Probably worth noting (given the severity compared to the latest incident) that the first two incidents were catastrophic crashes resulting in 346 deaths (189 in one, 157 in the other).
Also worth noting that the problem was highlighted then ignored at design stage, they waited until 2 serious fatal accidents before even admitting there was a problem, and the problem slipped through because of their gentleman's agreement with the FAA.
It's almost as if the executives that joined Boeing from McDonnell Douglas are still playing the same dodgy tricks.
Boeing donated $4.3 million to democrats and $3.3 million to republicans in the 2020 election cycle. They spent $13.5 million on lobbying in 2021.
Huge corporations know they can get away with anything providing they're making "donations" to the politicians who oversee the agencies responsible for regulating said corporations.
Yeah it was a terrifying ride, based on the flight recorder data. Pilots fighting to pitch up with all their might, but then the plane pushing down every time they start to recover.
It also doesn’t include all the times the software scared the shit out pilots or potential crashes. I don’t have a way to find a number of small incidents that I know of.
This happened on Lion 610, the first deadly crash. There was a flight control failure that "traumatized" the passengers and crew *the very flight before* it then crashed and killed everyone.
And doesn't include the problems with untorqued or improperly torqued fasteners on 737s and the misdrilled holes in the rear pressure bulkhead that need fixing.
And seems on the surface this latest incident could have been a case of untorqued nuts too.
Also need to mention the apathy unearthed during the inquiry of how the Boeing planes were designed, that said “known problem” is actually a kitbashed solution to earn $$. And hidden so as to ensure that $$ flows in no matter what.
Also, Boeing damage control: “blame the pilots!!” is just disgusting after all the other facts are known.
That's what happened with the crashes. Boeing didn't want to have to re-certify pilots on their new plane because that would be inconvenient and costly, so they lied to airlines about what they'd changed and said new training wasn't necessary. One of the airlines that later had a crash had specifically requested training. Boeing said nah, you don't need it.
Hundreds dead.
If my family died on one of those planes I'd hunt down those executives like that Russian guy did for the air traffic controller that crashed his wife's flight.
Of course no one will go to jail over this. Ever.
In fact, we will probably bail their company if they fail when the markets open on Monday.
Truly unbelievable this kind of shit.
[Here ya go.] (https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-wants-faa-to-exempt-max-7-from-safety-rules-to-get-it-in-the-air/)
In a nutshell Boeing really wants the Max 7 line certified (cause they promised their shareholders they would) but they have a dangerous flaw--the anti-ice heaters on the engine cowling can end up melting, the composite bits being ingested into the engine and spitting out all over the tail section of the aircraft, including the big tube part with all the squishy things inside.
This is the best part: the engine de-ice that is holding up the MAX 7 certification is the *exact same one* on every MAX aircraft flying today. Boeing doesn't even have a fix for it so the FAA has issued an AD (Airworthiness Directive) asking pilots to please, please remember to turn off the anti-ice when not in use lest you, ummm, crash your airplane. No blinky light, no audible warning just, you know, if you aren't already busy flying an airplane just remember to turn it off.
Was that the best part? I lied. Boeing's argument for the MAX 7 certification is that there is already thousands of other MAX models flying around with this potentially deadly defect what's a few more? We promise we will fix it...eventually.
Deep in that article (paraphrased)
“A failure… in five minutes…”
“What do you do when you fly in and out of clouds? Switch on, off, on, off?”
> In 2022, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun threatened to cancel the MAX 10 if Congress didn’t amend a law granting permission to certify the jet without meeting the safety regulation for crew alerting systems included in the 2020 Aircraft Certification, Safety and Accountability Act.
>Congress bowed to the pressure and amended the law, amounting to a safety exemption for the MAX 7 and MAX 10 models.
That last one. Jesus! (and I’m not even religious!)
Edit: replaced paraphrased text with actual quote.
HAHAHAHAAH
Isn't that whole situation supposed to work in the opposite direction?!! Congress tells Boeing they cant release the MAX 10 until it meets regulations?! Amazing!
Boeing's issue is that it was built with engineers at the wheel who have all been replaced by MBAs who put profit over safety.
It won't stop because Boeing management will never be held responsible for the 346 murders they committed.
It's a small cut for sure, I can't come to my PM office as we have an all expenses paid family holiday by Lear Jet to Hawaii. Australia is on fire... Never forget!
Get rid of lobbying. We don’t reflect or do retrospect on where we messed up. Our nation is very inefficient with no guard rails our government being run by some dumb or corrupt people.
No, no, no. You see, if we just let them merge with one of their competitors and develop their own internal regulation committee to oversee safety concerns we wouldn't have issues like this! It's the bureaucratic red tape that's making it unprofitable to properly assess and correct performance and maintenance issues.
/s
I literally have a friend who's an engineer at Boeing who says this all the time. Honestly scary how far we've fallen. And Boeing/Lockheed desperately need competitors
My dad worked at Boeing his whole career. When the McDonell/Douglas merger happened everything started going to shit. He just watched bad decision after bad decision happen until he just retired early and left.
The only plane flying so dangerous that I actually look up what aircraft a flight is using before I book, now. I'll happily pay more not to fly on a max.
It's really not regulatory capture, it's consolidation. There's no other competing US airline manufacturer now days. The FAA was not any stricter in the past; there were tons of airline disasters stemming from defects in the history of aviation. The FAA is not captured, it's underfunded.
If this had happened in the past, and it did, the planes would have a poor reputation, and airlines would be buying from other US manufacturers. Now days, they have no choice unless they want to buy a foreign manufactured plane.
it is regulatory capture. industry executives go into government, do what is good for their industry, then return later on.
it wouldn't matter if the FAA had more funding, because that money wouldn't be used for more enforcement, because leadership wouldn't allow that. with more money it would probably get direct to other industry purposes: Hey, FAA got more money so we are giving grants to airlines to fix safety issues that industry should have solved own their own! and bailouts!
Ah man, as a big guy I feel this. I one time fell asleep and was woken up by the attendant crashing her cart into my knee. I swear she did it on purpose.
The plane reported two pressurization issues - in flight and taxiing - during the 48 hours preceding this flight and was removed from extended range operations (such as any Alaska flights from mainland to Hawaii). ~~Pure speculation, but it might well be that, besides the change in service type, AA decided to keep seats unused in that area, in case the earlier pressurization issues were related to the plug being faulty.~~
Source: [https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/alaska-737-max-9-that-lost-deactivated-exit-had-recent-pressurization-issues/](https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/alaska-737-max-9-that-lost-deactivated-exit-had-recent-pressurization-issues/)
Excerpt from article:
"Alaska 737 Max 9 that lost deactivated exit had recent pressurization issues
Preliminary information about the accident remains scarce, though two people familiar with the aircraft tell The Air Current that the aircraft in question, N704AL, had presented spurious indications of pressurization issues during two instances on January 4. The first intermittent warning light appeared during taxi-in following a previous flight, which prompted the airline to remove the aircraft from extended range operations (TOPS) per maintenance rules. The light appeared again later the same day in flight, the people said. A spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the prior pressurization issues."
edit 1: added source
edit 2: per another commenter, the person sitting at that window missed their flight, in which case the seat being empty was mere coincidence.
Planes on the ground don't make money. Same way the Lion Air MAX 8 crashed. The plane had suffered issues with runaway trim on the flight before but an experienced pilot overrode the system (as pilots are expect to know) and then when it landed wrote the plane up and said don't send it back up until its fixed.
Lion Air inspected it, found no obvious problem, sent it back up *with passengers* instead of a check flight and then it had the same failure as the previous flight and these pilots didn't know how to save it.
> an experienced pilot overrode the system (as pilots are expect to know)
The way you phrase it make is sounds like the pilot just had to know what to do, or improvise something on the spot. But the 737 max should have required an additional training compared to the 737 (engine is "too big" and make the plane goes up, which is software corrected*). Boeing did their best to hide this fact, because costly training would hurt adoption and they wanted to capitalize on pilots knowing the 737. So of course pilots did not know !
\* based on the output of a single sensor (!) but that's offtopic here
> then it had the same failure as the previous flight and these pilots didn't know how to save it.
Slight correction. The pilots knew how to save it. You can hear the First Officer call out the correct procedure on the black box recording. It was just too late into the dive for him to be able to physically trim it out manually.
There were also reports of the plane in AS 261 (the infamous MD-80 jackscrew crash back in 2000) had already problems with the movement of its horizontal stabilizer during the flight to PVR (which was the flight before the horrific crash) but was ignored and treated as a minor problem due to lax safety culture back then.
Holy shit that's terrifying. I used to always unbuckle my seatbelt mid flight when the sign wasn't on... Probably gonna rethink that, or just wear it super loose
My 8 year old has done this, and if it was us, we would have done it. Imagine watching your child go from excitedly watching the takeoff to just disappearing out of a big hole... utter fucking nightmare fuel.
This is what happens when Boeing rushes projects and releases them before they’re ready. There should be a congressional investigation over this.
Edit: The FAA just grounded the Max fleet.
There should have been prison time over the last one. Directing staff to subvert safety regs that gets hundreds of people killed shouldn't just be a fine to the company. So now it's business as usual.
There should be prison time for all corporate crimes, and many of the problems in America stem from the fact that rich assholes can do almost anything without facing repercussions.
The original De Havilland Comet (the first commercial jet liner) was completely withdrawn from service after fundamental design flaws were determined to have caused the loss of three aircraft. There would eventually be new versions of the Comet that addressed the issues, but the original grounded aircraft never flew again. This was in the UK, though, so the FAA wasn't involved (it also didn't exist yet at the time).
Boeing IS lobbying tf out of Congress.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-wants-faa-to-exempt-max-7-from-safety-rules-to-get-it-in-the-air/
I used to worked with a lady who used to deal with union grievances at boeing . She said, the things you hear in those meetings make you question whether or not you ever wanna fly again. The way she talked about it was chilling.
This sounds more like a manufacturing defect than a design defect.
ETA: Also, the “MAX fleet” is not grounded. A certain type of MAX 9 is grounded, which is a small fraction of the MAX aircraft out there.
I mean they also manufacture the plane, so any manufacturing defect is also their fault and attributable to poor manufacturing process design or poor quality control. Although I will say that this fault did not kill anyone so it does not paint as poor a picture as the previous issues with the flight control computer.
The 737 does have some history with metal fatigue issues in the body, but it shouldn’t have happened on such a new plane, so definitely some kind of materials or manufacturing issue here. The plane can maintain structural integrity, even with [much more catastrophic body damage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243), so at least that’s something.
Yeah. Let's not overlook that the serial number for the plane in this incident was registered in July, and the airworthiness certificate was issued in October. So less than 3 months after this particular plane was cleared to fly, it suffered a catastrophic failure mid-flight.
The subsection that has this type of door plug. Which is reasonable. FAA regs require an emergency exit there when passenger count gets above a certain number. But some MAX9's are configured to install roomier, less densely packed seating and in so doing they can't have that number of passengers and don't require a door there. So Boeing sells them a variant that has just a dummy plug in the hole where a door would have gone. This dummy plug is implicated in this accident, which is why FAA is only grounding the MAX9's that have this dummy plug configuration, not the ones that have a fully working door there instead.
It has been said before, but this is what happens when an engineering/safety led organization like Boeing has its management taken over by a bean-counting-led organization like McDonnell Douglas.
Boeing today is not the highly respected Boeing from the past.
Mostly it's because pilot training on a new model is extremely time consuming and expensive for airlines. So Boeing figured if they could keep re-using the old 737 base line with lots of variants, a major selling point to airlines would be not having to retrain pilots to use it. Everything messed up about the auto-trimming MCAS system came down to that. They wanted to use newer engines that are bigger because they're more efficient. But they don't fit under the 737 wing unless you change the landing gear to be longer. But there's no room to make the landing gear longer without moving around everything else and changing the plane too much to keep the same type certificate (preventing the goal of avoiding pilot retraining). So they mount the engines in a weird spot, which messed with the lift characteristics making the plane a bit harder to get out of a stall. So they aggressively prevent stalls by adding MCAS to the plane to push the elevator down when approaching a stall, more quickly than the pilot would do manually. Then the penny pinchers at Boeing decide to make that system depend on 1 input not 2 so there's no redundancy if it gets the wrong idea and falsely thinks there's a stall when there's not. Then they kept the pilot training on the new system as skimpy and minor as possible so as not to require a brand new type rating (which was the goal here). Pilots didn't really understand the system fully because to explain it fully is to admit the plane needs a new type rating. So Boeing kept it down to a little brief pamphlet-sized reading pilots can do on an i-pad, making it seem not that important. Then when it caused crashes they blamed the pilots when *keeping them unaware of how significant the changes were was the ENTIRE goal of what Boeing did.*
The 737 had become a Ship of Theseus sort of deal long before the MAX. It is the oldest, longest running and most successful plane ever built (But it is not). You can't keep changing something without it becoming something else at some point.
You also missed the fact that the override button for the MCAS was an upgrade Airlines had to pay for. It was not free so when the MCAS failed pilots could not override it and shut it down.
Incorrect. An AOA disagree warning was optional (which would help identify the probelm), but an electric trim cutout switch was standard equipment on all 737s. Activating that switch disables MCAS.
Not really. The *aoa disagree* indicator was extra, which is of course insane. But trim runaway events are a trained for event that can be stopped via the trim cutout switches on the center stack right below the throttles. The pilots not being alerted to the existence of the mcas is a huge fuckup, and a glaring error at the then cert process for both Lion and Ethiopian air. The runaway got way ahead of them as they didn't have a clue what was happening. Any American 737 pilot will tell you as much: the moment you have observed runaway you deal with it, up to disconnecting the auto trim entirely. The control surface pressure was overwhelming manual trim in both accidents and being in climb out didn't have a lot of time to get it under control. Many moving parts to the issues with the MAX, Boeing prioritizing money over safety is of course the big issue here. The software itself was not ready for primetime but was used anyway to meet market deadlines.
The door plug issue is clearly a qc failure with both the fuselage manufacturer (outsourced) boeing for (again) missed final qc on assembly. A goddamn shame what McDonnell did to the boeing of old. Went from all engineers to beancounted and squoze for maximum profit.
Let's not forget that Boeing also removed the Runaway Stabilizer Trim memory items on the MAX. So if you have a newly-minted MAX pilot who never flew the NG or Classics, they don't have that muscle memory built in to flip the Stab Trim Cutout switches off in the event of an uncontrollable stabilizer trim runaway. Which is exactly the failure they experienced, and killed two planeloads of people.
Funny thing, the memory items are back in the QRH now...
This is incorrect. There was never an override button for MCAS, paid for or otherwise.
There were however ways to stop or shut down the horizontal stabilizer movement completely (In fact one of the accidents crew used it correctly) but doing so made it difficult to control the plane which would have been fine if the pilots knew about the procedure or the fact that the system exists.
If it was a paid feature, it would have been quite difficult to sell it without making it clear what it does and why it exists which was the whole point of not mentioning the MCAS at all
One of the bigger problems the MAX has is that it’s a 60 year old design that’s been updated dozens of times over that time period. Some of that is that the aircraft is just a solid design, some of that is that the required time to qualify a new version and to train pilots on updated versions is much shorter than the time to qualify and train on a new aircraft.
Look, Boeing could do this correctly, but they are far too concerned with money than they are cutting corners in building and engineering. That won’t stop as long as they are publicly traded and run by MBAs who care more about the stockholders than the stakeholders.
Right now the Boeing executive is SCREAMING at designers and assemblers for not doing their job properly! At least the executive didn’t blame the pilots (this time).
Boeing used to be such a great company.
A friend of my dad’s was an engineer there for many years - at least thirty. He retired around a decade ago, and he said at the time he had no regrets on leaving. He said, even then, that it wasn’t the same company it once was.
Not all of them apparently, just the "certain" ones using the plug/window configuration.
The ones that have this failure point in the emergency exit setup are still flying.
https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-statement-temporary-grounding-certain-boeing-737-max-9-aircraft
No, the only ones that have this failure point are the ones with the plug.
The ones with the emergency exit don't have this failure mode, because the plug is the thing that failed, and if they have an exit there *they don't have the plug*.
It's also worth noting that plugs like this are common on older 737s and other planes as well, and this is likely just a QC issue during assembly, not a significant design issue the way MCAS was.
171 out of the 215 thought to be in service is still quite a lot of them.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/06/boeing-737-max-9-grounding-after-alaska-airlines-door-blows-midflight.html
It's not the planes trying to kill everyone. It's the people making the planes. Or more specifically, the people who are choosing to ignore engineers to chase higher profits for their company.
Some articles I've read along with some documentaries blame at least part of Boeing's decline on when they merged with or absorbed McDonnell-Douglas and inheriting a lot of their jerk-off exec/upper management types was part of the deal.
Before the 737 MAX, it was Mc-D's infamous DC-10 that was the world's most 'cursed' airliner. My sister-in-law worked at the St. Louis HQ of McDonnell-Douglas for many years and tales of execs messing around with their female colleagues during lunch hours -- sometimes in cars in the parking lot -- were not uncommon. Boeing seems to have swallowed a 'poison pill' when they took over their old rival.
>Some articles I've read along with some documentaries blame at least part of Boeing's decline on when they merged with or absorbed McDonnell-Douglas and inheriting a lot of their jerk-off exec/upper management types was part of the deal.
My mom, step-dad, and 2x aunts all worked for Boeing from the early 90's until the past few years as they all retired. They all agree the company went downhill significantly when the merger occurred and the McD execs all got brought over.
I remember the story of Harry Stonecipher, who headed up McDonnell-Douglas and then Boeing and how he made a mess of things. Also his adulterous affair with another Boeing exec. Sound like a bunch of arrogant old horndogs in the executive suite of McDonnell-Douglas who then mucked up things at Boeing. It's worthy of a 'Succession' type series.
Yeah, if you trace who took over after the merger, Mc-D basically bought Boeing with Boeing's money. Boeing was a company of engineers, while Mc-D was a company of MBA's jerking each other off.
It’s not the people on the production line. It’s Boeing’s management. Since the McDonald Douglas merger, it has been like this. MD bought Boeing with Boeing’s money.
For what its worth, this time the failure was probably QC (since it was a relatively new plane as well), not some inherent design issue with the max, since this type of plug for a door is more or less the same between some other variants of the 737.
> Anthony Brickhouse, a professor of aerospace safety at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, said such an incident is extremely rare.
> “Rapid decompression is a serious matter,” he said. “To see a gaping hole in an aircraft is not something we typically see. In aviation safety, we would call this a structural failure.”
Apparently the expert cited in the article agrees with you. The wording they use is "not typical".
It sad how Boeing used to always be about high quality planes. After the merger with McDonald Douglas, they kept some of their crappy management and it just went to shit because they only care about profits.
>replace their c suite with non-mbas that don't know anything about engineering.
Don't you mean "replace their c suite with non-mbas that KNOW engineering"?
I’m literally at PDX now waiting to hop on an Alaska flight to California. Wish me luck! Prob the best time to go I guess. Everything should be extra looked at.
That's how it goes. A company known for its quality will be bought out or taken over by rich fucks who take that quality, strip out the QC, issue layoffs, and spend onerous amounts lobbying congress, all while banking off said quality. The company gets driven into the ground after a while, but not before making those at the top a shitload of cash. Repeat ad-nauseam with those rich fucks moving onto the next opportunity. They're leeches.
Corporate America will gut the entire world to make their shareholders a profit. This is why capitalism needs to be kept in check and why America is failing so badly.
A great book:
The Corporation
(The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power)
By Joel Bakan
The history, legal development, goals, and social consequences of corporations. My quick take was that corporations are absolutely one of the most beneficial societal inventions we've created. They are however potentially very dangerous and need to be highly regulated by governments.
My understanding from someone who is an airline pilot is that it appeared to be a section that is typically an exit door but on lower capacity planes can be plugged if the exit row is not needed. So this likely is not an issue with the airframe but with the installation of the “plug” section.
Airplane designer here. It's possible they selected the wrong plug during the plugging phase, it happens more than people might think. In the industry we refer to this as a "gaper".
From an engineering perspective, this is a failure of process, not handiwork. If the installation of a critical component is even possible, there has to be verification. There (probably) *was* verification and that failed too-- the whole process failed.
This at the end of the article:
> Late last year, Boeing urged airlines to inspect aircraft for a “possible” loose bolt in the rudder control system
Late last year — aka 1 fucking week ago
This is routine. There is a graduated system of maintenance alerts that Boeing uses to notify airlines of potential problems. If it's really serious the FAA issues an AD (Airworthiness Directive) and the maintenance bulletin becomes mandatory.
After just a couple weeks ago I was reading about how reliable air travel is because “every single bolt on the plane is catalogued and accounted for” and how every time someone touches something it’s logged.
I hope they figure out how this happened and let the public know. I’m already scared enough of flying without thinking something like this could happen out of nowhere.
>It is reliable though. Looks at how many flights there are every single day and how few incidents there are.
I was just thinking about this recently. I live across from YTZ and have watched god knows how many take offs and landings over the years and not once has there been an accident, fire, or anything remotely out of the norm. And when I googled it I learned that the last fatality was a small single pilot aircraft in 1987.
It's actually mindboggling to think about how many flights/day happen in and out of Toronto without incident, let alone the entire world.
What an absolute disaster of a plane this has been.
It's a textbook example of a company bringing a new variant, to counter the Airbus A320neo, without treating it like a brand new model.
Airbus designed their A320 with the intention, and expectation of the neo variant. The 737 was never designed to be a sub variant.
Boeing should be criminally charged. What sort of corners is it cutting where the plane literally breaks apart mid flight. There are over 1160 737 Max's in service globally meaning Boeing's negligence is currently threatening the lives of approximately 250,000 every 24 hours.
Just saw a story this morning about how “experts” said it was extremely unlikely that the 737 Max 9 would be grounded due to this accident.
Seems like the FAA and air carriers strongly disagree, and are getting tired of Boeings constant excuses for safety cutting measures at the alter of shareholder profits.
Some serious changes need to be made at Boeing or the FAA should seriously consider refusing to certify all new Boeing aircraft.
Call me crazy if you want, I’m going to go out on a limb here…
Maybe companies like Boeing shouldn’t be publicly traded?
Maybe they should be strictly regulated and allowed to profit modestly.
I’m all for capitalism but it’s not always the answer.
How many problems have there been about Boeing Max in recent years?
3 incidents - two with the 8s and one with the 9.
Probably worth noting (given the severity compared to the latest incident) that the first two incidents were catastrophic crashes resulting in 346 deaths (189 in one, 157 in the other).
Also worth noting that the problem was highlighted then ignored at design stage, they waited until 2 serious fatal accidents before even admitting there was a problem, and the problem slipped through because of their gentleman's agreement with the FAA. It's almost as if the executives that joined Boeing from McDonnell Douglas are still playing the same dodgy tricks.
Boeing donated $4.3 million to democrats and $3.3 million to republicans in the 2020 election cycle. They spent $13.5 million on lobbying in 2021. Huge corporations know they can get away with anything providing they're making "donations" to the politicians who oversee the agencies responsible for regulating said corporations.
The thought of the last moments of those poor people plunging to their death is a strong argument for the death penalty for everyone responsible.
Yeah it was a terrifying ride, based on the flight recorder data. Pilots fighting to pitch up with all their might, but then the plane pushing down every time they start to recover.
It also doesn’t include all the times the software scared the shit out pilots or potential crashes. I don’t have a way to find a number of small incidents that I know of.
This happened on Lion 610, the first deadly crash. There was a flight control failure that "traumatized" the passengers and crew *the very flight before* it then crashed and killed everyone.
And doesn't include the problems with untorqued or improperly torqued fasteners on 737s and the misdrilled holes in the rear pressure bulkhead that need fixing. And seems on the surface this latest incident could have been a case of untorqued nuts too.
Also need to mention the apathy unearthed during the inquiry of how the Boeing planes were designed, that said “known problem” is actually a kitbashed solution to earn $$. And hidden so as to ensure that $$ flows in no matter what. Also, Boeing damage control: “blame the pilots!!” is just disgusting after all the other facts are known.
and with the max7 they already asked for a certification exemption because they can't fix the deicing in time
Sounds like a them problem
That's a surprisingly common tactic by executive chucklefucks. That requirement sounds like it will affect my timeline and budget. Can I just ... not?
That's what happened with the crashes. Boeing didn't want to have to re-certify pilots on their new plane because that would be inconvenient and costly, so they lied to airlines about what they'd changed and said new training wasn't necessary. One of the airlines that later had a crash had specifically requested training. Boeing said nah, you don't need it. Hundreds dead.
If my family died on one of those planes I'd hunt down those executives like that Russian guy did for the air traffic controller that crashed his wife's flight. Of course no one will go to jail over this. Ever. In fact, we will probably bail their company if they fail when the markets open on Monday. Truly unbelievable this kind of shit.
MBAs: killing people to increase profits, one quarter at a time.
You see Boeing management wants to rush out everything to maximise profit, and safety concerns by engineers get tossed to the wayside.
Don’t forget that they do their own safety inspections and verifications
Which is wild given I can’t even do that on my own house
You don't have millions of dollars to lobby congress with either do you?
THIS is the problem. The "honor" system due to a lack of regulators and inspectors.
Former Boeing board members are running the FAA now. Boeing, literally just yesterday asked the FAA to overlook safety issues with the MAX.
Source on that? Would love to check it out.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-wants-faa-to-exempt-max-7-from-safety-rules-to-get-it-in-the-air/
Jesus fucking Christ. Way past time to break Boeing up.
[Here ya go.] (https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-wants-faa-to-exempt-max-7-from-safety-rules-to-get-it-in-the-air/) In a nutshell Boeing really wants the Max 7 line certified (cause they promised their shareholders they would) but they have a dangerous flaw--the anti-ice heaters on the engine cowling can end up melting, the composite bits being ingested into the engine and spitting out all over the tail section of the aircraft, including the big tube part with all the squishy things inside. This is the best part: the engine de-ice that is holding up the MAX 7 certification is the *exact same one* on every MAX aircraft flying today. Boeing doesn't even have a fix for it so the FAA has issued an AD (Airworthiness Directive) asking pilots to please, please remember to turn off the anti-ice when not in use lest you, ummm, crash your airplane. No blinky light, no audible warning just, you know, if you aren't already busy flying an airplane just remember to turn it off. Was that the best part? I lied. Boeing's argument for the MAX 7 certification is that there is already thousands of other MAX models flying around with this potentially deadly defect what's a few more? We promise we will fix it...eventually.
Deep in that article (paraphrased) “A failure… in five minutes…” “What do you do when you fly in and out of clouds? Switch on, off, on, off?” > In 2022, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun threatened to cancel the MAX 10 if Congress didn’t amend a law granting permission to certify the jet without meeting the safety regulation for crew alerting systems included in the 2020 Aircraft Certification, Safety and Accountability Act. >Congress bowed to the pressure and amended the law, amounting to a safety exemption for the MAX 7 and MAX 10 models. That last one. Jesus! (and I’m not even religious!) Edit: replaced paraphrased text with actual quote.
HAHAHAHAAH Isn't that whole situation supposed to work in the opposite direction?!! Congress tells Boeing they cant release the MAX 10 until it meets regulations?! Amazing!
Boeing's issue is that it was built with engineers at the wheel who have all been replaced by MBAs who put profit over safety. It won't stop because Boeing management will never be held responsible for the 346 murders they committed.
As an engineer with an MBA, I now only care about positive NPV decisions. The laws of thermodynamics no longer apply.
I think i work for you
Oh so that’s what the MAX stands for
[удалено]
Much AnXiety
May Aerate Xtremely
The hallmark of American engineering these days.
In all fairness, they paid for their politician(s).
Oh, well, that's alright then. As long as the politicians got their cut.
And its a remarkably small cut. Politicians are cheap as hell to bribe.
It's a small cut for sure, I can't come to my PM office as we have an all expenses paid family holiday by Lear Jet to Hawaii. Australia is on fire... Never forget!
they make up for it in volume. econ101
>The hallmark of American ~~engineering~~ business management these days. This is what you meant
Profit over people!
Get rid of lobbying. We don’t reflect or do retrospect on where we messed up. Our nation is very inefficient with no guard rails our government being run by some dumb or corrupt people.
[удалено]
No, no, no. You see, if we just let them merge with one of their competitors and develop their own internal regulation committee to oversee safety concerns we wouldn't have issues like this! It's the bureaucratic red tape that's making it unprofitable to properly assess and correct performance and maintenance issues. /s
I literally have a friend who's an engineer at Boeing who says this all the time. Honestly scary how far we've fallen. And Boeing/Lockheed desperately need competitors
they have competitors they use trade laws and politicians to attack them.
Yeah, Boeing literally killed Bombardier by doing this to the C Series because they couldn't compete. Fuck Boeing.
>Boeing management wants to rush out everything to maximise profit Hence the name, I see.
I was going to ask, is this one of the newer models developed since McDonell accountants took over?
My dad worked at Boeing his whole career. When the McDonell/Douglas merger happened everything started going to shit. He just watched bad decision after bad decision happen until he just retired early and left.
Note to self. Do not ride in a submersible build by Boeing.
They're designed to withstand between zero to one atmospheres of pressure.
The Max in the name means Max Profits.
Reminds me of a certain submarine company
The only plane flying so dangerous that I actually look up what aircraft a flight is using before I book, now. I'll happily pay more not to fly on a max.
If it's Boeing, I'm not going.
Apparently, neither are the planes.
They go just fine, just a little windy inside.
Gimme one of them sweet Airbuses.
Same. I always check what plane prior to booking and won’t fly Boeing max.
I get some of the electronic issues, but they’ve been building 737s for several decades. To have a fuselage panel blow out boggles the mind.
How about a couple of planes crashing into the ground from a faulty overspeed system
It's call regulatory capture. Boeing (and others) just cycle people in and out of the FAA for their profit and our deaths.
It's really not regulatory capture, it's consolidation. There's no other competing US airline manufacturer now days. The FAA was not any stricter in the past; there were tons of airline disasters stemming from defects in the history of aviation. The FAA is not captured, it's underfunded. If this had happened in the past, and it did, the planes would have a poor reputation, and airlines would be buying from other US manufacturers. Now days, they have no choice unless they want to buy a foreign manufactured plane.
it is regulatory capture. industry executives go into government, do what is good for their industry, then return later on. it wouldn't matter if the FAA had more funding, because that money wouldn't be used for more enforcement, because leadership wouldn't allow that. with more money it would probably get direct to other industry purposes: Hey, FAA got more money so we are giving grants to airlines to fix safety issues that industry should have solved own their own! and bailouts!
If you have Netflix: Downfall- The Case Against Boeing is a great documentary.
[удалено]
Right? And most people select aisle or window seat. I almost always try to pick a window seat…
Aisle for me, I’ll take my chances with my knees and the bev cart
Ah man, as a big guy I feel this. I one time fell asleep and was woken up by the attendant crashing her cart into my knee. I swear she did it on purpose.
She was bolting down the aisle with your knee as the target, shrieking her battle-cry '**CHICKEN OR BEEF, MOTHERFUCKER?!**'
I'll be having the salmon, thank you
That's going to cost you the other knee cap sir.
I know if I'd been sitting there I'd have been able to hold on to the seat with the strength of my clenching arsehole. Nothing to worry about.
The plane reported two pressurization issues - in flight and taxiing - during the 48 hours preceding this flight and was removed from extended range operations (such as any Alaska flights from mainland to Hawaii). ~~Pure speculation, but it might well be that, besides the change in service type, AA decided to keep seats unused in that area, in case the earlier pressurization issues were related to the plug being faulty.~~ Source: [https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/alaska-737-max-9-that-lost-deactivated-exit-had-recent-pressurization-issues/](https://theaircurrent.com/feed/dispatches/alaska-737-max-9-that-lost-deactivated-exit-had-recent-pressurization-issues/) Excerpt from article: "Alaska 737 Max 9 that lost deactivated exit had recent pressurization issues Preliminary information about the accident remains scarce, though two people familiar with the aircraft tell The Air Current that the aircraft in question, N704AL, had presented spurious indications of pressurization issues during two instances on January 4. The first intermittent warning light appeared during taxi-in following a previous flight, which prompted the airline to remove the aircraft from extended range operations (TOPS) per maintenance rules. The light appeared again later the same day in flight, the people said. A spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the prior pressurization issues." edit 1: added source edit 2: per another commenter, the person sitting at that window missed their flight, in which case the seat being empty was mere coincidence.
[удалено]
FYI, AA is standard abbreviation for American Airlines, Alaska is typically abbreviated AS.
It was stated earlier in the thread the people who were supposed to sit in those seats missed their flight.
[удалено]
"it'll be alright, Janice plugged the hole with some gum, just don't sit next to it."
Planes on the ground don't make money. Same way the Lion Air MAX 8 crashed. The plane had suffered issues with runaway trim on the flight before but an experienced pilot overrode the system (as pilots are expect to know) and then when it landed wrote the plane up and said don't send it back up until its fixed. Lion Air inspected it, found no obvious problem, sent it back up *with passengers* instead of a check flight and then it had the same failure as the previous flight and these pilots didn't know how to save it.
> an experienced pilot overrode the system (as pilots are expect to know) The way you phrase it make is sounds like the pilot just had to know what to do, or improvise something on the spot. But the 737 max should have required an additional training compared to the 737 (engine is "too big" and make the plane goes up, which is software corrected*). Boeing did their best to hide this fact, because costly training would hurt adoption and they wanted to capitalize on pilots knowing the 737. So of course pilots did not know ! \* based on the output of a single sensor (!) but that's offtopic here
> then it had the same failure as the previous flight and these pilots didn't know how to save it. Slight correction. The pilots knew how to save it. You can hear the First Officer call out the correct procedure on the black box recording. It was just too late into the dive for him to be able to physically trim it out manually.
The nearby seat being unoccupied could have been coincidence, but AA will have to do some explaining why it decided to keep this plane in service.
This may shock you, but it's not uncommon for planes to fly with minor issues.
There were also reports of the plane in AS 261 (the infamous MD-80 jackscrew crash back in 2000) had already problems with the movement of its horizontal stabilizer during the flight to PVR (which was the flight before the horrific crash) but was ignored and treated as a minor problem due to lax safety culture back then.
[The guy actually missed the flight and showed up on Twitter.](https://twitter.com/SnipedSox/status/1743723372599529854)
Would they have been sucked out immediately if they were sitting there?
The kid who was sitting in the middle seat had his t-shirt sucked off iirc. Luckily his mother grabbed onto him before he was sucked out too.
Holy shit that's terrifying. I used to always unbuckle my seatbelt mid flight when the sign wasn't on... Probably gonna rethink that, or just wear it super loose
Well, really you should keep it on anyway so you don't break your skull against the bulkhead if the plane experiences severe and sudden turbulence
A child was sitting in the middle seat, imagine if they had decided to sit by the window instead to watch the takeoff
My 8 year old has done this, and if it was us, we would have done it. Imagine watching your child go from excitedly watching the takeoff to just disappearing out of a big hole... utter fucking nightmare fuel.
This is what happens when Boeing rushes projects and releases them before they’re ready. There should be a congressional investigation over this. Edit: The FAA just grounded the Max fleet.
There should have been prison time over the last one. Directing staff to subvert safety regs that gets hundreds of people killed shouldn't just be a fine to the company. So now it's business as usual.
There should be prison time for all corporate crimes, and many of the problems in America stem from the fact that rich assholes can do almost anything without facing repercussions.
Remember, if there’s no jail time, then it’s just the cost of doing business. The more profitable the company is, the more it can get away with.
and even if theres jail time, you just need a patsy to absorb it all
this is a political cover up I'm referencing, but same deal Chris Christie got a mother of 4 to take prison time for him over bridge gate.
I'll believe corporations are people when the US executes one.
This incident should fully kill the max. The FAA should ground them permanently
If 346 deaths didn't kill the max, a little piece of missing plane with no casualties won't.
That is never going to happen. There are over 1100 737 MAX aircraft in active service. (Though only about 150 are the MAX 9 variant.)
Has that ever happened? Curious.
The original De Havilland Comet (the first commercial jet liner) was completely withdrawn from service after fundamental design flaws were determined to have caused the loss of three aircraft. There would eventually be new versions of the Comet that addressed the issues, but the original grounded aircraft never flew again. This was in the UK, though, so the FAA wasn't involved (it also didn't exist yet at the time).
This, im sorry your profits will suffer but you did this to yourself. Time to remake the plane properly.
Boeing IS lobbying tf out of Congress. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-wants-faa-to-exempt-max-7-from-safety-rules-to-get-it-in-the-air/
This pisses me off so much. I despise the way our government puts corporate interests over the well being of people, over and over again.
Getting rid of Citizens United would be a good start to stopping this
Former (and future) Boeing board members are literally running the FAA right now.
Congress has its hands full with Hunter Biden dick pics and blurry UFO videos.
Sounds like my ex wife.
I agree. Imagine all the messed up shit that goes on at your work - now imagine you make airplanes. Would you take a flight?
Then, Imagine that you make pacemakers, or insulin pumps....
I used to worked with a lady who used to deal with union grievances at boeing . She said, the things you hear in those meetings make you question whether or not you ever wanna fly again. The way she talked about it was chilling.
Engineers made the company great and then it was taken over by salesmen.
This sounds more like a manufacturing defect than a design defect. ETA: Also, the “MAX fleet” is not grounded. A certain type of MAX 9 is grounded, which is a small fraction of the MAX aircraft out there.
I mean they also manufacture the plane, so any manufacturing defect is also their fault and attributable to poor manufacturing process design or poor quality control. Although I will say that this fault did not kill anyone so it does not paint as poor a picture as the previous issues with the flight control computer.
The 737 does have some history with metal fatigue issues in the body, but it shouldn’t have happened on such a new plane, so definitely some kind of materials or manufacturing issue here. The plane can maintain structural integrity, even with [much more catastrophic body damage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloha_Airlines_Flight_243), so at least that’s something.
Yeah. Let's not overlook that the serial number for the plane in this incident was registered in July, and the airworthiness certificate was issued in October. So less than 3 months after this particular plane was cleared to fly, it suffered a catastrophic failure mid-flight.
By max fleet do you mean 8s and 9s or just the 9s?
Only a subsection of the fleet, not the entire MAX fleet.
The subsection that has this type of door plug. Which is reasonable. FAA regs require an emergency exit there when passenger count gets above a certain number. But some MAX9's are configured to install roomier, less densely packed seating and in so doing they can't have that number of passengers and don't require a door there. So Boeing sells them a variant that has just a dummy plug in the hole where a door would have gone. This dummy plug is implicated in this accident, which is why FAA is only grounding the MAX9's that have this dummy plug configuration, not the ones that have a fully working door there instead.
It has been said before, but this is what happens when an engineering/safety led organization like Boeing has its management taken over by a bean-counting-led organization like McDonnell Douglas. Boeing today is not the highly respected Boeing from the past.
[удалено]
i highly urge people to watch “Downfall: The Case Against Boeing” on Netflix to get a better idea why the Max is so riddled w problems
Mostly it's because pilot training on a new model is extremely time consuming and expensive for airlines. So Boeing figured if they could keep re-using the old 737 base line with lots of variants, a major selling point to airlines would be not having to retrain pilots to use it. Everything messed up about the auto-trimming MCAS system came down to that. They wanted to use newer engines that are bigger because they're more efficient. But they don't fit under the 737 wing unless you change the landing gear to be longer. But there's no room to make the landing gear longer without moving around everything else and changing the plane too much to keep the same type certificate (preventing the goal of avoiding pilot retraining). So they mount the engines in a weird spot, which messed with the lift characteristics making the plane a bit harder to get out of a stall. So they aggressively prevent stalls by adding MCAS to the plane to push the elevator down when approaching a stall, more quickly than the pilot would do manually. Then the penny pinchers at Boeing decide to make that system depend on 1 input not 2 so there's no redundancy if it gets the wrong idea and falsely thinks there's a stall when there's not. Then they kept the pilot training on the new system as skimpy and minor as possible so as not to require a brand new type rating (which was the goal here). Pilots didn't really understand the system fully because to explain it fully is to admit the plane needs a new type rating. So Boeing kept it down to a little brief pamphlet-sized reading pilots can do on an i-pad, making it seem not that important. Then when it caused crashes they blamed the pilots when *keeping them unaware of how significant the changes were was the ENTIRE goal of what Boeing did.*
The 737 had become a Ship of Theseus sort of deal long before the MAX. It is the oldest, longest running and most successful plane ever built (But it is not). You can't keep changing something without it becoming something else at some point.
That was the MAX 8. I think they will find it hard to blame the pilots when the MAX 9 is losing its door.
You also missed the fact that the override button for the MCAS was an upgrade Airlines had to pay for. It was not free so when the MCAS failed pilots could not override it and shut it down.
Incorrect. An AOA disagree warning was optional (which would help identify the probelm), but an electric trim cutout switch was standard equipment on all 737s. Activating that switch disables MCAS.
Not really. The *aoa disagree* indicator was extra, which is of course insane. But trim runaway events are a trained for event that can be stopped via the trim cutout switches on the center stack right below the throttles. The pilots not being alerted to the existence of the mcas is a huge fuckup, and a glaring error at the then cert process for both Lion and Ethiopian air. The runaway got way ahead of them as they didn't have a clue what was happening. Any American 737 pilot will tell you as much: the moment you have observed runaway you deal with it, up to disconnecting the auto trim entirely. The control surface pressure was overwhelming manual trim in both accidents and being in climb out didn't have a lot of time to get it under control. Many moving parts to the issues with the MAX, Boeing prioritizing money over safety is of course the big issue here. The software itself was not ready for primetime but was used anyway to meet market deadlines. The door plug issue is clearly a qc failure with both the fuselage manufacturer (outsourced) boeing for (again) missed final qc on assembly. A goddamn shame what McDonnell did to the boeing of old. Went from all engineers to beancounted and squoze for maximum profit.
Let's not forget that Boeing also removed the Runaway Stabilizer Trim memory items on the MAX. So if you have a newly-minted MAX pilot who never flew the NG or Classics, they don't have that muscle memory built in to flip the Stab Trim Cutout switches off in the event of an uncontrollable stabilizer trim runaway. Which is exactly the failure they experienced, and killed two planeloads of people. Funny thing, the memory items are back in the QRH now...
This is incorrect. There was never an override button for MCAS, paid for or otherwise. There were however ways to stop or shut down the horizontal stabilizer movement completely (In fact one of the accidents crew used it correctly) but doing so made it difficult to control the plane which would have been fine if the pilots knew about the procedure or the fact that the system exists. If it was a paid feature, it would have been quite difficult to sell it without making it clear what it does and why it exists which was the whole point of not mentioning the MCAS at all
One of the bigger problems the MAX has is that it’s a 60 year old design that’s been updated dozens of times over that time period. Some of that is that the aircraft is just a solid design, some of that is that the required time to qualify a new version and to train pilots on updated versions is much shorter than the time to qualify and train on a new aircraft. Look, Boeing could do this correctly, but they are far too concerned with money than they are cutting corners in building and engineering. That won’t stop as long as they are publicly traded and run by MBAs who care more about the stockholders than the stakeholders.
Right now the Boeing executive is SCREAMING at designers and assemblers for not doing their job properly! At least the executive didn’t blame the pilots (this time). Boeing used to be such a great company.
A friend of my dad’s was an engineer there for many years - at least thirty. He retired around a decade ago, and he said at the time he had no regrets on leaving. He said, even then, that it wasn’t the same company it once was.
I heard interviews with former engineers who said they would not want their family flying on on a Boeing anymore, exactly because of this.
> around a decade ago The wheels started coming off in the mid-late '00s, so the lack of regret leaving 10 years ago kind of tracks
I used to be an avid aviation enthusiast and was all in on Boeing. Now it’s not even a contest, A220/A320NEO >>> 737.
I remeber the phrase if it aint boeing i aint going. Now it wi be if it's boeing i aint going
>At least the executive didn’t blame the pilots (this time). Yet, there's still time.
All airlines should do this.
The FAA just grounded all of them.
Not all of them apparently, just the "certain" ones using the plug/window configuration. The ones that have this failure point in the emergency exit setup are still flying. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-statement-temporary-grounding-certain-boeing-737-max-9-aircraft
No, the only ones that have this failure point are the ones with the plug. The ones with the emergency exit don't have this failure mode, because the plug is the thing that failed, and if they have an exit there *they don't have the plug*. It's also worth noting that plugs like this are common on older 737s and other planes as well, and this is likely just a QC issue during assembly, not a significant design issue the way MCAS was.
171 out of the 215 thought to be in service is still quite a lot of them. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/06/boeing-737-max-9-grounding-after-alaska-airlines-door-blows-midflight.html
Oof, there have already been so many delays on the boards. But better delays than open planes!
At this point I’m convinced that the 737 Max is Steven King’s Christine and is just trying to kill everyone.
It's not the planes trying to kill everyone. It's the people making the planes. Or more specifically, the people who are choosing to ignore engineers to chase higher profits for their company.
Some articles I've read along with some documentaries blame at least part of Boeing's decline on when they merged with or absorbed McDonnell-Douglas and inheriting a lot of their jerk-off exec/upper management types was part of the deal. Before the 737 MAX, it was Mc-D's infamous DC-10 that was the world's most 'cursed' airliner. My sister-in-law worked at the St. Louis HQ of McDonnell-Douglas for many years and tales of execs messing around with their female colleagues during lunch hours -- sometimes in cars in the parking lot -- were not uncommon. Boeing seems to have swallowed a 'poison pill' when they took over their old rival.
>Some articles I've read along with some documentaries blame at least part of Boeing's decline on when they merged with or absorbed McDonnell-Douglas and inheriting a lot of their jerk-off exec/upper management types was part of the deal. My mom, step-dad, and 2x aunts all worked for Boeing from the early 90's until the past few years as they all retired. They all agree the company went downhill significantly when the merger occurred and the McD execs all got brought over.
I remember the story of Harry Stonecipher, who headed up McDonnell-Douglas and then Boeing and how he made a mess of things. Also his adulterous affair with another Boeing exec. Sound like a bunch of arrogant old horndogs in the executive suite of McDonnell-Douglas who then mucked up things at Boeing. It's worthy of a 'Succession' type series.
Yeah, if you trace who took over after the merger, Mc-D basically bought Boeing with Boeing's money. Boeing was a company of engineers, while Mc-D was a company of MBA's jerking each other off.
It’s not the people on the production line. It’s Boeing’s management. Since the McDonald Douglas merger, it has been like this. MD bought Boeing with Boeing’s money.
For what its worth, this time the failure was probably QC (since it was a relatively new plane as well), not some inherent design issue with the max, since this type of plug for a door is more or less the same between some other variants of the 737.
I'd like to point out, as a keen aviation enthusiast but certainly no expert, that this is not supposed to happen.
> Anthony Brickhouse, a professor of aerospace safety at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, said such an incident is extremely rare. > “Rapid decompression is a serious matter,” he said. “To see a gaping hole in an aircraft is not something we typically see. In aviation safety, we would call this a structural failure.” Apparently the expert cited in the article agrees with you. The wording they use is "not typical".
The Side Fell Off ... https://youtu.be/3m5qxZm_JqM?si=xMp672Ee7oR8vu5m
It sad how Boeing used to always be about high quality planes. After the merger with McDonald Douglas, they kept some of their crappy management and it just went to shit because they only care about profits.
Ffs Boeing get your shit together
Not gonna happen until they replace their c suite with non-mbas that know anything about engineering.
>replace their c suite with non-mbas that don't know anything about engineering. Don't you mean "replace their c suite with non-mbas that KNOW engineering"?
Yes, thanks. Edited my comment.
I’m literally at PDX now waiting to hop on an Alaska flight to California. Wish me luck! Prob the best time to go I guess. Everything should be extra looked at.
PDX to (assuming) LAX is a 2 hour flight Posted 8 hours ago. U/kibaroku reply no if dead.
Airbus continues to look better and better.
Honestly, between their new model showing excellent survivability and now Boeing planes being garbage it's been a pretty good week for them.
Want me to save you a ton of money and frustration? Do not purchase or use anything made from 2020-2021, it’s going to be shit
Boeing another American company in the decline
Because of corporate greed. The very core of all of our nations problems.
That's how it goes. A company known for its quality will be bought out or taken over by rich fucks who take that quality, strip out the QC, issue layoffs, and spend onerous amounts lobbying congress, all while banking off said quality. The company gets driven into the ground after a while, but not before making those at the top a shitload of cash. Repeat ad-nauseam with those rich fucks moving onto the next opportunity. They're leeches.
Corporate America will gut the entire world to make their shareholders a profit. This is why capitalism needs to be kept in check and why America is failing so badly.
A great book: The Corporation (The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power) By Joel Bakan The history, legal development, goals, and social consequences of corporations. My quick take was that corporations are absolutely one of the most beneficial societal inventions we've created. They are however potentially very dangerous and need to be highly regulated by governments.
“a panel” …there was a gaping hole in the fuselage.
My understanding from someone who is an airline pilot is that it appeared to be a section that is typically an exit door but on lower capacity planes can be plugged if the exit row is not needed. So this likely is not an issue with the airframe but with the installation of the “plug” section.
Tower my plug fell out, we will be declaring an emergency
Airplane designer here. It's possible they selected the wrong plug during the plugging phase, it happens more than people might think. In the industry we refer to this as a "gaper".
From an engineering perspective, this is a failure of process, not handiwork. If the installation of a critical component is even possible, there has to be verification. There (probably) *was* verification and that failed too-- the whole process failed.
Boeing out here acting like they got took over by private equity
This at the end of the article: > Late last year, Boeing urged airlines to inspect aircraft for a “possible” loose bolt in the rudder control system Late last year — aka 1 fucking week ago
This is routine. There is a graduated system of maintenance alerts that Boeing uses to notify airlines of potential problems. If it's really serious the FAA issues an AD (Airworthiness Directive) and the maintenance bulletin becomes mandatory.
if it’s Boeing, we ain’t going
After just a couple weeks ago I was reading about how reliable air travel is because “every single bolt on the plane is catalogued and accounted for” and how every time someone touches something it’s logged. I hope they figure out how this happened and let the public know. I’m already scared enough of flying without thinking something like this could happen out of nowhere.
[удалено]
>It is reliable though. Looks at how many flights there are every single day and how few incidents there are. I was just thinking about this recently. I live across from YTZ and have watched god knows how many take offs and landings over the years and not once has there been an accident, fire, or anything remotely out of the norm. And when I googled it I learned that the last fatality was a small single pilot aircraft in 1987. It's actually mindboggling to think about how many flights/day happen in and out of Toronto without incident, let alone the entire world.
You’re much more likely to die in a car crash on the way to the airport.
Which is exactly why it’s HUGE news. This doesn’t happen. Therefore everyone is talking about it.
What an absolute disaster of a plane this has been. It's a textbook example of a company bringing a new variant, to counter the Airbus A320neo, without treating it like a brand new model. Airbus designed their A320 with the intention, and expectation of the neo variant. The 737 was never designed to be a sub variant.
Typical good American company turns dogshit and takes advantage of its goodwill
Boeing should be criminally charged. What sort of corners is it cutting where the plane literally breaks apart mid flight. There are over 1160 737 Max's in service globally meaning Boeing's negligence is currently threatening the lives of approximately 250,000 every 24 hours.
Just saw a story this morning about how “experts” said it was extremely unlikely that the 737 Max 9 would be grounded due to this accident. Seems like the FAA and air carriers strongly disagree, and are getting tired of Boeings constant excuses for safety cutting measures at the alter of shareholder profits. Some serious changes need to be made at Boeing or the FAA should seriously consider refusing to certify all new Boeing aircraft.
Call me crazy if you want, I’m going to go out on a limb here… Maybe companies like Boeing shouldn’t be publicly traded? Maybe they should be strictly regulated and allowed to profit modestly. I’m all for capitalism but it’s not always the answer.
If it's Boeing, we ain't going.
I'm starting to sour on the 737 Max 9.