Topic: Ethiopian Airlines 737 plane crashes - No survivors

[So… Howard Philips]

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.

Wow, Nader must be getting on by now I think his first book about car safety was in the mid sixties.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

How does that work?

Fucked if I know 

[Elmo!]

How does that work?

Share prices will often go up after 'bad' news if the news is not as bad as was expected.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Share prices will often go up after 'bad' news if the news is not as bad as was expected.

Following the advice given by the manufacturer and still crashing should be just about the worst news though,including Ralf Nader suing them should make the days news even worse still.

[BoRed]

How does that work?

Selling crap for loads of money is generally considered good business.

[Red-Soldier]

This is how much big corporations care about public safety:

The public wont fly on a plane due to dodgy safety record, lets just rebrand it instead.......

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jul/15/boeing-737-max-ordered-by-ryanair-undergoes-name-change

Decision fuels speculation that manufacturer and airlines will rebrand troubled plane

A Boeing 737 Max due to be delivered to Ryanair has had the model’s name changed on the livery, further fuelling speculation that the manufacturer and airlines will seek to rebrand the troubled plane.

Photos have emerged of a repainted 737 Max in Ryanair colours outside Boeing’s manufacturing hub, with the name 737 Max replaced by 737-8200 on the nose.

The aircraft remains grounded worldwide after two crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia killed a total of 346 people. Boeing has yet to convince regulators that modifications to its software are sufficient to ensure its safety.

Ryanair has 135 of the 737 Max models on order, the first five of which are due for delivery in the autumn. The airline has ordered a larger version of the Max 8, with 200 seats, now badged 737-8200 in the photographs taken at Renton in Washington, US, and posted on social media by Woodys Aeroimages.

[Caligula?]

Airlines are required to tell you which aircraft you'll be flying on. Don't get on the 737 Max or whatever they're calling it now. If enough people kicked up a fuss, they'll probably keep them grounded.

[rob1966]

[redmark]

Airlines are required to tell you which aircraft you'll be flying on. Don't get on the 737 Max or whatever they're calling it now. If enough people kicked up a fuss, they'll probably keep them grounded.

There's no way 737-MAX's won't fly again at some point, upgraded with the necessary 'optional' safety extras and rigorously tested software updates - and probably rebranded. It's costing airlines and tour operators hundreds of millions, money that it's not yet clear they'll get back from Boeing. Modern planes like the MAX are important for airlines to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

[Caligula?]

There's no way 737-MAX's won't fly again at some point, upgraded with the necessary 'optional' safety extras and rigorously tested software updates - and probably rebranded. It's costing airlines and tour operators hundreds of millions, money that it's not yet clear they'll get back from Boeing. Modern planes like the MAX are important for airlines to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

Oh, they'll fly again. I don't doubt that. But I couldn't care less about reducing emissions. I care about my safety, as does everyone else. Until they can go out and prove that whatever was wrong with the plane has been 100% eradicated and fixed, I won't ever fly on that aircraft. They can rebrand it to whatever they'd like. They've lost the public's trust and are going to have to do a hell of a lot to earn it back.

[leroy]

You can care about both efficiency/emissions and safety! 

It'll come down to cutting corners to save money.  It doesn't matter what their spin is they will absolutely compromise on safety to save money.  What we already know shows that. 

As you say people just need to not book tickets on those flights.  When the regulators abdicate their responsibility it's the only way really.

[redmark]

Oh, they'll fly again. I don't doubt that. But I couldn't care less about reducing emissions. I care about my safety, as does everyone else. Until they can go out and prove that whatever was wrong with the plane has been 100% eradicated and fixed, I won't ever fly on that aircraft. They can rebrand it to whatever they'd like. They've lost the public's trust and are going to have to do a hell of a lot to earn it back.

I remember tourists to Sousse being interviewed after the terrorist attack and one saying they knew there were risks in the country, but "it was only £300". There are many areas of life - how we drive, eat, drink, etc - where we don't prioritise safety. Of course safety is important, and it is often a very stark issue when it comes to flying. But most of the flying public will be happy to pay the lower prices that will result when the improved/tested/proven MAX is back on the schedules.

[rob1966]

I remember tourists to Sousse being interviewed after the terrorist attack and one saying they knew there were risks in the country, but "it was only £300". There are many areas of life - how we drive, eat, drink, etc - where we don't prioritise safety. Of course safety is important, and it is often a very stark issue when it comes to flying. But most of the flying public will be happy to pay the lower prices that will result when the improved/tested/proven MAX is back on the schedules.

We tend to use EasyJet for our holiday flights these days, their entire fleet is Airbus A319/320/321s including the new NEO or Jet2 who use the older 757 and 737-800. They bought 34 new 737-800NG, but these are different to the MAX. I will make sure we only use these two airlines and I will never book with an airline, regardless of how cheap it is, who will put us on a Max, until it has been independently proven to be safe - Boeings word means nothing.

[Caligula?]

Absolute shitshow from Boeing. I'm never getting on some of these unless it was absolutely 100% necessary.

'Cracking issue' discovered on some of Boeing's 737 NG planes, airline says

The Federal Aviation Administration has ordered inspections of a Boeing 737 model after the company notified the agency of structural cracks.

Operators of certain 737 Next Generation planes will be required to make inspections, the FAA said.

"Boeing notified the agency of the matter after it discovered the cracks while conducting modifications on a heavily used aircraft. Subsequent inspections uncovered similar cracks in a small number of additional planes. The FAA will instruct operators to conduct specific inspections, make any necessary repairs and to report their findings to the agency immediately," the agency said.

The cracking was found in the plane's pickle forks, which attach the plane's body to its wing structure, CNN affiliate KOMO reported.

Pickle forks are designed to last more than 90,000 landings and takeoffs without cracking, the affiliate said, and there could be dire results if the system fails, it said.

Boeing didn't adequately plan for pilot response to 737 Max system failures, NTSB says

In a statement, Boeing said the "cracking issue" was found on a small number of airplanes.

"No in-service issues have been reported," the company said. "Over the coming days, we will work closely with our customers to implement a recommended inspection plan for certain airplanes in the fleet. This issue does not affect any 737 MAX airplanes or the P-8 Poseidon."

The Boeing 737 NGs are the models designated 737-700, 737-800, and 737-900.

Earlier this year, the FAA grounded all Boeing 737 Max planes after identifying similarities between two catastrophic crashes that left more than 300 people dead.

On Thursday, the National Transportation Safety Board released recommendations after an investigation into the certification of the 737 Max. The agency scrutinized the evaluation process for the Boeing 737 Max's Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), a critical system at the center of both crashes.

Variances in pilot behavior are not being fully considered when the FAA evaluates an aircraft for certification, the safety board said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/27/business/boeing-737-ng-cracks/index.html

Boeing omitted safeguards on 737 Max that were used on military jet

Boeing engineers working on the 737 Max passenger plane’s flight-control system omitted safeguards included in an earlier version of the system used on a military tanker jet, The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday, citing people familiar with the matter.

The engineers who created the flight-control system known as the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system more than a decade ago for the military refueling plane, designed the system to rely on inputs from multiple sensors and with limited power to move an aircraft’s nose, the Journal said.

The newspaper cited one person familiar with the design saying this approach was taken in order to guard against the system acting erroneously or causing a pilot to lose control.

In contrast, the version of MCAS on the 737 Max passenger planes relied on input from just one of two sensors which measure the angle at which the plane’s nose is flying, the newspaper said.

Boeing’s expected software fix for the 737 Max planes will make the MCAS more like the one used on the tanker jet, the Journal said.

Boeing did not immediately respond to Reuters’ request for comment outside regular business hours.

The company has previously said that erroneous sensor data fed to the MCAS system was a common link in a chain of events leading to the fatal crashes of a Lion Air 737 Max airliner in Indonesia in October 2018 and an Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max in March 2019, which killed all 346 people aboard the two aircraft.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/29/boeing-omitted-safeguards-on-737-max-that-were-used-on-military-jet.html

[redmark]

Absolute shitshow from Boeing. I'm never getting on some of these unless it was absolutely 100% necessary.
 
 

That's enormous, if other 737 NG types are in doubt.