OT: Boeing 737 MAX

[echappist]

Originally Posted by unterhausen

I feel like the pros at the FAA would ground this plane if they thought it was the right thing to do. I am sure they are somewhat hesitant, as I would be.

I'm more concerned about the AOA sensor failure rate. An airframe I used to work on would crash if the AOA sensor went out. I can't imagine too many companies make them.

the overly cozy relationship btwn industry and FAA would cast doubts as to if that were truly the case. Also, who are these said "pros"? from the following, emphases added

For decades, the F.A.A. has used a network of outside experts, known as F.A.A. designees, to certify that aircraft meet safety standards. In 2005, the regulator shifted its approach for how it delegated authority outside the agency, creating a new program through which aircraft manufacturers like Boeing could choose their own employees to be the designees and help certify their planes.

The program is intended to help the F.A.A. stretch its limited resources, while also benefiting plane makers who are eager to avoid delays in the certification process.

The regulator maintains offices inside Boeing’s factories, including those in Renton, Wash., and in Charleston, S.C. “I’ve raised this concern in the past, about people who go to work at the Boeing plant who work for the F.A.A.,” said Representative Peter A. DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon and the chairman of the House transportation committee. “How much scrutiny are they applying, and could they be influenced?”

The F.A.A.’s top safety official, Ali Bahrami, has worked closely with Boeing during his career, directing the agency’s certification of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner and the 747-8 passenger and freighter models.

“It’s a very cozy relationship,” said Jim Hall, the former head of the National Transportation Safety Board. “The manufacturer essentially becomes both the manufacturer and the regulator, because of the lack of the ability of government to do the job.”

At a congressional hearing in 2015, a Boeing executive described the arrangement as effectively having an “arm of the F.A.A. within the Boeing Company,” and said 1,000 employees were part of the program.

The regulatory policy of allowing manufacturers to essentially sign off on the safety of their own products has drawn criticism in the past. In 2011, a report from the Transportation Department’s Office of Inspector General found that the “F.A.A. has significantly reduced its role in approving individuals who perform work on F.A.A.’s behalf by further delegating this approval to private companies.”

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by jet sanchez

The secretary of Defense is a longtime Boeing exec, there's no way the FCC will be grounding any Boeing jets

Especially since the FCC is busy killing net neutrality. ;-)

[benb]

Originally Posted by unterhausen

I'm more concerned about the AOA sensor failure rate. An airframe I used to work on would crash if the AOA sensor went out. I can't imagine too many companies make them.

What plane was that? Lots of planes don't even have them and fly fine.

[redir]

What we need to do is go back to the DC-3

But seriously it's more dangerous driving to the airport then getting on an airplane.

[rallizes]

and now canada has grounded them

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/13/b...a-737-max.html

[Tony T]

Canada’s transportation minister grounded all Boeing 737 Max 8 and Max 9 jets on Wednesday morning, in the wake of a second deadly crash involving the jet. The move, he said was based on a review of newly available satellite tracking data that suggested similarities to last year’s crash of one of the planes.

He also banned any incursions into Canada’s airspace by the aircraft.

“This new information is not conclusive,” Marc Garneau told a news conference.

[vincenz]

The only way out of this for Boeing would be to prove the pilots on both flights did not know to disable the auto systems. And also prove that faulty sensors couldn’t cause software issues. Good luck with that... I wouldn’t want to be someone on their software/systems development team right now.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by vincenz

The only way out of this for Boeing would be to prove the pilots on both flights did not know to disable the auto systems. And also prove that faulty sensors couldn’t cause software issues. Good luck with that... I wouldn’t want to be someone on their software/systems development team right now.

i wouldn't want to be its insurance carrier

[MattTuck]

The fact that Boeing is scrambling to push out a software update suggests that the rest of the world is justified in their concern.

[marsh]

Warren Buffet just bought a bunch of Delta, they don't have any 737 Max B in their fleet.

[verticaldoug]

Originally Posted by marsh

Warren Buffet just bought a bunch of Delta, they don't have any 737 Max B in their fleet.

He bough 5.3mm shares on 3/8/19 to bring his total to 70.9 mm shares. He originally bought this position in March 2017.

He hasn't made any money and his own advice has always been "airlines have been a disaster for capital"

Even Warren pulls his pants on one leg at a time.

[goonster]

Originally Posted by vincenz

The only way out of this for Boeing would be to prove the pilots on both flights did not know to disable the auto systems.

If Ford sells cars that lock up the front and rear right side wheels when a yaw sensor fails, do we let them off the hook because the drivers couldn't figure out how to disable the traction control in the limited amount of time before they spin into opposing traffic?

[saab2000]

All the experts here need to contact the FAA and NTSB immediately with these accurate hypotheses. I’m sure nobody there, or at Boeing, thought of these things before.

Let’s wait for some more facts before we light the torches and get the pitchforks.

[sitzmark]

Originally Posted by Tony T

The biggest loser on a grounding would be Boeing, and the question (in my mind) is how/if political contributions effect the decision of the FAA.
There are not that many 737Max's in service in the US, so grounding them would not impact air travel. I would not fly an airline flying the 737Max (not choosing a flight not flying the plane is not enough, as the airline could switch aircraft for a variety of reasons before the flight)

The Airlines or Boeing could also ground the 737Max

If there is a proven air unworthiness design problem with the 727Max 8, Boeing would be the biggest WINNER as the result of a grounding. If there is a true design/manufacturing issue and another plane goes down - especially in a western country - Boeing will be financially and politically decimated for an extended period of time.

At this point grounding would be a temporary embarrassment for the short term. Might delay delivery and payment if some planes are scheduled for immediate delivery, but stock price and orders will rebound quickly. A competent CEO and BOD are thinking in those terms and would make decisions accordingly.

Based on reported domestic take-offs/landings (20,000+), there must be at least 100,000+ successful cycles worldwide. There are 2 crashes and a handful of pilots expressing concerns. Two crashes and loss of life is unacceptable, but there is no clear picture if the issue is product design, pilot error, a combination of both, or some environmental set of parameters that triggered the crashes and reported concerns.

Would I board a 737Max8 tomorrow - yes. Do I understand other's reluctance - yes.

[verticaldoug]

Originally Posted by saab2000

All the experts here need to contact the FAA and NTSB immediately with these accurate hypotheses. I’m sure nobody there, or at Boeing, thought of these things before.

Let’s wait for some more facts before we light the torches and get the pitchforks.

Do you drive a ford bronco II?