Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures

Old 23rd Oct 2019, 19:19
  #3381 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: leftcoast
Posts: 3
And we have this new bridge . .

seattle times oct 23 11 AM

selected extracts

Profits slashed and costs rising, Boeing CEO holds firm: MAX to fly again by year end

Calling the crisis “a defining moment for Boeing” Muilenburg said “We have changed from this and will continue changing.”

He said Boeing has completed the software redesign of the flight control system — known as the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) — that went wrong on both crash flights in Indonesia and Ethiopia and has conducted more than 800 flights with the updated software.

Boeing has hosted flight simulator sessions with more than 545 pilots representing airline customers and regulators to give them hands-on experience of the revised flight controls.

And Muilenburg said Boeing has made “steady progress” with a second software update that adds redundancy to all the flight control systems by routing them through both flight control computers instead of using only one of the computers on any given flight.

“In the upcoming days, Boeing will complete additional testing of this software update and conduct multiple simulator reviews,” Muilenburg said.

Last week, he added, Boeing performed a successful dry run of the certification flight test that the Federal Aviation Administration will conduct prior to granting final approval for the MAX to re-enter passenger service.

He said Boeing now assumes that it will get regulatory approval for the 737 MAX’s return to service by the end of the year and that it will gradually increase the 737 production rate next year.

However, Muilenburg spoke of a “phased approach,” with foreign regulators possibly granting approval later than the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the U.S.

“Timing may vary by jurisdiction,” he said.
Grebe is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2019, 19:39
  #3382 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far West Wessex
Posts: 2,543
I believe that the issue has always been that a longer gear - absent telescoping features, which nobody really likes - means moving the gear attach points outwards, and a new center section. At the start of the 737-300 program, that was ruled out: the team had been told to find something to do with the 737, at a point when Seattle was doing the 757 and 767 in parallel. (That wasn't the original intent - the plan was for the 757 to be a mishmash of 727 parts, a new British-funded wing and the RB.211-535 engine.) Even so, widening the gear might also have meant moving the engines outboard, at which time you had a new airplane.
LowObservable is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2019, 20:37
  #3383 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 102
Just a guess, but if Boeing can get out of this mess by changes that would require a separate MAX type rating, they would jump at the opportunity. In other words, delete or diminish MCAS, accept the difference in stick forces at high AOA and move on.
Lake1952 is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2019, 20:48
  #3384 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Rocket City
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by OldnGrounded View Post
Yes, I know -- from experience. OTOH, some companies (sometimes) understand when decisions really should be engineering-driven. Not least because, in the longer term, profits, and more, may depend upon doing that way. The MAX appears to be an example of a failure to understand that.
Seems to happen more in smaller companies, particularly when lead by engineers (like the semiconductor company I was once with).
As they grow, business (MBA) type and marketing get more and more control.

But I've seen many products that started as good ideas ruined when marketing got involved and started dictating features and other design constraints in a supposed effort to increase marketability.


ST Dog is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2019, 22:55
  #3385 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: YARM
Age: 70
Posts: 118
FYI - from someone on the call :

Boeing no longer accepts questions on its CEO teleconference calls from newspaper reporters

In the 105-minute call, journalists got less than 7 minutes. Only three wire service reporters were called upon
No NYT
No WSJ
No Seattle Times
Looks like a new, not very smart policy
unworry is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2019, 23:17
  #3386 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: leftcoast
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by unworry View Post
FYI - from someone on the call :



Looks like a new, not very smart policy
Circling the wagons now turning into a circular firing squad
Today on Cavuto fox news was an interview with a couple who lost their daughter on the ethopia crash. They sincerely want the whole boeing board and the rersponsible managers and the matching FAA types gone and replaced with competent- honest people - and also commented about the change from DER to ODA and Barami (sp)

Also commented about the FAA ignoring certain other agencies and recommendations
Grebe is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 00:02
  #3387 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 701
Originally Posted by unworry View Post
FYI - from someone on the call :

Boeing no longer accepts questions on its CEO teleconference calls from newspaper reporters

In the 105-minute call, journalists got less than 7 minutes. Only three wire service reporters were called upon
No NYT
No WSJ
No Seattle Times
Looks like a new, not very smart policy


Or maybe "very not smart." I wonder who told them that was a good idea.
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 00:28
  #3388 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: On the Ground
Posts: 153
The same kinds of lawyers that told Forkner to take the fifth.
Takwis is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 00:39
  #3389 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Under the radar, over the rainbow
Posts: 701
Originally Posted by Takwis View Post
The same kinds of lawyers that told Forkner to take the fifth.
It's a different situation. Any competent defense lawyer would advise a client at risk of criminal charges not to provide testimony (or documents if they are, effectively, "testimonial"). On the other hand, corporate executives on an earnings call would have to be pretty close to brain-dead not to know that not taking questions from the three most important media organizations (in the current context) will almost certainly result in serious suspicion -- which isn't likely to help its already-shaky stock price.

Last edited by OldnGrounded; 24th Oct 2019 at 00:51. Reason: Typo
OldnGrounded is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 03:36
  #3390 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Not far away
Posts: 40
Any chance they’ll scrap the Max and start again?
Mr Google Head is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 05:37
  #3391 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 507
Originally Posted by Mr Google Head View Post
Any chance they’ll scrap the Max and start again?
Sure, but not much chance that Boeing could afford or likely survive with the liability already burdened with.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 07:28
  #3392 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: EDSP
Posts: 216
After they piled up as many undelivered aeroplanes as they delivered before the grounding?



Found that slide involuntarily comical. Let's hope for them they used another definition of "manageable" than lately.
BDAttitude is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 09:10
  #3393 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 322
As I always understood regarding the 737 MAX design back in the days on the drawing board was that the 737 MLG undercarriage area and the space could not be enlarged, hence the only option was to heighten the NG, and move the new type of engines upwards and forward of the wing, which has lead us to where we are today...

This is now a rather sorry and sad state of affairs, where using Grandfather rights of an old Boeing design from the 1960's has shown up serious flaws and weaknesses in trying to piggy back a massive new design on an old air frame, basically on the ''cheap'' - In the process has ended up killing almost 350 passengers and crews in two brand new planes that dived into the ground, leaving the future of the project in serious doubt as to how the aircraft if, or when it is permitted to fly passengers again will be branded.

Is the 737 MAX product name tarnished?
TUI UK Holidays and Flights have removed any reference on their web pages that they have or had, any 737 MAX in their fleet.
Ryanair's brand new fleet grounded at Boeing's factory awaiting delivery, has had the word 'MAX' painted out, and now shows Boeing 737-8 200 on their noses.

DaveReid - Yes I note the front air-stairs seem to be a Ryanair option fitted - thanks.
I think they maybe one of the only MAX customers to have chosen them?

Last edited by rog747; 24th Oct 2019 at 09:45.
rog747 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 09:35
  #3394 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 694
Changing the gear for something longer would mean to change the gear bays. That would lead to some different wing structure requiring some new wing ending the grandfathering concept.
Less Hair is online now  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 14:19
  #3395 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: 8th floor
Posts: 0
Boeing wants it to fly, but travelers fear the 737 MAX

From the article:

Just 19 percent of business travelers and 14 percent of leisure travelers would willingly take the 737 MAX within six months of returning to the sky, according to an Atmosphere survey.

Nearly half of the 2,000 respondents said they would pay more to avoid the MAX.

Faced with this distrust, airlines are adapting.

"We will be transparent -- and communicate in advance -- with our customers who are booked to fly on a MAX aircraft, will rebook those who do not want to fly on a MAX at no charge, and for some time will not swap aircraft to a MAX if a change of aircraft is required," said a spokesperson at United Airlines, which owns 14 MAX aircraft.

[...]

According to Harteveldt, half of business passengers and 55 percent of leisure passengers consider Boeing to be "irresponsible," "arrogant" and "unsafe."

[...]

If Boeing can take comfort in anything, it may be that most travelers do not look up which jet they will fly when booking tickets.
MemberBerry is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 15:52
  #3396 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: On a good day - at sea
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by ST Dog View Post
But I've seen many products that started as good ideas ruined when marketing got involved and started dictating features and other design constraints in a supposed effort to increase marketability.
Don't fool yourelf. Ignorance and over confidence are a lethal combination and there are many engineers and pilots who would sell their grandmothers if it got them a promotion.
nnc0 is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 15:52
  #3397 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,437
Originally Posted by MemberBerry View Post
If Boeing can take comfort in anything, it may be that most travelers do not look up which jet they will fly when booking tickets.
Unless that "do not" changes to "used not to, before the 737 MAX returned to service".

I have been in the habit of noting the aircraft type out of mild curiosity after I've bought the ticket. If the 737 MAX returns to service I'll be checking before purchase. And if Ryanair, as rumoured, end up calling it something else and leaving out the MAX word, well, that's just another reason not to choose Ryanair.
Gertrude the Wombat is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 15:55
  #3398 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 396
Checking out the type of aircraft prior to purchase is at best limited as the airline has the option of changing the aircraft type / gauge if they wish after your purchase. There is no guarantee of aircraft type in the purchase contract / tariff.
Longtimer is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 16:34
  #3399 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 694
Even before the grounding some people filtered their searches on kayak for non-MAX flights.

Last edited by Less Hair; 24th Oct 2019 at 16:47.
Less Hair is online now  
Old 24th Oct 2019, 19:04
  #3400 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 67
Posts: 222
Approaching, Oct. 30

From WSJ today, "Ex-Boeing Pilot Cited MAX Pressure":
"Boeing has tried for months to interview Mr. Forkner about what he meant in the messages, a person familiar with the company’s internal review of the matter said."
Taking a step back from the first reactions and gut impressions of the information in this article as well as the several previously reported articles, there's an aspect which either is quite troubling, or very likely to attract keen questioning in next week's congressional hearings -- or both.
How could this level of big aerospace giant business corporation not have and operate a thorough system for receiving, tracking, documenting, preserving, and otherwise providing a platform for addressing (in other words, resolving, where appropriate) safety and regulatory compliance concerns? In today's (poor English) vernacular "I get it" that the MAX program was a banana peel on a well-oiled floor sprinkled with very small ball bearings, but to not already be thoroughly conversant with what the chief technical pilot was thinking?
I hope - and it pains me greatly to be forced by my attorney sense (or, if I have any, or any left) to say this about the q&a next week - but I hope the questions by committee members or counsel or both drill and drill with relentless focus into the exact structure, documentation, and "org chart" accountabilities of the internal communication system for safety and regulatory compliance concerns. Year by year and quarter by quarter if necessary. Every change in any of its significant or major components or operations. Examples - if any (and oh yeah that hurts to say too) - of such concerns being reported, handled properly, and leading to resolution, year-year etc.
One million Smackers per copy if Southwest needed more training, is their contract. Getting to this level of mega-depo with the Boeing people on the Hill might help the SWAPA in their case - but if I was advising the Hill committee chairmen I'd advise them to get the subpoenas drafted right da*n now - if Boeing so much as breathes "privilege for attorney-client communications" on these particular subject matters - - - straight into United States District Court.
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.