Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Checklist787
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

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

Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:45 pm

scbriml wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
I think Calhoun will reverse the machine. Since he is good at communication, he is the man for the situation. The Board has understood.

If a member of A.net understands it, I think a man of his stature knows it. Anyone who claims the opposite actually wants to continue eating Popcorn in 2020 ...

Look even Leeham is attacking the 777X to maintain doubt when the most difficult thing at Boeing has already passed ...


Changing the ingrained culture at a company like Boeing is like trying to turn a fully-laden supertanker. It happens very slowly.

If you think the most "difficult thing" at Boeing has already passed, then, IMHO, you're very optimistic. Let's see what 29th brings.


Well D. Gates published an article on the end of the USA-CHINA litigation, which proves that what I planned is true. The song has changed. The problems are well behind Boeing because there will be no more Popcorn articles and scandalous articles

Excuse me but what will happen on the 29th?
"No limit to my poooWer!!!
Do it! "...
 
889091
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:56 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:59 am

scbriml wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:
According to this guy at Leeham restarting production and getting up to speed again will take years:

https://leehamnews.com/2020/01/15/boein ... suppliers/

The MAX fiasco puts Boeing so much behind Airbus in the narrowbody race, I wonder if Boeing will ever catch up?


It will be somewhat discredited because "Leeham's always negative about Boeing", but to be honest, most of what he's saying is just common sense. Some posters here are overly optimistic on how long they think it will take Boeing to ramp production back up and get to the 57 they were aiming for last year, plus deliver 400 stored frames.

When Boeing were still expecting RTS towards the end of 2019, Muilenburg said delivery of stored frames would run into 2021 (without specifying numbers), but that was before they suspended production and said they would prioritise delivering stored frames over new production. But, with the FAA saying they will certify each stored MAX individually, delivery of those frames will drag on for quite a while.

It also seems more than reasonable that starting up production from stop will need to be a gradual build up. It's impossible to go from zero to 42 (let alone return to 52 or increase to 57) MAX a month instantly.

January 29th looks like it will be a pretty painful day for Boeing.


If Pierson's allegations are true, and if Calhoun is serious about changing Boeing's culture, is a production rate of 57/month even achievable? I think it would take a very long time for Boeing to ramp up production to 57 frames/month with the correct checks and balances in place.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9764
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:10 am

889091 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:
According to this guy at Leeham restarting production and getting up to speed again will take years:

https://leehamnews.com/2020/01/15/boein ... suppliers/

The MAX fiasco puts Boeing so much behind Airbus in the narrowbody race, I wonder if Boeing will ever catch up?


It will be somewhat discredited because "Leeham's always negative about Boeing", but to be honest, most of what he's saying is just common sense. Some posters here are overly optimistic on how long they think it will take Boeing to ramp production back up and get to the 57 they were aiming for last year, plus deliver 400 stored frames.

When Boeing were still expecting RTS towards the end of 2019, Muilenburg said delivery of stored frames would run into 2021 (without specifying numbers), but that was before they suspended production and said they would prioritise delivering stored frames over new production. But, with the FAA saying they will certify each stored MAX individually, delivery of those frames will drag on for quite a while.

It also seems more than reasonable that starting up production from stop will need to be a gradual build up. It's impossible to go from zero to 42 (let alone return to 52 or increase to 57) MAX a month instantly.

January 29th looks like it will be a pretty painful day for Boeing.


If Pierson's allegations are true, and if Calhoun is serious about changing Boeing's culture, is a production rate of 57/month even achievable? I think it would take a very long time for Boeing to ramp up production to 57 frames/month with the correct checks and balances in place.


Why not, but the revolution in Boeing´s culture will a huge challenge, simply because it was something obviously not limited to the 737MAX development team, when you look at the production problems for the 787 and KC-46 it shows the same basic attitude of cutting corners. This means accepting failure and delays in a time when Boeing can not afford delays and failure.
So there is a lot of higher and middle management positions that either need to be replaced or which need to change the way they work.
Which will be a long process, unless you believe that Muilenberg ruled as an evil dictator personally forcing everybody into submission.
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 759
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:21 am

Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
I heard that at slow speeds and higher AoA the engine and wing leading edge work like slotted flaps.

True, but wing leading edge didn't change from NG and engine is not all that much bigger than NG's engine, no?


It's not quite true, but a reasonable first order approximation. The 737 wing has Kruger flaps on the inboard section to deal with the issue of the tips unloading before the root. By adding the engine nacelle, and this problem would be present on every variant of the 737 from the -300 onwards you create a situation where the nacelle creates a 'slot' with the wing leading edge. In reality it is likely the general flow field off the nacelle and onto the engine at high AoAs that is the issue. This can come from two areas. The first is that the nacelle will likely reduce the local AoA of the flow where it contacts the wing. This will mean that this section will see and effectively lower AoA than the tips. The effect of this will vary slightly for each generation, but will be well in hand. The second issue, and one that slats can create is the presence of vortices and other locally high energy flow. This will delay separation on the section of the wing behind the engine. The challenge with vortices is that they are really hard to model correctly. Thus it may be only once you do wind-tunnel and flight testing that everything shows up. this is one reason we still spend a lot of time in low-speed tunnels with high-lift devices.

I have been spending way too much time looking into the general trends that should show up with MAX. It turns out that the larger engines, given their placement, should actually increase the static stability of the aircraft at lower AoAs. It is marginal, and second order effects may be important. However, this will not apply as we get to higher AoAs. Also, I am more firmly convinced that there is no static stability issue with the MAX in the sense that the aircraft becomes statically unstable. The reason for this is the wind-up turn issue has to do with manoeuvre margin and not static margin. For most aircraft the manoeuvre margin is less than the static margin. This means the stick forces to increase g loading will go to zero well before the aircraft is in danger of departing in an approach to stall. This has some effect on turbulence penetration, but is much more likely to be an issue where emergency manoeuvres are necessary, eg TCAS alerts. If the manoeuvre forces go to zero it becomes very easy to either overstress the airframe or bleed off too much energy, which could lead to a stall in a bad place. Of course this same trend of reducing manoeuvre margin will reduce static margin, and effect the speed stability stick force gradient, which might go too low. However, it would more likely become problematic in stall ID first.

Incidentally, the above issue shows up sooner for the 737 than it would for a 757, 757, or A320 with the same basic static margin. This is because of the nature of the control system. The controls on the other aircraft are fully hydraulically driven and irreversible, so they can be approximated as 'control-fixed'. The 737 elevator can be directly moved by the pilots, with assistance from the hydraulics. This means they are much closer to 'control-free'. The result of this is that for the same aerodynamic configuration and cg location the 737 has about an 8% lower static margin than a control-fixed equivalent, all while making the controls less effective for any given static margin. This makes sense when you look at the relative size of the horizontal stab on the 737 compared to its later counterparts (757/767). Switching to a controls-fixed design would have necessitated a 3rd hydraulic system, ram-air-turbine, and other changes. It wouldn't automatically have broken the common type rating, but at that point it might have been reasonable to go whole hog and use FBW and align the aircraft with the 777/787 TR.
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 759
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:26 am

seahawk wrote:
889091 wrote:
scbriml wrote:

It will be somewhat discredited because "Leeham's always negative about Boeing", but to be honest, most of what he's saying is just common sense. Some posters here are overly optimistic on how long they think it will take Boeing to ramp production back up and get to the 57 they were aiming for last year, plus deliver 400 stored frames.

When Boeing were still expecting RTS towards the end of 2019, Muilenburg said delivery of stored frames would run into 2021 (without specifying numbers), but that was before they suspended production and said they would prioritise delivering stored frames over new production. But, with the FAA saying they will certify each stored MAX individually, delivery of those frames will drag on for quite a while.

It also seems more than reasonable that starting up production from stop will need to be a gradual build up. It's impossible to go from zero to 42 (let alone return to 52 or increase to 57) MAX a month instantly.

January 29th looks like it will be a pretty painful day for Boeing.


If Pierson's allegations are true, and if Calhoun is serious about changing Boeing's culture, is a production rate of 57/month even achievable? I think it would take a very long time for Boeing to ramp up production to 57 frames/month with the correct checks and balances in place.


Why not, but the revolution in Boeing´s culture will a huge challenge, simply because it was something obviously not limited to the 737MAX development team, when you look at the production problems for the 787 and KC-46 it shows the same basic attitude of cutting corners. This means accepting failure and delays in a time when Boeing can not afford delays and failure.
So there is a lot of higher and middle management positions that either need to be replaced or which need to change the way they work.
Which will be a long process, unless you believe that Muilenberg ruled as an evil dictator personally forcing everybody into submission.


One of Boeing's big issues has been a dramatic shortening of their investment time horizon, and the resulting desire to minimise the development management costs of programmes. This led them to lose design control of the 787. It looks like they didn't learn adequately from that experience and 737MAX programme management was also a farce. Given that it too Boeing 10 years to destroy the 1990s culture, it is reasonable it will take as long again to fix their current culture.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19299
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:41 am

Checklist787 wrote:
Well D. Gates published an article on the end of the USA-CHINA litigation, which proves that what I planned is true. The song has changed. The problems are well behind Boeing because there will be no more Popcorn articles and scandalous articles

Excuse me but what will happen on the 29th?


Well it must all be true then, everything at Boeing is fixed! :spin:

Boeing announces their 2019 results on 29th. It's expected to be ugly.
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
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:51 am

Checklist787 wrote:
scbriml wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
I think Calhoun will reverse the machine. Since he is good at communication, he is the man for the situation. The Board has understood.

If a member of A.net understands it, I think a man of his stature knows it. Anyone who claims the opposite actually wants to continue eating Popcorn in 2020 ...

Look even Leeham is attacking the 777X to maintain doubt when the most difficult thing at Boeing has already passed ...


Changing the ingrained culture at a company like Boeing is like trying to turn a fully-laden supertanker. It happens very slowly.

If you think the most "difficult thing" at Boeing has already passed, then, IMHO, you're very optimistic. Let's see what 29th brings.


Well D. Gates published an article on the end of the USA-CHINA litigation, which proves that what I planned is true. The song has changed. The problems are well behind Boeing because there will be no more Popcorn articles and scandalous articles

Excuse me but what will happen on the 29th?


As long as the Board is not being replaced, nothing will change at Boeing.

And even so, changing a culture takes years.
Good moaning!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2937
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 11:58 am

phollingsworth wrote:
Revelation wrote:
seahawk wrote:
I heard that at slow speeds and higher AoA the engine and wing leading edge work like slotted flaps.

True, but wing leading edge didn't change from NG and engine is not all that much bigger than NG's engine, no?


It's not quite true, but a reasonable first order approximation. The 737 wing has Kruger flaps on the inboard section to deal with the issue of the tips unloading before the root. By adding the engine nacelle, and this problem would be present on every variant of the 737 from the -300 onwards you create a situation where the nacelle creates a 'slot' with the wing leading edge. In reality it is likely the general flow field off the nacelle and onto the engine at high AoAs that is the issue. This can come from two areas. The first is that the nacelle will likely reduce the local AoA of the flow where it contacts the wing. This will mean that this section will see and effectively lower AoA than the tips. The effect of this will vary slightly for each generation, but will be well in hand. The second issue, and one that slats can create is the presence of vortices and other locally high energy flow. This will delay separation on the section of the wing behind the engine. The challenge with vortices is that they are really hard to model correctly. Thus it may be only once you do wind-tunnel and flight testing that everything shows up. this is one reason we still spend a lot of time in low-speed tunnels with high-lift devices.

I have been spending way too much time looking into the general trends that should show up with MAX. It turns out that the larger engines, given their placement, should actually increase the static stability of the aircraft at lower AoAs. It is marginal, and second order effects may be important. However, this will not apply as we get to higher AoAs. Also, I am more firmly convinced that there is no static stability issue with the MAX in the sense that the aircraft becomes statically unstable. The reason for this is the wind-up turn issue has to do with manoeuvre margin and not static margin. For most aircraft the manoeuvre margin is less than the static margin. This means the stick forces to increase g loading will go to zero well before the aircraft is in danger of departing in an approach to stall. This has some effect on turbulence penetration, but is much more likely to be an issue where emergency manoeuvres are necessary, eg TCAS alerts. If the manoeuvre forces go to zero it becomes very easy to either overstress the airframe or bleed off too much energy, which could lead to a stall in a bad place. Of course this same trend of reducing manoeuvre margin will reduce static margin, and effect the speed stability stick force gradient, which might go too low. However, it would more likely become problematic in stall ID first.

Incidentally, the above issue shows up sooner for the 737 than it would for a 757, 757, or A320 with the same basic static margin. This is because of the nature of the control system. The controls on the other aircraft are fully hydraulically driven and irreversible, so they can be approximated as 'control-fixed'. The 737 elevator can be directly moved by the pilots, with assistance from the hydraulics. This means they are much closer to 'control-free'. The result of this is that for the same aerodynamic configuration and cg location the 737 has about an 8% lower static margin than a control-fixed equivalent, all while making the controls less effective for any given static margin. This makes sense when you look at the relative size of the horizontal stab on the 737 compared to its later counterparts (757/767). Switching to a controls-fixed design would have necessitated a 3rd hydraulic system, ram-air-turbine, and other changes. It wouldn't automatically have broken the common type rating, but at that point it might have been reasonable to go whole hog and use FBW and align the aircraft with the 777/787 TR.

With all that, how would you comment on high speed - low speed evolution of MCAS? Originally it was designed for high speed only, but flight test showed low speed problem as well. Tunnel tests were not able to get it fully, or there could be something else?
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1026
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:42 pm

phollingsworth wrote:
Incidentally, the above issue shows up sooner for the 737 than it would for a 757, 757, or A320 with the same basic static margin. This is because of the nature of the control system. The controls on the other aircraft are fully hydraulically driven and irreversible, so they can be approximated as 'control-fixed'. The 737 elevator can be directly moved by the pilots, with assistance from the hydraulics. This means they are much closer to 'control-free'. The result of this is that for the same aerodynamic configuration and cg location the 737 has about an 8% lower static margin than a control-fixed equivalent, all while making the controls less effective for any given static margin. This makes sense when you look at the relative size of the horizontal stab on the 737 compared to its later counterparts (757/767). Switching to a controls-fixed design would have necessitated a 3rd hydraulic system, ram-air-turbine, and other changes. It wouldn't automatically have broken the common type rating, but at that point it might have been reasonable to go whole hog and use FBW and align the aircraft with the 777/787 TR.

This explain why the NSA project was difficult to present as a competitor to the 737 MAX project: it can't compete with a grandfathering certification that allow the 737 MAX to no have a lot of systems that the new certification of the NSA require. In a decade or so, the 737 MAX with MCAS v2 safety record could be fine and then a justification to continue the grandfathering when the next generation of aircraft on that market segment will use a lot more of composite and possibly even bigger engines to lower operational costs.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
Mightyflyer86
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:50 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 2:04 pm

scbriml wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
I think Calhoun will reverse the machine. Since he is good at communication, he is the man for the situation. The Board has understood.

If a member of A.net understands it, I think a man of his stature knows it. Anyone who claims the opposite actually wants to continue eating Popcorn in 2020 ...

Look even Leeham is attacking the 777X to maintain doubt when the most difficult thing at Boeing has already passed ...


Changing the ingrained culture at a company like Boeing is like trying to turn a fully-laden supertanker. It happens very slowly.

If you think the most "difficult thing" at Boeing has already passed, then, IMHO, you're very optimistic. Let's see what 29th brings.


I spent 8 years working in BCA and I can tell you that indeed it will be difficult to change the culture. The fundamental problem that they have is excessive use of short term solutions that only impact short term results such as earnings on a specific quarter/year. Also they have become risk averse in terms of spending money on big projects or solutions that take some time to yield results. Instead they end up taking high risk/low cost/high reward decisions to please management. Also there is a major disconnect between Puget Sound management and Chicago since everybody is trying to please his/her management all the way from low level employees to senior management.
 
beechnut
Posts: 937
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:27 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 3:22 pm

Mightyflyer86 wrote:
Also there is a major disconnect between Puget Sound management and Chicago since everybody is trying to please his/her management all the way from low level employees to senior management.


Application of lowermost lips to next uppermost butt. A malady quite common in the corporate world these days.

Beech
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 759
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:58 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
phollingsworth wrote:
Incidentally, the above issue shows up sooner for the 737 than it would for a 757, 757, or A320 with the same basic static margin. This is because of the nature of the control system. The controls on the other aircraft are fully hydraulically driven and irreversible, so they can be approximated as 'control-fixed'. The 737 elevator can be directly moved by the pilots, with assistance from the hydraulics. This means they are much closer to 'control-free'. The result of this is that for the same aerodynamic configuration and cg location the 737 has about an 8% lower static margin than a control-fixed equivalent, all while making the controls less effective for any given static margin. This makes sense when you look at the relative size of the horizontal stab on the 737 compared to its later counterparts (757/767). Switching to a controls-fixed design would have necessitated a 3rd hydraulic system, ram-air-turbine, and other changes. It wouldn't automatically have broken the common type rating, but at that point it might have been reasonable to go whole hog and use FBW and align the aircraft with the 777/787 TR.

This explain why the NSA project was difficult to present as a competitor to the 737 MAX project: it can't compete with a grandfathering certification that allow the 737 MAX to no have a lot of systems that the new certification of the NSA require. In a decade or so, the 737 MAX with MCAS v2 safety record could be fine and then a justification to continue the grandfathering when the next generation of aircraft on that market segment will use a lot more of composite and possibly even bigger engines to lower operational costs.


I wouldn’t get too hung up on the grandfathering aspect. If you look at the certification basis for the MAX it is quite up to date in a lot of areas, commensurate to where the A320 is. In fact in a few of the areas I have mentioned in the last few posts the basis is either the most recent amendment or the next most recent, eg from 2009. The A320NEO occupies the same space. In many of the areas where they use an old basis, there are additional requirements to show equivalent level of safety to the current requirements . This is very typical. There is nothing about the basic flight control system on the 737 that isn’t certifiable today. Yes the implementation of MCAS wasn’t but he basic system is fine. So why rehash development work if you don’t have to. Of course once you break enough things the downside of having the older design (in terms of ease of changes and other efficiencies) disappear. The fact is that MCAS shouldn’t have been certified as it was under much older rules. Some of the areas it fails were from the mid 1960s.
 
Chrisba320
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:05 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:18 pm

This is probably a bit off topic in terms of the general conversation at this point but I really won’t mind if the Max never flies again. In fact, I still believe it shouldn’t be cleared for service again. I live in a city two hours flying away from where I work and most of my flights are on the 737-800 and the rest on the A319/A320. There is no denying the Airbii are vastly superior to the 737, as a passenger, it is actually embarrassing. And I’m talking the ceo here. Perhaps Boeing must just flush this turd instead of trying to polish it and come up with something that can actually compete with Airbus. A monopoly is good for no-one but let’s face it, Boeing is nowhere at the moment.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9764
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:22 pm

Less drama would be fine. There is no big difference between both products and the grandfathering is also not the root cause of the problem. The root cause is the management and work culture at Boeing. A newly designed plane made under the same pressure and with the same goals and strategies would be worse.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2937
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:24 pm

Chrisba320 wrote:
This is probably a bit off topic in terms of the general conversation at this point but I really won’t mind if the Max never flies again. In fact, I still believe it shouldn’t be cleared for service again. I live in a city two hours flying away from where I work and most of my flights are on the 737-800 and the rest on the A319/A320. There is no denying the Airbii are vastly superior to the 737, as a passenger, it is actually embarrassing. And I’m talking the ceo here. Perhaps Boeing must just flush this turd instead of trying to polish it and come up with something that can actually compete with Airbus. A monopoly is good for no-one but let’s face it, Boeing is nowhere at the moment.

Think about it in such a way: those 737-800 are getting old, in 5-6 years some of them will be retired. Airbus cannot pump enough planes out. So you - I mean your particular city - will see a cut in service as fewer planes will be in the air, and prices will go up - supply/demand, you know; and fewer people will fly from you airport as a result.
So beware of what you ask for - you may get it.
 
MrBretz
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 7:17 pm

Chrisba320 wrote:
This is probably a bit off topic in terms of the general conversation at this point but I really won’t mind if the Max never flies again. In fact, I still believe it shouldn’t be cleared for service again. I live in a city two hours flying away from where I work and most of my flights are on the 737-800 and the rest on the A319/A320. There is no denying the Airbii are vastly superior to the 737, as a passenger, it is actually embarrassing. And I’m talking the ceo here. Perhaps Boeing must just flush this turd instead of trying to polish it and come up with something that can actually compete with Airbus. A monopoly is good for no-one but let’s face it, Boeing is nowhere at the moment.


From a passenger point of view, the comfort level all comes from how the airlines configures the seats. I used to think A320s were more comfortable but I quickly discovered it all depends on the number, legroom, hardness, etc. of the seats. I once sat on one airlines packed A320 with slimline seats and tiny bathrooms for 4 hours in a middle economy seat. It was not pleasant and it had nothing to do with Boeing or Airbus. From a passenger point of view, the airline, not the manufacturer, determines comfort.
 
ShamrockBoi330
Posts: 357
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:28 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:03 pm

[New software issues, anyone know how bad this one is, or is it a quick fix?

Boeing discovers another MAX software issue

Boeing officials say the problem relates to a software power-up monitoring function that verifies system monitors are operating correctly.


https://seekingalpha.com/news/3532795?source=ansh

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN1ZG28M
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:17 pm

A new software bug has been discovered:

https://mobile.twitter.com/David_Kerley ... 6440364034

BREAKING NEWS-Another software issue for
@BoeingAirplanes
#737MAX . During testing audit last weekend the 737's two flight computers weren't talking to each other at startup. Unclear how long fix will take, but will be done as other return to service work is conducted.
@ABC
Good moaning!
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2490
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:33 pm

Indeed. As I predicted March last year the MAX would NOT be flying by the end of 2019.
And here we are. ANOTHER software "issue". Not to mention the trove of emails leaked recently that imply a major criminal cover up. Mark my words: the MAX ain't gonna fly for a LONG time, if EVER.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1026
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:36 pm

phollingsworth wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
phollingsworth wrote:
Incidentally, the above issue shows up sooner for the 737 than it would for a 757, 757, or A320 with the same basic static margin. This is because of the nature of the control system. The controls on the other aircraft are fully hydraulically driven and irreversible, so they can be approximated as 'control-fixed'. The 737 elevator can be directly moved by the pilots, with assistance from the hydraulics. This means they are much closer to 'control-free'. The result of this is that for the same aerodynamic configuration and cg location the 737 has about an 8% lower static margin than a control-fixed equivalent, all while making the controls less effective for any given static margin. This makes sense when you look at the relative size of the horizontal stab on the 737 compared to its later counterparts (757/767). Switching to a controls-fixed design would have necessitated a 3rd hydraulic system, ram-air-turbine, and other changes. It wouldn't automatically have broken the common type rating, but at that point it might have been reasonable to go whole hog and use FBW and align the aircraft with the 777/787 TR.

This explain why the NSA project was difficult to present as a competitor to the 737 MAX project: it can't compete with a grandfathering certification that allow the 737 MAX to no have a lot of systems that the new certification of the NSA require. In a decade or so, the 737 MAX with MCAS v2 safety record could be fine and then a justification to continue the grandfathering when the next generation of aircraft on that market segment will use a lot more of composite and possibly even bigger engines to lower operational costs.


I wouldn’t get too hung up on the grandfathering aspect. If you look at the certification basis for the MAX it is quite up to date in a lot of areas, commensurate to where the A320 is. In fact in a few of the areas I have mentioned in the last few posts the basis is either the most recent amendment or the next most recent, eg from 2009. The A320NEO occupies the same space. In many of the areas where they use an old basis, there are additional requirements to show equivalent level of safety to the current requirements . This is very typical. There is nothing about the basic flight control system on the 737 that isn’t certifiable today. Yes the implementation of MCAS wasn’t but he basic system is fine. So why rehash development work if you don’t have to. Of course once you break enough things the downside of having the older design (in terms of ease of changes and other efficiencies) disappear. The fact is that MCAS shouldn’t have been certified as it was under much older rules. Some of the areas it fails were from the mid 1960s.

I am perplex at how long a non-FBW design can be extended in the future. Fact is that from the E175-E2 and the A220, up to the biggest aircraft, all major new designs are FBW, except the 737 MAX. For example the Embraer E-Jet E2 FBW control reduces weight, increases fuel efficiency, enhances control and increases safety by full envelope protection in all flight phases. At some point, a future non-FBW 737 iteration will hit a challenge at increasing efficiency while maintaining safety with even more complex aerodynamic domains in some flight phases. My opinion is that it's already partially the case with the 737 MAX, as Boeing now have to implement some redundancy to support flight augmentation automation required by some complex aerodynamics. There can't increase the pilots workload induced by more complex aerodynamic, so automation is the only solution, and that automation require redundancy. Today new software issue on the 737 MAX, more than a year after that task started, illustrate how hard it is to add redundancy on a non-FBW flight control computer. The 737 MAX might ultimately pass that challenge with an astonish price tag, but I think this is now a dead end for the future in that segment of the market.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
MrBretz
Posts: 560
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:40 pm

I'm betting the new software issue has to do with having both FCCs involved. It probably a synchronization on power up where something is amiss in one of the machines and it was handled improperly. Having 2 instead of 1 computer handling things involves all sorts of timing issues that were never there before and other things. There is no way of telling if this is trivial or complex from the description. I bet it involves few lines of code but it was most likely an error condition that was missed.

EDIT: Here's another article on the "bug":

https://www.morningstar.com/news/dow-jo ... axs-return

It says it looks like it will delay the certification tests.
Last edited by MrBretz on Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
PepeTheFrog
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2019 10:38 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:37 pm

scbriml wrote:
Checklist787 wrote:
Well D. Gates published an article on the end of the USA-CHINA litigation, which proves that what I planned is true. The song has changed. The problems are well behind Boeing because there will be no more Popcorn articles and scandalous articles

Excuse me but what will happen on the 29th?


Well it must all be true then, everything at Boeing is fixed! :spin:

Boeing announces their 2019 results on 29th. It's expected to be ugly.


At least one Wall Street analyst thinks costs will reach $20 billion (excluding any settlements).

737 MAX crisis could cost Boeing $20 billion, Wall Street analyst says

For that amount of money, Boeing could have build a completely new aircraft AND bought the CSeries from Bombardier.
Good moaning!
 
aw70
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:20 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:00 pm

Totally left field question, and apologies for the fact that this has certainly been asked (and answered) before. In addition to being inane and impractical - but I'm just curious whether this would be at all doable.

It's not like the -800 series of the 737 is a completely terrible aircraft. Wouldn't it be a solution to simply hang -800 engines off the existing MAX frames (at least some of them), remove MCAS on these planes, and call it a day? Or is the MAX too different in other aspects, so that a hybrid 800/MAX with old engines and pylons (which avoids the stability issue entirely) would need a completely new certification as well?

I am very aware that it would take ages to get the necessary pylons and engines manufactured, if this were done to all existing MAX. So this is not going to work, at least not for large numbers of frames. But maybe for a few?
Last edited by aw70 on Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19299
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:21 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
It should have been back in the air last summer when MCAS was fixed. It's been their prerogative to keep it down since.


How was MCAS 'fixed' last summer? When did Boeing submit the correct software fix and documentation to the FAA?

Meanwhile, Boeing finds more software issues.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN1ZG28M

But of course, it should have been back in the air 'last summer'. :sarcastic:

MSPNWA wrote:


Your post seems to have been deleted, but help me understand how you are paying for the MAX grounding?

Tavocruz wrote:
Funny how you seem to think that MCAS is fixed.


You might think that...
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.
 
asdf
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:27 pm

aw70 wrote:
Totally left field question, and apologies for the fact that this has certainly been asked (and answered) before. In addition to being inane and impractical - but I'm just curious whether this would be at all doable.

It's not like the -800 series of the 737 is a completely terrible aircraft. Wouldn't it be a solution to simply hang -800 engines off the existing MAX frames (at least some of them), remove MCAS on these planes, and call it a day? Or is the MAX too different in other aspects, so that a hybrid 800/MAX with old engines and pylons (which avoids the stability issue entirely) would need a completely new certification as well?

I am very aware that it would take ages to get the necessary pylons and engines manufactured, if this were done to all existing MAX. So this is not going to work, at least not for large numbers of frames. But maybe for a few?



no airline would buy it
its all about economics

they absulutly have to use the big engines to get into the aerea of the A321NEO economics

they can fix the flawed aerodynamics
even with the big engines
but then the plane has a to high fuel consumtion
its not what they promised to the airlines in the contract

its completely sience fiction to re-engine on the small ones

but i am not shure if it would not be cheaper
- to fix the aerodynamic asap
- compensate the airlines for the lower milage
- develope the NSA
- offer the airlines a trade in programm from 737MAX to NSA in a few years

but who am i that i can estimate that
 
hivue
Posts: 2093
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:29 pm

aw70 wrote:
Wouldn't it be a solution to simply hang -800 engines off the existing MAX frames (at least some of them), remove MCAS on these planes, and call it a day?


What airline would pay for an 800/MAX frankenplane? They would have to pay more to get no improvement in fuel efficiency.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
pasen
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:03 pm

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

Fri Jan 17, 2020 10:59 pm

PepeTheFrog wrote:
As long as the Board is not being replaced, nothing will change at Boeing.

Even that is not enough. A bad company culture is like cancer. It slowly spreads across everything.

It is not just the board and CEO who drive this culture on a daily basis. It's large parts of the entire middle management. People who might be smart and well educated, but don't understand the industry and technology, or who primarely care about their own career and benefits. That part is very, very hard to change because it cannot just be replaced like a CEO or board member.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1026
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:25 am

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1437865#p21944881
Oykie wrote:
Aviation week reports that the FAA certification needs tweaks, but not a complete overhaul. The 737MAX was used as a case study.
https://aviationweek.com/air-transport/ ... ittee-says

"FAA certification as a whole ... is safe. It’s effective,” Moak said. "
"Even if Boeing was required to certify the MAX as a new design, it “would not have produced more rigorous scrutiny ... and would not have produced a safer airplane,” the report added. "

A bit disappointing. If I remember correctly, the EASA was confident that there way of doing certification would have detected the 737-8/9 MAX problem. So why not the FAA ? The FAA will not recover his leadership with such report and recommendations.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
LMP737
Posts: 6077
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:45 am

Checklist787 wrote:

Unless Calhoun changes the policy!

People love hitting Boeing a lot even when things was going better for them. It is not normal that already in 2004 the 7E7 / 787 at the time was not a good idea... :roll:

Many argue without obvious evidence. Changing a working method is feasible it is the responsibility of any large company.

No company was, no company is, and no company will immune to error! :)


This not the end result of some simple error. This is the end result of gutting your engineering core, treating your employees as liabilities, farming out work to companies that were not up to the task, management whose sole concern was the stock price, management who seemed to have an almost criminal ignorance of the business they were in, pressuring employees to do things that were not right. I could go on but I think you get the picture.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
LMP737
Posts: 6077
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:55 am

Revelation wrote:
I don't think the word 'error' covers what happened with MAX. It was a deliberate strategy to avoid cost (sim training cost that Boeing agreed to pay) by making compromises on safety ('jedi mind tricks' to bundle MCAS in with STS and not mention it anywhere in the training material, classification of MCAS as 'major' rather than 'hazardous' to avoid costly analysis and testing which could have discovered MCAS's flaws before the two crashes). At best it was an error of commision (i.e. something done deliberately) rather than an error of omission (something done by mistake or by laziness).

Conspiracy is a loaded term, but it covers the case where more than one person is involved which is clearly the case here. It's pretty clear from the message dump that the conspiracy reached the Chief Technical Pilot and only a fool would believe that he was acting on his own initiative so it's sure that it reaches further up the chain of command. The stuff we've seen so far is pretty tepid, IMO. Odds are high that someone higher up had just as poor regard for electronic communication pitfalls. DoJ/FBI is really good at their jobs. If I were a Boeing executive, I'd be pretty nervous right now.


I'm not even sure why any of us is even referring to it as Boeing anymore. We might as well be honest with ourselves and call it what it is, McDonnell-Douglas.

I used to scoff when people would say that MD bought Boeing with Boeing's money. But now the only conclusion one can come to is that it's true. You had two diametrically opposed corporate cultures. One that placed share holder value above all else, another one that valued building a quality product for it's customers. We all know which one won out.

In the twenty plus years since the merger almost every major program launched by Boeing has been a mess. Marked by huge cost overruns, delays measured not in months but by years, quality issues that ended up costing people their lives.

Calhoun in my opinion is going to be more of the same. Sure, they'll put on a dog and pony show. But in the end little will change.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
LMP737
Posts: 6077
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:59 am

Checklist787 wrote:

We could also qualify this as a "political error" if you prefer, Revelation...

Again, when you have responsibilities, like Boeing or another firm, you are forced to make a change to your policy. It would be too presumptuous to say that Boeing is still what it became almost 15 years ago, the changes that MC Nerney had brought about.

I think Calhoun will reverse the machine. Since he is good at communication, he is the man for the situation. The Board has understood.

:)


The board, which Calhoun has been a member of the past ten years, was a rubber stamp for all the changes guys like Stonechipher, McNerney and Mullinberger have made over the years. Which tells me anyone who sits on that board is the last person to try and fix the mess they helped create.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
uta999
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:01 am

I said in March last year, Boeing should have a plan B, and come up with a MAX conversion back to NG. The airlines just want new builds.

That is now looking more and more likely for the 900 built frames. Salvage what they can and scrap the rest. Keep the engines for a new FBW model.

The MAX will never fly again. Move on. It’s tragic that the company that built the Queen is now run by monkeys on crack.
Your computer just got better
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24836
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:15 am

uta999 wrote:
I said in March last year, Boeing should have a plan B, and come up with a MAX conversion back to NG. The airlines just want new builds.

That is now looking more and more likely for the 900 built frames. Salvage what they can and scrap the rest. Keep the engines for a new FBW model.

The MAX will never fly again. Move on. It’s tragic that the company that built the Queen is now run by monkeys on crack.

Sorry, no, CFM56 engine core technology is at best a decade old (last PIP), in reality more like 1998 tech (Tech Insertion program).

The airlines need the ~12% performance improvement MAX offers over NG in order to be competitive.

CFMI would probably need ~2 years to get the production of long lead time things like engine cases restarted, would need to rebuild production facilities that have switched over to LEAP, etc.

Switching back to MAX and CFM is just not going to happen.

Boeing has to exhaust every path to getting MAX back into service. It's not going to be easy since they have destroyed their relationship with the regulators, but they have no other choice but to keep trying.
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
 
LMP737
Posts: 6077
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 4:06 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:20 am

PepeTheFrog wrote:

At least one Wall Street analyst thinks costs will reach $20 billion (excluding any settlements).

737 MAX crisis could cost Boeing $20 billion, Wall Street analyst says

For that amount of money, Boeing could have build a completely new aircraft AND bought the CSeries from Bombardier.


That should answer any question on when Boeing will launch the NMA. My guess, never.
Never take financial advice from co-workers.
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2490
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:30 am

I suppose we also are rapidly approaching the point of “no return”: airlines are not going to wait forever for a permanent MAX fix to be implemented. At a certain point, they have the duty to their shareholders and their customers to move on and find a new plane to replace their grounded MAX.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8475
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:45 am

PepeTheFrog wrote:
At least one Wall Street analyst thinks costs will reach $20 billion (excluding any settlements).

737 MAX crisis could cost Boeing $20 billion, Wall Street analyst says

For that amount of money, Boeing could have build a completely new aircraft AND bought the CSeries from Bombardier.


I think BCA should give $5B to EMB and ask them to develop FSA.
Just keep patching MAX until it can fly. Also whatever going on with 777X, don't burn too much cash on it.

What is involved in restarting or ramping up NG production?

Can Spirit rework MAX fuselages for NG?
Can wings be reused for NG with pylon rework?
Can CFM re-purpose some of the LEAP-1B components for LEAP-1A
Can CFM ramp up CFM56 production?

The way I see, NG supply chain seems to think they can make lot more money selling components to airlines at a higher price, than building new NGs? More money in after sales service market.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10406
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:48 am

DoctorVenkman wrote:
and only hurts Boeing (and their insurers) in the long run.

Not sure Spirit and the other suppliers who are now laying off thousands of workers will share your sentiment...but you never know.
At least we can see the FAA favoring one of their hats, lets see if they see any conflict.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10406
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:01 am

scbriml wrote:
How was MCAS 'fixed' last summer? When did Boeing submit the correct software fix and documentation to the FAA?
.

You highlight the point I have been making, we all know that Boeing submitted the MCAS fix in June 2019.
We also know that during the testing of the fix submission the FAA initiated their bit flip which mandated the dual computer use.
Now I can ask this question, when did the FAA say that MCAS 2.0 did not work or that the documentation for that fix was deficient?

Reality is that they have said nothing about the MCAS fix, so it is fair game to say the the simulator test done by line pilots was with MCAS 1.0 and since all the pilots recovered using various methods deviating from the checklist, does that mean that all that was required for RTS was a checklist for MCAS 1.0? Once the pilots know about MCAS it will not drive the a/c into the ground like a lawn dart?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10406
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:13 am

Link below from the FAA at 26 June 2019 states that they were reviewing the modification to MCAS, is that proof that Boeing did submit a fix to MCAS?
https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=93206
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4423
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:18 am

LMP737 wrote:
PepeTheFrog wrote:

At least one Wall Street analyst thinks costs will reach $20 billion (excluding any settlements).

737 MAX crisis could cost Boeing $20 billion, Wall Street analyst says

For that amount of money, Boeing could have build a completely new aircraft AND bought the CSeries from Bombardier.


That should answer any question on when Boeing will launch the NMA. My guess, never.


non sequitur
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
acechip
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2018 12:22 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:15 am

At this point, IAG may be stratching their heads a bit, by jumping the gun and placing intent for ordering the Max. As far as I recall, no other major airline operator has ordered new or additional Maxes since the issue began.
 
speedbird30
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:59 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 4:13 am

After having read all these pages and pages of Boeing 737 Max threads, why are all of you esteemed individuals with this vast wealth of aeronautical knowledge, spending all this time and effort discussing an aircraft that is arguably, the biggest disaster in aviation history and should never be allowed to fly again? The mere duration of this discussion on this wonderful website, in and of itself, should lead any sane minded individual to never set foot this aircraft again and Boeing (a reknowned manufacturer of the best aircraft worldwide) should immediately terminate this program line regardless of shareholder loss or lobbyists failure.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9411
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 5:35 am

acechip wrote:
At this point, IAG may be stratching their heads a bit, by jumping the gun and placing intent for ordering the Max. As far as I recall, no other major airline operator has ordered new or additional Maxes since the issue began.


It is a LoI, IAG can let it quietly disappear by never firming it.
 
Checklist787
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2019 2:37 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 7:00 am

scbriml wrote:

Well it must all be true then, everything at Boeing is fixed! :spin:

Boeing announces their 2019 results on 29th. It's expected to be ugly.


The bad results that they are will not be a surprise on January 29th.
I hope (again) that 2020 will be a better year than 2019 ...

As I said, the HARDEST part is behind!

PepeTheFrog wrote:

At least one Wall Street analyst thinks costs will reach $20 billion (excluding any settlements).

737 MAX crisis could cost Boeing $20 billion, Wall Street analyst says

For that amount of money, Boeing could have build a completely new aircraft AND bought the CSeries from Bombardier.


Yep!

Many know that the bill for the 737MAX will be substantial. Not having launched a cleen sheet design in 2011 was a big mistake.

Very unfortunate for the airlines, the market, the 346 dead, but also in the long term. It is a very bad deal.

But to say that Boeing could have acquired the CSeries program, I don't know if it's worth it ... :roll:
"No limit to my poooWer!!!
Do it! "...
 
aw70
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:20 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:39 am

hivue wrote:
aw70 wrote:
Wouldn't it be a solution to simply hang -800 engines off the existing MAX frames (at least some of them), remove MCAS on these planes, and call it a day?


What airline would pay for an 800/MAX frankenplane? They would have to pay more to get no improvement in fuel efficiency.


Well, if your existing frames are close to timing out (or becoming uneconomical, due to heavy checks coming up), and you have some MAX on order which are actually complete, but which are currently gathering dust in a parking lot somewhere...

...you might be tempted to take the Frankenplane for your fleet, and just get it over with. You have routes to fly, and passengers to transport. Boeing would have to discount the Frankenplanes steeply, to the point where the higher operating costs are at least partially offset. As you said, no one in their right mind would order such a critter as a new build: but if plan B were to scrap all the existing MAX standing around in parking lots (hundreds of them), this might be preferable.

If it's technically doable, of course. Main problem would of course be getting all those conventional engines from somewhere. But given the huge number of existing planes which use such drivers, there might be slack in the existing pool of engines to re-fit a non-trivial number of MAX. Even if it's several dozen, that would be better than nothing, and possibly worth the hassle - if (and that is a big if) this can be done with reasonable effort in the first place. There have been some rare sub-types of the 737 with only several tens of them built, so even a small conversion run, to satisfy customers who desperately need planes, might be worth it.

Also, if the engine swap can be done easily enough that this is worthwhile, the reverse would probably also be true, once the "real MAX" has had its kinks ironed out. So the Frankenplanes could later be turned into proper MAX at some point, if this was done right.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7184
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:55 am

Checklist787 wrote:
The bad results that they are will not be a surprise on January 29th.
I hope (again) that 2020 will be a better year than 2019 ...

As I said, the HARDEST part is behind!


It has always been my experience that climbing out of the great big hole is way harder, and takes way longer, than falling into it.

The reason why everything about the MAX has slowed to a crawl is because of lack of trust, not for any other reason.
Everything that Boeing do now is being examined with a microscope.
And this will bring things out, small things maybe, that otherwise would have stayed below the radar.
And there is NO shortcut to be had in rebuilding trust :shakehead:

Trust me, the HARDEST part is NOT behind - it is ahead - fixing the damage.

Checklist787 wrote:
But to say that Boeing could have acquired the CSeries program, I don't know if it's worth it ... :roll:


Perhaps you don't.
I suspect the A220 has the long term potential to grow into one of the most successful programmes ever.
It really is a very good, and competently executed aircraft

Rgds
 
ACATROYAL
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:25 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 10:25 am

It appears that the latest software issue was discovered by auditors and not Boeing!!!! Thats it Im 100% officially done with the Max and 100% done with Boeing! Enough of this never ending Max Saga. The Max is an absolute Disaster and will go down in aviation history as the worst plane ever.
Now I'm 100% done with this thread. This is a dead end topic and thread...Lets all move on to happier topics...
 
uta999
Posts: 938
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 10:49 am

Even Airbus must be thinking wtf. Can we help Boeing in any way? Perhaps converting Spirit and Renton to A321NEO may be not that unlikely now.
Your computer just got better
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9764
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:03 am

That is bad and if it is really true that the latest problem was not found in house but during testing by/with the FAA, it is very bad. This will haunt Boeing for a long time and the 777-9 will pay the price and the certification process will be hard.
 
planecane
Posts: 1585
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

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

Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:27 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Indeed. As I predicted March last year the MAX would NOT be flying by the end of 2019.
And here we are. ANOTHER software "issue". Not to mention the trove of emails leaked recently that imply a major criminal cover up. Mark my words: the MAX ain't gonna fly for a LONG time, if EVER.

Would you have reminded us of your prediction of it was flying last year? You didn't make a "prediction," you made a "guess." A prediction is based on facts and analysis, neither of which existed in significant quantity in March of last year.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: accargofra, AM764, Aquila3, Baidu [Spider], BlueSky1976, Cassi, cougar15, CrisAA, csturdiv, David L, francibastiglia, Fuling, gensys, Google Adsense [Bot], gregn21, n757kw, Obzerva, Ott, sirtoby, Speedbird747436, TG788, vhtje and 296 guests

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