Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post Reply
firecat69

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by firecat69 »

gera wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:28 pm If one wants to objectively discuss the situation, one should rely on facts. It is well established that in both crashes pilots made numerous mistakes and the critical sensor malfunctioned. I do not see how Boeing can be responsible for that. Grounding Boeing in US , Trump inflicted a major damage to the company and American National Security taking into account the role of the company in National defense. I expect certification of the plane within two to three weeks. But huge damage already done.
Really ?? When were you last in a cockpit of a passenger jet . Boeing inflicted the damage on its self with shoddy work and worrying about saving pennies in training costs and rushing to put the plane in the air because of the competition . Of course the FAA is a joke under Trump appointments and any chance of them catching the problems or doing anything about would be reduced to money in the pockets of stockholders.

Boeing has damaged the reputation of a great company and those planes have no chance of being in the in 2 or 3 weeks. Wish I could bet on that in Vegas!!
fountainhall

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by fountainhall »

Undaunted wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 5:17 pm This is now really old news I am surprised that those who rehash news hear didn’t rehash this!

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48691488
Rehash? Nonsense. The Congressional Sub-Committee met less than 24 hours prior to the post and video clip. That is up-to-date news.

In any event, your suggestion has absolutely nothing to do with the 737 Max crashes. Perhaps you need to open a new thread about 5-year old plane crashes! Simple!
fountainhall

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by fountainhall »

gera wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:28 pm If one wants to objectively discuss the situation, one should rely on facts. It is well established that in both crashes pilots made numerous mistakes and the critical sensor malfunctioned. I do not see how Boeing can be responsible for that
What?? That is accurate? That, I'm sorry to say, is absolutely innacurate!

If a single sensor on an aircraft fails and the manufacturer has made a conscious decision to have absolutely no back-up, let alone two back up systems, that is 100% Boeing's fault.

If the manufacturer adds new, larger and more powerful engines onto an airframe that has seen virtually no change in 50 years (Sullenberger's comment yesterday), if these engines have to be set further forward and above the leading edge of the wings thereby changing the handling of the aircraft in certain key parts of flight, and if it then does not even inform the FAA, the airlines and, most importantly the pilots, about the software it had installed in an effort to correct that handling change, that is 100% the responsibility of Boeing.

As for the pilots being responsible by making "numerous mistakes" - even partly, the testimony given before Congress yesterday tosses that lie where it deserves to be - in the trash can. As Captain Sullenberger stated elsewhere in his testimony, he did not believe any American-trained pilot would have been able to control the two crashed planes. And before his testimony he spent some time in an Max simulator. Even knowing exactly what had happened in the crashes, he stated he could fully understand how the crews ran out of time before they could possibly take control of their aircraft! As he stressed more than once. Boeing was desperate for an aircraft that would be virtually identical for the pilots to the earlier 737-800. It even told airlines they would not require simulators. Indeed, the only simulator presently in the USA is located in Miami.

As every single pilot who has been interviewed in connection with the two crashes has stated, to expect pilots to adapt to such a major change in the handling characteristics of the aircraft with just an iPad programme for training was gross negligence at best. But we know now this was deliberate Boeing policy. And that iPad did not even mention the new MCAS system! Nothing that has so far come to light has suggested any error on the part of the pilots. The only parties putting forward such lies have been the CEO of Boeing (and he has every reason to put forward such a lie since his company is facing multi-billion lawsuits sooner rather than later) and one Congressman.

Let's never forget that Boeing even went a lot further by offering a rebate of $1 million per plane to Southwest if simulators were found to become necessary.
Former Boeing operations analyst Rick Ludtke says during development of the 737 Max, the company had a mandate to make sure any changes to the plane would not require additional pilot training in a simulator, something he called "unprecedented."

"(That's) never happened in the past that I'm aware of. We were very uncomfortable with this," he said.

Ludtke says Boeing managers told him they even sold the plane to Southwest Airlines with a guarantee a rebate of $1 million per plane if simulator training was required.
https://www.nbc11news.com/content/news/ ... 63721.html
gera wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:28 pmGrounding Boeing in US , Trump inflicted a major damage to the company and American National Security taking into account the role of the company in National defense.
What on earth has the grounding of an unsafe aircraft got to do with National Defence? Nothing whatever!
gera

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by gera »

The plane will be certified within two to three weeks. Accusing me of lies is getting personal and I hope the moderator will take notice of that. Let me repeat once again: pilots of two crashed plains made numerous mistakes. It is a fact confirmed by analysis of black boxes.
gera

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by gera »

fountainhall wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 11:57 pm
gera wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:28 pm If one wants to objectively discuss the situation, one should rely on facts. It is well established that in both crashes pilots made numerous mistakes and the critical sensor malfunctioned. I do not see how Boeing can be responsible for that
What?? That is accurate? That, I'm sorry to say, is absolutely innacurate!
gera wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:28 pmGrounding Boeing in US , Trump inflicted a major damage to the company and American National Security taking into account the role of the company in National defense.
What on earth has the grounding of an unsafe aircraft got to do with National Defence? Nothing whatever!
Sales of 737 Max produced more than 20 percent of cash flow for Boeing. Grounding the perfectly airworthy plane devoided company of cash required to fund other operations including those in the area of National Defense. Sorry, you do not understand that. Your personal attacks contradict the rules of message board. Stop accusing me of lies.
User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 21459
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 1306 times

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by Gaybutton »

gera wrote: Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:54 am Your personal attacks contradict the rules of message board. Stop accusing me of lies.
Please show me where you were personally attacked or accused of lying. I don't see any posts doing that.
fountainhall

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by fountainhall »

gera wrote: Sat Jun 22, 2019 11:54 amYour personal attacks contradict the rules of message board. Stop accusing me of lies.
I stated that you were spreading lies. Much of what you post on this subject has absolutely no basis in fact. That to me is a lie. Besides, you make statements and you hardly, if ever, back up from quoted sources. Therefore how do we know these are not merely your optimistic opinions not based on fact? At least I almost always print the link/s from which I obtain my information.

I am not going to continue a dialogue with someone whose flights of fancy, frankly, bear little basis in reality. I am not the only poster to point out your errors of fact. The actual facts are -

Fact: The Chairman/CEO of Boeing said just a few days ago he expects the 737 Max to be back in service but the end of the year.
Muilenburg said last week on CNBC that he expected that the Max would be back in the air by year-end.
https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi- ... story.html

Fact: The FAA agrees with Muhlenberg's comments re a return by year end.
Ali Bahrami, the Federal Aviation Administration’s associate administrator for aviation safety, said in an interview Wednesday at a conference in Cologne, Germany [June 11] the Max will be returned to service “when we believe it will be safe,” following reviews of the design, flight testing and other checks. Bahrami was reluctant to provide a timeline, but asked whether the plane would resume service this year or next, he said remarks by Boeing Chief Executive Officer Dennis Muilenburg projecting a return by the end of 2019 sounded correct.
https://time.com/5605368/boeing-737-max-fly-again/

We know airlines operating the 737 Max want their planes up in the air as quickly as possible. We also know from American Airlines - as earlier stated in this thread - that their pilots will now be provided with a full 45 days of training, including extensive simulator training, prior to taking over commercial flights. Boeing, lets recall, had earlier told all its customers that the pilots would definitely require no simulator training. So work back from the end of the year, allow a generous margin, and you can see that neither Boeing nor the FAA seem to expect full certification any time before September - probably the end of September.

You stated you expect ceritification within 2 or 3 weeks. Where did you get that information? And why does it fly in the face of what both Boeing and the FAA have publicly stated? Please also provide your source material.

As for the grounding affecting US defences, that is just plain stupid!
aviation analyst Eddie Miceli expressed doubts that the ongoing scandal over the 737 Max crash would affect Boeing's leading position as a major US defence contractor: "It is a complete different branch of aviation, and any concerns or flaws have always been addressed and corrected internally and without disclosing them to the general public".
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201903 ... contracts/

If you wish to continue this dialogue, I suggest you follow your own guidelines stated earlier in this thread.
gera wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2019 3:28 pmIf one wants to objectively discuss the situation, one should rely on facts.
https://qz.com/1576993/what-will-happen ... x-crashes/

So, facts please.
User avatar
Gaybutton
Posts: 21459
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:21 am
Location: Thailand
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 1306 times

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by Gaybutton »

Ok, now I have to ask that you gents simply stick to the issue itself. If people do post what they consider to be facts, yes I agree those posts should be accompanied by the source of those facts so that people can see all sides of the issues and form their own opinions.

But if personal arguments are going to be posted, then be prepared for those kinds of posts to be deleted. Just stick to the issues.

Right now, I'm in no mood or condition to be spending time as a referee for personal arguments, so gents, please - cut it out.
firecat69

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by firecat69 »

Guess we can forget about the 737 Max getting back in the Air any time soon!!

https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/boeing-737-max
fountainhall

Re: Boeing 737 Max8 Crashes

Post by fountainhall »

New Risk discovered in Being 737 Max
The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has identified a new risk that Boeing Co must address on its 737 MAX before the grounded jet can return to service, the agency said on Wednesday.

The risk was discovered during a simulator test last week and it is not yet clear if the issue can be addressed with a software upgrade or will require a more complex hardware fix, sources with knowledge of the matter told Reuters.

The new issue means Boeing will not conduct a certification test flight until July 8 in a best-case scenario, the sources said, but one source cautioned it could face further delays beyond that. The FAA will spend at least two to three weeks reviewing the results before deciding whether to return the plane to service, the people said.

Two people briefed on the matter told Reuters that an FAA test pilot during a simulator test last week was running scenarios seeking to intentionally activate the MCAS stall-prevention system. During one activation it took an extended period to recover the stabilizer trim system that is used to control the aircraft, the people said.

It was not clear if the situation that resulted in an uncommanded dive can be addressed with a software update or if it is a microprocessor issue that will require a hardware replacement.

In a separate statement, Boeing said addressing the new problem would remove a potential source of uncommanded movement by the plane’s stabilizer.

A hardware fix could add new delays to the plane’s return to service.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethi ... SKCN1TR30J
Post Reply