Ethiopian Airlines Crash/ B737MAX grounding

L1011

vicwatson wrote: »

So what?

They're based on no other factors at all. It has nothing to do with these accidents, MCAS, public perception or anything - just what politics China is playing.

gctest50 wrote: »

lol no

In such a freak occurrence, having only one or two is absolutely not better.

gctest50

<SNIP>

Offensive and ignorant comment removed

.

Jeff2

Boeing is being suied by some airline according to euro news.

kippy

Jeff2 wrote: »

Boeing is being suied by some airline according to euro news.

The first of many suits I should think. Wait till the investigations into the crashes are done, the flood gates will open.

vicwatson

L1011 wrote: »

They're based on no other factors at all. It has nothing to do with these accidents, MCAS, public perception or anything - just what politics China is playing.

May be a factor but it doesn’t detract from the fact Boeing are down an order of 300 aircraft

LeakRate

gctest50 wrote: »

lol no

Love to know how an AOA sensor can have a blockage..

Bob24

vicwatson wrote: »

May be a factor but it doesn’t detract from the fact Boeing are down an order of 300 aircraft

In that case geopolitics are not just a factor in the middle of other factors, they are no doubt the main factor, if not the only one, explaining why China did go for Airbus only.

Plus these contracts were most likely negotiated before the 737 Max issue became a thing and kept warm until Xi’s State visit to France so that both presidents could rubber stamp them and each use the plane orders as a political display suiting their agenda.

So realistically it has little to do with this thread (which is not to say the current issues won’t hurt Boeing - but this particular case is not an exemple of them losing business due to the crashes and their aftermath).

Nijmegen

Four clowns. Four dead clowns. Four dead human beings, actually. Four dead pilots who, it is widely considered, did not have the appropriate information to ensure they could make a quick diagnosis. And they did cut the trim. It just decided to go nuts again in a fashion they had no clue about in the 40 seconds they had to save their lives. Show some respect in the language you use.

gctest50

LeakRate wrote: »

Love to know how an AOA sensor can have a blockage..

The "other " type of sensor, hollow rod thing sticking out with a hole/ slot in the top and another hole/ slot along the bottom of it

Measure the difference in pressure between the two holes and you have your angle

Or you could sellotape a bit of wool onto the outside of the window

billy few mates

LeakRate wrote: »

Love to know how an AOA sensor can have a blockage..

They stick or seize so don't rotate smoothly. They're quite sensitive to abuse.

Hotblack Desiato

LeakRate wrote: »

Love to know how an AOA sensor can have a blockage..

In German "blockieren" means to lock in place or seize, so I'm guessing this got slightly lost in translation somewhere.

ABS = Anti-Blockier System (Antilock Braking System is a backronym)

basill

This condition, if not corrected, could result in loss of control of the aeroplane

And this is the big difference between Airbus and Boeing. An Airbus pilot is trained from the get go that if the aircraft doesn't do what they want it to do then there are ways and means of turning off the automation and flight control protections in order to recover safe flight. Its Airbus 101 if you will. In your example of AOA vane blockage/breakages etc then you push two buttons on the overhead panel above the skippers seat and the aircraft is immediately into alternate law.

All of this is in our everyday training manuals, dealt with in sims and is not hidden away in a maintenance manual. We practice stall and upset recovery in just about every sim detail.

ZiabR

Report out this morning claims to directly link the MCAS system to this crash and likely the Lion Air crash.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47745191

What is very frustrating is that Boeing slapped a price tag on an alert system that should by law be included with the base aircraft.

As part of the upgrade, Boeing will install an extra warning system on all 737 Max aircraft, which was previously an optional safety feature.

Neither of the planes, operated by Lion Air in Indonesia and Ethiopian Airlines, that were involved in the fatal crashes carried the alert systems, which are designed to warn pilots when sensors produce contradictory readings.

Bob24

ZiabR wrote: »

What is very frustrating is that Boeing slapped a price tag on an alert system that should by law be included with the base aircraft.

As part of the upgrade, Boeing will install an extra warning system on all 737 Max aircraft, which was previously an optional safety feature.

Neither of the planes, operated by Lion Air in Indonesia and Ethiopian Airlines, that were involved in the fatal crashes carried the alert systems, which are designed to warn pilots when sensors produce contradictory readings.

Agree. I think Boeing has a lot of explaining to do here. Making a warning that parts are failing a paid option doesn’t exactly reflect well on them.

Storm 10

I personally think there should be no such thing as an optional extra when it come to passenger aircraft, its beyond belief that Boeing would be selling aircraft like this, the new aircraft should have every safety feature required to fly the aircraft safely with no options for anything else. I was shocked when I heard this last night, hope that this revelation will force a change to this carry on.

Jacovs

Not sure was this asked/answered before, or does anyone here know, but how much did this optional extra cost per plane?

1123heavy

gctest50 wrote: »

.

Offensive and inappropriate post quote removed, as has original post

I very much hope that you are not a pilot and I have my doubts over whether you are. What a shocking display of ignorance at the effects of 'startle effect' and what it's like to actually be in the game. Have you ever flown a plane? Have you ever been in a sim when things are fine and suddenly you've no idea what's going on? How the mind reacts and the mental blockage that can hit a pilot? The stress?

That can go even for known failures, forget the unknown failure and situation the Lion and Ethiopian crews were faced with literally seconds to react whilst seeing the houses get bigger in the window.

Even the best crews can get caught out of the blue, I'll never forget an instructor with so many hours he'd stopped counting telling me of a passenger flight he had for a well known European carrier once down to Africa from Europe, he was conducting line training for pilots with lots of previous experience. The whole flight was uneventful with gin clear visibility, then on landing they had a go around. He said within a split second the cockpit became a total disaster and he'd never seen a situation go from being so peaceful to hell on earth within such a short space of time.

Now whilst that crew may not have covered themselves in glory, the moral of the story is that anyone can get caught out like that. The aviation industry train a hell of a lot to prevent those occurrences and regular checks are conducted etc but we are still humans and crews will still fall victim to being human. There is a reason why so much is put into the human factors!!

Hotblack Desiato

Storm 10 wrote: »

I personally think there should be no such thing as an optional extra when it come to passenger aircraft, its beyond belief that Boeing would be selling aircraft like this, the new aircraft should have every safety feature required to fly the aircraft safely with no options for anything else. I was shocked when I heard this last night, hope that this revelation will force a change to this carry on.

It's pretty shoddy tbh - and the FAA is to blame for this as much as the manufacturer and airlines are for trying to save a few bucks.

A bit reminiscent of the AA DC-10 that went down in Chicago when it (physically) lost an engine, stick shaker for the captain was rendered inoperable, stick shaker for the first officer was an optional extra, not fitted... FAA later mandated it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library%5CrgAD.nsf/0/83D4FF29A77B501C862569F200686555?OpenDocument

FAA wrote:

To reduce the probability of complete failure of the stall warning function, accomplish the following:

(a) On or before 210 days after the effective date of this AD, unless already accomplished:

1. Install two (2) auto throttle/speed control computers, each of which receives information from the positions of both outboard wing slat groups, in addition to other previously required inputs, in accordance with design data approved by the Chief, Aircraft Engineering Division, FAA Western Region.

2. Install a stick shaker at the First Officer's position, in addition to that previously required at the Captain's position, with both stick shakers actuated by either auto throttle/speed control computer in accordance with design data approved by the Chief, Aircraft Engineering Division, FAA Western Region.

PCros

Jacovs wrote: »

Not sure was this asked/answered before, or does anyone here know, but how much did this optional extra cost per plane?

It typically adds $800,000 to $2M to the price of an aircraft.

Jacovs

PCros wrote: »

It typically adds $800,000 to $2M to the price of an aircraft.

Cheers.
Would the $800,000 be if the option is selected before production starts? And the $2mil if it is to be retro fitted?
350 aircraft at $2mil each...

Nijmegen

If it's an optional extra I'd say there's significant margin on it.

PCros

Jacovs wrote: »

Cheers.
Would the $800,000 be if the option is selected before production starts? And the $2mil if it is to be retro fitted?
350 aircraft at $2mil each...

Not sure but apparently its a percentage of the overall cost of the aircraft so I guess this can vary.

Also in the same article I read its known that Boeing love a good up sell. They charge extra for the additional fire extinguisher system in the hold too despite evidence that a single extinguisher may not be enough to put out fires.

smurfjed

Generally during negotiations, each manufacturer will offer various OPTIONS, these can be simple like HF radio.
If BOEING didn’t explain the MCAS to flightcrew then I seriously doubt that their sales team explained it or the implications of not having it.
However this shouldn’t allow Boeing to pass the blame to individual airlines. They seriously fecked up with this system from the design, certification and implementation.
Having lost a colleague in Ethiopia, I seriously hope that his family take them to the cleaners !

Van.Bosch

smurfjed wrote: »

Generally during negotiations, each manufacturer will offer various OPTIONS, these can be simple like HF radio.
If BOEING didn’t explain the MCAS to flightcrew then I seriously doubt that their sales team explained it or the implications of not having it.
However this shouldn’t allow Boeing to pass the blame to individual airlines. They seriously fecked up with this system from the design, certification and implementation.
Having lost a colleague in Ethiopia, I seriously hope that his family take them to the cleaners !

I wonder would families have to sue the airline as that is who they have a contract with? In the US I’m sure you can sue anyone but wonder about elsewhere.

Bob24

PCros wrote: »

It typically adds $800,000 to $2M to the price of an aircraft.

Is that a once off cost or paid gradually as a support package subscription?

And I have no idea - would that be considered a significant cost for the airline?

PCros

Bob24 wrote: »

Is that a once off cost or paid gradually as a support package subscription?

And I have no idea - would that be considered a significant cost for the airline?

Both good questions.

Not sure on the payment side of things but as for cost in terms of revenue I think the big airlines like Ryanair and Southwest would have no problem paying for it.

HTCOne

smurfjed wrote: »

Generally during negotiations, each manufacturer will offer various OPTIONS, these can be simple like HF radio.
If BOEING didn’t explain the MCAS to flightcrew then I seriously doubt that their sales team explained it or the implications of not having it.
However this shouldn’t allow Boeing to pass the blame to individual airlines. They seriously fecked up with this system from the design, certification and implementation.
Having lost a colleague in Ethiopia, I seriously hope that his family take them to the cleaners !

The FAA are majorly liable for this too. The shambolic regulatory approval system in inadequate oversight of the trim, allowing Boeing to classify MCAS malfunction as “hazardous” rather than “catostrophic”, and then allowing them to feed the data from just 1 AoA vane when a system with a “hazardous” malfunction rating is mandated to have a feed from 2 sensors minimum, in addition to the FAA allowing Boeing talk them into delaying the software fix post Lion Air until the end of April.....

If the FAA hadn’t done that last bit, the folks on the Ethiopian aircraft would be alive today. The more info that comes out of these investigations, the more disgusted I am. Boeing and the FAA had their hands down the front of each other’s trousers and there was zero actual oversight.

Mebuntu

basill wrote: »

And this is the big difference between Airbus and Boeing. An Airbus pilot is trained from the get go that if the aircraft doesn't do what they want it to do then there are ways and means of turning off the automation and flight control protections in order to recover safe flight. Its Airbus 101 if you will. In your example of AOA vane blockage/breakages etc then you push two buttons on the overhead panel above the skippers seat and the aircraft is immediately into alternate law.
All of this is in our everyday training manuals, dealt with in sims and is not hidden away in a maintenance manual. We practice stall and upset recovery in just about every sim detail.

I couldn't disagree more with this statement. There have been Airbus crashes where the flight crew didn't know what was going on or how to save it, notably AF447 but plenty more over the years. Even one flown by one of their original test pilots crashed because he didn't know his aircraft well enough.

MJohnston

Fantastic summary of the whole mess here:
https://www.vox.com/business-and-finance/2019/3/29/18281270/737-max-faa-scandal-explained

Man Vs ManUre

Not looking to be disrespectful to the victims and families of these 2 tragedies, but does anyone have any kind of informed idea how much, even approximately, will end up being paid out to the families per deceased??
It looks like both airlines will be proved blameless. So decisions made by Manufacturer and regulator has effectively murdered all of these people.
I know you cannot put a price on any of this.
And what about those who were traveling on behalf of work?? Will their companies also seek compensation from manufacturer/regulators?? Each employer must already have to pay a large settlement to the families.