Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13930
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
Current timeline of FAA approval ~December 2019 and EASA approval ~January 2020 with airlines flying a month or so later seems to have some people clutching at straws.



Revelation wrote:
astuteman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Actual title, minus the spin: "Ryanair expects to be flying Boeing 737 MAX by Feb-March 2020".


A whole year on the ground. Ouch!

Rgds

Yes, this is one of the many awful outcomes of the MAX tragedy, yet a different outcome than the many posts here saying MAX needed to be scrapped, etc.


I used the wrong link, these are the ones saying Boeing expects march 2020 for RTS.
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news ... 45458.html
https://www.cnbctv18.com/aviation/boein ... 650561.htm
Last edited by keesje on Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9628
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:26 pm

Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.
 
chicawgo
Posts: 438
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:28 pm

seahawk wrote:
Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.


Truest post I’ve read on this thread in a while.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13930
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:32 pm

seahawk wrote:
Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.


As you might have noticed, this goes a bit further than the 737 MAX MCAS fix. It became clear how the aircraft was certified, how the certification process is organized, independency & objectivity is secured and all involved worked together.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8338
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:55 pm

seahawk wrote:
Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.


One way to avoid grounding was to release MCAS 2.0 as a routine software update right after EIS or even after JT601. no one would have noticed the issues.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24300
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:57 pm

keesje wrote:
I used the wrong link, these are the ones saying Boeing expects march 2020 for RTS.
https://www.livemint.com/companies/news ... 45458.html
https://www.cnbctv18.com/aviation/boein ... 650561.htm

Context from first link:

Boeing is expected to approach the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to recertify the 737 Max in the near future, according to media reports.

Regulators globally are, however, expected to conduct their own due diligence before permitting carriers to operate the plane.

A senior official of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) said in September that it would carry out its own due diligence before permitting the 737 Max planes to fly on Indian skies even if the US FAA re-certifies the aircraft.

So, nothing new to see here, India may take longer than other jurisdictions.

Context from second link:

The company also said that it is working with regulators for certification to help bring MAX to service in the US in Q4 and if the processes progress without pause, the MAX may return to service globally by March.

Again, nothing new: US RTS estimated in Q4, international RTS a few weeks or months later.
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
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:58 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
One way to avoid grounding was to release MCAS 2.0 as a routine software update right after EIS or even after JT601. no one would have noticed the issues.


Changes would be too big to just be slipped in an update without FAA's knowledge.
Flying at the cruising altitude is (mostly) boring. I wish all flights were nothing but endless take offs and landings every 10 minutes or so.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13930
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
Again, nothing new: US RTS estimated in Q4, international RTS a few weeks or months later.


"fourth quarter" :bored:

during a speech at the Economic Club of New York Wednesday Oct. 2, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg said the company is expecting the grounding to be lifted in the fourth quarter of 2019.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/10/0 ... n-service/
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
astuteman
Posts: 7146
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:26 pm

seahawk wrote:
Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.


As far as the MAX goes, I never thought the fix was that difficult.
I don't have any doubts about the MAX being safe once it is re-certified.

I'm not sure that that ends the "concerns" though.
For me there is still a question mark about the culture at the top of Boeing that caused this sad situation that has not been properly answered.
And I think it will rumble on for a while.
It revolves around one word.
Trust.

I do also have a view that the MAX will never really fully recover and perform in the market the way that it would have if the crashes and groundings had never happened.
It will undoubtedly fly again.
It will undoubtedly get more orders.
But it feels to me like its replacement is now being pushed to the top of the "what do we do next" list at Boeing ahead of NMA
(which always felt like the right thing anyway to me, but Hey.)

Feel free to disagree. Those are just opinions.

Rgds
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9628
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:31 pm

astuteman wrote:
seahawk wrote:
Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.


As far as the MAX goes, I never thought the fix was that difficult.
I don't have any doubts about the MAX being safe once it is re-certified.

I'm not sure that that ends the "concerns" though.
For me there is still a question mark about the culture at the top of Boeing that caused this sad situation that has not been properly answered.
And I think it will rumble on for a while.
It revolves around one word.
Trust.

I do also have a view that the MAX will never really fully recover and perform in the market the way that it would have if the crashes and groundings had never happened.
It will undoubtedly fly again.
It will undoubtedly get more orders.
But it feels to me like its replacement is now being pushed to the top of the "what do we do next" list at Boeing ahead of NMA
(which always felt like the right thing anyway to me, but Hey.)

Feel free to disagree. Those are just opinions.

Rgds


Why should I disagree, your post is spot on. Once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, the MAX must be considered safe, but that does not solve all problems. But I would have no concerns flying in fixed MAX.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8338
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:36 pm

BEG2IAH wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
One way to avoid grounding was to release MCAS 2.0 as a routine software update right after EIS or even after JT601. no one would have noticed the issues.


Changes would be too big to just be slipped in an update without FAA's knowledge.


Except that a routine MCAS 2.0 (or) 1.x would have been a minor fix with an automatic approval from the FAA under the old buddy system. It has become major fix because everyone is breathing on their neck. FAA dusted off its regulator hat, other CAAs questioning FAA and Boeing, US Congress hearings, Pilot unions, and FA unions just to name a few. The new spotlight is self-made.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24300
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:50 pm

keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Again, nothing new: US RTS estimated in Q4, international RTS a few weeks or months later.

"fourth quarter" :bored:

during a speech at the Economic Club of New York Wednesday Oct. 2, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg said the company is expecting the grounding to be lifted in the fourth quarter of 2019.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/10/0 ... n-service/

It all checks out. :checkmark:
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
 
DenverTed
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 6:06 pm

https://mynorthwest.com/1589211/boeing- ... io-larsen/
Does the rudder cable issue need a solution, or is that nothing? How about training? New simulators? Seems like still a couple open ended questions that are a headwind to RTS.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24300
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 6:23 pm

DenverTed wrote:
https://mynorthwest.com/1589211/boeing-737-max-new-serious-concerns-defazio-larsen/
Does the rudder cable issue need a solution, or is that nothing?

The current state of play is FAA management accepted Boeing's criteria despite some complaints from some FAA line employees and until this decision is changed this is not blocking RTS in USA.

DenverTed wrote:
How about training? New simulators? Seems like still a couple open ended questions that are a headwind to RTS.

IMO this is still to be determined.

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/busin ... 15311.html says:

US aircraft manufacturer Boeing expects to "more than double" the 737 Max simulators by the end of 2019 as it prepares to bring back the grounded fleet back to service.

At present, the company has 187, 737 Max simulators spread across the world, including in London, Miami and Singapore.

Seems they are preparing for various jurisdictions to impose mandatory sim training.
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
 
DenverTed
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 7:50 pm

Revelation wrote:
The current state of play is FAA management accepted Boeing's criteria despite some complaints from some FAA line employees and until this decision is changed this is not blocking RTS in USA.


But now that the chairman of the house transportation committee and aviation sub-committee have wrote a letter, what does Steve Dickson say? That was covered before I got here, we're good to go? Now he has to respond with a convincing letter. The Steve Dickson FAA has to give unimpeachable assurances that the rudder cables are a non-issue.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24300
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:01 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Revelation wrote:
The current state of play is FAA management accepted Boeing's criteria despite some complaints from some FAA line employees and until this decision is changed this is not blocking RTS in USA.

But now that the chairman of the house transportation committee and aviation sub-committee have wrote a letter, what does Steve Dickson say? That was covered before I got here, we're good to go? Now he has to respond with a convincing letter. The Steve Dickson FAA has to give unimpeachable assurances that the rudder cables are a non-issue.

If he's so unimpeachable then he should have rescinded the approval without waiting for a letter from a congressman, no?

Till he does, the state of play with regard to RTS is not changed.
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
 
pksundevil
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:48 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:16 pm

Holy smokes:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

Boeing engineers were nearly done redesigning software on the grounded 737 Max in June when some pilots hopped into a simulator to test a few things.

It didn’t go well.

A simulated computer glitch caused it to to dive aggressively in a way that resembled the problem that had caused deadly crashes off Indonesia and in Ethiopia months earlier.

That led to an extensive redesign of the plane’s flight computers that has dragged on for months and repeatedly pushed back the date of its return to service, according to people briefed on the work. The company -- which initially expressed confidence it could complete its application to recertify the plane with the Federal Aviation Administration within months -- now says it hopes to do that before the end of the year.

Changing the architecture of the jet’s twin flight computers, which drive autopilots and critical instruments, has proven far more laborious than patching the system directly involved in 737 Max crashes, said these people, who asked not to be named speaking about the issue.
 
Jshank83
Posts: 3501
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 2:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:23 pm

pksundevil wrote:
Holy smokes:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

Boeing engineers were nearly done redesigning software on the grounded 737 Max in June when some pilots hopped into a simulator to test a few things.

It didn’t go well.

A simulated computer glitch caused it to to dive aggressively in a way that resembled the problem that had caused deadly crashes off Indonesia and in Ethiopia months earlier.

That led to an extensive redesign of the plane’s flight computers that has dragged on for months and repeatedly pushed back the date of its return to service, according to people briefed on the work. The company -- which initially expressed confidence it could complete its application to recertify the plane with the Federal Aviation Administration within months -- now says it hopes to do that before the end of the year.

Changing the architecture of the jet’s twin flight computers, which drive autopilots and critical instruments, has proven far more laborious than patching the system directly involved in 737 Max crashes, said these people, who asked not to be named speaking about the issue.


That would explain why it has taken so long. Originally I didn't think it should be that big of a fix.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:49 pm

Revelation wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Revelation wrote:
The current state of play is FAA management accepted Boeing's criteria despite some complaints from some FAA line employees and until this decision is changed this is not blocking RTS in USA.

But now that the chairman of the house transportation committee and aviation sub-committee have wrote a letter, what does Steve Dickson say? That was covered before I got here, we're good to go? Now he has to respond with a convincing letter. The Steve Dickson FAA has to give unimpeachable assurances that the rudder cables are a non-issue.

If he's so unimpeachable then he should have rescinded the approval without waiting for a letter from a congressman, no?

Till he does, the state of play with regard to RTS is not changed.

I guess I can't argue that.
 
Chemist
Posts: 746
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 9:31 pm

pksundevil wrote:
Holy smokes:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

Boeing engineers were nearly done redesigning software on the grounded 737 Max in June when some pilots hopped into a simulator to test a few things.

It didn’t go well.

A simulated computer glitch caused it to to dive aggressively in a way that resembled the problem that had caused deadly crashes off Indonesia and in Ethiopia months earlier.

That led to an extensive redesign of the plane’s flight computers that has dragged on for months and repeatedly pushed back the date of its return to service, according to people briefed on the work. The company -- which initially expressed confidence it could complete its application to recertify the plane with the Federal Aviation Administration within months -- now says it hopes to do that before the end of the year.

Changing the architecture of the jet’s twin flight computers, which drive autopilots and critical instruments, has proven far more laborious than patching the system directly involved in 737 Max crashes, said these people, who asked not to be named speaking about the issue.


Is this the same as the bit flip issue, or something else? Because we already knew the bit flip issue was going to cause more redesign.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24300
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 9:46 pm

Chemist wrote:
pksundevil wrote:
Changing the architecture of the jet’s twin flight computers, which drive autopilots and critical instruments, has proven far more laborious than patching the system directly involved in 737 Max crashes, said these people, who asked not to be named speaking about the issue.[/i]

Is this the same as the bit flip issue, or something else? Because we already knew the bit flip issue was going to cause more redesign.

Yes, this is the bit flip issue.

And yes, we knew the bit flip issue would take time to get right.

The software changes themselves aren't complicated, but making the cycles available for the comparisons to be checked can cause issue and dealing with the shutdown when failure is detected requires a lot of testing.
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
 
oschkosch
Posts: 587
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:00 pm

Revelation wrote:
Yes, this is the bit flip issue.




You have a source for that?


Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13930
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:13 pm

pksundevil wrote:
Holy smokes:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

Boeing engineers were nearly done redesigning software on the grounded 737 Max in June when some pilots hopped into a simulator to test a few things.

It didn’t go well.

A simulated computer glitch caused it to to dive aggressively in a way that resembled the problem that had caused deadly crashes off Indonesia and in Ethiopia months earlier.

That led to an extensive redesign of the plane’s flight computers that has dragged on for months and repeatedly pushed back the date of its return to service, according to people briefed on the work. The company -- which initially expressed confidence it could complete its application to recertify the plane with the Federal Aviation Administration within months -- now says it hopes to do that before the end of the year.

Changing the architecture of the jet’s twin flight computers, which drive autopilots and critical instruments, has proven far more laborious than patching the system directly involved in 737 Max crashes, said these people, who asked not to be named speaking about the issue.


I think the usual "nothing to see here" "we knew already" "all will be fine" approach is missplaced. From a technical standpoint I find it encouraging to see FAA and Boeing take themselves serious this time and don't rush & press the FAA to approve what endangers commercial milestones.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2700
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:30 pm

If the FAA and EASA had to fail a documentation review as late as this week, it stands to reason the "final fix" has not been formally submitted yet. They might have supplied the gadgetry, but if the paperwork is not in order it's a no-go. Given the information in the Bloomberg article, however, I'm not fully convinced they've solved the issue of having the two FCCs working in parallel and comparing each others results. That's an enormous change to the legacy 737 system, and one which even under the best of circumstances is very time consuming. Add in oddities such as the bit flip, and the need to demonstrate a far higher level of fail-safe, that does not come as a surprise.

Fixing MCAS is one thing, dragging the internal gubbins from the 70s into the 90s, demonstrating and documenting compliance with regulations, is quite a different animal indeed.
Signature. You just read one.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Fri Nov 08, 2019 10:31 pm

keesje wrote:
pksundevil wrote:
Holy smokes:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nd=premium

Boeing engineers were nearly done redesigning software on the grounded 737 Max in June when some pilots hopped into a simulator to test a few things.

It didn’t go well.

A simulated computer glitch caused it to to dive aggressively in a way that resembled the problem that had caused deadly crashes off Indonesia and in Ethiopia months earlier.

That led to an extensive redesign of the plane’s flight computers that has dragged on for months and repeatedly pushed back the date of its return to service, according to people briefed on the work. The company -- which initially expressed confidence it could complete its application to recertify the plane with the Federal Aviation Administration within months -- now says it hopes to do that before the end of the year.

Changing the architecture of the jet’s twin flight computers, which drive autopilots and critical instruments, has proven far more laborious than patching the system directly involved in 737 Max crashes, said these people, who asked not to be named speaking about the issue.


I think the usual "nothing to see here" "we knew already" "all will be fine" approach is missplaced. From a technical standpoint I find it encouraging to see FAA and Boeing take themselves serious this time and don't rush & press the FAA to approve what endangers commercial milestones.

Thing is, "we already knew" is a spot-on comment. It was pretty much the same story in summer - bit flip (reliability) issue of on-board computers is what lead to rejection of first MCAS redesign.
My understanding is that with more control authority computers must have more reliability, and Boeing has been doing architectural redundancy re-work since then. This is definitely a lot to see, but Boeing seems to be accepting the requirement and doing modifications, saying all will be fine.
So it is 2 out of 3.
 
maint123
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:09 am

So can someone give a summary of the changes Boeing has made to make the max safe again. Officially released changes not speculations.
 
SEU
Posts: 278
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:10 am

Revelation wrote:
keesje wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Again, nothing new: US RTS estimated in Q4, international RTS a few weeks or months later.

"fourth quarter" :bored:

during a speech at the Economic Club of New York Wednesday Oct. 2, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg said the company is expecting the grounding to be lifted in the fourth quarter of 2019.

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2019/10/0 ... n-service/

It all checks out. :checkmark:


a FEW articles state March 2020 though, maybe Boeing are being cunning with their language and they mean the 4Q of the grounding itself..... so a year after the grounding.....
 
aryonoco
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 1:51 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:16 am

Southwest and American pull 737 MAX until early March, nearly a year after grounding:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN1XI2AA
 
Nick1209
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:24 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:18 am

Hoping and Relying on the ECAA won’t do much. Just look what those goons did with EgyptAir 990. Are we really expecting them to come up with an actual conclusion? They’re probably looking for dirt on Boeing far more than investigating the accident.

There’s a reason why Lion Air rushed to the families after the incident, and forced them to sign papers agreeing not to sue them, nor Boeing. They simply didn’t wanna ruin their relationship with Boeing over something their pilots should have known. Like not selling them anymore aircraft till they prove otherwise. All the talk from airlines regarding the max is just politics. I remember what the CEO for United said right after the incident too lol.

If we wanted to make sure every plane was perfectly built, then we would be grounding every single one. I can’t even begin to tell you how many aircraft have been cleared to fly that have “design flaws” but haven’t affected a single flight today. Not even Boeing’s “design flaw” affected either accident. It wasn’t the engines that caused the plane to crash. They both had a software malfunction. Which is Impossible to prevent. And any malfunction that is improperly handled, will end up the same way. Both of which were handled improperly. To me, this is more important that what happened at Boeing because even a perfectly designed and certified airplane can have failures and the crews are the ones who are left to handle them. Crews must be prepared to handle whatever emergency we are presented with, even those like UAL232, Aloha 243, Qantas 32, Qantas 72, and SWA1380 which were failures that were never anticipated and for which no crew had ever been trained.

So how much longer are we going to act like the crashes were very controllable, and entirely preventable? Of which happened in third world countries andone FO with a low amount of hours, flying the plane.

Regardless, neither crew completed a single step on their procedures for runaway stabilizer OR unreliable airspeed. Both of which have to be done in a reasonably manner to prevent an accident.

Lions crew knew what procedure to follow, but forgot it. As you can see on the final report. What I wanted to know, was why did the Captain keep them in trim through 21 MCAS activations, but the FO, to whom took control, did not. Neither of them went to their procedure. We know why though, now. Because they forgot it. Sounds like Lion Air if you ask me, just how many times have their pilots missed the runway, and confused the ocean for the runway? And how many drug charges have been in the news for their pilots?

Let’s not forget that Boeing promised the Max would come without any additional training. And the issues with the engine position was nonexistent till the end of certification. It wasn’t until the stick force per g, which involves banking the aircraft and pulling back on the yoke, and of course banking more and pulling back more, it should be harder to pull back each time, and never easier. But because of Boeing’s engine positioning, an aerodynamic nose up appeared. This nose up created a feeling of it being easier to pull back. The aircraft didn’t Meet FAA longitudinal stability anymore. So the easiest fix was to add some nose down. So it’s quite comical to watch the media call it a “stall prevention system” which is far from true. Just because Airbus has one, and calls it that, and yes, they’ve killed people with their system as well, but doesn’t mean it’s the same for Boeing. Their products do not need a stall prevention system nor recovery system. They’ll recover a stall with the control column in neutral.

Boeing figured one sensor shouldn’t be too bad, after all, the issue would appear itself as a runaway trim and there’s a procedure for that, and it has been around for 5 decades. Shouldn’t be too difficult for pilots already typed in the aircraft, right? Well they under looked these third world countries and the training issues they have. Oops. And it’s not like the system in Airbus aircraft, ya know? Like the one where the crews gotta call to the ground team to figure out what’s going on, who’s hiding systems? Airbus has been dealing with the same and has already been told by both US and Europe to fix it, but haven’t. So while everyone expects Boeing to fix this issue in under a year, Airbus hasn’t fixed theirs, in over 10 years now. Could it be, that designing an aircraft is just difficult? Nah, totally easy. Anyone can do it and Boeing should have knew better. It’s not like airlines had the option to purchase a second sensor but chose not to, and how did the airlines know to buy one or two? The 737 has always looked at one sensor the same way the Max did. It was just based off whoever was flying the plane.

It’s not like the Brazilian authority has MCAS on paper and listed as “B” training from January 2018. Besides all of that, the runaway stabilizer procedure has been the same and hardly changes. As you guys probably already know, the procedure that will disable MCAS. And Ethiopias crew knew it, because they verbalized it, and did it, and undid it. Then accelerated beyond the design limit and crashed. Blame Boeing. If anything, we can say Lions crew had the harder battle due to them not “knowing” not considering the fact that it literally the same as a runaway stab malfunction. Ethiopias crew was already reminded of the issue, due to the Lion crash. Boeing highlighted the issues on the checklist. And sent it out. It’s important that airlines inform their pilots of the new changes

That say “In the event of an uncommanded nose pitch down, hit the stab trim cut out switches to CUTOFF and stay in the CUTOUT position for remainder of flight” yet Ethiopias crew battled with the entire issue until it was near full nose down, then they cut out the switches. They also skipped over step 2 which was too disengage auto throttles, and that allowed the aircraft to fly to and past VMO and out of the flights envelope. Increasing nose down trim and increasing airspeed will result in a stronger nose down force. It’s also clear that when the FO took control, after hitting the cut out switches, he trimmed in the WRONG DIRECTION. And told his captain “it’s not working” followed by his captain saying “pitch up with me”

One of them re engaged the stab trim switches, and that allowed MCAS to reactivate and drive the nose down back down, and it did. Despite them knowing what was going on, and the entire procedure, and lions crash, they still failed the aircraft. I’m not trying to be harsh, but the blame is all going on Boeing when it shouldn’t. It’s clear there’s enough blame to go around here. And allowing such training issues to go unnoticed is going to be a disaster for the aviation industry.
 
MrBretz
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 1:58 am

aryonoco wrote:
Southwest and American pull 737 MAX until early March, nearly a year after grounding:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN1XI2AA


And in the past, both airlines announced earlier RTS dates. So these dates are are probably the earliest RTS we will see.

I have to add that the delays all make sense to me from a software perspective. I have worked on applications both in the aerospace and commercial space where multiple computers were used for redundancy. And I could never believe the time we spent testing the "failover" and data sharing conditions. Besides logic issues, there were numerous timing issues and problems with what happens when one machine goes south. It was never easy even if there were only a few lines of code generated.
Last edited by MrBretz on Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
2175301
Posts: 1863
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:21 am

maint123 wrote:
So can someone give a summary of the changes Boeing has made to make the max safe again. Officially released changes not speculations.


Here is a key summary of things I have read. I do not claim it is totally complete; but, it has the fundamentals:

MCAS Rev 2:
A) Compares both AOA sensors and only triggers an activation if both sensors are in reasonable agreement with each other.
B) Can only trigger 1 activation of trim change unless the aircraft is in a very specific area of the flight envelope where MCAS is actually likely needed to be there to provide appropriate consistent handling. As it relates to the accidents - the accident flight conditions would have only been able to see 1 activation if both AOA sensors agreed that there was a problem with Angle of Attack.

Multiple sources indicate that this was tested and found adequate in June 2019. Had this been the only real concern by the regulators it is likely the 737Max would have been re-certified in the July-August timeframe.

However, the regulators - especially apparently EASA was very concerned with the 1960 flight computer structure. While there were 2 independent computers - they did not cross check each other much (if at all); and my understanding is that for the 737 (all models) one computer controls the 737 while the other idles and is out of the control loop. To the best of my knowledge the 737 is the only commercial aircraft still in production with this kind of computer structure. Everything more modern has computers that cross check each other and resolve issues (you would need the same bit flips to occur in both computers at the same time to produce a similar result). Thus if you somehow triggered 5 specific bits to flip at once (what I have been told is highly statistically improbable); with each bit flip causing a change of state in some key setting or activation (one of them activating MCAS) - then without the cross check of the other computer that plane would not be expected to be saved by appropriately trained pilots.

This drove a requirement to significantly revise how the flight control computers work - and change the future 737Max computer structure to a dual involved and cross checking computer structure typical or more modern aircraft.

This has taken approximately another 6 months to accomplish.

Flight Computer Changes:
A) Change to a dual in process system where both flight control computers are normally in active loop and cross check each other and self correct (to a limited degree) most minor issues (typical of more modern aircraft design).
B) Reduction in pilot actions and work load for certain situations (upgraded algorithms). I have not seen any reference to what conditions; just some statements that the pilots will notice this in routine service.

Note that the 737 flight control computers are still the smallest and slowest computers used in production commercial passenger aircraft. That more modern aircraft has other computer systems to help with diagnostics and other things. But, this making them operate with normal cross checking is a big improvement in safety. Reducing pilot workload in certain situations helps as well.

So that's the big picture of the changes. We are unlikely to know all the specific details until after Return To Service (RTS) when the full details are released.

Hope that helps,
 
maint123
Posts: 396
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:49 am

Thanks 2175301.
So now they have 2 independent computers comparing inputs from 2 AOA sensors.
Incase of a freezing incident and both AOA sensors malfunctioning and giving wild readings, the MCAS would presumably be in a disabled condition ? How would the lack of MCAS effect the MAX in the flight envelope it was designed to help in?
 
pasen
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:03 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:19 am

2175301 wrote:
Flight Computer Changes:
A) Change to a dual in process system where both flight control computers are normally in active loop and cross check each other and self correct (to a limited degree) most minor issues (typical of more modern aircraft design).

MrBretz wrote:
I have to add that the delays all make sense to me from a software perspective. I have worked on applications both in the aerospace and commercial space where multiple computers were used for redundancy. And I could never believe the time we spent testing the "failover" and data sharing conditions. Besides logic issues, there were numerous timing issues and problems with what happens when one machine goes south. It was never easy even if there were only a few lines of code generated.


I'm wondering how other down-stream systems that depend on data from the flight computer cope with this change, for example in a disagreement scenario that cannot be auto-corrected? I assume they all need to be retested and potentially changed. Could there be any re-certification requirements for other systems potentially affected by this change?
 
MrBretz
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:17 am

pasen, I think the flight computers were done by Collins. It would be great to talk to a software engineer who actually understood the architecture. He or she might educate us.

Forgive me if this article is a repost but it mentions some of the issues with having 2 computers talking to each other. The article also has a few very absurd comments about students being able to rewrite software quickly. Ignore if it has been discussed.

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/arti ... -simulator
 
mzlin
Posts: 128
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:32 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:27 am

"Independent Review of Boeing 737 Max Finds Design Changes ‘Safe": https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... anges-safe

Review is by the Technical Advisory Board. "The TAB was established shortly after the 737 Max was grounded worldwide on March 13, after the second fatal crash linked to a flight-safety system that malfunctioned... The TAB is made up of aviation experts from the U.S. Air Force, the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, NASA and FAA."

Actually the design changes referred to in the headline appear to be for MCAS only, as there is no mention of the recent design changes to cover the bit-flip issue by cross-checking of the two flight computers. It makes sense FAA would want the MCAS revisions to be independently reviewed since nobody would trust FAA to do it correctly, whereas the bit-flip and flight computer reprogramming, as a FAA-requested change, would be appropriate for the FAA to review.
 
pune
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:18 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:42 am

Hi all,

I am sorry I have not gone through the whole thread but only the last couple of pages and am just a concerned flier and an enthusiast rather than anything else. I read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1432067&start=2550#p21782445 and did see the whole hearing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrpXLrDoGuw

There seems to be some inconsistency in what the gentleman was saying above and what one of the Senators who asked Mr. Muilenberg for which he at least IMO didn't give an adequate answer. In fact, most of his answers were non-answers rather than anything else. The Senator seems to have been a pilot sometime back as was admissioned by the gentleman next to Mr. Muilenberg.

One of the senators, a lady who spoke in Bali had asked about how the Brazilian regulators had made assessment that the MCAS issue needs to be in training manual determined by the Brazilian regulators for their airlines while that was not for the American airlines.

I found it surprising that the Boeing CEO said he did not know about the document that the Senator was talking about ? How can that be ? And when the Senator pressed the issue he gave a typical non-commital non-answer. Neither he nor his technical aide could give a convicing answer.

There is much more I could say but as member of general public who pays to travel, I would never be comfortable as seen the wooliness of Mr. Muilenberg in that exchange.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 587
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:48 am

mzlin wrote:
"Independent Review of Boeing 737 Max Finds Design Changes ‘Safe": https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... anges-safe




You missed the "but" in the article!

The group also made unspecified suggestions of actions that Boeing and FAA should complete before the plane returns to flight, according to the summary. The TAB is also recommending “additional future activity” and FAA has agreed, according to the summary.
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 6:55 am

morrisond wrote:
A decently trained pilot would have realized they were way out of trim and held that switch down until the forces were neutralized (...)

A decently designed aircraft would never have brought the crew in this situation.
 
2175301
Posts: 1863
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:08 am

pune wrote:
Hi all,

I am sorry I have not gone through the whole thread but only the last couple of pages and am just a concerned flier and an enthusiast rather than anything else. I read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1432067&start=2550#p21782445 and did see the whole hearing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrpXLrDoGuw

There seems to be some inconsistency in what the gentleman was saying above and what one of the Senators who asked Mr. Muilenberg for which he at least IMO didn't give an adequate answer. In fact, most of his answers were non-answers rather than anything else. The Senator seems to have been a pilot sometime back as was admissioned by the gentleman next to Mr. Muilenberg.

One of the senators, a lady who spoke in Bali had asked about how the Brazilian regulators had made assessment that the MCAS issue needs to be in training manual determined by the Brazilian regulators for their airlines while that was not for the American airlines.

I found it surprising that the Boeing CEO said he did not know about the document that the Senator was talking about ? How can that be ? And when the Senator pressed the issue he gave a typical non-commital non-answer. Neither he nor his technical aide could give a convicing answer.

There is much more I could say but as member of general public who pays to travel, I would never be comfortable as seen the wooliness of Mr. Muilenberg in that exchange.


A CEO of any company knows very little about various technical items and about what different countries do around the world. Their job quite frankly involves much bigger pictures and decisions.

Only in certain cases would a CEO learn about a lot of such details. I am sure that Mr. Muilenberg has now learned a lot about the 737Max certification process and MCAS, and even the flight computer structure change... However, he may not have studied up on what each country around the world had for training standards. He was probably aware that different countries could have different training standards.

As such, all he could do was admit he did not know, and make general non-committal answers.

There is no shame in not knowing something - and it's very laudable to admit that up front. In fact, it's vital when dealing with regulators. I cannot count the number of times I have quickly answered to a regulator that I did not know an answer or about a subject; but, that I could get them that answer or have someone more knowledgeable about a subject or issue talk to them directly. Tell them a lie... and you can kiss your career goodbye...

Have a great day,
 
dampfnudel
Posts: 588
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 7:55 am

seahawk wrote:
Sad that some do seem to enjoy the grounding. Yes, the problems need to be fixed, but once the FAA and EASA lift the grounding, this concern has no basis any more.

The concern will still be there or should be because only time will tell if it’s truly fixed. I hope there aren’t hundreds of more families out there that will get that dreadful call someday that their loved one perished in a crash related to Boeing’s initial negligence. In the end, Boeing will be fine, hopefully in a better position 5-10 years from now with a 737 NG/MAX replacement in/almost in service.
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
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2700
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 8:44 am

From the latest Dominic Gates article https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...x-assumptions/

Though MCAS was new on the MAX version of the 737, Boeing argued that it wasn’t new and novel because a similar system “had been previously implemented on the 767” tanker for the Air Force.

Yet MCAS on the MAX was triggered by just one of the jet’s two angle-of-attack sensors, whereas MCAS on the 767 tanker compared signals from both sensors on the plane. When asked after the second crash to explain why the airliner version lacked this same redundancy, Boeing’s response was that the architecture, implementation, and pilot interface of the KC-46 tanker MCAS were so different that the two systems shared little but the acronym.


Un.be.liveable. Thankfully I'm not a lawyer, but an even mildly competent one will have a field day with this.

Another paragraph in the article has this

That December presentation reveals Boeing’s thinking soon after the first crash and indicates both a substantial effort to deflect blame and a missed opportunity to reevaluate before the second crash happened.

The presentation shows that Boeing in its original certification of the MAX:
* Presented MCAS to the FAA as not being a “new and novel” technology — and thus not requiring deeper scrutiny. The justification given was a doubtful comparison with the 767 tanker.
* Did not consider in its safety assessment the effect of multiple system failures and how this would affect the reactions of the pilots.
* Used questionable math to downgrade the system’s risk classification below a level that would have required more redundancy with at least two sensors to activate it.
* Made a key safety assessment prior to a major change in the design of MCAS, and did not reevaluate the system again before certification


Un.be.liveable, redux.

And, as if that wasn't enough, Boeing rolled out the biggest John Deere you've ever seen and dug a deep hole even deeper:

Boeing’s message to the FAA that December — which formed the basis of multiple public statements by CEO Dennis Muilenburg since — was that MCAS had been certified using the company’s standard processes and was compliant with all FAA regulations.

In a statement Friday, Boeing reiterated: “The FAA considered the final configuration and operating parameters of MCAS during MAX certification, and concluded that it met all certification and regulatory requirements.”


Deny, lie, deny, lie, deflect, lie and deny. How stupid does Boeing think the industry and it's regulators are? They're spitting FAA right in the face at the most crucial moment in the process to bring the aircraft back in service. There's all the evidence in the world to tells us Boeing changed MCAS to fire in a low G regime, fire multiple time and increased the authority of the system by several orders of magnitude, yet never told anybody about it.

Fire them, fire the whole incompetent lot starting with Dennis and moving down to involve every single person involved in the certification of this aircraft.
Signature. You just read one.
 
Nick1209
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:24 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:36 am

Yet MCAS on the MAX was triggered by just one of the jet’s two angle-of-attack sensors, whereas MCAS on the 767 tanker compared signals from both sensors on the plane. When asked after the second crash to explain why the airliner version lacked this same redundancy, Boeing’s response was that the architecture, implementation, and pilot interface of the KC-46 tanker MCAS were so different that the two systems shared little but the acronym.[/i]

I believe it’s a business tactic pure and simple. The military doesn’t care how much they spend in the end. Airlines do. Airlines didn’t buy the second sensor although they had a choice to, for a reason. And Boeing knew it wouldn’t go over well with them, as shown, because in the end they didn’t purchase the sensor. So they also didn’t see any reason for it. The only crash that Boeing can be blamed for is JT610, and I mean lightly blamed. ET302? No. Boeing not only acknowledged the incident and Indonesia’s recommendation, but they also followed through with it. They told crews that the 5 decade old procedure does in fact still exist, and what they should do. Every cockpit, in the Max, had the paper. They were all notified about it as well. Not only did Lions crew fail to complete a single step on their procedure, but so did Ethiopias crew. Who had a warning about it.
 
wilgaking
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2018 10:27 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 11:12 am

Nick1209 wrote:
Hoping and Relying on the ECAA won’t do much. Just look what those goons did with EgyptAir 990. Are we really expecting them to come up with an actual conclusion? They’re probably looking for dirt on Boeing far more than investigating the accident.

There’s a reason why Lion Air rushed to the families after the incident, and forced them to sign papers agreeing not to sue them, nor Boeing. They simply didn’t wanna ruin their relationship with Boeing over something their pilots should have known. Like not selling them anymore aircraft till they prove otherwise. All the talk from airlines regarding the max is just politics. I remember what the CEO for United said right after the incident too lol.

If we wanted to make sure every plane was perfectly built, then we would be grounding every single one. I can’t even begin to tell you how many aircraft have been cleared to fly that have “design flaws” but haven’t affected a single flight today. Not even Boeing’s “design flaw” affected either accident. It wasn’t the engines that caused the plane to crash. They both had a software malfunction. Which is Impossible to prevent. And any malfunction that is improperly handled, will end up the same way. Both of which were handled improperly. To me, this is more important that what happened at Boeing because even a perfectly designed and certified airplane can have failures and the crews are the ones who are left to handle them. Crews must be prepared to handle whatever emergency we are presented with, even those like UAL232, Aloha 243, Qantas 32, Qantas 72, and SWA1380 which were failures that were never anticipated and for which no crew had ever been trained.

So how much longer are we going to act like the crashes were very controllable, and entirely preventable? Of which happened in third world countries andone FO with a low amount of hours, flying the plane.

Regardless, neither crew completed a single step on their procedures for runaway stabilizer OR unreliable airspeed. Both of which have to be done in a reasonably manner to prevent an accident.

Lions crew knew what procedure to follow, but forgot it. As you can see on the final report. What I wanted to know, was why did the Captain keep them in trim through 21 MCAS activations, but the FO, to whom took control, did not. Neither of them went to their procedure. We know why though, now. Because they forgot it. Sounds like Lion Air if you ask me, just how many times have their pilots missed the runway, and confused the ocean for the runway? And how many drug charges have been in the news for their pilots?

Let’s not forget that Boeing promised the Max would come without any additional training. And the issues with the engine position was nonexistent till the end of certification. It wasn’t until the stick force per g, which involves banking the aircraft and pulling back on the yoke, and of course banking more and pulling back more, it should be harder to pull back each time, and never easier. But because of Boeing’s engine positioning, an aerodynamic nose up appeared. This nose up created a feeling of it being easier to pull back. The aircraft didn’t Meet FAA longitudinal stability anymore. So the easiest fix was to add some nose down. So it’s quite comical to watch the media call it a “stall prevention system” which is far from true. Just because Airbus has one, and calls it that, and yes, they’ve killed people with their system as well, but doesn’t mean it’s the same for Boeing. Their products do not need a stall prevention system nor recovery system. They’ll recover a stall with the control column in neutral.

Boeing figured one sensor shouldn’t be too bad, after all, the issue would appear itself as a runaway trim and there’s a procedure for that, and it has been around for 5 decades. Shouldn’t be too difficult for pilots already typed in the aircraft, right? Well they under looked these third world countries and the training issues they have. Oops. And it’s not like the system in Airbus aircraft, ya know? Like the one where the crews gotta call to the ground team to figure out what’s going on, who’s hiding systems? Airbus has been dealing with the same and has already been told by both US and Europe to fix it, but haven’t. So while everyone expects Boeing to fix this issue in under a year, Airbus hasn’t fixed theirs, in over 10 years now. Could it be, that designing an aircraft is just difficult? Nah, totally easy. Anyone can do it and Boeing should have knew better. It’s not like airlines had the option to purchase a second sensor but chose not to, and how did the airlines know to buy one or two? The 737 has always looked at one sensor the same way the Max did. It was just based off whoever was flying the plane.

It’s not like the Brazilian authority has MCAS on paper and listed as “B” training from January 2018. Besides all of that, the runaway stabilizer procedure has been the same and hardly changes. As you guys probably already know, the procedure that will disable MCAS. And Ethiopias crew knew it, because they verbalized it, and did it, and undid it. Then accelerated beyond the design limit and crashed. Blame Boeing. If anything, we can say Lions crew had the harder battle due to them not “knowing” not considering the fact that it literally the same as a runaway stab malfunction. Ethiopias crew was already reminded of the issue, due to the Lion crash. Boeing highlighted the issues on the checklist. And sent it out. It’s important that airlines inform their pilots of the new changes

That say “In the event of an uncommanded nose pitch down, hit the stab trim cut out switches to CUTOFF and stay in the CUTOUT position for remainder of flight” yet Ethiopias crew battled with the entire issue until it was near full nose down, then they cut out the switches. They also skipped over step 2 which was too disengage auto throttles, and that allowed the aircraft to fly to and past VMO and out of the flights envelope. Increasing nose down trim and increasing airspeed will result in a stronger nose down force. It’s also clear that when the FO took control, after hitting the cut out switches, he trimmed in the WRONG DIRECTION. And told his captain “it’s not working” followed by his captain saying “pitch up with me”

One of them re engaged the stab trim switches, and that allowed MCAS to reactivate and drive the nose down back down, and it did. Despite them knowing what was going on, and the entire procedure, and lions crash, they still failed the aircraft. I’m not trying to be harsh, but the blame is all going on Boeing when it shouldn’t. It’s clear there’s enough blame to go around here. And allowing such training issues to go unnoticed is going to be a disaster for the aviation industry.

I think you are confused about ECAA that participated in Egyptair 990 investigation. In that case it was Egyptian Civil Aviation Authority, not european, as it seems to be implied in your post.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2700
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:11 pm

Nick1209 wrote:
I believe it’s a business tactic pure and simple. The military doesn’t care how much they spend in the end. Airlines do. Airlines didn’t buy the second sensor although they had a choice to, for a reason. And Boeing knew it wouldn’t go over well with them, as shown, because in the end they didn’t purchase the sensor.


I'm not sure if it's a tactic or blatant arrogance, but the latter part of your argument is not a true representation. There was no option to buy a second sensor; there was an option to buy an AoA indicator. There was also an option to buy an AoA disagree warning, which was taken up by at least Southwest. Problem was, it didn't work because there was no independent box to compare the signals from both AoA sensors, and the FCC ran on the signal from only one of them. Nice one.
Signature. You just read one.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:41 pm

B777LRF wrote:
Nick1209 wrote:
I believe it’s a business tactic pure and simple. The military doesn’t care how much they spend in the end. Airlines do. Airlines didn’t buy the second sensor although they had a choice to, for a reason. And Boeing knew it wouldn’t go over well with them, as shown, because in the end they didn’t purchase the sensor.


I'm not sure if it's a tactic or blatant arrogance, but the latter part of your argument is not a true representation. There was no option to buy a second sensor; there was an option to buy an AoA indicator. There was also an option to buy an AoA disagree warning, which was taken up by at least Southwest. Problem was, it didn't work because there was no independent box to compare the signals from both AoA sensors, and the FCC ran on the signal from only one of them. Nice one.

Wrong for both posts.
AoA disagree was supposed to be standard warning, AoA indicator was a premium feature. Due to programming error, AoA disagree didn't work as designed without a premium feature purchased.
Loss of control over design at its best.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24300
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:44 pm

B777LRF wrote:
The presentation shows that Boeing in its original certification of the MAX:
* Presented MCAS to the FAA as not being a “new and novel” technology — and thus not requiring deeper scrutiny. The justification given was a doubtful comparison with the 767 tanker.
* Did not consider in its safety assessment the effect of multiple system failures and how this would affect the reactions of the pilots.
* Used questionable math to downgrade the system’s risk classification below a level that would have required more redundancy with at least two sensors to activate it.
* Made a key safety assessment prior to a major change in the design of MCAS, and did not reevaluate the system again before certification


Un.be.liveable, redux.

Why unbelievable when these same things have been reported for weeks if not months now?

It seems the media is recycling material to generate clicks, and it's working out well for them.
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
keesje
Posts: 13930
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:11 pm

Revelation wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The presentation shows that Boeing in its original certification of the MAX:
* Presented MCAS to the FAA as not being a “new and novel” technology — and thus not requiring deeper scrutiny. The justification given was a doubtful comparison with the 767 tanker.
* Did not consider in its safety assessment the effect of multiple system failures and how this would affect the reactions of the pilots.
* Used questionable math to downgrade the system’s risk classification below a level that would have required more redundancy with at least two sensors to activate it.
* Made a key safety assessment prior to a major change in the design of MCAS, and did not reevaluate the system again before certification


Un.be.liveable, redux.

Why unbelievable when these same things have been reported for weeks if not months now?

It seems the media is recycling material to generate clicks, and it's working out well for them.


It is easy to dismiss any relevation first as unconfirmed and later as we already knew. The influence Boeing has/had on FAA and how it worked on 737 MAX certification, is slowly becoming more and more clear. Lessons should be learned, changes made.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
2175301
Posts: 1863
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 2:24 pm

Revelation wrote:
B777LRF wrote:
The presentation shows that Boeing in its original certification of the MAX:
* Presented MCAS to the FAA as not being a “new and novel” technology — and thus not requiring deeper scrutiny. The justification given was a doubtful comparison with the 767 tanker.
* Did not consider in its safety assessment the effect of multiple system failures and how this would affect the reactions of the pilots.
* Used questionable math to downgrade the system’s risk classification below a level that would have required more redundancy with at least two sensors to activate it.
* Made a key safety assessment prior to a major change in the design of MCAS, and did not reevaluate the system again before certification


Un.be.liveable, redux.

Why unbelievable when these same things have been reported for weeks if not months now?

It seems the media is recycling material to generate clicks, and it's working out well for them.


They get paid based on clicks... what else do you expect.

What is bad is that since the original articles on this both the NTSB and the JATR reports have been issued (and those bodies had full access to both Boeing and the FAA). They, to my reading essentially do say, that Boeing followed the certification process at the time. Key mistakes were using industry standard assumptions which turn out to be wrong; and that it should be work by the various international bodies to come up with new and appropriate assumptions for those areas.

The NTSB and JATR report mutes much of the previous identified things in the press... and regurgitating those things without discussing the NTSB and JATR reports is not being very truthful in my opinion.

I doubt any lawyer will have any field day. I actually think the NTSB and JATR reports will be used by Boeing in any legal defense that actually occurs.

At this point I think that Boeing can say (and there is no actual evidence so far to the contrary) that it was a mistake made at the Failure Modes & Event Analysis (FMEA) level based on incorrect assumptions; and the incorrect assumptions were standard industry assumptions that are now recognized as incorrect. I believe the JATR report uses the term Failure Hazard Analysis (FHA) as an alternate name for what I call the FMEA.

Have a great day,
 
kalvado
Posts: 2817
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:08 pm

2175301 wrote:
At this point I think that Boeing can say (and there is no actual evidence so far to the contrary) that it was a mistake made at the Failure Modes & Event Analysis (FMEA) level based on incorrect assumptions; and the incorrect assumptions were standard industry assumptions that are now recognized as incorrect. I believe the JATR report uses the term Failure Hazard Analysis (FHA) as an alternate name for what I call the FMEA.

Have a great day,

And this is not entire truth. Next iteration is much more grim for Boeing.
Industry assumption of 3 second response for software-related trim runaway is based not on hitting kill switch, but on hitting yoke cutoff switches - i.e. pulling yoke enough to let computer know trimming went too far. MCAS, as we know, is deliberately designed to ignore those switches - so assumption of 3 second responce was rendered inapplicable by specific system design.
 
Ertro
Posts: 130
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sat Nov 09, 2019 3:52 pm

Revelation wrote:
It seems the media is recycling material to generate clicks, and it's working out well for them.


What is the criteria what is acceptable and what is not?
What is the count how may times all of these issues have been reported to Seattle area audience?
Is that count too high? What is the criteria what is allowed?

One could also ask whether Seattle Times is allowed to write about these in the first place?
I mean what if the thing has been reported in another newspaper like San Jose Mercury News?
If another newspaper writes about the same stuff is it now "media recycling material" and not allowed?

Compare this for example on how many times on this very forum a certain one individual is allowed to repeat over and over exactly the same opinion about pilot training in foreign countries? Maybe the count is over 10000 already. Haven't bothered to read them so I cannot count them.
I haven't noticed you being outraged about this.

Would this be "internet recycling material". Is this allowed in the first place? What if some other website forum has already written about pilot training issues? Like our friends at ppr...something site. Would this be "internet recycling material" and outrageous?

I find it fascinating how some particular groups are being held to a hugely high standard while others are not.

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