Boeing Systemic Problems Continue

[Old fella]

I disagree that L39guy's post is "spot on". There is a lot there I, and many others, could debate but won't bother as it has been done ad nauseam for almost a year now. My questions was why the CBC should be defunded as the report was geared towards a simplified explanation to the public, not a technical review.

The CBC Fifth Estate going into its fifth decade now isn’t without its distractors and has been kinda losing viewership. Note as of last year the internal divisions aired publicly about a planned exposé on Paul Bernardo which was intended as an attempt to increase lost viewing support. Remember Swissair 111 the untold story back 2012 based on some former law enforcement type views on explosions who really had nothing to do with the aviation investigation. Having said this, I agree with you on this defund CBC musing because of one episode(‘37Max)in a rather long in the tooth investigative program that may have an expired best before date. It is like me saying I will never fly on any Air Canada aircraft again because they have in their fleet that “ dreaded widowmaker, coffin corner “ B737 Max. The CBC is no doubt seen as an Eastern Canada based elite taxpayer draining conglomerate with bias against Conservatism and Western area of Canada, I am into my 7th decade and this is the way CBC has always been tagged, I shrug it off with a whatever.

[L39Guy]

What makes you think simulator training for MCAS, which would involve the unreliable airspeed and stab trim runaway drills, would change things?

Training, to first, recognize the onset of the problem, then second, to habituate the appropriate response.

Could have prevented both prior accidents.

No guarantee, but there is nothing like experience, and simulated experience is much less costly than real experience.

Even Boeing now agrees that there should have been training provided, and the FAA apparently is mandating it for any re-certification.

So let's see what we will do for training an MCAS event. First, there is all those bells and whistles upon lift off and a disparity between the airspeeds and altimeters. In the presence of this uncertainty, let's turn off the autothrottle, the autopilot, the flight director, set a 10 degree attitude and set 80% N1. My, that sounds a lot like the Unreliable Airspeed drill. Oh, and that is part of the existing QRH for any type rated B737 pilot. Nothing new here.

Next, let's introduce, after the flaps are retracted, an uncommanded nose down trim. And let's have the pilot hold the control column firmly, apply nose up trim with the electric trim switch on the control wheel. If that doesn't work or if the nose down trim returns, how about it if we turn off the stabilizer trim using those two switches on the centre console. My, that sounds a lot like the Stabilizer Trim Runaway drill. And that too is part of the existing QRH for any type rated B737 pilot. Nothing new here either.

So while training for MCAS makes for good press, those of us in the industry that fly Boeing airplanes know that what needs to be trained is already trained, or at least should be.

Probably more valuable training - and you don't need a simulator to do this - is toe have the pilots hand fly the aircraft from take-off to at least 10,000 ft on the way up and from at least 10,000 ft to landing on the way down, going through airspeed and configuration changes that actually require one to use those little switches called electric trim to trim out the forces. It's clear by the lack of control of the aircraft in manual flight that the Lion Air FO and the two Ethiopian pilots did not know how to hand fly an aircraft. Controlling the speed by moving those levers on the centre console would be helpful too.

In a ground school environment training for "airmanship" would be helpful. If one has read the Indonesian accident report, you'll read that the investigators asked the incident crew why they didn't return to land rather than fly for 94 minutes to destination with UAS and using the manual trim wheel to trim the aircraft. Their answer? The QRH did not say "Land as Possible". In the same vein, what were the crews of both of the accident aircraft thinking cleaning up the aircraft with UAS rather than returning to land immediately at the departure airport.

Finally, in either a ground school or flight line environment, how about reviewing the memory items likes UAS, stab trim runaway, etc as it is obvious that the accident crews did not know their memory drills.

Extra MCAS simulator training will probably give everybody a warm and fuzzy feeling but the problems are much deeper than that. These crews had (or should have had) training to recognize the problem and respond. Only 1 of the 3 did. And these drills are the easy ones; if they can't even figure out an UAS in two minutes what hope to do they have for something serious, like an engine failure or rapid depressurization?

[HavaJava]

Nailed it L39guy,

You’ve exposed the root problem and no amount of engineering will overcome lack of basic airmanship until pilots are removed from the equation completely. The way the profession is going I believe that day will come sooner than later. Today’s “professional” pilots are becoming more of a liability than anything.

[L39Guy]

Thanks.

I largely agree with you however I would say “incompetent pilots” are removed. I hope this MAX thing turns into a wake-up call for the entire industry, particularly with the declining experience levels that are occurring.

I don’t agree with removing pilots completely. We only hear about pilots when there is an issue; we never hear about the instances when the pilots save the day. As an example, the crew of the same Lion Air aircraft the day before the accident did the job they’re trained to and saved the aircraft and the souls onboard (although their decision to fly to destination is highly questionable). We never would of heard about their fine work if there wasn’t an accident the next day with the same aircraft. There are scores of cases where pilots quietly do their jobs professionally and we and the public are no wiser.

[Duke Point]

Nailed it L39guy,

You’ve exposed the root problem and no amount of engineering will overcome lack of basic airmanship until pilots are removed from the equation completely. The way the profession is going I believe that day will come sooner than later. Today’s “professional” pilots are becoming more of a liability than anything.

They cant seem to figure out consistently safe automated operation in 2-dimensions. Trains still have Engineers, and they're on tracks. Cameras on vehicles can fail or become dirty rendering "auto-pilots" inoperative. Snow, icing, muddy roads, etc. Were a long way off in the vehicle department.

We're a long, long way from having fully automated aircraft operating in a fast 3-dimensional/ rapidly changing environment that doesn't require on-board operators. Commercial aircraft of this nature aren't even on any drawing board yet. The ground based infrastructure will be prohibitively expensive. I doubt a commercial aircraft without pilots will carry anyone on any appreciable scale in my or your lifetime.

DP.

[yycflyguy]

Nailed it L39guy,

You’ve exposed the root problem and no amount of engineering will overcome lack of basic airmanship until pilots are removed from the equation completely. The way the profession is going I believe that day will come sooner than later. Today’s “professional” pilots are becoming more of a liability than anything.

They cant seem to figure out consistently safe automated operation in 2-dimensions. Trains still have Engineers, and they're on tracks. Cameras on vehicles can fail or become dirty rendering "auto-pilots" inoperative. Snow, icing, muddy roads, etc. Were a long way off in the vehicle department.

We're a long, long way from having fully automated aircraft operating in a fast 3-dimensional/ rapidly changing environment that doesn't require on-board operators. Commercial aircraft of this nature aren't even on any drawing board yet. The ground based infrastructure will be prohibitively expensive. I doubt a commercial aircraft without pilots will carry anyone on any appreciable scale in my or your lifetime.

DP.

Agreed

[florch]

Thanks.

I largely agree with you however I would say “incompetent pilots” are removed. I hope this MAX thing turns into a wake-up call for the entire industry, particularly with the declining experience levels that are occurring.

I don’t agree with removing pilots completely. We only hear about pilots when there is an issue; we never hear about the instances when the pilots save the day. As an example, the crew of the same Lion Air aircraft the day before the accident did the job they’re trained to and saved the aircraft and the souls onboard (although their decision to fly to destination is highly questionable). We never would of heard about their fine work if there wasn’t an accident the next day with the same aircraft. There are scores of cases where pilots quietly do their jobs professionally and we and the public are no wiser.

I agree with everything you've said in the last couple of pages. Being a pilot is more than wearing a shiny uniform. Don't be afraid to demand high standards of our profession. If it was easy anyone could do it.

We are the goalie. Figure out why the puck was coughed up in front of you later, just make the save for right now. There is a whole Swiss cheese model and so many layers of blame to go around, but as a pilot I'll concentrate first on my own responsibilities before I cast blame on the other culprits.

A few decades ago every accident seemed to be blamed on pilot error. The narrative now seems to insulate poor performers from individual responsibility unless you are in a corner office.

[L39Guy]

Here is a really good series of flight safety podcasts some of which discuss the MAX. This is hosted by two former NTSB investigators including Greg Feith, the guy you'd see on the TV show Mayday,

Rather than relying on the pap that comes out of the NY Times these podcasts are hosted by expert and experienced accident investigators;

https://pca.st/7dd4plo6

http://www.flightsafetydetectives.com/

[Raymond Hall]

From this evening's Globe & Mail

Boeing discloses U.S. SEC probe over 737 Max

Boeing Co. on Friday disclosed it was being investigated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission over the 737 Max accidents.

The U.S. plane maker said in a regulatory filing it was co-operating with the regulators and cautioned that any adverse results could have a further material impact on its financial position.
…
The company said on Friday it has also entered into two-year loan agreements with a syndicate of banks for commitments of more than US$12-billion.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/busines ... r-737-max/

[Raymond Hall]

From Business News:

Boeing is Lying When it Blames all its Troubles on the Disastrous 737 MAX

By blaming its first loss in decades on the 737 Max narrowbody jet, Boeing is masking deeper problems at its other segments.

• Boeing’s Q4 2019 results demonstrate that segments beyond the commercial planes segment are performing poorly.
•
• While the US defense budget hits an eye-popping $738 billion, the planemaker registered declines in the Defense, Space and Security division.
•
• Rivals such as Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics have recorded revenue increases as well.

Boeing (NYSE:BA) is building a narrative that deceptively suggests that when the 737 Max is ungrounded, all its problems will magically disappear.

That couldn’t be further from the truth. As its commercial airplanes division was taking a hit following the twin 737 Max accidents which claimed over 300 lives, other segments have been struggling as well when rivals are reporting impressive growth.

As a defense contractor, Boeing saw revenue declines while competitors that have already released their financial results registered an uptick in sales in the most recent quarter.

Boeing’s Defense, Space And Security Division Under Threat


In its Defense, Space and Security segment, Boeing saw a 13% drop in revenues during the fourth quarter of 2019 relative to a similar period in 2018.

https://www.ccn.com/boeing-is-lying-whe ... s-737-max/

[co-joe]

Does anyone know what the hold up is in re-certifying the Max now? Is it in the hands of the FAA? Boeing made their changes and submitted it all to the FAA and we're waiting on them now right?

[boeingboy]

Yes....too a point. The FAA of course is being through....but the changes were being held back as they are trying to please EASA and all the other regulatory authorities at the same time. No sense in having the FAA approve it then make changes to satisfy someone else....only to have to go back to the FAA with those changes.

If they (regulatory authorities) don't get things together - the whole business of aircraft certification is going to go out the window and no-one will ever get anything certified again.

[yycflyguy]

Is this part of the hang-up?
https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... FffeFQ_5uC

[Human Factor]

FOD in brand new MAX fuel tanks... what's next?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjEDJUeUSuo

[digits_]

A shameless copy of a youtube comment, but just brilliant:

The year is 2063 and Dr. Zefram Cochrane has conducted the first test of the Phoenix space craft. Having exceeded the speed of Warp 1, the aliens known as Vulcan have made first contact with humanity.
Meanwhile, Boeing is still trying to get its 737 MAX model re-certified after it was grounded in 2019.

[2R]

They should move production of the 737 replacement to somewhere where the workers care about the product , and do not leave crap in the fuel tanks.
There are quite a few cities with cheaper real estate that have the capabilities to make a 737 replacement.

[goldeneagle]

There are quite a few cities with cheaper real estate that have the capabilities to make a 737 replacement.

Shanghai, Manila, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Hyderabad. Just to name a few...

[rxl]

They should move production of the 737 replacement to somewhere where the workers care about the product , and do not leave crap in the fuel tanks.
There are quite a few cities with cheaper real estate that have the capabilities to make a 737 replacement.

Post by goldeneagle » Sun Feb 23, 2020 11:31 am

2R wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 9:30 pm
There are quite a few cities with cheaper real estate that have the capabilities to make a 737 replacement.
Shanghai, Manila, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, Hyderabad. Just to name a few...


Come on now, that doesn’t fit very well into the Criminal in Chief’s MAGA plan does it?

[L39Guy]

I read somewhere yesterday in either the G & M or National Post that TC is at odds with the FAA on the re-entry of the MAX into service as the genius's at TC are insisting that the emergency drill with a stick shaker include disabling the stick shaker, i.e. pulling the circuit breaker, in order to reduce the distractions.

Just what one wants to be doing during a non-normal situation, looking behind the seats to find a circuit breaker to disable a warning system. Brilliant. Just brilliant.

Found it:

https://canadianaviator.com/canada-u-s- ... ck-shaker/

[boeingboy]

I suspect a lot of what is going on lately is just as much about headlines and public perception than it is about making it safe.

Heck - The interm Ethiopian report is saying it's 100% Boeings fault.