Another brand new 737 Max crashes

[Fly Mach .86]

Originally Posted by beepbeep

Osprey is nowadays a very very safe aircraft/rotocraft/ugly thing. But it took a while...

12 hull loses and 42 deaths. Yeah, that took awhile.

[Jolly Amaranto]

From Southwest Airlines

A message from our CEO
Since Sunday, we have been continually working with the FAA, Boeing, and others within the U.S. government, regarding the Boeing 737 MAX aircraft type that was involved in the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 accident on March 10. This afternoon, the FAA issued its order to ground the MAX, with our knowledge and support. We have removed the 34 MAX aircraft from service; they will remain out of service until the FAA rescinds this order. With more than 750 aircraft in our fleet, more than 95 percent of our aircraft are unaffected by this order.

Safety is our top priority. It always has been. It always must be. Our commitment to the Safety of our Employees and our Customers is unwavering and uncompromising. U.S. airlines operate within the most advanced, regulated aviation system in the world and nothing is more sacred to all of our Southwest Family Members than the trust our Customers place in our airline every day, on every flight. You have our commitment to minimize the disruptions to our Customers' travel plans, while adhering to the FAA's requirements and ensuring the Safety of our fleet.

Southwest® has a long history with the 737 and a stellar safety record. Our experience with the MAX, along with the other U.S. operators, has been phenomenal. We've operated over 40,000 flights covering almost 90,000 hours. There is a ton of data collected, which we continuously monitor. In all of our analysis since our first flight in 2017, or that by our U.S. counterparts or the FAA; nothing has presented any flight safety concerns. It is also important to add that all Pilots at Southwest are deeply experienced and highly trained, as are our Mechanics who are highly experienced and trained to safely maintain every airplane in our fleet.

I realize this disruption may inconvenience our Customers during this busy spring travel season, and we will do everything in our power to mitigate the impact to our operation. For that, I offer my sincere apologies. To support our Customers, we are offering flexible rebooking policies for any Customer booked on a cancelled flight.

Thank you for your patience and understanding. We will provide frequent updates to you as this story develops.

[DanielDudley]

https://imgur.com/gallery/4llOkKn

Originally Posted by Fly Mach .86

This is pretty much standard procedure when something like this happens. Especially when there are many lives lost. The DC-10 fleet was grounded when one of them had a number 2 engine failure that sent bits of the engine into and severed hydraulic lines and they lost all hydraulic power. The 787 was grounded after the battery explosions. The only surprise for me was that they weren't grounded by the FAA sooner. Many dollars will be lost from all of this and that is always the driving factor. What bothers me is they will likely find an electronic/software problem. When the first automated/glass cockpit airplanes were put into service, a common question in the cockpit was, "OK, now what's it doing"? Trying to make the airplanes safer by eliminating the human factor created a whole new set of problems to deal with. When UPS first got the 757, the pilots were told to use the automation as much as possible. When pilots went in for recurrent training, it was quite clear that their flying skills had deteriorated somewhat. In some cases a lot. They were then instructed that the time spent using automation was up to the discretion of the captain.

Funny story about that. I had a lawyer buddy who defended MacDac in the DC-10 litigation. He traveled all over the country doing depositions, and he carried the faulty parts from the A/C on board with him. We always joked about what would happen if a Boeing airplane went down and they discovered all these DC-10 parts in the wreckage. Litigation humor.

In other unfortunate Boeing news, there's this:https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/air-force-boeing-refueling-plane/index.html

Jef, you retired, and the whole place went to hell in a handbasket.

[stealthn]

Wow that last article really shows apathy to the product. They need to do some serious sole searching at all levels of the company...

[Scott R]

Internally they are keeping us in the dark, and the flight software is my gig.

[daepp]

Originally Posted by madcorgi

In other unfortunate Boeing news, there's this:https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/air-force-boeing-refueling-plane/index.html

Jef, you retired, and the whole place went to hell in a handbasket.

Hahahahaha - tru dat!

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by Scott R

Internally they are keeping us in the dark, and the flight software is my gig.

The old "treat `em like mushrooms" tactic, eh?
I am not surprised.

[stealthn]

Originally Posted by Scott R

Internally they are keeping us in the dark, and the flight software is my gig.

Well good luck, frankly I could not live with that responsibility

[Scott R]

Originally Posted by stealthn

Well good luck, frankly I could not live with that responsibility

Well thankfully my area is navigation only. It doesn't make things better of course.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by madcorgi

In other unfortunate Boeing news, there's this:https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/air-force-boeing-refueling-plane/index.html

Jef, you retired, and the whole place went to hell in a handbasket.

I wish I could say I am surprised.

While they may have done well in getting rid of me, they unfortunately lost an awful lot of really good people. The "Golden Handshake" fairly decimated the ranks, as it was intended to do. Across the board - from engineering to mechanics on the floor, a lot of experience was lost.

They followed that up with a pretty intense hiring binge. Especially within the mechanics' ranks. The problems noted in the linked article are, unfortunately, the inevitable result. Not enough "adult supervision" and the attendant discipline that instills. The company is going through teething pains. They are trying to get this new generation house broken and up to speed. It will take awhile.

For those of you unfamiliar with airline industry practices, "FOD" is a big, big deal. A really big deal. An enormously big deal. By way of example, I was hanging out in a 767 MLG wheel well one day in Tel Aviv when a mechanic above me on a scissors lift dropped a nut. I heard it clatter down off of the lift and land on the concrete floor somewhere near me. It was obviously on the floor somewhere.

In other industries, the fact that we both heard it hit the floor probably would have been good enough. It was obviously no longer anywhere on the airplane. Not so in the aviation world - it was imperative that we find that nut. To make a long story short, we eventually had the entire crew of about 30 mechanics, several engineers, several inspectors, and even the shift supervisor looking for that nut. It shut down the entire job. It was simply not an option to proceed without finding that nut. We did, several hours later, but that's how important FOD is in our world.

So, sandwiches and tools on a delivered aircraft? Someone got in very, very big trouble. Might have even lost their job. Probably reduced to being a burger flipper, or an architect, or some other equally unrewarding job.

[tdskip]

Originally Posted by Scott R

Well thankfully my area is navigation only. It doesn't make things better of course.

So just to clarify, your livelihood at present ultimately depends on science and a reliable understanding of physics.

Interesting.

Now back to the thread.

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

I wish I could say I am surprised.

While they may have done well in getting rid of me, they unfortunately lost an awful lot of really good people. The "Golden Handshake" fairly decimated the ranks, as it was intended to do. Across the board - from engineering to mechanics on the floor, a lot of experience was lost.

They followed that up with a pretty intense hiring binge. Especially within the mechanics' ranks. The problems noted in the linked article are, unfortunately, the inevitable result. Not enough "adult supervision" and the attendant discipline that instills. The company is going through teething pains. They are trying to get this new generation house broken and up to speed. It will take awhile.

For those of you unfamiliar with airline industry practices, "FOD" is a big, big deal. A really big deal. An enormously big deal. By way of example, I was hanging out in a 767 MLG wheel well one day in Tel Aviv when a mechanic above me on a scissors lift dropped a nut. I heard it clatter down off of the lift and land on the concrete floor somewhere near me. It was obviously on the floor somewhere.

In other industries, the fact that we both heard it hit the floor probably would have been good enough. It was obviously no longer anywhere on the airplane. Not so in the aviation world - it was imperative that we find that nut. To make a long story short, we eventually had the entire crew of about 30 mechanics, several engineers, several inspectors, and even the shift supervisor looking for that nut. It shut down the entire job. It was simply not an option to proceed without finding that nut. We did, several hours later, but that's how important FOD is in our world.

So, sandwiches and tools on a delivered aircraft? Someone got in very, very big trouble. Might have even lost their job. Probably reduced to being a burger flipper, or an architect, or some other equally unrewarding job.

I have a gadget that looks like a push-broom with wheels that has a strong magnet in it. I use it frequently when I drop fasteners in my shop--picks up anything ferrous. Sounds like you guys could have used one. Unless the nut was titanium or something.

Spent a couple years prowling the factory floor during the 777 AP #1 era. Our factories were pretty damn clean, but the Heavies' even were cleaner. I visited them all as one of Mulally's entourage in 93 or 94.

The Dreamliner fiasco was a disaster that simply would not have happened under the "old guard" whose tender ministrations gently guided me for two years with exhortations of "I'm gonna put my foot up your ass sideways!" Missing an on-dock date by even a day was unimaginable, much less a couple of years!

It was the most inefficient, wasteful management system I ever saw, but we made our on-dock dates. Proving the time-honored rule that companies that can afford wasteful inefficiency tend to indulge in it. I had twice as many on my staff as I needed, all lifers way older than me, with too little meaningful work to keep them all busy, yet my bosses wanted to continue to grow their fiefdoms. I had two senior managers between me and my director.Morale was ****, and we lost every decent person we had. My Boeing on-site manager in Gifu was an idiot, went completely native, and could not get anything done. That guy could not have pulled a greasy string out of a sick cat's ass. He became an enemy, bombing us every night with faxes. After rollout, I got bored and left for my next Boeing gig before the layoffs and buyouts started. Everyone I knew either retired or bailed.

Gorgeous airplane, though. And all the parts made it on dock on schedule.

[rfuerst911sc]

I retired from a Lockheed facility that built C130's and F35 center wings . The push for speed and efficiency during the builds if not monitored can lead to things like FOD or sloppy work . Your internal processes have to be redundant to " catch " all mistakes . Sounds easy to the layman but look at the size of a C130 . How many mechanical fasteners in that bird ? How many miles of wires ? You get the idea . You have to have rock solid processes , great mechanics , great inspectors etc. and EVERYONE has to be on the same page to deliver a quality product to the customer . Just one breakdown in this chain can lead to serious consequences !

It will be interesting to see what the final results are from the investigations into these two crashes . What happens if both are determined to be pilot error ? Is it just simply more training ? How do you prove your training is " good enough " to release the fleet from being grounded ? I am not familiar with the training side of the aircraft industry so am curious how it works .

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by madcorgi

In other unfortunate Boeing news, there's this:https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/air-force-boeing-refueling-plane/index.html

Jef, you retired, and the whole place went to hell in a handbasket.

From the article.

"FOD is really about every person, everyone in the workforce, following those procedures and bringing a culture of discipline for safety," Roper said.

Originally Posted by stealthn

Wow that last article really shows apathy to the product. They need to do some serious sole searching at all levels of the company...

From what I have seen in Jeff's post he does not come from a culture of discipline.

I suspect this lack of discipline comes as a result of prosperity.

Boeing's civilian market has only one real competitor, and the military sector has been even more lucrative.

This is bound to breed a certain culture and carry a certain amount of fat and laziness or at least "non-productives" lacking a sense of responsibility and discipline.

We once saw it in the domestic automobile industry decades ago, all that has changed now.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by rfuerst911sc

I retired from a Lockheed facility that built C130's and F35 center wings . The push for speed and efficiency during the builds if not monitored can lead to things like FOD or sloppy work . Your internal processes have to be redundant to " catch " all mistakes . Sounds easy to the layman but look at the size of a C130 . How many mechanical fasteners in that bird ? How many miles of wires ? You get the idea . You have to have rock solid processes , great mechanics , great inspectors etc. and EVERYONE has to be on the same page to deliver a quality product to the customer . Just one breakdown in this chain can lead to serious consequences !

It will be interesting to see what the final results are from the investigations into these two crashes . What happens if both are determined to be pilot error ? Is it just simply more training ? How do you prove your training is " good enough " to release the fleet from being grounded ? I am not familiar with the training side of the aircraft industry so am curious how it works .

I think you have a solid outlook on this and as with the domestic automobile industry building quality products was not possible until management made it top priority.

One could blame the line workers all day long, but if management promoted speed/quantity over quality the end result was predictable.

Good Work Ain’t Cheap... | RAW & UNFILTERED

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by DanielDudley

https://imgur.com/gallery/4llOkKn

Wow, this is the most informative big picture presentation of the 737 Max system/situation I've seen to date.

Thank you for posting it.

It kind of smacks me in the head with a big "duh" moment.

A comment from the link above.

endlesstraveller 204 pts 15 hr

Amazing work with this post.

Not a single news outlet has explained things this clearly.

And this is coming from an aeronautical engineer

EDIT-1:

A link from Dan's link.

737 MAX - MCAS
http://www.b737.org.uk/mcas.htm

MCAS was introduced to counteract the pitch up effect of the LEAP-1B engines at high AoA. The engines were both larger and relocated slightly up and forward from the previous NG CFM56-7 engines to accomodate their larger diameter. This new location and size of the nacelle causes it to produce lift at high AoA; as the nacelle is ahead of the CofG this causes a pitch-up effect which could in turn further increase the AoA and send the aircraft closer towards the stall. MCAS was therefore introduced to give an automatic nose down stabilizer input during steep turns with elevated load factors (high AoA) and during flaps up flight at airspeeds approaching stall.

Band-aids don't fix everything, I learned that as a kid.

EDIT-2:

Based on a reader's comment in Dan's link I looked up an earlier 737 problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues

Boeing 737 rudder issues

During the 1990s, a series of rudder issues on Boeing 737 aircraft resulted in multiple incidents. In two separate accidents, pilots lost control of their Boeing 737 aircraft due to a sudden and unexpected movement of the rudder, and the resulting crashes killed everyone aboard. A total of 157 people aboard the two aircraft were killed.[1] Similar rudder issues led to a temporary loss of control on at least one other Boeing 737 flight before the problem was ultimately identified. The National Transportation Safety Board ultimately determined that the accidents and incidents were the result of a design flaw that could result in an uncommanded movement of the aircraft's rudder.[2]:13[3]:ix The issues were resolved after the NTSB identified the cause of the rudder malfunction and the Federal Aviation Administration ordered repairs for all Boeing 737 aircraft in service.

[javadog]

I have a feeling that inadequate training is going to be factor in this accident. It looks pretty certain that MCAS was involved and I’d wager that the pilots did not deal with it correctly. The root cause is still far from known but what has been published of the flight data so far shows some really odd values for the airspeed.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

IFor those of you unfamiliar with airline industry practices, "FOD" is a big, big deal. A really big deal. An enormously big deal.

Unfortunately, the CNN article is all too familiar to me. When SH-60B's were being refurbed at the Corpus Christi Army Depot, the acceptance test flight, which in a fleet squadron might take an hour, was an all day affair.

When I was the Chief Government Pilot at the Sikorsky factory the emphasis on FOD and other "clean" processes was unrelenting. The Air Force folks that accepted the tanker should be fired.