Ethiopian Airlines Crash/ B737MAX grounding

Boeing's problems mean the board of directors are under the microscope, makes you think that the downfall of Boeing was only a matter of time when you consider that they decided to chase profits over safety, and ultimately not aim to be the best aircraft manufacturer in the world...

Seattle Times

Instead of building a new airplane, he said, Boeing cut costs by adding big new engines to an existing 737 airframe to create the MAX. Muilenburg and Boeing’s pliable board then redirected at least some of the company’s R&D savings into more than $43 billion of stock buybacks that drove up stock values in recent years

But the MAX flew for around 800,000 hours in commercial service and none of the airlines ever complained about the location of the engines or the aerodynamics. Problems ensued with the flight control systems - which is/has been rectified - allegedly.

Fritzbox wrote: »

But the MAX flew for around 800,000 hours in commercial service and none of the airlines ever complained about the location of the engines or the aerodynamics. Problems ensued with the flight control systems - which is/has been rectified - allegedly.

Very true,and often disregarded in the current scrum.

It appears that some 350 Max 8's were in service,with very little feedback readily available as to how they were performing generally.

We do know that some Pilots were concerned at the Max 8's characteristics,and more specifically the lack of specific training available,but that still leaves a lot of cycles operated without incident ?

Without doubt,Industry has been awakened to the conflicts between High Finance (Investor returns) and Good (Expensive) Engineering,with Regulation remaining as the weak spot in the Max 8 story.

Who watched the Watchers ?

Fritzbox wrote: »

But the MAX flew for around 800,000 hours in commercial service and none of the airlines ever complained about the location of the engines or the aerodynamics. Problems ensued with the flight control systems - which is/has been rectified - allegedly.

Not quite true. NASA has a confidential online reporting system outside the FAA or NTSB purview. They received two separate complaints of B38Ms diving for the deck uncommanded shortly after takeoff in the months leading up to Lion Air, and shared that data. It is another mark against the FAA and Boeing.

Edit: I think it used to be called FSAP, its called ASRS now. In a country where the regulator and ANSP are under the same roof, NASA wanted to provide an alternative method of filing a safety report. Excellent idea imo. Here's the link https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/report/electronic.html

Fritzbox wrote: »

Have you got a link?

Found these:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristykiernan/2019/03/13/boeing-737-max-understanding-pilot-safety-reports/
https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2019/03/heres-what-was-on-the-record-about-problems-with-the-737-max/584791/

Reports relating to the MCAS system it seems.

TomSweeney wrote: »

So when should this plane be back flying ?

Probably September: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/business/boeing-737-max.html

TomSweeney wrote: »

June/July according to that ...



damn it, I have a Norwegian air flight booked .... really hope it's not the Max..

I find you post and many other posts quite funny.
It will probably be the safest plane in the world once it's certified by everyone

ZX7R wrote: »

I find you post and many other posts quite funny.
It will probably be the safest plane in the world once it's certified by everyone

I know this and logically I can accept it, but these things aren't rational ..

TomSweeney wrote: »

June/July according to that ...



damn it, I have a Norwegian air flight booked .... really hope it's not the Max..

Even if it's July that the FAA certify it, then it has to go to all the other authorities to certify.
And for example, Ryanair won't add any new aircraft to the fleet during peak season...

So no matter what it could be at least October 2020 before they're added to commercial schedules..

Rawr wrote: »

Seeing the photos of the parked MAX'es makes me wonder about one practical issue.

Assuming that one day this year the MAX gets the green light from the regulators, I wonder if there would be a resulting scramble to get ferry flights sorted, which in turn would cause a huge jump in traffic (and possibly delays).

I'm kind of imagining large flying wings of MAX aircraft crossing the Atlantic to get to their bases. (I know that's probably not how it would work...it's just how my imagination works )

I assume there'll be work to be done on them before they can be released to service.

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Regardless if they are released back into service, I will leave it a couple of years before I venture onto one. Will be paying much more attention to type when booking flights and pay the bit extra if I have to.

I wouldn't think twice about it if they get certified. If you drive, I'll bet you don't think twice about getting behind the wheel, even though the likelihood of you dying in a car crash is several million time greater than of dying in a plane crash.

errlloyd wrote: »

I could be wrong, and if there is one forum I am going to get rinsed on it is this one.

But...

Per passenger mile - Aircraft much safer.
Per passenger hour - Aircraft marginally safer.
Per journey - Car journeys safer.

If you gave a rational actor the choice between driving from New York to LA and flying from New York to LA they would quite rationally accept that flying was much safer. They'd be less anxious about it etc.

But when you are comparing fear of flying to fear of driving a car, you're usually comparing a long flight to a very short car journey. In that case the flight is more dangerous.

Yeah, you are wrong. 2.1 crashes per 1,000,000 departures, according to the Swiss. The odds of you dying in a plane crash are one in 15,000,000 - so as likely as winning Euromillions.

The National Safety Council compiled an odds-of-dying table for 2008, which further illustrates the relative risks of flying and driving safety. It calculated the odds of dying in a motor vehicle accident to be 1 in 98 for a lifetime. For air and space transport (including air taxis and private flights), the odds were 1 in 7,178 for a lifetime, according to the table.

ah jaysus lads!!!
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51499777

When they are certified I presume they will do test flights, and test conditions, or will they just lash them back out to service and use passengers as guinea pigs ?

I am flying Norwegian BCN-OSL-EVE return 30/June - 9 July, according to my booking it is a 737 800 but if the MAX is back, I assume that could be changed.

Really don't want to be one of the earlier test batches....

Surprised that the fuel tanks of dormant planes were checked for debris, especially given there's no short-term plan to get them flying again.

The cynic in me thinks that this was "discovered" previously, and it's just opportune to reveal it now. The tanks definitely aren't the dirtiest bit of the MAX programme.

How will this impact on Ryanair? The longer the max’s return to service is delayed and more information becomes available on the various problems and Q.C. issues with this aircraft, can only continue to erode public confidence in the Max. Ryanair must be getting increasingly worried about passenger confidence/attitudes to the Max the longer this is dragged out.

Worst case scenario – the delays continue into early 2021 and all the while more and more problems are discovered with the design and quality control process until Boeing eventually bites the bullet and announces they are scrapping the whole program. Would Ryanair have a plan in place to deal with this, given that there are no more 737’ NGs under construction and Airbus replacements would be years away?