Jump to content
Twisties

Air Travel Safety and the 737 Max 8?

Recommended Posts

Joe Frickin' Friday

With the recent revelation of internal emails between Boeing employees claiming they'd never put their families on a 737-MAX, it seems Boeing just can't catch a break these days.   

 

Maybe they can catch a laugh?  Here's a fresh gem from the brilliant minds at The Onion:

 

Boeing Scrambling After New CEO Catches Fire During First Press Conference

 

:3:

Share this post


Link to post
Paul De
48 minutes ago, John Ranalletta said:

The fun doesn't stop there.  "30 Year Boeing Quality Manager Says "Fly Something Else", Refuses To Fly On 787 Dreamliner"  

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/30-year-boeing-quality-manager-says-fly-something-else-refuses-fly-787-dreamliner

The 737-Max issue seemed to be abdication of certification by the FAA to Boeing who has a conflict of interest in the cerification process. Sort of a benign negligence on both parties part.   What this article implies is a high level considered decision to defeat safety procedures and processes in the name of the almighty dollar.  Wow, I'm a little gobsmacked!   Might be making the conscious decision to fly exclusively Airbus planes in the future and that is sad.  I always thought the Boeing planes gave a smoother ride VS the analogous Airbus product, but that isn't worth an unsafe plane.

Share this post


Link to post
John Ranalletta
1 hour ago, Paul De said:

The 737-Max issue seemed to be abdication of certification by the FAA to Boeing who has a conflict of interest in the cerification process. Sort of a benign negligence on both parties part.   What this article implies is a high level considered decision to defeat safety procedures and processes in the name of the almighty dollar.  Wow, I'm a little gobsmacked!   Might be making the conscious decision to fly exclusively Airbus planes in the future and that is sad.  I always thought the Boeing planes gave a smoother ride VS the analogous Airbus product, but that isn't worth an unsafe plane.

 

Fly DAL https://ktvz.com/money/2020/01/14/delta-is-flying-high-as-rivals-suffer-from-the-737-max-crisis/

 

Though I can't vouch for the article's content, it appears to explain how/why Boeing got into these situations.

 

BTW, one of our members captains a 787 presently.

Share this post


Link to post
poodad

I'm a bit confused. Putting aside how Boeing and the FAA got into this mess, it seems to me that the 737-max is NOT an inherently unsafe aircraft. It seems to me that the 737-max is a perfectly viable aircraft IF:

 

Pilots are required to do simulator time to learn how to react to the MCAS system.

The AoA disagree glitch is fixed.

 

Am I missing something?

Share this post


Link to post
John Ranalletta
1 hour ago, poodad said:

I'm a bit confused. Putting aside how Boeing and the FAA got into this mess, it seems to me that the 737-max is NOT an inherently unsafe aircraft. It seems to me that the 737-max is a perfectly viable aircraft IF:

 

Pilots are required to do simulator time to learn how to react to the MCAS system.

The AoA disagree glitch is fixed.

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

Whatever it is you're missing is keeping lots of planes on the ground and driving BA stock down.  Perhaps, someone should call them and let them know the problem's been fixed. 

Share this post


Link to post
poodad
1 hour ago, John Ranalletta said:

 

 

Whatever it is you're missing is keeping lots of planes on the ground and driving BA stock down.  Perhaps, someone should call them and let them know the problem's been fixed. 

Well, that's my question - what's keeping the aircraft grounded? The recently discovered emails indicate there were lots of concerns about the 737-max safety, but no article that I've read mentions anything other than MCAS and AoA disagree being problems.

 

Now that's not to imply I don't think there's a huge problem with Boeing and the FAA letting us get to this point in the first place. That's an absolutely huge problem. But a separate problem. 

 

Oh, and while we are talking about AoA disagree, I thought I remember reading that the AoA disagree warning system was optional, and the two 737-max planes that crashed did not have it. I'm now seeing where AoA disagree is not optional, but had a bug that prevented it from working correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
John Ranalletta
27 minutes ago, poodad said:

Well, that's my question - what's keeping the aircraft grounded? The recently discovered emails indicate there were lots of concerns about the 737-max safety, but no article that I've read mentions anything other than MCAS and AoA disagree being problems.

 

Now that's not to imply I don't think there's a huge problem with Boeing and the FAA letting us get to this point in the first place. That's an absolutely huge problem. But a separate problem. 

 

Oh, and while we are talking about AoA disagree, I thought I remember reading that the AoA disagree warning system was optional, and the two 737-max planes that crashed did not have it. I'm now seeing where AoA disagree is not optional, but had a bug that prevented it from working correctly.

 

Aside from real issues (known and unknown), there's a confidence problem.  Given what's been unearthed about BA's rush to get the plane certifiend and the two crashes, I believe the FAA will take a long time to make sure that's not the only issue with this model.  Just imagine being the FAA chief who lets it fly only to see one do a ground loop with fatalities - for any reason.

 

Do past events create confidence in BA?  No.  In FAA?  No.  In operators who didn't react to crew complaints?  No.  Whose left?

 

Share this post


Link to post
John
4 hours ago, poodad said:

I'm a bit confused. Putting aside how Boeing and the FAA got into this mess, it seems to me that the 737-max is NOT an inherently unsafe aircraft. It seems to me that the 737-max is a perfectly viable aircraft IF:

 

Pilots are required to do simulator time to learn how to react to the MCAS system.

The AoA disagree glitch is fixed.

 

Am I missing something?

I don't think you're missing anything.

 

The MCAS needs a dual inputs (data from TWO alpha vanes - not one, as currently is the case). Otherwise there is no redundancy. I believe this is part of the fix, and should have ALWAYS been designed that way.

 

Regarding the AoA Disagree: The QRH procedure offers no solution in the -800 (which I fly). It only tells you which other instrument indications may vary from normal. An AoA indicator should NOT be optional (as it currently is). The nearest checklist to get anything resolved is Airspeed Unreliable. It takes you back to basics in an effort work out which instruments are functioning, and which are giving misleading information. The old "Attitude+Power=Performance", if you will.

 

It works.

 

The thing with the MCAS and the associated Stab Trim movement is that it doesn't matter whether a new procedure is devised - the current Stabilizer Trim Runaway procedure works just fine, provided you recognise and use it. It manifests the same as a runaway. You don't need to know what's causing the runaway, just do the same bloody thing! As I mentioned earlier - that's most likely what the Southwest boys did, with a successful outcome.

 

John.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...