Plane Crash - Jet Crash

User avatar
tencats
Posts: 315
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:09 pm

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#926

Post by tencats » Wed May 15, 2019 2:00 pm

Audio reveals pilots angrily confronting Boeing about 737 Max feature before second deadly crash
Wed May 15, 2019 https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/15/us/boein ... index.html
(CNN)Just months before a second deadly crash of a Boeing 737 Max airplane, American Airlines pilots angrily confronted a Boeing official about a computerized anti-stall system that preliminary reports have now implicated in both deadly wrecks, audio obtained by CBS News reveals.

The meeting between the pilots and Boeing happened in November -- just weeks after an October crash of a Lion Air 737 Max into the Java Sea, and four months before a 737 Max operated by Ethiopian Air crashed in Ethiopia.
On the audio, a Boeing official is heard telling pilots that software changes were coming, perhaps in as little as six weeks, but that the company didn't want to hurry the process.

The pilots indicated they weren't aware of the 737 Max's computerized stability program -- the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or MCAS.
"We flat out deserve to know what is on our airplanes," a pilot is heard saying.
"I don't disagree," the unidentified Boeing official answers.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/15/us/boein ... index.html
:shock:

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5580
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#927

Post by Maybenaut » Tue May 21, 2019 8:33 pm

NY Times:
An airline whose planes were involved in two deadly crashes in one week in a remote part of Alaska has voluntarily suspended operations, the Federal Aviation Administration said Tuesday.

The airline, Taquan Air, which sells sightseeing tours to cruise ship passengers and also carries passengers and cargo across rural Alaska, suspended operations after a crash on Monday that killed two people, the authorities said. Six others were killed in a midair collision involving one of its planes last week.

The most recent crash occurred when a small floatplane, a de Havilland Beaver, flipped over upon landing on Metlakatla Harbor, south of Ketchikan, in southeast Alaska, the F.A.A. said. Taquan Air did not respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.

Both people on the plane were killed: the pilot, whose name has not been released, and an epidemiologist identified Tuesday by her employer, the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, as Sarah Luna.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/21/us/t ... e=Homepage
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Lani
Posts: 4779
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Some island in the Pacific

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#928

Post by Lani » Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:16 am

Boeing says some of its 737 Max planes may have defective parts
New York(CNN Business) Boeing on Sunday said some of its 737 planes, including many 737 Max aircraft, may have faulty parts on their wings. It's the latest problem Boeing faces as it tries to get its most important and popular airplane, the grounded 737 Max, back in the air.

Working with the Federal Aviation Administration, Boeing said it has reached out to airlines that fly 737 planes, advising them to inspect their slat track assemblies on Max and NG aircraft. The 737 NG series includes the 737-600, -700, -800 and -900 planes.

Leading edge slats are an aerodynamic control surface that extend from the front of the wing. Some the tracks may not meet manufacturing standards and may need to be replaced, Boeing and the FAA said. They said if the parts are found to be defective, airlines should replace them before returning the planes to service.

The faulty parts could fail prematurely or crack. The FAA said a part failure would not bring down a plane, it could damage an aircraft while in flight.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/06/02/busi ... index.html
I'm flying in 2 weeks. Currently it looks like I'm on an Airbus.
Insert signature here: ____________________________________________________

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#929

Post by RTH10260 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:32 am

More headache for Boeing
6/2/2019 Update

FAA Statement

Boeing has informed the FAA that certain 737NG and 737MAX leading edge slat tracks may have been improperly manufactured and may not meet all applicable regulatory requirements for strength and durability.

Following an investigation conducted by Boeing and the FAA Certificate Management Office (CMO), we have determined that up to 148 parts manufactured by a Boeing sub-tier supplier are affected. Boeing has identified groups of both 737NG and 737MAX airplane serial numbers on which these suspect parts may have been installed. 32 NG and 33 MAX are affected in the U.S. Affected worldwide fleet are 133 NG and 179 MAX aircraft.

The affected parts may be susceptible to premature failure or cracks resulting from the improper manufacturing process. Although a complete failure of a leading edge slat track would not result in the loss of the aircraft, a risk remains that a failed part could lead to aircraft damage in fight.

The FAA will issue an Airworthiness Directive to mandate Boeing's service actions to identify and remove the discrepant parts from service. Operators of affected aircraft are required to perform this action within 10 days. The FAA today also alerted international civil aviation authorities of this condition and required actions.


https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=93206

User avatar
Whip
Posts: 3890
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#930

Post by Whip » Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:02 am


User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#931

Post by RTH10260 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:23 am

To note: "Published on 10 Sep 2014" - so may not represent todays production practices at Boeing.

Also to note that the video presents the first of the 737 machines. That generation has operated without major troubles overall.

The current troubles are on the most recent generations of the 737 family, the MAX and the NG.

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7152
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#932

Post by Sam the Centipede » Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:39 pm

RTH10260 wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:23 am
To note: "Published on 10 Sep 2014" - so may not represent todays production practices at Boeing.

Also to note that the video presents the first of the 737 machines. That generation has operated without major troubles overall.

The current troubles are on the
most recent generations of the 737 family, the MAX and the NG
.
I suspect that Boeing would have preferred to push these as a new 7-something-7 model if it weren't for the bother of completely new certification and the unattractive cost to airlines of mandatory retraining for their pilots. They prossibly could also have rejigged the geometry to make the wing position more friendly to the big engines ehich might not have been do easy if claiming that it's still a 737.

Typically companies like to announce a nee model even for s relatively insignificant bunch of updates and cosmetic changes. It's interesting how regulation of aircraft turns that on its head.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#933

Post by RTH10260 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:05 pm

Sam the Centipede wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:39 pm
RTH10260 wrote:
Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:23 am
To note: "Published on 10 Sep 2014" - so may not represent todays production practices at Boeing.

Also to note that the video presents the first of the 737 machines. That generation has operated without major troubles overall.

The current troubles are on the
most recent generations of the 737 family, the MAX and the NG
.
I suspect that Boeing would have preferred to push these as a new 7-something-7 model if it weren't for the bother of completely new certification and the unattractive cost to airlines of mandatory retraining for their pilots. They prossibly could also have rejigged the geometry to make the wing position more friendly to the big engines ehich might not have been do easy if claiming that it's still a 737.

Typically companies like to announce a nee model even for s relatively insignificant bunch of updates and cosmetic changes. It's interesting how regulation of aircraft turns that on its head.
Juan Browne in one of his clips above mentioned that today the creation of a new plane from scratch with all possible new design issues and the need for certification of every item and building block is commercially not feasable. That's why manufacturers prefers to build planes in evolutionary cycles with increments.

IMO the MCAS is a valid solution to a engineering problem. But someone at Boeing botched up the implementation yuugly. I don't understand how anyone ever would allow a non-redundant implementation of such a vital tool. The implementation was botched by having some other feature accidentially dectivated, ought to have been caught earlier by quality assurance. IMO the runaway situation ought to have also be detected during flight testing of the new model. And totally crazy to let an airline company "chose" an essentially mandatory safety feature as an option.

User avatar
Sam the Centipede
Posts: 7152
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#934

Post by Sam the Centipede » Mon Jun 03, 2019 10:23 pm

The point about new models was about what is considered to be or touted as a nee model rather than about the actual technology. As you say, design of big passenger airplanes has been very much evolution rather than revolution since everything went monoplane, except oddities like Concorde*. A lot of esrly 1950s/60s airliners (half the history of powered flight ago!!) look reasonably modern except they predate the move to underslung wing-mounted engines on pylons that are designed to break in the event of a crash.

The risks in the new system should have been picked up by systems engineers long, long before any flight testing. A basic Fault Tree Analysis would have identified the issue, surely something that Boeing should do and should have effective internal Quality Assurance systems to ensure that it is done, done right and known and certified to be done right.

The Challenger enquiry (or Richard Feynmann commenting about it) identified an undesirable feature with how people approach some safety-related issues. In the casd of space crsft, higher reliability was required for crewed craft than uncrewed. Definitely a reasonable idea. But this led to people assuming that crewed craft were somehow inherently safer because their cargo was human rather than (say) satellites or supplies for a space station. The need to be safe does not in itself create safety.

* Completely off-topic, but I liked the story of a US pilot flying a spy mission over Cuba in the early 70s probably, fancy modern super-fast military jet, him kitted out with oxygen and flight suit, being surprised by a radio call from his controllers warning him of civilian traffic above overtaking him. Some plane!

User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 22580
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 4:44 pm
Location: Texas Gulf Coast and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired Mechanical Engineer

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#935

Post by Volkonski » Mon Jun 10, 2019 2:54 pm

New York: helicopter crashes on roof of building in midtown Manhattan

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... 1560191721
In a tweet, the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) said: “FDNY members are operating on scene at 787 7th Avenue in Manhattan, helicopter crash landing.”

The New York police department subsequently said the incident was a “hard landing on the roof” of the building.

“Fire has been extinguished,” the NYPD tweet said, adding that people should avoid the area between West 51st Street and 7th Avenue.

The building at 787 Seventh Avenue, which is close to Broadway theaters and Times Square, is the 54-storey Axa Equitable Center.
At least one person killed. :(
Image“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.”
― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#936

Post by RTH10260 » Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:21 am

Boeing’s 737 Max Suffers Setback in Flight Simulator Test

By Natalie Kitroeff and Tiffany Hsu
June 26, 2019

The Federal Aviation Administration said Wednesday that it had recently discovered a new problem with the 737 Max jet that Boeing must correct before the plane is returned to service.

In a flight simulator last week, F.A.A. pilots tested erroneous activations of anti-stall software that pushes down the nose of the Max, two people with knowledge of the matter said. The software, known as MCAS, was involved in two crashes that killed 346 people.

In at least one instance, an F.A.A. pilot was unable to quickly and easily follow Boeing’s emergency procedures to regain control of the plane. The pilot rated that failure as catastrophic, meaning it could lead to the loss of an aircraft midflight, the people said. The situation that was tested is highly unlikely to occur during a typical passenger flight, but the regulator is still requiring Boeing to make a fix, one of the people said.

The F.A.A., in a statement, referred to the issue as “a potential risk that Boeing must mitigate.”

The discovery may erode confidence in Boeing’s assertions, in conversations with regulators, airlines and aviation unions, that well-trained pilots can easily handle a software malfunction based on their understanding of standard emergency procedures.


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/busi ... -test.html
NYT wrote:The issue discovered last week is linked to the data-processing speed of a specific flight control computer chip, according to the two people with knowledge of the matter. In the test, the F.A.A. pilot encountered delays in executing a crucial step required to stabilize an aircraft.

Test pilots in previous simulations found that they had less than 40 seconds to override MCAS in a crisis and prevent a nose-dive.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#937

Post by RTH10260 » Thu Jun 27, 2019 8:13 pm


User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#938

Post by RTH10260 » Sat Jun 29, 2019 10:56 am

Boeing is obviously having some management problems
Boeing's 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers
By Peter Robison
June 28, 2019, 10:46 PM GMT+2
Planemaker and suppliers used lower-paid temporary workers
Engineers feared the practice meant code wasn’t done right


It remains the mystery at the heart of Boeing Co.’s 737 Max crisis: how a company renowned for meticulous design made seemingly basic software mistakes leading to a pair of deadly crashes. Longtime Boeing engineers say the effort was complicated by a push to outsource work to lower-paid contractors.

The Max software -- plagued by issues that could keep the planes grounded months longer after U.S. regulators this week revealed a new flaw -- was developed at a time Boeing was laying off experienced engineers and pressing suppliers to cut costs.

Increasingly, the iconic American planemaker and its subcontractors have relied on temporary workers making as little as $9 an hour to develop and test software, often from countries lacking a deep background in aerospace -- notably India.

In offices across from Seattle’s Boeing Field, recent college graduates employed by the Indian software developer HCL Technologies Ltd. occupied several rows of desks, said Mark Rabin, a former Boeing software engineer who worked in a flight-test group that supported the Max.

The coders from HCL were typically designing to specifications set by Boeing. Still, “it was controversial because it was far less efficient than Boeing engineers just writing the code,” Rabin said. Frequently, he recalled, “it took many rounds going back and forth because the code was not done correctly.”


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -engineers

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#939

Post by RTH10260 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:33 am

Boeing makes major redesign of flight software - 737 MAX to be grounded into 2020
Newly stringent FAA tests spur a fundamental software redesign of Boeing’s 737 MAX flight controls
Aug. 1, 2019 at 11:18 am Updated Aug. 1, 2019 at 9:45 pm

Dominic Gates By Dominic Gates
Seattle Times aerospace reporter

While conducting newly stringent tests on the Boeing 737 MAX flight control system, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in June uncovered a potential flaw that now has spurred Boeing to make a fundamental software-design change.

Boeing is changing the MAX’s automated flight-control system’s software so that it will take input from both flight-control computers at once instead of using only one on each flight. That might seem simple and obvious, but in the architecture that has been in place on the 737 for decades, the automated systems take input from only one computer on a flight, switching to use the other computer on the next flight.

Boeing believes the changes can be accomplished in time to win new regulatory approval for the MAX to fly again by October. Significant slipping of that schedule could lead to a temporary halt in production at its Renton plant where 10,000 workers assemble the 737.

After two deadly crashes of Boeing’s 737 MAX and the ensuing heavy criticism of the FAA for its limited oversight of the jet’s original certification, the agency has been reevaluating and recertifying Boeing’s updated flight-control systems.


https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... -controls/

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#940

Post by RTH10260 » Sat Aug 31, 2019 4:13 pm

update
FAA panel reviewing 737 MAX certification will take additional time
David Shepardson

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Federal Aviation Administration said on Friday a blue-ribbon panel of experts around the world will need a few more weeks to finish its review into the Boeing 737 MAX certification.

FILE PHOTO: Unpainted Boeing 737 MAX aircraft are seen parked in an aerial photo at Renton Municipal Airport near the Boeing Renton facility in Renton, Washington, U.S. July 1, 2019. REUTERS/Lindsey Wasson
The team, which is reviewing the approval of the now grounded jet involved in two fatal crashes since October, is taking additional time to finish documenting its work and the FAA said it expects its recommendations in the coming weeks.

Boeing Co (BA.N) has said it hopes to receive regulatory approval for updated flight control software at the center of both crashes in October, but it could take a month or two for airlines to train pilots on the new software and prepare the jets for commercial flight after sitting idle for months.

The Joint Authorities Technical Review is chaired by former National Transportation Safety Board Chairman Christopher Hart, and the FAA said its focus on the certification of the aircraft “is separate from the ongoing efforts to safely return the aircraft to flight.”

In September the NTSB plans to outline airplane design certification procedures, the head of the agency, Robert Sumwalt, told Congress in July.

Sumwalt said in March that the agency was “examining the U.S. design certification process to ensure any deficiencies are captured and addressed” after two fatal Boeing 737 MAX crashes.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethi ... SKCN1VK2B4

Note: airlines are now postponing 737 MAX services to just prior to Christmas.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 44690
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#941

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:21 pm

The 737 MAX is a clunker that only excessive computing power can make safe (maybe). By trying to save lots of money by using an old airframe with giant new engines, Boeing may be killing itself after the next one crashes.

Dumb.

TexasFilly
Posts: 18180
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#942

Post by TexasFilly » Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:28 pm

Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:21 pm
The 737 MAX is a clunker that only excessive computing power can make safe (maybe). By trying to save lots of money by using an old airframe with giant new engines, Boeing may be killing itself after the next one crashes

Dumb.
:like:
I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill! I believe Dr. Ford!

User avatar
ZekeB
Posts: 15901
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 10:07 pm
Location: Northwest part of Semi Blue State

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#943

Post by ZekeB » Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:34 pm

Whoever heard of charging extra to make a non-redundant safety system redundant? May this be a lesson that Boeing will remember for the next 75 years.
Trump: Er hat eine größere Ente als ich.

Putin: Du bist kleiner als ich.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 21723
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Plane Crash - Jet Crash

#944

Post by RTH10260 » Fri Sep 06, 2019 10:02 am


Post Reply

Return to “► ► Breaking News ◄ ◄”