Ethiopian 737 Max 8 crash and Fallout

[Quickstatus]

FDR data downloaded and given to investigators.

 

[JB expat]

So the USA FAA did not ground the MAX 8 because they finally determined it was the right thing to do but because Boeing asked them to? That’s infuriating. Who can trust the FAA ever again. Please tell me I’ve misread this article. After 2 Crashes of New Boeing Jet, Pilot Training Now a Focus
After 2 Crashes of New Boeing Jet, Pilot Training Now a Focus

 

[33kft]

The manufacturer advising that their aircraft be grounded vs a civil aviation authority grounding aircraft are separate things. The article suggests that after internal analysis, the manufacturer determined that it would instruct the FAA that its customers should not fly the aircraft, and to take on all of the legal/financial implications of such an advisory.

 

[Quickstatus]

Hindsight is always 20/20

 

[JB expat]

The manufacturer advising that their aircraft be grounded vs a civil aviation authority grounding aircraft are separate things. The article suggests that after internal analysis, the manufacturer determined that it would instruct the FAA that its customers should not fly the aircraft, and to take on all of the legal/financial implications of such an advisory.

Not understanding (and I’d like to)
1 - crash
2 - many sophisticated air regulators ground the aircraft based on an abundance of caution approach
3 - Boeing calls White House asks that the MAX 8 not be grounded
4 - White House holds firm in not grounding and speaks to its confidence in boeing
5 - Boeing calls WH and requests that the MAX 8 be grounded
6 - WH grounds craft

So who is leading who? Who is the regulator with responsibility if they are following the requests of the entities that they are supposed to be regulating?

 

[33kft]

So who is leading who? Who is the regulator with responsibility if they are following the requests of the entities that they are supposed to be regulating?

The FAA has the responsibility to enforce groundings and airspace restrictions.

As to the rest of your commentary, it is certainly one interpretation of what has occurred. As to whether anyone is going to jump to conclusions with the limited amount of information available to us currently, I'd say there is neither any need to, nor would it really help matters. Personally, I'll be waiting for the outcome of investigations.

 

[JB expat]

The FAA has the responsibility to enforce groundings and airspace restrictions.

As to the rest of your commentary, it is certainly one interpretation of what has occurred. As to whether anyone is going to jump to conclusions with the limited amount of information available to us currently, I'd say there is neither any need to, nor would it really help matters. Personally, I'll be waiting for the outcome of investigations.

I’m not arguing the need to see what the investigation reveals before jumping to conclusions as to cause. My comment is focused on the actions (inactions) of the FAA in light of 2 conversations (that we know of) between Boeing and the White House.

 

[33kft]

I’m not arguing the need to see what the investigation reveals before jumping to conclusions as to cause. My comment is focused on the actions (inactions) of the FAA in light of 2 conversations (that we know of) between Boeing and the White House.

Based on a single article. Off the back of how many posts in here claiming impropriety. You may be right, you may be wrong, but it will all come out in the wash and when it does, history shall document the validity of your position. Until then, it's conjecture.

 

[JB expat]

Based on a single article. Off the back of how many posts in here claiming impropriety. You may be right, you may be wrong, but it will all come out in the wash and when it does, history shall document the validity of your position. Until then, it's conjecture.

Without conjecture, this thread would have stopped at 3 pages.

 

[33kft]

Without conjecture, this thread would have stopped at 3 pages.

I agree.

 

[drron]

Maybe 2 at the most.

 

[NZflygirl]

Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing and FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system.
Engineers speaking on condition of anonymity. Damning.

Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing and FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system

The safety analysis:

• Understated the power of the new flight control system, which was designed to swivel the horizontal tail to push the nose of the plane down to avert a stall. When the planes later entered service, MCAS was capable of moving the tail more than four times farther than was stated in the initial safety analysis document.
• Failed to account for how the system could reset itself each time a pilot responded, thereby missing the potential impact of the system repeatedly pushing the airplane’s nose downward.
• Assessed a failure of the system as one level below “catastrophic.” But even that “hazardous” danger level should have precluded activation of the system based on input from a single sensor — and yet that’s how it was designed.

Issues with certification etc in article.

CVR data downloaded. BEA working on FDR.

 

[juddles]

At the end of the day, the Ethiopian crash was the second major catastrophe in just a few scant months for a single aircraft type. Where new aircraft "fell out of the sky" despite perfect weather, etc etc. This alone is such an aberration in modern aviation, that even without knowing about the MCAS thing, it should cause enough concern to warrant a huge halt and grounding.

 

[JB expat]

At the end of the day, the Ethiopian crash was the second major catastrophe in just a few scant months for a single aircraft type. Where new aircraft "fell out of the sky" despite perfect weather, etc etc. This alone is such an aberration in modern aviation, that even without knowing about the MCAS thing, it should cause enough concern to warrant a huge halt and grounding.

Agree. From Day 1. The delay in grounding by the FAA and Canada’s equivalent is complete failure by the regulator in therms of fulfilling its duties.

 

[jb747]

The ultimate public perception of this will be very interesting. In years past, people quickly forget about an accident, but now, with everything being on the net, pictures and items about this will turn up forever. If the MAX ultimately causes even 10% of passengers to go looking for alternatives, you'd have to wonder if it will survive in airline service at all.

Another part of history tells us that Boeing will be able to fix the problem by simply renaming it.

 

[JB expat]

Doubling down on my assertion that the FAA was more interested in looking after Boeing than the flying public As Memorial Services Begin, "Clear Similarities" Found Between Ethiopian and Lion Air 737 Crashes - News & Guts Media:

Boeing’s ties to the U.S. government have been deep and wide for many years. The Washington Post reports:

“Boeing was among the top companies spending money last year trying to influence U.S. government decision-making. The Chicago-based aerospace giant spent $15.1 million lobbying the federal government, employing about 100 lobbyists on its behalf.

“On top of that, Boeing’s political action committee made $2.4 million in donations to political candidates in 2017 to 2018, eighth most in the country among corporations, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The recipients included 329 current members of Congress.”

Also, Donald Trump’s acting Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan, is a former Boeing executive.

 

[kelvedon]

Yes, I think the Max name will disappear from their product range

 

[jb747]

Doubling down on my assertion that the FAA was more interested in looking after Boeing than the flying public As Memorial Services Begin, "Clear Similarities" Found Between Ethiopian and Lion Air 737 Crashes - News & Guts Media:.....

Also, Donald Trump’s acting Secretary of Defense, Patrick Shanahan, is a former Boeing executive.

Boeing, as the major defence producer in the USA is always going to have hooks into the establishment. It certainly helps them sell the vast array of military products. But, it remains a huge leap, with no evidence, to accuse them of any complicity with regard to certifying aircraft.

The ties show up in the stupid behaviour that went on with Bombadier / Airbus over the A220.

But it's far more likely, that instead of conspiracy, you simply need to look for sloppy engineering.

 

[JB expat]

Boeing, as the major defence producer in the USA is always going to have hooks into the establishment. It certainly helps them sell the vast array of military products. But, it remains a huge leap, with no evidence, to accuse them of any complicity with regard to certifying aircraft.

The ties show up in the stupid behaviour that went on with Bombadier / Airbus over the A220.

But it's far more likely, that instead of conspiracy, you simply need to look for sloppy engineering.

I'm not asserting conspiracy in terms of certification. I'm asserting failure by the FAA to act with appropriate speed to ground the aircraft. I don't know enough about the certification process generally or specifically re: MAX to even try to speak to that.

 

[drron]

Boeing, as the major defence producer in the USA is always going to have hooks into the establishment. It certainly helps them sell the vast array of military products. But, it remains a huge leap, with no evidence, to accuse them of any complicity with regard to certifying aircraft.

The ties show up in the stupid behaviour that went on with Bombadier / Airbus over the A220.

But it's far more likely, that instead of conspiracy, you simply need to look for sloppy engineering.

Indeed.As a senior politician once said to me-"Ron if there is ever a choice between a conspiracy or a c*ckup the c*ckup wins every time.