Boeing 737 Max8 Aircraft Crashes and Investigations [Part 5] 19

[Sparweb]

This is the continuation from:

thread815-445840
thread815-450258
thread815-452000
thread815-454283

This topic is broken into multiple threads due to the length to be scrolled, and images to load, creating long load times for some users and devices. If you are NEW to this discussion, please read the above threads prior to posting, to avoid rehashing old discussions.

Thank you everyone for your interest! I have learned a lot from the discussion, too.

Some key references:
Ethiopian CAA preliminary report

Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee preliminary report

A Boeing 737 Technical Site

Washington Post: When Will Boeing 737 Max Fly Again and More Questions

No one believes the theory except the one who developed it. Everyone believes the experiment except the one who ran it.
STF

 

[RVAmeche]

That'd be amazing in a truly horrible way. Sorry we messed up, but do what we say or we'll declare bankruptcy and crash the commercial aviation market.

For an agency that's already lost a good portion of the public faith, if FAA hand-wave approves it due to those alleged threats, I hope serious consequences ensue.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

its not only going to be the FAA all the regulators in the world have their balls in a vice with this one.


The max will fly in December and it is absolutely nothing to do with it meeting flighty safety standards. Quiet what they will do when the next one crashes is any ones guess. Another one will crash more than likely nothing to do with the MCAS system.

I must admit I really don't understand all the different enquires in the US about the various stuff that's been spouted. It seems to me that if there is a chance of Boeing going bust the they will all shut up and stop the grandstanding.

 

[davefitz]

I was under the impression that the conditions for bankruptcy would be determined by a bankruptcy judge, and its conditions are not determined solely by Boeing's objectives.The needs of the employees, pensioners, airline companies, and families seeking retribution are all considered by the judge.

"...when logic, and proportion, have fallen, sloppy dead..." Grace Slick

 

[waross]

Splitting Boeing.
This may limit liability going forward but it may be argued that the action was done to evade past liabilities.

Bankruptcy.
This does not imply liquidation. In fact it protects creditor's interests by preventing one major creditor to force liquidation to the detriment of other creditors.
Johns Manville emerged from over 5 years of bankruptcy and is still in business.
Celgar Pulp Mill was under bankruptcy for over 5 years before being bought out. The mill is a going concern today under a new name.
Under bankruptcy Boeing could continue to operate under the supervision of a receiver.


Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[Lou Scannon]

balls in a vice

...Interesting typo... or is it a Freudian slip

"Schiefgehen wird, was schiefgehen kann" - das Murphygesetz

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

its a pretty common saying in UK English.

"balls in a vice
Somebody else has cornered you into a really tough situation, where you must now make a major decision between two things neither of which you want in the least.
They had his balls in a vice: either take the pay cut they were demanding from him, or be fired."

from Urban dictionary.

 

[verymadmac]

We might see new aircraft with the Douglas Aircraft Company label yet out of this mess.

 

[Sparweb]

AH:
Usage may vary from one country to the next.
"Vise" is accepted spelling in some countries for a machine tool used to safely secure a piece you are working on.
"Vice" refers to the stuff you need AFTER work, that tends to be LESS safe...

Nobody said the Urban Dictionary was big on spelling nuttin'

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Fair enough.

UK and International English the tool is definitely spelled that way.

The Boeing MD merger is the root cause of this mess.

 

[LittleInch]

Maybe I'm being dense here, but why would splitting the company make the type approval certs invalid.

Surely they would / could be transferred?

Even with the 737 max disaster, Boeing makes money and other aircraft. It won't be allowed to just fold. chapter 11 is a bankruptcy protection mechanism which aims to prevent liquidation and allow companies to be sold / restructured.

As for how many law suits this would generate can only be speculated.

But something will have to give somewhere. I would have thought the type certification training is one way or some hardware mods.

3 FCC is also an option


Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

the splitting wouldn't.

The entity that ends up holding the type approvals after the split if it then goes bust is the issue.

Its not easy transferring them and it will involved a break in cover during which the planes can't fly.

3 FCC is an option and also 3 AoA also an ECAM system to deal with the 1960's warning and advisory sensory saturation which has been noted in the MAX cockpit. But realistically that's a good 2 years to develop for the max if they start tomorrow.

They are just running out of time and parking spaces. If it doesn't start flying soon then the production line will have to be stopped, labour released, suppliers will move on or possibly go bust and it will takes years to get back to the current skill and production rate, never mind the 72 a month they say they are going to ramp up to once they get the certification back. What that's going to do for quality is anyone's guess. They have issues already in that department.

The training is the next elephant in the room, 1 million per aircraft for air southwest if sim training is required. And there are also issues that current sims it has been discovered can't generate the control forces for the out of trim condition requiring the rollercoaster recovery to regain manual trimming.

Something has given,

Another huge question is if the passengers will travel in it.

 

[RVAmeche]

Unfortunately I don't think the general public would pay much attention, if they even know this is happening in the first place.

If the design and training issues aren't sorted out but the various entities approve it, I would hope the pilots unions (I assume they have unions?) would take a stand and say we don't have faith in the aircraft? I imagine that'd cause a bigger stink though.

 

[waross]

My bum and my family (apart from the mother in law) will not be sitting in it.

I feel the same but I can't make that statement.
However, the next time I fly, I will probably do whatever I can to avoid a Boeing product.
Pay more, adjust my flying date, take a longer route.
The really tough choice will be if I am offered a fly-in job and the flight uses Boeing craft.
In some cases this may mean driving 200 miles and then riding the bus 200 miles.
In other cases driving may not be an option and the choice will be ride a Boeing or don't take the job.
I will be thinking hard about that one.
It is a matter of trust.
It is a matter of the perception that Boeing has a history of abusing grandfather privileges.
It is a matter of Boeing's response to the issues more than the issues themselves.
It is a matter of the cozy deal with the FAA that allowed Boeing to sign off on their own work.

It may LOOK like a picture of some 40 airplanes, but it's actually a picture of FOUR BILLION DOLLARS:

Continuing production was an awfully big bet by Boeing that they could bafflegab the regulators with another less than adequate fix.
It look as if they are losing that bet.
This whole situation has repeatedly suggested that passenger safety has little priority in the Boeing culture.
Remember the old slogan?
"At Ford, Safety is Job One!"
Would it be fair to paraphrase that?
"At Boeing, Safety is Job None!"

There are a few companies that I have had more than one issue with and so avoid dealing with. I will suffer added costs and/or inconvenience to avoid these companies.
It is more a matter of company policy and company culture, and the companies response to a problem than the problem itself.
Welcome to my no fly list, Boeing.

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

The cabin crew are making noises currently but the pilots are keeping out of it until the final product is again released.

In Europe there is various pilot organisations involved in the EASA side of things.

PAX are funny in what they will go for and what they won't. You are correct most won't have a clue what aircraft type they are sitting on. But the margins are that small on routes that if even just 5% of them fly with the competition on a route because they are using airbus then your stuffed. The bottom line for 80% of them is price. Its that 20% which can make or break a pairing. I am in that 20% who will actively make sure I won't get on one for a couple of years to see what else crops up.

They definitely know its happening. Especially in the USA it seems everyday some form of release is made on the subject or Boeing in general. I think I counted 13 different investigations ongoing plus the court cases from victims families etc.

Per say if the regulator says the plane is safe to fly then we will fly it.

I wouldn't avoid all Boeing models. The ones designed and built before the merger are good. Even the O2 issue on the 787 wouldn't bother me knowing fine that its extremely unlikely I will be flying over the china highlands in one and everywhere I might go in one they will be able to get down to 10k without issues. And explosive decompression is usually linked to major structural failure so we will be dead anyway. 757/767/747/77. 737 apart from the MAX all good. The new variant of 777 after this will be under a microscope so it should be fine as well.

Stopping production would have been fatal for Boeing and the 737 and would take years to establish again.

To be honest airbus are far from perfect as well. The biggest issue at the moment with the other types is the engines seem to be having issues.

An E175 had a trim issue the other week

https://avherald.com/h?article=4cef2f7b&opt=0

here is the RT from it

https://youtu.be/RzoEsM0L2CM

 

[charliealphabravo]

Is it even possible to avoid flying on any particular equipment? Can't the plane shown on your ticket be swapped out for any number of reasons and you wouldn't know until you arrived at the gate? Even after you board the plane they can decide to swap equipment and then you are stuck balking with your luggage already on the other aircraft. Will they refund you ticket because you don't want to fly 737-M8?

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

I don't have a clue what US t&c are for tickets.

If you use easyJet in the eu you won't be flying on a max so it's pretty easy to avoid for us.

 

[IRstuff]

In some cases this may mean driving 200 miles and then riding the bus 200 miles.

Those illusory safety measures; have you seen the statistics on buses? There's less oversight on buses, by far.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[waross]

Those illusory safety measures; have you seen the statistics on buses?

On the other hand, when several hundred workers a day are being transported in and out of the northern site, I was often concerned about the safety of the planes that I have flown on.
It is not uncommon to see three 737s on the ramp at the jobsite private aerodrome.
That is just one of several fly-in sites.
The mandate up there is get it done safely.
However at times the word is whispered around the site;
"The push is on and safety's gone."
When the planes have to fly, the push is on and often no replacement craft are available.
As far as the bus, it is not as bad as it seems.
Flying in still involves driving 150 Miles to the airport and often 30 or 40 miles on a bus at the northern end.
The time the bus caught fire during the daily 50 mile ride everyone just got off the bus.
You can't often do that on a plane.
The time that a driver of a bus ahead of us on a 40 mile trip to an airport had a medical emergency and made an abrupt right turn and came to a stop a couple of hundred feet out in the bush, there were no injuries.
The flights reduce but do not eliminate the driving and the buses.
There was not a high level of confidence in the flights to begin with.


Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Over the years I have had way way more scares getting to the airport than in flight. Usually I do 4 sectors every time I go to work.

I still have nightmares about getting driven to work in Saudi. Driving past smashed up cars with bodies hanging out blood everywhere. Never mind the near misses we had. Thankfully we had a very good defensive Pakistani gentleman driving us.

Anyway the FAA have just broadened the Pickle fork inspections.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FAA-2019-0866-0002

Currently its running at 38 out of 810 inspected which is 4.6% and they still don't know why its happening. Out of the ones that have been grounded none have been repaired and serviceable again. Once cracks found they are flying them back to Boeing to get fixed. But parts are still not available apart from the 20 that were in stock after the NG line shut down.

And with the MAX nothing heard rumour wise but the FAA is obviously feeling stuck between an anvil and hammer.

https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...wayed-by-pressure-to-approve-boeings-737-max/

 

[LittleInch]

Interesting timing for a documentary in the UK next week (wed 9pm). The title gives an idea of the program but usually channel 4 do decent programmes. Will be interesting to see what they say. Doesn't look like it's going to be on boeings website.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/boeings-killer-plane-what-went-wrong

Remember - More details = better answers
Also: If you get a response it's polite to respond to it.