Team-BHP - Boeing 737 Max crashes and grounding

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeroen (Post 4562101)

We should be raising questions on the leadership of the President and his government. The FAA has been underfunded for many year and it was without a formal Head of the organization for more than a year. Took two crashes for the President to appoint somebody?

FAA didn't became understaff suddenly from 2016 and they must be struggling years prior to that.

FAA can not use understaff statement as defence (and I don't think they will formally). That is not how a reputed aerospace certification body is suppose to work.

Such actions from Trump is more of a show but the underlying truth is FAA leadership should have been more forthcoming and firm on their processes rather than hoping things to work out with increasing delegation.

Lives lost in the end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_skyliner (Post 4562138)

FAA didn't became understaff suddenly from 2016 and they must be struggling years prior to that..

Lives lost in the end.

True, but then again Trump did absolutely nothing to help them and it took him more than a year to appoint a new head of the FAA.

Whether lives were lost as a direct consequence still remains to be seen. Again, there was a procedure that should have brought the airplane under control. We know it worked on the flight of the Lion aircraft prior to the fatal flight. We know poor maintenance was definitely a factor in the Lion case, nothing to do with the FAA or the certification and lastly we have no clue what happened with the Ethiopian flight at all.

So blaming the FAA for lives lost is premature. Who knows they might have some blame but I haven't seen any factual evidence from either crash.

Unfortunately this whole thing is now in the public domain where emotion reigns and not logic and facts. Personally I think both Boeing and the FAA feel compelled to respond due to public pressure. Whether that is good or not is in the eye of the beholder.

If the root cause turns out to be pilot error the public outcry will be huge, because it has already decided the FAA has blood on its hands. Not a particular enlightening thought I think.

It is difficult to imagine how the public perception will not have some influence on how the final reports and its conclusions on these two tragedies will read.
Aviation accident investigations needs to be devoid of any stakeholder influence and be completely impartial. Not sure how that will play out in these cases.

The sad case is that if the final report has a bias to what the public at large demands, and the real causes are different, aviation and us as consumer and passengers are loosing out big time. We will have our good feeling moment, told you so, but if that was only partly true, aviation safety has taken a step back not forward
Jeroen

Jeroen

Canada's aviation regulator and Europe's EASA indicate they'll assess Boeing's changes to 737 MAX themselves, instead of taking FAA assessment and certification at face value per current practices.

Quote:

The Europeans and Canadians vow to conduct their own reviews of Boeing’s changes to a key flight-control system, not to simply take the Federal Aviation Administration’s word that the alterations are safe. Those reviews scramble an ambitious schedule set by Boeing and could undercut the FAA’s reputation around the world.

Quote:

By international agreement, planes must be certified in the country where they are built. Regulators around the world have almost always accepted that country’s decision.

As a result, European airlines have flown Boeing jets with little independent review by the European Aviation Safety Agency, and U.S. airlines operate Airbus jets without a separate, lengthy certification process by the FAA.

That practice is being frayed, however, in the face of growing questions about the FAA’s certification of the Max. Critics question whether the agency relied too much on Boeing to vouch for critical safety matters and whether it understood the significance of a new automated flight-control system on the Max.

Source

Some more reports coming in.

Quote:

Ethiopian crash captain untrained on 737 MAX simulator: Source
The captain of a doomed Ethiopian Airlines flight was unable to practice on a new simulator for the Boeing 737 MAX 8 before he died in a crash with 157 others, a pilot colleague said.
Yared Getachew, 29, was due for refresher training at the end of March, his colleague told Reuters, two months after Ethiopian Airlines had received the simulator.
In the Ethiopian crash, it was not clear if Yared's colleague - First Officer Ahmednur Mohammed, 25, who also died in the crash - had practised on the new MAX simulator.
"Boeing did not send manuals on MCAS," the Ethiopian Airlines pilot told Reuters in a hotel lobby, declining to give his name as staff have been told not to speak in public.

Source.
Not sure to what degree the report is true and what the implications of this might be. May be the experts here can throw some light on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mukund (Post 4562701)

Some more reports coming in.
Source.
Not sure to what degree the report is true and what the implications of this might be. May be the experts here can throw some light on it.

The short answer is, it depends on the type rating, which if part of the certification.

Part of the certification of the plane entails requirements on what kind of type training/rating a pilot is required to have. Obviously, carrier like to see as few as possible differences between different 737 models, which allows them to redeploy staff quickly onto newer models.

I am not entirely sure on the formal requirements, but I believe if you were qualified on the 737/700/800/900 very minimal training was required to transition to the Max. In essence just some hours of what they call ground school. E.g. you run through some course on your iPad/PC. No simulator time required.

So the answers depends a lot as to what the pilots previous type rating was.

And no, pilots were not aware of the MCAS. Whether that was necessary or not is part of the ongoing investigation on the crash and no also whether the certification of the 737 Max had sufficient due diligence on this matter

Jeroen

It’s a huge responsibility that aircraft manufacturers have. One accident can claim the life of so many persons. Boeing seems to have been lax in case of the 737 MAX. Many people are of the opinion that this particular aircraft should have been recertified as a new aircraft as the physical characteristics have changed, rather than using certification of the original 737. This would also entail new pilot training and type rating. There is also speculation that the desire to retain one of their biggest customers, a US airline, made Boeing decide not to recertify.

About this Lion Air aircraft, there are some news item stating that the previous day’s flight was saved with the help of a pilot on leave travelling on that flight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maveryq (Post 4562791)

Boeing charged extra for the safety features which could have prevented the accidents. Unimaginable.

From the article, I'm mentioning the two safety features that the crashed aircraft lacked:

Quote:

Angle of attack indicator, displays the readings of the two angle of attack sensors
Disagree light, activated if those sensors are at odds with one another

Boeing has mentioned it will offer the safety feature as standard:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane/boeing-to-offer-safety-feature-as-standard-in-737-max-software-upgrade-sources-idUSKCN1R20CU

I thought 'pay extra for more safety' only happens for cheap cars! Makes it plainly clear that if this attitude by aircraft manufacturers is absurd, then so is this attitude by car manufacturers.

American Airlines pilots will test 737 MAX software fix in Boeing simulator

Quote:

CHICAGO (Reuters) - American Airlines pilots will test Boeing Co's 737 MAX software fix on simulators this weekend, the pilots' union told Reuters on Thursday, a key step in restoring confidence in the jet after two fatal crashes.

Boeing has been working on a software upgrade for an anti-stall system and pilot displays on its fastest-selling jetliner in the wake of the deadly Lion Air crash in Indonesia in October.

"This airplane can be a safe airplane, and there have been great strides on getting a fix in the works, but I'll have a better feel after we can test it out," said Mike Michaelis, safety committee chairman of the Allied Pilots Association (APA), which represents American Airlines pilots.

Michaelis said one APA pilot and one pilot from American's management team would test the software fix in Renton, Washington, where Boeing builds the MAX and has two simulators.

"We have been engaging with all 737 MAX operators and we are continuing to schedule meetings to share information about our plans for supporting the 737 MAX fleet," Boeing spokesman Paul Bergman said.

Boeing has indicated it would deploy the software update by April or sooner, though it was unclear how long it would take to get the jets flying again. Pilots must complete FAA-approved computer-based training on the changes, followed by a mandatory test, and some pilots have said more may be needed.

Full Article

Apparently Boeing has released some sort of software update. Actually they're rather boastfully promoting the "free" software update for all planes.

I don't know if anyone shares the same thoughts, but IMHO it's audacious - the way they're boastful about it. The crashes have cost lives. Rather sad & disgusting that it's often seen how many corporates talk this way - asif they're doing a great favour to humanity by doing what they were anyway obligated to do. Heartless behaviour, shows they have neither regret nor any conscience.

With such a tone in their press statement, irony died a thousand deaths.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrammarNazi (Post 4565260)

I don't know if anyone shares the same thoughts, but IMHO it's audacious - the way they're boastful about it. The crashes have cost lives. Rather sad & disgusting that it's often seen how many corporates talk this way - asif they're doing a great favour to humanity by doing what they were anyway obligated to do. .

Just one little observation: As of today we do not know what the exact cause of either of these two horrific crashes was/is.

Although the software is updated, the procedure on what to do, has remained unchanged. We do not know if the pilots responded correctly and if they did, what else went wrong.

We simply do not know whether this software patch would have prevented either or both of these frightful accidents.

Jeroen

Seems like Boeing is in real trouble. Now a plane makes emergency landing for engine failure. :Frustrati

Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 Max makes emergency landing in Orlando

Quote:

A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 on its way to storage was forced to make an emergency landing shortly after departing Orlando on Tuesday afternoon.

Southwest Flight 8701 took off from Orlando International Airport at 2:50 p.m. and returned to the airport just before 3 p.m. after pilots reported an engine problem, federal aviation and airline officials said.