Jump to content


Photo

Flight Tj610 Crashed In The Sea.

lion Sumatra

  • Please log in to reply
167 replies to this topic

#41 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 13 March 2019 - 1441 PM

Well whatever their habits, Donald Trump will not be left behind in a good media frenzy.

 

Trump follows lead of other nations and grounds Boeing 737 Max planes

 

US had stood virtually alone in allowing the plane to keep flying after Canada joined growing list of nations that grounded aircraft

 

Dominic Rushe in New York and Lauren Gambino in Washington and Edward Helmore

 

Wed 13 Mar 2019 19.16 GMT

  First published on Wed 13 Mar 2019 17.37 GMT
 

Donald Trump grounded Boeing’s 737 Max fleet on Wednesday, days after the second fatal crash involving the plane in five months.

 

Issuing an emergency order, Trump said all 737 Max jets in the US would now be grounded. “Planes that are in the air will be grounded if they are the 737 Max. Will be grounded upon landing at their destination,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

 

Trump said the safety of the American people and others was of “paramount concern.” “They [Boeing] have to find the problem ... and they will find it,” he said.

 

In a statement Boeing said it had “full confidence in the safety of the 737 Max” but “out of an abundance of caution and in order to reassure the flying public” it had decided to temporarily suspend the entire fleet.

 

The United States had stood virtually alone in allowing the plane to keep flying. On Wednesday Canada joined a growing list of nations that had grounded the aircraft involved in the Ethiopian Airlines crash that killed 157 people this week.

 

Boeing and US aviation safety officials at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had resisted mounting pressure from Congress and labor unions to halt operation of the the Boeing 737 Max while investigators work to find the cause of the crash. Regulators in the European Union, the United Kingdom, China, Australia and India have restricted the planes from flying. The latest bans came from Egypt, Thailand and Vietnam on Wednesday.

 

[...]

 

 

https://www.theguard...us-stands-alone


  • 0

#42 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 13 March 2019 - 1758 PM

Lets the FAA off the hook if the Prez takes responsibility.


  • 0

#43 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,407 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 13 March 2019 - 1921 PM

There is of course the existance of the manuevers of the media and politicians in self-interest to follow popular trend.

But this is a different realm. Its not some sabre rattling, or inciting national pride, or statements of human right violations in Syria. This is entirely innocent civilians riding bugged airlines in which the result is over a hundred dead if the bug happens. Even if it is media frenzy, the media has a frenzy on other things that are ceftainly not worthy of a frenzy. Boeing screwed up. Over 300 people innocently died because of the software problem. So I think a different word of description to distinguish this case from other examples. Or risk another 100-200 innocently dead by not giving it its appropriate high degree of immediate attention.

Edited by JasonJ, 13 March 2019 - 1925 PM.

  • 0

#44 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,462 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0047 AM

Not before shorting Boeing stock of course!
  • 0

#45 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,709 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0317 AM

Nothing new here of course. Its no different than what Douglas did in the early 1970's when they started having problems with Cargo Doors. They said 'we will fix it, dont worry', and suddenly you have the Eremonville Forest Crash.

https://en.wikipedia...ines_Flight_981

 

Which was bad enough. Then Boeing managed to create their own version of exactly the same problem, despite clear evidence of what not to do.

https://en.wikipedia...ines_Flight_811

'Deficiencies in the design of wide-body aircraft cargo doors were known since the early 1970s from flaws in the DC-10 cargo door. These problems were not fully addressed by the aircraft industry or the NTSB, despite the warnings and deaths from the DC-10 accidentsand attempts by Boeing to solve the problems in the 1970s.'

 

What is new is Boeing being the largest surviving aircraft manufacturer, has somehow managed to turn the FAA into its own outstation. There was a discussion on the news the other day that the FAA just took Boeing certifications of one of their aircraft (Ive a feeling it was the 787) and signed off on them without further study. It was widely known as the self certified airplane in the industry. Which when you remember what problems Boeing had with the batteries, you might think is something of a failure of responsibility on the part of the FAA. You wonder if it had any bearing in these accidents too.


  • 0

#46 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,431 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0618 AM

 

What is new is Boeing being the largest surviving aircraft manufacturer, has somehow managed to turn the FAA into its own outstation. There was a discussion on the news the other day that the FAA just took Boeing certifications of one of their aircraft (Ive a feeling it was the 787) and signed off on them without further study. It was widely known as the self certified airplane in the industry. Which when you remember what problems Boeing had with the batteries, you might think is something of a failure of responsibility on the part of the FAA. You wonder if it had any bearing in these accidents too.

That's probably it, Stuart.  That's probably the problem with the 737MAX, no real oversight.  Why do you suppose two airlines with relatively small fleets of the 737 MAX have had planes fall out of the sky, but airlines with the largest fleets have had none?  Luck of the dice roll?


  • 0

#47 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,709 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0658 AM

There was an incident that occurred some 20 years ago that I think has some bearing. An RAF Tornado, i think an ADV version, when taking off had a flaps retraction. There was a clear failures, so the crew flew around, dumped fuel and landed in sporty fashion with a no flaps configuration.

 

So they took the Tornado into the hangar, tore it down, fault tested it and found... nothing. Not one single mechanical problem. They later determined that it was a single line of code, somewhere in the millions of lines of code in the flight management computer that had done it. But they never found where exactly it was, and as far as I can tell, it never happened again.

 

Thats 20 years ago. So you think of how sophisticated computers in modern airliners are, maybe something similar happened again, twice in close succession. Which is a million to once chance, but that isnt to say it couldnt happen. Or, its another mechanical condition, a failure of a data probe, that triggered the underlying fault in the rest of the system, which is an overreaction to an action it THINKS is happening but in reality isnt.

 

However its spun, 2 identical configuration aircraft crashing in close succession is just the kind of warning we had with the Comet airliner. It will not do just to point to operators as being responsible, not least because Ethiopian Airlines has an unusually good reputation, even by the rest of the world standards. And its worth pointing out, the media have found US pilots pointing to exactly the same problems in service in CONUS. The only difference is, it hasnt killed anyone. Yet.

 

 

If Boeing didnt have such a poor reputation right now with the KC767 Id cut them some slack. But they do, and I dont.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 14 March 2019 - 0659 AM.

  • 0

#48 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0702 AM

I saw a conspiracy theory that Boeing was aware of the problem even before the Lion Air crash and was quietly sending out software fixes, starting with American carriers where pilots had already reported the bug. Not sure I'm buying that; the safe and easy way would have been amending the flight manual as they should have done from the start, even if it would have been a minor PR issue.
  • 0

#49 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,709 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0723 AM

I think a more likely cause is they sent out advisories (or even manual updates as you say) of a problem for pilots to be aware of, and the US pilots got the heads up and were aware of the problem. And the African and Sri lankan airlines, for whatever reason didnt, and it caught them unawares. Which would point perhaps to the FAA being partly culpable, as well as the airlines concerned, but it still wouldnt let Boeing off the hook if it is, as it looks, a defective aircraft.


  • 0

#50 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,540 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 14 March 2019 - 0922 AM

Lets remember to look at technical documentation of possible faults and real reports from pilots as more credible than talking heads who profess knowledge on the subject in the media as the prime drivers of what's what.


The Canadian realist perspective...



Keep yer dick in a vice!
  • 0

#51 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1116 AM

That's probably it, Stuart.  That's probably the problem with the 737MAX, no real oversight.  Why do you suppose two airlines with relatively small fleets of the 737 MAX have had planes fall out of the sky, but airlines with the largest fleets have had none?  Luck of the dice roll?


The whole thing could simply be luck of the dice roll, even without a common cause. Even though SW has the most aircraft, it still has fewer than 10% of the fleet. Can't do the stats here as I'm on my phone, but I will later and get back to this.
  • 0

#52 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,709 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1135 AM

Turns out the FAA grounding was based on some new data that indicates the aircraft did behave like the Lionair flight.

https://www.sharecas...d--3791871.html

Boeing grounds 737 Max fleet after new evidence on Ethiopia crash

Information on MCAS not included in technical documents - El Mundo

 

American regulators changed tack on Thursday, ordering that all Boeing 737 Max aircraft in the US be grounded after investigators uncovered new evidence at the scene of the fatal Ethiopian Airlines crash that took place on Sunday.

 

The Federal Aviation Administration took the decision after satellite tracking data revealed that the crashed jet had followed a flight path similar to that of the October disaster involving another 737 Max 8 flown by Indonesia's Lion Air.

After the black box from the aircraft was sent to Paris for further analysis, it was revealed that the Sunday flight which killed all the 157 passengers on board the Ethiopian-flagged jet had “behaved very similarly to the Lion Air flight”, the FAA said.

Dan Elwell, acting administrator at the FAA, said on Wednesday “The evidence we found on the ground made it even more likely the flight path was very close to Lion Air's".


  • 0

#53 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,709 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1140 AM

https://www.latimes....0314-story.html

 

Boeing executives sat down in November with pilots at the Allied Pilots Assn.’s low-slung brick headquarters in Fort Worth.

Tensions were running high. One of Boeing’s new jets — hailed by the company as an even more reliable version of Boeing’s stalwart 737 — had crashed into the ocean off Indonesia shortly after takeoff the month before, killing all 189 people aboard the flight operated by Lion Air.

After the crash, Boeing issued a bulletin disclosing that this line of planes, known as the 737 Max 8, was equipped with a new type of software as part of the plane’s automated functions. Some pilots were furious that they were not told about the new software when the plane was unveiled.

Dennis Tajer, a 737 captain who attended the meeting with Boeing executives, recalled, “They said, ‘Look, we didn’t include it because we have a lot of people flying on this and we didn’t want to inundate you with information.’”

“I’m certain I did say, ‘Well that’s not acceptable,’” said Tajer, a leader in the association representing American Airlines pilots.

A Boeing spokesman said the company disputes that any of its executives made that statement.

 

This has actually happened before. I seem to recall an episode of Air Crash investigation, where  there was an undocumented feature that caused an Airbus crash. If you put the aircraft into decend mode immediately after it being in climb mode, then it would decend at twice the ordinary rate, the logic being that it would be useful to avoid middair collisions. The only problem was, they didnt bother to tell the pilots about it, so one pilot who did it by accident flew his aircraft and passengers into the side of a mountain.

 

So its not uncommon for manufacturers to sneak in things that operators dont ask for and even want. it probably happens all the time. It is kind of remarkable the breadth of the system they put in that they didnt think operators needed training on. Even Airbus which had its own problems with Pilot and cockpit integration went further than that. Mad.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 14 March 2019 - 1146 AM.

  • 0

#54 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1334 PM

So.. If there are 371 aircraft flying, and SW airlines has 34, then the probability of their aircraft being affected if there is an incident is 34/371, which is ~9.2%

 

In other words, there's an ~82% chance their fleet won't be the one with an accident.

 

It gets a bit more complicated with 2 accidents, but the likelihood of exactly one of the accidents involving an SW Airlines aircraft is about 18%

 

If you include American Airlines (24 aircraft) then there are 68 US aircraft and the numbers are 18% and 33% respectively.

 

I feel reasonably confident in saying that those numbers do not support a claim that the accident rate is likely to be dependent on the airline.

 

Note that this is not a claim that there is no connection between the airline and the accident rate, it is simply stating that the numbers do not support that claim (not statistically significant).


  • 0

#55 MiloMorai

MiloMorai

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,682 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1525 PM

https://www.usatoday...ash/3145393002/


  • 0

#56 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,431 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1655 PM

I think a more likely cause is they sent out advisories (or even manual updates as you say) of a problem for pilots to be aware of, and the US pilots got the heads up and were aware of the problem. And the African and Sri lankan airlines, for whatever reason didnt, and it caught them unawares. Which would point perhaps to the FAA being partly culpable, as well as the airlines concerned, but it still wouldnt let Boeing off the hook if it is, as it looks, a defective aircraft.

So China is just lucky?  After all, combined, I think the Chinese Airlines are the largest group of airlines flying the 737 Max.  So really, we're back to it all being the luck of the roll?  Lion Air and Ethiopia just happened to crap out?


  • 0

#57 Jeff

Jeff

    Drum beating laughing boy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,803 posts

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1702 PM

Turns out the FAA grounding was based on some new data that indicates the aircraft did behave like the Lionair flight.

https://www.sharecas...d--3791871.html

Boeing grounds 737 Max fleet after new evidence on Ethiopia crash

Information on MCAS not included in technical documents - El Mundo

 

American regulators changed tack on Thursday, ordering that all Boeing 737 Max aircraft in the US be grounded after investigators uncovered new evidence at the scene of the fatal Ethiopian Airlines crash that took place on Sunday.

 

The Federal Aviation Administration took the decision after satellite tracking data revealed that the crashed jet had followed a flight path similar to that of the October disaster involving another 737 Max 8 flown by Indonesia's Lion Air.

After the black box from the aircraft was sent to Paris for further analysis, it was revealed that the Sunday flight which killed all the 157 passengers on board the Ethiopian-flagged jet had “behaved very similarly to the Lion Air flight”, the FAA said.

Dan Elwell, acting administrator at the FAA, said on Wednesday “The evidence we found on the ground made it even more likely the flight path was very close to Lion Air's".

 

So, if correct, upon receiving pertinent facts, they acted.


  • 0

#58 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,431 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1705 PM

 

Note that this is not a claim that there is no connection between the airline and the accident rate, it is simply stating that the numbers do not support that claim (not statistically significant).

Work it the other way around.  Lion Air has a bit less than 4% of the 737 Max fleet yet 7% of their fleet fell out of the air, and Ethiopia Air has just a bit over 1.3% of the fleet but has suffered a 20% accident rate.

 

These numbers are really meaningless anyway as the number of aircraft in the fleet is doesn't say anything meaningful about air safety.  The number that has meaning is the number of landings by type and airline.


  • 0

#59 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,128 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 14 March 2019 - 1731 PM

Doesn't work that way, you know.

 

You'd have been saying the same thing if it had been any of the non-US airlines, and they're the majority.by far.

 

"Working it the other way" means an 82% chance it's not what you consider a decent airline, etc. If it had been Chinese, I bet you'd have accused them of being part of some third world shithole airline, or of bribing their way into a ticket.


  • 0

#60 rmgill

rmgill

    Strap-hanger

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,540 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:33.8369/-84.2675
  • Interests:WWII Armor, Ferrets, Dingos, Humbers, etc...

Posted 14 March 2019 - 2148 PM

Could also be slightly less astute maintenance is what spurs the failure mode in the AOA sensor? 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users