Indonesia plane crash: All 189 passengers presumed dead in latest aviation disaster (Oct 2018)

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
66,088
1,139
323
Huntsville, AL,USA
It seems the design of the MAX should have warranted a more rigorous (or full) certification. Relocating the engines doesn't seem like a minor tweak. At least part of the reason for the software was to make plane pass a stall design criteria - keeping it from nosing up.
In the end, the software did its job entirely too well. The problem was with the sensors, which kept telling the software that the airframe was nose-up. I suppose you can argue that after the second porpoise maneuver, the software should have said "wait a minute." Anyway, the airlines which decided to cheap out and not add the second sensor (which should never have been charged for, anyway), doomed their passengers, given the software. That didn't just cut their safety margin by a mere 50%. There is no way to estimate by what factor they increased risk. Suffice it to say that, if they had known the problems with the entire system, they would never have cut that second sensor. The 737 Max may never make the air again and that's a shame for Boeing and for the country. There are people who will never board one again - no matter what. I'm not even sure that I could. If the entire affair had been conducted correctly to begin with, the present situation wouldn't have happened. The CEO properly should have fallen on his sword...
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
38,025
771
123
50
East Point, Ga, USA
things just are not going well for boeing.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/boeing-internal-employee-messages-737-max-clowns-congress.html

Things appear to only get worse for Boeing these days, and Thursday was no different, as the American company disclosed more than a hundred pages of internal emails and instant messages to congressional investigators that showed employees describing cover-ups and concern over the safety of the 737 Max airliner. ...
The employees appear to discuss instances in which the company concealed such problems from the [Federal Aviation Administration] during the regulator’s certification of the simulators, which were used in the development of the Max, as well as in training for pilots who had not previously flown a 737.”

How bad was the employee chatter? Here’s a sampling:

• “I still haven’t been forgiven by God for the covering up I did last year,” one employee said in a message in 2018 in an apparent reference to prior dealings with the FAA.


• “Would you put your family on a Max simulator trained aircraft? I wouldn’t,” one employee said to a colleague before the first crash in 2018. “No,” the colleague said.

• “This airplane is designed by clowns, who are in turn supervised by monkeys,” an employee wrote in 2017.

The messages also show how the company pushed to reduce the scope of mandatory training for pilots to fly the new aircraft in order to cut costs. Regulators ultimately agreed to only mandate computer-based training, rather than full simulator training, for pilots with experience flying another model, the 737 NG.
 

NationalTitles17

Super Moderator
May 25, 2003
14,205
870
198
Mountainous Northern California

This proposed civil penalty is in addition to a previously proposed civil penalty of more than $3.9 million against Boeing for allegedly installing the same nonconforming components on approximately 133 Boeing 737 NG aircraft. The FAA sent that letter to Boeing in early December.

Slat tracks are located on the leading edge of a Boeing 737’s wings and are used to guide the movement of panels known as slats. These panels provide additional lift during takeoff and landing.

The FAA alleges that Boeing failed to adequately oversee its suppliers to ensure they complied with the company’s quality assurance system. The agency contends that this failure resulted in the installation of slat tracks that were weakened by a condition known as hydrogen embrittlement that occurred during cadmium-titanium plating.

The FAA further alleges that Boeing knowingly submitted aircraft for final FAA airworthiness certification after determining that the parts could not be used due to a failed strength test at a third-tier supplier, indicating the presence of hydrogen embrittlement.
 
  • Like
  • Thank You
Reactions: UAH and TexasBama

NationalTitles17

Super Moderator
May 25, 2003
14,205
870
198
Mountainous Northern California
Why do you hate the invisible hand of the free market?
I get the joke, but:

Obviously an area where regulation is needed. The more people potentially effected the more rigidity may be needed in those regulations.

Take LSA (light sport aircraft), for instance. Little regulation by comparison and things are moving toward less rigid regulation based on "industry standards". Those rules are currently being revised and big changes are expected in a few years both on the aircraft and pilot side. LSA's in the US can only carry two people at most. These planes carry many more and are vastly more complicated. The regulation was there to be followed but Boeing chose to not follow the regulations, placing many at risk.

My point is that the problem wasn't regulation or lack thereof. The level and type of regulation needed varies with the risk. In this case Boeing showed yet again a complete disregard not just for regulations but safety.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
38,025
771
123
50
East Point, Ga, USA
I get the joke, but:

Obviously an area where regulation is needed. The more people potentially effected the more rigidity may be needed in those regulations.

Take LSA (light sport aircraft), for instance. Little regulation by comparison and things are moving toward less rigid regulation based on "industry standards". Those rules are currently being revised and big changes are expected in a few years both on the aircraft and pilot side. LSA's in the US can only carry two people at most. These planes carry many more and are vastly more complicated. The regulation was there to be followed but Boeing chose to not follow the regulations, placing many at risk.

My point is that the problem wasn't regulation or lack thereof. The level and type of regulation needed varies with the risk. In this case Boeing showed yet again a complete disregard not just for regulations but safety.
i think this was in part an example of the problems with regulatory capture
 

NationalTitles17

Super Moderator
May 25, 2003
14,205
870
198
Mountainous Northern California
I don't disagree with either of you. The FAA did have clear regs on this issue and did not follow through with oversight. There are two main problems aside from what you mention: 1. lack of funding for inspections/enforcement and 2. lack of expertise among those charged with enforcement so they must rely on those with expertise to say whether the regs were followed or not. Those two problems must be solved in order for the FAA to properly do its job, either by giving proper incentive to attract the needed expertise or by contracting it out to an objective third party, which would itself require regulation and oversight.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
38,025
771
123
50
East Point, Ga, USA
I don't disagree with either of you. The FAA did have clear regs on this issue and did not follow through with oversight. There are two main problems aside from what you mention: 1. lack of funding for inspections/enforcement and 2. lack of expertise among those charged with enforcement so they must rely on those with expertise to say whether the regs were followed or not. Those two problems must be solved in order for the FAA to properly do its job, either by giving proper incentive to attract the needed expertise or by contracting it out to an objective third party, which would itself require regulation and oversight.
at least the last ceo was able to make out nicely upon his forced exit.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: NationalTitles17

Go Bama

Hall of Fame
Dec 6, 2009
6,990
268
93
Thirteenessee
Where money is more important than your life. - Boeing’s new company slogan.

It won’t happen but this company deserves to be shut down.
According to Google, Boeing has 153,000 employees. Shutting the company down would put a hardship on a lot of families. I don’t know what the solution is, but I hate seeing good people put out of work because of bad people at the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NationalTitles17

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
25,503
2,607
173
According to Google, Boeing has 153,000 employees. Shutting the company down would put a hardship on a lot of families. I don’t know what the solution is, but I hate seeing good people put out of work because of bad people at the top.
There is a lot of stuff out there about emails and documents from Boeing employees making fun of the FAA and its employees, regulations, "tests", etc. Every one of those employees needs to be fired. Every executive needs to be fired. The folks on the lines just going to work every day had nothing to do with this.

There was clearly a culture there that needs to be eradicated. That doesn't happen unless all of the management staff involved in that culture are eliminated.
 

NationalTitles17

Super Moderator
May 25, 2003
14,205
870
198
Mountainous Northern California
I've mentioned before that there were a group of whistleblowers several years ago who were fired from Boeing after taking their concerns to officials, who dismissed them and their stories. Boeing and the FAA have no excuse as they deliberately decided to continue on as if nothing were wrong.

Found the link: Documentary on Boeing Problems and Whistleblowers
 

Padreruf

All-American
Feb 12, 2001
3,118
345
93
69
Charleston, South Carolina
According to Google, Boeing has 153,000 employees. Shutting the company down would put a hardship on a lot of families. I don’t know what the solution is, but I hate seeing good people put out of work because of bad people at the top.
I live in Charleston, SC and shutting down Boeing would financially devastate people who have no alternatives for jobs...but paying someone millions who was where the buck stopped -- aand a complicit FAA -- heads ought to swing (metaphorically).
 

Latest threads