Boeing 737 Max8 Aircraft Crashes and Investigations [Part 8] 24

[Sparweb]

This post is the continuation from this series of previous threads:

thread815-445840
thread815-450258
thread815-452000
thread815-454283
thread815-457125
thread815-461989
thread815-466401

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 (Link from Ethiopia is now broken. See link from NTSB Investigations below)

Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee preliminary report

NTSB Investigations

NTSB Safety Recommendation Report: Assumptions Used in the Safety Assessment Process and the
Effects of Multiple Alerts and Indications on Pilot Performance

A Boeing 737 Technical Site

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

BBC: Boeing to temporarily halt 737 Max production in January

Pulitzer Prize, For groundbreaking stories that exposed design flaws in the Boeing 737 MAX that led to two deadly crashes and revealed failures in government oversight.

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Just finished reading it.

The very disappointing thing to me is they even had a test pilot fail to neutralise the situation in under 4 seconds with MCAS problems with multiple triggers. They took over 10 seconds and the session finished in the same way as it did in the two accidents.

The timeline on page 100 is particularly worrying...

 

[Lou Scannon]

I have finished reading the report, and I am sickened... words fail me. What I had reluctantly suspected due to the revelations in all these 8 threads is now emphatically confirmed. I wish Boeing and the FAA the strength to sincerely admit their failures and make a new start.

"Schiefgehen wird, was schiefgehen kann" - das Murphygesetz

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

FAA has slot on its plate from multiple directions.

It has this certification issue.

It has the drone issue.

And there is major issues with the air traffic control system and setup.

It also has multiple inputs from various political entities. Who control the amount of cash they have to do there job. And who won't hesitate to withhold cash if they don't do things the way they want it done.

Also the entities that they are regulating can bypass any ruling by talking to the political types.

So I really can't see how the FAA can do it job properly. I might bitch about EASA being a bunch of paper pushing lawyers but the financial setup allows a much more independent organisation. Even though they come out with over complicated, over regulated, oppressive nonsense. A mid way between the two would be perfect.

 

[Sparweb]

...and no budget...
...and repeated shutdowns...
...and most of them are still working from home...

I'm still picking my way through the report. It seems a lot of it is already known (this is a different take in places) from the NTSB and the JATR reports, plus the synthesis of new reports that Dominic Gates was doing at the Seattle Times. The findings of the JATR were very specific and detailed, and seem to have influenced if not formed the goals being worked on by the certification authorities now.

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Comments are starting to be released.

https://aviationweek.com/air-transp...ax-changes-spotlight-broader-737-fleet-issues

The manual trimming is a feature in a lot of comments but I have heard that because there is no regulation on this then nothing can be enforced. But I suppose they can say it needs to be 1 in 1 000 000 that you would be required to do it.

 

[moon161]

ALPA also expressed concern over Boeing’s language on the runaway stabilizer and stabilizer inoperative checklists that says both pilots may need to turn the manual trim wheel simultaneously to generate enough leverage to move the stabilizer.

“ALPA believes that a scenario where both pilots are required to provide manual inputs to a safety-critical flight control system during a non-normal event is not an ideal response to that event,” the association said. “During non-normal events it is commonly trained that one pilot continues to maintain the safe flight of the aircraft while the other pilot conducts the completion of related checklists, such as the [quick-reference handbook]. To interrupt this paradigm by requiring a two-pilot intervention on a safety-critical flight system cannot maintain the same level of safety.”

 

[dik]

From the Far Side cartoons...

just couldn't hold myself back...

Dik

 

[dik]

Looks like Boeing and the FAA are trying to fix this using snakeoil lubricant...

Dik

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Well I think they are more in need of KY than snake oil. Its not the FAA that's driving this now. Even if they said yes if the rest of the world's regulators say no its a dodo.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/new...oposed-fixes-to-max-aren-t-enough/ar-BB19eLEZ

 

[dik]

AH: as usual, it's political interference...

Dik

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

The process that going on now they can't really interfere with it away from the FAA. As much as they would like to and Boeing have paid millions if not billions in lobbying over the years to be able to get things setup they way they want it.

The FAA is stuck, unless it gets international certification its a dead product.

 

[dik]

The first step is to get the political interference unwound... not likely happen since the key players want to interfere. Legislation has to be in place to prevent government interference with regulatory agencies... FAA, CDC, etc.


Dik

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

The issue is a lot of the key players are now involved in the 777x program.

So a post challenger Nasa retire or relocate exercise as soon as the shrapnel has gone to ground will be problematic. And it will be the same internally in the FAA.

Its due to enter service next year but I really can't see that happening and most of them are meant to be going to the Middle east 3 and Cathy and I can see them wanting them next year or the one after unless there is a overnight improvement to the aviation scene.

In fact that's a big issue with the MAX delivery's airlines just don't have access to finance anymore to pay for new aircraft.

Airbus has just started the extremely problematic process of making people in France redundant. Yes it has some 7000 orders on the books which would keep things going at full production but a lot of them are going to evaporate in the next 12 months and again there is no finance out there to pay for them.

It really wouldn't surprise me if the MAX ends up with under 2500 units produced and they have already made 1200 of them.

 

[davefitz]

Not likely to ever have the "political interference" to become unwound- that is the heart and soul of western democracies. How exactly does one regulate what happens between executives and elected representatives during a golf game? I recall once visting the headquarters of a large US manufacturer's headquarters, and noticed a large black limousine pull up ( US zip code 12345, no kidding). I asked who was the big shot ,and the reply was he was one of the current US senators, preparing to increase his re-election funds. It is no mistake that the head of the committte that oversees the FAA is the representative for Boeing's factories in washington state. The interesting thing about the term "corruption" is that there is a continuous gradation from honest advocacy of an industry in one's district to outright flagrant gorging at the till, with really no bright line demarking the boundaries. In the case of the 737 Max, it seems that the advocacy came at the cost of 300+ lives.I am sure no one involved is losing any sleep over it, and continues to count their dollars.

It is what it is, and one can either learn to live with it, or one can keep ones eyes closed and continue to believe the fairy tales taught to you in 4th grade.Whatever gets you thru the night, is alright.

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

 

[moon161]

^ How apropos, Schenectady GE. My grandad retired from there, my other granddad worked there a bit too. Senator D'Amato or Schumer, depending on the decade, I guess, Cuomo the Elder or the Younger as governor, with some interruption. Used to be a big light up GE logo above the building, a hundred or so lightbulbs, not sure if it's there anymore.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Seems easa has its boxes ticked as well

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ng-of-boeing-737-max-flight-ban-idUSKCN26G1H8

 

[LittleInch]

Errr, this little bit was interesting.

"All but one of the differences has been resolved, Ky said, with EASA, supported by some unions, calling for pilots to be able to manually cut power to a “stick shaker” alarm system suspected of distracting Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crew."

How much grief could that be?

I thought Canada also wanted this?

But my understanding was that it was almost literally hard wired into the design not to allow it to be disabled??

Then three sensors retrofitted - "Ky said Boeing had agreed to install the computerised third-sensor system on the next version of the plane, the 230-seat 737 MAX 10, followed by retrofits on the rest of the fleet later."

And the microscope on the 777X.

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

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Canada does,

It's not as easy as you think I am told. It could also be linked into other things. So the effect cascades down multiple other systems.

They also have the issue that they have run out of space on the glare shield for another two buttons each side

This argument has been on going since the late 70's about stick shakers and pushers. Boeing and FAA have been dead against it. And some old types the FAA made them remover the feature. When jar25 came in they sort of called a truce on the subject in both directions.

The only way to kill it on the 737 is to go hunting for the CB that powers the shaker motors but there is two of them one for each side. And there is other safety related stuff powered through the same CB. So if you pull them those systems are gone as well.

I have seen comments that changing it would trigger another 4-6 months system testing and 50-100 hours of test flights. And it would be a fundamental system change and they would loose the common type rating with the NG.

 

[LittleInch]

So a pretty fundamental "difference" then.

I suppose it depends on how big they want to dig their heels in over this one.

It does though sound like it could greatly help reduce distractions if it's going off when it shouldn't, like lots of other aircraft if I recall a previous post from you?

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

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Well this is spars area but I have a sneaky suspicion that the emergency DC buses are involved. I don't know really the full extent of the repercussions of changing anything attached to them but it ain't going to be a document pack and an earth check like a coffee maker going onto the galley bus which is automatically shed at the start of any electrical checklist. And the only thing that happens is no coffee or hot meals.

Yes all types I have flown have it along with a caution announcator panel CAP. All the new Boeing types have them or an ecas system.

Even the DC3 had a CAP.. no stick shaker though.

In fact I suspect the 737 series's is the last aircraft out there that that doesn't have.