737 Max - Boeing grounds the fleet after second crash | Production temporarily suspended

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
Canada has grounded the Max 8 based on some information they received this morning. I'm a bit more satisfied that some reasonable comparative evidence was used in the decision but still eagerly await the analysis of both crashes to determine the root cause.
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
Why are you so invested in this? You in the industry?
No, I just always enjoy a good joke about Southwest.

My reluctance was based on the circumstantial evidence used to make the decision and the high likelihood that most of the decisions were based on public pressure from people that we know are, for the most part, cretins who couldn't even tell you what scientific principles actually get the planes they ride on into the air. (not saying that about anyone in this thread).
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,033
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
It wouldn't be the first time they've put business interests over passenger safety. They turned a blind eye to problems with the DC-10, until one fell out of the sky. A worldwide grounding could be the end of the 737 family. Boeing have had their CEO on the phone to the president it's that serious for them, and Trump has already shown the lengths he will go to to protect them. They're also now kicking off that the data recorders are being sent to Europe instead of to the US.

When it comes to regulation i trust the Europeans and the Australians to be more impartial than the Americans, personally.
False on the bolded. You can't lobby the FAA (an organization which takes pride in it's relative separation). You're talking about the decisions of aviation and engineering experts being overrode by a phone call to Trump.

As of this instant I'm sure Boeing's DERs are running helter skelter to respond to any FAA inquiries, that won't be subverted by public pressure. And it shouldn't be, the public just isn't rational about aviation safety.
 

Ramshock

CAF Pilib De Brún Translator
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
45,425
Location
Swimming against a tide of idiots and spoofers
No, I just always enjoy a good joke about Southwest.

My reluctance was based on the circumstantial evidence used to make the decision and the high likelihood that most of the decisions were based on public pressure from people that we know are, for the most part, cretins who couldn't even tell you what scientific principles actually get the planes they ride on into the air. (not saying that about anyone in this thread).
Yes but Dwayne, 2 fatal accidents within 5 months for a brand new plane? That goes beyond reasonable doubt for me. There hasnt been anything like this since the DC 10.
 

The Firestarter

Full Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
28,111
Definitely the A380. I got in the cockpit of a 747 as a kid though, so that one's up there.
A380 cockpit looks like the USS Enterprise compared to the 747. Joke aside, it's sad that 380's days are numbered now.

Btw, are you an engineer?
 

adexkola

Doesn't understand sportswashing.
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
48,033
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
You ever seen a grown man naked?
I was walking home one day, and this man came up to me and said hi, unbuttoned his shirt and started playing with his nipple.

I was 19. Hope this helps

A380 cockpit looks like the USS Enterprise compared to the 747. Joke aside, it's sad that 380's days are numbered now.

Btw, are you an engineer?
Yep. Studied AeroEng in Uni

the A380 has been a flop though right? What were Airbus thinking?
It did unfortunately. The change in route preferences fecked them over. Engineering wise it's a fantastic plane IMO.
 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
21,206
False on the bolded. You can't lobby the FAA (an organization which takes pride in it's relative separation). You're talking about the decisions of aviation and engineering experts being overrode by a phone call to Trump.

As of this instant I'm sure Boeing's DERs are running helter skelter to respond to any FAA inquiries, that won't be subverted by public pressure. And it shouldn't be, the public just isn't rational about aviation safety.
The FAA's own internal inquiry on the DC10 found their actions to have been "questionable", with things like corners being cut on safety certification and a gentleman's agreement in place with McDonnell Douglas over the schedule for fixing the problems.


Before he joined them, the current head of the FAA worked for the biggest airline trade association in the US, one of the main aerospace manufacturing associations, and American Airlines. The current heads of the UK CAA, EASA and Australian CASA had nothing to do with aviation before they joined.
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
Yes but Dwayne, 2 fatal accidents within 5 months for a brand new plane? That goes beyond reasonable doubt for me. There hasnt been anything like this since the DC 10.
You may have seen the math I did earlier in the thread. It's a 1 in 100,000 occurrence. Seems reasonable to conclude that a design fault is not the issue.

Do you have shares in Boeing? Im genuinely curious.
Not that I'm aware of. I do have some index funds but as a Canadian I'm forced to have the majority of my holdings in the Toronto Stock Exchange.
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
As a precautionary measure, EASA has published today an Airworthiness Directive, effective as of 19:00 UTC, suspending all flight operations of all Boeing Model 737-8 MAX and 737-9 MAX aeroplanes in Europe. In addition EASA has published a Safety Directive, effective as of 19:00 UTC, suspending all commercial flights performed by third-country operators into, within or out of the EU of the above mentioned models.
so that's that then. Currently they are only operating in the States and Canada.
 

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,829
You may have seen the math I did earlier in the thread. It's a 1 in 100,000 occurrence. Seems reasonable to conclude that a design fault is not the issue.



Not that I'm aware of. I do have some index funds but as a Canadian I'm forced to have the majority of my holdings in the Toronto Stock Exchange.
Why would Boeing tell the press about the changes they're going to make to the software to mitigate these issues, if the issues weren't there in the first place?
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47562727

The whole MAX fleet had now been grounded on advice from Boeing.

-----
Boeing said it "continues to have full confidence in the safety of the 737 Max".

However, it said that after consultation with the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board - which is conducting an investigation into the Ethiopian Airlines crash - it had decided to ground the flights "out of an abundance of caution and in order to reassure the flying public of the aircraft's safety".
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,255
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
Why would Boeing tell the press about the changes they're going to make to the software to mitigate these issues, if the issues weren't there in the first place?
Design effectiveness and operating effectiveness are two different things. To me, this is an operating effectiveness issue. The system may be designed well enough but in operation, the performers may encounter situations where they cannot execute the function without failures.
 

Skills

Snitch
Joined
Jan 17, 2012
Messages
42,010
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47562727

The whole MAX fleet had now been grounded on advice from Boeing.

-----
Boeing said it "continues to have full confidence in the safety of the 737 Max".

However, it said that after consultation with the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board - which is conducting an investigation into the Ethiopian Airlines crash - it had decided to ground the flights "out of an abundance of caution and in order to reassure the flying public of the aircraft's safety".
Ouch. That's going to be expensive.
 

Abizzz

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
7,614
Given the vague nature of the problem (at the moment) I can see them grounded for a very long time.
 

Ramshock

CAF Pilib De Brún Translator
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
45,425
Location
Swimming against a tide of idiots and spoofers
You may have seen the math I did earlier in the thread. It's a 1 in 100,000 occurrence. Seems reasonable to conclude that a design fault is not the issue.



Not that I'm aware of. I do have some index funds but as a Canadian I'm forced to have the majority of my holdings in the Toronto Stock Exchange.
Why the AOA corrective software then?
 

Ramshock

CAF Pilib De Brún Translator
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Messages
45,425
Location
Swimming against a tide of idiots and spoofers
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47562727

The whole MAX fleet had now been grounded on advice from Boeing.

-----
Boeing said it "continues to have full confidence in the safety of the 737 Max".

However, it said that after consultation with the FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board - which is conducting an investigation into the Ethiopian Airlines crash - it had decided to ground the flights "out of an abundance of caution and in order to reassure the flying public of the aircraft's safety".
Ouch
 

zing

Zingle balls
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
13,797
No, I just always enjoy a good joke about Southwest.

My reluctance was based on the circumstantial evidence used to make the decision and the high likelihood that most of the decisions were based on public pressure from people that we know are, for the most part, cretins who couldn't even tell you what scientific principles actually get the planes they ride on into the air. (not saying that about anyone in this thread).
It's ironic that you talk about circumstantial evidence but you actually don't know what evidence they had. Your reaction was to assume that they're going off public outrage, your whole premise could be complete nonsense.
 

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,829
Design effectiveness and operating effectiveness are two different things. To me, this is an operating effectiveness issue. The system may be designed well enough but in operation, the performers may encounter situations where they cannot execute the function without failures.
What's the importance of the distinction, in this case? The system is designed and delivered in a way which increases the likelihood of a specific issue during take off, and it appears to have been an unusually common and evidently quite dangerous issue. If they can't execute the function, why is that not a significant problem which justifies the cautious response?
 

Enigma_87

You know who
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
27,596
Ouch. That's going to be expensive.
1 to 5 billion to ground them for 3 months in terms of expectation. Not that much of an issue for Boeing who post revenues or circa 100b yearly.

The bigger issue would be to undermine the confidence in their aircrafts. Their stock had seen a major hit since the crash plummeting with 11%.