Another (2nd) 737 Max 8 crash

Forums › Travel (planes, train, cruise) › Another (2nd) 737 Max 8 crash - no survivors

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 32

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2196950 13-Mar-2019 08:56

tdgeek:

It seems the only ones that don't want to ground it is the US Republican Party and Boeing. Wait for due process. Putting lives behind profits. If the cause was unrelated to LionAir and not a MAX issue it makes no difference, there is too much similarity and to close together to risk another

It's all under control - Trump is addressing Boeing via Twitter. Trump should know - he owns (owned?) a 757.

Think of all the money that could be saved if they ripped all the automation out of the F35s.

Boy the way Glenn Miller Played
Songs that made the Hit Parade
Guys like us we had it made
Those were the days.

Tracer

343 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 151

#2196951 13-Mar-2019 09:00

freitasm:
Boeing is preparing a software update to be installed by April. Current stall-prevention system relies on one sensor data only, new software will use multiple sensors for this.

Because the FAA forced their hand, as posted previously in the thread. ;)

msukiwi

2443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2126

Lifetime subscriber

#2196956 13-Mar-2019 09:07

Now this from NZHerald:

"Fiji Airways has suspended flights with its Boeing 737 Max 8 planes to Australia after authorities there banned the plane as the worldwide safety scare widens."

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2196966 13-Mar-2019 09:13

msukiwi:

Now this from NZHerald:

"Fiji Airways has suspended flights with its Boeing 737 Max 8 planes to Australia after authorities there banned the plane as the worldwide safety scare widens."

Strange article, must be clickbait. AUS banning it is old news. How can Fiji Air suspend flights? AUS has already done that for them. Herald is just making up news to feed it.

dafman

4055 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2652

Trusted

#2196968 13-Mar-2019 09:17

freitasm:

Boeing is preparing a software update to be installed by April. Current stall-prevention system relies on one sensor data only, new software will use multiple sensors for this.

Software updates don't instill a lot of comfort for me. Isn't the issue that the engines are basically too heavy for the plane which is why they need the software tweaks to keep it level?

msukiwi

2443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2126

Lifetime subscriber

#2196970 13-Mar-2019 09:18

Another Country - doesn't look good for Boeing!

From: https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/boeing-max-8-aircraft-ban-causes-planes-to-turn-back-midflight/news-story/a23f33d400f36e5fa33a7249e0cf5ff0

"Boeing 737 Max 8 planes bound for the UK have been forced to turn back mid-flight after the country banned the aircraft from its airspace."

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2196971 13-Mar-2019 09:19

msukiwi:

Now this from NZHerald:

"Fiji Airways has suspended flights with its Boeing 737 Max 8 planes to Australia after authorities there banned the plane as the worldwide safety scare widens."

I think at the moment the only significant operators of the Max that haven't grounded them are US and Canada. Canada not grounding them kind of dispels some conspiracy theory.

Reading some news (which may be fake) some aircrews are pressuring US operators to ground them. In my opinion, if it came to that (having aircrew refuse to fly in them) it's far more damaging to reputation/public perception than if they were grounded by FAA. I think that rightly or wrongly, the general public would lose faith in the FAA, and Boeing.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15474

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2196975 13-Mar-2019 09:29

Whilst there are arguments for not grounding them, I feel it's the safest if not the most economically expedient thing to do. You'd have to wonder what the liability would be for the airline who has another one go into the ground with fatalities.

Just out of curiosity, I am sure if I wasn't being lazy, I could find out myself, what is the liability on airlines/manafacturersin the event of fatal air crashes? What sort of payout do families get if it's proved a pilot error, or a manafacturer issue?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2196976 13-Mar-2019 09:29

tdgeek:

msukiwi:

Now this from NZHerald:

"Fiji Airways has suspended flights with its Boeing 737 Max 8 planes to Australia after authorities there banned the plane as the worldwide safety scare widens."

Strange article, must be clickbait. AUS banning it is old news. How can Fiji Air suspend flights? AUS has already done that for them. Herald is just making up news to feed it.

Not sure how that all works, because according to FR24, one of FA's Max 8s departed Sydney for Nadi about half an hour ago, and looks like it's scheduled to fly to Melbourne later today.

Tracer

343 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 151

#2197007 13-Mar-2019 09:57

dafman:
Software updates don't instill a lot of comfort for me. Isn't the issue that the engines are basically too heavy for the plane which is why they need the software tweaks to keep it level?

No? Where did you hear that? The suspected issue is the MCAS algorithm + faulty AOA sensor AFAIK.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2197057 13-Mar-2019 10:17

Tracer:
dafman:
Software updates don't instill a lot of comfort for me. Isn't the issue that the engines are basically too heavy for the plane which is why they need the software tweaks to keep it level?

No? Where did you hear that? The suspected issue is the MCAS algorithm + faulty AOA sensor AFAIK.

The new engines mean that based on the existing 737 layout, the centre of balance is slightly off, so it tends to nose up because of this. MCAS is designed to auto correct this. As the AOA sensor was incorrect, the MCAS nosed down the aircraft when there was no need to.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

chatterbox

204 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 108

#2197065 13-Mar-2019 10:22

Tracer:
dafman:
Software updates don't instill a lot of comfort for me. Isn't the issue that the engines are basically too heavy for the plane which is why they need the software tweaks to keep it level?

No? Where did you hear that? The suspected issue is the MCAS algorithm + faulty AOA sensor AFAIK.

https://www.france24.com/en/20190312-ethiopian-airlines-crash-what-mcas-system-boeing-737-max-8

"MCAS was introduced by Boeing on the 737 Max 8 because its heavier, more fuel-efficient engines changed the aerodynamic qualities of the workhorse aircraft and can cause the plane's nose to pitch up in certain conditions during manual flight."

etc

Never say never

Tracer

343 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 151

#2197089 13-Mar-2019 10:46

Ah, right. So it’s a workaround to avoid a larger redesign of the airframe. It won’t be going anywhere so let’s hope they can redesign the algorithm and sensor arrangement.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2197130 13-Mar-2019 10:54

If the pilots have been updated on the behaviour and how to disable it, then that would mitigate the issue a great deal. However, a slight pitch down at 30,000 ft is different to a large pitch down at 200 feet or 600 feet. I assume Boeing tried to shift existing ballast to counteract the weight movement? I fail to see why they would accept adding a problem so that they can add automation to solve it.

Beccara

1473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 517

ID Verified

#2197141 13-Mar-2019 11:02

I don't mind if for marketing they want to keep the 737 brand going but for pilots it really should be training along the lines of going from 737 to a different frame like the 767/777

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 32