Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 35
 
Canuck600
Posts: 292
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Mon Jan 06, 2020 10:00 pm

As far as sim time there is no way they'll spend 10 hours training in the sim on one issue. Annual recurrency where they go over everything is probably no more then a couple of hours.
 
User avatar
flyingphil
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Mon Jan 06, 2020 10:04 pm

“Spirit AeroSystems offers voluntary layoffs amid Boeing 737 Max uncertainty”

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/ar ... 09448.html

Inevitable.. so once these employees are gone and have found jobs elsewhere.. good luck in ramping up production again.

“ Wichita’s largest employer Spirit Aerosystems is offering voluntary layoffs to employees, saying the company does not know how long production of the troubled 737 Max will remain on hold.”

So maybe Spirit should offer to make A220 fuselages.. they are buying Bombardier in Belfast who make the A220 wings.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4575
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Mon Jan 06, 2020 10:07 pm

Canuck600 wrote:
As far as sim time there is no way they'll spend 10 hours training in the sim on one issue. Annual recurrency where they go over everything is probably no more then a couple of hours.


You can probably expect 6 hours for the LPC/recurrency. Most competent airlines will throw in an additional training pass or two. That makes between 10 and 14 hours per crew, MAX specific training not included.
 
MrBretz
Posts: 557
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Mon Jan 06, 2020 11:18 pm

Looks like American Airlines has been compensated by Boeing for the late MAXs. The article doesn't say the amount but says AA has added $30M to employee profit sharing.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3529948-a ... rom-boeing
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20278
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:13 am

I had to temporarily lock topic to clean up: discuss the topic, post links for new facts, and if no links, discuss as opinion.

Stop discussing other users.

We have strong opinions. Post within forum rules.
If someone disagrees, don't call them out, agree to disagree, or wait on new information.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19175
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:41 am

MSPNWA wrote:
Since you appear to think this newsworthy based on your personal shot at me, how is this newsworthy?


Personal shot? You said it wasn't newsworthy.

With MAX, Boeing and the FAA under with microscope, something that could delay MAX RTS further would seem to be newsworthy to me.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
art
Posts: 3494
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:56 am

Interested wrote:
And surely they can't work on any changes to the Sims until the Max is approved to fly and they know what changes need making to the Sims hardware and software

So nobody can learn anything in the meantime in the Max sims


That is the way I see it, too. How long to modify sim software involved, given that nobody knows for sure what modifications are required until RTS is approved?
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 724
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:00 am

flyingphil wrote:
“Spirit AeroSystems offers voluntary layoffs amid Boeing 737 Max uncertainty”

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/ar ... 09448.html

Inevitable.. so once these employees are gone and have found jobs elsewhere.. good luck in ramping up production again.

“ Wichita’s largest employer Spirit Aerosystems is offering voluntary layoffs to employees, saying the company does not know how long production of the troubled 737 Max will remain on hold.”

So maybe Spirit should offer to make A220 fuselages.. they are buying Bombardier in Belfast who make the A220 wings.


The layoffs hints towards the fact that a production rate of 57 is far far away now but with the stored frames at least a ramp up at Spirit can be done gradually. What rate can we expect Boeing will start producing at again? 30? 40?

Spirit will not be able to produce at 50+, CFM shifts towards LeapA, it all tends towards a low production rate this year and also next year will be tough to see 50+. This will increase costs for Boeing a lot and with purchase prices agreed and compensation to pay we might see no money made from the 737 for years to come. Boeing will probably build another pool of deferred production costs now for the 737 instead of the 787.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24604
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 1:28 am

scbriml wrote:
par13del wrote:
Reports we have seen say Boeing identified the issue, not the FAA, so who is trying to make the a/c safer, Boeing or the FAA?

Hopefully both of them, since they both share most of the burden for MAX being where it is today.

But yes, since Boeing's internal process review appears to have discovered intra-company communications that have highlighted issues with MAX that weren't dealt with, they effectively grassed themselves to the FAA.

morrisond wrote:
If someone is going to cite poor engineering by Boeing - there needs to be context

The context is that it was poor original engineering by Boeing, apparently recognised and reported as such internally, but not acted upon. With Boeing and MAX certification under the microscope, they fessed up to the FAA. Now it has to be fixed on 800 planes.

The context I have is from NYT

So in developing a software update for the Max, Boeing and the F.A.A. recognized that the previous industry assumptions should be changed, and that they needed to consider what would happen if it took crews much longer to act in the face of emergencies.

Using that new set of assumptions about pilot reactions, Boeing discovered that if two wire bundles placed close together toward the rear of the plane caused an electrical short, it could lead to a catastrophic accident. The wiring connects to the motor that controls the stabilizer, the horizontal fin on a plane’s tail, sending signals from the flight control computer that can push the nose down or lift it up.

If pilots did not recognize the problem and quickly take appropriate action, the plane could go into a nose dive, the senior Boeing engineer said. Under those circumstances, a short could bring a plane down in the same way that the MCAS software did on both doomed flights, forcing the stabilizer’s motor to run uncontrollably.

Boeing is still working to determine how likely it is that the wires could actually short circuit. The company does not want to make changes to the plane’s wiring if it doesn't have to, fearing that additional damage could be done during a repair.

Ref: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/busi ... 7-max.html

So, in short, FAA asked Boeing to reevaluate potential safety issues based on the changed assumptions on pilot response time, and this is one potential issue they identified, however they haven't identified the likelihood of the potential issue from happening.

I don't see where any confession is involved. The rules were changed, Boeing was asked to re-evaluate, Boeing identified a potential issue, one whose actual odds of occurrence are not yet known.

airboss787 wrote:
Hoping to see the MAX flying again this quarter. The issues are nearing the end and excited to fly on one once it is ready. Boeing needs this over soon and lets hope it does. They need the cash flow generated from this badly.

It seems to be in the realm of possibility, according to the same NYT article:

Still, there are signs that Boeing is making progress toward getting the Max flying again. Regulators from Europe plan to fly to Seattle this week to test the new software in a flight simulator, a sign that international authorities believe the company is far enough along that its fix is ready for serious evaluation, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Government officials believe that the plane may be cleared for a certification test flight as soon as this month, where the company must demonstrate the plane meets all the safety requirements.
The flight — the regulator’s final exam for the Max — is a significant milestone and one of the last hurdles the company needs to clear for regulators to lift the grounding.
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
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1865
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 6:47 am

Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Whatever problems that involves are much smaller problems than the ones created by dumping MAX and figuring out what to do next after you've burned all the MAX partners and all the MAX customers by dumping MAX.

Didn't they already do 50% of that (burning all the MAX partners)?

We had media reports earlier in this thread saying that Boeing would be supporting partners throughout the production stop, although it was not specified how deep/far such support goes, it is being evaluated on a case by case basis. We just recently read that CFM will still be making on average 70 LEAP-1B per month in 2020 so it seems they are getting a lot of support.

Well then the cash savings might be much smaller than assumed. Either partners are burned, or cash.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2897
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:18 am

Revelation wrote:
scbriml wrote:
par13del wrote:
Reports we have seen say Boeing identified the issue, not the FAA, so who is trying to make the a/c safer, Boeing or the FAA?

Hopefully both of them, since they both share most of the burden for MAX being where it is today.

But yes, since Boeing's internal process review appears to have discovered intra-company communications that have highlighted issues with MAX that weren't dealt with, they effectively grassed themselves to the FAA.

morrisond wrote:
If someone is going to cite poor engineering by Boeing - there needs to be context

The context is that it was poor original engineering by Boeing, apparently recognised and reported as such internally, but not acted upon. With Boeing and MAX certification under the microscope, they fessed up to the FAA. Now it has to be fixed on 800 planes.

The context I have is from NYT

So in developing a software update for the Max, Boeing and the F.A.A. recognized that the previous industry assumptions should be changed, and that they needed to consider what would happen if it took crews much longer to act in the face of emergencies.

Using that new set of assumptions about pilot reactions, Boeing discovered that if two wire bundles placed close together toward the rear of the plane caused an electrical short, it could lead to a catastrophic accident. The wiring connects to the motor that controls the stabilizer, the horizontal fin on a plane’s tail, sending signals from the flight control computer that can push the nose down or lift it up.

If pilots did not recognize the problem and quickly take appropriate action, the plane could go into a nose dive, the senior Boeing engineer said. Under those circumstances, a short could bring a plane down in the same way that the MCAS software did on both doomed flights, forcing the stabilizer’s motor to run uncontrollably.

Boeing is still working to determine how likely it is that the wires could actually short circuit. The company does not want to make changes to the plane’s wiring if it doesn't have to, fearing that additional damage could be done during a repair.

Ref: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/05/busi ... 7-max.html

So, in short, FAA asked Boeing to reevaluate potential safety issues based on the changed assumptions on pilot response time, and this is one potential issue they identified, however they haven't identified the likelihood of the potential issue from happening.

I don't see where any confession is involved. The rules were changed, Boeing was asked to re-evaluate, Boeing identified a potential issue, one whose actual odds of occurrence are not yet known.

airboss787 wrote:
Hoping to see the MAX flying again this quarter. The issues are nearing the end and excited to fly on one once it is ready. Boeing needs this over soon and lets hope it does. They need the cash flow generated from this badly.

It seems to be in the realm of possibility, according to the same NYT article:

Still, there are signs that Boeing is making progress toward getting the Max flying again. Regulators from Europe plan to fly to Seattle this week to test the new software in a flight simulator, a sign that international authorities believe the company is far enough along that its fix is ready for serious evaluation, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Government officials believe that the plane may be cleared for a certification test flight as soon as this month, where the company must demonstrate the plane meets all the safety requirements.
The flight — the regulator’s final exam for the Max — is a significant milestone and one of the last hurdles the company needs to clear for regulators to lift the grounding.

I have pretty hard time digesting this story.
So, wire bundle can get problems due to a short. Is wiring protected at all? Obviously thinnest wiring possible is used, but then protection is a must.
Ok, it is unprotected and can affect ajacent wiring.
Now, reevaluating situation due to changes about pilot response means fire from unprotected wiring spreads within the airframe in a matter of seconds.
Swissair 111 comes to mind. They had minutes, sounds like 737 has seconds before fire spreads.
I don't know, but my gut feeling that the problem here is ways bigger than a clamp install. More like design concepts review is on order.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:27 am

Seems like compensation payments are coming daily now!

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/06/america ... oyees.html

American Airlines said Monday that it reached an agreement with Boeing to reimburse the airline for financial damages incurred last year from the grounding of the 737 Max, which is now in its 10th month.

Airlines have lost more than $1 billion in revenue because of the grounding after two fatal crashes. Boeing and Southwest Airlines ⁠— the largest U.S. operator of the 737 Max ⁠— disclosed they had reached an agreement last month.

American didn’t disclose the terms of the agreement, but as CNBC reported last week, it plans to share a portion of the compensation with employees. American said the compensation would add $30 million to an employee profit-sharing program, payable in March. Southwest had taken a similar step, saying it would share $125 million with its workers.

American’s pilots deserve more compensation, their labor union, the Allied Pilots Association said. Dennis Tajer, a Boeing 737 captain and spokesman for the union, called the profit sharing increase a “good start” but not enough because pilots lost out on income, not just profit sharing.


https://simpleflying.com/american-airli ... nsation-2/

The compensation deal with American Airlines concerns financial damage caused by the 737 MAX grounding throughout 2019. The airline notes talks would be continuing concerning financial reparations for 2020.

This I think is highly interesting:
Boeing has set aside USD$6.1 billion to compensate customers via a combination of cash, in-kind benefits, and discounts.
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:13 pm

flyingphil wrote:
“Spirit AeroSystems offers voluntary layoffs amid Boeing 737 Max uncertainty”

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/ar ... 09448.html

Inevitable.. so once these employees are gone and have found jobs elsewhere.. good luck in ramping up production again.

“ Wichita’s largest employer Spirit Aerosystems is offering voluntary layoffs to employees, saying the company does not know how long production of the troubled 737 Max will remain on hold.”

So maybe Spirit should offer to make A220 fuselages.. they are buying Bombardier in Belfast who make the A220 wings.


Ramping up production will be a logistic challenge. Spirit will have to train a lot of new workers.
Good moaning!
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19175
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:32 pm

PepeTheFrog wrote:
Ramping up production will be a logistic challenge. Spirit will have to train a lot of new workers.


It will be something of a challenge, but Spirit is in a better position than some as they've 'over produced' and have around 100 737 fuselages completed and stored in Wichita.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
flyingphil
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 12:51 pm

From @jonostrower
NEWS: Boeing has begun reassigning some 737 Max production employees to other programs, affecting some 3,000 employees. Max production will halt after the roll-out of Line #7896 in Mid-January. Company is setting up a new Max storage site in Victorville, CA.

Hmm.. so Moses Lake must be reaching capacity?
Its quite a commute from Renton to Everett too..
So the big question is when will (or if) 737MAX production start again..

Still wondering about the 737MAX10..

The saga continues
 
kalvado
Posts: 2897
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:32 pm

Boeing borrowed about $9B between ET crash and end of 3Q, and I saw another $10B in 4Q, from less reliable source. I wonder when they would start getting questions about assets value...
 
morrisond
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:43 pm

kalvado wrote:
Boeing borrowed about $9B between ET crash and end of 3Q, and I saw another $10B in 4Q, from less reliable source. I wonder when they would start getting questions about assets value...



They will report Q4 by the end of January so they will have to disclose everything then.

I doubt they would be borrowing against assets - they would be borrowing against future cash flows. Although they could structure something around the undelivered MAX's but probably no need to do so at this point and it just complicates matters.
 
art
Posts: 3494
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding News and Reference Thread 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:10 pm

StTim wrote:


I listened to the brief statement of the governor and was interested to hear that the state might (will ?) provide financial support to personnel laid off. Does that mean the state contributes to fund the layoffs or will the state seek to recover any payments for staff layoffs at a later point? What is the contract between Spirit and Boeing? Can Boeing simply say no more deliveries for the time being to Spirit?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24604
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:19 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
Well then the cash savings might be much smaller than assumed. Either partners are burned, or cash.

Of course. There is no easy way out. Cash can be regenerated more easily than partners can.

kalvado wrote:
I have pretty hard time digesting this story.
So, wire bundle can get problems due to a short. Is wiring protected at all? Obviously thinnest wiring possible is used, but then protection is a must.
Ok, it is unprotected and can affect ajacent wiring.
Now, reevaluating situation due to changes about pilot response means fire from unprotected wiring spreads within the airframe in a matter of seconds.
Swissair 111 comes to mind. They had minutes, sounds like 737 has seconds before fire spreads.
I don't know, but my gut feeling that the problem here is ways bigger than a clamp install. More like design concepts review is on order.

That's not the way I read it. The concern is a potential short could case a similar nose down action to the one that MCAS 1.0 did, and then we're back to the same issues like will the pilots recognize this as another form of runaway stabilizer within the new shorter time standard and run the right check list to disable the runaway trim. I'm not seeing a discussion of fire, presumably for the reasons you gave, that SR111 caused a banning of certain kinds of insulation and this kind of failure mode is no different than any other potential fire from wiring.

People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.
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: 3494
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:35 pm

If Boeing needs cash in the near future, why does it not convert treasury stock into cash? If you are never going to sell treasury stock, what is the point of buying your own stock?
 
morrisond
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:48 pm

art wrote:
If Boeing needs cash in the near future, why does it not convert treasury stock into cash? If you are never going to sell treasury stock, what is the point of buying your own stock?


They have stopped the buybacks for now.

They are probably assuming that if they issued shares now it could be a lot more expensive to buy them back later after RTS.

If they can borrow at the rates they are getting right now that is a lot cheaper.
 
RossW
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 3:39 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 3:55 pm

art wrote:
If Boeing needs cash in the near future, why does it not convert treasury stock into cash? If you are never going to sell treasury stock, what is the point of buying your own stock?


Shareholders probably wouldn't be too happy with that.

Selling treasury stock = more dilution = less share value.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9391
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 4:23 pm

art wrote:
If Boeing needs cash in the near future, why does it not convert treasury stock into cash? If you are never going to sell treasury stock, what is the point of buying your own stock?


There are problems with that idea. Boeing would not get an comparable price to when they bought them and sales could lead to the need to revalue the rest of the treasury shares bought and stored. If Boeing would need to lower the value, that could have a bad effect on the annual reports.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4123
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:03 pm

Revelation wrote:
People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.

This seems to be a very plausable and rational scenario. It feeds back to the poor FMEA performed on MCAS, and explores other areas where similar FMEA gaps are being identified. Thanks for sharing your thoughts here.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
airnorth
Posts: 458
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:12 pm

Just noticed one AC MAX C-FSLU heading to Montreal (YUL) from Marana (MZJ), via Windsor (YQG). Is this more pilot training, similar to the MAX flights back in September, or what is going on here?

https://www.flightradar24.com/JZA184/2371ba55
 
Interested
Posts: 887
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 12:19 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:13 pm

Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Well then the cash savings might be much smaller than assumed. Either partners are burned, or cash.

Of course. There is no easy way out. Cash can be regenerated more easily than partners can.

kalvado wrote:
I have pretty hard time digesting this story.
So, wire bundle can get problems due to a short. Is wiring protected at all? Obviously thinnest wiring possible is used, but then protection is a must.
Ok, it is unprotected and can affect ajacent wiring.
Now, reevaluating situation due to changes about pilot response means fire from unprotected wiring spreads within the airframe in a matter of seconds.
Swissair 111 comes to mind. They had minutes, sounds like 737 has seconds before fire spreads.
I don't know, but my gut feeling that the problem here is ways bigger than a clamp install. More like design concepts review is on order.

That's not the way I read it. The concern is a potential short could case a similar nose down action to the one that MCAS 1.0 did, and then we're back to the same issues like will the pilots recognize this as another form of runaway stabilizer within the new shorter time standard and run the right check list to disable the runaway trim. I'm not seeing a discussion of fire, presumably for the reasons you gave, that SR111 caused a banning of certain kinds of insulation and this kind of failure mode is no different than any other potential fire from wiring.

People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.


It's also another reason why the Max can never be as safe as the NG

Issues that can cause crashes that the NG doesn't have to worry about
 
kalvado
Posts: 2897
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:25 pm

Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Well then the cash savings might be much smaller than assumed. Either partners are burned, or cash.

Of course. There is no easy way out. Cash can be regenerated more easily than partners can.

kalvado wrote:
I have pretty hard time digesting this story.
So, wire bundle can get problems due to a short. Is wiring protected at all? Obviously thinnest wiring possible is used, but then protection is a must.
Ok, it is unprotected and can affect ajacent wiring.
Now, reevaluating situation due to changes about pilot response means fire from unprotected wiring spreads within the airframe in a matter of seconds.
Swissair 111 comes to mind. They had minutes, sounds like 737 has seconds before fire spreads.
I don't know, but my gut feeling that the problem here is ways bigger than a clamp install. More like design concepts review is on order.

That's not the way I read it. The concern is a potential short could case a similar nose down action to the one that MCAS 1.0 did, and then we're back to the same issues like will the pilots recognize this as another form of runaway stabilizer within the new shorter time standard and run the right check list to disable the runaway trim. I'm not seeing a discussion of fire, presumably for the reasons you gave, that SR111 caused a banning of certain kinds of insulation and this kind of failure mode is no different than any other potential fire from wiring.

People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.

Problem of your explanation is that wire bundle separation doesn't come anywhere as a meaningful step for problem resolution in such story.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 6:05 pm

flyingphil wrote:
So maybe Spirit should offer to make A220 fuselages.. they are buying Bombardier in Belfast who make the A220 wings.


... and A220 centre fuselage.

Shenyang (AVIC) never made one set that was good enough to go onto an aircraft - so they had to be build in Belfast as well.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 6:10 pm

So you have independent knowledge of the effect that a wire shortage would have on the 737MAX?
The regulators and Boeing seem to think that in such a situation, control of the a/c will be affected and the pilots will have minimum time to react appropriately.
Or am I misunderstanding your statement?
 
morrisond
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:01 pm

Interested wrote:
Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Well then the cash savings might be much smaller than assumed. Either partners are burned, or cash.

Of course. There is no easy way out. Cash can be regenerated more easily than partners can.

kalvado wrote:
I have pretty hard time digesting this story.
So, wire bundle can get problems due to a short. Is wiring protected at all? Obviously thinnest wiring possible is used, but then protection is a must.
Ok, it is unprotected and can affect ajacent wiring.
Now, reevaluating situation due to changes about pilot response means fire from unprotected wiring spreads within the airframe in a matter of seconds.
Swissair 111 comes to mind. They had minutes, sounds like 737 has seconds before fire spreads.
I don't know, but my gut feeling that the problem here is ways bigger than a clamp install. More like design concepts review is on order.

That's not the way I read it. The concern is a potential short could case a similar nose down action to the one that MCAS 1.0 did, and then we're back to the same issues like will the pilots recognize this as another form of runaway stabilizer within the new shorter time standard and run the right check list to disable the runaway trim. I'm not seeing a discussion of fire, presumably for the reasons you gave, that SR111 caused a banning of certain kinds of insulation and this kind of failure mode is no different than any other potential fire from wiring.

People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.


It's also another reason why the Max can never be as safe as the NG

Issues that can cause crashes that the NG doesn't have to worry about


The NG would have the same issue as the Horizontal Stabilizer is usually controlled through an electrical circuit. But then the Pilots would have to run the Runaway Trim checklist which seems like it has deemed to be be too much for pilots these days.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:03 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
art wrote:
If Boeing needs cash in the near future, why does it not convert treasury stock into cash? If you are never going to sell treasury stock, what is the point of buying your own stock?


There are problems with that idea. Boeing would not get an comparable price to when they bought them and sales could lead to the need to revalue the rest of the treasury shares bought and stored. If Boeing would need to lower the value, that could have a bad effect on the annual reports.


Treasury shares aren't bought and stored - they are bought and retired so the Company can report a higher EPS.

They already have negative Share Capital of $47 Billion.

You can't revalue something that doesn't exist (not that it would matter at all even if they did need too).
 
morrisond
Posts: 2774
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:05 pm

keesje wrote:
I don't think the stock development of the last 3 years reflects the company value / condition (debt, assetts, short / medium term outlook).
There's a lot of effort to keep stock price up from investors / beneficiaries. So much relies on it.


You could lump in most of the Companies listed on Worldwide exchanges in that category right now. Most valuations are ridiculous.
 
max999
Posts: 1233
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 11:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:41 pm

Boeing reverses its long held position against simulator training for Max pilots. I wonder how much additional Boeing will owe Southwest... for the special clause in their contract that requires to pay millions for each Max delivered that requires sim training.

https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEE ... id=US%3Aen
All the things I really like to do are either immoral, illegal, or fattening.
 
User avatar
flyingphil
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:43 pm

More from @jonostrower
“HUGE NEWS: Boeing’s interim CEO Greg Smith says that the company will recommend full simulator training for all 737 Max pilots before the jet returns to service.”

So those 737MAX Sims will be busy once they have been updated.

It seems like since DM’s departure things seem to be moving and hard decisions are being made.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding News and Reference Thread 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:46 pm

9Patch wrote:
Leeham News reports that Boeing internally sees production suspension of the 737 MAX of at least 60 days, LNA thinks it will be more like 90 days.

The FAA is proceeding slowly and flight testing is going at a snail’s pace, LNA is told. Only one airplane has been authorized for flight testing by the FAA. This compares with three or four normally used by Boeing for tests of this nature
.

With all these factors casting continued uncertainty over the recertification of the MAX, restarting production appears highly unlikely though March—90 days from now. Internally, Boeing so far doesn’t see production restarting through February.

https://leehamnews.com/2020/01/07/boein ... t-60-days/
I just have a gut feeling that a mere production suspension of 60-90 days wouldn't make any commercial sense, when factoring in the cost of later restarting production etc. and that the actual production stop will be longer.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
lowbank
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:47 pm

oschkosch wrote:
Seems like compensation payments are coming daily now!

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/06/america ... -employees
This I think is highly interesting:
Boeing has set aside USD$6.1 billion to compensate customers via a combination of cash, in-kind benefits, and discounts.


I think the guys who were debating this issue would cost less than 50 billion need to start re assessing their estimates.
Every days a school day.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:47 pm

kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Well then the cash savings might be much smaller than assumed. Either partners are burned, or cash.

Of course. There is no easy way out. Cash can be regenerated more easily than partners can.

kalvado wrote:
I have pretty hard time digesting this story.
So, wire bundle can get problems due to a short. Is wiring protected at all? Obviously thinnest wiring possible is used, but then protection is a must.
Ok, it is unprotected and can affect ajacent wiring.
Now, reevaluating situation due to changes about pilot response means fire from unprotected wiring spreads within the airframe in a matter of seconds.
Swissair 111 comes to mind. They had minutes, sounds like 737 has seconds before fire spreads.
I don't know, but my gut feeling that the problem here is ways bigger than a clamp install. More like design concepts review is on order.

That's not the way I read it. The concern is a potential short could case a similar nose down action to the one that MCAS 1.0 did, and then we're back to the same issues like will the pilots recognize this as another form of runaway stabilizer within the new shorter time standard and run the right check list to disable the runaway trim. I'm not seeing a discussion of fire, presumably for the reasons you gave, that SR111 caused a banning of certain kinds of insulation and this kind of failure mode is no different than any other potential fire from wiring.

People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.

Problem of your explanation is that wire bundle separation doesn't come anywhere as a meaningful step for problem resolution in such story.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/118 ... ng-737-max

This article has an adequate description of the scenario of short circuit in the wire bundle potentially leading to runaway stabiliser that has, subsequent to the crash investigations, been found to be potentially catastrophic.

It remains to be determined if the short circuit scenario is mitigated by existing protection, and if not, the design change necessary to remove the potential.

It should be noted, that if the Catastrophic failure mode of Speed Trim eluded to in Mr Markos leaked email is also runaway it is also applicable to the NG and if design change is required, then it would also then apply to the NG.

Ray
 
lowbank
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 7:53 pm

flyingphil wrote:
More from @jonostrower
“HUGE NEWS: Boeing’s interim CEO Greg Smith says that the company will recommend full simulator training for all 737 Max pilots before the jet returns to service.”

So those 737MAX Sims will be busy once they have been updated.

It seems like since DM’s departure things seem to be moving and hard decisions are being made.


At last a common sense decision, they owe Southwest 1 million per aircraft.

That’s a small percentage of what’s this costing them.

Instantly removes many of the pilots concerns.

Shows the new guy is willing to make brave decisions to ba able to get this plane back in the air.
Every days a school day.
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:01 pm

scbriml wrote:
par13del wrote:
Reports we have seen say Boeing identified the issue, not the FAA, so who is trying to make the a/c safer, Boeing or the FAA?


Hopefully both of them, since they both share most of the burden for MAX being where it is today.

But yes, since Boeing's internal process review appears to have discovered intra-company communications that have highlighted issues with MAX that weren't dealt with, they effectively grassed themselves to the FAA.

morrisond wrote:
If someone is going to cite poor engineering by Boeing - there needs to be context


The context is that it was poor original engineering by Boeing, apparently recognised and reported as such internally, but not acted upon. With Boeing and MAX certification under the microscope, they fessed up to the FAA. Now it has to be fixed on 800 planes.


So this time Boeing didn't try to perform a Jedi mind trick on the FAA?
Good moaning!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2897
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:02 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Of course. There is no easy way out. Cash can be regenerated more easily than partners can.


That's not the way I read it. The concern is a potential short could case a similar nose down action to the one that MCAS 1.0 did, and then we're back to the same issues like will the pilots recognize this as another form of runaway stabilizer within the new shorter time standard and run the right check list to disable the runaway trim. I'm not seeing a discussion of fire, presumably for the reasons you gave, that SR111 caused a banning of certain kinds of insulation and this kind of failure mode is no different than any other potential fire from wiring.

People seem to be missing the fact that this problem arose because FAA and other regulators pushed back on small amount of reaction time Boeing used when deciding how quickly pilots would respond to problems. It was said that this same wiring design is present on NG so we know from its track record that it's not something that has ever happened. However Boeing was asked to come up scenarios that could cause pilots to need to react quickly so the regulators could be sure the pilots would be able to figure out what to do about such scenarios. It should be held up as an example of increased thoroughness on the part of the regulators and Boeing, but instead it is held up as an example of more shoddy work. If it bleeds, it leads.

Problem of your explanation is that wire bundle separation doesn't come anywhere as a meaningful step for problem resolution in such story.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/118 ... ng-737-max

This article has an adequate description of the scenario of short circuit in the wire bundle potentially leading to runaway stabiliser that has, subsequent to the crash investigations, been found to be potentially catastrophic.

It remains to be determined if the short circuit scenario is mitigated by existing protection, and if not, the design change necessary to remove the potential.

It should be noted, that if the Catastrophic failure mode of Speed Trim eluded to in Mr Markos leaked email is also runaway it is also applicable to the NG and if design change is required, then it would also then apply to the NG.

Ray

And I still miss the point. Short circuit leading to unintended movement is a fairly straightforward concept. After all, circuit diagram we saw so far shows relay as a final actuator; shorting same wires leading to motor without command is a runaway. Why separation of a short segment of bundles would help is beyond me.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24604
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:09 pm

lowbank wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
More from @jonostrower
“HUGE NEWS: Boeing’s interim CEO Greg Smith says that the company will recommend full simulator training for all 737 Max pilots before the jet returns to service.”

So those 737MAX Sims will be busy once they have been updated.

It seems like since DM’s departure things seem to be moving and hard decisions are being made.


At last a common sense decision, they owe Southwest 1 million per aircraft.

That’s a small percentage of what’s this costing them.

Instantly removes many of the pilots concerns.

Shows the new guy is willing to make brave decisions to ba able to get this plane back in the air.

It is good news, hopefully it will remove doubts that training was rushed or inadequate.

I also hope that the sim training also includes a check by an independent observer that serves to weed out pilots who can't remember memory items or find things in the QRH in a reasonable amount of time.
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
 
Interested
Posts: 887
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 12:19 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:25 pm

lowbank wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
More from @jonostrower
“HUGE NEWS: Boeing’s interim CEO Greg Smith says that the company will recommend full simulator training for all 737 Max pilots before the jet returns to service.”

So those 737MAX Sims will be busy once they have been updated.

It seems like since DM’s departure things seem to be moving and hard decisions are being made.


At last a common sense decision


Do you actually think they had any choice in that decision?
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2645
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:28 pm

keesje wrote:
Amiga500 wrote:
keesje wrote:
I don't think the stock development of the last 3 years reflects the company value / condition (debt, assetts, short / medium term outlook).
There's a lot of effort to keep stock price up from investors / beneficiaries. So much relies on it.


As far as I can see - the only thing within Boeing reliant on it is the bonuses paid to executives.

Can anyone enlighten me as to what else within Boeing their stock price influences? [Assuming Boeing were "free" to put shares back into the market to raise liquidity.]

They aren't highly geared in terms of borrowing I don't believe... are they?



Ability to get loans, pensions, the savings of many people. Nobody dares to move, blink, sell.. it became a proud household brand.. Like GE.

https://www.industryweek.com/talent/lab ... own-shares


Pension investments aren't within Boeing. Neither are savings. Neither of those are going to impact on Boeing's ability to develop top quality aircraft in the future.


Loans - yes - agreed. However do Boeing currently have a large loan balance? If not, then they are still low risk for getting loans, regardless of what market capital does.


My real point is - if Boeing need to issue shares to fund their way to a 737 replacement - what is stopping them? Executives being scared about their bonuses?
 
DenverTed
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:46 pm

lowbank wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
Seems like compensation payments are coming daily now!

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/06/america ... -employees
This I think is highly interesting:
Boeing has set aside USD$6.1 billion to compensate customers via a combination of cash, in-kind benefits, and discounts.


I think the guys who were debating this issue would cost less than 50 billion need to start re assessing their estimates.

6.1 is still a long way from 50. 10, 20, 30, 40, where is it at right now? I would imagine 20.
 
Alfons
Posts: 310
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:17 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:54 pm

Interested wrote:
lowbank wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
More from @jonostrower
“HUGE NEWS: Boeing’s interim CEO Greg Smith says that the company will recommend full simulator training for all 737 Max pilots before the jet returns to service.”

So those 737MAX Sims will be busy once they have been updated.

It seems like since DM’s departure things seem to be moving and hard decisions are being made.


At last a common sense decision


Do you actually think they had any choice in that decision?


As 50% of all 1st world American Pilots who where part of the test group didn't chose the right checklist, they deffinitely didn't have any choice. You see that right.
 
art
Posts: 3494
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:01 pm

morrisond wrote:

Treasury shares aren't bought and stored - they are bought and retired so the Company can report a higher EPS.


Did not know that, so thanks for the info. How are shares bought by and helld by the company termed? eg Boeing buys 1000 shares in itself

Amiga500 wrote:
My real point is - if Boeing need to issue shares to fund their way to a 737 replacement - what is stopping them? Executives being scared about their bonuses?


I can think of a number of reasons -

1. Executives being scared about their bonuses
2. Executives being scared about their bonuses
3. Executives being scared about their bonuses
4. Executives being scared about their bonuses..... ;)
Last edited by art on Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
TaromA380
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:01 pm

lowbank wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
More from @jonostrower
“HUGE NEWS: Boeing’s interim CEO Greg Smith says that the company will recommend full simulator training for all 737 Max pilots before the jet returns to service.”

So those 737MAX Sims will be busy once they have been updated.

It seems like since DM’s departure things seem to be moving and hard decisions are being made.


At last a common sense decision, they owe Southwest 1 million per aircraft.

I guess that as we speak, at Southwest it is champagne time.

They suddenly become $280 millions richer overnight.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:02 pm

DenverTed wrote:
lowbank wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
Seems like compensation payments are coming daily now!

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/06/america ... -employees
This I think is highly interesting:
Boeing has set aside USD$6.1 billion to compensate customers via a combination of cash, in-kind benefits, and discounts.


I think the guys who were debating this issue would cost less than 50 billion need to start re assessing their estimates.

6.1 is still a long way from 50. 10, 20, 30, 40, where is it at right now? I would imagine 20.
6.1 Billion $ is only the figure for compensation of airlines.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
hivue
Posts: 2078
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:11 pm

TaromA380 wrote:
I guess that as we speak, at Southwest it is champagne time..


Not likely. The Reuters link in the other thread indicates WN has 9000+ pilots, who all will need the sim training, and they only have 3 MAX sims.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
TaromA380
Posts: 363
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 12:35 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, January 2020

Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:20 pm

hivue wrote:
TaromA380 wrote:
I guess that as we speak, at Southwest it is champagne time..


Not likely. The Reuters link in the other thread indicates WN has 9000+ pilots, who all will need the sim training, and they only have 3 MAX sims.

This situation as well as the grounding financial impact is common for all airlines. They will all get compensations. However only Southwest had that infamous "$1million/airframe if training" clause. It is their unique bonus.

Sure, some of the money will go into covering the grounding and training expenses. But overall it's jackpot. Any company would dream they had the same clause.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 35

Who is online

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