B737 MAX – Will You Fly on One ?
Back to Forum- This topic has 143 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 28 Sep 2020
at 03:05 by cwoodward.
-
- Author
- Posts
- Skip to last reply Create Topic
-
AMcWhirterParticipantRyanair reported to be cancelling some flights, maybe closing some bases owing to the MAX issues.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49000796
I was asked why Ryanair couldn’t simply cancel its huge MAX order and buy from another firm.
But besides losing the Boeing discount which other manufacturer, besides Airbus, builds the sort of aircraft suitable for LCCs ?
And the Airbus waiting list (for high-capacity short-haul aircraft) is long.
16 Jul 2019
at 14:18
AFlyingDutchmanParticipant[quote quote=949613]BT has a poll regarding the Max returning to service this year or next. IMHO, it won’ t return to service anytime soon if enough carriers cancel their orders and pax refuse to fly the equipment.[/quote]
The problem with this is what choice do airlines have. The backlog or orders at both Boeing and Airbus are enormous, and even if airlines with the Max on order cancel their orders, they will then be so far down the list for delivery of Airbus equipment that they wont see their new aircraft for at least ten years. The Max will most likely be the most scrutinised modern day aircraft, and once re-certified in whatever guise it comes, will likely be incredibly safe, due to the intense new/current scrutiny. Whilst most of us on this formu travel regularly, many of us too frequerntly, and know every aircrafty type, the vast majority of the publci do not, and they rarely have a clue what plane they are boarding, they just want to get from a to b at the lowest cost and best schedule. Perhaps a bigger issue might be crew not willing or reluctant to work the aircraft, which you hear more of in the US press.
18 Jul 2019
at 07:32
SwissdiverParticipant9 “things” contributed to the Lion Air crash says the final report, including the fact the plane should have been grounded! Here is the BBC article: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50177788
25 Oct 2019
at 14:08
Cedric_StatherbyParticipantIt is not a great surprise that there were other factors involved – after all, all the 737-MAXs that didn’t crash also had the MCAS software, so it is unlikely to be the MCAS alone that brings a plane down.
But I doubt this will get Boeing off the hook. The MCAS system seems to introduce vulnerabilities into the plane (to put it no stronger than that). And they still stand accused of hiding its weaknesses.
And it increasingly looks as though the FAA have a serious case to answer as well. At the very least I think the “gentlemen’s agreement” between air safety regulators, whereby if one regulator passes a plane as safe then other regulators will accept their word for it, is done for. No-one will trust the FAA on the 737-MAX; every regulator will want to do its own checks. The fall-out for any non-US regulator from taking the FAA’s word that the plane is safe and then it having another crash would be simply horrendous.
Still a long road back for Boeing and this troubled plane.
(edited for spelling mistakes)
25 Oct 2019
at 18:07
capetonianmParticipantBoeing boss attacked for turning 737 Max ailriners into ‘flying coffins’
1 user thanked author for this post.
30 Oct 2019
at 09:40
Travel Manager UKParticipantA lot has happened since I started this thread.
Yes the MCAS has been overhauled , it will be safer. The promised certification flight gets put back, why?
Flight attendants are scared of flying on it.
Boeing has started a charm offensive.The one thing which still worries me is pilot training. Boeing is desperate to avoid mandatory simulator training because of the cost, this was a major usp.
However if you have a crew , especially a co-pilot with 200 hours and something goes wrong, if they have practiced in the simulator, they can get it wrong.On a real flight there is no reset button.
I would not allow any of my travellers onto one until pilots have had simulator training. If that takes 6 months or 2 years it is a deal breaker.NO pilot simulator training, NO 737 MAX flights for corporate travellers
6 Nov 2019
at 12:14
cwoodwardParticipantI nailed my colours to the mast a long time ago on this thread.
I do not believe that this aircraft can ever be properly certified in its present form…it needs structural changes and no amount of computer program fiddling can make this aircraft safe in my opinion.
I stand to be proved wrong which I rather hope that I am or this feascio could well be the end of Boeing.1 user thanked author for this post.
6 Nov 2019
at 12:34
InquisitiveParticipantI cannot understand one simple thing: Is adding a second sensor that difficult?
The fuselage is segmented so adding second sensor shall be possible, but I do not see any discussion on that. All report is about fixing only the software.With a second AoA sensor, even if one sensor is not working, MCAS can operate correctly.
Anyone knowledgeable could comment on this?6 Nov 2019
at 14:17
AFlyingDutchmanParticipantThe Boeing 737 MAX has 2 AoA sensors. However, MCAS only takes input from 1 AoA sensor at a time, hence the need for the software update, amongst other things.
1 user thanked author for this post.
7 Nov 2019
at 07:18
IanFromHKGParticipantAnd Boeing have gone on record as saying the “new” Max MCAS will take input from both AoA sensors AND only act if both are in agreement AND only activate once. They have also said that both flight computers will operate in parallel rather than, as they historically did, alternating between one and the other.
All well and good, but a bit behind the times, and the competition. I understand that the competing Airbus aircraft have three AoA sensors and use the majority report (ie if one sensor disagrees with the other two its input is ignored), and always run both flight computers in parallel. In other words, a full redundancy system which, I naively thought for many years, was a central bedrock for modern aircraft design systems – to ensure that there was no single critical failure point.
Given the historical record of AoA sensor faults, that Boeing should have designed such a system dependent on a single sensor is strange, that they should have failed to use one level of available redundancy (the additional flight computer that was installed in every Max) is bizarre, that they should have failed to use the other potential level of redundancy for a known unreliable (not in the sense that they are poorly designed or made as such, but that they are vulnerable to damage) input sensor is deeply reprehensible and (to me) incomprehensible, and that they should have designed and implemented a system which its own staff had criticised is deeply worrying in terms of what it says about their safety culture, and that they then actively decided to hide from pilots and omit from training materials – and failed to fit as standard warning lights and alerts which it offered as options (establishing that they recognised and acknowledged the risk) and which might have prevented these problems – is, or to my mind should be, criminal
6 users thanked author for this post.
7 Nov 2019
at 07:56
canuckladParticipant[quote quote=976977]I do not believe that this aircraft can ever be properly certified in its present form…it needs structural changes and no amount of computer program fiddling can make this aircraft safe in my opinion.[/quote]
Agreed, when computer software geeks are more critical to safe flight operations than aero dynamic engineers , as an aircraft manufacturer you’ve crossed the line.
7 Nov 2019
at 09:23
capetonianmParticipantComputer experts programming for stuff they don’t understand the mechanics of is a recipe for disaster, in any field.
7 Nov 2019
at 09:30
Cedric_StatherbyParticipantThe plane needs to pass more tests than just the official FAA airworthiness test.
Even once it has passed that, then:
1. Other air safety regulators need to demonstrate that they trust the FAA. Not in my book a given, given how close they are to Boeing and the way they have behaved in this case.
2. Pilots and cabin crew need to be prepared to fly the plane again.
3. And passengers need to be willing to be flown on it.
None of these is an automatic and immediate consequence of any FAA certification.
7 Nov 2019
at 09:41 -
AuthorPosts
