crash.
IMO the next step should be criminal proceedings against the responsible persons at the FAA, EASA and Boeing.
IMO the MAX should be not aloud to fly again, before there would be a revue and rework on the complete 737MAX trim system.


Holy crap, or maybe, just maybe in a huge complex system someone, somewhere checked a box and it got missed. Sounds impossible I know, but it really does happen. This nonsense about criminal proceedings is just foolishness. And it flies in the face of the methodology that has helped make aviation as safe as it is. Launching criminal proceedings against anyone is just going to make all parties MORE secretive, not less. The lack of fear of criminal proceedings encourages openness, so when a mistake is made it can be identified and corrected.

Also "Boeing did not even mention..."... Maybe they didn't, but the documentation was there from EASA a long time ago, MAYBE we need to start criminal proceedings against every airline and pilot too, because they should know what the hell they are operating and RTFM. This isn't a scooter we are asking these guys to drive around. Every airline should have their own department to review these things too. So basically everyone who was involved should face criminal charges...

Or... maybe no one realized it was that bad/a big deal.. like leaded gas or paint.. or asbestos... or all the other stupid in hindsight mistakes man as made (I used three examples but there are literally ... at least millions that someone could cite)


After the Lion Air crash and not grounding the MAX straight away, it went from forgetting to tick a box to criminal.

What I mean with training: EASA did require that pilots would get special training on the changed behavior at stall and MCAS and the problems or failure possibilities around it.
Instead Boeing did hide MCAS from the pilots and the difference training did not mention MCAS. That was Boeing ´s way of fulfilling the added training requirements. And that again I call criminal, because that was a conscious decision, not forgetting to tick a box.

And sorry there is anyway not forgetting to tick a box when you play with the lives of hundreds of people.
 
Forgedias
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2017 1:12 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 7:28 pm

Original article is from Bloomberg. More then likely you will run into the paywall so here is the article on Yahoo.

https://news.yahoo.com/boeing-sued-over ... 29513.html
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24599
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 7:31 pm

duplicate.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 7:44 pm

osiris30 wrote:
Or... maybe no one realized it was that bad/a big deal.. like leaded gas or paint.. or asbestos... or all the other stupid in hindsight mistakes man as made (I used three examples but there are literally ... at least millions that someone could cite)

Are you trying to be obtuse? Boeing knew of the problem and started to work quietly on the fix immediately after Lion Air crash. They were testing it back in Jan. No one realized it was a bid deal? Seriously?
 
speedking
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:00 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:40 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
Or... maybe no one realized it was that bad/a big deal.. like leaded gas or paint.. or asbestos... or all the other stupid in hindsight mistakes man as made (I used three examples but there are literally ... at least millions that someone could cite)

Are you trying to be obtuse? Boeing knew of the problem and started to work quietly on the fix immediately after Lion Air crash. They were testing it back in Jan. No one realized it was a bid deal? Seriously?


To me, unfortunately, it looks more like adding filters to cigarettes. To make already safe product safer, you know?
 
Virtual737
Posts: 733
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:51 pm

mwmav8r01 wrote:

Im sorry. I have to chime in. It is not that hard when you are hand flying to know that trim is not where it should be.... But hey what do i know.


Don't be sorry, but do tell me what your profession is. Are you a 737 driver? Are you confident that, in the same situation, in a critical phase of flight, you would have saved the day? What is it that you know? If you are that professional, how can you be so sure that, when your life and the 180 folk behind you had your life on the line you would have done the right thing? How about you are professional enough to say that, when the chips are down, you HOPE you would have done better. I could be wrong, but both you and I are armed with only a keyboard and knowledge after the fact. Please don't be telling me that you would have done better in a situation you've never encountered before.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1524
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:53 pm

starrion wrote:
ELBOB wrote:
dampfnudel wrote:
Ferry flights are allowed.


If the aircraft is genuinely unsafe it should not fly at all, because it poses a risk to the crew and to people on the ground.

So is it unsafe? Or just partially unsafe? Or not sufficiently unsafe that airlines shouldn't be inconvenienced by having their fleet dispersed? Money talks.


They are not allowed to carry passengers. As commercial aircraft, they are 'grounded' but they are allowed to do ferry flights with no passengers. There is nothing that would prevent the aircraft from safely going from point A to B, given that the pilots know exactly what system is suspect of causing the problem and how to disable it. That system is not required for the pilots to properly fly the aircraft. Money has nothing to do with it.

When an aircraft type is grounded by airworthiness authorities, the hull and liability insurance for that aircraft type is suspended if in motion.

Ferry flights will be approved on a one for one basis, likely in specific conditions and using named crew, with much higher deductibles / excesses.

Also makes a difference to the ferry crew's life cover, whether taken out by the employer and/or employee. Anyone making these ferry flights should seek 'unqualified' indemnity from their employer for any shortfall / changes in their personal cover.
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1865
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 9:34 pm

BlueSky1976 wrote:
Not a rocket science whatsoever, only two words: SELF-CERTIFICATION.

This prompted me to draw this little satirical balsamiq wireframe, which shows how the ominous FAA page could have looked like, that was used to speed up MAX certification:
Image
Be aware: this a satirical contribution, so the presented image might be an exaggeration, but as usual there is also piece of truth in it.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
trigged
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:25 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:35 pm

dampfnudel wrote:
trigged wrote:
I was looking at Flightaware and noticed United has a Max 9 flying to IAH from SAL. I thought all MAX aircraft were grounded. UAL1467. Is this just a software /info glitch?

Ferry flights are allowed.


https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SWA2304

This is flying regular passenger flights and it’s listed as a 738Max. I still assume it’s a computer glitch as to the actual equipment.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19175
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:45 pm

trigged wrote:
dampfnudel wrote:
trigged wrote:
I was looking at Flightaware and noticed United has a Max 9 flying to IAH from SAL. I thought all MAX aircraft were grounded. UAL1467. Is this just a software /info glitch?

Ferry flights are allowed.


https://flightaware.com/live/flight/SWA2304

This is flying regular passenger flights and it’s listed as a 738Max. I still assume it’s a computer glitch as to the actual equipment.


Flightaware is often unreliable in my experience.

FlightRadar24 reports that flight as being operated by N8537Z a 737-800, not a MAX.
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.
 
namezero111111
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Mar 20, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 6:59 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
BlueSky1976 wrote:
Not a rocket science whatsoever, only two words: SELF-CERTIFICATION.

This prompted me to draw this little satirical balsamiq wireframe, which shows how the ominous FAA page could have looked like, that was used to speed up MAX certification:
Image
Be aware: this a satirical contribution, so the presented image might be an exaggeration, but as usual there is also piece of truth in it.


Excellent how it isn't even https.
This sums it up pretty well. I love it, thanks for sharing!
 
User avatar
hilram
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:12 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 7:26 am

mjoelnir wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-regulator-insight/regulators-knew-before-crashes-that-737-max-trim-control-was-confusing-in-some-conditions-document-idUSKCN1RA0DP

Regulators knew before crashes that 737 MAX trim control was confusing in some conditions: document

(...)



After the Lion Air crash and not grounding the MAX straight away, it went from forgetting to tick a box to criminal.

What I mean with training: EASA did require that pilots would get special training on the changed behavior at stall and MCAS and the problems or failure possibilities around it.
Instead Boeing did hide MCAS from the pilots and the difference training did not mention MCAS. That was Boeing ´s way of fulfilling the added training requirements. And that again I call criminal, because that was a conscious decision, not forgetting to tick a box.

And sorry there is anyway not forgetting to tick a box when you play with the lives of hundreds of people.

:checkmark:

It seems obvious to me that Boeing intentionally turned a blind eye to the EASA condition for certification that Pilots must be made aware of this new system and trained to cope with the unfamiliar behaviour of the airplane requiring trim wheel adjustments - that might incur in some conditions.
The decision to leave it out of the manual, and simulator, and speed up difference training between NG and MAX to just 90 minutes on an iPad (!!!), would never have been initiated from the engineering team. This clusterf*ck is the work of an unholy alliance between customers willing to cut corners to save cost, short-sighted management of Boeing who seem committed to quarterly shareholder reports and not-so-much safety, and a "Yes-Man" culture that has evolved within Boeing where being a whistleblower may stifle your career. :whistleblower:

But where were EASA when deliveries of MAX started to pick up with airlines?
Do we know which airlines in Europe opted for the 90-minute iPad session and skipped the simulator training?

Not that simulator training would have helped the crews, since MCAS was left out of the simulator by Boeing, but then EASA could claim it was reasonable to belive Boeing included it in the simulator. Now they can only say "wow, we forgot what we said in the first place" if they at any point approved the iPad approach to difference training.

With regard to the FAA, rheinwaldner summed it up brilliantly with his satirical drawing.
Flown on: A319, 320, 321, 332, 333, 343 | B732, 734, 735, 736, 73G, 738, 743, 744, 772, 77W | CRJ9 | BAe-146 | DHC-6, 7, 8 | F50 | E195 | MD DC-9 41, MD-82, MD-87
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 10:31 am

hilram wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
osiris30 wrote:


After the Lion Air crash and not grounding the MAX straight away, it went from forgetting to tick a box to criminal.

What I mean with training: EASA did require that pilots would get special training on the changed behavior at stall and MCAS and the problems or failure possibilities around it.
Instead Boeing did hide MCAS from the pilots and the difference training did not mention MCAS. That was Boeing ´s way of fulfilling the added training requirements. And that again I call criminal, because that was a conscious decision, not forgetting to tick a box.

And sorry there is anyway not forgetting to tick a box when you play with the lives of hundreds of people.

:checkmark:

It seems obvious to me that Boeing intentionally turned a blind eye to the EASA condition for certification that Pilots must be made aware of this new system and trained to cope with the unfamiliar behaviour of the airplane requiring trim wheel adjustments - that might incur in some conditions.
The decision to leave it out of the manual, and simulator, and speed up difference training between NG and MAX to just 90 minutes on an iPad (!!!), would never have been initiated from the engineering team. This clusterf*ck is the work of an unholy alliance between customers willing to cut corners to save cost, short-sighted management of Boeing who seem committed to quarterly shareholder reports and not-so-much safety, and a "Yes-Man" culture that has evolved within Boeing where being a whistleblower may stifle your career. :whistleblower:

But where were EASA when deliveries of MAX started to pick up with airlines?
Do we know which airlines in Europe opted for the 90-minute iPad session and skipped the simulator training?

Not that simulator training would have helped the crews, since MCAS was left out of the simulator by Boeing, but then EASA could claim it was reasonable to belive Boeing included it in the simulator. Now they can only say "wow, we forgot what we said in the first place" if they at any point approved the iPad approach to difference training.

With regard to the FAA, rheinwaldner summed it up brilliantly with his satirical drawing.


I have pointed out in earlier post, that I am not enamored of EASA by its role in this disaster. Recognizing the danger of MCAS and than let it slide? Heads should role.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1026
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 10:53 am

rheinwaldner wrote:
BlueSky1976 wrote:
Not a rocket science whatsoever, only two words: SELF-CERTIFICATION.

This prompted me to draw this little satirical balsamiq wireframe, which shows how the ominous FAA page could have looked like, that was used to speed up MAX certification:
Image
Be aware: this a satirical contribution, so the presented image might be an exaggeration, but as usual there is also piece of truth in it.

Too bad, there just removed it: http://www.faa.com/self-service
:lol:
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 11:00 am

mjoelnir wrote:
hilram wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

:checkmark:

It seems obvious to me that Boeing intentionally turned a blind eye to the EASA condition for certification that Pilots must be made aware of this new system and trained to cope with the unfamiliar behaviour of the airplane requiring trim wheel adjustments - that might incur in some conditions.
The decision to leave it out of the manual, and simulator, and speed up difference training between NG and MAX to just 90 minutes on an iPad (!!!), would never have been initiated from the engineering team. This clusterf*ck is the work of an unholy alliance between customers willing to cut corners to save cost, short-sighted management of Boeing who seem committed to quarterly shareholder reports and not-so-much safety, and a "Yes-Man" culture that has evolved within Boeing where being a whistleblower may stifle your career. :whistleblower:

But where were EASA when deliveries of MAX started to pick up with airlines?
Do we know which airlines in Europe opted for the 90-minute iPad session and skipped the simulator training?

Not that simulator training would have helped the crews, since MCAS was left out of the simulator by Boeing, but then EASA could claim it was reasonable to belive Boeing included it in the simulator. Now they can only say "wow, we forgot what we said in the first place" if they at any point approved the iPad approach to difference training.

With regard to the FAA, rheinwaldner summed it up brilliantly with his satirical drawing.


I have pointed out in earlier post, that I am not enamored of EASA by its role in this disaster. Recognizing the danger of MCAS and than let it slide? Heads should role.


Whatever blame deflection strategies you use it will be Boeing/FAA that will have to answer. They have the responsibility.

Anyway, you cant really blame EASA for not catching them in lie.


Ray
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 11:46 am

XRAYretired wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
hilram wrote:
:checkmark:

It seems obvious to me that Boeing intentionally turned a blind eye to the EASA condition for certification that Pilots must be made aware of this new system and trained to cope with the unfamiliar behaviour of the airplane requiring trim wheel adjustments - that might incur in some conditions.
The decision to leave it out of the manual, and simulator, and speed up difference training between NG and MAX to just 90 minutes on an iPad (!!!), would never have been initiated from the engineering team. This clusterf*ck is the work of an unholy alliance between customers willing to cut corners to save cost, short-sighted management of Boeing who seem committed to quarterly shareholder reports and not-so-much safety, and a "Yes-Man" culture that has evolved within Boeing where being a whistleblower may stifle your career. :whistleblower:

But where were EASA when deliveries of MAX started to pick up with airlines?
Do we know which airlines in Europe opted for the 90-minute iPad session and skipped the simulator training?

Not that simulator training would have helped the crews, since MCAS was left out of the simulator by Boeing, but then EASA could claim it was reasonable to belive Boeing included it in the simulator. Now they can only say "wow, we forgot what we said in the first place" if they at any point approved the iPad approach to difference training.

With regard to the FAA, rheinwaldner summed it up brilliantly with his satirical drawing.


I have pointed out in earlier post, that I am not enamored of EASA by its role in this disaster. Recognizing the danger of MCAS and than let it slide? Heads should role.


Whatever blame deflection strategies you use it will be Boeing/FAA that will have to answer. They have the responsibility.

Anyway, you cant really blame EASA for not catching them in lie.


Ray


I am blaming Boeing and the FAA, if you have not realized that, than you have not read my posts.. I blame EASA for catching them out, as documents show, and than doing effectively nothing.
Boeing and the FAA have blood on their hands, at least after the Lion Air crash, still declaring the 737MAX to be safe.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 12:05 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

I have pointed out in earlier post, that I am not enamored of EASA by its role in this disaster. Recognizing the danger of MCAS and than let it slide? Heads should role.


Whatever blame deflection strategies you use it will be Boeing/FAA that will have to answer. They have the responsibility.

Anyway, you cant really blame EASA for not catching them in lie.


Ray


I am blaming Boeing and the FAA, if you have not realized that, than you have not read my posts.. I blame EASA for catching them out, as documents show, and than doing effectively nothing.
Boeing and the FAA have blood on their hands, at least after the Lion Air crash, still declaring the 737MAX to be safe.


My apologies sir. No slight intended.

Ray
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2278
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 12:12 pm

speedking wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
osiris30 wrote:
Or... maybe no one realized it was that bad/a big deal.. like leaded gas or paint.. or asbestos... or all the other stupid in hindsight mistakes man as made (I used three examples but there are literally ... at least millions that someone could cite)

Are you trying to be obtuse? Boeing knew of the problem and started to work quietly on the fix immediately after Lion Air crash. They were testing it back in Jan. No one realized it was a big deal? Seriously?


To me, unfortunately, it looks more like adding filters to cigarettes. To make already safe product safer, you know?

You, Sir, are a wicked, wicked person. :rotfl:
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24599
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: B737MAX Grounded Worldwide

Sat Mar 30, 2019 2:02 pm

At the risk of being bitten as I throw red meat into the lion's cage, here is how Boeing explains itself ( ref: AvWeek ):

Commenting on criticism of the single-string-failure potential of the AOA input to the MCAS, a Boeing executive says the original design was based on a standard industry process of hazard classification, which defined the potential failure as one that could be mitigated “very quickly by a trained pilot using established procedures.”

“In this particular case, because we don’t know yet what the ultimate cause is, we can look at that one link in the chain and say we know ways to update the MCAS functionality to make it more robust, and that’s what we are doing,” the executive says. “While certification standards say a runaway stabilizer has a memory procedure associated with it—despite all of that, we are looking at it and saying, ‘We don’t want to intentionally provide the pilot with that scenario again.’ So in the design, we are using multiple inputs, even though in the original hazard classification, multiple inputs would not be required. We’ve seen two accidents, and we believe it’s appropriate to make that link in the chain more robust.”

While some here won't be sympathetic to this explanation, I personally think it's important we understand what the explanation is, right from a company executive.

My understanding of the context is that during this week's gathering in Seattle the media was allowed to attend and report on a question and answer session, as long as they did not report the names of the engineers and executives answering the questions, thus the reference to a "Boeing executive" as the source of the quote. This also shows that this is a very recent statement.

osiris30 wrote:
Or... maybe no one realized it was that bad/a big deal.. like leaded gas or paint.. or asbestos... or all the other stupid in hindsight mistakes man as made (I used three examples but there are literally ... at least millions that someone could cite)

My interpretation of the statement above is that even as of this week Boeing still feels their original design was sufficient and that if any problem with MCAS was encountered the pilots would recognize it as a runaway stabilizer problem and invoke the associated memory procedure to resolve the problem.

As I've written in another thread, the fact that they are issuing changes is a tacit admission that their MCAS design was found wanting. Above the Boeing exec is using the words "make it more robust" which is a very similar statement, but presumably out of legal necessity, admits no guilt.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own

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