Boeing 737 Max - Page 34
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 34 of 42 FirstFirst ... 243233343536 ... LastLast
Results 661 to 680 of 840

Thread: Boeing 737 Max

  1. #661
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,635
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    761

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    It'd be a nice change if in your posts you figured out which side of the fence you're on.
    People with a mind don't have to choose sides. They can decide for themselves what they think about individual issues.

    You might try it sometime.

  2. Likes Mrs Clarke, fusker liked this post
  3. #662
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1123
    Likes (Received)
    5022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    No, sounds like the FAA finally decided to do its job, like they should have done in the first place, and came up with a bunch of unlikely scenarios that could theoretically happen. Notice that nothing like this has occurred in Real Life.

    But that IS their job. What they get paid for, as it were.

    You run machines, I take it ? And you've never ever made a mistake ?

    If Boeing had a history of producing shit and lying about it, I could understand the antagonism here.

    But they don't.
    I made loads of mistakes in my time but I don't ever recall a machine making a mistake for me.

    I've not got a beef against Boeing or any other aircraft manufacturer. Given I fly reasonably often I'm just uneasy with the way computers seem to be taking over more of the process of flying than I'm comfortable with.

    It's like the latest tumbledrier I bought recently. I can turn it on and off with my phone. Will I ever do that - No, because the phone can't load and unload the drier. Just more things to go wrong. But some bozo thought it was a good idea.

    Regards Tyrone.

  4. #663
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    2,997
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1546
    Likes (Received)
    1036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    I made loads of mistakes in my time but I don't ever recall a machine making a mistake for me.

    I've not got a beef against Boeing or any other aircraft manufacturer. Given I fly reasonably often I'm just uneasy with the way computers seem to be taking over more of the process of flying than I'm comfortable with.

    It's like the latest tumbledrier I bought recently. I can turn it on and off with my phone. Will I ever do that - No, because the phone can't load and unload the drier. Just more things to go wrong. But some bozo thought it was a good idea.

    Regards Tyrone.
    +1.
    And as for your tumble drier, I bet marketing stats show that "thanks to the phone integration option, we've sold another one"...

  5. #664
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1123
    Likes (Received)
    5022

    Default

    Can I just add that none of my many mistakes over the years ended up killing anyone. I hope I'm not being overly dramatic here when I say anybody on machine maintenance has the safety and lives of their fellow workers in their hands some of the time.

    Regards Tyrone.

  6. #665
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    California
    Posts
    1,528
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    969
    Likes (Received)
    882

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    That is what they get paid for.
    If not why do we taxpayers need them on our payroll.
    Bob
    So you don't think Boeing should have caught this before the FAA?

    So what happens if Boeing doesn't test every scanerio, then the FAA does a substandard review and misses a few aspects of the planes flight hardware they the FAA (and Boeing) should have caught.

    Two planes crash, that's what happens.

  7. Likes JoeE. liked this post
  8. #666
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California, Central Coast
    Posts
    3,154
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2119
    Likes (Received)
    1225

    Default

    Reminds me of this old '90's comparison of cars and computers.
    "What if microsft made airplanes" seems to be more current?

    At a computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated that “If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1000 mi/gal.”

    Recently General Motors addressed this comment by releasing the statement: “Yes, but would you want your car to crash twice a day?”

    IF MICROSOFT BUILT CARS…..

    -Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
    -Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
    -Occasionally, executing a maneuver would cause your car to stop and fail and you would have to re-install the engine. For some strange reason, you would accept this too.
    -You could only have one person in the car at a time unless you bought “Car95” or “CarNT”. But, then you would have to buy more seats.
    -New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
    -Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast, twice as easy to drive – but would only run on 5 percent of the roads.
    -The Macintosh car owners would get expensive Microsoft upgrades to their cars, which would make their cars run much slower.
    -The oil, gas and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single “general car default” warning light.
    -The airbag system would say “are you sure?” before going off.
    -If you were involved in a crash, you would have no idea what happened.

  9. #667
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California, Central Coast
    Posts
    3,154
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2119
    Likes (Received)
    1225

    Default

    On a more serious note:

    Federal prosecutors have subpoenaed records from Boeing relating to the production of the 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina, where there have been allegations of shoddy work, according to two sources familiar with the investigation.

    The subpoena was issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ), the sources said. DOJ is also conducting a criminal investigation into the certification and design of the 737 MAX after two deadly crashes of that jetliner.

    The 787 subpoena significantly widens the scope of the DOJ’s scrutiny of safety issues at Boeing.
    More at link:
    DOJ probe expands beyond Boeing 737 MAX, includes 787 Dreamliner | The Seattle Times

  10. Likes JoeE. liked this post
  11. #668
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    peekskill, NY
    Posts
    24,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    The wages of sin is death.
    Apparently - for passengers in boeing aircraft.

  12. #669
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    4,626
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2126
    Likes (Received)
    3917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    The wages of sin is death.
    Quote Originally Posted by jim rozen View Post
    Apparently - for passengers in boeing aircraft.
    Theologically speaking - the death referred to here is spiritual death not physical death and has no bearing on the problem being discussed at all.

    We do a fair bit of work for Boeing and I have relatives (engineers) who work for Boeing in their military business unit. Boeing is like every other company in the world that employs people from the vast spectrum of candidates that are fairly well represented by the posters on this forum.

    As far as customers go - stringent quality standards for all suppliers and the follow up on the commercial side as far as our experience goes is top notch. We don't make parts that fly, but we make machines that make parts and test parts that fly.

    Emanuel Goldstein is correct that the problem with the specific failure of a system on one of the aircraft was known, logged, and properly switched off by an experienced pilot the day before the same problem was improperly handled by a less experienced crew who died as a result. The fact that the plane was not grounded at that time is another mistake that betrays a lack of training and careless regard for safety on the airline company's part.

    From a design standpoint, the issue that should receive priority is that it was a single point failure that resulted in the failure of a critical system.

    From an operational standpoint, this failure combined with a lack of training and experience resulted in the loss of life.

    Going forward, not only does this system need to be corrected (presently being done by Boeing), but also, the manner in which the design was arrived at in the first place needs to be solved . . . which in my estimation is the larger problem given societal changes over the last generation where bean counters, HR, quarterly stock prices, and international trade negotiations all directly influence or vie for decision rights related to a myriad of topics and people lose sight of (or are incapable of comprehending) basic things like the safety of the products that are being produced.

    The same is true for the airline operators - training is expensive and less costly training was requested. I don't think this is surprising at all given the priorities that most everyone seems to have these days which are predominantly setting up outcomes to benefit self rather than others.

  13. #670
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1123
    Likes (Received)
    5022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob F. View Post
    Reminds me of this old '90's comparison of cars and computers.
    "What if microsft made airplanes" seems to be more current?

    At a computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated that “If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving twenty-five dollar cars that got 1000 mi/gal.”

    Recently General Motors addressed this comment by releasing the statement: “Yes, but would you want your car to crash twice a day?”

    IF MICROSOFT BUILT CARS…..

    -Every time they repainted the lines on the road you would have to buy a new car.
    -Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason, and you would just accept this, restart and drive on.
    -Occasionally, executing a maneuver would cause your car to stop and fail and you would have to re-install the engine. For some strange reason, you would accept this too.
    -You could only have one person in the car at a time unless you bought “Car95” or “CarNT”. But, then you would have to buy more seats.
    -New seats would force everyone to have the same size butt.
    -Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast, twice as easy to drive – but would only run on 5 percent of the roads.
    -The Macintosh car owners would get expensive Microsoft upgrades to their cars, which would make their cars run much slower.
    -The oil, gas and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single “general car default” warning light.
    -The airbag system would say “are you sure?” before going off.
    -If you were involved in a crash, you would have no idea what happened.
    Who was it said " Computers are roughly where motor cars were in about 1914 " ? This was about ten years ago.

    Regards Tyrone.

  14. #671
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Country
    SPAIN
    Posts
    2,997
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1546
    Likes (Received)
    1036

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motion guru View Post

    Going forward, not only does this system need to be corrected (presently being done by Boeing), but also, the manner in which the design was arrived at in the first place needs to be solved . . . which in my estimation is the larger problem given societal changes over the last generation where bean counters, HR, quarterly stock prices, and international trade negotiations all directly influence or vie for decision rights related to a myriad of topics and people lose sight of (or are incapable of comprehending) basic things like the safety of the products that are being produced.
    When I had my business, we were a Tier 1 supplier to aircraft instrumentation companies - cockpit, controls, flight data and recorder.
    Over the years, there has been a marked shift in what I call the general lowering of standards, and what you've written has completely nailed it on the head.

  15. #672
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    7,500
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    371
    Likes (Received)
    6278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by triumph406 View Post
    So you don't think Boeing should have caught this before the FAA?

    So what happens if Boeing doesn't test every scanerio, then the FAA does a substandard review and misses a few aspects of the planes flight hardware they the FAA (and Boeing) should have caught.

    Two planes crash, that's what happens.
    Of course I think Boeing should have found it but it is not a perfect world.
    That is why we have the FAA as a second check.
    Here both level one and level two failed.(and perhaps level three at the airline itself)

    As such failures are rare upper management gets complacent and places time frame as important.
    Not to mention they don't see the pay value of these people who cry over every detail. In larger companies being this guy does not work out so well for your career and at some point you just give up or quit.
    So you end up with not so great pay, a push to get it through and some lack of training which all comes together here.
    Bob

  16. Likes JoeE. liked this post
  17. #673
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1123
    Likes (Received)
    5022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    Of course I think Boeing should have found it but it is not a perfect world.
    That is why we have the FAA as a second check.
    Here both level one and level two failed.(and perhaps level three at the airline itself)

    As such failures are rare upper management gets complacent and places time frame as important.
    Not to mention they don't see the pay value of these people who cry over every detail. In larger companies being this guy does not work out so well for your career and at some point you just give up or quit.
    So you end up with not so great pay, a push to get it through and some lack of training which all comes together here.
    Bob
    Been there, seen that Bob. Finishing machines on site, painting them the back of the truck. Telling the police that the low loader is on it's way when they've got streets blocked off with mobile cranes in place. Knowing all along the machine is still being worked on in the shop two hours drive away. Took the bulb out of the flashing warning light and stuffed a rag in the bell of an overloaded mobile crane ! Yeah done that, got the tee shirt.

    It may come as a shock to the home shop guys on here but that's what happens in the big, wide world !

    Regards Tyrone.

  18. Likes fusker liked this post
  19. #674
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    peekskill, NY
    Posts
    24,178
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by motion guru View Post
    ...the death referred to here is spiritual death not physical death ....
    Except for the initial presenting symptom of this debacle. Physical death, lots of.

  20. #675
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,286
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    418
    Likes (Received)
    1658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    ...Telling the police that the low loader is on it's way when they've got streets blocked off with mobile cranes in place. Knowing all along the machine is still being worked on in the shop two hours drive away. Took the bulb out of the flashing warning light and stuffed a rag in the bell of an overloaded mobile crane ! Yeah done that, got the tee shirt.

    It may come as a shock to the home shop guys on here but that's what happens in the big, wide world !
    So you lied to the police and tied up public safety resources when you knew the truck was not going to be there, and you disabled the warnings on the crane so no one would know it was operating beyond it's rated capacity.

    Based on your own willingness to disregard the safety of others in favor of completing your task, you assume Boeing operates the same way?

  21. #676
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    8,028
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1123
    Likes (Received)
    5022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    So you lied to the police and tied up public safety resources when you knew the truck was not going to be there, and you disabled the warnings on the crane so no one would know it was operating beyond it's rated capacity.

    Based on your own willingness to disregard the safety of others in favor of completing your task, you assume Boeing operates the same way?
    Hang on a minute, management lied to the police, I was working on finishing the job ! The significant factor in these episodes was that no lives were lost or even threatened, especially mine. I was illustrating the fact that sensible people will push the envelope somewhat when they are backed into a corner by senior management.

    This doesn't make me a bad guy.

    The " Space Shuttle " is a classic example.

    Regards Tyrone.

  22. Likes JoeE. liked this post
  23. #677
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Woodland Hills, Ca. and some times Hutchinson, Ks.
    Posts
    2,271
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    15
    Likes (Received)
    572

    Default

    I hesitate to say this, todays companies are NOT what they were even 10 years ago. So this ain't your fathers Boeing, P&W, Collins etc making airplanes.

    Motion hit on the why of the problem and, it is not just Boeing or aerospace, not even manufacturing. It is a mindset in companies that every single item has to be paired to the absolute minimum. Regarding Boeing in particular, their move to Charleston and sale of Spirit has some impact on assembly. These have an effect on the folks in Washington as well. The USAF has had a number of issues with KC-46 and refused delivery after finding trash and tools in new airplanes. That alone speaks volumes of the degradation of "culture" at Boeing.

    Regarding the Max airplanes, I know why Boeing or any other airplane builder would want to bootstrap onto an existing type certificate. The more pressing question is was it wise to stretch the airplane to the point where all this intervention was necessary to certify it? The cost in time and money to develop a new airframe is enormous, the cost to Boeing IF this airplane becomes the 21st century Comet could break them.

    Steve

  24. Likes barbter liked this post
  25. #678
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,286
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    418
    Likes (Received)
    1658

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    Hang on a minute, management lied to the police, I was working on finishing the job ! The significant factor in these episodes was that no lives were lost or even threatened, especially mine. I was illustrating the fact that sensible people will push the envelope somewhat when they are backed into a corner by senior management.
    Your words were "Yeah done that, got the tee shirt."

    The significant factor is not that no one was hurt. The significant factor is that safety was sacrificed for expediency. It doesn't sound to me like you even realize that.
    Took the bulb out of the flashing warning light and stuffed a rag in the bell of an overloaded mobile crane !
    ^^^ That in itself threatens lives.

    I have been fortunate that in 38 years of running and owning shops no employee of mine has ever had to go to the emergency room. That's part luck, but it's also largely due to an uncompromising attitude towards workplace safety. I do not hesitate to come down hard on someone who is acting in an unsafe way. When I was in management I had no qualms whatsoever about telling the owner or GM that I was not going to permit something that was unsafe for me or my people.

    And I enforced the safety rules on the owner just as if he was an employee, whenever he was on MY shop floor.

    Every man on the work site has a responsibility to watch out for the guy next to him. At the very least, you turned your back on a serious safety violation. You should consider yourself lucky that no one was hurt or killed.

    Yes, people will sometimes do what you did. That has not been shown to be the case with Boeing. What Boeing is guilty of, is performing a poor risk assessment. They will suffer the consequences of that, which is how it should be. It's a tragedy that lives were lost, and lessons will be learned and incorporated as they always are.

  26. #679
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Washington
    Posts
    4,626
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2126
    Likes (Received)
    3917

    Default

    regarding all of the comments about pushing for getting the most from the least . . . this story just seemed ripe for posting.

    Boeing'''s 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers

    While the headline is bogus - as it appears that the 737 software was not outsourced to this company, still, many of the forces at play are not in the best interests of producing robust products.

    1.) Lowest cost engineering resources who lack experience writing code that requires rounds of rework
    2.) Reciprocal business deals that bring rewards in the form of orders from India / Russia in part from recognition of using programmers from India / Russia
    3.) Experienced engineering talent is too expensive to keep on the books and layoffs result "Engineering is a commodity" - likely they work for Amazon or Google or Microsoft now

  27. Likes duckfarmer27, JoeE. liked this post
  28. #680
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    4,654
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2424
    Likes (Received)
    2224

    Default

    I was under the impression that the major contributor to the crew confusion wasn't cost paring by Boeing. It was Boeing's commercial decision to maximise the price they could get by making things, that should have been standard, extra cost options. Specifically activating the AOA sensor disagree warnings.

  29. Likes JoeE. liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •