Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:15 pm

TaromA380 wrote:
I begin to think that it’s too late now, because all the problems have the root at the internal decision to launch the industrial project (versus going new aircraft). Back then, they bet everything on the hypothesis that no one ever will be affected nor realize how generously (and cheaply) they were going to self-certify the Max. Only under that hypothesis the project would be attractive enough to win the favor over starting from scratch.
Now that initial critical hypothesis proved wrong. As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program. Am I the only pessimistic out here?

It's an interesting hypothesis to suggest that the executives making the decision to go with the MAX didn't understand the degree to which the decision would result in middle managers putting the squeeze on the designers and the design reviewers to the point where those engineers would consciously or unconsciously fail to do their jobs correctly which would result in this human, fiscal and reputational tragedy that MAX has become. Interesting, but difficult to prove.

It's also an interesting hypothesis to say the self-certified product cannot be patched to be made certifiable, but IMO one far more difficult to prove.

So many high level hypothesis going around today...

Amiga500 wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program.

Nah, its not that bad.

The various regulators will be going over most (all?) of the changes with a fine tooth comb now, so while it will cost BCA in time (and ultimately, dollars), it will see the aircraft back into service at some point.

It has to. The ramifications for Boeing if they can't are very dark.

Yet earlier we read:

NDiesel wrote:
None of us hate the plane. We're just concerned about its potentially lethal flaws.
A badly designed plane shouldn't be flying just to please shareholders, my friend.

Doubling down on this statement begs the questions of how badly is it designed (i.e. fatally flawed vs patchable) and who really needs to be pleased (just Boeing stockholders, or the US national economy and the world's balance in trade)

scbriml wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
The problem appears to be the FAA. Not Boeing.

Year, it's all on the pilots FAA, not Boeing at all.

Where are the FAA's cut-out switches? :sarcastic:

Boeing lobbied for more self regulation.

You would think this would also come with more self responsibility.

Yet we have many cases where we in the US capitalize profits and socialize losses.

See GFC 2008 for a great example of such.
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
 
art
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:16 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program.


Nah, its not that bad.

The various regulators will be going over most (all?) of the changes with a fine tooth comb now, so while it will cost BCA in time (and ultimately, dollars), it will see the aircraft back into service at some point.

It has to. The ramifications for Boeing if they can't are very dark.


I'm curious about Boeing continuing to pump frames out at 40+ a month. I understand there will be contracts with suppliers, so Boeing cannot just say: "Stop work on MAX components. We don't want any more for the time being thanks very much." I wonder, however, if there might be an element of Boeing playing a game of chicken with the US administration, along the lines of maintaining production at 80% of March rates so that if the MAX is not re-certified without hardware changes Boeing will suffer devastating losses. Would this not have the effect of pushing politicians to put pressure on the regulators to re-certify without demanding hardware changes unless the risk calculation numbers absolutely demanded such changes?

Not saying this is what is going on. Just wondering if something along these lines could be going on.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 734
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:36 pm

scbriml wrote:
:checkmark: Panorama is generally well respected.



One part of the piece that really impressed me was that all the 737 cockpit scenes were actually 737 MAX. No idea how they managed to get hold of a simulator.
 
giblets
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 8:34 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:52 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
:checkmark: Panorama is generally well respected.



One part of the piece that really impressed me was that all the 737 cockpit scenes were actually 737 MAX. No idea how they managed to get hold of a simulator.


Must be a struggle to get hold of one that's not busy generating revenue! :D Was it possible to discern who it belonged to?

On a more serious note, anyone have any idea of the chaos (delay) that could be caused if the regs bodies demanded:
    Extra AOA sensor
    New computer processor
    Realigned rudder cables....
Last edited by giblets on Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
146, ATR72, Q400, Saab 340, PA-46 Jetprop, Jetstream, E175/195, 707/727/737/747/757/767/777, DC-3/9/10, MD-11/80, A300/310/319/320/321/330/340/350/380 Tristar, BAC 1-11, Trident, Chipmunk, Bell 206/222, Chinook, Puma, Cessna 172, Fokker 70, 100, SRN4!
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:54 pm

flyingphil wrote:
The FAA seems to be leaking out more information lately.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/regulators ... 1564565521

I don't think anyone on this forum is salivating for bad news to bash Boeing.
Thousands of jobs depend on the 737, but the evidence is stacking up that the current design is not safe.

If this report is close to the truth, it confirms the gamble with peoples lives that was taken in the full knowledge of the problem at hand, following the LionAir event, that a fix could be implemented before another catastrophic event.

It would be interesting to find the elements of the calculation that predicted 10 months before the next event was a reasonable conclusion. It would be particularly interesting to see if that included entirely random bird strike/FOD events.

No doubt, it will never become public.

Others can argue if this constitutes sufficiency for prima facia case for criminal proceedings.

Ray
 
User avatar
InsideMan
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:49 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:57 pm

art wrote:

I'm curious about Boeing continuing to pump frames out at 40+ a month. I understand there will be contracts with suppliers, so Boeing cannot just say: "Stop work on MAX components. We don't want any more for the time being thanks very much." I wonder, however, if there might be an element of Boeing playing a game of chicken with the US administration, along the lines of maintaining production at 80% of March rates so that if the MAX is not re-certified without hardware changes Boeing will suffer devastating losses. Would this not have the effect of pushing politicians to put pressure on the regulators to re-certify without demanding hardware changes unless the risk calculation numbers absolutely demanded such changes?

Not saying this is what is going on. Just wondering if something along these lines could be going on.


Boeing has no choice, not only because of the agreements with the suppliers, but more importantly with the airlines. The more you "reduce" production, the more penalties for delivery delays they have to pay. It's bad enough as it is. If you stop production the "pile" of orders to fulfill only grows higher and higher.

On top of that it is quite difficult to halt production completely and even worse to start up production again. Somewhere I read it would take a year or more, but thay may have been hyperbole.
 
AirwayBill
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:01 pm

Virtual737 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
:checkmark: Panorama is generally well respected.



One part of the piece that really impressed me was that all the 737 cockpit scenes were actually 737 MAX. No idea how they managed to get hold of a simulator.


Are we talking about the same documentary?

BBC Panorama seems to show a 737 NG cockpit.

https://youtu.be/1ShF9XMoNQc
 
TaromA380
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
I begin to think that it’s too late now, because all the problems have the root at the internal decision to launch the industrial project (versus going new aircraft). Back then, they bet everything on the hypothesis that no one ever will be affected nor realize how generously (and cheaply) they were going to self-certify the Max. Only under that hypothesis the project would be attractive enough to win the favor over starting from scratch.
Now that initial critical hypothesis proved wrong. As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program. Am I the only pessimistic out here?

It's an interesting hypothesis to suggest that the executives making the decision to go with the MAX didn't understand the degree to which the decision would result in middle managers putting the squeeze on the designers and the design reviewers to the point where those engineers would consciously or unconsciously fail to do their jobs correctly which would result in this human, fiscal and reputational tragedy that MAX has become. Interesting, but difficult to prove.

Self-certification is synonym to self-assessment. It will always carry a subtle human sub-conscientious component, kind of a trap...
The lies we tell other people are nothing to the lies we tell ourselves”.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:04 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
It would be interesting to find the elements of the calculation that predicted 10 months before the next event was a reasonable conclusion. It would be particularly interesting to see if that included entirely random bird strike/FOD events.

No doubt, it will never become public.

FBI has subpoena power and I can say from personal experience they are damn good at their job.
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
 
Virtual737
Posts: 734
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:18 pm

AirwayBill wrote:
Are we talking about the same documentary?

BBC Panorama seems to show a 737 NG cockpit.

https://youtu.be/1ShF9XMoNQc


It is official. I've been taking drugs. In my defense, 08:15 is a MAX, but probably stock footage rather than something filmed for the piece.


giblets wrote:

Must be a struggle to get hold of one that's not busy generating revenue!



MAX simulators are still as common as rocking horse poo.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:24 pm

TaromA380 wrote:
As you cannot duplicate to make redundant an old cable control in such a plane without heavy redesign of the frame, the Max program is today a testimony of a product designed for a specific era, suddenly belonging to a different one. Able only to being parked somewhere on the ground.


Cheaper and quicker to do that than to do a new program.

They have several avenues they could take - just off the top of my head:

(i) duplicate control cable at keel of fuselage
(ii) duplicate control cable and move existing control cable so they are both (non-co-) located at furthest practical points of the crown (only workable if it reduces risk enough)
(iii) add in an electrical servo that is located aft of the projected damage zone and driven by position sensor(s) on the rudder pedals - it can then hook onto the control cable and be activated from cockpit (free moving otherwise). The electrical line is then ran through the keel of the fuselage. (call this "fly-by-wire" without the computer in the loop)
(iv) same as (iii) but with hydraulic driven motor and hydraulic lines.
(v) same as (iii) but with pneumatic driven motor and air lines.

There will be others that I can't think of.


***If*** the rudder cable is within in the UERF zone, the FAA really should have held them to a fix.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:31 pm

Lots of commentary in this thread, but where are we on the fix? I've heard nothing recently from Boeing or the FAA indicating any progress on the software/equipment changes that are required to get this bird back in the air. Any news I've missed?
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:43 pm

art wrote:
I wonder, however, if there might be an element of Boeing playing a game of chicken with the US administration, along the lines of maintaining production at 80% of March rates so that if the MAX is not re-certified without hardware changes Boeing will suffer devastating losses. Would this not have the effect of pushing politicians to put pressure on the regulators to re-certify without demanding hardware changes unless the risk calculation numbers absolutely demanded such changes?


The FAA (and by extension political pressure from within the US) are largely irrelevant now in the piece.

You strongly suspect Anything that the FAA don't find will be found by others and anything the FAA don't look at will be looked at by others.
 
User avatar
PITingres
Posts: 1313
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:59 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:54 pm

asdf wrote:
PITingres wrote:
... Since two pilots were able to control the Lion Air plane, the probable cause seems to me to be the apparent failure to communicate the situation and cure to the third pilot, leaving him to figure it out on his own. Or not, as the unfortunate case turned out to be.
....


in the ET case there seem to be a big probability that the electric trim button simply stopped responding after a few seconds of every MCAS cycle
do YOU really know that it wasn´t the same situation @ the Lion Air crash? ...


I said nothing about the ET crash, did not intend to say anything about it, and don't plan to. If there's sufficient public information to draw a proper conclusion as to probable and contributing causes (in the sense I've used above), I'm not aware of it.

So, please don't quote me if you are going to discuss ET or the overall situation. I only posted about Lion Air.
Fly, you fools! Fly!
 
User avatar
InsideMan
Posts: 353
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 9:49 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:56 pm

Amiga500 wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
As you cannot duplicate to make redundant an old cable control in such a plane without heavy redesign of the frame, the Max program is today a testimony of a product designed for a specific era, suddenly belonging to a different one. Able only to being parked somewhere on the ground.


Cheaper and quicker to do that than to do a new program.

They have several avenues they could take - just off the top of my head:

(i) duplicate control cable at keel of fuselage
(ii) duplicate control cable and move existing control cable so they are both (non-co-) located at furthest practical points of the crown (only workable if it reduces risk enough)
(iii) add in an electrical servo that is located aft of the projected damage zone and driven by position sensor(s) on the rudder pedals - it can then hook onto the control cable and be activated from cockpit (free moving otherwise). The electrical line is then ran through the keel of the fuselage. (call this "fly-by-wire" without the computer in the loop)
(iv) same as (iii) but with hydraulic driven motor and hydraulic lines.
(v) same as (iii) but with pneumatic driven motor and air lines.

There will be others that I can't think of.


***If*** the rudder cable is within in the UERF zone, the FAA really should have held them to a fix.


I am assuming the problem with most of these approaches is, that this would void the grandfathering from the NG and the Classic. And thus would open many other cans of worms that would need to be fixed to the point that it is economically not viable. I'm really curious how this one plays out....
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4345
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:00 pm

MartijnNL wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
I don't watch network news. I prefer just the facts. Only official statements from the FAA, DOT, and NTSB. I don't need a news agency to tell me what to think or believe.

That's really sad and narrow minded of you.


I started quitting network new in the late 70s. That was the beginning of the 'if it bleeds it leads'. Increasingly network news and television is aimed at emotional responses, and it has been insanely successful. (and note both words apply). I read a variety of independent news sources. They monitor network news and report on it appropriately. Just as on this site there are a number of trustworthy posters. I may disagree with them a lot, but they work at being accurate.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
smithbs
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:09 pm

TaromA380 wrote:
Self-certification is synonym to self-assessment. It will always carry a subtle human sub-conscientious component, kind of a trap...
The lies we tell other people are nothing to the lies we tell ourselves”.


As an engineer who designs safety-critical products, let me chime in. Self-certification is common in these fields and is only subtly different than being accredited by a third party. In either case, the OEM generates the majority of the certification analysis and justification material. A self-certifier then simply says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product." If going the 3rd party accreditation route, that material is reviewed by the 3rd party and (maybe after negotiating, justification and even some re-design) eventually also says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product." When you go to the regulator (like the FAA), that material is reviewed again and (maybe after negotiating, justification and even some re-design) eventually also says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product."

The point is that only the OEM knows how their product works and is capable of producing the certification justification. No one else can do it for them, and certainly not the regulator - the regulator needs to be taught how the product and its certification works. It's the regulator's job to review the certification package and determine if they agree. If there is disagreement, it gets worked out either through analysis or design. Particularly for aviation and especially for the big jets, it's always going to be a partnership between the OEM and regulator. Unfortunately for the MAX, something slipped through and now the OEM is not shipping product and the regulator let slip their civic duty. The solution is for both sides to sharpen their pencils and get back at it.

And then for those who think the entire 737 program should be scrapped at this point, I'm amazed at the drama and extremist position. Just because a couple issues need to be worked out in the design doesn't mean the whole product needs to be put down.

Here's a real world example - when you are driving in your car, look at your steering wheel and imagine a shotgun shell loaded in the steering column that will go off if you impact an object. For millions of drivers, that's exactly what was in there due to a defect in the air bag cartridge. So did we immediately send 41.6 million cars to the trash compactor? No, a fix was developed and deployed in a recall, and everybody got to keep their cars too. And so with the MAX - these issues will be fixed, deployed and we will move on.
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 999
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
I take anonymous complaints to the NYT and anonymous internet posts much less seriously.

Are the complaints to the New York Times really anonymous? Or are the names of the people who complain known to the newspaper staff? And hidden from the public, as they should be?
 
LDRA
Posts: 329
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:12 pm

smithbs wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
Self-certification is synonym to self-assessment. It will always carry a subtle human sub-conscientious component, kind of a trap...
The lies we tell other people are nothing to the lies we tell ourselves”.


As an engineer who designs safety-critical products, let me chime in. Self-certification is common in these fields and is only subtly different than being accredited by a third party. In either case, the OEM generates the majority of the certification analysis and justification material. A self-certifier then simply says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product." If going the 3rd party accreditation route, that material is reviewed by the 3rd party and (maybe after negotiating, justification and even some re-design) eventually also says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product." When you go to the regulator (like the FAA), that material is reviewed again and (maybe after negotiating, justification and even some re-design) eventually also says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product."

The point is that only the OEM knows how their product works and is capable of producing the certification justification. No one else can do it for them, and certainly not the regulator - the regulator needs to be taught how the product and its certification works. It's the regulator's job to review the certification package and determine if they agree. If there is disagreement, it gets worked out either through analysis or design. Particularly for aviation and especially for the big jets, it's always going to be a partnership between the OEM and regulator. Unfortunately for the MAX, something slipped through and now the OEM is not shipping product and the regulator let slip their civic duty. The solution is for both sides to sharpen their pencils and get back at it.

And then for those who think the entire 737 program should be scrapped at this point, I'm amazed at the drama and extremist position. Just because a couple issues need to be worked out in the design doesn't mean the whole product needs to be put down.

Here's a real world example - when you are driving in your car, look at your steering wheel and imagine a shotgun shell loaded in the steering column that will go off if you impact an object. For millions of drivers, that's exactly what was in there due to a defect in the air bag cartridge. So did we immediately send 41.6 million cars to the trash compactor? No, a fix was developed and deployed in a recall, and everybody got to keep their cars too. And so with the MAX - these issues will be fixed, deployed and we will move on.


Lucky airbag is easy to replace. Try VW emission scandal, the solution is buy back, not fixing

Otherwise I agree with your point self cert itself is not the issue. If anything, self cert makes OEM as the single entity responsible, thus avoiding "I screwed up, BUT you are acvountable" scenarios
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:16 pm

PITingres wrote:
asdf wrote:
PITingres wrote:
... Since two pilots were able to control the Lion Air plane, the probable cause seems to me to be the apparent failure to communicate the situation and cure to the third pilot, leaving him to figure it out on his own. Or not, as the unfortunate case turned out to be.
....


in the ET case there seem to be a big probability that the electric trim button simply stopped responding after a few seconds of every MCAS cycle
do YOU really know that it wasn´t the same situation @ the Lion Air crash? ...


I said nothing about the ET crash, did not intend to say anything about it, and don't plan to. If there's sufficient public information to draw a proper conclusion as to probable and contributing causes (in the sense I've used above), I'm not aware of it.

So, please don't quote me if you are going to discuss ET or the overall situation. I only posted about Lion Air.

And yet the ET Preliminary report is more comprehensive in its coverage than Lion Air? Less wiggle room? cant claim what information was passed from a previous flight or not like LionAir by absence of evidence in that case dressed up as evidence of fact?


Ray
 
User avatar
Carlos01
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 11:52 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:22 pm

TaromA380 wrote:
I begin to think that it’s too late now, because all the problems have the root at the internal decision to launch the industrial project (versus going new aircraft). Back then, they bet everything on the hypothesis that no one ever will be affected nor realize how generously (and cheaply) they were going to self-certify the Max. Only under that hypothesis the project would be attractive enough to win the favor over starting from scratch.
Now that initial critical hypothesis proved wrong. As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program. Am I the only pessimistic out here?


It's obvious that Boeing's board made a safe decision to make their safe future benefits even safer. They made a horrible mistake, but somehow I don't get the feeling that anyone would be willing to admit that, even in their own heads. Financial losses are already gigantic, and there is nothing in sight which would indicate that we know when they will stop piling up. Reputational damage is even bigger, the company has lost the admiration and confidence of millions and millions of people worldwide. Boeing has gone in 6 months from one of the sexiest companies on the planet - to be seen as something between a hedge fund and a pyramid scheme. To me they look like used car salesmen, trying to convince people how great this 2003 Chrysler with 320k miles on it really is, that brown thing all over is not rust, it'll buff right out when you just put some wax on it!

I trust there must have been a plan B in the making ever since the ET-crash, if not, Boeing's board has not only made a huge mistake, but they are also hugely incompetent. They must have considered, by latest at that point, the scenario "what if". If the CEO just continues to mis-communicate all over the place, mis-managing expectations, while month after month goes by - then the company really is doomed. They have already used all possible shortcut-cards they could have had, nobody is going to move an inch anymore due to business-driven pressure. Nobody (outside of Boeing) gives a damn now about Boeing's timelines, everyone will make sure 100% that their own behind is covered before making any statements about lifting the grounding.

Seriously, the only thing Boeing could do now to restore their reputation, is to kill the MAX and go with the NSA, timeline X - Y - Z. Image Muilenberg announcing tomorrow just that, what would happen? Shockwave across the world, stock value would plummet, partners and customers screaming and shouting everywhere, insecurity, layoffs, unemployment issues, the media rubbing their hands with the amount of extra clicks they are going to get. Ok, that's bad of course. Not to mention a lot of people would lose their bonuses! Now that would be a real disaster. Would people die? Maybe some. But not 346 in 5 months.

Ok, the bad news would now be out of the way. With every passing month, they would be closer to their new cleansheet, that is going to be awesome in every possible way, superior to anything else on the market. Very soon the ranting and raging would start changing into exited expectations, airlines would eat their shitsandwiches and queu up to get this new bird as soon as possible. Boeing would get financing to survive in between, no question about it. A company as capable as Boeing, working on a really cool new project, will not be killed, even if it takes government intervention. Boeing would again start to look sexy and cool, Muilenberg could shine on the front page of every magazine and newspaper, being THE LEADER who turned the company around, cleared all dusty corners, and led it to a bright future unlike ever seen in the company's history. Finally, not so many years later, the NSA would be filling the vaults of Boeing, they could start paying their debts off, settling disputes and court cases, everything finally falls to place. They would come out of this stronger and shinier, Airbus would be having crisis-meetings, wondering what had just happened.

Instead, if Boeing just keeps on waiting and waiting and paying billions and billions, and doing nothing about their damaged reputation - they will have a serious problem very soon and at that point it's too late. Not to mentioned a horribly failed productline. Now they still would have a chance. Let's see.
 
User avatar
smithbs
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:30 pm

LDRA wrote:
Lucky airbag is easy to replace. Try VW emission scandal, the solution is buy back, not fixing


For the VW scandal, the fix was also easy - software and/or parts, depending on the model. The buy-backs were optional for owners - owners could either have the fix made or have their car bought back by VW. The EPA forced VW to create the buy-back program as a consumer good-will measure (aka punishment for VW).

I think the EPA came out okay in this case, as opposed to the FAA. The EPA's case that VW was cheating was fairly obvious. For the FAA and the MAX, the FAA has some egg on its face - and bureaucracies that you embarrass won't let you forget it, which is why I'm sure the MAX is getting wrung out by the FAA at this time.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 3:59 pm

InsideMan wrote:
I am assuming the problem with most of these approaches is, that this would void the grandfathering from the NG and the Classic. And thus would open many other cans of worms that would need to be fixed to the point that it is economically not viable. I'm really curious how this one plays out....

MAX already has a fly by wire spoiler system implemented without voiding the "grandfathering" ( ref: http://www.b737.org.uk/max-spoilers.htm ) so that not a factor.

All that is being suggested is a redundancy "FBW" path to activate the rudder, should the issue rise to the level of being actionable.

smithbs wrote:
And then for those who think the entire 737 program should be scrapped at this point, I'm amazed at the drama and extremist position. Just because a couple issues need to be worked out in the design doesn't mean the whole product needs to be put down.

Here's a real world example - when you are driving in your car, look at your steering wheel and imagine a shotgun shell loaded in the steering column that will go off if you impact an object. For millions of drivers, that's exactly what was in there due to a defect in the air bag cartridge. So did we immediately send 41.6 million cars to the trash compactor? No, a fix was developed and deployed in a recall, and everybody got to keep their cars too. And so with the MAX - these issues will be fixed, deployed and we will move on.

I agree with this, but Boeing surely is not helping its position by repeatedly suggesting dates it ends up missing, and by being "behind the curve" with respect to issues being publicized via media channels instead of by Boeing itself.

This gives the impression that Boeing can't evaluate its own situation correctly, and we end up with the appearance of a situation that worsens rather than improves as a function of time.

In particular it seems to be giving its airline customers and the financial markets guidance that it ends up missing, which surely is a big peril for the people in Boeing's C-Suite.

MartijnNL wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I take anonymous complaints to the NYT and anonymous internet posts much less seriously.

Are the complaints to the New York Times really anonymous? Or are the names of the people who complain known to the newspaper staff? And hidden from the public, as they should be?

IMO there's a big difference between a person willing to go "on the record" versus one who insists on being "off the record".

The difference is we can't judge the source's reputation or motivations independently, we have to rely on NYT to do so, and clearly their reputation has been taking a dive over the last several years.

A truly anonymous source falls to the level of hearsay, and I would hope NYT would never rely on such sources, but you never know.
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
 
User avatar
Grizzly410
Posts: 441
Joined: Sun May 10, 2015 8:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:00 pm

TaromA380 wrote:
Right now, it seems that the hypothesis of keeping (only) one rudder control cables in virtue of grandfathering is void. Any grandfathering stops when you abruptly modify old inputs.
The NG risk assessment was based on NG engines and chances to affect the cables if failure. You cannot grandfather the NG risk assessment with Max engines, so different in size and location.


About grandfathering, I've read so much mistake in previous posts I'd like to add a bit of my experience in system installation under EASA authority.
I pick your post to illustrate, it could have been another :)

Grandfathering means keeping a system certified against an old regulation on an update product. If your system, in his case the Rudder Flight Control, isn't affected by a major modification you just can keep as it is. It's certified by grandfathering.
If on the contrary it is affected by a major modification you then have to make your system compliant to the current regulation to certify it.
Of course, the old regulation could be affected by mandatory updates, but in such case the grandfather version must have already been modified to comply at the time of the update.

Risk assesment for an uncontained engine failure would affect the "zoning" of the bird, in an Airbus it's called Engine Burst Area. In this zone, your system installation have specificity to respect. For electrical wiring for example you'll have to duplicate all critical link and route both in a different position (let's say : one underfloor, other in the ceiling). When changing the engine type, the risk assesment and thus the EBA is revised, you can't "grandfather" this. But that doesn't mean it will be vastly different either.

To give an idea, on A320 the EBA in the fuselage affects the complete tube on something like 20 frames long and I'm pretty sure the EBA didn't change between a ceo and a neo.
I understand the engine change have more consequence on the 737 than the A320, but knowing how large the EBA is considered in A320 I can't see why it wouldn't be as big in 737, and even if affected by the engine change it wouldn't be that much (a shift of 1 frame in forward direction, maybe).

All this to say that if FAA works the same way, and I think it's the case, if rudder control system didn't change much (no MAJOR modification) and EBA at least not enough modified to command a major change in the rudder cable installation, then your system is already certified by virtue of grandfathering even if it doesn't conform to today's regulation.
In order to be old and wise, one must first be young and dumb.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:00 pm

NDiesel wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
giblets wrote:


None of us hate the plane. We're just concerned about its potentially lethal flaws.
A badly designed plane shouldn't be flying just to please shareholders, my friend.



NDiesel, I fully agree with that statement! :checkmark: :bigthumbsup:

I fly 4-6 legs basically every week or so and I just want to feel safe.
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:02 pm

InsideMan wrote:
I am assuming the problem with most of these approaches is, that this would void the grandfathering from the NG and the Classic. And thus would open many other cans of worms that would need to be fixed to the point that it is economically not viable. I'm really curious how this one plays out....


I don't believe so - the divergence from grandfathering would only be limited to the sub-systems affected, not the whole aircraft.

Now - there is always the possibility that the one small thing you want to change ends up cascading to a level that means you might as well scrap the plane and start again - but I don't think that should be the case.

I *think* dual, non-co-located, redundancy on the rudder control cables/lines/pipes should be sufficient to meet regs, but I don't work in stability & control so could be wrong on that.


As long as they can keep the 2nd approach (i)non-computerised and (ii)testable prior to every flight then it would hopefully keep things as limited as is feasible in scope.


But we could all be getting ahead of ourselves here - its possible the cables are outside the UERF zone anyway and its a misspeak.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:07 pm

smithbs wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
Self-certification is synonym to self-assessment. It will always carry a subtle human sub-conscientious component, kind of a trap...
The lies we tell other people are nothing to the lies we tell ourselves”.


As an engineer who designs safety-critical products, let me chime in. Self-certification is common in these fields and is only subtly different than being accredited by a third party. In either case, the OEM generates the majority of the certification analysis and justification material. A self-certifier then simply says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product." If going the 3rd party accreditation route, that material is reviewed by the 3rd party and (maybe after negotiating, justification and even some re-design) eventually also says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product." When you go to the regulator (like the FAA), that material is reviewed again and (maybe after negotiating, justification and even some re-design) eventually also says "this product complies with the regulations that apply to this product."

The point is that only the OEM knows how their product works and is capable of producing the certification justification. No one else can do it for them, and certainly not the regulator - the regulator needs to be taught how the product and its certification works. It's the regulator's job to review the certification package and determine if they agree. If there is disagreement, it gets worked out either through analysis or design. Particularly for aviation and especially for the big jets, it's always going to be a partnership between the OEM and regulator. Unfortunately for the MAX, something slipped through and now the OEM is not shipping product and the regulator let slip their civic duty. The solution is for both sides to sharpen their pencils and get back at it.

And then for those who think the entire 737 program should be scrapped at this point, I'm amazed at the drama and extremist position. Just because a couple issues need to be worked out in the design doesn't mean the whole product needs to be put down.

Here's a real world example - when you are driving in your car, look at your steering wheel and imagine a shotgun shell loaded in the steering column that will go off if you impact an object. For millions of drivers, that's exactly what was in there due to a defect in the air bag cartridge. So did we immediately send 41.6 million cars to the trash compactor? No, a fix was developed and deployed in a recall, and everybody got to keep their cars too. And so with the MAX - these issues will be fixed, deployed and we will move on.

I pretty much agree with everything you have written.

Except. You have reduced the deaths of 346 people to 'a couple of issues that need to worked out'. I'm sure that was not your intent.

Secondly, from reports we can concluded Boeing introduced a major change in design and minimised it such that it did not receive second party review, let alone a third party. They did not update the SSA, as they should have, which would have required FAA review so it didn't get reviewed by FAA. The FAA were not adequately appraised of how the 'new' system worked. References to the system were physically removed from at least one manual. The system, or even reference to modification of STS, were not included in the FSB. All chances of the problem being caught by 2nd or 3rd parties were removed. I.e. Boeing did not live up their side of the bargain. This a lot more significant than 'something slipped through'.

Ray
 
uta999
Posts: 930
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:10 pm

Plan B (since the grounding) should have been what is involved ($ cost) in turning all the completed MAX a/c back to an NG. It might not be necessary, but five months has already been wasted and it should have been planned for by now.

There is now a real possibility the MAX won't fly EVER, or for two more years. A really old plane just got older.
Your computer just got better
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:16 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
When changing the engine type, the risk assesment and thus the EBA is revised, you can't "grandfather" this. But that doesn't mean it will be vastly different either.

To give an idea, on A320 the EBA in the fuselage affects the complete tube on something like 20 frames long and I'm pretty sure the EBA didn't change between a ceo and a neo.
I understand the engine change have more consequence on the 737 than the A320, but knowing how large the EBA is considered in A320 I can't see why it wouldn't be as big in 737, and even if affected by the engine change it wouldn't be that much (a shift of 1 frame in forward direction, maybe).


The distance between the non-co-located areas has traditionally been defined by a distance of at least half a blade fragment dimension.

Bigger blades on the GTF/LEAP means that if your routing was getting marginal in terms of distance apart on the CFM-56 (or V2500) then you'd be in trouble with regards the newer engines.


So, like you say, the zone won't have changed - but whether your solution is considered disparately located or not may have changed.


I've had a quick look around, its hard to find definitive info, but I **think** the rudder cables for the 737 run through the floor. If they don't run down the two sides of the floor, but instead are somewhere kinda toward the centreline, then by moving the cables further from centreline, Boeing should have a straightforward solution.

An electrical line running down the crown of the fuse will definitely be OK, so that plus a servo on the rudder and as long as they get the details sorted they should be fundamentally all right.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9683
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:32 pm

smithbs wrote:
LDRA wrote:
Lucky airbag is easy to replace. Try VW emission scandal, the solution is buy back, not fixing


For the VW scandal, the fix was also easy - software and/or parts, depending on the model. The buy-backs were optional for owners - owners could either have the fix made or have their car bought back by VW. The EPA forced VW to create the buy-back program as a consumer good-will measure (aka punishment for VW).

I think the EPA came out okay in this case, as opposed to the FAA. The EPA's case that VW was cheating was fairly obvious. For the FAA and the MAX, the FAA has some egg on its face - and bureaucracies that you embarrass won't let you forget it, which is why I'm sure the MAX is getting wrung out by the FAA at this time.


But that is how it needs to be. If the OEM does not fear the regulator and thinks he can play him, it is exactly what happened wit the 737MAX. The regulator in the VW did not have egg on the face because it was an obviously illegal device and intended to trick the regulator. And that is the problem for Boeing, the FAA can only save themselves by throwing Boeing under the bus.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:42 pm

Carlos01 wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
I begin to think that it’s too late now, because all the problems have the root at the internal decision to launch the industrial project (versus going new aircraft). Back then, they bet everything on the hypothesis that no one ever will be affected nor realize how generously (and cheaply) they were going to self-certify the Max. Only under that hypothesis the project would be attractive enough to win the favor over starting from scratch.
Now that initial critical hypothesis proved wrong. As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program. Am I the only pessimistic out here?


It's obvious that Boeing's board made a safe decision to make their safe future benefits even safer. They made a horrible mistake, but somehow I don't get the feeling that anyone would be willing to admit that, even in their own heads. Financial losses are already gigantic, and there is nothing in sight which would indicate that we know when they will stop piling up. Reputational damage is even bigger, the company has lost the admiration and confidence of millions and millions of people worldwide. Boeing has gone in 6 months from one of the sexiest companies on the planet - to be seen as something between a hedge fund and a pyramid scheme. To me they look like used car salesmen, trying to convince people how great this 2003 Chrysler with 320k miles on it really is, that brown thing all over is not rust, it'll buff right out when you just put some wax on it!

I trust there must have been a plan B in the making ever since the ET-crash, if not, Boeing's board has not only made a huge mistake, but they are also hugely incompetent. They must have considered, by latest at that point, the scenario "what if". If the CEO just continues to mis-communicate all over the place, mis-managing expectations, while month after month goes by - then the company really is doomed. They have already used all possible shortcut-cards they could have had, nobody is going to move an inch anymore due to business-driven pressure. Nobody (outside of Boeing) gives a damn now about Boeing's timelines, everyone will make sure 100% that their own behind is covered before making any statements about lifting the grounding.

Seriously, the only thing Boeing could do now to restore their reputation, is to kill the MAX and go with the NSA, timeline X - Y - Z. Image Muilenberg announcing tomorrow just that, what would happen? Shockwave across the world, stock value would plummet, partners and customers screaming and shouting everywhere, insecurity, layoffs, unemployment issues, the media rubbing their hands with the amount of extra clicks they are going to get. Ok, that's bad of course. Not to mention a lot of people would lose their bonuses! Now that would be a real disaster. Would people die? Maybe some. But not 346 in 5 months.

Ok, the bad news would now be out of the way. With every passing month, they would be closer to their new cleansheet, that is going to be awesome in every possible way, superior to anything else on the market. Very soon the ranting and raging would start changing into exited expectations, airlines would eat their shitsandwiches and queu up to get this new bird as soon as possible. Boeing would get financing to survive in between, no question about it. A company as capable as Boeing, working on a really cool new project, will not be killed, even if it takes government intervention. Boeing would again start to look sexy and cool, Muilenberg could shine on the front page of every magazine and newspaper, being THE LEADER who turned the company around, cleared all dusty corners, and led it to a bright future unlike ever seen in the company's history. Finally, not so many years later, the NSA would be filling the vaults of Boeing, they could start paying their debts off, settling disputes and court cases, everything finally falls to place. They would come out of this stronger and shinier, Airbus would be having crisis-meetings, wondering what had just happened.

Instead, if Boeing just keeps on waiting and waiting and paying billions and billions, and doing nothing about their damaged reputation - they will have a serious problem very soon and at that point it's too late. Not to mentioned a horribly failed productline. Now they still would have a chance. Let's see.

It should be obvious that the only way forward is for Boeing to do what it takes to get the MAX flying again, but since this keeps coming up, let's compare Plan A to Plan B:

Plan A:
  • Boeing projects optimism to keep customers on board as long as possible
  • Boeing knows there are skeletons in the closet that may come out of the closet but this can't be helped
  • Boeing doesn't want to invite the world to look into the closet so it just deals with the issues as they get discovered or leaked
  • Eventually the fix rate exceeds the incoming discovery/revelation rate
  • Eventually regulators find no more reasons to keep the plane on the ground
  • Eventually people stop worrying about getting on a Boeing just like they stopped worrying about being killed by their car's air bag
  • Grounding duration measured in a large number of months

Plan B:
  • Boeing destroys confidence in its ability to produce safe aircraft
  • FAA destroys confidence in its ability to certify aircraft as safe
  • Boeing destroys the investments any current MAX customer has made
  • Boeing destroys its customers fleet plans for the next 5-10 years
  • Boeing destroys the investments any MAX supply chain vendor has made
  • Boeing has no product to sell in its highest volume and value business for five+ years
  • Boeing has no narrow body income for five+ years while spending $billions to develop a new clean sheet
  • Boeing expects customers to be confident that their new clean sheet product is safe and reliable despite its now destroyed reputation
  • Boeing expects customers to be confident that FAA regulations are all met despite the FAA's destroyed reputation
  • The effective grounding period for most customers is more than five years since ramp up is slow

We've seen the impact on Boeing's bottom line after just one quarter without 737 income.

Can you imagine what that would be like after five years, spending $billions make all the businesses that invested in MAX whole again, spending $billions to clear all the law suits, then spending $billions to develop a clean sheet replacement?

MOL is angry about months worth of groundings, can you imagine how angry he gets when he finds his investment in 737is now nullified and he has to hope he can keep flying ageing and inefficient NGs with CFMs for five+ years while his competitors fly new build aircraft with GTFs or LEAPs?

There's no way you can do Plan B until you have exhausted all variations of Plan A, it's corporate suicide to do otherwise.
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
 
sillystrings
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 7:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:48 pm

smithbs wrote:

For the VW scandal, the fix was also easy - software and/or parts, depending on the model. The buy-backs were optional for owners - owners could either have the fix made or have their car bought back by VW.


False. The only car that was fixable was the Passat. I know, I had to sell back my Jetta for which there was no fix, my son still has his Passat. I would have gladly held on to the car had they been able to fix it.
 
planecane
Posts: 1579
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:12 pm

BoeingVista wrote:
planecane wrote:
BoeingVista wrote:

Its not an unanswered question, the result of the safety complaint was a decision against the FAA managers so they did not sufficient evidence to rule against their engineers but by then it was too late as the delegation had already happened. But today is a new dawn and the FAA must now rectify this safety issue, the MAX is not compliant.


I think a more important question is how many uncontained engine failures have occurred in the last 20 years where parts flew out that could cut through the fuselage and rudder cables?

Since it is accepted that you can't economically design a plane that is 100% safe, does this failure occur frequently enough that it really is a safety issue? Then add that at least from the report the concern is that it happens just after takeoff.

I also don't understand why the issue is only with the rudder cables. Are the elevator and aileron cables routed differently and redundant? I always assumed that all the control cables were close to each other.


Well, lets start with April 17, 2018

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/pag ... ma142.aspx

Sorry, no lets start with June 1 2019 instead

https://www.airlive.net/venezolana-boei ... e-failure/

So plenty enough uncontained failures on 737's for this to be a real safety issue.

The engines on the MAX are a lot further forward so the throw and impact will also be further forward. Your timescale also conveniently excludes 2 DC-10 (AA191, UA232) crashes where the rudder cable was cut bu an uncontained engine failure.


My timeframe was selected to attempt to discuss relatively state of the art engine design and manufacturing processes. The DC-10 engines and especially the 737-200 engines aren't very relevant in this context. Let's go with engines with EIS of at least 1980.

You also missed the key qualifier in my question. Maybe I should have been more clear. I said parts that could cut through the fuselage and rudder cables. The southwest incident did not send parts out with enough energy to do that.

Finally, the engines on the MAX aren't "a lot further forward" and the position has little, if anything to do with the potential increased risk. The rudder cables run from front to back so the engine could be mounted behind the wing and it wouldn't protect the cables. The concern is mostly due to larger parts spinning with more energy.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9683
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:24 pm

Revelation wrote:
Carlos01 wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
I begin to think that it’s too late now, because all the problems have the root at the internal decision to launch the industrial project (versus going new aircraft). Back then, they bet everything on the hypothesis that no one ever will be affected nor realize how generously (and cheaply) they were going to self-certify the Max. Only under that hypothesis the project would be attractive enough to win the favor over starting from scratch.
Now that initial critical hypothesis proved wrong. As the self-certified product realistically cannot be patched to make it certifiable under the whole world scrutiny, it means everything is lost. The whole program. Am I the only pessimistic out here?


It's obvious that Boeing's board made a safe decision to make their safe future benefits even safer. They made a horrible mistake, but somehow I don't get the feeling that anyone would be willing to admit that, even in their own heads. Financial losses are already gigantic, and there is nothing in sight which would indicate that we know when they will stop piling up. Reputational damage is even bigger, the company has lost the admiration and confidence of millions and millions of people worldwide. Boeing has gone in 6 months from one of the sexiest companies on the planet - to be seen as something between a hedge fund and a pyramid scheme. To me they look like used car salesmen, trying to convince people how great this 2003 Chrysler with 320k miles on it really is, that brown thing all over is not rust, it'll buff right out when you just put some wax on it!

I trust there must have been a plan B in the making ever since the ET-crash, if not, Boeing's board has not only made a huge mistake, but they are also hugely incompetent. They must have considered, by latest at that point, the scenario "what if". If the CEO just continues to mis-communicate all over the place, mis-managing expectations, while month after month goes by - then the company really is doomed. They have already used all possible shortcut-cards they could have had, nobody is going to move an inch anymore due to business-driven pressure. Nobody (outside of Boeing) gives a damn now about Boeing's timelines, everyone will make sure 100% that their own behind is covered before making any statements about lifting the grounding.

Seriously, the only thing Boeing could do now to restore their reputation, is to kill the MAX and go with the NSA, timeline X - Y - Z. Image Muilenberg announcing tomorrow just that, what would happen? Shockwave across the world, stock value would plummet, partners and customers screaming and shouting everywhere, insecurity, layoffs, unemployment issues, the media rubbing their hands with the amount of extra clicks they are going to get. Ok, that's bad of course. Not to mention a lot of people would lose their bonuses! Now that would be a real disaster. Would people die? Maybe some. But not 346 in 5 months.

Ok, the bad news would now be out of the way. With every passing month, they would be closer to their new cleansheet, that is going to be awesome in every possible way, superior to anything else on the market. Very soon the ranting and raging would start changing into exited expectations, airlines would eat their shitsandwiches and queu up to get this new bird as soon as possible. Boeing would get financing to survive in between, no question about it. A company as capable as Boeing, working on a really cool new project, will not be killed, even if it takes government intervention. Boeing would again start to look sexy and cool, Muilenberg could shine on the front page of every magazine and newspaper, being THE LEADER who turned the company around, cleared all dusty corners, and led it to a bright future unlike ever seen in the company's history. Finally, not so many years later, the NSA would be filling the vaults of Boeing, they could start paying their debts off, settling disputes and court cases, everything finally falls to place. They would come out of this stronger and shinier, Airbus would be having crisis-meetings, wondering what had just happened.

Instead, if Boeing just keeps on waiting and waiting and paying billions and billions, and doing nothing about their damaged reputation - they will have a serious problem very soon and at that point it's too late. Not to mentioned a horribly failed productline. Now they still would have a chance. Let's see.

It should be obvious that the only way forward is for Boeing to do what it takes to get the MAX flying again, but since this keeps coming up, let's compare Plan A to Plan B:

Plan A:
  • Boeing projects optimism to keep customers on board as long as possible
  • Boeing knows there are skeletons in the closet that may come out of the closet but this can't be helped
  • Boeing doesn't want to invite the world to look into the closet so it just deals with the issues as they get discovered or leaked
  • Eventually the fix rate exceeds the incoming discovery/revelation rate
  • Eventually regulators find no more reasons to keep the plane on the ground
  • Eventually people stop worrying about getting on a Boeing just like they stopped worrying about being killed by their car's air bag
  • Grounding duration measured in a large number of months


I agree with you, except for one point. The third point is suicide imho. If they do not come clean now, one more problem that has been hidden (again) would destroy the MAX and probably Boeing. It is suck it up time and that is the only way forward imho.
Boeing should be proactive and convince people that this was a one time misstep and not company policy. Something like "not only do we fix everything the regulators want, we will also add feature XYZ to further improve the safety of our planes"
 
art
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:40 pm

Revelation wrote:
It should be obvious that the only way forward is for Boeing to do what it takes to get the MAX flying again, but since this keeps coming up, let's compare Plan A to Plan B:

Plan A:
  • Boeing projects optimism to keep customers on board as long as possible
  • Boeing knows there are skeletons in the closet that may come out of the closet but this can't be helped
  • Boeing doesn't want to invite the world to look into the closet so it just deals with the issues as they get discovered or leaked
  • Eventually the fix rate exceeds the incoming discovery/revelation rate
  • Eventually regulators find no more reasons to keep the plane on the ground
  • Eventually people stop worrying about getting on a Boeing just like they stopped worrying about being killed by their car's air bag
  • Grounding duration measured in a large number of months

Plan B:
  • Boeing destroys confidence in its ability to produce safe aircraft
  • FAA destroys confidence in its ability to certify aircraft as safe
  • Boeing destroys the investments any current MAX customer has made
  • Boeing destroys its customers fleet plans for the next 5-10 years
  • Boeing destroys the investments any MAX supply chain vendor has made
  • Boeing has no product to sell in its highest volume and value business for five+ years
  • Boeing has no narrow body income for five+ years while spending $billions to develop a new clean sheet
  • Boeing expects customers to be confident that their new clean sheet product is safe and reliable despite its now destroyed reputation
  • Boeing expects customers to be confident that FAA regulations are all met despite the FAA's destroyed reputation
  • The effective grounding period for most customers is more than five years since ramp up is slow

We've seen the impact on Boeing's bottom line after just one quarter without 737 income.

Can you imagine what that would be like after five years, spending $billions make all the businesses that invested in MAX whole again, spending $billions to clear all the law suits, then spending $billions to develop a clean sheet replacement?

MOL is angry about months worth of groundings, can you imagine how angry he gets when he finds his investment in 737is now nullified and he has to hope he can keep flying ageing and inefficient NGs with CFMs for five+ years while his competitors fly new build aircraft with GTFs or LEAPs?

There's no way you can do Plan B until you have exhausted all variations of Plan A, it's corporate suicide to do otherwise.


Not sure I'm too keen on your plan A.

[*] Boeing projects optimism to keep customers on board as long as possible

So having created major problems for customers, Boeing exacerbates the problems even further by giving false reassurances.

[*] Boeing knows there are skeletons in the closet that may come out of the closet but this can't be helped

The longer they are concealed, the longer it will take before they start being dealt with ergo the longer the grounding, the greater the financial damage to customers

[*] Boeing doesn't want to invite the world to look into the closet so it just deals with the issues as they get discovered or leaked

Every time another attempt to cover up a problem is exposed Boeing's reputation is further besmirched.

Eventually regulators find no more reasons to keep the plane on the ground

Later than need be, so even more losses for customers.

Know what I think about Plan A? It's dishonest, deceitful, devoid of integrity, shows callous disregard for damage done for customers. A company like that has no business being in business IMO.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4345
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:56 pm

At some point if Boeing does not get all of this under control, within say 60 days, the 'nuclear option' takes place. Boeing will be advised to sell its commercial division to someone in whom the aviation world has confidence. Or alternatively stock holders will go to court and take control of the company.
Last edited by frmrCapCadet on Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:57 pm

planecane wrote:
BoeingVista wrote:
planecane wrote:

I think a more important question is how many uncontained engine failures have occurred in the last 20 years where parts flew out that could cut through the fuselage and rudder cables?

Since it is accepted that you can't economically design a plane that is 100% safe, does this failure occur frequently enough that it really is a safety issue? Then add that at least from the report the concern is that it happens just after takeoff.

I also don't understand why the issue is only with the rudder cables. Are the elevator and aileron cables routed differently and redundant? I always assumed that all the control cables were close to each other.


Well, lets start with April 17, 2018

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/pag ... ma142.aspx

Sorry, no lets start with June 1 2019 instead

https://www.airlive.net/venezolana-boei ... e-failure/

So plenty enough uncontained failures on 737's for this to be a real safety issue.

The engines on the MAX are a lot further forward so the throw and impact will also be further forward. Your timescale also conveniently excludes 2 DC-10 (AA191, UA232) crashes where the rudder cable was cut bu an uncontained engine failure.


My timeframe was selected to attempt to discuss relatively state of the art engine design and manufacturing processes. The DC-10 engines and especially the 737-200 engines aren't very relevant in this context. Let's go with engines with EIS of at least 1980.

You also missed the key qualifier in my question. Maybe I should have been more clear. I said parts that could cut through the fuselage and rudder cables. The southwest incident did not send parts out with enough energy to do that.

Finally, the engines on the MAX aren't "a lot further forward" and the position has little, if anything to do with the potential increased risk. The rudder cables run from front to back so the engine could be mounted behind the wing and it wouldn't protect the cables. The concern is mostly due to larger parts spinning with more energy.



I posted the regulation from the FAA and the paper on the calculations earlier. There are three factors: The size of the disks, the energy on release and most importantly the flight paths. If the chance of hitting both cables is bigger than a certain value due to the cables being in a plane perpendicular to the flight path of the fragments the aircraft design is not safe.


And about the airbags: The manufacturer (takata) went bust from the costs of fixing (in this case replace the whole airbag) the parts. So no this does not count except the fix of the max leads to Boeing going down.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3698
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:58 pm

art wrote:
A company like that has no business being in business IMO.


Under your criteria there's likely not an aviation company existing that should be in business.

There is no plan B that doesn't permanently harm the airline industry. There's been enough irreversible damage done already with plan A.
Last edited by MSPNWA on Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24657
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 5:58 pm

art wrote:
Know what I think about Plan A? It's dishonest, deceitful, devoid of integrity, shows callous disregard for damage done for customers. A company like that has no business being in business IMO.

Nice to see you are not jaded like me.

For my part, I've accepted that "business morals" is an oxymoron a very long time ago.

Especially after several decades of working for large corporations and seeing how they operate from the inside.
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: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 6:39 pm

smithbs wrote:
And then for those who think the entire 737 program should be scrapped at this point, I'm amazed at the drama and extremist position. Just because a couple issues need to be worked out in the design doesn't mean the whole product needs to be put down.


Two downed planes - couple of issues? Wow. :mad:
 
Western727
Posts: 1786
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 6:44 pm

This whole thing is just a crying shame.

I was recently in my hometown of Seattle on vacation and stopped by the employee lot this past Monday where a quick count of tails netted a total of 39. In just the employee lot. And the flight line was full of 737s extending further south of KBFI's control tower; I don't remember seeing new jets parked south of that in my 44 years though I could be wrong.
Jack @ AUS
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 6:58 pm

seahawk wrote:
I agree with you, except for one point. The third point is suicide imho. If they do not come clean now, one more problem that has been hidden (again) would destroy the MAX and probably Boeing. It is suck it up time and that is the only way forward imho.
Boeing should be proactive and convince people that this was a one time misstep and not company policy. Something like "not only do we fix everything the regulators want, we will also add feature XYZ to further improve the safety of our planes"

By one time misstep you would be referring to the MAX, 787, KC tanker or Boeing in general?
Suck it up how, the USA is a liability country, any admissions as in "suck it up" will have a bevy of lawyers looking for compensation for mental stress and aggravation.
Every day someone somewhere is coming up with additional things, some previously known and accepted, some known but only accepted by some and not all, now as a result of the tragedies, everyone is now empowered to throw more irons into the fire.

All Boeing can do is pretty much what they are doing, unless they elect to go chpt.11. The MCAS fix was completed and submitted, we got no word on whether it was accepted or not, what we did get is a list of 5 or 6 more items from the FAA and EASA along with a specific test which crippled the computer to see how it performed.
Where Boeing is not being given credit is that in spite of the financial cost, they have not attempted to rush the fix out to the FAA to get the a/c back in the air, based on the tone in these threads, one could be shocked that Boeing did not release the fix the day after the a/c was grounded in the USA, do we give them credit for now trying to do due diligence and make sure the fixes are done properly on their side before independent testing?
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1118
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 6:58 pm

I don't think a smart company would be wondering about Plan A or Plan B

The smart company would be doing both right now, and be shining up on a Plan C as well

I would be absolutely shocked if Boeing is not VERY actively working on a 737 replacement, whatever each of us might choose to label it. Yes, they may have 1000s secretly working on the "797", but if today they don't have "more thousands" on the "NSA", I would be very surprised and perplexed!

What does the Boeing BODs do, and whatever it does, does it do it in public? What did it do at its last meeting? Sorry to be lazy, I did not search yet! I would, however, assume that something like BOD meeting minutes are made public, no? If yes, anyone please care to share with us!!!!
 
User avatar
smithbs
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 6:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:01 pm

sillystrings wrote:
smithbs wrote:

For the VW scandal, the fix was also easy - software and/or parts, depending on the model. The buy-backs were optional for owners - owners could either have the fix made or have their car bought back by VW.


False. The only car that was fixable was the Passat. I know, I had to sell back my Jetta for which there was no fix, my son still has his Passat. I would have gladly held on to the car had they been able to fix it.


I'm not entirely clear on the terms of the VW fiasco. From the consumer reports and Car-and-Driver articles I read, it appeared that mandatory buy-back did not occur. Maybe some were "highly encouraged?"

https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/car ... ns-recall-
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a1533 ... s-scandal/

XRAYretired wrote:
Except. You have reduced the deaths of 346 people to 'a couple of issues that need to worked out'. I'm sure that was not your intent.


It was, actually. 346 people died due to a few issues that need to be worked out. Welcome to safety-critical engineering performed by humans. The same number of people died at once due to "an issue that needed to be worked out" with some cargo door locking actuators (TK 981), which to me is an even more stupid reason for 346 people to die than the chain of events that needed to crash two separate MAX's. It was just some stupid clasps and rods on the DC-10. So yes, little issues have big effects, and all the more ironic because often the fix for a little issue is not a big deal to accomplish. I'm certain Boeing wishes it could go back in a time machine and do the simple little things that would have prevented this disaster...but nobody gets that luxury.

XRAYretired wrote:
Secondly, from reports we can concluded Boeing introduced a major change in design and minimised it such that it did not receive second party review, let alone a third party. They did not update the SSA, as they should have, which would have required FAA review so it didn't get reviewed by FAA. The FAA were not adequately appraised of how the 'new' system worked. References to the system were physically removed from at least one manual. The system, or even reference to modification of STS, were not included in the FSB. All chances of the problem being caught by 2nd or 3rd parties were removed. I.e. Boeing did not live up their side of the bargain. This a lot more significant than 'something slipped through'.


I agree that both sides did not live up to their side of the bargain. Boeing let slip a dangerous scenario and FAA didn't pay enough attention. Now the consequences get to be experienced. I expect to see the FAA riding their backs for a long time to come.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:07 pm

art wrote:
Know what I think about Plan A? It's dishonest, deceitful, devoid of integrity, shows callous disregard for damage done for customers. A company like that has no business being in business IMO.

If you disregard his specifics, Boeing only has two plans and no one wants to even think about Plan B.

Plan A is to get the a/c back in the air doing whatever the FAA says to do, since the FAA is tasked with the health of the industry and not just safety, they will not drive Boeing into the ground because it is not in the best interest of the industry. The FAA is the political agency, the NTSB is the safety only agency who does not have to look at financial consequences.

Plan B is to discontinue the MAX and start fresh with the NSA / NMA or both at the same time. This will entail Boeing going chpt.11 as they will not be able to pay compensation to all clients, vendors, maintain staff and borrow money to build the new a/c while delivering only 787's and slowly ramping up 777X.

The scale of unemployment in such a situation is beyond what anyone wants to consider right now.....52 a/c per month is what the 737 was doing prior to this tragedy, since no NSA is presently in the wings, where would all that production go, along with the employees?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:12 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
At some point if Boeing does not get all of this under control, within say 60 days, the 'nuclear option' takes place. Boeing will be advised to sell its commercial division to someone in whom the aviation world has confidence. Or alternatively stock holders will go to court and take control of the company.

I thought stock holders already control the company via their board?
As for selling, short of some venture capitalist who have the money but no knowledge of commercial aviation, who would they sell it to?
We can assume that it has to be a USA based company, as it is a national asset, its not as if the knowledge does not exist in Boeing, a board and top management shake up down to middle level is probably more realistic.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10363
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:16 pm

sassiciai wrote:
I don't think a smart company would be wondering about Plan A or Plan B

The smart company would be doing both right now, and be shining up on a Plan C as well

I would be absolutely shocked if Boeing is not VERY actively working on a 737 replacement, whatever each of us might choose to label it. Yes, they may have 1000s secretly working on the "797", but if today they don't have "more thousands" on the "NSA", I would be very surprised and perplexed!

What does the Boeing BODs do, and whatever it does, does it do it in public? What did it do at its last meeting? Sorry to be lazy, I did not search yet! I would, however, assume that something like BOD meeting minutes are made public, no? If yes, anyone please care to share with us!!!!

It will take years to get the NSA into flight test, the way the FAA is now we can safely say 4 to 6 years, even if they decide to go with the 797, that is also years away, they were saying 2025, so if we even bring that forward by one year, if they do not get the MAX back in the air, what exactly will they do for the next 4 years?
 
Andy33
Posts: 2568
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:30 pm

par13del wrote:
Plan A is to get the a/c back in the air doing whatever the FAA says to do, since the FAA is tasked with the health of the industry and not just safety, they will not drive Boeing into the ground because it is not in the best interest of the industry. The FAA is the political agency, the NTSB is the safety only agency who does not have to look at financial consequences.

Plan B is to discontinue the MAX and start fresh with the NSA / NMA or both at the same time. This will entail Boeing going chpt.11 as they will not be able to pay compensation to all clients, vendors, maintain staff and borrow money to build the new a/c while delivering only 787's and slowly ramping up 777X.

The scale of unemployment in such a situation is beyond what anyone wants to consider right now.....52 a/c per month is what the 737 was doing prior to this tragedy, since no NSA is presently in the wings, where would all that production go, along with the employees?


The thing to consider is that around 80% of both the built but undelivered planes and the outstanding order book, are for airlines based outside the USA. Until regulators around the world are convinced that the MAX has been made safe to fly in their airspace and for airlines registered in their countries, Boeing is still in desperate trouble even if the FAA gives a green light to the MAX.
None of the non-US regulators have the health of the US aviation industry as part of their remit, some indeed see the FAA's dual role as part of the problem.
 
art
Posts: 3496
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:12 pm

Revelation wrote:
art wrote:
Know what I think about Plan A? It's dishonest, deceitful, devoid of integrity, shows callous disregard for damage done for customers. A company like that has no business being in business IMO.

Nice to see you are not jaded like me.

For my part, I've accepted that "business morals" is an oxymoron a very long time ago.

Especially after several decades of working for large corporations and seeing how they operate from the inside.


I am in the UK. Symbiotic business relationships don't exist your side of the pond? You know, I gain from dealing with you and you gain from dealing with me and if I as a supplier encounter problems likely to lead to late delivery, I give you my best estimate of when I will deliver, being aware that you are making plans based on when I say I will deliver.

I think that if customers can trust you they will be more likely to want to deal with you again.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1532
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Jul 31, 2019 8:13 pm

Grizzly410 wrote:
About grandfathering, I've read so much mistake in previous posts I'd like to add a bit of my experience in system installation under EASA authority.
I pick your post to illustrate, it could have been another :)

Grandfathering means keeping a system certified against an old regulation on an update product. If your system, in his case the Rudder Flight Control, isn't affected by a major modification you just can keep as it is. It's certified by grandfathering.
If on the contrary it is affected by a major modification you then have to make your system compliant to the current regulation to certify it.
Of course, the old regulation could be affected by mandatory updates, but in such case the grandfather version must have already been modified to comply at the time of the update.

All this to say that if FAA works the same way, and I think it's the case, if rudder control system didn't change much (no MAJOR modification) and EBA at least not enough modified to command a major change in the rudder cable installation, then your system is already certified by virtue of grandfathering even if it doesn't conform to today's regulation.

Grandfathering isn't as black and white, which you elude to in your comment '... if rudder control doesn't change MUCH..' (my bold).

Firstly, many grandfathering decisions - yes, can grandfather, no can't, are now made by the OEM not FAA, and even where not, Boeing employees with FAA badges, make recommendations which carry enormous weight, due to FAA resources and de-skilling.

Secondly, the 'change much' grandfathering philosophy goes way back to the -100 and -200, through all subsequent iterations, when in reality if you start with the first models, and leap to the MAX, the changes are massive. For example engine thrust, aircraft length and payload.

Thirdly, where materials and structures are concerned, via scaling rules (a fancy way of saying yet more grandfathering), we are grandfathering between aircraft families, for example the 787 to 777X.

Fourth, every new grandfathering decision creates yet a new 'base' precedent.

Aircraft OEM's trying to launch completely new aircraft families believe grandfathering gives established OEM's insurmountable cost advantages, and creates unfair and illegal barriers to entry. How much innovation would have been brought to market by now, if Boeing had had to clean sheet the NG?

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