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

[clearedtocross]

There is another strong reason why B tries to coax the FAA to lift the grounding before the end of the year. Looking at their public 3rd quarter financial statement, they obviously booked all the undelivered aircraft fully as inventories. Now the financial year is closing soon and they have to produce a full report on the business year 2019. I doubt that any public company is allowed to add nearly 400 undelivered aircraft at the full sales price to their inventories when they are not airworthy at the time of the statement. That would probably provoke more then just a letter from the SEC. And the effect on the balance sheet of even a small value deduction on those aircraft not complying with regulations would be abysmal.

[OldnGrounded]

Originally Posted by Icarus2001

They did receive help from a couple of crews and some shoddy installation of a vane completed at the level of a neanderthal.

However true that may be, it has little to no impact on public and international regulator confidence in Boeing and its safety culture, and it may end up having little impact on customer and shareholder confidence, as well.

[OldnGrounded]

Originally Posted by clearedtocross

There is another strong reason why B tries to coax the FAA to lift the grounding before the end of the year. Looking at their public 3rd quarter financial statement, they obviously booked all the undelivered aircraft fully as inventories. Now the financial year is closing soon and they have to produce a full report on the business year 2019. I doubt that any public company is allowed to add nearly 400 undelivered aircraft at the full sales price to their inventories when they are not airworthy at the time of the statement. That would probably provoke more then just a letter from the SEC. And the effect on the balance sheet of even a small value deduction on those aircraft not complying with regulations would be abysmal.

Yup. The markets would not be happy. And it seems increasingly unlikely that the FAA will lift the grounding in the next . . . 25 days.

[fergusd]

Originally Posted by Icarus2001

They did receive help from a couple of crews and some shoddy installation of a vane completed at the level of a neanderthal.

Two crews who should not have been exposed to such a shonky control system design and a vane problem which should not have upset said shonky control system

Boeing are the ones with blood on their hands.

It is inconcievable that Boeing did not know this was a game of hand grenade juggling, no matter the lies and spin and BS they are using to try to wriggle out of it. A chimpanzee with a days training in control system safety would know this.

The FAA, similarly, are clearly incompetent. Perhaps they will take their role seriously, perhaps not, but it is clear that they, also, cannot be trusted.

This whole farce makes the aviaton industry a laughing stock in other safety critical industries . . . poor, piss poor.

What else is being hidden, there is absolutely no chance this is the only lethal shortcut that has been taken . . .

Fd

[Water pilot]

A cynical person might wonder if Boeing was just saying stuff to keep the price afloat until the insiders could legally sell. Like everything else in this strange and tragic saga, making an announcement about a specific time that you expect an independent government agency over which you supposedly have no control to give you an approval is just bizarre. It is completely outside of my experience of acceptable corporate behavior, but maybe after Enron I shouldn't be as surprised as I am,

That Boeing gets away with it says something about how messed up things are here.

[JPcont]

Originally Posted by GlobalNav

Typical. Boeing cites delay in approval for its change in production rate.

Kind of like saying it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop.

The Boeing fall is ALL theirs to own. Good that someone puts an end to that fall.

For me, it is a mystery, why don’t MAX fly. It has to be some political inside the company. In physical/mathematical world the alternative facts are not useful. If theory is right, it predicts the phenomenon. Fighting against wind mills might need bravery but it is stupid. In this case stupidity is expensive.

In this case, a control law competing with the pilot was implemented to augment stick forces (for stall preventing purposes). To some extent, the competition is justified, but from control theory perspective, it leads potentially to a situation where stronger wins. If the system just adds the stick force and it could be turned off, major harm could be avoided. If the system spoils the aerodynamics for longer period the is needed to recovery, the system is brain damaged.

In the Boing, they must have known for a long time that they have a brain damaged system that is very hard to fix. Even I wrote it in this thread after second accident. For some reason they have denied the hard truth and wasted valuable time.

Nowadays people are speaking about augmented reality and similar topics. In this case augmented force to stick would probable solve the problem but they have chosen to change the reality (at least in couple of meaning of it) .

Somebody should stop this stupidity and admit the false design rules. I bet the problem could be fixed relatively soon after someone start to think out of the tiny box and stops shooting the messenger.

[DJ 11]

For understanding the again and again

delayed recertification, one has to go back to the time right after the second crash. The first question was: How could MCAS rely on one single sensor?

After a few months it became clear that the old flight computer could not handle the input of two sensors. The workaround meant combining the two flight computers for reading both aoa sensors.
While this gives some failsave for the sensors, it eliminates any backup for the flight computer, since there are only two of them and in combined use they count as one without any failsave.

So with the current hardware there just is no way of getting a certifiable MCAS. The Canadians are on the right track, because dumping MCAS and certifying the Max as a new plane is the only way to get it in the air. I know, that this takes time, training and money, but it might save lives and jobs.

[PHDracing]

The stock flies even if the planes don't

I know there are only a few days until the end of the quarter and maybe that will bring a reckoning.....But I remain impressed (or amazed) at the strength of BA stock.
Close today at $354....Give this company some good news.....like the Max will fly again......and this stock will run!

What do the Pros say? Well, Reuters, Ned Davis, Morningstar, Credit Suisse, etc....all are "neutral" for BA's future.......With people like Market Edge Second Opinion saying to Buy and hold for the long term!

Of the other hand.....Charlie Schwab gives them a rating of F. STRONGLY UNDERPERFORM.....Charlies lowest rating.

I wouldn't touch them with "your money".....but I am impressed at how strong the stock is.... considering all the bad news. IF and that's a might big IF.....you believe they will straighten out and fly right........
This could be a nice play.

[Bend alot]

Originally Posted by Icarus2001

They did receive help from a couple of crews and some shoddy installation of a vane completed at the level of a neanderthal.

Was it intentional to leave out the the "serviceable" vane was supplied shoddy from a very shoddy FAA approved repair station, recently closed by the FAA after a long history of shoddy practices - not picked up by the FAA or other companies that would have been auditing the repair shop?

[jdawg]

Originally Posted by Bend alot

Was it intentional to leave out the the "serviceable" vane was supplied shoddy from a very shoddy FAA approved repair station, recently closed by the FAA after a long history of shoddy practices - not picked up by the FAA or other companies that would have been auditing the repair shop?

Regardless. The bird strike ET experienced could have killed any of your loved ones just as easy. This has nothing to do with bad parts and everything to do with insane engineering concepts.

[CurtainTwitcher]

Originally Posted by PHDracing

I wouldn't touch them with "your money".....but I am impressed at how strong the stock is.... considering all the bad news. IF and that's a might big IF.....you believe they will straighten out and fly right........
This could be a nice play.

I suggest you go back to my post #3775 and read the two articles by Ben Hunt, then you will understand the financial momentum behind Boeing (hint, stock buybacks).

[Peter H]

Originally Posted by Bend alot

Was it intentional to leave out the the "serviceable" vane was supplied shoddy from a very shoddy FAA approved repair station, recently closed by the FAA after a long history of shoddy practices - not picked up by the FAA or other companies that would have been auditing the repair shop?

Perhaps appropriate to mention that one of the problems with the Challenger shuttle was that the booster sections were
often distorted, and the "official" way to "make good" didn't always work. If maintenance is given orders, but has no way
of raising problems ...




The fuller story can be seen at: https://tinyurl.com/tjlpdbw

[etudiant]

Originally Posted by PHDracing

I know there are only a few days until the end of the quarter and maybe that will bring a reckoning.....But I remain impressed (or amazed) at the strength of BA stock.
Close today at $354....Give this company some good news.....like the Max will fly again......and this stock will run!

What do the Pros say? Well, Reuters, Ned Davis, Morningstar, Credit Suisse, etc....all are "neutral" for BA's future.......With people like Market Edge Second Opinion saying to Buy and hold for the long term!

Of the other hand.....Charlie Schwab gives them a rating of F. STRONGLY UNDERPERFORM.....Charlies lowest rating.

I wouldn't touch them with "your money".....but I am impressed at how strong the stock is.... considering all the bad news. IF and that's a might big IF.....you believe they will straighten out and fly right........
This could be a nice play.

Aviation is a direct beneficiary of the current free money craze. Financing airplanes gets a positive yield and tax benefits, while regulatory scrutiny ensures that the assets are adequately maintained. That is almost impossible to find elsewhere.
So Boeing and Airbus will continue to flourish as long as Fed Chairman Powell keeps pumping the money. Once the music stops, that will change, but for now, even the MAX issues can't stop the dance.

[WHBM]

Originally Posted by OldnGrounded

Yup. The markets would not be happy. And it seems increasingly unlikely that the FAA will lift the grounding in the next . . . 25 days.

I have commented on this before, it is almost as if Wall Street cannot see that the Boeing balance sheet, instead of having $10bn of cash in it, looks pretty much the same but has $10bn of Stock & Inventory with a poor public record instead. I wonder if they are depreciating their value, and if not why not. There have been issues before with major US companies having inventory in the accounts at supposedly full sales value when in fact it is obsolete.

I believe the cash shortfall in the year is actually going to be roughly the same as Boeing was going to spend on "buying back" some of their shares, which is a device to make the lesser number of remaining shares worth more. Not doing that ought to knock the stock value back as well.

The SEC must surely also look at the multiple public pronouncements made by Boeing about imminent re-entry dates, all of which to date have proved groundless.

[Bend alot]

Originally Posted by jdawg

Regardless. The bird strike ET experienced could have killed any of your loved ones just as easy. This has nothing to do with bad parts and everything to do with insane engineering concepts.

Any evidence for that bird strike ET had?

Bad part was certainly a contributing factor and Neanderthal type work is not limited to African countries.

While the engineering concept of the MAX is very poor, the intentional secrecy of MCAS and the changes that had to be made for the system to work was a larger part of "everything".

If the system was known, key information given (pulling back on the stick no longer his the cut out switches guys), correct training given - we probably would not be talking about the MAX now. But it was too important for the MAX to be just an NG.

Are Boeing still doing lots of flight testing in the MAX?

[jimtx]

Originally Posted by Bend alot

Any evidence for that bird strike ET had?


Bad part was certainly a contributing factor and Neanderthal type work is not limited to African countries.


While the engineering concept of the MAX is very poor, the intentional secrecy of MCAS and the changes that had to be made for the system to work was a larger part of "everything".


If the system was known, key information given (pulling back on the stick no longer his the cut out switches guys), correct training given - we probably would not be talking about the MAX now. But it was too important for the MAX to be just an NG.


Are Boeing still doing lots of flight testing in the MAX?

What "intentional secrecy" are you referencing. I think the use of MCAS was not hidden from anyone. Boeing (Chief Technical Pilot Forkner) appears to have put it in the Brazilian certifying authority's list of differences and maybe it showed up in some other states differences. Did it not show up in the FAA list of differences because of secrecy or because Boeing and the FAA thought the pencil whip in a rarely visited flight regime was not worth mentioning? But the later expansion of the MCAS envelope does raise questions about who knew what and who was told about that. But my question is whether the training, category B and referenced in their differences certification, that should/would have been given to the Brazilian pilots flying the MAX would have been sufficient for them to deal with the two accident conditions. What training was that?

Off this topic observation: Unless there is a real surprise in the MAX's handling I agree with the Canadian authority. MCAS should turned off. And I was saying this before the Canadians did.

[OldnGrounded]

Originally Posted by WHBM

The SEC must surely also look at the multiple public pronouncements made by Boeing about imminent re-entry dates, all of which to date have proved groundless.

Yes. If it wasn't already obvious, the fact that the FAA has recently felt compelled to make it clear that they haven't given any such assurances should be enough to awaken any sleepy securities watchdogs. And if the share price starts heading south, shareholders will be prodding the SEC guys awake with sharp sticks.

[OldnGrounded]

Originally Posted by jimtx

Off this topic observation: Unless there is a real surprise in the MAX's handling I agree with the Canadian authority. MCAS should turned off. And I was saying this before the Canadians did.

The list of folks who want to know how the MAX behaves in those questionable corners of the envelope, without MCAS, is pretty long, now. Perhaps we will learn.

[jimjim1]

Originally Posted by Bend alot

Any evidence for that bird strike ET had?

There is evidence that the AoA sensor behaved in a way consistent with the loss or disconnection of the external vane as the aircraft was subjected to +ve and -ve vertical acceleration during the event.

The data is in the Ethiopian preliminary report FDR charts.

Details here on pprune:-
Ethiopian airliner down in Africa

I think that some official source has attributed that loss to a bird strike but I am not sure.

[MechEngr]

Originally Posted by Bend alot

Any evidence for that bird strike ET had?

Bad part was certainly a contributing factor and Neanderthal type work is not limited to African countries.

While the engineering concept of the MAX is very poor, the intentional secrecy of MCAS and the changes that had to be made for the system to work was a larger part of "everything".

If the system was known, key information given (pulling back on the stick no longer his the cut out switches guys), correct training given - we probably would not be talking about the MAX now. But it was too important for the MAX to be just an NG.

Are Boeing still doing lots of flight testing in the MAX?

All of that information was made available to Ethiopian Airlines prior to the crash and the Ethiopian pilots, the management, and Ethiopia's CAA all knew what training the pilots had. Since the plane was developed according to the requests of the customer base, the responability for it to be similar to the NG lies with those spending the money to buy them.

Blaming a single hole for the entire mess ignores the potential for another similar problem leading to similar results. Fix all the holes.