Ethiopian 737 Max 8 crash and Fallout

[UP4014]

I have to say I find some of the quotes from yesterday's FAA meeting in Dallas to be very weird coming from a government agency. Basically it seems that the FAA found the meeting very positive and expect the MAX back in the sky soon. Why? Shouldn't they only base their decision on data? Shouldn't they say that there is a possibility the MAX never flies again?
I can't imagine people would accept the FDA saying that they are optimistic a drug killing people would be back on the market soon!!!
Regulatory agencies shouldn't give a f#$@ if aviation or drug companies lose billions of dollars if their products are pulled from the market.

The bottom of the FAA vision statement......while they bang on about safety this says it all. In our creativity we will let manufacturers sign off on things themselves.

• Innovation is our signature. We foster creativity and vision to provide solutions beyond today's boundaries.

 

[pauly7]

Noooooho! If Qantas, after all these years, wants to really lose me as a customer for good, then they introduce this death trap into their fleet. No way in hell!

Well VA are going to beat them to it so that leaves Jetstar for you

 

[straitman]

Noooooho! If Qantas, after all these years, wants to really lose me as a customer for good, then they introduce this death trap into their fleet. No way in hell!

Whilst I understand your (and others) concerns but still really struggle with the perspective on this.

Look at aviation history and this type of thing is not new and has happened to other types previously. Those types have gone on to long and successful lives.

The required updates and training will be carried out and the a/c will be back safely flying.

At least in this circumstance the actual cause is known and can be remedied. Sometime previously an a/c has crashed and no cause has been known for a very long time and with possible dire consequences.

 

[serfty]

The required updates and training will be carried out and the a/c will be back safely flying.

But will.the training now require new type certification? That's what the MCAS software was supposed to avoid ... which it did ... at the apparent cost of 350 lives.

 

[oz_mark]

Look at aviation history and this type of thing is not new and has happened to other types previously. Those types have gone on to long and successful lives.

Although the number of passenger aircraft models that have had two crashes within six months with an obvious common factor is pretty small.

 

[straitman]

But will.the training now require type certification? That's what the MCAS software was supposed to avoid ... which it did ... at the apparent cost of 350 lives.

I would think not but irrespective of the words used it would/will be a whole lot less training than a completely new type rating. Credits can be given of prior knowledge.

 

[straitman]

Although the number of passenger aircraft models that have had two crashes within six months with an obvious common factor is pretty small.

Would it be any different if it was two in 12 months?

 

[oz_mark]

Would it be any different if it was two in 12 months?

Let's go with it this way. Entry into service was March 8. 2017. By March 10, 2019 (so 2 years and 2 days) there had been two catastrophic crashes of the type, with the aircraft itself setting off the chain of events. How many models have that record?

 

[straitman]

Let's go with it this way. Entry into service was March 8. 2017. By March 10, 2019 (so 2 years and 2 days) there had been two catastrophic crashes of the type, with the aircraft itself setting off the chain of events. How many models have that record?

I'm not sure where you are going with this. In any discussion something must have the worst set of statistics.

I'm not defending the a/c just stating what I believe will happen from background knowledge and from talking to pilots and reading aviation publications rather than the tabloids and other newspapers.

Note for accuracy: 737 MAX was certified on March 8 2017 and had its first revenue flight on May 22 2017. Prior to the accidents the MAX had flown 41,000+ flights, 120,000+ flying hours and 7 million plus passengers at an exceptionally high dispatch rate.

 

[oz_mark]

I'm not sure where you are going with this. In any discussion something must have the worst set of statistics.

I'm not defending the a/c just stating what I believe will happen from background knowledge and from talking to pilots and reading aviation publications rather than the tabloids and other newspapers.

Note for accuracy: 737 MAX was certified on March 8 2017 and had its first revenue flight on May 22 2017. Prior to the accidents the MAX had flown 41,000+ flights, 120,000+ flying hours and 7 million plus passengers at an exceptionally high dispatch rate.

Where am I going with it? If there had been only one accident, then people would move on from it. The court of public opinion might have a different opinion of two accidents.

Even today, people are wary of Malaysia Airlines - not because they had one accident, but because they had two. I still fly them (although maybe that's because it's them or Air Asia where I am going....), but a lot of people won't.

So you're going to get people that will avoid the aircraft. And Boeing certainly aren't doing anything to instil public confidence in the aircraft....

 

[Berlin]

Even today, people are wary of Malaysia Airlines - not because they had one accident, but because they had two. I still fly them (although maybe that's because it's them or Air Asia where I am going....), but a lot of people won't.

Well, I think this is a very different story- in the case of the Max, it is shotty aircraft design and the constant attempt to keep things hidden not only from the public but, worse even, from pilots who have to fly that thing.

The vanished MH plane, we don't know if any blame can be laid upon MH- from all we know, it's at least highly doubtable. And the other one- well, Putin's warmongering friends shot that one down, just really bad luck that it hit MH again and even happened to be the same aircraft model.

But as you say- the flying public still has fears about MH. So I wouldn't be too sure about the "Max issue" just going away any time soon...

 

[jb747]

Personally, I think Boeing and the airlines are lucky that passengers generally have very short memories, and misplaced belief in the efficiency of the regulators.

This whole saga is throwing the concept of grandfathering into the spotlight, as well as the silly levels gone to to avoid type rating changes. For people to actually be safe, all we really need is for the aircraft to be certified to modern standards. If it can’t do that, then perhaps it is time for the 737 to be retired.

The coughpit is vastly different to the NG. The 737 has a history of having pilots flying aircraft with disparate coughpits, which in itself is a terrible way to operate. If I were a regulator I’d separate the licensing of the MAX from all previous models, and not allow dual endorsement. The airlines would moan, and then move on. Or they’d buy Airbus, and Boeing would fix the problem. Beyond that, I would remove all grandfathered exemptions from the 737, for any system that has been changed since the original certification. That is specifically aimed at the size of the tail, and the manual trimming system, but I’m sure the aircraft is full of such surprises.

SM...the aircraft you speak of that had events early in their history, and which went on to good careers, were new aircraft types. This is anything but new, but is an attempt to make a good looking Frankenstein. It is a very old aircraft.

 

[Max Samuels]

Dont forget that China is developing its aircraft manufacturing industry as well

Hope they are better made than their cars or baby formula...

 

[straitman]

Hope they are better made than their cars or baby formula...

From what I've read thus far they make Boeing look like Rolls Royce.

 

[defurax]

From what I've read thus far they make Boeing look like Rolls Royce.

Rolls Royce Trent 972...

 

[straitman]

Personally, I think Boeing and the airlines are lucky that passengers generally have very short memories, and misplaced belief in the efficiency of the regulators.

Which is really all I have been saying.

This whole saga is throwing the concept of grandfathering into the spotlight, as well as the silly levels gone to to avoid type rating changes. For people to actually be safe, all we really need is for the aircraft to be certified to modern standards. If it can’t do that, then perhaps it is time for the 737 to be retired.

The coughpit is vastly different to the NG. The 737 has a history of having pilots flying aircraft with disparate coughpits, which in itself is a terrible way to operate. If I were a regulator I’d separate the licensing of the MAX from all previous models, and not allow dual endorsement. The airlines would moan, and then move on. Or they’d buy Airbus, and Boeing would fix the problem. Beyond that, I would remove all grandfathered exceptions from the 737, for any system that has been changed since the original certification. That is specifically aimed at the size of the tail, and the manual trimming system, but I’m sure the aircraft is full of such surprises.

Agreed. Many parts will/can be common however the important parts of the endorsements need to be separated. Had they done it slightly different in the first instant then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

SM...the aircraft you speak of that had events early in their history, and which went on to good careers, were new aircraft types. This is anything but new, but is an attempt to make a good looking Frankenstein. It is a very old aircraft.

This will undoubtedly shorten its production life but I don't see it as all doom and gloom as many do. Potentially it means that airlines will buy replacement a/c earlier than originally planned which may well be a back handed bonus to the manufacturers.

 

[Flying Fox]

I didn't think it would take until end 2019 to see the Max flying again.

Boeing CEO hopeful 737 MAX will be in the air by the end of 2019

Boeing chief executive Dennis Muilenburg says the grounded fleet of 737 MAXes could be back in the air by the end of 2019.

australianaviation.com.au

Boeing chief executive Dennis Muilenburg says the 737 MAX could be back in the air by the end of 2019.

 

[Max Samuels]

From what I've read thus far they make Boeing look like Rolls Royce.

lol read on Xinhua? Hope it was better written than this little gem...

China Focus: China issues U.S. travel alert - Xinhua | English.news.cn

"Noting the frequent occurrence of shootings, robberies and theft in the United States recently, the ministry warned Chinese tourists of the risks of traveling there".... LOL - I would imagine a Chinese citizen has a higher chance of being murdered by their own Government than by a random shooting in the US.... would be keen to see the stats of how many foreign nationals die in US shootings - not many I would imagine.

"Chinese citizens traveling to the United States were recently harassed by U.S. law enforcement agencies, which is not only unfair to Chinese tourists but also hurts their desire to visit the United States, according to tourism experts. "... no details provided

 

[jb747]

Which is really all I have been saying.

Yes....the MAX will survive because people forget that it killed them, and those that do remember think that the problem has been fixed. Which is not to say that it has been....

Agreed. Many parts will/can be common however the important parts of the endorsements need to be separated. Had they done it slightly different in the first instant then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

Well, we wouldn't if they'd stuck to the original implementation of MCAS, but as it was released, no amount of training would be likely to make it viable.

This will undoubtedly shorten its production life but I don't see it as all doom and gloom as many do. Potentially it means that airlines will buy replacement a/c earlier than originally planned which may well be a back handed bonus to the manufacturers.

Yep, my Boeing is a dud, so I need a new aircraft. Oh yes, I'll buy another Boeing....

 

[kpc]

Another viewpoint: Boeing's flawed 737 MAX 'must never fly again', says consumer activist