Korat-Farang.com

FAA disregarded safety flaws during the certification of Boeing 737 MAX, sources

KiwiCanadian · 29 · 1003

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Roger

  • KFers beyond Korat
  • Forum Wizard
  • *****
    • Posts: 3564
''Scores of Boeing 737 Max 8s have been left grounded at the aircraft manufacturer's factory in Washington amid as investigations continue into security concerns.

Two high-profile crashes in the past year have meant several airlines have temporarily abandoned the model - leading to a dramatic pileup of unused hardware at at Boeing Field in Seattle.

Boeing has admitted that the planes may not reinstated until next year, as they scramble to fix the design flaws that led to the deadly crashes, the Wall Street Journal reported
.''

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7272453/Dozens-Boeing-737-Max-8s-grounded-Boeing-Factory-Washington.html
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Online KiwiCanadian

  • Member
    • Posts: 660
I think this explains a lot of the "culture" change at Boeing
I have also seen this at Bombardier Aerospace, counting the beans, I think I went through 3 or 4 iterations making engineering quicker than better, the last one was when a number of management types went to Japan to Toyota to see how they did it, Later in one of our meetings where we got a briefing on the trip, one engineer stood up and said all well & good, but cars don't fly and for a certain percentage of crashes are survivable as the car usually does not leave the ground, can't argue with that!

I think this guy is on the MONEY, pun intended.
https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-coming-boeing-bailout

Another perspective here.
https://leehamnews.com/2019/07/05/bjorns-corner-cutting-corners-in-aerospace-costs-a-fortune/

I think its time to get aviation back under the safe umbrella of like minded Engineers, Pilots and others that are passionate about their jobs.

KC
I used to have a handle on life........but it broke


Online Roger

  • KFers beyond Korat
  • Forum Wizard
  • *****
    • Posts: 3564
Thanks for that KC - I've only looked at the first link - will catch up with the second link later . . . .

''The key decision was, rather than fix the fundamental aerodynamic control problems caused by the new engine, to bandaid the existing 737 software, while pretending that flying the 737 Max was just like flying old ones. . . . . . .

The old Boeing would have redesigned the plane’s control surfaces to fix the faulty aerodynamics, but the McDonnell Douglas influenced Boeing new one tried to patch the problem with software. And it was bad software, some of written by outsourced engineers in India paid $9/dollar an hour
.''

Shocking . .  :o
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Online KiwiCanadian

  • Member
    • Posts: 660
Yes SHOCKING is a kind word for what Boeing has done to the industry.
Having worked in the industry and see it taken over by the bean counters who have no clue as to the enthusiasm that a majority of the work force, white collar & blue collar alike had for the "Industry" the wall street boys came in and screwed with a good working rap-ore just for the sake of the share holders, I all ways wondered why at BA they could announce the sale of new locomotives and rolling stock to some company any where in the world and the shares would go up, but when the company announced a new order for aircraft (some times a larger order than for the rail division) the stocks would go down. Could never figure it out at first.
There are some customers of the 787 that will only take aircraft made in Everett, as they know the conditions of the plant in South Carolina. One is unionised and the other has only recently been unionised, even the workers need protection from that kind of management.  I usually am not a fan of unions but when management go the other way its time to turn things back a notch or two.

KC
I used to have a handle on life........but it broke


Online Roger

  • KFers beyond Korat
  • Forum Wizard
  • *****
    • Posts: 3564
I find it surprising that even 20 Passengers sitting in the wrong place can unbalance an aicraft when say, aborting a landing. Just think of the weight and power of the Aircraft. BUT maybe this is a common issue, I remember being asked before to move seats for this reason.

Well done the system - "All airlines using the plane have been slapped with a safety directive by EASA". At least it didn't need a crash to wake 'em up to the problem  >:(

"British Airways has been forced to block off seats on some short-haul flights over weight-related safety concerns, it has been claimed. The airline has reportedly been forced to seal off one or two economy rows at the rear of flights using Airbus A320neo aircraft.

Insiders say the plane has too many economy seats in the rear, leading to fears the aircraft may become unbalanced during certain manoeuvres. One passenger on a recent flight to Malaga said that the captain told passengers three times to return to their original seat due to 'plane weight issues'
."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-7473573/British-Airways-blocks-economy-seats-A320neo-aircraft-counter-balance-issue.html

((I read that Boeing are planning to phase in the 737 MAX with new software soon - I'm not reassured personally)).
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Online KiwiCanadian

  • Member
    • Posts: 660
I find it surprising that even 20 Passengers sitting in the wrong place can unbalance an aicraft when say, aborting a landing. Just think of the weight and power of the Aircraft. BUT maybe this is a common issue, I remember being asked before to move seats for this reason.

Hi Roger its all about weight & balance, with trying to cram as many bodies on to the aircraft.
When one has a flight that has less than a full passenger loading, then seat placement can be critical depending on the A/C type, An A 320 neo as is the case here and EASA has rightly so told airlines to block off the last 2 rows at the back of the plane. If you have as you say 20 people siting in the back that's 1800 KG of movable mass that needs to be counter weighted. Basic Phisyics
If the flight only has 1/2 of the capacity in Business class then the pilot needs to have passengers move up from the back, this may be not possible due to an over booked economy section (happens on a lot of airlines due to no shows, or blocks of seats pre-booked by travel agents but not sold).  Or have them removed and put on a later flight. not good for PR.
When one arrives at the check in counter without a confirmed seat, then the agent will place you according to the load sheet dictates the best position to balance the A/C. based on the known loading at that point. ( at least most of the majors that I have flown tend to use this type of scenario, I am not counting budget airlines as the tend to be mostly fully booked).
It used to be that one had to use their assigned seat for take off and landing just for this reason, in flight the captain can adjust the trim and move fuel to counter balance this to some degree,  at the cost of using more fuel. But with the newer A/C and company directives to be more fuel efficient dictates that theses seats may be blocked for ever.
Don't forget that when a new variant of an aircraft concept is started up to 5 years before going into service there is a lot of known data that the design team can rely on, but 5 years in the real world can have a huge impact on the out come of the final product, One just has to look at Mitsubishi to see their "new" space jet. Copied from the Bombardier CRJ, (They built the aft sections of the CRJ with the vertical and horizontal stabilisers).

KC
I used to have a handle on life........but it broke


Online Roger

  • KFers beyond Korat
  • Forum Wizard
  • *****
    • Posts: 3564
Thanks for the explanation KC. Yes 1800 kg for 20 pax but the loaded aircraft is what 100 tonnes or more ? Surely the A320 neo can still fly fully loaded i.e. with the 20 in the back seats ? ATB 
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein


Online KiwiCanadian

  • Member
    • Posts: 660
Here is another explanation of the A 320 neo, it is from the Times of India.
I do not like the way the writer of this piece likens this to the Max a/c, the conditions are NOT the same.
But it does give a more detailed synopsis of the neo's problem,  Weight & Balance. and the directive from EASA.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/airlines-play-safe-with-a320neo-lighten-load/articleshow/71176199.cms
I used to have a handle on life........but it broke


Online Roger

  • KFers beyond Korat
  • Forum Wizard
  • *****
    • Posts: 3564
More problems for Boeing - the 777X fuselage splits during stress testing :-

"The test plane is a complete write-off, its fuselage skin ripped wide open just behind the wing. A passenger door that blew out and fell to the factory floor was a secondary impact of the initial rupture, which was located far below the door."

In fairness to Boeing, at least this WAS discovered in testing, not whilst in service  ::)

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-777xs-fuselage-split-dramatically-during-september-stress-test/

And the 737 MAX 8 - Boeing still can't get that software right   :o  I hope I never have to fly on this gremlin.
(I prefer an airframe with a natural aeronautic stability myself  ;)  )

"Earlier this year, Boeing executives suggested that if the grounding persisted beyond this year, the company would consider shutting down the Max production line. Such a move would have enormous economic consequences, most likely resulting in sweeping job losses at Boeing and many of its suppliers.

Yet even if the Max does return to the skies early next year and Boeing avoids shutting down the production line, the grounding’s effect will linger for years. Airlines have had to cancel routes and slow expansion plans. Boeing has a backlog of hundreds of planes to deliver, a process that could take more than a year
."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/business/boeing-737-max-return-to-service.html
''If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough'' - Albert Einstein