Would you fly on a 737 Max?

[airbusA346]

Dingu said:

They only have themselves to blame for that one. If they had been competent in the first place…

If anything regulators need to put them under more scrutiny currently.

This was posted in the thread about todays incident.

The links are:

- https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/19/us-lawmakers-set-t...
- https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense...
- https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense...
- https://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-N...


And the new 777X is massively delayed too.

[Dingu]

airbusA346 said:

Dingu said:

They only have themselves to blame for that one. If they had been competent in the first place…

If anything regulators need to put them under more scrutiny currently.

This was posted in the thread about todays incident.

The links are:

- https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/19/us-lawmakers-set-t...
- https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense...
- https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense...
- https://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-N...


And the new 777X is massively delayed too.

I’m aware. It’s a complete dereliction of duty and I think other countries should no longer rely on FAA certification and make the planes pass another countries checks (a country who actually follow proper process)/pass each countries own. Clearly the FAA and Boeing can’t be trusted to do things properly anymore.

[airbusA346]

Dingu said:

I’m aware. It’s a complete dereliction of duty and I think other countries should no longer rely on FAA certification and make the planes pass another countries checks (a country who actually follow proper process)/pass each countries own. Clearly the FAA and Boeing can’t be trusted to do things properly anymore.

Shame the FAA don't tell Boeing to do one and come back when they've sorted themselves out. Is it going to take another fatal accident (which could have been the Alaska flight) for it to happen.

[Ancient Wheelbarrow]

airbusA346 said:

Shame the FAA don't tell Boeing to do one and come back when they've sorted themselves out. Is it going to take another fatal accident (which could have been the Alaska flight) for it to happen.

Indeed, 171 passengers but thankfully nobody sat in that one seat that next to the door that had it's padding ripped clean off. Dread to think what would have happened with anyone sat there.

[havoc]

Dingu said:

Clearly the FAA and Boeing can’t be trusted to do things properly anymore.

Indeed.

This has apparently been known in industry circles for some time, it hit the public eye with the original MCAS disasters, and yet...has anything changed?

It would appear not...not while mega-corporate lobbying still has such sway over lawmakers in the US.



We are definitely past peak-democracy across the world. The US is an oligarchy, India appears to be in the thrall of populist/demagogic politics as much as the UK has been recently, corporate-sponsored corruption is either growing or is just becoming less and less discreet.

[untakenname]

Was interesting that till the plane crashes Boeing were heralded as being one of the best examples of quickly implementing Agile working practices on the 737 Max project yet after the incidents everyone was quick to distance themselves and pretend they never changed their working methodology.

Sloppy working practices as evidenced by the loose bolts/tools left in the fuelselage and the lack of sackings over it means I wouldn't trust getting on a Max though you're not really given a choice when flying at the point of booking tickets unless you choose an airline that doesn't have any in their fleet.

[Piginapoke]

Blancoleiro is all you need for this kind of thing- active 777 Pilot and knows his stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9EvHpf8jZg

[MB140]

Piginapoke said:

Blancoleiro is all you need for this kind of thing- active 777 Pilot and knows his stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9EvHpf8jZg

Yep there is also Pilot Debrief on youtube, ex f15, f18 pilot now flys for major US airline, i like his channel.

[Speed 3]

Decompression was so fierce it blew the ballistic cockpit door open

Can't have been far off the seatbelts off altitude. Amazing no-one got sucked out. Plug Door and a couple of mobile phones now found on the ground.

[Ancient Wheelbarrow]

This specific plane had 3 pressurisation warnings on different flights the day before, and was restricted to overland flights only so it could return to an airport quickly in the event of continued warnings.

WTF.

Is that 'normal'?

[Speed 3]

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace. They're normally down to ill-fitting seals on the numerous openings on the fuselage. Aircraft can be grounded for days trying to find the cause. You can see why they probably thought spurious warning and the fault in the sensing system given the age of the aircraft. Unless there was a significant overload on the pressurisation system or whistling noises in the cabin, it would have been deferrable.

ETOPS rules on twins are more stringent for certain categories of defect, hence needing to be able to divert. Not all depressurisations are explosive.

Edited by Speed 3 on Monday 8th January 11:55

[Teddy Lop]

Ancient Wheelbarrow said:

This specific plane had 3 pressurisation warnings on different flights the day before, and was restricted to overland flights only so it could return to an airport quickly in the event of continued warnings.

WTF.

Is that 'normal'?

Seems fast'n'loose doesn't it. Either the jets flightworthy or not.

Wiping the CVR raised an eyebrow too, "policy" or not, after you've declared an emergency!

[Speed 3]

Teddy Lop said:

Seems fast'n'loose doesn't it. Either the jets flightworthy or not.

Not everything in airworthiness is that binary.

Teddy Lop said:

Wiping the CVR raised an eyebrow too, "policy" or not, after you've declared an emergency!

They didn't "wipe" the CVR, it does that itself automatically, having only a 2 hour record time. Hence the NTSB repeating the ask of the FAA for a 25 hour rule. The 2-hour rule is so out of date, can't believe its still going (originating from physical limitation of recording media (tape/wire). Solid state memory these days is small & cheap.

[Teddy Lop]

Speed 3 said:

Teddy Lop said:

Seems fast'n'loose doesn't it. Either the jets flightworthy or not.

Not everything in airworthiness is that binary.

Teddy Lop said:

Wiping the CVR raised an eyebrow too, "policy" or not, after you've declared an emergency!

They didn't "wipe" the CVR, it does that itself automatically, having only a 2 hour record time. Hence the NTSB repeating the ask of the FAA for a 25 hour rule. The 2-hour rule is so out of date, can't believe its still going (originating from physical limitation of recording media (tape/wire). Solid state memory these days is small & cheap.

CVR - thanks, makes sense.

How common are pressure faults, how common is it to have 3 in a day? On both a new aircraft and a newish type is there a period of being slightly more concerned? In my experience I like to burn-in as most things fail early on or last for years. I get intermittent faults can be a b!tch as I'm a spark but they can also be a warning of things about to let go...

[J4CKO]

Speed 3 said:

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace.

Yeah, cant just dip an airliner in a bucket of water to find the puncture by watching for the bubbles, well they sort of did for the Comet but its a big job.

[Teddy Lop]

J4CKO said:

Speed 3 said:

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace.

Yeah, cant just dip an airliner in a bucket of water to find the puncture by watching for the bubbles, well they sort of did for the Comet but its a big job.

Not saying it's easy but there must be a way, such as pressure the craft with a non-residual dyed gas, or hot air in a chilled hanger/chiiled air hot place and thermal camera it.

[captain_cynic]

Teddy Lop said:

J4CKO said:

Speed 3 said:

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace.

Yeah, cant just dip an airliner in a bucket of water to find the puncture by watching for the bubbles, well they sort of did for the Comet but its a big job.

Not saying it's easy but there must be a way, such as pressure the craft with a non-residual dyed gas, or hot air in a chilled hanger/chiiled air hot place and thermal camera it.

It might not even be a leak (faulty sensor) or it could only appear at a higher pressure differential, so doing a pressure test at ground level might not show much at all.

I'm also pretty sure they've already got coloured smoke machines.

IANAAME (I Am Not An Aircraft Maintenance Engineer), happy to sit corrected.

[Teddy Lop]

captain_cynic said:

Teddy Lop said:

J4CKO said:

Speed 3 said:

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace.

Yeah, cant just dip an airliner in a bucket of water to find the puncture by watching for the bubbles, well they sort of did for the Comet but its a big job.

Not saying it's easy but there must be a way, such as pressure the craft with a non-residual dyed gas, or hot air in a chilled hanger/chiiled air hot place and thermal camera it.

It might not even be a leak (faulty sensor) or it could only appear at a higher pressure differential, so doing a pressure test at ground level might not show much at all.

I'm also pretty sure they've already got coloured smoke machines.

IANAAME (I Am Not An Aircraft Maintenance Engineer), happy to sit corrected.

You can replicate the pressure differential it has to endure at altitude at ground level though. I'd be surprised if an airliner isn't rated to x + y%, eg 230v wiring (230v AC RMS peaking at 330v) is tested and signed off at 500v so you know its good beyond its expectancy, if it's good at 500 it's brilliant at 230.

[tonyvid]

J4CKO said:

Speed 3 said:

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace.

Yeah, cant just dip an airliner in a bucket of water to find the puncture by watching for the bubbles, well they sort of did for the Comet but its a big job.

My old office used to be just around the corner from the "creaky tank" at Hatfield - during my time there it had a 146 fuselage in there for years and it used to make the weirdest, spookiest noises as they cycled it.

[s1962a]

Speed 3 said:

Real pressurisation faults are notoriously difficult to trace

Then take it out of service till it's figured out. Definitely don't put passengers on a plane that could potentially have pressurisation problems.

I've flown on the 737 Max (8) and i'm annoyed that I gave Boeing the benefit of the doubt that they had learnt from the MCAS scandal. Everything about them seems to put profit/saving money above safety.

https://www.levernews.com/how-boeing-bought-washin...