Topic: Ethiopian Airlines 737 plane crashes - No survivors

[Red Beret]

How do you figure that, given that two brand new airplanes of the same model have gone down shortly after take off within 5 months of each other?

Because we've not had anything from the black boxes yet. All we have are eyewitness reports saying the plane was on fire as it came down, which doesn't match the Lion Air crash.

Its been said on here we should disregard those statements, so until we have more information, everything is speculation. Of course it seems probable, but we really just don't know, do we?

[Red-Soldier]

The US aviation union are saying to their members that they'll back them if they don't want to step onto a 737 Max, due to safety concerns.

I'm shocked that Boeing are putting their profits before public safety 

[Caligula?]

Canada & US are now grounding them as well.

[I've been a good boy]

Because we've not had anything from the black boxes yet. All we have are eyewitness reports saying the plane was on fire as it came down, which doesn't match the Lion Air crash.

Its been said on here we should disregard those statements, so until we have more information, everything is speculation. Of course it seems probable, but we really just don't know, do we?

Better to be safe than sorry. Imagine the 737 MAX's were still in the air at this very moment and one was to come down crashing? If two crashes occured in the space of five months for an A320, it simply wouldn't get grounded because it is an well-known and reliable aircraft. But it it happened to an A320neo which is a fairly recent type, it'd be a different story if that makes sense

[WhereAngelsPlay]

The US aviation union are saying to their members that they'll back them if they don't want to step onto a 737 Max, due to safety concerns.

I'm shocked that Boeing are putting their profits before public safety 

So Canada grounds them and then Drumpf jumps in to announce that he is grounding them.



There's literally fuck all that the twat won't take credit for.

[rob1966]

The fuselage of the 737Max is smaller than previous models and Boaeing couldn’t fit the engines in the same spot. Their solution was to shift them further forward in the plane. There is some suggestion that this changed the centre of gravity and is playing a part in the planes behaving differently to what the pilots expect. 

It’s too early to know if it’s a significant thing or a red herring but it’s not true to say the plane is identical to other 737s.

Many places now grounding the aircraft. Arguably  should have happened after the Lion Air crash.

The fact that is was a new 737 and Lion Air was the airline possibly played a large part in that not happening.

Lion Air has a notorious safety record including two planes sliding off the same runway on consecutive days, poor training, switching faulty parts between planes and going over the head of an inspector to fly a plane with an hydraulic leak that the inspector had grounded. A head of safety said they were getting a major engineering fault every 3 days on new planes and Lion were banned from EU airspace from 2013 to 2016.

In the build up to the crash, there were airspeed indicator failures on 3 consecutive days on that exact plane.

[Red Beret]

Better to be safe than sorry. Imagine the 737 MAX's were still in the air at this very moment and one was to come down crashing? If two crashes occured in the space of five months for an A320, it simply wouldn't get grounded because it is an well-known and reliable aircraft. But it it happened to an A320neo which is a fairly recent type, it'd be a different story if that makes sense

Absolutely agree, and I wasn't trying to imply that the planes shouldn't be grounded.  But right now what evidence is there that these two planes have gone down in "similar circumstances"?  Eyewitness reports say the Ethiopian plane was on fire, which was not the case with the Lion aircraft?  Only the black box can either confirm or refute that. 

It might be a completely unrelated problem, which makes grounding the planes all the more vital.  After all, two new planes crashing for completely different reasons that could be related to something in their construction is very alarming.

[rob1966]

Absolutely agree, and I wasn't trying to imply that the planes shouldn't be grounded.  But right now what evidence is there that these two planes have gone down in "similar circumstances"?  Eyewitness reports say the Ethiopian plane was on fire, which was not the case with the Lion aircraft?  Only the black box can either confirm or refute that. 

It might be a completely unrelated problem, which makes grounding the planes all the more vital.  After all, two new planes crashing for completely different reasons that could be related to something in their construction is very alarming.

From what I've read about Lion, while they spend money like mad on new planes, they make cuts everywhere else, such as pilot training. I had a look on a pilots forum the other day and they were getting ripped for how bad they are.

Like you, I agree with the grounding, even though they don't yet know what caused the latest crash. Crew and passenger safety has to come first and until they determine what caused this one, they need to ground them. However, with the amount of 737 Max 8's flying, it does seem unlikely that there is an issue with the model.

[Jimmy Conway]

New evidence found on crash site, resulting in Boeing grounding ALL 787 Max's.

Wonder what they found?

[rafathegaffa83]

Rebecca Ballhaus@rebeccaballhaus
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.

[Ray K]

@juliamacfarlane
My God, if this is true this is HUGE. Safety analysis of the 737 Max had "several crucial flaws". Seattle Times reporting that "both Boeing and the FAA were informed and were asked for responses 11 days ago, BEFORE the second crash" of the Ethiopian jet: https://t.co/bYLBG1ZeO8


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

As Boeing hustled in 2015 to catch up to Airbus and certify its new 737 MAX, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) managers pushed the agency’s safety engineers to delegate safety assessments to Boeing itself, and to speedily approve the resulting analysis.

But the original safety analysis that Boeing delivered to the FAA for a new flight control system on the MAX — a report used to certify the plane as safe to fly — had several crucial flaws.

That flight control system, called MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System), is now under scrutiny after two crashes of the jet in less than five months resulted in Wednesday’s FAA order to ground the plane.

Current and former engineers directly involved with the evaluations or familiar with the document shared details of Boeing’s “System Safety Analysis” of MCAS, which The Seattle Times confirmed.

The safety analysis:

-Understated the power of the new flight control system, which was designed to swivel the horizontal tail to push the nose of the plane down to avert a stall. When the planes later entered service, MCAS was capable of moving the tail more than four times farther than was stated in the initial safety analysis document.

-Failed to account for how the system could reset itself each time a pilot responded, thereby missing the potential impact of the system repeatedly pushing the airplane’s nose downward.
-Assessed a failure of the system as one level below “catastrophic.” But even that “hazardous” danger level should have precluded activation of the system based on input from a single sensor — and yet that’s how it was designed.

The people who spoke to The Seattle Times and shared details of the safety analysis all spoke on condition of anonymity to protect their jobs at the FAA and other aviation organizations.

Both Boeing and the FAA were informed of the specifics of this story and were asked for responses 11 days ago, before the second crash of a 737 MAX last Sunday.


Late Friday, the FAA said it followed its standard certification process on the MAX. Citing a busy week, a spokesman said the agency was “unable to delve into any detailed inquiries.”

Boeing responded Saturday with a statement that “the FAA considered the final configuration and operating parameters of MCAS during MAX certification, and concluded that it met all certification and regulatory requirements.”

Delegated to Boeing

The FAA, citing lack of funding and resources, has over the years delegated increasing authority to Boeing to take on more of the work of certifying the safety of its own airplanes.

Early on in certification of the 737 MAX, the FAA safety engineering team divided up the technical assessments that would be delegated to Boeing versus those they considered more critical and would be retained within the FAA.

But several FAA technical experts said in interviews that as certification proceeded, managers prodded them to speed the process. Development of the MAX was lagging nine months behind the rival Airbus A320neo. Time was of the essence for Boeing.

A former FAA safety engineer who was directly involved in certifying the MAX said that halfway through the certification process, “we were asked by management to re-evaluate what would be delegated. Management thought we had retained too much at the FAA.”

“There was constant pressure to re-evaluate our initial decisions,” the former engineer said. “And even after we had reassessed it … there was continued discussion by management about delegating even more items down to the Boeing Company.”

Even the work that was retained, such as reviewing technical documents provided by Boeing, was sometimes curtailed.

“There wasn’t a complete and proper review of the documents,” the former engineer added. “Review was rushed to reach certain certification dates.”

When time was too short for FAA technical staff to complete a review, sometimes managers either signed off on the documents themselves or delegated their review back to Boeing.

More

[Caligula?]

Looks like they rushed to unveil and get the plane up and running without addressing all aspects of its safety. I honestly hope airlines return that sorry excuse of a plane and Boeing gets sued to brim. They deserve nothing less from this fiasco.

[kcbworth]

Corporations certifying themselves and avoiding all the regulatory red tape... I'm sure I've heard that approach being espoused as the best way by some in recent years

IDIOTS

[Red Beret]

That article is damning. What idiot thought it was a good idea to run the anti stall system off a single sensor?? If the second crash is tied to this Boeing should be absolutely crushed.

Wonder if the tax cuts played a part in the FAA's underfunding, or if it's a chronic issue stretching back much further?

[PhilV]

snip

all that is HUGE and confirms my personal suspicion the FAA were involved somehow, everyone else grounded the plane but they were the last ones to do so claiming nahhh it's all good until their hand was essentially forced.

What a joke of an agency that lets the manufacturer safety rate their own plane, of course that's never gonna be as thorough and will be biased.

Main issue for me also comes right back to design, a single sensor for this new instrument is mental, single point of failure is bad in anything let alone aircraft and also that the MCAS was changed from initial checks to perform 4 times more change in aircraft AoA

[losCHUNK]

That article is damning. What idiot thought it was a good idea to run the anti stall system off a single sensor?? If the second crash is tied to this Boeing should be absolutely crushed.

Wonder if the tax cuts played a part in the FAA's underfunding, or if it's a chronic issue stretching back much further?

Damn right.  An accident like this was pretty much a certainty if that article is accurate, instruments fail and human error should always be factored in to limit the risk.  It's crazy Boeing allowed it to go into production let alone some 'FAA' exec signing off on it.  Then not updating this known flaw resulting in further death and destroyed lives, some justice needs to be served up here.

[Jimmy Conway]

This is a bloody shame as the 737 is one hell of a plane. 40 years on from launch, the Max could kill its excellent reputation.

Comac, Airbus, Embrarer will get new customers from this. Even the big US legacy airlines are starting to favour Airbus. Pretty damning when American Airlines now fly Airbus, they've historically been Boeing customers.

[Caligula?]

This is a bloody shame as the 737 is one hell of a plane. 40 years on from launch, the Max could kill its excellent reputation.

Comac, Airbus, Embrarer will get new customers from this. Even the big US legacy airlines are starting to favour Airbus. Pretty damning when American Airlines now fly Airbus, they've historically been Boeing customers.

The 737 has been an excellent workhorse and has a very good safety record so I doubt this new version of it will kill its reputation. I mean the 737 MAX is bigger, more complex and has its engines fitted differently than any other 737 before. Essentially it was supposed to be a new plane but Boeing fitted it into the 737 family so pilots wouldn't have to undergo certification for a new type of aircraft. What will suffer is anything new that Boeing roll out from now on though. As well it should.

[I've been a good boy]

Dusgusting from Boeing and the FAA, glad this plane is grounded and hopefully never sets fly again until every operator of it has confidence in it. Their roll-out ceremony last week for the B777-9 was such a low-profile event when it should have made headlines. I feel there may be a changing of the guard, especially with Airbus' strong A350 program and the upcoming A330neos.

[rob1966]

This is a bloody shame as the 737 is one hell of a plane. 40 years on from launch, the Max could kill its excellent reputation.

Comac, Airbus, Embrarer will get new customers from this. Even the big US legacy airlines are starting to favour Airbus. Pretty damning when American Airlines now fly Airbus, they've historically been Boeing customers.

Really don't see how airlines can fly the 737 MAX now, no passenger is going to believe Boeing have corrected the issues after what has gone on here. I certainly won't fly on one. We tend to fly easyjet these days and their fleet is all Airbus these days.

[ChaChaMooMoo]

And is that the way the cookie begins to crumble?

Garuda looks to scrap Boeing 737 Max 8 order after crashes

Garuda Indonesia is seeking to scrap its multi-billion dollar order for 49 Boeing 737 Max 8 jets after the plane was involved in two fatal crashes.

The move is thought to be the first formal cancellation of an order for the aircraft.

A Garuda spokesperson said passengers had "lost trust" in the plane.

It comes as investigators work to establish the cause of a recent crash involving a 737 Max 8, which killed 157 people.

It was the second fatal disaster involving the jet in five months. A Lion Air flight crashed in October, killing 189 people.

"We have sent a letter to Boeing requesting that the order be cancelled," Garuda spokesman Ikhsan Rosan told AFP.

"The reason is that Garuda passengers in Indonesia have lost trust and no longer have the confidence" in the plane he said, adding that the airline was awaiting a response from Boeing.

Garuda did not immediately respond to a BBC request for comment. A spokesperson for Boeing was "unable to comment on customer discussions".

Garuda had already received one of the 737 Max 8 planes, AFP reported, part of a 50-plane order worth $4.9bn (Ł3.7bn) at list prices when it was announced in 2014.

Investigation ongoing

Garuda was among Boeing's customers that had indicated they could scrap their orders. for the 737 Max jets but the Indonesian airline appears the first to take action.

While there is no conclusive evidence so far that the Ethiopian Airlines and Lion Air disasters are linked, French experts analysing the Ethiopian Airlines' flight data black box say early investigations point to "clear similarities".

Experts believe a new automated system in Boeing's aircraft - intended to stop stalling by dipping the nose - may have played a role in both crashes, with pilots unable to override it.

The company said a software update is coming following the crash of the Lion Air flight.

Investigators intend to to issue a preliminary report into the Ethiopian Airlines disaster by mid-April.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47662967

[leroy]

A Garuda spokesperson said passengers had "lost trust" in the plane.

Coming from a Garuda spokesperson... the people of Indonesia must really be skeptical of that plane now.

[Ray K]

Looks kinda bad..

Doomed Boeing Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features That Company Sold Only as Extras - New York Times

As the pilots of the doomed Boeing jets in Ethiopia and Indonesia fought to control their planes, they lacked two notable safety features in their cockpits.

One reason: Boeing charged extra for them.

For Boeing and other aircraft manufacturers, the practice of charging to upgrade a standard plane can be lucrative. Top airlines around the world must pay handsomely to have the jets they order fitted with customized add-ons.

Sometimes these optional features involve aesthetics or comfort, like premium seating, fancy lighting or extra bathrooms. But other features involve communication, navigation or safety systems, and are more fundamental to the plane’s operations.

Many airlines, especially low-cost carriers like Indonesia’s Lion Air, have opted not to buy them — and regulators don’t require them.

Now, in the wake of the two deadly crashes involving the same jet model, Boeing will make one of those safety features standard as part of a fix to get the planes in the air again.

It is not yet known what caused the crashes of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 on March 10 and Lion Air Flight 610 five months earlier, both after erratic takeoffs. But investigators are looking at whether a new software system added to avoid stalls in Boeing’s 737 Max series may have been partly to blame. Faulty data from sensors on the Lion Air plane may have caused the system, known as MCAS, to malfunction, authorities investigating that crash suspect.

The jet’s software system takes readings from one of two vanelike devices called angle of attack sensors that determine how much the plane’s nose is pointing up or down relative to oncoming air. When MCAS detects that the plane is pointing up at a dangerous angle, it can automatically push down the nose of the plane in an effort to prevent the plane from stalling.

Boeing’s optional safety features, in part, could have helped the pilots detect any erroneous readings. One of the optional upgrades, the angle of attack indicator, displays the readings of the two sensors. The other, called a disagree light, is activated if those sensors are at odds with one another.

Boeing will soon update the MCAS software, and will also make the disagree light standard on all new 737 Max planes, according to a person familiar with the changes, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they have not been made public. Boeing started moving on the software fix and the equipment change before the crash in Ethiopia.

The angle of attack indicator will remain an option that airlines can buy. Neither feature was mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration. All 737 Max jets have been grounded.

“They’re critical, and cost almost nothing for the airlines to install,” said Bjorn Fehrm, an analyst at the aviation consultancy Leeham. “Boeing charges for them because it can. But they’re vital for safety.”

[Caligula?]

It's finished as a plane. I sure as hell am never getting on one and I reckon many other people won't as well. More airlines will probably cancel their orders.

[Red Beret]

Pity the anti stall device wasn't optional. When you need an optional extra to counter something fitted as standard there's a problem.

[Red-Soldier]

I hope every airline cancels their orders of this plane

I'd never get on one, that's for sure.

[rob1966]

It's finished as a plane. I sure as hell am never getting on one and I reckon many other people won't as well. More airlines will probably cancel their orders.

Like my wife just said, will you be able to convince a pilot to fly one?

[Elmo!]

It wouldn't surprise me if you were still far more likely to be killed in a car accident than by the 737 MAX 8 statistically.

Not to defend Boeing at all, but I don't get the logic of deciding you wouldn't fly on one again. I would probably prefer to get another plane, but I wouldn't change my booking from the best price/most convenient to avoid it.

[CraigDS]

I imagine once it's in service again it will have been put through more testing, by more groups, than any other plane.

I'd still feel nervous though I guess.

[Red Beret]

airplanes aren't like some crap game released on Steam in beta mode where you have to wait for about five patches and V1.8 before it becomes playable.

You do the checks before you release it to the public.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

airplanes aren't like some crap game released on Steam in beta mode where you have to wait for about five patches and V1.8 before it becomes playable.

You do the checks before you release it to the public.

Not when the company is American and Airbus has just released a game changer,people should boycott them out of principle.

[Red Beret]

Full Article: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/23/business/boeing-737-max-crash.html

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

Boeing faced an unthinkable defection in the spring of 2011. American Airlines, an exclusive Boeing customer for more than a decade, was ready to place an order for hundreds of new, fuel-efficient jets from the world’s other major aircraft manufacturer, Airbus.

The chief executive of American called Boeing’s leader, W. James McNerney Jr., to say a deal was close. If Boeing wanted the business, it would need to move aggressively, the airline executive, Gerard Arpey, told Mr. McNerney.

To win over American, Boeing ditched the idea of developing a new passenger plane, which would take a decade. Instead, it decided to update its workhorse 737, promising the plane would be done in six years.

The 737 Max was born roughly three months later.

The competitive pressure to build the jet — which permeated the entire design and development — now threatens the reputation and profits of Boeing, after two deadly crashes of the 737 Max in less than five months. Prosecutors and regulators are investigating whether the effort to design, produce and certify the Max was rushed, leading Boeing to miss crucial safety risks and to underplay the need for pilot training.


Inside Boeing, the race was on. Roughly six months after the project’s launch, engineers were already documenting the differences between the Max and its predecessor, meaning they already had preliminary designs for the Max — a fast turnaround, according to an engineer who worked on the project.

“The timeline was extremely compressed,” the engineer said. “It was go, go, go.”

One former designer on the team working on flight controls for the Max said the group had at times produced 16 technical drawings a week, double the normal rate. “They basically said, ‘We need something now,’” the designer said.

A technician who assembles wiring on the Max said that in the first months of development, rushed designers were delivering sloppy blueprints to him. He was told that the instructions for the wiring would be cleaned up later in the process, he said.

His internal assembly designs for the Max, he said, still include omissions today, like not specifying which tools to use to install a certain wire, a situation that could lead to a faulty connection. Normally such blueprints include intricate instructions.

Despite the intense atmosphere, current and former employees said, they felt during the project that Boeing’s internal quality checks ensured the aircraft was safe.

In a statement, Boeing said: “The Max program launched in 2011. It was offered to customers in September 2012. Firm configuration of the airplane was achieved in July 2013. The first completed 737 Max 8 rolled out of the Renton factory in November 2015.”

The company added, “A multiyear process could hardly be considered rushed.”

[Jimmy Conway]

All of TUI (UK) fleet of 737 Maxs are parked up on the appron at Manchester. You can see all 5 near the Airport pub.

[robertobaggio37]

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47812225

Pilots "repeatedly" followed procedures recommended by Boeing before last month's crash of an Ethiopian Airlines flight, according to the first official report into the disaster.

Despite their efforts pilots "were not able to control the aircraft", Transport Minister Dagmawit Moges said.

Flight ET302 crashed six minutes after take-off from Addis Ababa, killing all 157 people on board.

It was the second crash of a Boeing 737 Max aircraft in five months.

Last October, Lion Air flight JT 610 crashed into the sea near Indonesia killing all 189 people on board.

Truly saddening...

[redbyrdz]

Sounds like the pilots did all they could, and the software still took them down.

An extra safety light wouldn't have helped. The pilots knew what was wrong. Boing have to change the sensor design and allow for the pilots to turn the system off, not just temporarily override it.

[Red Beret]

Sounds like the pilots did all they could, and the software still took them down.

An extra safety light wouldn't have helped. The pilots knew what was wrong. Boing have to change the sensor design and allow for the pilots to turn the system off, not just temporarily override it.

How utterly terrifying.  In the grip of a barking mad "safety" system and knowing there's not a damned thing you can do about it.  Seems Boeing didn't put an off switch in because they were more worried about it being turned off accidentally than they were the system fucking up - unless the off switch was one of their vaunted optional extras.

Hope they get hammered in the courts.

[No666]

Ralph Nader was on BBC News earlier, saying he was suing Boeing on behalf on his niece, who died in the crash. Feels that these cases are usually settled with less money than could be extracted, followed by a PR exercise, and is determined not to let that happen.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

The sick thing is that their share price went up after this news.

[Rhi]

That is a damning assessment of the safety of the 737MAX. Terrible.

[killer-heels]

The sick thing is that their share price went up after this news.

How does that work?