Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Boeing 737-8 MAX Kills Again

ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia -- An Ethiopian Airlines flight crashed shortly after takeoff from Ethiopia's capital on Sunday morning, killing all 157 on board, authorities said, as grieving families rushed to airports in Addis Ababa and the destination, Nairobi. More than 30 nationalities are among the dead.

It was not immediately clear what caused the crash of the Boeing 737-8 MAX plane, which was new and had been delivered to the airline in November. The pilot sent out a distress call and was given clearance to return, the airline's CEO told reporters.

157 killed, including 8 Americans, in Ethiopian Airlines plane crash en route to Kenya

An Ethiopian Airlines flight crashed shortly after takeoff from Ethiopia's capital on Sunday morning, killing all 157 on board

by Anonymousreply 31705/15/2019

The Boeing 737-8 MAX was new, delivered to Ethiopian Airlines in mid-November, the airline's CEO said. Its last maintenance was on Feb. 4 and it had flown just 1,200 hours. The pilot was a senior one, joining the airline in 2010, he said.

In a statement, Boeing said it was "deeply saddened" to hear of the crash and that a technical team was ready to provide assistance at the request of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board.

In October, another Boeing 737-8 MAX plunged into the Java Sea just minutes after taking off from Jakarta, Indonesia's capital, killing all 189 people on board the plane Lion Air flight. The cockpit data recorder showed that the jet's airspeed indicator had malfunctioned on its last four flights, though Lion Air initially claimed that problems with the aircraft had been fixed.

by Anonymousreply 103/10/2019


An American Airlines spokesmen said of #ET302: “We will closely monitor the investigation via Boeing and the National Transportation Safety Board.” The airline - second largest U.S. operator after Southwest - has 24 737 Max aircraft in its fleet, all operating normally toda

by Anonymousreply 203/10/2019

My go-to site for professional discussion/opinions about airline "events".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 303/10/2019

Thanks r3

by Anonymousreply 403/10/2019

Given the Lion Air crash and now the Ethiopian Air crash what will the major airlines do? Something is definitely going on. Does anyone with knowledge of how these things work have any insight? Surely AA, Southwest, United and others must be concerned at this point? It’s only a matter of time before it happens again.

by Anonymousreply 503/10/2019

I'm glad I'm poor.

by Anonymousreply 603/10/2019

r2 Southwest is bigger than Delta?

by Anonymousreply 703/10/2019

r5 -- see r2 for American Airline's response.

The others you mentioned will have similar responses soon.

by Anonymousreply 803/10/2019

Darfur Orphan might have a point:

30 passengers, crew injured as flight makes emergency landing at JFK

The passengers suffered non-life threatening injuries

by Anonymousreply 903/10/2019

First video of crash site:

BREAKING An Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 has crashed after takeoff from Addis Ababa - Aviation news and services

  Ethiopian Airlines flight #ET302 from Addis Ababa to Nairobi has crashed. Still very few details available on the accident but Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 (reg. ET-AVJ) was involved in a fatal accident. Please reload the page for updates… UPDATE 10 Nationalities of passengers on board #ET302. UPDATE 9 The pilot of #ET302 reported difficulties with the …

by Anonymousreply 1003/10/2019

Darfur Orphan gets some new friends.

by Anonymousreply 1103/10/2019

A chicken probably got loose on the plane and distracted everyone.

by Anonymousreply 1203/10/2019

Travel expert weighs in:

Is The Boeing 737 MAX Safe? Here's What We Know - One Mile at a Time

With two brand new Boeing 737 MAX aircraft having crashed just months apart, should you be worried about flying this plane? Here's what we know so far.

by Anonymousreply 1303/10/2019

r7 You may have a point.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1403/10/2019

There were some UN personnel on the plane

by Anonymousreply 1503/10/2019

A few days ago Linda G predicted a plane crash with a lot of casualties.

by Anonymousreply 1603/10/2019

Obviously, millennial programmers in India have fucked something up in the new flight control system.

by Anonymousreply 1703/10/2019

Funny, when I was a kid, the only ones who hated the UN were John Birchers. Odd that the Israelis picked up that group's attitudes, tactics and strategies so soon after the US GOP rid themselves of that sort of negativity.

by Anonymousreply 1903/10/2019

I love you, R14.

by Anonymousreply 2003/10/2019

Jeremiah was on that flight!

Jewish Dad & Designer Nate Berkus Welcomes Second Child – Kveller

Jewish dad Nate Berkus and his husband, Jeremiah Brent, just welcomed a baby boy into their family. The interior design power couple — the hosts of TLC’s Nate & Jeremiah By Design — are already parents daughter, Poppy, 3. Oskar Michael was born at 8 pounds, 2 ounces. The proud dads announced his birth Wednesday night on Instagram. …

by Anonymousreply 2103/10/2019

How difficult would it be for Boeing to do a “software upgrade” to the 737 MAX to make it operate or behave like the other 737s at climb out or when it senses a stall so that pilots would not get confused? That seems to be the theory behind both crashes. Pilots have complained that they have not been trained properly on the plane.

by Anonymousreply 2203/10/2019

R21 Are you being serious or is this a joke? Not funny.

by Anonymousreply 2303/10/2019

Unimaginable thinking about their last moments. This is by far my worst fear. Many of these people were environmentalists. So sad.

by Anonymousreply 2403/10/2019

R22, can you elaborate? I’m obviously no expert in flying so I’m not sure why you’re referring to but it sounds like a crucial theory.

by Anonymousreply 2503/10/2019

I love you, R21.

by Anonymousreply 2603/10/2019

Ethiopian Airlines was relatively safe until this crash and had a relatively new fleet.

by Anonymousreply 2703/10/2019

Isn't this the airline of some shithole country?

by Anonymousreply 2803/10/2019

R25 Read the article posted at R13 it gives a rundown of everything. Basically the 737 MAX has a different system where when it senses a stall it takes over control. Pilots have complained that they were not made aware of this new system on the 737 MAX and as a result accidents could occur.

by Anonymousreply 2903/10/2019

The Addis Ababa to Nairobi route. That poor plane committed suicide.

by Anonymousreply 3003/10/2019

which airlines in the US use this?

What about British Airways? That's what I usually fly every year.

by Anonymousreply 3103/10/2019

C’mon, R12, you know someone would’ve caught and eat that chicken. It’s Ethiopian Airlines for goodness sake.

by Anonymousreply 3203/10/2019

Most of the US carriers use the 737 MAXs, r31. A lot of them use the 8 series that wa involved in both these crashes (Lion Air and this one), but you'd have to check with the airline to see what they're using for each flight.

by Anonymousreply 3303/10/2019

R17 - preach you brilliant whore!

by Anonymousreply 3403/10/2019

It isn't just Boeing that suffers this, Airbus does too. You see airspeed is measured by a thing called a Pitoc tube. They ice up and send bunk data n airspeed.

by Anonymousreply 3503/10/2019

How do we know this isn't just a plot by the oligarchy to eliminate environmentalists?

by Anonymousreply 3603/10/2019

[quote]You see airspeed is measured by a thing called a Pitoc tube.

You mean a pitot tube.

by Anonymousreply 3703/10/2019

R35 You're right. Faulty Pitot tubes are assumed the reason behind the Air France crash.

by Anonymousreply 3803/10/2019

Hopefully they find the black boxes.

by Anonymousreply 3903/10/2019

Aircraft are such complex things nowadays, that until they analyse the black box, then trying to speculate correctly on why it came down, is very difficult.

Could be an issue in climb. Could be pilot error. Could be terrorism. Could be a failure of part of the aircraft like the pitot tubes. Could be systems related. Could be allsorts.

by Anonymousreply 4003/10/2019

[quote] Hopefully they find the black boxes.

If those black boxes are meant to survive a crash, why don't they make all the plane of the same material?

by Anonymousreply 4103/10/2019

R35, this isn't a pitot tube problem. This is the first generation of Boeing's to include MCAS. It's a system that takes over if the plane is in a stall. It pushed the nose down and increases speed. The issue with Lion Air was the pilots were unaware of MCAS and fought the autopilot instead of shutting it down. From what I've read, this crash seems to have given different data points than the Lion Air crash on FlightTracker and it may be a different cause.

by Anonymousreply 4203/10/2019

I read some of the posts at a pilot's forum linked in this thread or another thread. The pilots were saying that the problem likely runs a lot deeper than a software fix.

by Anonymousreply 4303/10/2019

I've read that this generation has new a new engine design and that the engine design may be part of the problem.

I should add to my post at r42 that the preliminary Lion Air crash report put the blame on sensors. The pilot and co-pilot were receiving different speed readings and they didn't know who had the correct info. At the same time they were battling MCAS for control of the plane.

by Anonymousreply 4403/10/2019

My first thought is that a 2nd crash for the same model definitely points towards the aircraft being an issue vs pilot error.

U.S. carriers American and Southwest have been flying this model with no reported problems, so it makes you wonder if this aircraft is to complex for less experienced pilots from 3rd world countries.

by Anonymousreply 4503/10/2019

China grounds all MAX 8s in its airspace until further notice, other countries & airlines following suit. Knew that was coming today.

by Anonymousreply 4603/10/2019

Ethiopian Airlines is, by all accounts, the best airline in Africa and maintains a pretty high standard, and the pilot was a senior pilot with a lot of experience, so I doubt it's that the aircraft is too complex, but it could be that they weren't adequately trained.

by Anonymousreply 4703/10/2019

R47 Rubbish! Ethiopian has had three hijacks and four crashes, two in which everyone on the plane was killed, in 25 years. Pilots are flown well over any legal or normal limits. Rest rules are blatantly ignored. That is not "the best" by any standard, even African.

Canada's Global News showed locals walking around the site of the wreckage, picking up anything that looked interesting/valuable and then walking on.

by Anonymousreply 4803/10/2019

A Norwegian was on the plane. She was just 28 years old. She was wotking with the UN. RIP.

by Anonymousreply 4903/10/2019


by Anonymousreply 5003/10/2019

[quote]You're right. Faulty Pitot tubes are assumed the reason behind the Air France crash.

Actually no, the reason behind the Air France crash was the pilot response, with the pilot causing repeated stall-outs even when the plane was at comfortably high altitudes.

by Anonymousreply 5103/10/2019

Sorry, should have said pilotS.

by Anonymousreply 5203/10/2019

Now that China has grounded the the 737 MAX will the US and Europe follow suit?

by Anonymousreply 5303/10/2019

r48 no African airline would be considered up to par in the West. That's not a PC thing to say, so it doesn't get talked about on SM, but it's the truth. The last time I did a deep dive on aviation sites, many industry personnel--including pilots, were warning of this happening A lot of these manufacturers are assuming standards of maintenance, training and/or operation that don't exist in all parts of the world.

Having said that, it's not just a question of pilot error/training; it's an entire technological threshold of what being a pilot means. Many aviation/aerospace commentators were also concerned about the on-board systems being too complex and prone to security issues.

There was much internet back & forth at the time (about 5 years ago), admittedly over my head in some places, but I understood enough to realize that it was going to be a major concern.

DL aviation industry insiders--any thoughts?

by Anonymousreply 5403/10/2019

[QUOTE]The pilots were saying that the problem likely runs a lot deeper than a software fix.

I blame those fucking Wright Brothers

by Anonymousreply 5503/10/2019

r36: The oligarchy are the psycopaths who own the central banks as well as the UN (which stands on Rockefeller land, btw) They are desperate to impose a global tax on everyone to pay the billion$ in interest to themselves on the massive and exponentially increasing government debts. So they came up with a 'carbon tax' (which homosexual Macron tried to impose in France and angered the yellow vests) to do the job. Thankfully there is fierce resistance to this caca and hopefully people are starting to wake up to the $cam of man-made climate change Nice that a few of the UN criminals were 'eliminated'!

by Anonymousreply 5603/11/2019

. I work in the UN and this crash is a gut punch across the system through most agencies. My colleague and dearest friend, a beautiful gay man, died as did many experts working in the fields of development and environment. There are no words.

by Anonymousreply 5703/11/2019

Ethiopian Airlines was actually created by TWA way back when. It isn’t really government owned like the other “good” airline, South African Airways, and has mostly escaped the taint of ID with 3rd World Airlines in general.

It really has quite a good reputation, and Bolé Intl in Addis is rapidly expanding as the only true connecting hub in Africa.

by Anonymousreply 5803/11/2019

Lad 20 miles back at the coast from me was on the flight.

'He wanted to save the world' - Micheál Ryan's mother

Tributes have been paid to Irishman Micheál Ryan who was among those who died in yesterday's Ethiopian Airlines crash.

by Anonymousreply 5903/11/2019

And Addis itself is growing amazingly fast. New metro train system.

Basically serves as the “capital” of Africa (as Brussels does for the EU) as home of the African Union.

High elevation so no pesky tropical diseases, great food, gorgeous people.

by Anonymousreply 6003/11/2019

R51 is of course an idiot. The final report released in 2012 concluded that the aircraft crashed after temporary inconsistencies between the airspeed measurements—likely due to the aircraft's pitot tubes being obstructed by ice crystals—caused the autopilot to disconnect, after which the crew reacted incorrectly and ultimately caused the aircraft to enter an aerodynamic stall, from which it did not recover.

by Anonymousreply 6103/11/2019

Poor little r61, calls me an idiot then is forced to agree I was right. It’s ok dear, maybe next time.

by Anonymousreply 6203/11/2019

Of course the BBC is like a dog with a bone on this one — apparently they’re already concluded Boeing is at fault.

That’s what happens when State run media also owns state run aerospace corp that’s struggling.

by Anonymousreply 6303/11/2019

That's one way to look at it R63. Or maybe as an corporation that is not funded by advertising, the BBC doesn't worry about losing revenue when it tells unflattering business stories.

Maybe we should focus on why Boeing planes keep falling out of the sky rather than what the BBC says about it.

by Anonymousreply 6403/11/2019

[quote]Sorry, should have said pilotS.

No, you should’ve said pilots’.

by Anonymousreply 6503/11/2019

Sorry for your loss, R57.

by Anonymousreply 6603/11/2019

The thing is that both Ethiopian and Lion Air flights could have dropped out of the sky for the same or differing reasons.

Aa soon as the black box is examined, we will know more.

by Anonymousreply 6703/11/2019

One of the posts from that pilots' forum noted that both planes malfunctioned at the same airspeed, 383 kts.

by Anonymousreply 6803/11/2019


Boeing has delivered a total of 350 MAX aircraft worldwide.

In the United States, three airlines fly the MAX and all three said today they have no plans to stand down:

American – flies 24 MAX 8

Southwest – flies 34 MAX 8

United – flies 14 MAX 9

by Anonymousreply 6903/11/2019

Aircraft might have taken a hit from a bomb or missile.


Crash witness Gebeyehu Fikadu, 25, told CNN he was collecting firewood nearby when he saw the plane 'swerving'.

'I was in the mountain nearby when I saw the plane reach the mountain before turning around with a lot of smoke coming from the back and then crashed at this site. It crashed with a large boom. When it crashed luggage and clothes came burning down.

'Before it crashed the plane was swerving and dipping with a lot of smoke coming from the back and also making a very loud unpleasant sound before hitting the ground.'

Another witness, Tegegn Dechasa told AFP 'the plane was already on fire when it crashed to the ground. The crash caused a big explosion.'

Malka Galato, the farmer whose land the plane crashed on, told Reuters he saw small items that looked like paper coming from the plane. The jet was making a strange noise and made a sudden turn just before it crashed, he said.

The plane tried to climb before it made a sharp turn and came down, farmer Tamirat Abera added.

Another farmer Sisay Gemechu, added: 'The plane seemed to be aiming to land at a nearby level open field, but crashed before reaching there.'

by Anonymousreply 7003/11/2019

Weirder and weirder, if what those farmers are saying is accurate.

It couldn't have been hit by a missile, because if it had the pilot wouldn't have had time to call in for permission to turn around and re-land.

by Anonymousreply 7103/11/2019

Yeah, the farmers' accounts are inaccurate; eyewitnesses of plane & car crashes notoriously are -- it all happens too fast, too spectacularly. Pilot radio'd he had technical problem, pilot was flying a circle back to the airport, and both black boxes will clearly show no missle/explosion/fire (it's what they track).

by Anonymousreply 7203/11/2019

It’s very common (I have no idea why) for eyewitnesses of plane crashes to say that the plane was on fire before it hit the ground, when it wasn’t.

by Anonymousreply 7303/11/2019

The Western Erasure of African Tragedy

The Western Erasure of African Tragedy

Media coverage of the crash of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 framed a horrifying accident in appallingly familiar ways.

by Anonymousreply 7403/11/2019


How a Bad Business Decision May Have Made Boeing’s 737 Max Vulnerable to Crashes

How a Bad Business Decision May Have Made Boeing’s 737 Max Vulnerable to Crashes

Where Boeing might have gone wrong.

by Anonymousreply 7503/11/2019

R75 Thank you for this article - This expert explains it all - There is an inherent design flaw that causes the nose to pitch up causing them to stall that Boeing will not be able to overcome. It is irresponsible for any airline to be flying these planes. Wow!

It all comes down to business strategy. Chicago-based Boeing is locked in a fierce duopolistic rivalry with Toulouse-based Airbus, with whom it roughly splits the $200 billion airliner market. The biggest segment of that market is for short- to medium-range narrowbody jets that typically carry between 100 and 200 passengers. These are the workhorses of aviation, unglamorous and hard-ridden, endlessly bouncing back and forth on routes like Salt Lake-Denver and La Guardia-O’Hare.

Boeing’s entry, the 737, first flew in 1967, and though various improvements have been rolled out over the years, at heart it’s still a creature of the Right Stuff era. Instead of computer-controlled fly-by-wire controls, which guide a plane’s flight electronically, it still has old fashioned mechanical actuators, and it’s made of aluminum rather than modern lightweight composites.

Airbus’ A320 family, meanwhile, took to the skies a generation later, in 1987, but it was a fly-by-wire, composite creature from the get go. In 2014 Airbus rolled out its most recent iteration, the A320neo, a range of jets with engines that were billed as being 15 percent more fuel efficient than the old model.

To maintain its lead, Boeing had to counter Airbus’ move. It had two options: either clear off the drafting tables and start working on a clean-sheet design, or keep the legacy 737 and polish it. The former would cost a vast amount—its last brand-new design, the 787, cost $32 billion to develop—and it would require airlines to retrain flight crews and maintenance personnel.

Instead, they took the second and more economical route and upgraded the previous iteration. Boeing swapped out the engines for new models, which, together with airframe tweaks, promised a 20 percent increase in fuel efficiency. In order to accommodate the engine’s larger diameter, Boeing engineers had to move the point where the plane attaches to the wing. This, in turn, affected the way the plane handled. Most alarmingly, it left the plane with a tendency to pitch up, which could result in a dangerous aerodynamic stall. To prevent this, Boeing added a new autopilot system that would pitch the nose down if it looked like it was getting too high. According to a preliminary report, it was this system that apparently led to the Lion Air crash.

If Boeing had designed a new plane from scratch it wouldn’t have had to resort to this kind of kludge. It could have designed the airframe for the engines so that the pitch-up tendency did not exist. As it was, its engineers used automation to paper over the aircraft’s flaws. Automated systems can go a long way toward preventing the sorts of accidents that arise from human fecklessness or inattention, but they inherently add to a system’s complexity. When they go wrong they can act in ways that are surprising to an unprepared pilot. That can be dangerous, especially in high-stress, novel situations. Air France 447 was lost in 2009 after pilots overreacted to minor malfunctions and became confused about what to expect from the autopilot.

by Anonymousreply 7603/11/2019

[quote]When they go wrong they can act in ways that are surprising to an unprepared pilot.

This is the bone of contention. There are aviation experts who maintain that there is a measurable threshold beyond which these hi-tech system planes become too complex for humans to fly, too complicated to diagnose and fix economically, and too prone to security flaws.

"Unprepared pilot" is code for third world carriers with lax standards, or airlines run by rich despotic regimes who do what the sheik, king, dictator, etc want. Right now, they are the ones involved in the 4 incidents (there were 2 other 'nose up' incidents).

Yes, this is a major no-no in aviation, to mod repeatedly when the issue is a design flaw; however, the core problem is that threshold.

by Anonymousreply 7703/11/2019

R77 I would argue that both are issues - Unprepared pilots that aren’t trained to the same standards as in the United States, Europe and Asia - Also repeatedly modifying the 737 to the point where it will spontaneously nose up and stall due to repositioning the engines further back on the fuselage is not safe. The idea that the autopilot was redesigned to force the nose down so the engines can be restarted makes sense unless the plane is still at climb out and at a low altitude. The plane crashes. Boeing needs to redesign the plane if it is prone to stall.

by Anonymousreply 7803/11/2019

R78 exactly. We're not talking about Excel having a bug you need to work around -- this is a damn plane! Hate the arrogance of computer engineers (as opposed to real engineers): "Oh, looks like these third world pilots aren't well trained enough to....uh.... to overcome a serious design flaw WE created." Smdh

by Anonymousreply 7903/11/2019

For those interested -- a primer on Black Boxes (which are orange):

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 8003/11/2019

r79 if the design flaw was the main issue, then more planes of this type would crash, so it clearly is a partial training/ability problem. As I said, the design has to be flawless, but shouldn't the pilot be able to disconnect the MCAS and fly it? The original complaint from pilots was they weren't aware of the workaround. Do you really think that a fatal design flaw with no acceptable workaround would be tolerated by pilots? If it was malfunctioning, then that's slightly different, and IIRC that happened re: Lion Air. If the design is flawed, *&* the correction system automation isn't working, then the margin of safety will be too low.

To me, that points to a larger problem. Even if these planes are grounded tomorrow, another problem could arise that will result in an accident because the tech is just too complicated, but the pilots are losing the ability to problem solve due to over-dependence on auto-pilot. This has been a bone of contention on aviation sites generally, not just re: accidents--pilots are too slow/reluctant to go off auto-pilot.

by Anonymousreply 8103/11/2019

R81 the problem is that the design flaw DOES cause malfunction: autopilot insistently & erroneously pointing the nose in the wrong direction. Even after pilots manually point it back in the right direction, the malfunction fights them. No, it's not a training error, unless pilots should be expected to wrestle with autopilot that keeps sending the plane in the wrong direction. There's no time to deal with that shit: Lion Air crashed 13 minutes after takeoff, Ethiopian Air just 6 minutes after takeoff. Both very experienced pilots. This is a serious design flaw.

by Anonymousreply 8203/11/2019

I remember engines falling off 747s from the 70s through the 90s.

by Anonymousreply 8303/11/2019

Wrong, R83. Engines were falling off DC-10s in the late seventies, not 747s. Different aircraft and different manufacturer.

by Anonymousreply 8403/11/2019

747 engines falling off

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 8503/11/2019

[quote]The idea that the autopilot was redesigned to force the nose down so the engines can be restarted...

R78, I think you misunderstand the meaning of the word stall when used in relation to airplanes. The engines don't stop and need toi be restarted when angled too high, the wings lose lift. The autopilot pushes the nose down so the wings again meet the airflow at the proper angle of attack to regain lift.

MCAS is just a more modern version of the mechanical stick pusher, which has been present on many airplanes for many years. It may well be that the engine placement causes MCAS to kick in when it's not needed, but the correct response to an aerodynamic stall is indeed to push the nose down and increase speed.

by Anonymousreply 8603/11/2019

R86 yeah but thanks to this design flaw, as the pilot pushes it down, the damn autopilot keeps trying to push it back up -- can't fly with a software glitch fighting against you as you make the correct moves.

by Anonymousreply 8703/12/2019

The UK Civil Aviation Authority has now banned 737-Maxs from UK airspace.

UK bans Boeing 737 Max planes from its airspace after Ethiopia crash

Civil aviation authority says it doesn’t yet have sufficient information from flight data recorder of crashed plane

by Anonymousreply 8803/12/2019

Some developments this morning:

UK has ordered the aircraft grounded and banned it from its airspace; Trump tweets blame complex automation for confusing pilots ; Senators Romney and Blumenthal call on Boeing to ground the 737 Max fleet.

Airlines around the world ground Boeing 737 MAX jets after second fatal crash

UK aviation regulators joined airlines and aviation regulators around the world in grounding Boeing 737 MAX jets following the second deadly crash of one of the popular planes in less than five months.

by Anonymousreply 8903/12/2019

Wow. That’s huge, R89!

by Anonymousreply 9003/12/2019

Does Trump know what plummeting Boeing stock will do to the Dow Jones? I would hate to be the one who has to tell him.

Trump just tweeted:

[quote] Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are........needed, and the complexity creates danger. All of this for great cost yet very little gain. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot. I want great flying professionals that are allowed to easily and quickly take control of a plane!

by Anonymousreply 9103/12/2019

R91 This is from the guy trumpeting those nifty inventions: walls and wheels. The latest must-have items.

by Anonymousreply 9203/12/2019

I have to agree with Trump. This obsesion with replacing humans in every fucking area is insane.

Greedy captains of industry and sociopathic nerds ruin everything.

by Anonymousreply 9303/12/2019

This from a man who needs a computer scientist from MIT if his Twitter account accidentally logs itself out.

“How do I log cabin again?” “Do you mean login?”

by Anonymousreply 9403/12/2019

Problems arise from both sides of the computer interface. One reviewer of fly-by-wire, "pilot-proof" Airbus noted that since anyone can fly those planes, anyone does.

by Anonymousreply 9503/12/2019

The UK has now grounded the 737 MAX - The FAA can continue the make all the excuses it wants but something needs to be done in the United States - Until a definitive cause for both crashes is determined the planes should not be in the air - I almost wonder how much of Boeing’s money is falling out of the FAA’s pockets to keep these planes airborne? Given how many in the government are calling for the grounding of these planes is there anything they can do to force the FAA’s hand? Can Trump force the head of the FAA to ground the planes? Hate on him all you want but he does have a point regarding the over reliance pilots have on automation while flying modern aircraft. Many others with far more knowledge on the subject have made the same exact point as Trump.

by Anonymousreply 9603/12/2019

And the elephant in the room that no one wants to address is that the Pilot was way inexperienced. Too few flying hours and MAX experience. 28 years old and 8,000 hours flying experience? Perhaps if he started flying professionally at 14.

by Anonymousreply 9703/12/2019

Engine mount design change may have contributed to 737-8 MAX crashes.

Henry Blodget on Twitter

“Boeing changed the way engines are mounted on the new 737, which changed the plane’s center of gravity. Software designed to counteract that now appears to make plane nosedive if sensors fail.”

by Anonymousreply 9803/12/2019

R97 The pilots experience may have been a contributing factor. You cannot discount the 737 MAX being redesigned within an inch of it’s life to achieve maximum fuel efficiency to compete with the Airbus A320neo a completely new design. Boeing saved billions of dollars in research and development costs. The fact remains until the root cause of the accidents is determined whether it be pilot error, equipment failure, onboard computer malfunction or a combination of any or all of these the planes should not be transporting passengers.

by Anonymousreply 9903/12/2019

"At this point every major Boeing 737 MAX operator outside of North America has grounded these planes. Every. Single. One. Either voluntarily or by request from the government."

Ben Schlappig on Twitter

“The FAA, Boeing, And US Airlines Are Starting To Look Ridiculous”

by Anonymousreply 10003/12/2019


The #BOEING737MAX8 groundings and air space bans just keep coming. So far Boeing's response as been "Well, the FAA hasn't ordered us to do anything, so nothing to see here."

by Anonymousreply 10103/12/2019

[quote]So far Boeing's response as been "Well, the FAA hasn't ordered us to do anything, so nothing to see here."


As someone else just said, will it take an accident here for us to wake up?

by Anonymousreply 10203/12/2019

Here's a nasty fact about crash investigation. Depending on the problem, it may not be possible to determine the cause from the evidence in one or two crashes. This was true of the cause of the bizarre rudder-based 737 crashes back in the 70's and 80's. A couple of crashes went unsolved for years until the problem happened under just the right circumstances to allow investigators to determine it was due to cold temperatures on an activator. So grounding the fleet may actually make it take longer to find the issue.

by Anonymousreply 10303/12/2019

U. S. pilots are managing to keep the max in the air just fine. The distinction is pilot quality and experience.

by Anonymousreply 10403/12/2019

EU and India have grounded the aircraft.

OK for you Americans to fly in them by the sounds of it though!

by Anonymousreply 10503/12/2019

Several Boeing 737 Max 8 pilots in U.S. complained about suspected safety flaw

Several Boeing 737 Max 8 pilots in U.S. complained about suspected safety flaw

Pilots repeatedly voiced safety concerns about the Boeing 737 Max 8 to federal authorities, with one captain calling the flight manual inadequate...

by Anonymousreply 10603/12/2019

Now you’ve got me scared to fly back to the East Coast for my sister’s wedding next month.

by Anonymousreply 10703/12/2019

I think they are hestitant to ground the planes because it would tank Boeing's stock and that would fuck with the stock market. Trump and his people are pretty transparent.

[quote] The stock's sharp move down cost the 30-stock Dow more than 150 points. Boeing has by far the biggest influence on the Dow given the index is price weighted. In other words, a higher share price will have a greater impact on the Dow.

Boeing's depressed stock cost the Dow more than 150 points

Boeing fell more than 5 percent on Monday, a move that capped the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

by Anonymousreply 10803/12/2019

Maddow read some posts from some pilot site where they described the exact same things happening to their flights. They turned off autopilot and kept going without any other incidents. All these two pilots had to do was know enough to turn off the autopilot and all those people would be alive. It's probably one line of code in some software. Maddow also covered that the fix of this software was delayed by the government shutdown. Fucking Trump. And fucking McConnell. Oh, and fucking Elaine Chao, who is the head of the department of transportation and, of course, also known as...Mrs. McConnell. I hope they all die in fiery crashes.

by Anonymousreply 10903/12/2019


But the manufacturers and airline operations guides still need to be followed.

by Anonymousreply 11003/12/2019

Gruesome question:

In all the pictures of these crashes we just see burned out plane parts and shoes and suitcases laying on the ground next to a giant pit where the plane blew up and disintegrated on impact. I always assumed the people mostly also blew up and disintegrated on impact but is that true? Are these sites just covered with body parts or is everything pretty much gone? Anyone ever work a crash site?

by Anonymousreply 11103/12/2019


The software fix to solve the unexpected nosedive problem in these planes had been expected in early January but the government shutdown reportedly "halted work on the fix for five weeks."

by Anonymousreply 11203/12/2019

Hong Kong bans the 737 Max.

by Anonymousreply 11303/13/2019

Why would Boeing take this risk? If another plane goes down, won't Boeing be completely wiped out as a company?

by Anonymousreply 11403/13/2019

R111 The people don't disintegrate. There are bodies and body parts used for the IDing the victims of a crash

NY Daily News has some graphic non-gory images from 2015.

Germanwings crash recovery effort yields 400 to 600 body parts but force of crash left not ‘a single body intact’ on French Alps mountain 

The speeding Germanwings jetliner effectively obliterated the 150 people aboard, leaving remains scattered and not “a single body intact.”

by Anonymousreply 11503/13/2019

R107 Law of averages. There's already been a plane crash, so the likelihood of another so soon after goes way down. Check what type of plane you're flying on. And enjoy your sister's wedding.

by Anonymousreply 11603/13/2019

Canada now has it's first grounding of Max 737- Sunwing has grounded it's 4 Max planes. No word yet on Air Canada.

by Anonymousreply 11703/13/2019

Air Canada has 24 Max 737.

by Anonymousreply 11803/13/2019

So if there will be another crash it will be in North America.

by Anonymousreply 11903/13/2019

I' d say Boing is already fucked

by Anonymousreply 12003/13/2019

PR disaster for Boeing

by Anonymousreply 12103/13/2019

Canada has now grounded the Max.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 12203/13/2019

Reminder to R117 and the rest of the illiterate morons:

it's - contraction of it is

its - possessive, e.g. its first grounding, its 4 MAX planes

by Anonymousreply 12303/13/2019

R123 Boeing CEO

by Anonymousreply 12403/13/2019

R124 Illiterate moron

by Anonymousreply 12503/13/2019

To all of the racist assholes saying the problem is the airline not Boeing, what is the excuse for the malfunction on that Boeing plane to Houston the other day?

Trump doesn't care if 50 Boeing planes crash in America. He's not going to want a stock market crash right before election

by Anonymousreply 12603/13/2019

R109 Wouldn't turning off the autopilot be the fundamentals of flying 101 when a jet airliner begins behaving erratically and becomes difficult to control? I find it hard to believe that they would've overlooked something so obvious. I don't know the first thing about flying an aircraft, so maybe it's a bit more complicated than that?

by Anonymousreply 12703/13/2019

R126 truly believes that only positive images should be portrayed of African airlines and not the reality that crews are poorly trained and airplanes poorly maintained.

by Anonymousreply 12803/13/2019

R122 Wow, so Canada has not only grounded the planes, but are also not allowing any (meaning US planes as we are the last ones to do the right fucking thing) to fly into their airspace. Would love to know what new information they have.

by Anonymousreply 12903/13/2019

R127, the problem that happened with Lion Air was a malfunctioning senor caused critical data, like air speed, to show up differently on both the pilot and copilot's consoles. So control over the plane was only one issue. The second was how to fly a plane when you don't know what data is correct.

by Anonymousreply 13003/13/2019

R128, I used to work in Ethiopia. I've flown with Ethiopian Airlines all the time. You probably think the coked out American pilots are just the epitome of professionalism, right?

This was a plane issue. Don't fall for the Boeing PR/damage control that this was the fault of the pilot or airlines. They're in big trouble and will look to deflect blame elsewhere. I guess the pilot in Indonesia and the American pilot in Houston was at fault too, right?

by Anonymousreply 13103/13/2019

If this were any other country, the people would be outraged in the streets that their country and president refuses to support suspending a dangerous plane model. Imagine how the deplorables would freak and call Obama a terrorist if he refused to do so.

Only in America do stocks and financial gain matter more than public safety and disaster prevention.

by Anonymousreply 13203/13/2019

[quote]U. S. pilots are managing to keep the max in the air just fine...for now.

Fixed that for ya.

by Anonymousreply 13303/13/2019

And only on DataLounge could people discussing a plane crash, the manufacturer’s lack of action and the country’s inaction be accused of racism.

It’s the new scarlet letter for the 21st century. Let’s not have frank and open dialogue, let’s just scream the “R” word, and if you don’t agree...guess what that means you are?

by Anonymousreply 13403/13/2019

The Ethiopian pilot had issues with flight control. American pilots are also complaining about flight control issues with this 737-Max 8. Our government refuses to do anything of course because Boeing and the defense industry controls Washington.

Congress will remain silent on this as well because pissing off Boeing can cost them an election.

by Anonymousreply 13503/13/2019

Southwest should do the right fucking thing if not for moral/ethical reasons than a PR boost, and get one over on United and AA. Instead, every minute they are deflecting and doubling down on their Twitter. That used to be "my" airline, now I am disgusted. If Herb was still alive, I wonder if they wouldn't have taken action by now. Instead they are doing polls asking what movies they should be offering. They are scrambling to keep up in their replies to concerned customers, mostly via DM, and continuing to toe the line, example:

Hey, there. As you know, our fleet of Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft are operating as planned today and we plan to operate those aircraft going forward. We remain confident in the Safety of our fleet, and our focus on the Safety of our operation is constant and unwavering. -Chelsea

by Anonymousreply 13603/13/2019

[quote]I've flown with Ethiopian Airlines all the time. You probably think the coked out American pilots are just the epitome of professionalism, right?

Professionalism isn't the issue. It's experience and knowledge, something those "coked out American pilots" have in abundance, which African pilots sorely lack. To say nothing of poor airline maintenance. But carry on pretending.

Whether or not the plane was the issue is up to the investigators, not someone who NEEDS the plane to be the issue.

by Anonymousreply 13703/13/2019

R137, I'm not needing the plane to be the issue. The plane is the issue you moron. The adequately trained perfect American pilots are also complaining about flight control regarding this plane.

Do you think the whole world is suspending this plane for fun?

by Anonymousreply 13803/13/2019

The Boeing PR people have found Datalounge. No point arguing with them, though it's hard not to. As you said r138, the rest of the world isn't suspending this plane for fun.

by Anonymousreply 13903/13/2019

Yes, cause the world knows just how influential Datalounge is on the aviation industry.

by Anonymousreply 14003/13/2019

You can go too r140.

by Anonymousreply 14103/13/2019

You're a moron, r141.

by Anonymousreply 14203/13/2019

Such rapier wit r141! Thanks! WW to YOU!

Back to Boeing...

by Anonymousreply 14303/13/2019

Southwest's 737 Max planes are fitted with a display for the AoA data (the single input that the MCAS relies on - a dubious engineering choice). This upgrade, paid for by SW after the Lion Air crash, potentially makes their Max fleet a wee bit safer because their pilots have more data available when making decisions in flight. Boeing at the very least ought to provide the AoA displays for free even if the MCAS is not implicated in the Ethiopian crash as it was in Lion Air. Their planes are grounded everywhere but in the States, so now is the perfect time to refit them and it would go a small way toward remedying their PR catastrophe.

by Anonymousreply 14403/13/2019

R144 I also understand that Southwest is the only one of the 3 carriers with a simulator that supports the MAX. You make good points.

by Anonymousreply 14503/13/2019

Confirmed, you're moron and a prolific poster, r143. Do you even have a life off DL?

by Anonymousreply 14603/13/2019

Every airline flies with an experienced pilot and an inexperienced co-pilot in the cockpit, somewhere in the world everyday.

Pilots can only build up their experience of an aircraft type that way.

The race or nationality of the pilots is immaterial. It's the airline and the nation's civil aviation authority's training and operating procedures and rules that are important.

by Anonymousreply 14703/13/2019

FAA grounds Max fleet in the United States.

Boeing 737 Max 8 planes grounded after Ethiopian crash

An investigation is underway after a Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft crashed Sunday in Ethiopia, killing all 157 people on board. Follow here for the latest.

by Anonymousreply 14803/13/2019

R148, and there was me hoping Dad might go to Mar-a-Lago with one of these planes some day.


by Anonymousreply 14903/13/2019

Tried to post this hours ago. But trying again..

Is it true that Boeing gave $1,000,000 to Trump's Inaugural Committee? No wonder it took Trump so long to ground the planes. Wasn't USA one of the last?

by Anonymousreply 15003/13/2019

Boeing probably gave a million to Hillary, too. They play both sides.

by Anonymousreply 15103/13/2019

R150= The US was the last major carrier, right after Canada banned the MAX.

by Anonymousreply 15203/13/2019

[quote]If those black boxes are meant to survive a crash, why don't they make all the plane of the same material

It would be too heavy to fly.

by Anonymousreply 15303/13/2019

It's about time that the US did the right thing in grounding these planes..shameful it took so song.

by Anonymousreply 15403/13/2019

R154 It took so song because Boeing was dancing around the issue.

by Anonymousreply 15503/13/2019

R138 Complaining and crashing are worlds apart. Experience and training make the difference here.

by Anonymousreply 15603/13/2019

[quote]The US was the last major carrier

The U.S. is a carrier?

by Anonymousreply 15703/13/2019

R137 has obviously never flown Ethiopian Airlines. Bless her uninformed heart.

by Anonymousreply 15803/13/2019

R3 Yeah, but they never think it could be pilot error on almost every crash they discuss.

by Anonymousreply 15903/13/2019

On the pilots' forum PPRuNE, many repeat the mantra, "If it's not Boeing, I'm not going."

by Anonymousreply 16003/13/2019

R305 Pitot not pictoc. Frozen/malfunctioning pitot tubes have resulted in a few airline crashes.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 16103/13/2019

R76 The Airfrance crash wasn't due to the error of the pilots (plural). It was the inexperienced co-pilot who waited too long to notify the captain (who was taking a break with a stewardess) about the trouble. Then , when the pilot returned to the cabin, the co-pilot was pulling the wrong way on the controls.

Air France 447 - Is this what caused the tragic plane crash that killed 228 people?

Air France flight 447 tragically crashed on 1 June, 2009. A new theory on the real reason the plane came down has been put forward in Lost at Sea: Air France 447 on Channel 5 tonight.

by Anonymousreply 16203/13/2019

Ha! R155... very good.. stupid typos.

by Anonymousreply 16303/13/2019

[quote]Law of averages. There's already been a plane crash, so the likelihood of another so soon after goes way down. Check what type of plane you're flying on. And enjoy your sister's wedding.

You need to take a statistics class.

by Anonymousreply 16403/13/2019

R162, the Air France crash was also due to Air France not requiring their pilots to hand-fly their planes during training. The younger pilots have all been trained to depend on automation to resolve any issues and they weren't even learning stall recovery with the larger jets. In addition, the lead pilot did contribute to the problem by not announcing clearly he was taking control and communicating with his copilot to recognize the guy was hauling back on his joystick. Also, the design of the Airbus contributed because it allowed conflicting control inputs - the copilot was pulling back and the pilot was doing the right thing in pushing forward. The computer interpreted the conflicting commands as cancelling each other out and did nothing.

The accident would never have happened on a Boeing since they use linked control columns, not joysticks that give physical feedback. The pilot would have known immediately the copilot was pulling up because he would feel it.


by Anonymousreply 16503/13/2019

Excessive automation is at fault.

I personally feel much safer flying in planes with older technology

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 16603/13/2019

The Boeing 'safety feature' in 737 Max 8 jets that crashed after take-off: System meant to prevent stalling pushes plane's nose down during steep climbs

The Boeing 'safety feature' in Max 8 jets that crashed after take-off

An Ethiopian Airlines Max 8 crashed on Sunday killing all 157 on board less than five months after a Lion Air plane of the same type came down in Indonesia claiming 189 lives.

by Anonymousreply 16703/13/2019

Boeing claims THEY requested the FAA temporarily ground all 737 Max 8 planes 'out of an abundance of caution' - but insists it has full confidence in their safety following Ethiopia disaster

Boeing says it encouraged the FAA to temporarily ban its planes

Boeing said it recommended that aviation authorities ban its 737 Max aircraft from the skies 'out of an abundance of caution. Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg offered sympathy to crash victims.

by Anonymousreply 16803/13/2019

r168 Liars. I despise Trump but whoever convinced him he had to order those fucking planes grounded should get a medal. And for the airlines (looking at you Southwest) that insisted they would not be able to operate without those planes in use, well... so far the world has kept turning.

by Anonymousreply 16903/13/2019

Boeing had the software patch to fix the issue. Due to the government shutdown, the software patch was delayed.

But, this turns out to be terrific for China. China has a competing airplane under development.

by Anonymousreply 17003/13/2019

Regardless of whether it’s pilot error or design flaw the law of averages with modern airline travel should dictate that something isn’t kosher. Either land the planes issue re-training for pilots world-wide or alter the design of the plane. Can you imagine the sheer terror for both flights 6 minutes of utter terror knowing you are about to be reduced to dust.

by Anonymousreply 17103/13/2019

It’s very entertaining to see a whole lot of posters who have never left their home state except to jump on South West to Vegas for their brother in law’s bucks’ weekend, make authoritative pronouncements on the skills of an Ethiopian Airlines pilot when they couldn’t point out Addis Ababa on a map.

And couldn’t distinguish a 737-8 Max from and A380-800.

by Anonymousreply 17203/13/2019

The shutdown was only part of the problem:


A software fix to the Boeing 737 MAX was delayed for months as discussions between regulators and Boeing dragged on—and U.S. officials said the government shutdown halted work on the fix for five weeks.

Boeing to Make Key Change in 737 MAX Cockpit Software

Boeing is making an extensive change to the flight-control system in the 737 MAX aircraft implicated in October’s crash in Indonesia, as world-wide unease about the jet’s safety grows following a crash Sunday.

by Anonymousreply 17303/13/2019

So, is it a good time to buy Boeing shares, or no?

by Anonymousreply 17403/13/2019

Absolutely, R174. Seriously. Look at it as they’re having a sale.

by Anonymousreply 17503/14/2019

Money above everything.. and lives. That's what it always boils down to..

by Anonymousreply 17603/14/2019

^^ It's the American Way. Let's face it, that's what the American Revolution was really all about.

by Anonymousreply 17703/14/2019

USA: 42nd nation to ground the aircraft. What a shit hole.

by Anonymousreply 17803/14/2019

R176, I once saw a documentary on plane crashes that said airlines have a formula for “acceptable risk.” It was like an algorithm wherein if the cost of potentially one plane crashing was cheaper than the cost of the fix, they’d take the gamble.

Scary shit.

by Anonymousreply 17903/14/2019

Why is it that we have only an ACTING head of the FAA.? Was donald too busy playing golf to appoint a permanent chief? Jesus, what is wrong wth this so-called administration?

by Anonymousreply 18003/14/2019

Because the head of the FAA must be confirmed by the Senate. Until that happens s/he is “acting” as the head.

by Anonymousreply 18103/14/2019

@flightradar24 20m20 minutes ago More Updated count of #737MAX flights through yesterday, 13 March.

6 March — 1251

7 March — 1256

8 March — 1313

9 March — 1252

10 March — 1257

11 March — 950

12 March — 718

13 March — 314

There are currently 5 MAX flights (all ferry flights) in the air now:

(Four AA getting planes out of the Caribbean, and one SWA moving a MAX from La Guardia to Atlanta)

by Anonymousreply 18203/14/2019

Map as of 30 minutes ago:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 18303/14/2019

I thought all 737 Max planes grounded effectively immediately as of early yesterday afternoon. How can some still be in the air some 20-24 hours later?

by Anonymousreply 18403/14/2019


by Anonymousreply 18503/14/2019

The exemption process would be very educational to know.

by Anonymousreply 18603/14/2019

Was thinking the same thing, R184.

[quote]and one SWA moving a MAX from La Guardia to Atlanta)

And this particularly troubles me. These planes were supposed to be grounded due to potential safety issues yet it’s OK to send one down the east coast?!

by Anonymousreply 18703/14/2019

The black box that could solve Boeing crash mystery: Flight recorder from doomed Ethiopian flight is revealed by French investigators as families demand answers

Black boxes from doomed Ethiopia Airlines jet arrive in Paris

The contents of the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder are expected to provide critical details about what caused the disaster in Ethiopia that left 157 dead on Sunday.

by Anonymousreply 18803/14/2019

Pilot of Ethiopian Boeing 737 Max 8 called 'in a panicky voice' and requested to return to the airport shortly after take-off just minutes before the plane crashed and killed 157 people

Crash jet pilot called 'in panicky voice' to request return to airport

Speaking in a 'panicky voice,' the doomed aircraft's captain Yared Getachew is said to have requested permission to return to the airport almost immediately after takeoff from Addis Ababa.

by Anonymousreply 18903/15/2019

Some pilots complained that the new technology, they weren't aware of... and had no training in how to handle it. How very irresponsible of the airlines.. and scary, that they put everyone in a dangerous situation. Updated training should be on an ongoing basis.

by Anonymousreply 19003/15/2019

REVEALED: FAA says they finally decided to ground Boeing 737 Max planes because data from two doomed flights showed the reasons they crashed were 'linked'

FAA says flight path similarities from two jets prompted 737 ban

The FAA reversed a decision not to ground Boeing 737 Max planes after satellite data showed two jets with both crashed within months of each other had 'similar flight paths.'

by Anonymousreply 19103/15/2019

Hero pilot Sully of 'Miracle on the Hudson' fame slams 'absurdly low' number of training hours for Ethiopian Airlines pilots after deadly crash

Capt Sully slams 'absurdly low' number of pilot training hours

Captain Chesley B Sullenberger III on Thursday publicly weighed in on Sunday's accident that killed 157 passengers and crew on board Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302.

by Anonymousreply 19203/15/2019

More bad news for Boeing: Pentagon says firm is 'simply unacceptable' after they received fueling jets scattered with trash and tools

More bad news for Boeing as Air Force says Boeing has severe situation

More bad news for Boeing  as a senior Pentagon official says it could take at least a year to restore full confidence in the KC-46A aerial refueling tanker program after trash and tools were found onboard.

by Anonymousreply 19303/15/2019

Now you know why it’s called “Boeing.”

Because when the planes crash, they go “Boeing, Boeing, Boeing!”

by Anonymousreply 19403/15/2019

More here.

Ethiopian Airlines crash shows similarities with Lion Air accident, official says

Dagmawit Moges told reporters on Sunday evening that data so far shows there is a "clear similarity" between the Ethiopian Airlines crash and an earlier one in Indonesia that involved the same type of plane.

by Anonymousreply 19503/17/2019

[quote]That's one way to look at it [R63]. Or maybe as an corporation that is not funded by advertising, the BBC doesn't worry about losing revenue when it tells unflattering business stories.

Sure it has to worry about that — when the unflattering news stories are about the aerospace business its master owns. You know, the one whose flight control design contributed to the Air France disaster, or whose small minded desire to outdo the 747 led to the A380 catastrophe (always softpedalled by state run BBC of course).

Do keep up.

by Anonymousreply 19603/17/2019

Today’s Seattle Times has the best article yet.

Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing and FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system

Federal Aviation Administration managers pushed its engineers to delegate wide responsibility for assessing the safety of the 737 MAX to Boeing itself. But safety engineers familiar with the documents shared details that show the analysis included crucial flaws.

by Anonymousreply 19703/17/2019

R197 Thanks, great find! Some damn good reporting there.

by Anonymousreply 19803/17/2019

To answer the question above about body parts. apparently in this crash, there is very little left of these souls. I am very surprised by this as I figured the plane crashed from a low altitude. Family members are receiving soil from the crash site in lieu of body parts (Articles just came out today)

Some wonderful people on that plane.

Worthy of remembrance- See excellent memorial at link. A lot of people who spent their lives helping others- This truly is tragic.

Ethiopian Airlines: Who are the victims?

Passengers from more than 30 nations were on board the plane that crashed in Ethiopia, killing 157.

by Anonymousreply 19903/17/2019

R199 it's because of the intense fire. Plane had a full tank of gas when it hit the ground, so

by Anonymousreply 20003/17/2019

Plane also came to a dead stop as a hole in the ground after going over 500 mph. You really don't want to know what it does to a body. It's pretty much the same as Lufthansa hitting a mountain.

by Anonymousreply 20103/17/2019

Yeah, R200, I just realized that it crashed from 9000 feet- and yes, and being loaded with fuel is basically says it all-


by Anonymousreply 20203/17/2019

There are remains.Fire has liftle to do with it. Coming to a stop at 500 mph tears flesh apart.

[quote]Forensic DNA work has begun on identifying the remains but it may take six months to identify the victims, because the body parts are in small pieces. However, authorities say they will issue death certificates within two weeks. The victims of the crash came from 35 countries.

Grieving families given earth from Ethiopian crash site

ADDIS ABABA, Ethiopia (AP) — Grieving family members of victims of the Ethiopian air disaster are being given sacks of earth to bury in place of the remains of their loved ones.

by Anonymousreply 20303/17/2019

A good article that explains clearly what (probably) went wrong in both these disasters.

Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing and FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system

Federal Aviation Administration managers pushed its engineers to delegate wide responsibility for assessing the safety of the 737 MAX to Boeing itself. But safety engineers familiar with the documents shared details that show the analysis included crucial flaws.

by Anonymousreply 20403/17/2019

R204, are you also R197?

by Anonymousreply 20503/17/2019

No, I’m not R204. But 204 must’ve just seen it, and kindly thought to share. I’m just checking back because the information coming out is so troubling.

Of note in the article is that the original approved design of the horizontal tail (stabilizer) was to tilt only 0.6 degrees in response to MCAS. But then somehow it ended up at 2.5 degrees. And it would keep triggering itself. Unclear if the FAA approved the final 2.5 degree movement.

Also unclear why the FAA thought it was a good idea to allow huge engines placed on a different part of the wings on a1960 airframe design.

The comments on the article provide an interesting insight from the local Boeing personnel.

I love Southwest Airlines. But I’ll never book a 737 Max again, regardless if Southwest pilots are trained in the simulator and know fully well to disable things when the MCAS is tilting the plane down. There isn’t much room to play with after takeoff!

I’m about to go over to ppune “rumors and news” and lurk. It’s always interesting to re-read the threads by the professional pilots/engineers and see how the conversation evolved.

by Anonymousreply 20603/17/2019

NBC news: “Understaffed and underfunded, the FAA delegated much of the oversight of the plane to Boeing.” Now a grand jury is looking into the oversight process.

by Anonymousreply 20703/18/2019

More trouble for Boeing.

Capt. Sullenberger on the FAA and Boeing: ‘Our credibility as leaders in aviation is being damaged’

The ‘Miracle on the Hudson’ pilot says the Boeing 737 Max controversy is ‘unprecedented’ and an ‘ugly saga.’

by Anonymousreply 20803/19/2019

That's not more trouble, R208, it's the same trouble. And Sully expresses the issue well.

by Anonymousreply 20903/19/2019


An off-duty pilot who happened to be riding in the cockpit of a Lion Air 737 Max jet told the crew how to disable a malfunctioning flight-control system and save the plane. A day later, the same aircraft crashed into the sea.

A pilot who hitched a ride on a Lion Air 737 saved that plane. The next day, the same Boeing jet crashed

An off-duty pilot who happened to be riding in the cockpit of a Lion Air 737 Max jet told the crew how to disable a malfunctioning flight-control system and save the plane. A day later, the same aircraft crashed into the Java Sea.

by Anonymousreply 21003/19/2019

Incident on Lion Air plane day before it crashed

Pilot Who Hitched a Ride Saved Lion Air 737 Day Before Deadly Crash

As the Lion Air crew fought to control their diving Boeing Co. 737 Max 8, they got help from an unexpected source: an off-duty pilot who happened to be riding in the cockpit.

by Anonymousreply 21103/20/2019


BREAKING: The FBI has joined the criminal investigation into the certification of the Boeing 737 MAX

FBI joining criminal investigation into certification of Boeing 737 MAX

The federal grand jury investigation, based in Washington, D.C., is looking into the certification process that approved the safety of the new Boeing plane, two of which have crashed since October.

by Anonymousreply 21203/20/2019


by Anonymousreply 21303/20/2019

Reading the article in R199’s post makes me feel guilty about being alive (i’m lazy and unaccomplished). There were quite a few inspiring people on that flight.

by Anonymousreply 21403/20/2019

R207 -

I understand that a new ‘clean-sheet’ design would have taken Boeing longer and cost more - and that pushing the existing design to this next stage also saved a lot in pilot and crew training (tho we’ve seen how that worked out!) - but...

Although the basic 737 airframe is as you point out - essentially a sixties design - it is nonetheless a robust one. Over time, there have been many tweaks - and composite materials incorporated into wings and control surfaces, etc. - so although an old basic design - the planes themselves are new.

Yes, the engines have wider inlets and have had to be repositioned. And yes - this causes some problems in some circumstances. But I don’t think it’s an insurmountable problem. Clearly the design has been looked at and computer mapped and analysed and wind-tunnel checked and flight -tested with the most up to date aviation tech possible. And tho the engine placement and shift of weight does have the potential to cause some control issues - there have already been thousands of flight with no problems.

The best solution would have been a new aircraft. But Boeing would have lost a lot of time and many sales to the A320-NEO. They made a commercial decision and are kind of stuck with the consequences now.

Ultimately I think the fix will be better pilot training and awareness - and some tweaking of sensor(s) and existing software. They’ll go back to into service and in time people will forget and assume it was all fixed ages ago...

Their real problem will be now that they’ve made stupid decisions at the corporate level. After the first crash they should have come clean that they suspected/knew of a problem and rushed a solution - grounding if necessary. Now - by delaying - and denying - they risk more legal action - and a big spotlight will now be shone publicly onto practices in the industry they’d rather we didn’t know or think about. The current Boeing management need to be canned. Their lack of compassion and transparency is truly appalling. But I still think these planes will be back in the air and things will go back to normal. Just like after those early DC-10 crashes. And the Comet crashes in the fifties - once the problems were fixed - people flew in them. But neither plane ended up as successful financially as planned - so the sooner Boeing has a viable replacement design ready to go into production - the better!

I gotta say - I’m more reluctant to fly in one of their Dreamliners! Those 787 battery fires were fucking freaky! And if that happens when you’re halfway across an ocean - not so good! I know they claim to have ‘fixed’ the issue - but a big, fireproof metal box isn’t exactly elegant! And the very nature of those batteries means there’s always gonna be a risk if instability. I know there hasn’t been a problem since they were introduced in numbers - and I realise I’m being irrational! - but a fire in the air is nightmarish and can cause catastrophic damage in such a short time. I find it scary as fuck!

by Anonymousreply 21503/20/2019

[quote]Although the basic 737 airframe is as you point out - essentially a sixties design - it is nonetheless a robust one. Over time, there have been many tweaks - and composite materials incorporated into wings and control surfaces, etc. - so although an old basic design - the planes themselves are new.

Believe me when I say I am NOT being snarky, I am genuinely curious:

Isn’t that like saying the 1960 Cadillac is the same basic design, but with updates and tweaks? Not much has changed over the years regarding the actual design: engine, 4 tires and a steering wheel. I’m not sure I’m making myself clear, but what could they “redesign” to make a new plane?

by Anonymousreply 21603/21/2019

Cadillacs don't fly.

by Anonymousreply 21703/21/2019

Well, obviously r217. But that’s not what I meant. They were discussing that the basic design of the plane hasn’t changed since the ‘60s. I was wondering exactly what was expected to be changed.

by Anonymousreply 21803/21/2019


In an unusual move during an airline safety investigation, Alaska Air Group expressed support for Boeing in “an incredibly difficult time” after two crashes of the 737 MAX 8.

Alaska Air Group declares support for Boeing during ‘an incredibly difficult time’

Alaska Air Group President and Chief Operating Officer Ben Minicucci emailed a statement to employees expressing support for Boeing.

by Anonymousreply 21903/21/2019


Doomed #Boeing737 Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features That the Company Sold Only as Extras.

Doomed Boeing Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features That Company Sold Only as Extras

Airlines had to pay more for two optional upgrades that could warn pilots about sensor malfunctions. Boeing now plans to make one of the features standard.

by Anonymousreply 22003/21/2019

What an utter disgrace. That article at r220 is very telling, and what it tells is disgusting.

by Anonymousreply 22103/21/2019

R218 -

That’s exactly right. The original design is very much sound - and perfect to do the job it’s desugned to do. That’s why it’s endured for so long - with very few problems.

But what has advanced and changed in a big way are engines. The design of the engines is getting far more efficient and effective as time goes by. The holy grail is more bang for the buck. Things like geared turbofans use less fuel. But the engine intakes are much bigger.

This is the problem.

When the 737 was designed - it was pre turbofan engines. It had sleek engine pods. And for various practical reasons with smaller airports - the plane was fairly low to the ground. As turbofans came into play and they were installed - they posed a problem. There’s only so high the plane can go without needing to accommodate new, larger landing gear. This means radical redesign as you have to accommodate the extra space that takes. And to do that you have to reroute electrical systems and hydraulics and a shit ton of other things - radical redesign changes -

In which case - you might as well redesign the whole airframe. And while you’re at it - incorporate the latest advances in aviation tech - new, stronger, lighter materials etc - a whole new plane.

Which costs a lot more than retrofitting the existing design. And of course when it comes to manufacturing the current plane already in production - all the tools to do so already exists and every part and how to manufacture it - is a known quantity. So no extra costs involved.

The new plane will use newer materials and be lighter and stronger - it will essentially do the same duty - but cost a shit ton more to set it all up and get it into production. So rather than do that - Boeing have elected to milk every last drop out of the existing model. And from a business point of view - who can blame them?

So yeah - the old Cadillac does the job admirably. But newer cars are lighter, stronger, more efficient - reflecting all we’ve learnt in the meantime. As will be a 737 replacement - when they eventually are forced to introduce one.

by Anonymousreply 22203/21/2019

Fascinating, R222. Truly fascinating.

I’m such a huge fan of aviation in general that this stuff is amazing to me.


by Anonymousreply 22303/21/2019

The first 737 MAX order cancellations are starting to roll in. $4.9 Billion from Indonesian airline Garuda. I wonder if others will follow suit? Boeing doesn’t have a comparable product to replace it with.

Indonesia's Garuda is canceling its $4.9 billion order for the Boeing 737 Max

Indonesian airline Garuda said Friday that it's canceling a multibillion-dollar order for Boeing's 737 Max 8 passenger jet after the plane was involved in two deadly crashes in less than five months.

by Anonymousreply 22403/22/2019

Based on the article at R220, I hope everyone cancels any pending orders and the other carriers demand a refund as a defective non-functional product.

by Anonymousreply 22503/22/2019

WHy so harsh, R225? It should be perfectly safe once they get the MCAS issues solved. No need to destroy the company.

by Anonymousreply 22603/22/2019

R226, again, read the article at r220. They knew much like Volkswagen knew what they were doing.

They offered the bare minimum as “standard equipment,” and the item that could’ve prevented this and/or assisted the pilots in the event something happened was sold as an “upgrade.” That, to me, is unconscionable when it could (and now has) involve the death of innocent people.

by Anonymousreply 22703/22/2019

Fuck Boeing. It's bad enough when the airline unbundles everything and up charges you to carry on a bag, pick a seat where your knees are in your neck, or take a shit.

But Boeing unbundled safety?

by Anonymousreply 22803/22/2019

Here’s a March 23 NYT article. It’s clear Boeing got cocky. If you google the 1960 737 vs today’s 737, it clear how much those engines have grown in size, and thus disrupting the aerodynamics.

Boeing Was ‘Go, Go, Go’ to Beat Airbus With the 737 Max

Caught short by its rival’s gains, Boeing raced to update its workhorse jet rather than design a new one. Workers describe a hectic project, but say they hadn’t felt safety was compromised.

by Anonymousreply 22903/23/2019

Can you cut and paste the article above R229? Can’t access it - abd it looks good!

R224 - doubt this’ll result in a huge tranche if order cancellations - unless it happens again and another one crashes in similar circumstances.

As it stands - they seem to know what the problem is - and can fix it. They can offer additional pilot training - and hopefully all will go on as normal and people will gradually forget.

I think Garuda cancelling is to show solidarity with Lionair - and people in Indonesia will remember longer as it happened on their turf. Plus the initial response looks like the initial response that it must be pilot error - and the implication that brown skinned pilots in the third world can’t quite cut it like western pilots must leave a nasty racist taste in their mouths - and rightly so!

But unless anything else untoward happens - the bulk of the orders will go through as normal. The airlines need those fuel efficient planes - the roughly fifteen percent fuel saving is tens - if not hundreds! - of millions a year - depending on their fleet size.

And as it stands - there’s not really an alternative. Airbus is producting around 55-57 A320 NEOS a month. They’re hoping to ratchet that up to around 60-63 - but they’ve got thousands of orders already. If you switch your 737 MAX order to them - you’re going to be waiting a very long time...

So really - if the current problems are rectified - imagine most will stick with what they’ve got - tho some may cut their orders slightly and order some airbuses to arrive later on - just in case. Imagine this would only be the very big airlines who already have mixed fleets so that the training and maintenance costs of changing type aren’t as onerous.

Let’s hope the whole mess is fixed soon and no one else dies - and that Boeing really does the right thing by admitting some culpability and compensating the relatives of those poor victims.

by Anonymousreply 23003/23/2019

I truly urge you all to read about the passengers in the Ethiopian crash- such a true loss for the world

Oh Mary, I know. But in this case it is warranted.

by Anonymousreply 23103/23/2019

[quote]Airbus is producting around 55-57 A320 NEOS a month. They’re hoping to ratchet that up to around 60-63

Really? I honestly had no idea that many planes, from any manufacturer no less, were produced annually. Seems like you’re always hearing planes that are 30-35 years old are the norm.

by Anonymousreply 23203/23/2019

One of my colleagues back in the 80s worked for Boeing for 19 years, 10 months and 13 days.

Then they laid him off.

by Anonymousreply 23303/23/2019

Was the pension just about to kick in?

by Anonymousreply 23403/23/2019

Oh yes...

by Anonymousreply 23503/23/2019

R232 - yeah - it’s boggling really! Fifty/sixty planes a month seems extraordinary - but then both Boeing and airbus each have a backlog of around five thousand orders each - it they’re pushing out 60 or so planes a month for twelve months - that’s still only just around 700-750ish a year - so it’s gonna take several years to deal with just the current orders. Suspect airbus will do everything it possibly can to increase production - but there’s limits they just can’t exceed (see the article at link)

Airbus to take A320 monthly production rate to 63

Airbus has signalled a further rate increase for A320-family production, with monthly output rising to 63 in 2021.

by Anonymousreply 23603/23/2019

R233 happened to a loved one too. 24.5 years there, from age 27-51, an executive then mysteriously laid off in the early 90s -- first generation of folks that happened to. His boss cried at the lunch he took him to to break the news. Poor guy is really struggling financially in retirement now.

by Anonymousreply 23703/23/2019

I’m kinda wondering if this might be a real sales opportunity for the Airbus 220?

The plane is like a smaller version of the 320 or 737. Less passengers, shorter range - meant for smaller regional transport. It’s the old bombardier C-series that Airbus bought into as bombardier was having financial difficulties. Apparently it’s a really great little plane - with better than anticipated fuel economy. And airbus is looking at setting up a production line in the US (Alabama).

Suspect many could make this work on some of the of the routes they’d scheduled their new 737NEOs for? So if there are ongoing problems with that - it might be a possibility?

by Anonymousreply 23803/23/2019

R238 here - just to clarify - when I sad ‘old’ I just meant it was bombardier’s design not Airbus’s. It’s not old at all - it’s really cutting edge - and by all amounts - a great plane!

by Anonymousreply 23903/23/2019

Love the Airbus!

And fuck Boeing right in the ass for laying off employees just before retirement. Disgraziato.

by Anonymousreply 24003/23/2019

Our new DL word for the day:


(really good article too!)

"Kludge" keeps coming up when pilots and engineers discuss Boeing's 737 Max

Merriam-Webster defines the word "kludge" as "a haphazard or makeshift solution to a problem and especially to a computer or programming problem."

by Anonymousreply 24103/23/2019

Boeing has always been thieves scamming the government.

by Anonymousreply 24203/23/2019

Excellent article, r241. Thank you for posting. I’m not familiar with Quartz.

I guess we shall see how the flying public reacts. But me? I’m booking a flight right now. Hmmm, looking at my options I just see 737 with stops, 757, or A320. The site doesn’t specify what 737 it is. So it’s a NOPE. I’m going with the 757 or Airbus.

by Anonymousreply 24303/24/2019

Go with the airbus. Much smoother ride.

by Anonymousreply 24403/24/2019

How soon is your flight R243?

All the 737 MAXs are grounded just now - so if it’s pretty soon - you’ll be on an older - and perfectly safe! - version.

Remember: it’s a good plane! The older versions were constantly improved and tweaked - it didn’t get to be the most produced passenger plane evah by accident. It’s juat this latest iteration that’s taking it maybe a bridge too far. And you can bet if it comes back into service shortly - it’ll have been tested and tested - and tested! - Boeing & the airlines know they cannot afford another crash anytime soon.

Having said that - if course you must go with your gut. As i said in an earlier post! - I’m still reluctant to travel on a Dreamliner after those battery fires. They freaked me the fuck out. Fire on a plane can render vital electrical systems useless within minutes - and once that happens - you’re going down.

My worst nightmare.

by Anonymousreply 24503/24/2019

Yeah, electrical fire is a worry like smelling one while taking off from Colombo at 3am and feeling quite sure my remains were destined to be scattered across southern Sri Lanka Terrifying.

by Anonymousreply 24603/25/2019

United Airlines flight from Melbourne to LAX forced to make emergency landing

Smoke was coming from the 787 cockpit of a United Airlines flight out of Melbourne before it made an emergency landing, according to reports.

Melbourne flight in emergency landing

A United Airlines flight from Melbourne to Los Angeles has been forced to make an emergency landing tonight after reports of smoke coming from the cockpit.

by Anonymousreply 24703/25/2019

That's more common than you'd think, r247, and it happens with both Boeing and Airbus.

by Anonymousreply 24803/25/2019


A look at some of the Boeing 737 Max airplanes flown by @SouthwestAir now grounded in #Victorville while FAA and the airline investigate the models safety following 2 fatal crashes in 5 months outside the United States on different airline carriers.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 24903/25/2019

Yeah, r248, but the 787s already have a scary reputation because of the batteries.

by Anonymousreply 25003/25/2019

That was fixed awhile ago, r250. Again, it's quite common regardless of the plane type and maker.

by Anonymousreply 25103/25/2019

[quote]Again, it's quite common regardless of the plane type and maker.

Poor r246...

by Anonymousreply 25203/25/2019

And your problem, r252?

by Anonymousreply 25303/25/2019

Um - don’t think so R248.

Fires in plane cockpits aren’t that common.

And the whole problem with the 787 battery is that they’ve gone for a lighter Lithium battery. There’s a big weight saving. But the lithium batteries are just a wee bit unstable. It doesn’t seem to matter how much quality control goes into it - they have in inherent instability that means once in a blue moon - one is gonna go critical and self combust.

Hence the Dreamliner ‘solution’ of surrounding the batteries with a fireproof metal box and a vent to expel the burning gasses. It appears to work - but like MCAS - it’s a kind of patch solution to a built in problem. But again - it seems to have worked so far!

I’m guessing that they’ve put in a lot of work in ensuring the batteries are manufactured to a higher standard than when the plane first came into service - but every so often they’re gonna get a failure. And when they burn - they really go off!

by Anonymousreply 25403/25/2019

Thermal runaway in the lithium-ion batteries used in the dreamliners. And solution(s)

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25503/25/2019

Oh - and airbus does NOT use lithium-ion batteries in its planes. They we’re intended for the A350 - it’s competitor to the Dreamliner - but too problematic and dropped in favour of the heavier but more stable nickel-cadmium batteries that have been used for years.

I’m not sure if the 737 max uses a lithium-ion battery system? Anyone know?

Those lithium batteries can be fiendish! The fire onboard the Eithiopian 787 at Heathrow wasn’t even the plane’s big main battery - but one attached to a beacon device near the tail. Once they burn - really hard to extinguish!

by Anonymousreply 25603/25/2019

My mistake! Looks like Airbus has eventually decided that newer lithium ion batteries are safe enough! And guess we have been flying with them for a while now... let us hope the more stringent manufacturing controls continue to keep problems at bay...

Lithium ion batteries fly again on A350-900

Battery supplier Saft has clarified that Airbus installed and delivered the first A350-900 equipped with rechargeable lithium-ion batteries to a customer at the end of last year.

by Anonymousreply 25703/25/2019

[quote]let us hope the more stringent manufacturing controls continue to keep problems at bay...

As long as it’s not the Chesapeake Bay.

by Anonymousreply 25803/25/2019

R254, read any pilot forum. It's far more common than you think and it's not isolated to Boeing.

by Anonymousreply 25903/25/2019

R257, the issue with the lithium batteries was pretty much resolved in 2014.

by Anonymousreply 26003/25/2019

R260 - was it though? Let’s see what the story is with the United dreamliner that had to divert and land in New Caledonia...

by Anonymousreply 26103/25/2019

Sure, r261, cause there's been sooooooo many issues since 2014. By god, it's been in the news daily. No, hourly!

by Anonymousreply 26203/25/2019

The smoke in the cockpit that took down SwissAir 111 was a wire harness that rubbed and caused an arc. Fixes to that design flaw were expected to take more than ten years...

Who knows what other fixes are pending...

by Anonymousreply 26303/25/2019

Just to be clear, r263, SwissAir 111 was a MD-11 that crashed over 20 years ago.

by Anonymousreply 26403/25/2019

In storage:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 26503/25/2019


Five decades ago, Boeing's new 727 jet also had a terrible start

Five decades ago, Boeing's new 727 jet also had a terrible start

As Boeing Co and global airlines work to restore public confidence in the 737 MA...

by Anonymousreply 26603/25/2019

r262 the poster might be a disaster troll, but s/he has a point. Before the public aviation forums were over-run with other civilians like me, there were lively discussions about lithium batteries, both using and carrying. Some senior pilots point-blank refused a flight if they were on the manifest. Containment was discussed, and it was never seen as a total solution.

That also assumes you know exactly what's being carried. Sometimes, like the Helderberg, you don't.

by Anonymousreply 26703/25/2019

R267, do you realize that your post had nothing to do with what was being discussed?

by Anonymousreply 26803/26/2019

The point being referenced was the poster was "looking for problems" with aircraft. The point was you don't have to be a disaster troll to find problems with airplanes. Pilots on aviation forums have been doing it for years, sometimes before the planes crash from the problems they discussed previously.

by Anonymousreply 26903/26/2019

[quote]Go with the airbus. Much smoother ride.

Bullshit. The ride in most modern airplanes are indistinquishable from each other. Some may take off quicker than others, some have different kinds of engine noise, but the smoothness (or not) of the flight is exactly the same.

by Anonymousreply 27003/26/2019

Breaking News - Southwest 737 MAX Makes Emergency Landing in Orlando!

Southwest Boeing 737 Max makes emergency landing in Orlando — CNBC

A Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 Max made an emergency landing in Orlando Tuesday because of an engine issue unrelated to recent crashes, the FAA said.

by Anonymousreply 27103/26/2019

R270, bless your heart.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 27203/27/2019

[quote]The ride in most modern airplanes are indistinquishable

Oh, dear!

by Anonymousreply 27303/27/2019

Great article!

Is the Boeing 737 Max Worth Saving?

Even when the Max does get FAA approval to fly again, its troubles won’t be over.

by Anonymousreply 27403/29/2019

Such a shame to lose so many useful people who were doing such go,

Why could it not have been a planeful of chavs heading to Santa Ponza or Magaluf? The only effect would be the closure of a nail salon or a tattoo parlour

by Anonymousreply 27504/01/2019

OP why are you red tagged? I'm curious, if you go incognito does it show you?

by Anonymousreply 27604/01/2019

Holy shit! This is some scary shit.

The Ethiopian Pilots did follow Boeing’s emergency steps before crash!

Ethiopian Airlines pilots followed Boeing's emergency steps before 737 Max crash: Report

It's the latest report amid mounting pressure on Boeing and the FAA over their assertions that the crash may have avoided.

by Anonymousreply 27704/03/2019

If true, R277 that may mean Boeing may have to completely recertify before it can fly these planes again. What a mess.

by Anonymousreply 27804/04/2019 take onnit is:

The new 737 MAX - although sold to airlines as the same as previous iterations so as to save big bucks on additional training and recertification for pilots - is actually quite different. It’s more ‘sporty’ and not as aerodynamically stable as it once was thanks to the weight and placement of the new fuel efficient engines.

It will still fly perfectly well however - but it will require additional training - so that particular cost saving is now moot.

In order to keep producing and not face many long term cancellations, Boeing may well have to pony up a subsidy for the extra training and get lotsa flight simulators out there pronto.

So the plane will fly and after some modifications - it’ll go back into service and people will gradually forget and get used to it. Boeing won’t make quite as much out of the plane initially as hoped. Some lawsuit payouts for the victims and airlines as well. And hopefully there’ll be some changes to the way planes are certified.

Unless there’s another crash in similar circumstances - in which case - they’re completely fucked.

by Anonymousreply 27904/04/2019

R279, can you elaborate on the position of the engines? This is not the first time I’ve heard it mentioned and, when I see the plane as a layperson, it doesn’t look like they’re in a different position than any other aircraft with wing engines.


by Anonymousreply 28004/04/2019

Wow, Boeing has just gone on record admitting that their software was to blame and they're "sorry". Yeah, that helps.

What's bad for Boeing will be good for Airbus and Bombardier.

by Anonymousreply 28104/04/2019

R280 - because the original 737 was designed for smaller and regional airports back in the sixties - before those telescoping terminal-to-plane ramps were as ubiquitous - it was designed low to the ground. Easy access. And back then - prior to the invention of turbofan engines - it had sleek little fuel-hungry pods on its wings.

Then came the turbofans - which were a game changer. Much quieter, more fuel efficient and cheaper to run - but bigger intakes at the front of the engine.

Boeing had to gradually accomodate those bigger engines - without having to radically redesign the undercarriage. It’s main completion - the Airbus A320 series - was designed in the eighties - when turbofans were standard - and so it has room for engines with bigger intakes.

An airliner is designed to be inherently stable and fly in a fairly benign manner - unlike say, a fighter - which is meant to be like a little racecar and is more unstable and highly manoeuvrable.

These new engines on the 737 max have the largest intakes of any of its engines yet. - so to avoid radical and costly redesign to the undercarriage - but still fit the engines on! - they’ve been slightly repositioned. They sit a little more forward - to the general public it’s not really that obvious and still looks much the same - much like any other generic modern twin engine passenger jet.

But this discreet repositioning has changed the handling characteristics of the plane. It’s been referred to by some pilots as more ‘sporty’. It no longer flies in quite the same benign, stable manner - and under some circumstances the nose can pitch up - risking a stall. Which sounds bad - but isn’t necessarily a big deal - providing pilots are trained and made aware of the nuances of the type.

The training of pilots to fly the - essentially new! - plane IS a big deal.

But this training costs. And a big part of selling it to the airlines was that there’d be none of this extra costly training involved.

The dollar is King!

(just to make clear: IF they had to redesign the undercarriage substantially - it would cost a bomb. It’s really complex as they’d have to redesign existing electrical and hydraulics abd so much besides. In which case you might as well go design a whole new airliner. Which is the expense they were desperately trying to avoid!)

by Anonymousreply 28204/04/2019

[quote]they’ve been slightly repositioned. They sit a little more forward


by Anonymousreply 28304/04/2019

Interesting article. Terrible PR crisis for Boeing looming....

Ralph Nader’s young niece was among those killed in the Eithiopian crash.

Ralph Nader: Boeing 737 Max 'should never fly again'

Ralph Nader, the noted consumer rights advocate, called for a recall and consumer boycott of the Boeing jet grounded by regulators across the globe after two deadly crashes.

by Anonymousreply 28404/05/2019

Unsafe at any speed?

by Anonymousreply 28504/05/2019

This 737 Max malarky will keep the lawyers in business for years.

by Anonymousreply 28604/06/2019

Thank you R282. I’m just a regular person who’s first flight was on a gorgeous 747 from O'Hare to LAX in 1971. They had cheese, crackers and milk for me (under 18) in the upstairs lounge. Since then, over the last 48 years, I’ve flown hundreds of times, much on 737s. But the larger engines make the MAX plane unstable. I won’t fly on a 737 again, unless my booking links specifically say it’s not a 737 Max 8.

by Anonymousreply 28704/06/2019

R288 - I’m R282! Thank you!

I’m just an average guy who has nothing to do with the aviation industry - but have been an enthusiast since my first flight in 1973 - on a DC-9 - for a school excursion for a couple of days from Sydney to Canberra. (Australia) - I was about 11 or 12 at the time.

I was in heaven.

It was nothing special in hindsight - but I loved the feeling of flying through the air in such a futuristic machine - and my baby-gay got off on the glamour of the terminal and the cabin crew and their gorgeous, tasteful outfits. I pushed my parents to get the opportunity to fly whenever I could after that - but it was always on Oz domestic services - so the aforementioned DC9s, Boeing 727s and the odd Fokker Friendship turboprop. Great memories!

Didn’t get to fly on a 747 till my first trip to the US in 1981 for the World Science Fiction Con in Denver. Just a fantastic trip with great friends - god I’ve been fortunate! And planes were always an added joy. To this day - can’t go anywhere that has an air museum and not visit and spend hours and hours. My sense of wonder is still intact after all this time.

Lol! Little off topic I know - now back to the doom and gloom of the 737 debacle...

by Anonymousreply 28804/06/2019

Interesting perspective...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 28904/07/2019

Oooos! Sorry - did link above - try again!

The Boeing scandal is an indictment of Trump’s corporate America | Will Hutton

There is growing alarm in the US that Capitol Hill’s bonfire of the regulations has led to hundreds of deaths. It may be a turning point

by Anonymousreply 29004/07/2019

R287 You can always find the type of plane being used before you book. If you go into “view seats” it will show the model of plane.

My first flight was also the “Queen of the skies” 747. My last trip on one was last year PHX-LHR and she was showing her age. I remember when the 747 would go to Hawaii. Now I can’t even find a widebody to Maui. It’s the 737 or the 757. Those planes are also going from the east coast to Western Europe. I’m not usually a nervous flyer but I get a little antsy being over the Pacific in a narrow body twin engine.

by Anonymousreply 29104/07/2019

All of you who flew on a 747 are making me jealous.

Always wanted to, never did.

by Anonymousreply 29204/07/2019

R292 - I think there’re still some 747s around - but they’re gradually disappearing :(

My last flight on one was pretty great -

QANTAS had not long introduced the A380 and was starting to phase out out 747s. They had a really good deal on premium economy seats across the Pacific - and I wanted to spend some time with an old friend in Chicago - so I grabbed a return ticket.

Whole buying it at the QANTAS Travel Centre (which sadly, are no more - it’s all online now) - my travel agent there said I could just fly as per normal from Brisbane - or for no extra cost! - they’d fly me to Sydney so I could fly to the US in a brand new A380. It was an easy sell! I was soooo excited to be on the new plane - and the cabin crew were awesome and I chatted them up - and they could see what an Avgeek I was - so after everyone had gone to sleep, one of them came and fetched me and took me on a tour of the whole plane - including a peek into first. I was beside myself. Best flight evah!

But it got better:

On the way home after a month in Chicago - I just wanted to go straight to Brisbane - and not faff about changing planes and clearing customs in Sydney. So when I got to check in to go home at Chicago - they’re all - oh! By the way - when you get onto your flight home at LAX - you’ll be upgraded to business class...


Apparently several of the old 747s didn’t yet have premium economy seats fitted - I guess they were gonna be retired soon it wasn’t worth the expense. And with a premium seat - they couldn’t downgrade me - only could put me up!

It was great fun! Great cabin crew again - nothing was too much effort - fabulous!

Sadly - I’m not affluent enough to just travel business all the time. I’m self employed and I have to pay for it all. But god it was nice! I dunno if it was a few thousand dollars extra worth of nice - but since I wasn’t paying for it - it was wonderful. :)

by Anonymousreply 29304/07/2019

Ahem - sorry to digress! Back to the MAX...

So: this NYT article would indicate it’s a cheap ass POS. Still flies - but still relies on outdated hydraulic systems and reading checklists and manuals. And everyone seemed to be fine with that - as it supposedly meant no extra training...

The engineers all seemed to know they were pushing up against the old design’s limitations. Great article from the NYT - hopefully you won’t be hampered by any paywall...

Boeing’s 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

The Boeing jet that crashed twice in five months relied on decades-old systems and left pilots without some common safety features.

by Anonymousreply 29404/09/2019


American Airlines announced that it was canceling 115 flights per day through mid-August because of ongoing problems with the Boeing 737 Max aircraft

American Airlines cancels Boeing 737 Max flights through mid-August

American Airlines announced Sunday that it was canceling 115 flights per day through mid-August because of ongoing problems with the Boeing 737 Max aircraft.

by Anonymousreply 29504/15/2019

United cancelling flights into July.

Does anyone think the 737 8 MAX can recover the public’s confidence? If American, United, and Southwest take legal action against Boeing for lost revenue, I don’t see how that plane can survive.

United Airlines is canceling 737 Max flights through early July

United Airlines says it is canceling flights through "early July" because of the Boeing 737 Max grounding.

by Anonymousreply 29604/16/2019

R206 - yep! I certainly think it can!

If the airlines using it have several sales and the tickets are cheap enough - people will flock back to ‘em - and in no time at all these difficulties will all be forgotten.

Most people don’t pay much attention to the type of plane they’re flying on anyway.

Unless there’s another accident in similar circumstances - especially if it’s a first world airline - then all bets are off. But for now - still recoverable.

by Anonymousreply 29704/16/2019

This is a great five minute summary - well worth watching!

The real reason Boeing’s new plane crashed twice

This isn’t just a computer bug. It’s a scandal.

by Anonymousreply 29804/19/2019

Long-article - but very good!

How the Boeing 737 Max Disaster Looks to a Software Developer

Design shortcuts meant to make a new plane seem like an old, familiar one are to blame

by Anonymousreply 29904/19/2019


Boeing plant under scrutiny after Times article claims weak oversight, shoddy production

(There have been problems there for years...)

Boeing plant under scrutiny after Times article claims weak oversight, shoddy production

A Boeing plant in South Carolina is being criticized for a lack of safety oversight.

by Anonymousreply 30004/21/2019


A ladder and a string of lights left in planes' tails. Bolts left in engines. Chewing gum holding together a door's trim.

by Anonymousreply 30104/21/2019

One airline refused to take dreamliners if they were made at the South Carolina plant.

The airforce sending back tankers that have construction debris at levels deemed unacceptable.

The old Boeing, run by engineers and with safety always a top priority - is no more. This is the Boeing controlled by suits in Chicago

Safety inspectors - the company’s own! - silenced, transferred - and berated for putting concerns in writing rather than face to face - it’s all about the dollar now. Be under no illusions.

by Anonymousreply 30204/21/2019

[quote]One airline refused to take dreamliners if they were made at the South Carolina plant.

Claims of Shoddy Production Draw Scrutiny to a Second Boeing Jet

Workers at a 787 Dreamliner plant in South Carolina have complained of defective manufacturing, debris left on planes and pressure to not report violations.

by Anonymousreply 30304/22/2019

That Times article is damning. Planes made by shiftless non-union deplorables.

by Anonymousreply 30404/22/2019

Thank you for posting that great explanation-video, R298. Sadly, R299’s article doesn’t load.

How unfortunate it is that Boeing was in too much of a hurry. They put profit in front of basic design. They should’ve had a new airframe.

I won’t get on a 737-8 Max. I’ve read that the -9 Max is better aerodynamically, due to its longer fuselage. We’ll see.

by Anonymousreply 30504/24/2019

Really interesting follow up articles for to the original on this blog by a pilot - which is linked.

Beginning to wonder now if Boeing will ever be able to make this work? I mean - it’s inherently unstable. And there’s a limit to the software fixes you can use to try and work around that. And especially damning is the comment by one pilot that he had asked to not fly these planes again - and that the old 767s were far more advanced in comparison. Oh - and the bit about the Swedish pilots on the simulator doing exactly what Boeing had said to do - and it really not working...

Can the problem really go away? It just takes one more crash in similar circumstances - and the whole program will be kaput...

Airline Pilots Respond to "Boeing 737 Max Unsafe to Fly": It's Not Just Boeing - Mish Talk

3 pilots responded to my 737 Max article, one was the captain of Qantas Flight 72 (QF72) who made an emergency landing.

by Anonymousreply 30604/26/2019

The Swedish Aviator at Mentour Pilot explains it all for us!

Apparently we are all catastrophising it - and there’s nothing to fear.

But then - his whole career is built around the 737 in its various iterations - so I wonder if he could be a little biased?

Still - such reassuring Scandi reasonableness! Surely it must be ok...?

Five questions about the Boeing 737MAX!! - Answered

Join my growing community in the Mentour Aviation app! ???????? ????IOS: ????Android:

by Anonymousreply 30704/28/2019

Juan Brown’s meticulous explanation of the proposed fix offers hope. But I’ll wait a few years before I get in a Max.

737 Max UPDATE 14 April 2019 "The Fix"

LINKS: FAA Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community: Boeing 737 Max Softwar...

by Anonymousreply 30804/28/2019

Australia 60 Minutes. After watching this, it’s pretty clear to me that the planes should’ve been grounded right after the Lion Air crash. Dennis Mullenberg should go to prison.

Rogue Boeing 737 Max planes ‘with minds of their own’ | 60 Minutes Australia

Liz Hayes investigates the disaster of Boeing’s 737 MAX jetliner. Why two supposedly state-of-the-art and safe planes crashed killing 346 people; why pilots ...

by Anonymousreply 30905/07/2019

Yesterday’s WaPo article about Boeing Board of Directors. Nice how former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley got rewarded a board seat since she prevented unions at the SC Boeing plants - including one which is dedicated to building the MAX.

She was appointed 4 months after the first MAX crash. And by then Boeing most-likely knew it had a problem with the MAX.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 31005/07/2019

Nearly the entire Southwest Airlines #737MAX fleet in storage at Victorville in mid-April.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 31105/07/2019

Anyone want to guess when the first airline company will file suit against Boeing for lost revenue due to grounded planes? Southwest and American will probably be first. No way will those planes be flying revenue passengers by August, if ever.

It’s interesting to re-read pprune threads - within a week of the Oct 29, 2018 Lion Air crash, some posters were gravitating from thinking an unreliable air speed indicator was the issue, to thinking it had something to do with software commands. Some posters say no way is there an unknown HAL computer input - when in fact there was. That just shows how murky the whole set-up was.

So that’s November, 2018 and anonymous posters are getting a feel, with just the Flight Radar data and experience, that there were other issues besides “pilot error.”

Boeing does nothing except send out a non-alarming advisory.

Ethiopian Airline crash occurs 4 months later, March 10. World starts grounding the MAX on March 11. March 12, FAA says all is fine. March 13 Boeing says ground them, and Trump agrees.

Knowing this self-regulatory bullshit now, I won’t get on one. Like the pilot said in the Australia 60 minutes - what else is hidden that we don’t know about?

Before Crashes Killed 346 People, Boeing Knew of 737 Jet Malfunction But Didn’t Tell Authorities

Boeing said Sunday that it discovered after airlines had been flying its 737 Max plane for several months that a safety alert in the cockpit was not working as intended, yet it didn't disclose that fact to airlines or federal regulators until after one of the planes crashed. The feature was designed to warn pilots when a key sensor might be providing incorrect information about the pitch of the plane's nose.

by Anonymousreply 31205/07/2019

Another article.

The many human errors that brought down the Boeing 737 Max

A damning investigation revealing the many small failures that led to 346 lives being lost.

by Anonymousreply 31305/08/2019

This debacle appears to be a continuation of a trend at Boeing. Here's an excellent documentary on problems with the 787 by, of all source, Al Jazeera. Some of these issues have already been mentioned in this thread. It's sobering and the Max problems could just be the beginning of the problems for Boeing.

The Boeing 787: Broken Dreams l Al Jazeera Investigations

This is a major project by the Al Jazeera Investigative Unit focusing on the 787 “Dreamliner”, the flagship passenger jet of the Boeing Company. Our journali...

by Anonymousreply 31405/09/2019

To think this is the same company that gave us the B-52, now approaching 65 years in the air...

But it was built with strict oversight -- no self-monitoring.

by Anonymousreply 31505/09/2019

And it wasn't built by union-busting slackers iin a state with no skilled workers on the cheap.

by Anonymousreply 31605/10/2019

Surely this doesn’t look good for Boeing? They’re gonna have to payout substantially I would have thought...? Especially on the second crash?

Pilots confronted Boeing with 737 Max fears after first fatal crash, audio reveals

Boeing appeared to play down concerns of second disaster weeks after Lion Air Max crashed and four months before Ethiopian Airlines plane went down

by Anonymousreply 31705/15/2019
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Don't you just LOVE clicking on these things on every single site you visit? I know we do! You can thank the EU parliament for making everyone in the world click on these pointless things while changing absolutely nothing. If you are interested you can take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT and we'll set a dreaded cookie to make it go away. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!