Big corps always hide safety concerns and will silence those who point out....money speaks and the faa is kind of a puppet looks like....this is one such example...dont know how many are still waiting....
Seriously, Chao, wife of McConnell? What makes her ‘transportation’ anything? Lunacy rules the day!
This is the weakest-kneed editorial I've ever read. What's going on here? I recommend the Editorial Board take a look at the comments of their readers - many of them engineers, aviation software developers and all of them flying human beings - if they need additional perspective.
Why have the esteemed Editors kept their dainty gloves on with this damning issue? Get real.
PEOPLE'S LIVES MATTER
I canceled my 2 flights in May (both on 737 MAX American Airlines). Yes, I know the 737 MAX was grounded dragging and kicking a few minutes after the entire banned it. This is larger than the 737, larger than a tone-deaf airline who does not give a damn about anybody, it is the entire GOP leadership in this country.
I'm not going to fly again until Individual-1 and the entire GOP senate has been purged. This is not going to happen anytime soon as one third of the electorate is as dumb as the average FOX viewer.
The US is now not only an unreliable trading and treaty partner (America is a bad joke to the rest of the world) it is no longer reliable in carrying out its duty for the safety of its own citizens.
I just visited the FAA website:
https://www.faa.gov/about/key_officials/
Two years into this administration:
The top 3 positions are unfilled (IE 'acting').
Dan Elwell Acting Administrator
Carl Burleson Acting Deputy Administrator
Tina Amereihn Acting Chief of Staff
1
Spelling: “The fact that this airplane requires such jury rigging to fly is a red flag,”
Jury-rigged vs. Jerry-rigged. This one's for you, DIY fans. Jury-rigged means something was assembled quickly with the materials on hand. Jerry-built means it was cheaply built. Jerry-rigged is a combination of these two words.
https://www.dictionary.com/e/jury-rigged-vs-jerry-rigged/
Make no mistake about it. It wasn't concern for the safety of the American public that prompted Donald Trump to ground the Boeing 737 Max 8.
Because if that were the case he wouldn't be the one dragging his feet to do it after first entertaining the personal pleas of Boeing's chief executive, Dennis Muilenburg and the F.A.A. to keep it airborne, as just about every country on the planet pulled it from the skies after two catastrophic crashes in less than 5 months.
Somewhere along the line this president must have realized if one of these planes went down in American airspace. his chances for reelections would go down with it.
And it doesn't take a computer scientist from M.I.T. to figure that one out.
2
Something has been going on that clearly indicates that this airplane is dangerous and kills. Why there has been so much reluctance on the part of Boeing to face the facts and why our government has been so shy of asking the question is about money. Now Boeing is going to pay the price for its arrogance.
But that means nothing to the families who have lost so many to this horror. Money talks too loud and people have too little voice. The airlines are not to be trusted as they exploit passengers rather than serve them. That aircraft has obscenely small bathrooms and any flight to any distance means great discomfort a trivial thing but a measure of how human needs are ignored and as death stalked us in the air as a function failure waited to happen. There is a deep immortality in how life has been debased and gambled in the interest of pretending the problem was minor and irrelevant. Boeing is too big to fail? Not by my book.
1
What if it was not pilot error but a
maintenance issue. What if MCAS
was serviced and incorrectly installed ?
Pilot would not know sensor faulty.
@J B
True. Precautionary principle says wait until this and other questions are sorted out.
This is not "safety at all costs" or "Chicken Little, sky is falling." It is reasonable prudence.
Might also be a terrorist conspiracy to garble software of specific airlines. I'm sure Alex Jones can come up with a good story here.
The US aviation industry/oversight used to be the gold standard worldwide. Now we are (rightly) viewed as corrupt, inept and compromised.
I'm glad Ethiopian Airlines refused to send the EH302 black boxes to Boeing. I wouldn't trust them.
2
Someone must have explained to Trump that his re-election depended on grounding the planes. If he kept refusing to do so and, God forbid, one of these American planes had crashed, he would have had no chance in 2020. It would have been to Trump what Chernobyl was to the Soviet Union--irrefutable proof of utter incompetence.
1
This is so bizarre. Trump has left the FAA leaderless and unable to make a tough decision. Then he actually makes the right decision himself, while surrounding it with his explanatory typical drivel. Meanwhile, he is oblivious to the fact that his useless government shutdown has delayed critical work on possible solutions due to the unavailability of FAA input for weeks. These are scary times.
1
So, you expect the American public to swallow the fairy tale that these planes are safe. Five weeks and only a temporary employee in charge of the FAA in an administration full of ihcompetents starting from the top. I am still laughing.
1
Prone? Nonsense. Thousands of these aircraft have been built and to this day no evidence suggests that of the 2 crashes the aircraft system/s were responsible. None.
@Jim
In marketing, perception is everything.
Facts are what people think they are, not what some anonymous expert asserts that they are.
Trump shut down the US government for 35 days after the crash of Lion Air Flight 610 thereby delaying assessment of Boeng fix before crash of Ethiopian Airlines flight 302. What cost Presidential pique?
Two things: "jury rigged" should never ever exist on a plane let alone an airline.
And we have a president who has been flying around in his own private jets and now Air Force 1 and he says they are too complicated for a pilot to fly.
Hal 9000 (or Boeing): "I'm sorry Dave, I can't let you maintain this angle of attack."
1
@Marshall
Just wait until "self-driving" cars are the norm.
My former Air Force/airline pilot spouse has said for years that pilots flying these newer planes on autopilot most of the time are not prepared to do what’s necessary to fly the plane manually when there’s an emergency.
They need to be required to be comfortable overriding the autopilot, but, like any other complex task, that takes repetition,which currently isn’t part of their training. Too costly?
Complex software can never be guaranteed bug free. The notion that everything should be automated must be challenged. We are automating for the sake of automating. If our personal computers have bugs it is annoying but it is another thing altogether when human lives are at stake.
What will it take? A nuclear reactor blows up due to software issues or hacking vulnerabilities and some more planes go down before we our love of technology hits hard reality that some things should not be at the mercy of a program ?
Maybe it is time to start regulating software development i.e. Good Software Practices just as similar regulations exist in other industries.
Maybe we should start respecting that humans actually can do certain things very well.
2
This is a good example of the pitfalls of AI - a subsystem that is fundamentally designed with the idea that it can perform better than humans and to push them out of the decision loop. The stall avoidance feature on the Max over-rides what human pilots are doing even when they manually flying the plane. That is all well and fine if the AI system is flawless and there is no situation in which a human would ever be in the loop, but since the AI system is designed by humans, who are not perfect, it is impossible to have a flawless AI system. This is a cautionary tale for the many industries that are seduced by the possibilities of AI.
4
The 737 MAXs have been grounded. The claim is they will stay grounded until safe. But how will their safety be assured?
Evidently Boeing will make the call; not a disinterested party. The FAA has neither the equipment nor the expertise to test proposed “fixes”, but must rely upon Boeing.
No doubt Boeing will make changes to improve safety, but certainty in identifying the problems and their fix is a challenge. The system is complex and to exercise all its possible failure modes and remedy them is utopian.
So when they return to the air, the risks might be reduced, but the planes will remain a gamble. Time and experience will set the odds, not so much engineering and science.
2
I'm not a pilot, have never flown. Yet I surmised right away that if both crashes happened just during take-off that the software wrongly detected a 'stall' and nosed the aircraft downwards.
What has happened to common sense? And why has 'hands-on' engineering been turned over to computer software geeks that have no clue about flying.
2
From an accident prevention standpoint there is a federal database where US pilots reported similar problems with the MAX8. Given the Lion Air disaster one would think that the FAA would be monitoring this pilot report database for other indications of problems with the MAX8 and would have included that data in its overall risk level assessment. That does not seem to have happened, otherwise it would not have taken 3 days for the FAA to make the decision to ground the planes. Going forward, part of the accident analysis by FAA and others should be to implement a more robust monitoring system of all the pilot database and any other reporting databases that would yield predictive risk management data. There is certainly AI software that can scan these databases looking for patterns and issue warning reports. This technology should be implemented as soon as possible.
The aircraft should have been grounded worldwide immediately after the Ethiopian crash. This is not to say there is a fault with the aircraft itself, most likely there isn't. But vacillation by the United States will not inspire confidence in what is most likely a very fine and safe aircraft. One only needs to look at the history of the DC-10, which was a good plane, but maligned by flaws that could have been corrected early and by incorrect maintenance procedures.
1
Astonishingly Trump just announced the grounding of the
MAX8 and MAX9’s
Thank you Canada.
14
@New World,
Putin told him to do i.
Boeing, are you out of your mind? Ground your planes before you are sued, boycotted and divested out of existence. You knew there was a problem and now people have died. Shame on you.
3
One reply to this editorial, in a word, is maybe. There are many facts not stated and apparently not taken into account by those governments and individuals calling for a grounding of the airplane. U.S. carriers and other carriers around the world have to date flown tens of thousand of flights on the 737 MAX aircraft without incident of any kind. It is not at all statistically unlikely that two aircraft of the same type would have similar accidents in a short period of time. If there were a truly significant safety problem with this particular airplane, you could and should literally bet your life that the airlines would be dealing not with a passenger boycott, but with a pilot boycott of the plane, yet I've seen no reports of pilots anywhere in the world refusing the airplane.
As a pilot nearing retirement, my guess is that while Boeing very likely needs to make some system changes with the aircraft, action toward and FAA approval of which was probably hampered by the absurd Trump / McConnell shutdown tantrum, the common thread between these accidents will prove eventually to be at least as much third-world maintenance standards and procedures, inadequate pilot training and hiring requirements, and corners cut due to financial pressures as to problems with the specific aircraft.
In short, so far the evidence shows that when properly maintained and operated, the 737 Max is not a dangerous aircraft.
7
Well, the pilot unions are objecting, and US pilots have reported suspiciously similar problems. If the US wants to maintain its extraordinary airline safety record it should apply the precautionary principle and pull these planes. I am no fan of our current President, but on this occasion he has done the right thing.
2
@RBW
From what I read, Boeing made many changes to the aircraft to make it almost like a completely different then the prior version 737. But still managed to keep it close enough so they could bypass the lengthy process of certifying a completely different aircraft. This was one of the complaints that the FAA received from some of the pilots. By your own statement "inadequate pilot training" in 2nd/3rd world countries. Well if that is the case, being this is a newer model then they should have had better training. Or was it the auto pilot? Or maybe erroneous flight data fed into the MCAS? As I type this the black boxes are being flown back to Europe. Any of those reasons listed above are still reasons to ground the planes. Including lack of training. I disagree with your commit. Mostly because both crashes were routine take offs and suddenly fell out of the sky. FAA is getting a mix of complaints and can't find any trends. I agree with the shutdown of this plane. At least analysis the data and flight recorder. If your right, the pilots were at fault and a course of action can be planned to get all pilots up to speed on the newer avionics. Also remember, this plane had a mix of nationalities including many Americans. Maybe that would change your mind? It shouldn't matter. But some people put third world as a lesser etc.. And that is truly unfortunate.
5
@RBW: Just a question. Is it possible that these pilots tried to gain altitude too quickly, and the software wrongly detected a 'stall'.
Secondly, are better trained pilots aware of this scenario and compensate for it by operating differently or over-riding it?
1
Choice A. Ground the planes while the causes of the problem are determined and addressed. While the planes are grounded there is no risk of another 737MAX crash.
Choice B. Keep flying the planes while the causes of the problem are determined and addressed. While the planes are being flown Boeing, the airlines, and the FAA are betting that there will be no additional crashes.
One choice contains no risk of crashing in a 737MAX. The other carries an unknown risk of a 737MAX crashing again. The FAA is betting your life that it is right. How do you bet? What is your life worth to you?
7
@Marie: While you are correct that grounding them would ensure no risk of a 737MAX crashing, it does not ensure that the replacement aircraft will not crash. Crashes can occur with any aircraft. When a significant part of the fleet is grounded, older planes receive more use. Statistically, older planes are more likely to develop a fault.
Right now, the 737MAX has a record that statistically can not be determined if it is safe or unsafe. Sometimes you get back to back failures that's just "one of those things". I calculated the Z-score and it is 1.32 which is just suggestive but by no means proof of a fatal flaw. Statistics will give you answers that an emotional response does not.
1
@Marie There was a choice C before the grounding Marie, choose to not book a 737 MAX flight. That also sent a message to the carrier that you did not trust that aircraft.
I get that the average consumer may not know the aircraft designations on flightaware.com or airline reservation systems but a simple phone call would verify you weren't booking on a MAX.
I happened to have a flight next week on a MAX and wouldn't have totally freaked out flying on it (easy to say now) but changed my reservation this morning anticipating the FAA would ground them and didn't want my vacation screwed up.
@Marie,
By your logic, you would live in and never leave a protective plastic bubble at the front door of a fire station. Safety at any/all cost is neither feasible nor desirable.
1
We should all read Joseph Conrads wonderful short story 'Typhoon' , which ultimately reminds us to think and use our imagination when weighing the consequences of transporting passengers.
Hmm, an Indonesian airline crash and an African airline crash - think anyone in the Trump "administration, the GOP congress, or their drooling "base", gives a damn about "those countries"?
4
Well, everything points to the fact that bad American engineering is at least partly to blame for these tragedies. And this after their previous new bird, the 787, keept setting some battery in flames when it was flown...
@Richard
Looks like they do, he just announced that the US is grounding the flights.
Well Mr. Muilenburg and Mr. Kelly! Fancy you two needing a ride to La Guardia at the same time! Hop in my Honda Civic Max 8 Miracle Car. Do fasten your seat belts, we'll be hurtling through Manhattan on crappy roads full of semi trucks and random taxi behavior at 70mph. Just so you know, sometimes when I turn the wheel to the right the car swerves hard to the left. Suicidal auto pilot, haha! But no big deal, I'm a great driver and I know how to compensate. Besides, it almost never happens and nobody knows why or how or when it's gonna happen again... so watcha gonna do?
3
Boeing is being a risk taker, betting that the problem will go away or be solved before another crash. Grounding the planes would cost money and damage their image now; waiting risks further damage later but offers the possibility of minimizing loss of profits and reputation.
Boeing is being boldly entrepreneurial rather than stodgily bureaucratic, and the FAA has been helping them.
3
Re: "...Why should the F.A.A. continue to permit a system prone to going haywire aboard an aircraft?"
I hired, in to be a, (NYC), municipal paramedic, in 1983; like many / most brand new paramedics...every shift, w/o a plane crash / other M.C.I., seemed...wasted;
Within weeks...I was thanking my lucky stars for each, and every shift where an M.C.I. hadn't occurred...a sense of relief made all the more intense after I responded, '1St. Due', to the 1990 'Happy_Lands' incident!
What could Boeing / the F.A.A. possibly be thinking, by... refusing to ground the 737-8's until the very, last 'profitably second'??
2
This drama is primarily a debate of automation and how reliable it is. Boeing is in the business of selling airplanes as Tesla is in the business of selling cars. They are not in the business of operation airplanes or cars. Automation is a labor saving tool of both pieces of equipment. As we all know, just like your phone, computers, etc, automation sometimes fails and needs a reboot. Shut down the automation, operate the equipment 'manually' and get the automation fixed. Pilots in the US are baseline trained to fly the airplane manually and only utilize the automation as needed. The majority of offshore carries train their pilots to utilize and command the automation to fly the aircraft. When the automation fails; and it will, automation biased pilots have difficulty flying the aircraft manually where US based pilots just disconnect the automation and fly the aircraft manually as their longtime experience and ability easily provides.
3
Wag the dog. I can assure you that probably know one reading this article can understand the $ billions that have gone into this plane. Anyone who thinks that Boeing and the FAA would not look at the data in their recommendations are delusional. Now you’ve got laymen instructing the company to stand down. Trump just grounded the plane because- he’s a sociopath that hates Boeing. In spite of the recent events, the Max 8 is ~10 times safer than driving to an from work everyday .
2
@Henry: Who wants to fly if that's the level of safety they can expect? What will that perception of risk do to the airlines and Boeing?
2
@Henry The problem with this logic, i.e. the Max 8 is ~10 times safer, is that inside the care, you remain protected even if it crashes. There is certain death to EVERYONE INVOLVED when the Max 8 crashes. Also, statistically, the Max is much more prone to accident than other planes based on two recent disasters by over a hundred thousand times in my elementary estimate based on the incidents reported historically. Finally, there are recent data about the nose dive tendency complained by other pilots with no clear solution because of this recent disaster in Ethiopia. Your simple judgment based on assumption that FAA knows everything appears to be rash.
@Henry
You first. I'll watch you fly on those over engineered failures for a year or two before I get on one.
1
Evidently there is a public database in which commercial pilots can tell and discuss experiences they had with their aircraft. Evidently some pilots discussed temporary control problems they had with the Max 8 during ascent to cruising altitude, some of them before either crash.
If this was covered in or by the New York Times, I missed it. Does this mean that some news is not fit to print until it is acknowledged by establishment sources?
“during the government shutdown, the F.A.A. stopped working on the 737 Max issue for five weeks. There’s no one in charge, either. The job of F.A.A. administrator is one of the many crucial but unoccupied positions in this administration”.
This country is in the toilet. There’s no other explanation but rampant corruption. The current secretary of transportation is the Senate Majority leader’s wife. What are the chances that she will testify at a serious hearing on such an important issue?
3
"For some reason, [the Lion Air pilots] couldn’t or didn’t cut off the automation, which ultimately sent the year-old Boeing jet into a steep dive and a crash that would claim 189 lives."
The reason they couldn't or didn't cut off the automation is simple: they weren't trained on how to disconnect the MCAS system. Worse yet, there's a chance they weren't even aware that the system existed. Boeing didn't intend for pilots to have to interact with MCAS -- it was designed to kick-in when needed in the background.
Now MAX pilots are trained to recover from an upset caused by MCAS -- but it's really a temporary hack. The Ethiopian pilots were surely aware of this procedure -- and the fact they still crashed creates more questions.
5
"The job of F.A.A. administrator is one of the many crucial but unoccupied positions in this administration — although Mr. Trump proposed to put his personal pilot at the agency’s controls."
It's important to run a country of 325 million Americans and a $20 trillion economy like an incestuous corner mom-and-pop shop.
TRUMP-GOP 2019
"Drop dead, America !"
"Corporations are people, my friends....very incredible and incredibly greedy, corrupt, criminal people who love to run government oversight into the deadly ground..."
Remember in 2020
23
Glad to see your comment, Socrates. Have yours been blocked?
Just imagine what the right would do to Hillary if a hissy-fit shutdown caused the FAA to stop working on the 737 issue for 5 WEEKS !!! Going into the soldiers' deaths and treatment of their families in Niger is another story...
5
I am sure Boeing is looking at the problem day and night since the first crash of Max8. They sent a patch to the software after the first crash, but Boeing did not explain what that patch for. It may be a trade secret, but at least explain to FAA. If the aircraft suppose to have positive angle to the horizontal as in the case of takeoff, suddenly goes negative with nose dive, may be related to takeoff time or using the trigonometric functions improperly. As per grounding, it is not warranted and FAA decision is correct, politics aside. EU has self interests to promote Airbus and China may be getting even with Trump. If there are no problems in US, then it could be a deficit in pilot training. Still, Boeing should make it very simple as in push one button to disengage autopilot. Any thing more than that could cause pilot errors, no matter how much training the pilot gets.
To quite Rep. Oman, “It’s all about the Benjamins, bany.”
It seems very clear to me that the only reason the FAA is not grounding the Boeing 737 Max 8 is because of money. The Boeing stock holders will be hurt, the Boeing executive will lose there bonuses and the people who work on the planes. If it was a Airbus plane with the same problem, the FAA would ground that plane in a heart beat!
4
It is uncanny how each time a Trump administration official or former employee is indicted, put on trial, sentenced, etc., almost simultaneously, Trump schedules a major press conference about another significant matter. Today— grounding the Boeing Max 8. All in an attempt, it appears, to distract from negative news related his administration.
I was quite a gamble to defer grounding the Boeing Max 8
3
For what it's worth, my husband is a 737 MAX pilot and he's confident that he can safely pilot his plane should the known defect repeat itself - by simply turning off the autopilot. We have three kids. I know he wouldn't put his children in danger of losing their father. Along with the 10s of thousands of other pilots.
However, I understand the public's concern and if these planes are grounded. But it's not just airline profits at stake - it's all the weddings, funerals, business meetings, last goodbyes ... that might not be made because of a lack of seats. There's more in the balance than rampant capitalism (which of course exists - just not the sole factor here).
8
In January, 1967, three Apollo astronauts died testing the Apollo 1 space craft. What did NASA do? They stopped all Apollo flights to determine why a fire occurred, why the astronauts died, and why could not get out of harms way. They stopped the "space race", to deal with a dire safety issue.
It was determined that Apollo 1 had no escape system, in the event of a fire or launch accident. Also, the astronauts were sealed in the capsule, with no means to open up the hatch, and finally, highly combustible oxygen filled the capsule, so a spark caused an instant fire.
The lesson learned from this, space exploration, and aviation, involves risk Anyone who pilots an aircraft or space craft knows these risks. What they do expect is that the craft, they inspect, and check out, for each flight is worthy and safe to fly. Why? Because lives are at stake. This is more true for commercial aviation.
The FAA, Boeing the airlines, and the Trump Administration are putting profits ahead of the safety of those who fly.
One air fatality is too much for any pilot. They assume they are flying a safe aircraft, as are flight attendants and their passengers. So, until this problem is truly fixed, it is not acceptable to experiment with software and flight manual updates. The 737 Max 8 should be taken out of service immediately.
FYI, my father worked in Avionics, at American Airlines (LGA and JFK), for 30 years; making flying safe. He would have agreed this jet should be grounded.
5
@Nick Metrowsky
As I posted the above comment, Trump ordered all 737 Max 8 aircraft grounded. Apparently pilots, flight attendants, avionic crews and passengers thin k more about safety than corporations (airlines) and the FAA (the agency that is suppose to protect the flying public).
Trump, for the first time since taking office, put the public interest ahead of corporate profits.
2
It is a sad state of affairs in our country that the FAA is leaderless and cowardly, but somehow that seems par for the course.
The bigger surprise is that US airlines are not acting. One would think that crisis management and crisis communication would be a non-negotiable requirement for an airline CEO. They would understand that it is far better to take a hit, ground the planes until more information is analyzed and hopefully rule out or address a problem with the plane. The damage to their reputations is far greater than the cost of (presumably) temporarily grounding a few planes.
Something tells me that if either of the recent crashes had happened in the US or Europe (affecting mostly--let's be frank--white people) the FAA and US airlines might be more aggressive in calling for grounding of planes.
2
Why? How many Boeing executives stay at Trump hotels?
1
Corporate greed rules in the United States. Nothing else matters except keeping the stockholders satiated.
Below are the comments of 2 US PILOTS--yes 2 US PILOTS--on their experiences with this Max 8 model....
“I reviewed in my mind our automation setup and flight profile but can’t think of any reason the aircraft would pitch nose down so aggressively,” the pilot wrote."
Another US PILOT wrote this based on his experience with the training materials for the MAX 8.....
“I am left to wonder: what else don’t I know? The Flight Manual is inadequate and almost criminally insufficient.”
Can this seriously be a question with US authorities and Boeing? This is criminal, truly, as this US PILOT claims about flying this death trap!
2
Remember when that self driving car hit and killed a woman in Arizona? Was that the car or the drivers fault? Did they pull all self driving cars off the road?
I was a computer programmer for many years, so I have a genuine appreciation for computer technology and how far we’ve come. Let me tell you, I don’t want a computer programmer flying an airplane I’m on while they’re sitting on the ground. I want the pilots to have 100% control of the plane 100% of the time. And don’t even get me started on self-driving cars.
2
Someone at Boeing approved the root cause of these accidents - putting much larger engines onto an existing airplane that was never designed to carry larger engines. This changed the flying dynamics of the jet in such a way that Boeing knew the nose of the jet tended to pitch upwards. This risked a stall and an uncontrollable plummet to the ground.
Someone else at Boeing pointed this out. An engineer. A safety professional. A pilot representative. Their concerns and protests were ignored. Rather than doing it the right (safe) way, and build a new jet from the ground up, Boeing took the cheapest route. It put the larger engines on the existing 737 design, in spite of the "nose up" safety problem. Then looked to technology for a "fix" to the problem Boeing created.
The tech fix to save money didn't work. People died as a result.
Boeing didn't retrain pilots, again, to save money. People died as a result.
The American way of business. It never changes. Profit and money over lives.
20
Years ago, a wide body cargo aircraft caught fire internally, the result of its Lithium Ion battery cargo. It was in a foreign country so little attention was paid here.
A few years later the new B787 aircraft had a few incidents with the aircraft’s internal LI batteries overheating in passenger aircraft, here and abroad. The entire fleet of 787’s were grounded worldwide. There were LI battery manufacturing plants and recycling plants catching on fire as well as news of some Tesla car LI battery fires.
That’s when I rejected a large load of LI batteries off my wide body aircraft, knowing much less about that product than Boeing engineers or the manufacturers. I recommended in writing that my airline not accept LI batteries as cargo, when it fails the risk reward test.
The 787 internal LI batteries were eventually housed in a fireproof box and vented to the outside of the aircraft. After several years of industry research, engineers couldn’t determine a suitable fire extinguishing agent, much less the quantity of agent required to put a fire out. So the airline, then the FAA, then the international aviation community prohibited LI batteries to be shipped on passenger aircraft, as I had recommended years earlier. However, cargo airlines are still permitted to carry LI battery cargo and the cargo airline crew members are not entirely delighted.
If those 737 crashes had occurred in the U.S., I suspect the FAA would behaved differently.
7
In my opinion, the most important technical reason to immediately prohibit these aircraft from further flight is that there is evidence of a similar issue in the two accidents. It has already been conclusively established that defects in the flight control system and software contributed to the Lion Air accident. That is why Boeing is admittedly working on revisions to the system. Also, according to The New York Times, the pilots of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 reported to air traffic control that they were having “flight control problems.” And, there are anonymous pilot reports describing occurrences of similar unsafe flight dynamics. This type of problem is especially dangerous when an aircraft is close to the ground and there may not be sufficient time and altitude to recover to a controlled flight condition. In my opinion, Boeing needs to recommend, and the FAA must immediately require, no further commercial flight until necessary modifications are developed, tested in flight, and made to each aircraft. I speak from 46 years of experience as an engineer and professor in aerodynamics and flight vehicle dynamics, and as a licensed pilot for more than a decade. At this time, I would advise every one of my family members not to fly on this aircraft.
15
The FAA appears to subordinate passenger safety to political interference and is fast loosing its intended independence. God forbid that a crash occurs in the US. The country hasn't paid adequate attention to president Eisenhower's warning made decades ago about the dangers of the military industrial complex.
1
I keep hearing the FAA say they have “no specific information” of faulty design or methods.
Why is that the standard?
They have a “strong presumption” that things are amiss. Shouldn’t they ground the planes until the facts of the latest crash are known, and a solution, if possible, is implemented?
I understand there’s a lot at stake. I’ve heard on tv that the Max aircraft accounts for 2/3 of Boeing profits. I’ve also heard that Boeing is America’s #1 exporter, and that the failure of the Max program would even have a measurable effect on GDP.
But... isn’t it the job of the federal regulators to keep us safe? And even from Boeing’s self-interest perspective, if there’s another
crash, that’s much worse for them than grounding the planes and fixing them, even if it takes weeks or months.
No wonder socialism is looking good to so many people. This is an example of capitalism’s profit motive run amok, and our government’s failure to regulate properly.
10
The FAA says the two crashes aren’t proven to be related, so no systemic failure is indicated. In other words, two problems are safer than one?
6
I am going on a trip to Hawaii next week, a place I have wanted to go for a very long time. Last week I peaked at the type of craft and yes, it was a 737 Max. Thankfully, Canada has stepped in today and grounded the planes, taking the decision away from individual airlines. I'm disappointed that Boeing has chosen not to ground these air craft until they figure out how to prevent whatever computer program or sensors causes them take a nosedive and kill everyone on board. No thanks. I'm not at all surprised that the gong show US administration is not doing the right thing.
7
Re: "...I'm not at all surprised that the gong show US administration is not doing the right thing..." {@Kathy Doyle}
...Why did you insult the gong show, L.O.L.??!!
Does anyone wonder why Trump had a phone conversation with the chief executive of Boeing after the crash in Ethiopia instead of talking to pilots? Boeing claims that it's working on the problems of the MAX 8, but couldn't proceed during Trump's tantrum of a 5 week government shut down.
Trump has not even assigned a director to the FAA--can't the House do anything about that? This President seems to have a sinister influence on just about everything negative that happens in this country.
8
We are planning a trip on Southwest in April. Just called the airline and asked if we could be guaranteed an aircraft other than the 737 Max 8. They will get back to us. If no guarantee, then we cancel the trip. Come on FAA!! Ground this aircraft!
5
The Max 8 and 9 have just been grounded in the US.
5
There is this curios case of protecting US business interests and NY Times' delayed call for action also fits into it. Take off (and landing) should be under pilot control and not under computer control, period. Only when the aircraft reaches cruise shall the computer take over to optimize the myriad parameters that make the flight sustainable. Boeing has made a grave error in having computer control during takeoff and then working on a patch to make the software better and sending instructions to disengage the auto control. This is nonsense.
7
The question isn't should, but why WOULD the FAA still permit these planes to fly?
5
Americans need to vote with their wallets and boycott United, Southwest, and American Airlines until they also agree to ground the Boeing Max 8, pending the results of the investigation. People's safety is worth more than money.
7
@Kristin This might be happening by default if people just avoid flying in 737 Max aircrafts. Airlines most likely will cancel half-empty flights. But a recent report said most passengers are shrugging off any concerns. The problem seems to be more than software (whose role seems to be to compensate for an awkward physical design).
1
Some of your readers appear to hold the view that the authorities should hold off on grounding the 737 max. for the time being. Why? In my view it is better to err on the side of safety. What if there were to be another crash, say in Washington, DC in which hundreds died. Could the authorities then face the backlash? I am speaking from experience having witnessed (seeing and listening) a crash and hearing his torment while the pilot burned to death. I will never forget.
4
I would like to hear from the airlines... They have primary responsibility for safety. Their silence is leading me to believe that they are primarily interested in profit, not safety.
6
Land of the free market, home of some very brave (or very foolish?) flyers.
5
Both the FAA and Boeing seem to be taking the position that grounding the planes is equivalent to declaring them unsafe, when in fact I think most air travelers simply view it as a prudent step until the investigation of these two apparently similar crashes can be completed. By contrast, NOT grounding the planes makes it look like Boeing and the airlines are prioritizing profit over safety, and exposes the FAA to accusations of lax oversight and conflicts of interest. I’m surprised to see all of these entities doubling down on this PR nightmare of a position.
172
@Jen
Excellent comment and could not agree more!
Worthy of a NYT Pick!
6
Boeing, the airlines, the FAA, and the President have all had fair warning. One more crash and all should be held criminally liable for all deaths and injuries.
19
Why do there have to be pictures of grieving relatives in this article? Stories abound of people who have just lost a loved one being harassed by paparazzi. By displaying such pictures, you are helping to ensure there is a market for them. I expect this from a tabloid, but not the NYT. Please reconsider your policy.
14
Here is some more info. Boeing has some explaining to do. Yet they still are flying in the US because Boeing donated to Trumps campaign - how is that lawful. Get money out of politics.
“The 737 MAX has two flight control computers. Each is connected to only one of the two angle of attack sensors. During a flight only one of two computer runs the MCAS control. If it detects a too high angle of attack it trims the horizontal stabilizer down for some 10 seconds. It then waits for 5 seconds and reads the sensor again. If the sensor continues to show a too high angle of attack it again trims the stabilizer to pitch the plane's nose done.
MCSA is independent of the autopilot. It is even active in manual flight. There is a procedure to deactivate it but it takes some time.”
“Neither the airlines that bought the planes nor the pilots who flew it were told about MCAS. They did not know that it exists. They were not aware of an automatic system that controlled the stabilizer even when the autopilot was off. They had no idea how it could be deactivated.”
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/03/boeing-the-faa-and-why-two-737-max-planes-crashed.html#more
9
@steve I'm not a trump supporter, but do note that he ordered an emergency grounding of Boeing 737 Max 8 and Max 9 planes today, costing Boeing and the airlines a bundle. This is pretty clearly not about him or campaign donations.
Agree 100%.
2
Who holds the ultimate responsibility for the FAA ? Why that would be the Secretary of the Department Of Transportation, Elaine Chao. Also known as the spouse of Senator Mitch McConnell. DO YOUR JOB, Madam.
Period.
35
You ask, NY Times editors, "Why should the F.A.A. continue to permit a system prone to going haywire aboard an aircraft?"
It's very simple. Profit uber alles.
9
Yet one more disgusting example of rampant corporate greed and NOBODY with the backbone to say enough.
The rest of the world has grounded this turkey - only the USA cowers before this ravenous corporation.
The entire C-Suite of Boeing should be tossed in jail. And they should take a 737 Max 8 flight to get there.
5
“The fact that this airplane requires such jury rigging to fly is a red flag,” one of the pilots said."
If would be refreshing if Boeing would actually listen to qualified and licensed pilots who actually fly these beasts and who have encountered issues. Thank goodness they are still alive to tell the tale of close calls.
What will it take for Boeing or the FAA to temporarily suspend the Max 8? Another deadly crash? A deadly crash on American soil?
This entire scenario is heartbreaking as it is terrifying.
Please, PLEASE listen and heed the words of the pilots. They have encountered first hand experience. Their only agenda is to fly safe planes. Why is that so difficult or complicated to comprehend?
34
@John
It pains me to agree with your spot on assessment of the possible current mindset "those 2nd-rate 3rd world countries don't know how to fly".
Publically, that sentiment has never been voiced, but the actions by some on this side of the pond certainly hints loudly at that perception.
9
@Marge Keller Incidentally, many "2nd-rate 3rd world" airlines employ pilots from the 1st world. There's an acute shortage of pilots everywhere. It's hard to tell just by looking at the name or domicile of an airline who the pilot might be. And, of course, those "2nd-rate 3rd world" pilots are also usually well-trained, perhaps in 1st world countries. Overall, it's a rather ignorant attitude.
2
@Bala
I completely agree. That attitude and mindset is not only ignorant, but terribly unfair, untrue, and dangerous.
I hate think or say that if these crashes occurred in the U.S., a completely different sense of urgency and action would have taken place.
2
The United States has ceased being a leader. We are now a nation that follows.
11
In America the welfare of corporations matter more than that of people.
4
You ask why the FAA is allowing the Boeing 737 Max 8 continue to fly?
Corporations control the nation. The CEO of Boeing dares calling The POTUS and ask for an “understanding.”
Do we need more proof that we are being run by an oligarchy that cares nothing about human welfare.
Can you imagine the same CEO calling Bernie when he is finally president? I don’t.
Bernie 2020. Let’s stop this precipitous fall. Please!
5
@Blunt Yep! I am glad other countries who have grounded this albatross plane will also not allow the USA to land it in their airports.
And I can imagine that Boeing CEO calling Bernie and Bernie giving him a blistering earful, you know, as a President who stands up for his people and can never be bribed.
2
I remember back when human lives were more important than corporate greed.
9
@Shelly H
That must be before corporations existed and human lives were more (or less) important than business owner greed.
That time must be before tobacco companies and leaded gasoline and patent medicines with cocaine or opioids in them and the conditions "The Jungle" described and the Spanish-American war in which the army had more dead and wounded from bad provisions than Spanish weapons.
That time would have been before slavey, except that corporations did not own most of the slaves so the greed involved in slavery was not corporate.
Your memory is way too rosy.
The FAA, now this is the wrong kind of American exceptionalism.
2
Whatever. Let Southwest and American do what they want, if anyone decides to fly them, it's their own fault if something goes wrong at this point.
1
@Ryan
What about people under the flight path
So now Canada has grounded this model based on satellite images of the flight and the Ethiopian pilot reporting "flight control Problems" minutes before crashing. Seems to me if Boeing and the FAA don't ground these planes, they have now entered criminal negligence if something should happen again. Ground these planes NOW!
7
Funny too how conservatives complained about Obama and what they called his apology tour (as if careful language about our foreign relations is an apology). In 2 years, Trump has made us untrustworthy and disrespected. It may take a long time to recover.
10
“The job of F.A.A. administrator is one of the many crucial but unoccupied positions in this administration- although Mr. Trump proposed to put his personal pilot at the agency’s controls.”
Right, just like he proposed putting the presidential physician Ronny Jackson in charge of the “Veterans’ Affairs Administration,” and we all know how well that worked out. I think I’d feel safer having the position left unfilled than having Trump put one of his unqualified sycophants at the head of the F.A.A.
4
Why is it so difficult to disconnect a flight control system that may erroneously point the aircraft's nose towards the unyielding earth during takeoff? It should be a single toggle switch.
3
What makes the editors think that 335 lives in Indonesia and Ethiopia mean anything to Donald Trump, to Boeing, or to Sec. Chao? Not when it could sink one of the last high-tech manufacturers in the US! Horrors!
Of course the planes should be grounded. They need more than a software patch, they need a BIG RED SWITCH you hit for total manual control of the aircraft and a BIG FLASHING LIGHT that tells you when you're fighting the autopilot.
Cruise control in cars: You step on the gas to override and brake to suspend. It needs to be that simple and obvious.
10
@Dadof2 In the case of 737 Max, the MCAS system is not an optional luxury like cruise control or even auto-pilot. It seems to be part of the basic design to keep the "modified" plane aloft under anticipated and highly likely conditions of stall. Yes, it seems unbelievable that Boeing would use hard-to-disable software to compensate for risks in the physical design. But that's the reality here, and that's the reason the automation is difficult to turn off.
4
Just checked my flight for next week; all passengers should be calling the airlines and demanding alternatives to the 737 Max 8. When the pilots are complaining, it's time to listen!
42
A NY Times article entitled "What We Know About the Lion Air Flight 610 Crash", dated Nov 9, 2018, stated:
" 'Erroneous inputs from an angle of attack sensor could put a Max 8 into a rapid descent,' Boeing said in an advisory to customers. It advised pilots to follow “existing flight crew procedures” if such an event occurs. Those procedures include switching off electric motors that move the stabilizers in the plane’s tail, which are forcing the aircraft’s nose downward."
After 4 months following the Air Lion crash, Boeing is still "developing a software patch." Heads should roll.
21
The emerging theme is that if the auto-pilot goes haywire, the flight crew should immediately turn it off and fly old school until leveled off enough to turn it back on. It's a simple enough hack.
1
@Juvenal451 According to the article, it is not clear whether that is the solution, because we do not know what Ethiopian pilots done or could have done. Don't rush to simple judgment.
2
see this article share above by steve. It is NOT an autopilot issue: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2019/03/boeing-the-faa-and-why-two-737-max-planes-crashed.html#more
Boeing and these airlines now have adequate warning about the safety issues with this plane. Another crash under these circumstances would amount to little more than intentional homicide.
They can no longer argue that they didn't think the gun was loaded.
Boeing needs to fix this pronto! Until then, the plane must be grounded.
16
The problem with the FAA is they it is more of a political agency than a safety agency.
Trump has placed pro business members of the industry in charge of regulatory agencies and these members have no other agenda but to maximize profits.
17
One more important point.
This is the cost of deregulation that the GOP so dearly loves.
I look to the federal government to ensure that the nation is safe from environmental contamination, food poisoning, and airplanes falling out of the air. Trump and his administration like to leave these kinds of protections to industry or to no one at all.
23
The FAA is comprised of aviation professionals that switched from the commercial or military branch of aviation into what is essentially a “government job”. Less stressful, steadier hours, predictable, comfortable environment. So their knowledge of these newer aircrafts and systems is very limited because their real time expertise stopped a decade or more ago. So they acquiesce to the manufacture by stating the FAA standard PR quote, “we don’t know yet”. in other words, we won’t convict until all evidence is in. but the faa is at the mercy of Boeing, because no one at the faa has the knowledge to dissect these systems. happy flying.
5
When this crisis passes the GOP will do something else through action or in-action that will degrade our country once more. It is staggering how far we have fallen since Nov 2016. Disgraceful. 2020 will announce who we really are..one way or the other.
12
The software update to fix this problem has been available for some time, except for the 5 weeks the FAA was shut down during the Trump Government Shutdown. Had the govt shutdown not occured, would all of these passengers still be alive today?
8
@markymark Actions have consequences. Shutting the government for weeks has consequences that may not be immediately apparent. Trump's shut down was simple extortion; let's hold him accountable. 1-Make government shutdowns illegal going forward. 2-Indict Trump with second degree murder. This psychopath will get you killed. We have proof!
Something is off here. If there is a seat belt or air bag or brake issue, a whole slew of cars are immediately recalled. It's not as though safety is a taboo term in the transportation world. Why is Boeing being so stubborn on this? Why is the FAA dragging its heels?
40
@htg Allow me to venture a guess. In the US, evidence that you have fixed a problem cannot be used against you to prove that a product is defective. Federal Rules of Evidence 407.
Other countries may not have that rule. So if Boeing fixes the plane, those repairs might be used against them in a lawsuit.
That's not much of an excuse for killing people, however.
3
@htg. Remember the Pinto? Their gas tanks blew up when rear-ended for lack of a $1.85 part. The bean counters figured it would be cheaper to pay off a few lawsuits than recall all the Pintos and put in the necessary part. The bean counters at Boeing could have come to a similar conclusion. In addition, Boeing gave Trump's campaign $1 million. To be fair, they contributed to same amount to Obama. And the beat goes on.
4
The US is no longer a world leader, especially when it comes to moral issues. The government of the Unites States under a Republican administration operates for the benefit of business, not it's people.
56
@CA Give me a break. If something goes wrong on one of these planes, it's honestly the fault of the passengers for deciding to fly them. No idea what this has to do with America being a world leader. No need to moralize an aviation issue.
oh haha , “ the fault of the passenger “ , that’s rich
That we are even having this conversation is unconscionable. The planes in question are at risk until investigators are satisfied that they are not. That the airlines' management continues to fly them indicates an amazing lack of concern. I won't fly those planes and I wonder when the crews will refuse to fly them, too.
49
It is very clear that the rest of the world errs on the side of protecting its people. The US errs on the side of protecting its corporations and its profits.
If these aircraft are considered safe by Boeing and the Trump administration, I recommend these leaders in government and industry start flying on them as part of their commitment to the American people. Then we'd see how safe they really think they are.
73
@avrds The FAA decided not to ground their planes, I don't think you can just blame Trump for everything.
@avrds "Corporations are people, my friend." This is just further confirmation that corporations are the only people that matter.
3
@Justin. They are treated like people until it's time to put them in jail.
4
Enough have been said. Time to act, FAA.
Ground the 737 MAX now. If you are confident that it is safe, then make a public announcement assuring the public its safety.
Then fly again.
Everyone is happy.
29
@Sometimes it rains Agree completely, but there's no one in charge at the FAA. Instead, let's have the Aviator In Chief NOT fly Air Force One for a while, and fly a Max 8/9 instead. And take the Boeing CEO with him.
8
"There’s no one in charge, either. The job of F.A.A. administrator is one of the many crucial but unoccupied positions in this administration — although Mr. Trump proposed to put his personal pilot at the agency’s controls."
The incompetence, negligence and corruption of the Trump maladministration has far-reaching consequences. The mind boggles.
84
@Andrew
I recall reading a NYT article back in March of 2017 in which the prerequisite for key White House posts was loyalty, not experience.
Keith Schiller, who rose from part-time security guard at the Trump Organization would be the director of Oval Office operations.
I'm surprised a crop duster pilot was not placed in charge of Air Force One and all of its maintenance and high tech operations or even the FAA.
One of the many problems I see with Trump is his inability to recognize or NOT recognize experience, thus leaving many key and crucial posts vacant - indefinitely.
4
@Marge Keller Indeed. Read Michael Lewis' The Fifth Risk.
2
I'll be booking flights to attend conferences around the country for me and other volunteers. I won't book any flights on the three airlines that haven't grounded the Max--Southwest, United, American. Also, I have a long memory of the companies who put the customer first and those who don't. I hope other flyers will follow suit.
66
@Kathy
I hope Delta or Alaska Air is flying where you need to go.
2
March 13, 2019
Airline pilot culture is not universal global trainable and herein lies the problem. What is for universal computer arts and science technological applications has its risks - to say misunderstandings both conscious & unconscious to the upgrading adaptions to complex systems that need tolerance for for the programs to offer satisfactory - built in pilot confusions and dare say errors of safety results. Not a problem as long as the industry understands and implements the psychology and adaptations to upgrade of flight tolerances for a happy and safe flying controls that are welcomed and hand and glove one with the objective and only goal safety and enjoyable travelling in all lands at all distances to confirm the essence of the manufacturing user mastery.
1
I think its important to look at why all these countries disregarded the FAA guidance. And why Ethiopia is sending the boxes to Germany to investigate. Do you think that the US has lost its previously unquestionable position of unbiased expertise and authority in this sector? Any wonder why that might be?
101
@S Stuible Yes,, and no wonder at all.
5
@S Stuible Absutely. Although I have felt the FAA to be a bit sleepy for some time, Trump's aura of corruption seems to stain most involved in his orbit. Now Boeing and FAA? $$$over lives. What transpired in that phone call?
6
@S Stuible
I am delighted to hear that the black boxes are going tp Germany. The US is not to be trusted on this one.
7
Have a trip next week. Just checked my flights. No 737 Max. Thank goodness. Had it been different, I would have canceled or tried to reschedule -- at considerable extra cost no doubt -- to get on a different aircraft. I'll bet thousands of others with pending trips are checking as well.
55
@Patrick I'm flying on SWA on Thurs. and returning on Sun. Can't for the life of me figure out how to determine the type of 737 I'll be on. Spent 30 minutes on the SWA website to no avail.
1
@ckciii I used seatguru.com to check the plane for my upcoming Southwest flight. Turned out to be a 737 Max, so I switched flights.
26
@ckciii Also, looking at the Southwest site listing flights by date and time, clicking on the flight number at the left of the screen yields details including equipment.
10
You would think this would be the very definition of a no-brainer. People's lives are at stake. Ground them all until the situation is 100% resolved, verified, and satisfied. Why are we even talking about this?
Oh, that's right -- stock prices. Got it now. Money is involved so people's lives are only ONE part of the calculus.
Life in the Corporate States of America.
127
@David Apparently the President of Boeing and the President of the United States have the same moral values for human life other than their own---none.
4
@David
You think the F.A.A. is that concerned about Boeing's profits?
@Ryan And you think the FAA is immune to political pressure?
2