737 Max

[Graeme H]

On 17/12/2019 at 16:14, EwenS said:

And the “pickle fork” problems with the wing mountings of the 737 NG rumble on.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-boeing-airplanes/cracks-found-on-38-of-810-boeing-737-ng-jets-inspected-globally-idUSKBN1WP2BD

I'm a bit out of all this these days since I retired, but knowing how Boeing doesn't really change everything, just what they want to change or update.

 

So,  does the Max have the same substandard pickle forks?

will Boeing do anything about them before they are sold?

 

Seems like if you have all those airframes sitting around, to just get stuck in and fix them beforehand

maybe way to logical though. 

[NoSG0]

8 hours ago, busnproplinerfan said:

If so, that would be to easy a fix.

Well, from what I have read, yes(I guess) and no.

 

Failed safety analysis. Mr. Gates again.  https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/

 

And finally the fix. I am not sure that they have enough room up front for another (3rd) A0A vane.  People called for a 3 sensor agree/disagree. But shoehorn? So the software fix is it?

 

Are the 16 bit chips nearing saturation?   I dont know.  I am asking. 

 

"The processors in question are said to be Intel 80286 type CPUs. The original Intel version of that CPU, sold between 1982 and 1991, had a maximum clockrate of 4, 6 or 8 MHz. It was later manufactured by a number of other firms, including by AMD and aeronautics company Harris, with a clockrate of 20 and 25 MHz. It is likely that the Boeing 737 FCC uses these or similar types."

 

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/06/boeings-software-fix-for-the-737-max-problem-overwhelms-the-planes-computer.html

 

That is an article from June 2019.  I would sincerely hope that BA has figured out how to increase efficiency

Edited December 30, 2019 by NoSG0

[NoSG0]

7 hours ago, Graeme H said:

I'm a bit out of all this these days since I retired, but knowing how Boeing doesn't really change everything, just what they want to change or update.

 

So,  does the Max have the same substandard pickle forks?

will Boeing do anything about them before they are sold?

 

Seems like if you have all those airframes sitting around, to just get stuck in and fix them beforehand

maybe way to logical though. 

According to this site: https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/faa-expands-boeing-737ng-crack-inspections/135321.article

"The order impacts US-registered 737NGs, including -600, -700, -800 and -900 series aircraft."

 

Puts on Bean counters hat:

 

Bean counter says to manager:

ONLY 38 have failed on the NG.  Why replace them all? Plus they have inspection limits/cycles now! Any cracks will be found in time.  Puts on best I am a  bright person smile!

(The above was JOKE)

 

From what I read on various sites, the pickle forks were expected to be replaced once in the airframe's life span.  According to this site about 60 have been found?

 

https://www.mro-network.com/maintenance-repair-overhaul/new-issue-prompts-expansion-737-‘pickle-fork’-checks

"The initial checks were required within 7 days for aircraft with 30,000 or more flight cycles, and within 1,000 cycles for aircraft with 22,600-29,999 cycles. Repetitive checks are required every 3,500 cycles. About 1,200 aircraft have gone through the original inspections, and cracks have been reported on about 60.

The new directive, which is expected to be adopted by other regulators, calls for aircraft in the high-cycle category to be re-inspected within 60 days. Aircraft in the lower cycle category must re-inspect the entire area within 1,000 cycles. The global NG fleet numbers about 6,300, but only about 25% have enough cycles to fall under the inspection mandate"

 

 

 

[Abandoned Project]

Thank you all who have given their time to research and post on this thread. It is a sober, thought provoking discussion. If I am reading this correctly the 737-MAX8 is as stated earlier an overworked design taken beyond its limits to the point where it is unstable and I think the term used earlier was "fundamentally flawed".

I would say Boeing's biggest and first mistake was fear.

The fear of the competition, Airbus and its products.

The fear of committing to a new design, but from what I have read in different books and on the webnet, that has been a very long term problem (ie; the 747) with Boeing. Also with hindsight it is beginning to like it would have been the cheaper option. Given the current estimates of over $9billion USD to mothball the production that could have been used for developing 1 or 2 new designs.

The fear of upsetting some of its biggest and most loyal customers.

The fear of upsetting shareholders and the stock market (which has always seemed to me to be exceedingly complicated gambling).

It also seems to me that a lack of imagination has crept in to the company, especially when former employees talk of a culture change over 20 years ago.

It is very sad that Boeing and many other big companies think that human lives are just a factor in a risk assessment and that business ethics and moral duty are mutually exclusive with no relation to each other. I am left thinking twice about boarding the TUI 787 I'm supposed to fly on in August 2020 after the stellar review it has had here. Yes, I am aware that the main article of discussion is the 737 but its sibling the 787 has also been mentioned. Possibly I can get me, the good lady and our brood on something Airbus instead.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Abandoned Project

[bzn20]

33 minutes ago, Abandoned Project said:

I would say Boeing's biggest and first mistake was fear

They let go of Flight safety . Capitals because it is a thing , the foundation which everything comes from . It's the only industry (until this and a few things before ) that envelope safety from the start . What's happened is evil , root of all evil , money , disgusting , no knowledge of what they're doing , press on regardless and keep it quiet . Give them a primary system but make it an optional extra to tell the crew what's happening and no back up . They deserve everything that happens to them sooner or later it doesn't matter . 300 ish people died because they couldn't compete with a rival . The 737 MAX-8 is a new type no matter how you look at it . Not only is it nothing like a previous 737 , it's nothing like another plane that's ever been built

We put in software to keep it up and on page 30 tells the crews what to do …..

That's not an answer .

[NoSG0]

I do wonder how engineering and MBA courses will change?  Will they change I wonder?

 

For Engineers

Section 1: How to resist manager/executive pressure

Edited December 30, 2019 by NoSG0

[bzn20]

1 hour ago, NoSG0 said:

How to resist manager/executive pressure

Tell them it doesn't work 1st or health and safety . Once you said it you have to back it up with facts … When they tell you to do something that's wrong … Ask for that in writing . I've still got a signal telling me to do something I wasn't happy with and it went wrong ,although I wasn't there at the time it happened . Still got it ,keeping it . Golden rule number one . Still have it 20 odd years later . Bullet proof

 

Cover your bottom . I didn't type bottom , got software here ! I meant to say arris …. yeah didn't work did it ?

Edited December 30, 2019 by bzn20

[stevehnz]

I wonder if Boeings biggest problem is that they didn't have a CEO with the breadth of vision to see that the 737Max was a short term lash up to fix a long term problem, ie, what was going to be Boeings bread & butter for the next 3 or 4 decades. It is almost as though a few people at the top were keen to see the share price stay up for just long enough for them to cash theirs in & shoot through. I find it hard to see how the road to the current shambles could have been seen as cementing Boeings long term future.

Steve.

[Adam Poultney]

https://aeronewsglobal.com/video-crashed-in-iran-boeing-737-800-ukraine-international-flight-ps752/

Not a MAX but still relevant

[Work In Progress]

Not really: from pics of the debris and eyewitness accounts it seems highly likely that it was shot down

[stalal]

There is no instance of it being shot down. But if you want to sensationalize, thats another thing  

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/business/boeing-iran-crash/index.html

 

Boeing, in order to save money and plan long term, chose to cut corners and add new things to an old airframe. In that effort, they have not only lost more money but most importantly their reputation. 

[bzn20]

6 hours ago, Work In Progress said:

it was shot down

Well , one airline is not liking the details coming from the info collected so far . Lufthansa (and about 7 others are taking action) have cancelled flights to Tehran already .

According to BBC and using (probably) flightradar24 info say the 737 climbed to 4,000 ft and vanished from radar screens , no mention of tracked descending from 4K . The company said plane had just had a servicing , I assume that meant a sched servicing . They all get a BF servicing before take off.

 

Just read on BBC News site that it reached 8.000 feet

Edited January 8, 2020 by bzn20

[Work In Progress]

The final ADS-B data point has it 7925 feet above sea level, about 4600 feet above ground level on climb-out from the airport which is at 3300 feet.

Edited January 8, 2020 by Work In Progress

[NoSG0]

BA released about 100 pages?  Story developing, but when they post this apology, well, I will wait to see what was said.

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2020 by NoSG0

[JohnT]

Internal Boeing emails less than flattering

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51058929

[NoSG0]

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-internal-documents-reveal-culture-of-deceit-to-keep-down-costs-of-737-max/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=article_inset_1.1

 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2020 by NoSG0

[bzn20]

5 hours ago, JohnT said:

Internal Boeing emails less than flattering

I was just about to repeat your link . Mind blowing really . You have to feel sorry for the guys writing them . They know/knew it was all wrong . They've been forced to go against they're knowledge of what is right and just plain wrong and dangerous . Some probably didn't sleep at nights with all the worry of will it all land in their laps .

[NoSG0]

Couple of quotes that stuck out to this user.  I am seeing defenses for BA from forum members about how some of the quotes refer to the SIM etc etc.  Still pilot error etc etc etc.

 

https://www.pprune.org/10659604-post37.html

 

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by NoSG0

[Jure Miljevic]

Hello

A few posts further down the forum there is a part of an e-mail exchange on "Landing Attitude Modifier" and "Elevator Jammed Landing Assist System" and how to circumvent a likely necessity for simulator training to use these two systems. The idea floated was to make such training mandatory on 737 NG. Cheers

Jure

P.S.: #55 ˝... 60 page PhD thesis ...˝.

Edited January 12, 2020 by Jure Miljevic
P.S. added

[bzn20]

On ‎1‎/‎12‎/‎2020 at 2:40 PM, NoSG0 said:

quotes

It's a bag of rats on there usually  . I don't know what their admins do .

But that is interesting .

Edited January 14, 2020 by bzn20

[Max Headroom]

And more problems discovered with the software

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-01-17/new-software-flaw-identified-in-boeing-s-grounded-737-max-jet

 

To make matters worse, the USAF are still making grumblings about the KC-46 and how it isn’t up to the job at the moment.

 

Trevor

[bentwaters81tfw]

Boeing say MAX will not fly until JULY.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7913137/Boeing-doesnt-expect-Max-jet-cleared-summer.html

[Adam Poultney]

So they'll announce the next delay in May? 

Honestly I don't believe anything I hear regarding the RTF out of Boeing anymore. 

 

So since the MAX is a money black hole where did those 2707 plans go..... 🤔

[Alan P]

On 12/30/2019 at 9:29 PM, Abandoned Project said:

I am left thinking twice about boarding the TUI 787 I'm supposed to fly on in August [...] Possibly I can get me, the good lady and our brood on something Airbus instead.

Which just goes to show how thoroughly the public are affected by current news cycles and how quickly they forget.

 

When I started flying, it was the exact opposite because pilots kept losing control of A320s*. (Spoiler: it's still largely the same aeroplane as then, as is the 737) Airbus was equally reluctant to change their design philosophy, equally cosy with the European regulator(s) and equally preoccupied with the competition.

 

My only surprise catching up with this thread again is the perception that any of this is new. It's been going on for decades and thousands of people have paid for it.

 

I believe it's called 'business'.

 

 

*they still do.

[stever219]

2 hours ago, Alan P said:

Which just goes to show how thoroughly the public are affected by current news cycles and how quickly they forget.

 

When I started flying, it was the exact opposite because pilots kept losing control of A320s*. (Spoiler: it's still largely the same aeroplane as then, as is the 737) Airbus was equally reluctant to change their design philosophy, equally cosy with the European regulator(s) and equally preoccupied with the competition.

 

My only surprise catching up with this thread again is the perception that any of this is new. It's been going on for decades and thousands of people have paid for it.

 

I believe it's called 'business'.

 

 

*they still do.

The Airbus jets haven’t been subjected to airframe/power plant/systems changes that have significantly altered the aircraft handling characteristics in certain critical flight regimes that have then required a deliberately-concealed piece of software/hardware which can be disabled by a single failure to correct them.  The Airbus philosophy has been to make the handling of each member of the family as near to that of the others that, whichever jet they are flying, crews can respond instinctively to any given upset without having to go through several pages of the QRH or FCOM to find a nearly-concealed check list.  I’ll concede that this won’t apply to the A220 range at present as that is a “bought in” product with different design philosophies, and may never do if Airbus wants to take advantage of “grandfather rights” as Boeing has done with the 737, possibly the most extreme example of this practice, should the FAA/EASA and other regulatory authorities allow their continued use.