Another 737 mishap

[PandaBear]

The most important thing they could do is move HQ back to Seattle. Calhoun needs to go, and all C suit. They need drastic changes to try to root out this organizational culture.
Also, the new CEO has to come from outside. It cannot be an insider.

Impossible now that the best paying job there is for Amazon, Microsoft, Google, etc. Boeing would be only hiring low cost low performance people for that industry there.

You don't have to move your HQ but you need people who could lead. Boeing's outsourcing and lack of quality is what leads to its problems, even if they stay in Seattle.

 

[PandaBear]

Boeing CEO Calhoun to step down at end of 2024:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-ceo-calhoun-step-down-2024-03-25/

United needs to do the same with the last 2-3 weeks of problems to / from SFO.

 

[edyvw]

Impossible now that the best paying job there is for Amazon, Microsoft, Google, etc. Boeing would be only hiring low cost low performance people for that industry there.

You don't have to move your HQ but you need people who could lead. Boeing's outsourcing and lack of quality is what leads to its problems, even if they stay in Seattle.

They absolutely must move HQ.
That would give them some breathing space and put them on good side with public. That move would absorb potential downfall from next crash, incident etc. If some MAX crashes and kills bunch of people, Boeing could be grasping for air and suffocating before it is determined it wasn’t their fault.
They are where McDonnell-Douglas was in 1979.

 

[Nuclear_42]

While Boeing is having serious issues manufacturing aircraft it's not fair the media just misreporting everything. Most of the armchair experts blame maintenance, Boeing, etc for all of these issues. EVERY single day their are dozens if not hundreds incidents. Gate returns, rejected take offs, engine failures, mechanical diversions everything you can think of. It's been going on since the the dawn of aviation! All the sudden the media just wants to report on anything that has a United or Boeing to play the blame game. While yes there has been maintenance related issues or human factors for the most part aviation is the safest way to travel. You could literally spend $30,000 a year maintaining your vehicle to the maximum standard and still have the engine throw a rod or a wheel bearing fail. Most maintenance and designs are predictable as far as service life. However you can't just simply predict everything. Aircraft are machines with millions of parts. Next time your flights delayed for maintenance don't blame the airline or aircraft manufacturer. It's just the nature of the industry. Just remember there are still many aircraft in legacy carriers that are 20-30+ years old. I wasn't even born yet and many of these aircraft were already in service and have been taking a beating hauling passengers multiple times a day. Every now and then you have to just pause and think about the engineering marvel it is. You can't just simply pull over on a cloud 5 miles high going over 500 miles per hour. Exact reason why Boeing needs to improve their company and products. As far as the missing belly panel nobody will know until the FAA releases their findings. It could of been sudden failure something like delamination but of course blame maintenance and Boeing.

 

[Revving2Redline]

Wondering if they got VTEC in these too?? My flight experience is Ace Combat on the Playstation VR . My dad and his buddies bought a little Cessna long time ago and after the instrument panel went dark in Western Kansas and they could see Wichita they gave it up. My wife is doing 3rd through 1st class physicals on pilots and I get this slight interest in crop dusters and puddle jumpers but John Madden has kept me side lined from flying. It's fear based and I would rather not flying unless the trumpets are calling me home.

 

[y_p_w]

Wondering if they got VTEC in these too?? My flight experience is Ace Combat on the Playstation VR . My dad and his buddies bought a little Cessna long time ago and after the instrument panel went dark in Western Kansas and they could see Wichita they gave it up. My wife is doing 3rd through 1st class physicals on pilots and I get this slight interest in crop dusters and puddle jumpers but John Madden has kept me side lined from flying. It's fear based and I would rather not flying unless the trumpets are calling me home.

View attachment 211129

Engines | HF120 Engine | GE Honda Aero Engines

The durable HF120 engine features lightweight design and counter rotating differntial bearing architecture. Features best-in-class fuel efficiency and high thrust-to-weight ration.

www.gehonda.com

 

[BusyLittleShop]

The media could educate their viewers more starting with the fact that
the FAA was created by congress to not only Regulate but also
Encourage civil aeronautics, including new aviation technology... and
also the fact that Aviation safety is the study and practice of
managing risks in aviation. This includes preventing aviation
accidents and incidents through research, educating air travel
personnel, passengers and the general public, as well as the design of
aircraft and aviation infrastructure. The aviation industry is subject
to significant regulation and oversight... Finally that fatal accidents are
more likely the result of loss of control than Corporate Greed...

Loss of control inflight represents 35%
Controlled flight into terrain 21%,
Runway excursions 17%
System or component failure: 6%
Touchdown off the runway: 5%
Abnormal Runway Contact: 4%
Fire: 2%
Corporate Greed: 0.0%

 

[edyvw]

The media could educate their viewers more starting with the fact that
the FAA was created by congress to not only Regulate but also
Encourage civil aeronautics, including new aviation technology... and
also the fact that Aviation safety is the study and practice of
managing risks in aviation. This includes preventing aviation
accidents and incidents through research, educating air travel
personnel, passengers and the general public, as well as the design of
aircraft and aviation infrastructure. The aviation industry is subject
to significant regulation and oversight... Finally that fatal accidents are
more likely the result of loss of control than Corporate Greed...

Loss of control inflight represents 35%
Controlled flight into terrain 21%,
Runway excursions 17%
System or component failure: 6%
Touchdown off the runway: 5%
Abnormal Runway Contact: 4%
Fire: 2%
Corporate Greed: 0.0%

Corporate greed is not something you can measure using quantitative methodology.
Organizational culture is at the core of Boeing issues. Engineering problem is consequence of that culture.

As for FAA, Boeing is one of the culprits, if not biggest one, in lobbying to underfund FAA and with that have more “self regulation.”

 

[RAVL]

Corporate greed is not something you can measure using quantitative methodology.
Organizational culture is at the core of Boeing issues. Engineering problem is consequence of that culture.

As for FAA, Boeing is one of the culprits, if not biggest one, in lobbying to underfund FAA and with that have more “self regulation.”

What is not reported is that the second Max crash was avoidable and largely the result of crew error. It got very little coverage other than the WSJ, which has been on top of the story with Boeing for a number of years.

More specifically, on the same day the Ethiopian government issued its final findings on the second Max accident in late 2022, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board issued its own “comment” rebuking the Ethiopian air regulator’s report for “inaccurate” statements, for ignoring the crew’s role, for ignoring how readily the accident should have been avoided.

In the US, this was ignored and the press ran with the “profits over people” line. In reality, while the Max’s software could fairly be said to be a band aid that placed too much burden on the crew, overall the industry, including Boeing, reorganized along profit and loss lines about 50 years ago, in the 1970s, and since that time we have seen enormous increases in airplane safety.

None of this means Boeing has nothing to fix, but profits in the airplane industry are based on engineering excellence, and Boeing is now learning that lesson first hand. Making profit a bad word means that you are consigning people to a second class safety environment. See, for example, Aeroflot. Max assembly will be brought in house and fixes will be made to prevent the assembly line “catch up” work that leads to these problems.

 

[edyvw]

What is not reported is that the second Max crash was avoidable and largely the result of crew error. It got very little coverage other than the WSJ, which has been on top of the story with Boeing for a number of years.

More specifically, on the same day the Ethiopian government issued its final findings on the second Max accident in late 2022, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board issued its own “comment” rebuking the Ethiopian air regulator’s report for “inaccurate” statements, for ignoring the crew’s role, for ignoring how readily the accident should have been avoided.

In the US, this was ignored and the press ran with the “profits over people” line. In reality, while the Max’s software could fairly be said to be a band aid that placed too much burden on the crew, overall the industry, including Boeing, reorganized along profit and loss lines about 50 years ago, in the 1970s, and since that time we have seen enormous increases in airplane safety.

None of this means Boeing has nothing to fix, but profits in the airplane industry are based on engineering excellence, and Boeing is now learning that lesson first hand. Making profit a bad word means that you are consigning people to a second class safety environment. See, for example, Aeroflot. Max assembly will be brought in house and fixes will be made to prevent the assembly line “catch up” work that leads to these problems.

I think there is too much evidence what really happen. Ultimate problem was Boeing! Press can say whatever they want. Facts are accessible to anyone.
Your thinking is kind of how corporations get into trouble.

 

[ragtoplvr]

News is not about the news. It is profit driven, is about the advertising revenue. Scaring people gets you more readers =. more revenue. Look at weather radar. Green used to be light to moderate rain. Now green often is not even hitting the ground. Red used to be moderate rain Now it is a gentle shower. Black was a tornado. . Now black is moderate to tornado. Black keeps viewers tuned in = more money. So weather radar is less useful. News is less useful.

Rod

 

[RAVL]

I think there is too much evidence what really happen. Ultimate problem was Boeing! Press can say whatever they want. Facts are accessible to anyone.
Your thinking is kind of how corporations get into trouble.

I think we probably agree more than you realize. My point is that excellence is good for business and what Boeing has been doing is far from excellence, and this is why they are having problems. Excellence also leads to profits so I don’t want to make profit a bad word. Have a good day.

 

[edyvw]

I think we probably agree more than you realize. My point is that excellence is good for business and what Boeing has been doing is far from excellence, and this is why they are having problems. Excellence also leads to profits so I don’t want to make profit a bad word. Have a good day.

No one talks about profit as bad. But Boeing tried blaming foreign pilots and didn’t work.

 

[RAVL]

No one talks about profit as bad. But Boeing tried blaming foreign pilots and didn’t work.

On that I have to respectfully disagree. In the second accident, it wasn’t Boeing, it was the NTSB that issued the comment to the Ethiopian authorities as I mentioned above because the pilots did not handle the situation appropriately. Doesn’t mean the software was terrific but the accident was avoidable. If I can find the link and post it, I will.

 

[4WD]

On that I have to respectfully disagree. In the second accident, it wasn’t Boeing, it was the NTSB that issued the comment to the Ethiopian authorities as I mentioned above because the pilots did not handle the situation appropriately. Doesn’t mean the software was terrific but the accident was avoidable. If I can find the link and post it, I will.

I don’t understand why they don’t fly planes to at/near cruising altitude before putting on auto - is 20 minutes too much to ask …
Maybe fly to land too?

Both pilots on Ethiopian Airlines flight fall asleep, miss landing

Ethiopian Airlines has suspended two pilots after they reportedly fell asleep during a two-hour flight and overshot the runway at a cruising altitude 37,000 feet.

nypost.com

 

[edyvw]

On that I have to respectfully disagree. In the second accident, it wasn’t Boeing, it was the NTSB that issued the comment to the Ethiopian authorities as I mentioned above because the pilots did not handle the situation appropriately. Doesn’t mean the software was terrific but the accident was avoidable. If I can find the link and post it, I will.

It is far from just software! It is whole approach to the MAX! The MCAS, single AOA, training approach, the fact the hid MCAS, etc.

 

[RAVL]

It is far from just software! It is whole approach to the MAX! The MCAS, single AOA, training approach, the fact the hid MCAS, etc.

You are argumentative. I was using software as an umbrella term to acknowledge there were problems with the design. No question. But the second plane crashed when it was avoidable because the pilots did not handle the situation appropriately. Not according to Boeing, but according to the NTSB. There is no such thing as a perfect machine. But every flaw needn’t lead to fatalities if the situation is handled correctly. Candidly, this is why I always prefer a U.S. carrier because the chances the pilot is ex military are higher and that means they are better trained. Look at the pilot of the SW flight where the engine came apart and fractured the fuselage, and a passenger was sucked out. That could have been a loss of aircraft event but because she was ex US Air Force, she handled the situation and the plane landed. I am done here. Enjoy arguing about oil.

 

[edyvw]

You are argumentative. I was using software as an umbrella term to acknowledge there were problems with the design. No question. But the second plane crashed when it was avoidable because the pilots did not handle the situation appropriately. Not according to Boeing, but according to the NTSB. There is no such thing as a perfect machine. But every flaw needn’t lead to fatalities if the situation is handled correctly. Candidly, this is why I always prefer a U.S. carrier because the chances the pilot is ex military are higher and that means they are better trained. Look at the pilot of the SW flight where the engine came apart and fractured the fuselage, and a passenger was sucked out. That could have been a loss of aircraft event but because she was ex US Air Force, she handled the situation and the plane landed. I am done here. Enjoy arguing about oil.

Argumentative? We are talking about issues at Boeing not just one single issue. The root of the problem is Boeing. You can’t make a car and say: “we built it for excellent roads, not your roads, but please, buy it, it is excellent machine.”
Boeing is in this situation because of chain of events that span 2 decades. Planes will be flown by various type of pilots. In thenUS you also have some horrible pilots (Amazon 767?) and some terrific ones.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

You are argumentative. I was using software as an umbrella term to acknowledge there were problems with the design. No question. But the second plane crashed when it was avoidable because the pilots did not handle the situation appropriately. Not according to Boeing, but according to the NTSB. There is no such thing as a perfect machine. But every flaw needn’t lead to fatalities if the situation is handled correctly. Candidly, this is why I always prefer a U.S. carrier because the chances the pilot is ex military are higher and that means they are better trained. Look at the pilot of the SW flight where the engine came apart and fractured the fuselage, and a passenger was sucked out. That could have been a loss of aircraft event but because she was ex US Air Force, she handled the situation and the plane landed. I am done here. Enjoy arguing about oil.

You almost made sense until you made it seem as if the only reason the SW flight didn't crash was because an ex military pilot was the Captain.

For those with zero flying experience ( that's also you, the media ) , you are just as safe flying on any Boeing as you are on any Airbus, even with a pilot with only civilian experience, even during an emergency. Depends on the pilot more than make/where they learned to fly.

I have flown a long time, and I have flown with pilots from various backgrounds ( ex militray , fighter pilots/transport pilots, F18 demo pilots, NATO exchange pilots, aviation college pilots, pilots who learned to fly at flying clubs, etc ) and no group stands out as better than any other.

What I have noticed is that some pilots are better ( hands and feet, decision making , situational awareness, multi tasking, stress tolerance ) than other pilots, regardless of where they learned to fly.

Just heard the other day, a former F18 pilot could not pass his B737 Captain upgrade. Lots of ex military experience ( exchange pilot ).

The new pilot's that U.S airlines train from scratch at their academies will be just as good as any other pilots when they go Captain one day.

I try to stay out of these threads but when I read stuff that's untrue I have to say something given my experience having flown with different groups ( and handling emergencies in the sim ).

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Ultimate problem was Boeing!

Negative...

There were no air worthy problems with those Boeing aircraft except the manner in which they were handled...

Quote
"After takeoff, Flight ET302 was in the air for just 6 minutes before
slamming into the earth. The BEA narrative lays out how the pilots’
lack of control began during the first 2 minutes of the flight, before
MCAS activated."


The crew did not address the problem. The cockpit voice recording contains no exchange
between the pilots recognizing the airspeed as an issue...

Mercy!!! even student pilots learn to recognize the warning signs
that a stall is imminent and execute the procedures for stall prevention...

1)lower the nose in recognition of decaying airspeed
2)roll wings level
3)add power