Boeing again 47

[GregLocock]

This hasn't happened yet. The anti icing heaters in the 737 Max engines will cause the engine shroud to break up if they are left switched on in non-icing conditions. This could just be a beatup by the Seattle Times, there are plenty of other things pilots have to remember to do.

https://www.seattletimes.com/busine...max-7-from-safety-rules-to-get-it-in-the-air/

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[TugboatEng]

It's a good thing I always fly Southwest. There isn't any ice down there.

 

[davidbeach]

Another Boeing problem -

https://www.oregonlive.com/portland...rces-alaska-airlines-flight-back-to-pdx.html.

When one this sentence into the German to translate wanted, would one the fact exploit, that the word order and the punctuation already with the German conventions agree.

-- Douglas Hofstadter, Jan 1982

 

[3DDave]

The flight lost a covered exit door that was not optioned by the airline.

Remember to wear you seat belts at all times.

 

[dik]

Good thing they were only at 16,000 ft.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[SnTMan]

Yeah. "only". LOL

Glad there were no injuries.



The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

 

[waross]

Could the cabin pressure somehow gone too high?

It's a good thing I always fly Southwest. There isn't any ice down there.

uh Tug; Apparently it is only in non-icing conditions that the heaters are an issue.

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

No there are various safety valves which require no human or computer input to make sure it won't get too high. Either exploding or imploding.

 

[TugboatEng]

Sorry, I was making a joke. My regular flight used to be Southwest in the morning and Alaskan in the evening. Alaskan discontinued all service on my regular route so it's all Southwest now. The joke is that now I never fly Alaskan and only fly Southwest I don't have to worry about ice as there is no ice in the southwestern United States. Southwest as an airline does fly to icy airports.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

err we need it in cloud, temperature drops by the lapse rate with altitude which is about 2 degs every 1000ft. So if its 30 on the ground cloud above 15000ft agl there maybe icing.

Certain cloud types there is pretty much always icing even below icing level but we actively avoid them and they show up on wx radar.

 

[hokie66]

Tug, jokes don't seem to go over well in the disasters forum.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Ok presume southwest doesn't do ice on the cabin service?

 

[hokie66]

Service? What's that?

 

[TugboatEng]

True, it's a short hop so we don't always get service.

 

[waross]

In late 2018 and early 2019, two aircraft were lost in near identical accidents, off the coast of Indonesia and outside the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa.

A total of 346 people were killed. Both crashes were caused by flawed flight control software, which ultimately forced the planes into catastrophic dives, despite the best efforts of the pilots.
Getty Images Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 plane crashed in March 2019Getty Images
All passengers and crew perished after the Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 flight crashed in 2019

Those incidents led to the grounding of the global 737 Max fleet for more than 18 months while the problem was rectified and further safety checks were carried out. The head of the FAA subsequently described the design as "the most scrutinised transport aircraft in history".

However, since the 737 Max came back into service, there have been a number of high profile problems with the programme, including electrical faults and quality control issues.

Safety campaigners have also expressed concern about the number of reported malfunctions aboard aircraft that have gone into service.

In December, Boeing called on airlines to inspect rudders on their aeroplanes, after a bolt was found to be missing on one aircraft. It said it was acting "out of an abundance of caution".

The head of the FAA subsequently described the design as "the most scrutinised transport aircraft in history"
Is it out of place to ask if any amount of scrutiny is enough until the company culture changes?

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!

 

[3DDave]

The accidents were not near identical; any review of the FDR data will show that. The grounding was to create a software solution that would work even when the crew of an aircraft was taking active measures to make the situation worse, as the second accident crew did almost continuously.

The scrutiny was for the design. At the time there weren't widespread assembly problems.

But what can you expect with American labor? One could conclude Boeing has taken too much profit for the stockholders, but then the US Congress passed laws that encourage that exact outcome and this has affected every US company adversely.

 

[TugboatEng]

One should look to the longshoreman's union as an example that money doesn't buy better labor...

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

It was way before the software that the design flaws were the root cause.

In fact alot of the issues they are having getting the 7 and 10 certified date back to the flawed certification of the 737 NG.

And then they are going to have to retro fit them to the 8 and 9.

The only reason why it's been so closely looked at is because the faa has lost its competence with the other authorities. And they are piggybacking it's process. If the max was N reg faa airspace only it would be dead now.

There are more than a few think the 7 and 10 wont be certified in 2024.

 

[debodine]

The comment from 3DDave about American labor piqued my interest. I do not work at Boeing and have never worked at Boeing. I do have a question for someone who is in a position to know, such as a current or recent Boeing employee.

As part of my job I have been to a number of United States MRO and modification organizations for Part 25 (air transport) aircraft. The trend at every USA MRO I have visited in at least the last ten years is entire maintenance and/or modification crews that do not speak English, led by a lead mechanic that is supposed to be fluent in both English and the team's language.

It is, I believe, a truism that information can be lost or corrupted when crossing language barriers. It is not guaranteed to happen, but I have witnessed occasions where it did happen.

What I would like to know is when we consider "American labor" at Boeing, does the same crew makeup exist? I believe this forum has recognized that problems exist at the higher management levels at Boeing. I ask my question because I wonder if Boeing is falling victim to information loss or corruption at the level where the tools meet the aircraft?

 

[waross]

That reminds me of a local equipment dealer.
They had a lot of shop problems.
I hadn't been in there for several years but dropped in for a replacement part.
I got talking to the manager about the poor shop performance.
"Things are a lot better. Now All of our mechanics can speak English and our shop foreman can read and write!"
As well as being illiterate, the previous shop foreman was not bi-lingual and had problems communicating with the mechanics.
Not "Only In America".

--------------------
Ohm's law
Not just a good idea;
It's the LAW!