News Forum - Is the new Boeing 737 Max safe to fly? A new book makes you wonder.

[Bluesofa]

1 hour ago, butterfly said:

there was a criminal prosecution process, but they settled instead for $2.1b, and the charges were dropped

 

$2.1B?

Last night I watched the Netflix documentary  ‘Downfall: The Case Against Boeing’
Right at the end, immediately before the credits, this was shown on the screen:

"In January 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice charged Boeing with criminal conspiracy to defraud the FAA.
Boeing agreed to pay 2.5 billion dollars in fines and compensation.
This arrangement has allowed the company to avoid criminal prosecution"

Edit. added link:
https://thethaiger.com/talk/topic/2208-film-tv-recommendations/?do=findComment&comment=166954

 

[Smithydog]

18 minutes ago, Bluesofa said:

$2.1B?

Last night I watched the Netflix documentary  ‘Downfall: The Case Against Boeing’
Right at the end, immediately before the credits, this was shown on the screen:

"In January 2021, the U.S. Department of Justice charged Boeing with criminal conspiracy to defraud the FAA.
Boeing agreed to pay 2.5 billion dollars in fines and compensation.
This arrangement has allowed the company to avoid criminal prosecution"

It was quite a good watch. I saw it on Netflix last night as well. It was disappointing to see the changes they made to build the share price rather than keep the reputation intact they had built up over so many years.

[KT50]

Tim Newton incorrectly stated on Good Morning Thailand yesterday, that only the 737Max has the split scimitar winglet.  My company operates the 737NG variant in the 700/800/900 models.  The NG variant was the technological predecessor to the MAX variant.  The majority of my company’s NG either came with or have been retrofitted with the more efficient split scimitar winglet.  So, just because you notice the split, absolutely does not mean the aircraft is a 737MAX  variant.  
Respectfully,

KT50

[Soidog]

On 2/21/2022 at 9:38 AM, Cadett767 said:

I checked the film and it looked to me that both pilots had “runaway trim” which in itself is fairly easy for experienced pilots to deal with in an airplane that is not a Max. I don’t know whether this check list emergency would apply to the 737 Max. But disabling the electric and hydraulic trim (on the throttle quadrant) switches and using the manual trim wheels to fly the airplane manually, declare an emergency and land asap would have been the order of the day.

However I still don’t know whether or not this same emergency item would have applied to the 737 Max.

The Netflix documentary (Downfall) explained why this normal procedure of disabling the Hydaulic trim failed to work for the pilots. I think it was in the Ethiopian airlines that the pilots did exactly as you say. However by then, the airspeed and rate of decent was so high that it was simply too difficult to manually retrim the aircraft. Boeing themselves identified that in the event of MCAS failing, the pilots had just 10 seconds to react to carry out the procedure you refer to. After that, it would be impossible to manually retrim. 10 seconds!!  
 

One of the most depressing parts of this is how the merger of Boeing with McDonald Douglas resulted in the MD culture becoming the prevalent culture within Boeing. The most depressing part was to see the CEO Muilenburg walk away with bonus and shares worth a reported $62m. 
 

It would be great to hear from anyone who worked for Boeing after the merger with MD to see how they perceived the changes. 

[Soidog]

On 2/21/2022 at 10:20 AM, KT50 said:

Are you aware that ALL airbus aircraft only allow conventional control by the pilot from the ground to 50 feet?  Above 50 feet, the Airbus basically operates in an MCAS, “mind of its own,” state all the time.  Please, a little research will save you from such embarrassing comments. 

The sentiment of what you say is true. However they are multiple systems operating and hence the failure of a single angle of attack sensor would not cause it to fall from the sky. Equally, Pilots are aware and trained in all systems. As far as we know, Airbus don’t have a culture of deliberately hiding automated systems from regulators and pilots in order to speed up the introduction of new models. This was the  culture within Boeing that led to the two fatal 737-Max incidents. 

[KT50]

I could not agree more soidog.  I believe someone or some folks from Boeing should be in prison for what they have done.  My point, is that even Airbus has a pilot over riding AI, and can prohibit the pilot/s from turning everything off in short order and just fly the airplane.  Several Airbus crashes have happened this way, even one famous crash flown by Airbus test pilots at an air show. 

[Tim_Melb]

20 minutes ago, KT50 said:

I could not agree more soidog.  I believe someone or some folks from Boeing should be in prison for what they have done.  My point, is that even Airbus has a pilot over riding AI, and can prohibit the pilot/s from turning everything off in short order and just fly the airplane.  Several Airbus crashes have happened this way, even one famous crash flown by Airbus test pilots at an air show. 

There is one significant difference as far as I am aware Airbus are not producing any commercial aircraft that are inherently unstable and rely entirely on the software to correct faults created in the aerodynamic design of the aircraft to make it stable. The Boeing 737 design while originally stable has been pushed too far and made unbalanced this is the core problem.

[CamPat]

 

• One more reason to avoid flying with a 737

FAA says 5G could impact radio altimeters on most Boeing 737s

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/faa-issues-notice-over-boeing-737s-5g-wireless-interference-2022-02-23/

 

[Bluesofa]

5 hours ago, CamPat said:

• One more reason to avoid flying with a 737

FAA says 5G could impact radio altimeters on most Boeing 737s

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/faa-issues-notice-over-boeing-737s-5g-wireless-interference-2022-02-23/

I get the impression this might affect only older design of aircraft which can't filter out any potential interference. Plus this higher (5G) frequency seems to be used only in the US?

[KT50]

On 2/23/2022 at 1:18 PM, Tim_Melb said:

There is one significant difference as far as I am aware Airbus are not producing any commercial aircraft that are inherently unstable and rely entirely on the software to correct faults created in the aerodynamic design of the aircraft to make it stable. The Boeing 737 design while originally stable has been pushed too far and made unbalanced this is the core problem.

If that were truly the case, MCAS would be active in all phases of flight.  As far as I know, that is not the case.  However, I am a pilot, not an aeronautical engineer.  I also know that the aircraft would not be flying as it does today if it were a death trap.  However, if it scares you, you and everyone have the choice to find another flight.  Freedom is a good thing!

Respectfully,

KT50

[KT50]

On 2/23/2022 at 7:49 PM, Bluesofa said:

I get the impression this might affect only older design of aircraft which can't filter out any potential interference. Plus this higher (5G) frequency seems to be used only in the US?

My colleagues and I have been informed that only a small number of radio altimeters are effected by the new 5G.  There are three bands of 5G frequency.  A B and a new C.  The C band, bought up by Verizon and AT&T, ( because Sprint, T-mobile, everyone else, bought up the A and B 5G bands a while ago).  The C band is closest in frequency to what the effected radar altimeters use.  True, Europe has no such issue because they have different laws governing airspace and what frequency bands are allowed where.  Here in the US of A, freedom and capitalism rule.  So Verizon and AT&T can use any airspace to run the band essentially putting who has the most money/politicians on the pay roll to dictate whether the airlines or cell companies win.  The cell companies won, sending airlines to find an alternative to the few aircraft types effected.    So look for an airfare increase or loss of available seats soon. 
respectfully,

KT50

I have not heard the 737 is bothered by the C band.  My aircraft type B-757/767 is not. 

[oldschooler]

On 12/30/2021 at 8:44 AM, HiuMak said:

A little is still hiding, telling half truth is still unacceptable. Ban this airline

And all MAX crashes by obviously poorly trained non- western pilots.

My flight protection plan is unchanged. acceptable airlines (western pilots) and unacceptable airlines, based on culture & safety. Acceptable Safe Airlines can fly me in any damn plane

[oldschooler]

6 minutes ago, oldschooler said:

And all MAX crashes by obviously poorly trained non- western pilots.

My flight protection plan is unchanged. acceptable airlines (western pilots) and unacceptable airlines, based on culture & safety. Acceptable Safe Airlines can fly me in any damn plane

My acceptable airline countries are EU ( not SE Europe) / UK / East Asia (1st World) / Arabian Gulf (not Saudia). AUS/ NZ / CAN.

[CamPat]

2 hours ago, oldschooler said:

My acceptable airline countries are EU ( not SE Europe) / UK / East Asia (1st World) / Arabian Gulf (not Saudia). AUS/ NZ / CAN.

Oh well here we are again. Pure "whiteass" Prejudice at work. The facts are that the 2 737 max 8 crashes were not caused by incompetent pilots but by a unscrupolous Boeing Management. Those pilots had no chance since Boeing did not even suggest a training involving the Macs system that was so poorly designed that it had to lead to desaster.

[CamPat]

4 hours ago, KT50 said:

If that were truly the case, MCAS would be active in all phases of flight.  As far as I know, that is not the case.  However, I am a pilot, not an aeronautical engineer.  I also know that the aircraft would not be flying as it does today if it were a death trap.  However, if it scares you, you and everyone have the choice to find another flight.  Freedom is a good thing!

Respectfully,

KT50

I heard that from another Cargo 737 max 8 pilot, too. As long as you havn't crashed you feel save. Good luck. I'm never stepping into one of these potentioal flying coffins in my life.

[JohninDublin]

On 2/23/2022 at 1:34 AM, Soidog said:

The sentiment of what you say is true. However they are multiple systems operating and hence the failure of a single angle of attack sensor would not cause it to fall from the sky. Equally, Pilots are aware and trained in all systems. As far as we know, Airbus don’t have a culture of deliberately hiding automated systems from regulators and pilots in order to speed up the introduction of new models. This was the  culture within Boeing that led to the two fatal 737-Max incidents. 

I watched a UK Channel 4 doc on this: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/boeings-killer-plane-what-went-wrong I don't know how it compares with the Netflix doc, but the "takeaway" I got from this, was that a senior exec at Boeing, in order to make the plane more attractive to buyers, promised that clients would nit need to retrain pilots on simulators. They had gone so far as to offer a $1 mill refund on every plane purchased if they broke that promise. 

Over the years, the Aviation Industry in the US have lobbied the FAA to be increasingly allowed to self-certify the safety of the planes manufactured. The doc that I saw, suggested that the ability to self-certify with the possible risk of having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for simulator training penalties, was a conflict of interest too far for Boeing.

[vlad]

33 minutes ago, JohninDublin said:

I watched a UK Channel 4 doc on this: https://www.channel4.com/programmes/boeings-killer-plane-what-went-wrong I don't know how it compares with the Netflix doc, but the "takeaway" I got from this, was that a senior exec at Boeing, in order to make the plane more attractive to buyers, promised that clients would nit need to retrain pilots on simulators. They had gone so far as to offer a $1 mill refund on every plane purchased if they broke that promise. 

Over the years, the Aviation Industry in the US have lobbied the FAA to be increasingly allowed to self-certify the safety of the planes manufactured. The doc that I saw, suggested that the ability to self-certify with the possible risk of having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for simulator training penalties, was a conflict of interest too far for Boeing.

Why did they omit the new software update on the max from their trouble shooting cockpit manual?.

[JohninDublin]

39 minutes ago, vlad said:

Why did they omit the new software update on the max from their trouble shooting cockpit manual?.

I can't recall the reason for that, but I suspect it may have "red flagged", the purchasers to conclude that simulator training was essential. Not sure though.

[vlad]

Most Aircraft have 2 sensors maybe 3 these are called Pito tubes. 1 is a sensor for air pressure that monitors airspeed and the other monitors the angle the plane is flying. The 737 max had only 1 sensor as boing thought the software would take over and alter the Tail Ailerons if the pilot allowed the plane to go down too much the Autopilots disconected. The 2 Aircraft went down due to the software thinking the plane was at a downward angle. The pilots couldn't understand as the manual failed to identify this fault. Once the pilots realized the plane was in a dive it was unrecoverable and they nosedived into the ground.

[Tim_Melb]

8 hours ago, oldschooler said:

And all MAX crashes by obviously poorly trained non- western pilots.

My flight protection plan is unchanged. acceptable airlines (western pilots) and unacceptable airlines, based on culture & safety. Acceptable Safe Airlines can fly me in any damn plane

Yes that is the exact excuse that Boeing used to try and get out of compensating the victims. Way to pull the company line. Unfortunately for them and for your bullsh*t argument the investigation proved otherwise and that's why the Max aircraft were grounded by the authorities world wide. 

[CamPat]

5 hours ago, JohninDublin said:

I can't recall the reason for that, but I suspect it may have "red flagged", the purchasers to conclude that simulator training was essential. Not sure though.

Boeing's self ceritificarion was flawed from begin in order to maximise shareholder Value. Hence the costs of additional pilot training was scraped and no pilot knew about MACS .

If you really want to know the whole history of this subject i suggest you read Domini Gates' Contributions in the Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/author/dominic-gates/

[oldschooler]

3 hours ago, Tim_Melb said:

Yes that is the exact excuse that Boeing used to try and get out of compensating the victims. Way to pull the company line. Unfortunately for them and for your bullsh*t argument the investigation proved otherwise and that's why the Max aircraft were grounded by the authorities world wide. 

Was It ? But now this aircraft recertified  ? Tend to fly EU airlines and will not fly US airlines so can’t recall last time flying Boeing. But if Lufthansa or KLM flew this aircraft I wouldn’t have a problem unlike all you aviation experts.

[oldschooler]

7 hours ago, vlad said:

Why did they omit the new software update on the max from their trouble shooting cockpit manual?.

Surely any “simulator training penalties” are just illegal & practice stupid & also airline safety ultimate business.

[oldschooler]

On 2/20/2022 at 3:15 AM, Cathat said:

One thing's for sure,if one more max falls out of the sky for any reason it will probably be the end of the commercial aircraft division of boeing for good.3 strikes and your out!

Indeed. Talking many hundreds of innocent dead who trusted aircraft / airlines/ pilots. Never understood how Malaysian Airlines survived MH370 and why on earth anybody would continue to fly with them ! Then came the stupid Ukraine overfly & tragic shoot down …

Flew MA once as “cheapest”  KL to London. Shudder ….Then instituted my acceptable/ unacceptable airline practice…..

[oldschooler]

9 hours ago, CamPat said:

Oh well here we are again. Pure "whiteass" Prejudice at work. The facts are that the 2 737 max 8 crashes were not caused by incompetent pilots but by a unscrupolous Boeing Management. Those pilots had no chance since Boeing did not even suggest a training involving the Macs system that was so poorly designed that it had to lead to desaster.

Wrong. The gold standard airlines all conducted specialized simulator training for this plane. Another reason I don’t fly Air Shithole !