More countries are grounding them!!!
More countries are grounding them!!!
EASA is halting all European flights from 19:00 UTC tonight, the pressure will be on FAA to change it's advice. Boeing shares have taken a bit of hit and are down 7% today,
Boeing have a massive order book for 737-MAX* sales, Airbus will be looking on in delight.
It's ok they've released a software update.
I’m buying the dip.
I wouldn't fly on one until the investigation is complete
The Netherlands has closed its air space for the Boeing.
Menno
You wouldn't have to,alternative aircraft will be used.Originally Posted by wotsthecrack
Yeah done mine on I tunes seriously huge questions with huge consequences
Would be surprised if Boeing isn’t hit with corporate manslaughter charges over the two 737 crashes. Doubling down by claiming they are safe to fly is clearly risky too. There’s good reason to suspect the necessary modifications should have been flagged and tested before 300 people died
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I strongly suspect that if the aircraft were manufactured by Airbus, then the FAA would have grounded them.
Fingers crossed that one doesn’t have an incident Stateside.
There doesn't appear to be a cause yet so why a huge knee jerk reaction?
One is unlucky, two is not.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Because when a plane crash it is normal procedure to ground the others until you know why it crashed.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Is it? Never realised that.
I unwittingly flew to Iceland on one on Monday.
Sometimes ignorance is bliss!
Especially for new planes. And especially in this case where the first crash showed it was the plane (software) that was faulty.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I'm trying to decide whether it's a bold move to ground the whole type, or a bold move to decide not to.
If the suspicion is true, that all this is caused by software that causes the nose to dip in error, then the scariest thing is that the pilots can't seem to override it. Surely you'd think there would be some manual means of switching this thing off?
I wonder how many passengers unsuspectingly flew 737 Max since the Lion Air crash ?
The 737 max had to have MCAS fitted to meet regulation because of engine size and location in relation to centre of gravity. It would be possible for a pilot to get the aircraft into a high angle of attack situation (near the stall) and not have elevator authority to push the nose down. When aircraft have unstable characteristics like this, they have systems fitted to prevent dangerous situations.
Another more simple example...if you fly in an aircraft with a high-T tail, they have “stick pushers” fitted to prevent deep stalling...a situation you’d never want to find yourself as you are then flying in a brick!
MCAS can be switched off - its not active, for example, with any stage of flap or with the autopilot selected. It can also be switched off by turning off both electric trim switches. Unfortunately, prior to the Lion Air crash, I believe Boeing didn’t even let operators know it existed. In addition to this, they designed a system that had a single point of failure...one angle of attack sensor. Not great. Since the Lion Air crash, operators should know about MCAS and actions in the event of unwanted MCAS input (trim runaway). The stage of flight that the Ethiopian jet crashed in is eerily similar to Lion Air though.
AvE has just made a video talking about this (Patreon only at the moment), and he came to similar conclusions.
Here's a web page I found that describes the problem with the MCAS system: https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-s...ion-air-crash/
A lot of knowledgeable guys on an aircraft forum I browse feel the evidence released so far suggests this was an explosion, quite possibly lithium-ion batteries in the cargo catching fire.
I would suggest from looking at the pictures of the crash site that the aircraft flew into the ground rather than broke up in mid air (explosion)
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
i find myself reluctant to fly anywhere with any airline as i get older, watch now I will be run over by a bus :-)
There is a manual override. The problem is that relatively low airspeed and height it is very easy to stall..................Not a lot of thinking time.
and if the pilots unaware of this 'feature' because it isn't covered in the manual or training provided for this aircraft, would he naturally look to other cause/solutions first in what little time was available.
Last edited by Passenger; 14th March 2019 at 12:21.
Because the Black boxes have been recovered it is a fairly safe move, even politically. Analysis should not take too long and there will hopefully be a clear answer.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Did this aircraft go down tail or nose first?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You know if you posted that statement in the BP youd have an avalanche of facts and figures tossed at you!!
One AoA sensor eh? One. Interesting.
https://blog.thetravelinsider.info/2...e-project.html
Really good article on Boeing and the Max, if a little long, but very insightful and well written.
NY Times article on the FAA’s oversight of Boeing self certification. Possibly nothing new but an interesting read.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/27/b...7-max-faa.html
I’m sure the usual ‘experts’ will be along although some are probably busy with electrical problems. ;-)You know if you posted that statement in the BP youd have an avalanche of facts and figures tossed at you!!
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Why the Max 8 has the MCAS:
Probable problem (Ethiopian flight):
U.S. authorities have extracted $25 billion in fines, penalties and restitution from VW for the 580,000 tainted diesels it sold in the U.S.
I hate to think what sort of fine will be slapped on Boeing for killing 198 people aboard of Lion Air and 157 people in Ethiopian Airlines crash..
Fas est ab hoste doceri
Ah but the difference is Boeing is a US company. I doubt any fine and compensation will exceed a billion
Boeing is a key US business......so I doubt that the US will fine it at all. Furthermore, VW actively sought to defeat tests (by accounts), and no-one is suggesting that Boeing tried to hide potential failures, so the company's actions were not exactly comparable. I do, however, think the cosy relationship between the FAA and Boeing will be looked at rather closely, and rightly so; independent certification should be exactly that..... The failure of a sensor causing the pilots to lose control of their aircraft (if that is proven to be the cause) shows a complete failure to carry out appropriate risk analsis.
Failures in stall warning systems are not that uncommon - a very good friend of mine, who often flew with me, was killed by a relatively-inexperienced pilot who reacted wrongly to such a warning many years ago. The loss of an almost completely serviceable aircraft (bar the AOA sensor) was the result....
Unfortunately, the Boeing (as yet to be proven) fault put any recovery beyond the capabilities of even experienced pilots (by the sound of things).
We really should wait for the official reports to emerge before any judgement.....
It's a US company, therefore they'll blame some young intern, then say it's job done.
If it was Airbus, they'd be baying for blood
I only fly British Airways. Fairly sure their only 737 Max is in South Africa (ComAir) and if I was on the flight between JNB at CPT I’d decline to travel.
Apparently the Max 8 does fly transatlantic, all be it only with Norwegian.
You may only book BA, but that does not mean you'll always fly BA. BA code share flights with AA and AA have plenty of 737 Max aircraft.
Short of declining to travel at the gate, or accepting that you won't fly short haul, I still can't see how as a passenger you avoid any aircraft type.
Blimey, does it really?
I only use Virgin from my local airport (lgw) and it's all 747's.
Cheers,
Neil.
Air Canada also fly the aircraft into Heathrow from the east coast; unfortunately a regular route for me!
TBH I think you have absolutely nothing to worry about now. Even with unmodified ones, even if they might have struggled a bit before the cat is so far out of the bag that no one sitting up front will have a moment's doubt what's going on and how to deal with it now.
I understand the mods include AoA Disagree annunciator and single action rather than repetitive actions from MCAS.
The things being discovered about this 737 thing are nothing short of deeply disturbing. It is unbelievable how something like this was possible, despite the greed and the corporate bullshit.
Boeing is traditionally a company with great know-how and known for well designed airplanes, so one can't help but ask - what the hell, Boeing?
This kind of behavior needs to get more public scrutiny and needs to be driven out of the corporate mindset.
That has been taken out of service. (They only have 1)
Fly by wire, so probably not.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Aren't all commercial planes like this now?
Cheers,
Neil.
I think all Airbus planes are fly by wire, but these not. Boeing have always kept a mechanical connection twixt pilot and surfaces. The problem her was that the manual effort on the pilot-operated control surfaces on the wings is simply not enough to defeat the much larger tail surface which remains in the hands of the MCAS system, even when at fault.
The Ethiopian plane had the pilots trying with all their might, but even with the tail powered down and not actively opposing them, they still had no means at their disposal to defeat the enormous tail forcing them to dive.
As usual with these things there are a lot of contributory factors, the problem is that most of them (in this case) lie at Boeing's door.
It seems that the only exception is the FAA's lamentable lack of true oversight into the design compromises and software fudges that they should have used.
I think the FAA is also in danger of losing its status over this affair, with some non-US Aviation authorities possibly intent on testing every Boeing new design, rather than taking the FAA's word for their air worthiness.
Who knew we have so many latent air crash investigators and aviation/aerospace experts on the forum.
Fas est ab hoste doceri
Apparently Boeing knew about the problem earlier than they have previously admitted, according to the Beeb. Referring to the article's mention of the "Angle of Attack (AOA) Disagree alert" I must say this passage puzzles me:
Are they suggesting that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand was doing? Whatever, it's looking pretty bad for Boeing.The planemaker said it had intended to provide the feature as standard, but did not realise until deliveries had begun that it was only available if airlines purchased an optional indicator.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
