World, Writing, Wealth discussion
Wealth & Economics
>
What's with Boeing?
Boeing are in some serious trouble on this one I think.
AS is US Aviation Authority given further reports from US pilots complaining of same issue experienced in Lion crash
1000s of lives already put at risk after Lion crash and Boeing appear to have deliberately not warned pilots of the system being used. The clearance of the aircraft by FAA despite significantly different centre of gravity and angle of attack data, also raise questions as to why a full certification programme was not requested. The previous 737 model certification was used with this Max as a variant not a new model. It has a new wing new materials and the engines are larger and mounted differently therefore flight characteristics will be different.Some interesting statistics
https://qz.com/1571820/deaths-on-the-...
According to our news (about an hour ago) the FAA has grounded the Max 8 and Max 9.In my opinion, when flying a plane there has to be a very quick way to disconnect autopilot and take manual control free of any automated system, and autopilot should not be turned on until you have enough airspeed and altitude you have time to correct a malfunction. A device controlling attitude at low altitude during take-off is a disaster waiting to happen because there has been o way of checking that it is working properly before it is too late if it isn't.
Like in the link the comment on documentation for pilot training. If it is anything like the average "Help" section on my computer, pilots are in real trouble.
So, they will release a software fix soonest: https://www.reuters.com/article/ethio...With investigations still ongoing, don't know whether this will solve the issue..
We can envision flying along when all of a sudden everything freezes as you aircraft informs you that you must be patient as the latest software update is downloaded. If you cannot recall your password, you cannot install it and will not be permitted to land :-(
Ian wrote: "We can envision flying along when all of a sudden everything freezes as you aircraft informs you that you must be patient as the latest software update is downloaded. If you cannot recall your pass..."Yeah, a patch should maybe come with a parachute, just in case -:(
Yeah, like using a parachute would be a good thing :-0 !!
Since the plane seems to dive vertically into the earth from about 1000 meters, the pilot might be able to eject, but not anyone else!
Wouldn't want to be him, going down in history as the anti-Sully :-)
Hmmm - like physics - where there's an anti for everything - well, almost :-)
I've been thinking recently, when is the day going to come when we install an airbag system into each seat. If there's some sort of disaster where they know the plane won't survive, the top blows off, then every seat is ejected. Parachutes deploy to slow the decent, then the airbags deploy to soften the landing. :D
Damn! Pressed the wrong button, says pilot watching however many lightly clad people parachute to the chill of the Arctic :-(
Or what about the guy who comes out of the bathroom late and wonders where everybody went. :D
Read or heard somewhere that passengers are not equipped with the parachutes because at cruising altitude of 10k meters/30k feet, they won't survive the cold and lack of oxygen, but if the problem is during take-off sending renewed software with ejection hardware makes sense -:)
I would think getting the passengers out would be a worse problem. Look how long it takes to get them out at an airport. The idea that first class passengers might have a chance, but nobody else would would not go down well. The cold at much lower altitudes would be a problem for lightly clad passengers, let alone those over the arctic. Most international flights are over oceans, very cold places, or rather rough country. If the passenger survived a parachute drop unhurt (and they have no landing skill) they would still have no survival skill. It would be another form of torture. :-(
And we just had another 737 max make an emergency landing in Orlando.https://www.foxnews.com/travel/southw...
This just gets worse and worse for Boeing...
Ian wrote: "The idea that first class passengers might have a chance, but nobody else would would not go down well...."Come on, they are Boeing, they surely can manufacture planes with opening roofs to propel all the passengers out if needed
Something happens in mid flight. All those not properly belted in have no chutes :-( Includes stewardesses. Oops! Do you want to be always belted in, with shoulder belts, during long international flights?Terrorist has way of triggering it during take-off. Hell of a mess where residual plane lands and there is not enough altitude for chutes. Everyone dies. Aaargh!
Between comfort and safety, I'd choose the latter. Kinda preferred Boeing after this sad accident with Airbus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Fra... , but now that I see that they get their airworthiness notwithstanding...
We all want safety, Nik. Not flying in a 787 Max until this is sorted out is a good step towards it :-)
Hope after the overhaul it flies smoothly. Read recently the story about the first commercial airliner - de Havilland Comet. Sometimes such a small nuance like square windows instead of round ones can significantly diminish the duress and cause a plane to break apart
Philip wrote: "Update on Boeing 737-Max casehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/jDOe..."
"Boeing, which has been struggling for the past year with the safety of its 737 Max jet, has spent over $43 billion buying back stock over the past decade."
REF: https://www.newsweek.com/boeing-airli....
In the same timeframe they underinvest in engineering and safety.
The CEO and the executive team are motivated to maximize their bonuses by shifting the share price rather than building the best and safest aircraft.
Graeme wrote: "The CEO and the executive team are motivated to maximize their bonuses by shifting the share price rather than building the best and safest aircraft."Exactly! Capitalism at work.
Philip wrote: "Update on Boeing 737-Max casehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/jDOe..."
From Philips link.
"Meanwhile, critics of Boeing and the FAA claim the flawed design of the 737 Max was merely a symptom of a much wider disease. They believe that a corporate culture at Boeing prioritised profit at the expense of safety, and that the regulatory culture failed to keep the aerospace giant in check."
We live in a society where dominant corporates co-opt the regulatory agencies designed to 'regulate,' them.
The most common way of doing this is via a revolving door process where staff on the career fast track are passed through senior management ranks in the regulating agency and the interested corporates.
This ensures cultural alignment and subordination of the regulating agency to the dominant corporates and by proxy through to the major shareholders of the corporates who hold the board seats.
By that chain of control, uber-wealthy interests are able to gain favorable rulings that entrench the profits of their corporate vehicles.
But like any system that throws effective engineering, safety, objectivity, and accountability under the bus - blow ups are inevitable.
Greed and Hubris are at the foundation of these pathologies.
Ian wrote: "Graeme wrote: "The CEO and the executive team are motivated to maximize their bonuses by shifting the share price rather than building the best and safest aircraft."Exactly! Capitalism at work."
Not exactly... more a pathological expression of greed and hubris, who are equal opportunity employers in any political/economic system...
Graeme, in my opinion, the mathematics of capitalism so strongly favour greed that it is more or less inevitable unless society can make it unattractive in other ways. In other words, if you can get away with it, you will take what you can.
Career politicians like Biden are rolling in dough. How does that happen? Not on a politician's salary.
Hunter must be a genius businessman - how else can you explain making lots of moola from doing little? Besides, Biden's brand is by now may have become bigger than McDonalds :)
Not so sure, Nik. How can Biden franchise how he makes that money?
The autopilot erred and the discussion deviated from its proper course, but hopefully didn't take that lethal nosedive. So, Boeing, please.Would you board Max right away or rather wait a year or two to see how it's performing?
Flying in any plane is pretty safe in comparison to a trip in a car (If we were allowed to fly anywhere :-/)When booking there is rarely a choice of plane - scheduled flights there might be, as part of a package not.
I would not choose to fly on a Max but I have been on fa more dangerous aircraft ones I have personally watched go up in flames (CH46 if you are asking) I was young and gung-ho then and military risk was part of my life.
Boeing did something so inherently wrong and the FAA let them get away with it and the rest of the World's regulators trusted the FAA. None of those regulators trust the FAA now therefore Max flying anywhere outside the USA is still a long wait. All those airlines need new training, new certification and that would be without pandemic impact on airline industry. They have lots of empty planes they can use instead. Lots of spare crews. (This impact Airbus too in terms of sales and spare planes.
When and if finally certified it will like any other plane with a troubled past - including the Comet which turned into a decent reliable plane. May need a new name and makeover to avoid lingering public issues and Boeing's reputation let alone FAA will take years to repair. That will be a problem for the airlines who buy it/use it expect empty seats.
I'll avoid it if I can
Concerns also raised about 787 and rest of Boeing self-certification expect a bunch of product recalls/maintenance and other technical adjustments (In Airbus too) Every now and then the aviation industry needs a good kick up the....
I remember flying An-2 as a kid in Altai mountains. I could swear it covered more vertical distance, falling and climbing back, than horizontal. But as a kid there is no real sense of danger...Wonder where all the Ilyushin, Tupolev and Antonov disappeared to. You rarely see them nowadays even on home turf. As opposed, Embraer seems to pick up and is encountered more frequently, especially on short range, but it's pretty much a Boeing too now.
Philip wrote: "Flying in any plane is pretty safe in comparison to a trip in a car (If we were allowed to fly anywhere :-/)When booking there is rarely a choice of plane - scheduled flights there might be, as p..."
Agreed, Philip.
Nik wrote: "I remember flying An-2 as a kid in Altai mountains. I could swear it covered more vertical distance, falling and climbing back, than horizontal. But as a kid there is no real sense of danger...Won..."
During my military career we analysed Soviet aviation - think we may have mentioned before Concord-ski issues due to metallurgy technology failing.
Suspect safety concerns destroyed these companies or just plain old capitalism (Bribery included) persuading newly privatised Russian oligarchs and associated airlines to buy Boeing and Airbus. Global brands with route share would also push similar fleets for maintenance and handling purposes
As with auto mobiles aviation manufacturing is now a near monopoly or duopoly - the concern for the civilian aviation industry is that we need a competitive Boeing to keep Airbus honest and progressing
Unless a new entrant picks up the slack - Lochhead returning or some other manufacturer - maybe China?
Boeing need to get their reputation back and the only way I see that happening is a major effort of safety and regulatory compliance. Their response to the report does not show that. The FAA is still in denial about its failures and until that changes other regulators including UK's CAA will not certify the Max - even then they will need a lot of convincing. With all the planes grounded due to Pandemic its an opportunity for the industry to fix a bunch of issues - but they won't unless regulators force them to.
This includes routing, landing slot allocation, ticketing and other issues - unfortunately cheap air travel may be a thing of the past.
Philip wrote: "...Suspect safety concerns destroyed these companies or just plain old capitalism (Bribery included) persuading newly privatised Russian oligarchs and associated airlines to buy Boeing and Airbus. Global brands with route share would also push similar fleets for maintenance and handling purposes..."Safety concerns and bad PR, for sure. Plus I remember reading somewhere that many of them were designed having zero regard to saving on jet fuel in oil rich USSR nor for using lightweight composite materials, so that many aren't competitive
Nik, what aircraft do the Russians use now? I recall three flights with Aeroflot, one of which had me wondering. Going out of Tashkent this plane with counter-spinning props was so overloaded there seemed to be an issue as to whether it would clear a number of pine trees at the end of the take-off path. It did, but not with a lot to spare.
Supposedly, this offers the list of what should be available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of... and maybe some of the old ones still have airworthiness certificates. The main were Il, Yak, Tu and Ukrainian - An, of one of which you probably remember this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov...
I read that Sukhoy developed a civilian aircraft and promotes it.
Ukrainian Airlines uses Boeings and Embraers on international destinations. They used to have Antonovs on their fleet, but just checked - and it seems not anymore.
Haven't been to Russia for a few years, but remember seeing and flying mostly Boeings and Airbuses even with local airlines.
Following your question checked Aeroflot's fleet: https://www.aeroflot.ru/xx-en/about/p... . As you can see mostly Bs and As with a few Sukhoys. Checked also S7, which appears to not have any locally produced aircrafts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S7_Airl...
Yes, it was some time ago. I think someone told me my last flight was in a Tupolev, which seemed to work well enough.
Brazil's Gol has become the first airline to resume commercial flights with the Boeing 737 Max.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-lati...
I sure am glad,not to be flying these days.Boeing is playing Russian roulette with people's lives.
And more software issues with Boeing with advisories issued to airlines by FAAhttps://www.theregister.com/2020/12/1...
Car manufacturers' recalls became routine. Maybe here too the recall was overdue? What do you think?