nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Ethiopian Airlines Crash/ B737MAX grounding

RiseToMe

Reports that an Ethiopian Airlines plane with 157 souls on board has crashed en route to Nairobi

http://news.sky.com/story/ethiopian-airlines-plane-with-157-people-on-board-crashes-11660677

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Blut2

This is paywalled, but is a good read: Boeing faces first lawsuit from 737 Max customer -- https://www.ft.com/content/30a68cd4-c84b-11e9-a1f4-3669401ba76f

Some highlights:

A Russian aircraft leasing company is suing Boeing for breach of contract in connection with its grounded 737 Max in what is the first lawsuit brought against the US manufacturer by a customer over the safety crisis.

Avia Capital Services, a subsidiary of Russian state conglomerate Rostec, claims two deadly crashes were due to the “negligent actions and decisions of Boeing” not just in designing a plane that was “defective” but also in “withholding critical information” from the US aviation safety regulator during certification.

Avia ordered 35 Max 8 jets from Boeing before they were grounded worldwide in March, and now it wants the order cancelled. The company says it gave Boeing a cash deposit of $35m to secure the order, and is asking for that amount to be returned with interest, along with $75m in lost profits for a total of $115m in compensatory damages, plus “several times the amount” in punitive damages.

Avia’s lawyer, Steven Marks of the Miami aviation law firm Podhurst Orseck, told the Financial Times in an interview that Boeing had offered compensation but it was inadequate. He said other Boeing customers had been in touch with him about bringing similar lawsuits. “I think you will see a number of other operators filing suit in coming months. This will be the first of many to come,” Mr Marks said.

Popeleo

Blut2 wrote: »

This is paywalled, but is a good read: Boeing faces first lawsuit from 737 Max customer -- https://www.ft.com/content/30a68cd4-c84b-11e9-a1f4-3669401ba76f

Pilots are at it now too - this article was in my newsfeed earlier.
3,000 pilots from 12 airlines have joined a class action lawsuit in the US against Boeing over the Max fiasco:

https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/08/boeing-737-max-pilot-class-action-grows/

Inquitus

EASA won't take FAA's word on 737 Max Safety.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49591363

GM228

Inquitus wrote: »

EASA won't take FAA's word on 737 Max Safety.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49591363

And rightly so.

ChikiChiki

Inquitus wrote: »

EASA won't take FAA's word on 737 Max Safety.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49591363

Only a matter of time before Trump throws his toys out of the pram on twitter over this.

Damien360

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Only a matter of time before Trump throws his toys out of the pram on twitter over this.

It may end up as tit-for-tat should Airbus try bring something new to the market.

Bob24

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Only a matter of time before Trump throws his toys out of the pram on twitter over this.

Depends on what the exact situation is. The EASA said they won’t take the FAA for granted which makes sense. But that was a while ago and they are carrying their work alongside the FAA.

So unless there is a specific point the FAA is happy with and the EASA disagrees on, they might certify it to fly around the same time.

But yeah, if we end up in a situation whereby in can fly in the US and not in Europe, this will turn into a geopolitical football.

Given how large the Chinese market is, it will also be interesting to see what happens with the Chinese regulation authority - all in the context of the trade war!

Shedite27

Inquitus wrote: »

EASA won't take FAA's word on 737 Max Safety.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49591363

Surely if they're rejecting their certification of this plane then they should be rejecting certification of all planes yeah? It's the certification process they have a problem with, not only this plane

cnocbui

Not really. That would be impractical. They might, and ought to, take note of any whistle blowing by ex-Boeing employees about issues with other models and look into those very carefully.

Inquitus

777X Cargo door blows out in static ground testing, more woes for Boeing.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2019-09-09/boeing-777x-suffers-testing-setback

blackwhite

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

An interesting take on the 737MAX from a former pilot. Blames pilot errors much more than MCAS for the two accidents.

Some very strong criticism of the current pilot training regimes at some airlines

The One Doctor

blackwhite wrote: »

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

An interesting take on the 737MAX from a former pilot. Blames pilot errors much more than MCAS for the two accidents.

Some very strong criticism of the current pilot training regimes at some airlines

The author of that article fails to mention that Ethiopian, an airline with a very good safety record, also had the same problem with MCAS.

I'm wondering if Boeing paid for that opinion piece. Especially given the author's preeminence as a pilot.

Professional pilots should not be giving opinions in public on this sort of thing. It is very unprofessional.

Lustrum

blackwhite wrote: »

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

An interesting take on the 737MAX from a former pilot. Blames pilot errors much more than MCAS for the two accidents.

Some very strong criticism of the current pilot training regimes at some airlines

I'm not sure interesting is the word I'd use. American, presumably former navy pilot, blames everyone but the Americans for the grounding. This is where he lost any credibility in my eyes...

The Max’s creation took place in suburban Seattle among engineers and pilots of unquestionable if bland integrity, including supervising officials from the Federal Aviation Administration. Although Boeing’s designers were aware of timetables and competitive pressures, the mistakes they made were honest ones, or stupid ones, or maybe careless ones, but not a result of an intentional sacrifice of safety for gain.

Also, harping on about Indonesia's corruption, aviation safety record etc is all well and good, but he seems to quite happily disregard the fact that the 2nd crash which actually grounded the fleet happened nowhere near Indonesia, and to and airline that flies into the US daily!

john boye

Author apparently has a habit of blaming dead pilots.

padjocollins

meant to post this yesterday
https://newrepublic.com/article/154944/boeing-737-max-investigation-indonesia-lion-air-ethiopian-airlines-managerial-revolution

murphaph

padjocollins wrote: »

meant to post this yesterday
https://newrepublic.com/article/154944/boeing-737-max-investigation-indonesia-lion-air-ethiopian-airlines-managerial-revolution

Very powerful read.

cnocbui

Boeing's evaluation of the 737 Max system during development used an oversimplified test that didn't anticipate the cacophony of alarms and alerts that actually occurred during a pair of deadly crashes, US investigators have concluded.

In the first official finding from a US government review of the crashes that grounded Boeing's best-selling airliner, the National Transportation Safety Board on Thursday issued seven recommendations calling on the Federal Aviation Administration to update how it assumes pilots will react in emergencies and to make aircraft more intuitive when things go wrong.

"We want them to step up how they certify these airplanes with regard to the human interface," said Dana Schulze, the director of NTSB's Office of Aviation Safety.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/116138273/boeing-underestimated-cockpit-chaos-on-737-max-us-investigators-say

More reassuring findings, highlighting how Boeing do what they want and the FAA officials ... actually, what do they do, now that Boeing does their old jobs?

Hotblack Desiato

padjocollins wrote: »

meant to post this yesterday
https://newrepublic.com/article/154944/boeing-737-max-investigation-indonesia-lion-air-ethiopian-airlines-managerial-revolution

Link in that article

Boeing’s 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers

deconduo

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Link in that article

Boeing’s 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers

Bit of a red herring there isn't it? The software was fine, it did exactly what it was supposed to do. It was the spec/design that was the problem.

Hotblack Desiato

No it's not a red herring. It's worrying that Boeing are willing to outsource software development to guys straight out of college on $9 an hour.

cml387

There is a danger of writing off software written by Indian engineers because they are Indian (I accept that that is not what the poster or the article intends).

Boeing used to design aircraft that were designed to be flown by pilots of all abilities. They understood that like all professions there can be a wide range of competences and once a defined level of competence had been demonstrated by a trainee pilot they would be considered safe to take control of an aircraft.

billie1b

Boeing 38M - BOE106, one of the Ryanair max fleet up doing a test flight over Seattle now

cnocbui

There goes any argument Boeing haven't been grossly negligent and utterly culpable for the deaths of hundreds of people. They ought to be in really deep poo. This is no longer a case where there was a prospect of them making a mistake or just being a bit incompetent. It's gone from possible lapse to deliberate,

(Reuters) - Boeing Co (BA.N) engineers working on the 737 MAX passenger plane’s flight-control system omitted safeguards included in an earlier version of the system used on a military tanker jet, The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday, citing people familiar with the matter.

The engineers who created the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) flight-control system more than a decade ago for the military refueling plane designed the system to rely on inputs from multiple sensors and with limited power to move aircraft's nose, the Journal said on.wsj.com/2mOypqT.

The newspaper cited one person familiar with the design saying this approach was taken in order to guard against the system acting erroneously or causing a pilot to lose control.

In contrast, the version of MCAS on the 737 MAX passenger plane relied on input from just one of two sensors which measure the angle at which the plane’s nose is flying, the newspaper said.

Boeing’s expected software fix for its 737 MAX planes will make its MCAS more like the one used on the tanker jet, the Journal said.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-boeing/boeing-omitted-safeguards-on-737-max-that-were-used-on-military-jet-wsj-idUSKBN1WE0FR

The_Wanderer

I did the Boeing Factory tour on Saturday at Paine Field and was very surprised to see Boeing still selling merchandise branded with 737 Max and their promotional video at the start of the tour also mentioned the improved 737 max.

Felt a bit insensitive to me, especially considering the fleet is still grounded.

On a side note managed to get out there via Public Transport for a total of $8.50, a big saving compared to the $90 the coach companies look for on day tours. That includes the admission cost of €25.

L1011

Many of the staff still think it's the "poorly trained pilots" fault and can't accept they made unairworthy planes. There'd be war internally if they removed the merch

banie01

L1011 and I have posted earlier about Boeing's inheritence of McDonnell's and Douglas's failed management culture and practices.
The more detail that comes to light regarding Boeing's programme management and actual reaction to failure, the more the contagion of poor practice and cultural acceptance by management becomes apparent.

Between blaming the Pilots, then the off shored Software work ignores the fact that Boeing designed the Max to be flown by NG pilots with minimal additional training.
Off shoring software development, one could argue that they got what they paid for?
That would ignore that Boeing surely had on-shore QC teams aswell as the fact that specs and scoping for any software would have issued from Boeing!
Aswell as that I've never yet seen a development contract, where the product delivered, was not verified as being to the required Spec before being allowed into a production environment.

Boeing a reaping a whirlwind borne of poor corporate governance and taking the cheapest, least risky (In development terms) path over the last 25yrs.
There really is a reckoning coming and where Boeing not one of the US big 2, I think they would already likely really be facing chapter 11 protection issues.
The confidence the market seems to have in Boeing riding this out, is not based on any logic I can grasp.

Boeing do have a cash pile.
That is facing conflagration on multiple fronts.
Suit from the families of the Max victims.
Suit from the Airlines who have had plans and services affected by the grounding.
Storage and maintainence costs for Airframes, Furloughed worker costs.
I'd think once the true scope of Boeings corner cutting in pursuit of shareholder value becomes apparent, that suit from investors both personal and institutional would follow.
Then one needs to factor in the military issues and business Boeing has already lost in the US or is having trouble competing for.
A lot of those bids, are based on the cah pile soaking up R&D costs until a bid is won, the US military have shifted goalpost considerably on what and when they will pay for when organising bidding competitions.

The rush to order F15z and other gen 4.5 aircraft from Boeing is likely as close as the US can get to offering Boeing state aid without Lockheed or another company suing the Government.
Airbus could seriously dent Boeing IMO if they were to force the tanker decision to be revisited in a US court too.

It will make for an interesting few years for Boeing IMO.

cnocbui

Boeing management just sinking deeper and deeper.

A senior Boeing engineer filed an internal ethics complaint this year saying that during the development of the 737 Max jet the company had rejected a safety system to minimize costs, equipment that he felt could have reduced risks that contributed to two fatal crashes.

Boeing has provided the complaint, which was reviewed by The New York Times, to the Department of Justice as part of a criminal investigation into the design of the Max, according to a person with knowledge of the inquiry who requested anonymity given the ongoing legal matter. Federal investigators have questioned at least one former Boeing employee about the allegations, said another person with knowledge of the discussions who similarly requested anonymity.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/business/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

ZiabR

padjocollins wrote: »

meant to post this yesterday
https://newrepublic.com/article/154944/boeing-737-max-investigation-indonesia-lion-air-ethiopian-airlines-managerial-revolution

That is a super read, scary and infuriating, but super.

L1011

Multiple airlines are ferrying planes out of colder wetter climes to drier storage before winter hits

Fairly certain they won't be flying in passenger service this year now

Thirdfox

Some small change at the top:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/12/boeing-removes-ceo-as-chairman-amid-737-max-crisis

So CEO is still CEO, but no longer chairman.

Though in these cases - I think it's still rarely just one person at the top that changes the culture of a company completely - plenty of people would need to be happy with the direction a company goes in before they change course. See the protests by google employees (and backtracking by Google) when Google tries to do things some people regard as against the company's "values".