737 Max emergencies
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
737 Max emergencies
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-...robe/101175214
A news article on the numerous incidents and emergencies on 737 Max during in the year of return to service.
What surprises me is the fuel leak in overhead baggage bins. How does that happen? I would have expected the pipes to be located under the cabin.
A news article on the numerous incidents and emergencies on 737 Max during in the year of return to service.
What surprises me is the fuel leak in overhead baggage bins. How does that happen? I would have expected the pipes to be located under the cabin.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: antipodies
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-...robe/101175214
A news article on the numerous incidents and emergencies on 737 Max during in the year of return to service.
What surprises me is the fuel leak in overhead baggage bins. How does that happen? I would have expected the pipes to be located under the cabin.
A news article on the numerous incidents and emergencies on 737 Max during in the year of return to service.
What surprises me is the fuel leak in overhead baggage bins. How does that happen? I would have expected the pipes to be located under the cabin.
good honest people
Yes Boeing and FAA people have shown how very responsible they are so far wrt the big MAX. How dare the ABC ask questions about their honesty and professionalism or imply they may have overlooked some safety issues? Outrageous journalism!
Where are the companison figures for other versions of the 737, or perhaps the A320?
Absolute figures on their own are meaningless.
Absolute figures on their own are meaningless.
There may be a political lean in the reporting here, there is a new start airline in AUS that is based on the Max as their equipment, for better or worse. Aircraft coming out of storage often have dispatch reliability issues, a fleet of them increases the number of events that will occur.
Did Boeing have issues with the production line? That is not limited to the Max, recall the Ducommun ring frame saga, and the manner by which Boeing handled QA concerns raised by the discovering investigators? Those planes still hold C of A's even with the full knowledge by the FAA that the aircraft involved, those early 2000-odd NGs that used those ring frames were not produced consistent with the TCDS, making a primary structural part that is supposed to have been CNC fabricated were made by hand over ad-hoc formers.... then there was the KC version of the B767, the B787 debacle, swarf in fuel tanks, etc. Building planes is an industrial process that takes a lot of QA steps, Boeing has shown it's attitude to QA with most of its product production runs since the takeover of Boeing by the MDD management.
Are Boeings safe? Pretty much, they are not bad aircraft, their lords and masters have driven their reputation into the dirt by their continuous ethical disregard of their engineering heritage. Pretty sure that Joe Sutter would not be amused by the corporate attitude to what was an impressive engineering company. It should be again, but the attitude that has stained the reputation of the brand for the last 25 years seems to be ingrained in all aspects of the enterprise, which is not in the company, the country or the industry's best interests.
The resultant economic advantages of the last 25 years on shareholders is lost on me, I would have thought that a well-run engineering program would have had as good or better outcomes. The takeover of much of the DOD aerospace production and concentration in a company with such ambivalence towards quality. It is a company's right to determine what how they see the value (quality/cost) to customers vs value (short-term return and long-term potential returns) to shareholders, but an imbalance in either direction becomes unsustainable over time.
The Max "quality" problems that are being raised now are curious. The alarming headlines would suggest that there are real problems, however, a look at the actual reports and the rates do not seem to support such alarming headlines.
The Max systems failures (forget MCAS, that is a specific badness that showered embarrassment on many, not just Boeing...) can be expected to have some grounding-related early failure issues, some random ones, and the usual series of age-related issues would be surprising if they didn't. Planes don't like being parked; stuff happens; things get old n' worn.
Would be happy to jump on the bandwagon of beating up Boeing, but, while the production line QA issues still appear to be real issues, they are not related to the operational issues that the latest media frenzy seems to imply are the unfixed Max problems.
The Max had some really bad development processes applied, and the stain from that is real. The Max production QA deems to be as poor as it is with other Boeing production, and the fact that corporate management seems to facilitate that by their style and substance of management is a choice, I think a really bad one, but they are at apparent liberty to do so without the ire of customers resulting in voting with their wallet, or the FAA suspending production approvals for the corporate attitude towards their responsibility. Other than that, the ASRS, event data that is published suggests that birds are having some bad days with planes, that is not news in itself. The LEAP blender should be more accommodating of birdstrike damage from it's inherent design... but they seem to get scheduled into places where birds like to meet n' greet them. Maybe the complaints should be about flight schedules around dusk and dawn, or the lack of effective bird prevention around TO and approach paths. That is itself annoying, there are bird tracking systems for sale, and there are standoff means to disincentivize birds playing chicken with blenders.
Did Boeing have issues with the production line? That is not limited to the Max, recall the Ducommun ring frame saga, and the manner by which Boeing handled QA concerns raised by the discovering investigators? Those planes still hold C of A's even with the full knowledge by the FAA that the aircraft involved, those early 2000-odd NGs that used those ring frames were not produced consistent with the TCDS, making a primary structural part that is supposed to have been CNC fabricated were made by hand over ad-hoc formers.... then there was the KC version of the B767, the B787 debacle, swarf in fuel tanks, etc. Building planes is an industrial process that takes a lot of QA steps, Boeing has shown it's attitude to QA with most of its product production runs since the takeover of Boeing by the MDD management.
Are Boeings safe? Pretty much, they are not bad aircraft, their lords and masters have driven their reputation into the dirt by their continuous ethical disregard of their engineering heritage. Pretty sure that Joe Sutter would not be amused by the corporate attitude to what was an impressive engineering company. It should be again, but the attitude that has stained the reputation of the brand for the last 25 years seems to be ingrained in all aspects of the enterprise, which is not in the company, the country or the industry's best interests.
The resultant economic advantages of the last 25 years on shareholders is lost on me, I would have thought that a well-run engineering program would have had as good or better outcomes. The takeover of much of the DOD aerospace production and concentration in a company with such ambivalence towards quality. It is a company's right to determine what how they see the value (quality/cost) to customers vs value (short-term return and long-term potential returns) to shareholders, but an imbalance in either direction becomes unsustainable over time.
The Max "quality" problems that are being raised now are curious. The alarming headlines would suggest that there are real problems, however, a look at the actual reports and the rates do not seem to support such alarming headlines.
- Engines have had to be shut down.... If that is a surprise, then we have other problems. There has been a number related to lubrication indications, and a few too many for filter bypass, which begs operational and maintenance questions.
- Engine shutdowns have resulted in declared emergencies. And that is considered to be alarming?
- Stab trim motors have failed. They are an electromechanical device...
- Wiring faults have been found. Should be avoidable, but it happens.
- Autopilot pitched down all on its lonesome... Annoying but not Robinson Crusoe...
The Max systems failures (forget MCAS, that is a specific badness that showered embarrassment on many, not just Boeing...) can be expected to have some grounding-related early failure issues, some random ones, and the usual series of age-related issues would be surprising if they didn't. Planes don't like being parked; stuff happens; things get old n' worn.
Would be happy to jump on the bandwagon of beating up Boeing, but, while the production line QA issues still appear to be real issues, they are not related to the operational issues that the latest media frenzy seems to imply are the unfixed Max problems.
The Max had some really bad development processes applied, and the stain from that is real. The Max production QA deems to be as poor as it is with other Boeing production, and the fact that corporate management seems to facilitate that by their style and substance of management is a choice, I think a really bad one, but they are at apparent liberty to do so without the ire of customers resulting in voting with their wallet, or the FAA suspending production approvals for the corporate attitude towards their responsibility. Other than that, the ASRS, event data that is published suggests that birds are having some bad days with planes, that is not news in itself. The LEAP blender should be more accommodating of birdstrike damage from it's inherent design... but they seem to get scheduled into places where birds like to meet n' greet them. Maybe the complaints should be about flight schedules around dusk and dawn, or the lack of effective bird prevention around TO and approach paths. That is itself annoying, there are bird tracking systems for sale, and there are standoff means to disincentivize birds playing chicken with blenders.
The linked article is an example of journalists investigating no further once they have the answer they want.
Here’s some questions that could have been asked:
1. What is the dispatch rate, incident rate, and reliability of the MAX compared with the NG?
2. Same question but expanded to other single-aisle airliners.
3. Were any of the MAX incidents due to systems unique to the MAX (e.g., engine) or were they due to systems common to the MAX and NG?
This past weekend, I put a family member aboard a MAX as I boarded an NG. Five minutes into my flight immersed in the noisy NG cabin, I sure was wishing I was on a MAX.
Here’s some questions that could have been asked:
1. What is the dispatch rate, incident rate, and reliability of the MAX compared with the NG?
2. Same question but expanded to other single-aisle airliners.
3. Were any of the MAX incidents due to systems unique to the MAX (e.g., engine) or were they due to systems common to the MAX and NG?
This past weekend, I put a family member aboard a MAX as I boarded an NG. Five minutes into my flight immersed in the noisy NG cabin, I sure was wishing I was on a MAX.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 839
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Pretty sure that Joe Sutter would not be amused by the corporate attitude to what was an impressive engineering company." (fdr, a few posts above)
While I don't know what his labor relations and negotiations interactions with Mr. Sutter may have been, I do think that if Wm. "Wimpy" Winpisinger were alive today and engaged with the 737 MAX as paradigm for the fall and decline of the once-impressive engineering company, some words might need to be added to this description of the late labor leader: he was "flamboyant, aggressive, radical, blunt, and outspoken." (from a widely available biographical article)
It sometimes seems interesting to ask if younger corporate types, with their fullsome derision of Boomers (the people variety, not the uniformed servicemembers aboard aerial refueling tankers), can effect wrenching change in direction, and performance, in a business such as Boeing. With as bad as the post-merger company has been, I'm about ready to say give the reins over (.... and to advocate for same).
While I don't know what his labor relations and negotiations interactions with Mr. Sutter may have been, I do think that if Wm. "Wimpy" Winpisinger were alive today and engaged with the 737 MAX as paradigm for the fall and decline of the once-impressive engineering company, some words might need to be added to this description of the late labor leader: he was "flamboyant, aggressive, radical, blunt, and outspoken." (from a widely available biographical article)
It sometimes seems interesting to ask if younger corporate types, with their fullsome derision of Boomers (the people variety, not the uniformed servicemembers aboard aerial refueling tankers), can effect wrenching change in direction, and performance, in a business such as Boeing. With as bad as the post-merger company has been, I'm about ready to say give the reins over (.... and to advocate for same).
If you are an engineering company you need engineering leaders. Including the ones that get to define program schedules, budgets and targeted margins. They bent over too far towards Wall St.
Last edited by beardy; 28th Jun 2022 at 12:32.
I agree that it is an unbalanced article, that does not nullify the meaning of absolute figures, it just shows poor journalism.
There are roughly 1,000 737 MAX aircraft currently in service - a certain number of shutdowns and grounded aircraft would be expected for a fleet that size.
Heck, even GT would have got that one right ...
“Heck, even GT would have got that one right ... “
Assumes facts not in evidence.😎
The ABC does have some fine journalists, but of course not all of them are. The story as written is a beat-up, something they learned from the Murdoch press.
“Assumes facts not in evidence.😎
The ABC does have some fine journalists, but of course not all of them are. The story as written is a beat-up, something they learned from the Murdoch press.
Chief Bottle Washer
And with that summary I think the topic is done and dusted 🤔👍
