Boeing to reduce 737 production in wake of MAX crashes - statement

[Aforek]

5 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Sure why not? Let's get Airbus in there and show them every secret piece of software Boeing has.  

Do you think that Airbus waited Boeing to know how  to build a plane ? 

before Airbus, England and France had their own plane industry long time ago , and they built Concorde together

Airbus is the continuity of Concorde 

For the 737 max, Boeing were in a hurry because there is a big pression from Airbus A 320

[Mavideol]

5 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

I am not sure an agency exists that knows more about airplanes than Boeing does.

just on top of my head there's one AIRBUS but could look deeper and may find more 555

[zydeco]

7 hours ago, bristolboy said:

So who was it who created the fiasco known as the 737 Max? The FAA? The reason Boeing created this jury-rigged fiasco was that Airbus had blindsided them with a better plane in the A320.

I don't know enough about aircraft to make anything but a statement of sentiment. And that is that Boeing took the cheap route with this plane, creating a hybrid that is unflyable without special software and computer flight handling. That's okay for a moonshot or an advanced fighter jet. But I don't want to be using something like it just to get from Cincinnati to Minneapolis.

[Ireland32]

10 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Trump is also responsible for every kitten that died since his birth. This is really getting tiring and a good section of the American population is becoming sick of it. 

He’s a Jackass, that’s why...

[bristolboy]

11 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

It's as I said the relevant agencies lack the talent to assess it.

Well, if they're incompetent for approving it, what does that make Boeing? Your assertions about the FAA lacking the technical skill to evaluate aircraft design are just the words of a fanboy who is heavily invested in the Boeing corporation. And, most likely, not just emotionally.

[bristolboy]

13 hours ago, toenail said:

Trump’s “kiss-arse” policy to corporate America is doing its damage already...allowing Boeing to inspect its own planes ( FAA does not have the expertise and the director of FAA, Mr Elwell, once worked for Boeing.)... Relaxed safety concerns under the Trump administration is also hitting the food industry under the FDA.  Beware

 

12 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Trump is also responsible for every kitten that died since his birth. This is really getting tiring and a good section of the American population is becoming sick of it. 

Nonsensical deflection. The point is that under Trump more and more industries are being allowed to self-regulate and/or dubious standards are replacing sound scientific ones. And as we've seen, the consequences of that can be dire.

[ballpoint]

“Since taking office I have been very strict on Commercial Aviation.  Good news - it was just reported that there were Zero deaths in 2017, the best and safest year on record!”

Donald Trump.

 

If he's going to take credit for no crashes, then he has to take the blame for these ones.

 

[bristolboy]

Below is a link to an excellent article that explains how the Max 737 debacle occurred. Mainly it happened because Airbus had stolen a march on Boeing with its A320 line so Boeing had to resort to somehow updating its 737s, a low lying plan that really shouldn't have been modified to accommodate large and more powerful engines. It wasn't and isn't that the FAA doesn't possess the technical expertise to review airliner design and modifications to that desing; it's just that instead of increasing funding for the FAA to review new airliners, funding has actually been cut.

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/5/18296646/boeing-737-max-mcas-software-update

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

12 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

It's as I said the relevant agencies lack the talent to assess it.

 

I don't believe that in the slightest. I believe the FAA does, and if it doesn't for some reason, certainly could reach out to bolster its expertise.

 

What the FAA probably lacked, more than expertise, was the administrative and institutional will to be an independent and objective evaluator of aviation safety characteristics when a major new Boeing passenger jet program is on the table.

 

The FAA's posture probably was shaped by a combination of:

--institutional coziness between the FAA and the U.S.'s largest jet manufacturer.

--the Republican mantra of less regulatory oversight by federal agencies.

--and probably agency budget and staffing constraints as well.

 

The FAA had a duty to perform, which included ensuring the safety of commercial aviation aircraft, especially before allowing a new variant into commercial service. And in that regard, there is plenty of evidence piling up that they failed miserably in that duty.

 

Not to mention their rather dubious and questionable move of publicly issuing a statement declaring the 737 Max aircraft was safe and airworthy -- in the wake of two successive major fatality crashes and multiple other governments and aviation agencies ordering the planes grounded within their jurisdictions.

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I don't believe that in the slightest. I believe the FAA does, and if it doesn't for some reason, certainly could reach out to bolster its expertise.

 

What the FAA probably lacked, more than expertise, was the administrative and institutional will to be an independent and objective evaluator of aviation safety characteristics when a major new Boeing passenger jet program is on the table.

 

The FAA's posture probably was shaped by a combination of:

--institutional coziness between the FAA and the U.S.'s largest jet manufacturer.

--the Republican mantra of less regulatory oversight by federal agencies.

--and probably agency budget and staffing constraints as well.

 

 

 

There is something to your argument about FAA being too cozy with Boeing. But there was a lot of pressure on them to approve of Boeing's  considering how important it is to American exports and the well paying jobs it provides workers. So there would have been political pressure from both Republicans and Democrats.

And it has definitely suffered budget cuts thanks to Republican attacks on regulation. The expertise is there. It's just spread too thin.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Hate to have to say it, and repeat it, but it's been a common theme throughout the Trump admin:

 

--Polluters are put in charge of environmental agencies.

--Telcom/broadcast execs are put in charge of the FCC.

--Anti public education advocates are put in charge of federal education agencies.

--Critics of the poor are put in charge of federal poverty agencies

 

So why should aviation safety and regulation be any different....

 

Quote

 

Daniel K. Elwell is the Acting Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). In this capacity, he is responsible for the safety and efficiency of the largest aerospace system in the world

.....

From 2013-2015, as Senior Vice President for Safety, Security, and Operations at Airlines for America (A4A), Elwell was responsible for leading the advancement of commercial aviation safety and security excellence for major U.S. air carriers.

...

Prior to A4A, Elwell was Vice President of the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) from 2008-2013. In this role, Elwell represented civil aerospace manufacturers and led policy development and advocacy for the civil aerospace manufacturing interests of more than 300 AIA member companies.

 

...

 

 

[bristolboy]

Just now, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Hate to have to say it, and repeat it, but it's been a common theme throughout the Trump admin:

 

--Polluters are put in charge of environmental agencies.

--Telcom/broadcast execs are put in charge of the FCC.

--Anti public education advocates are put in charge of federal education agencies.

--Critics of the poor are put in charge of federal poverty agencies

 

So why should aviation safety and regulation be any different....

 

...

 

 

But the Max 737 was designed and in production before the Trump administration. The FAA's tardy response to the crashes may be laid at the Trump administration's door, but not the decisions that allowed this aircraft to be built.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

But the Max 737 was designed and in production before the Trump administration. The FAA's tardy response to the crashes may be laid at the Trump administration's door, but not the decisions that allowed this aircraft to be built.

 

Point taken, but the FAA under the current admin had plenty of time to figure out that things were wrong with the 737 Max since its 2017 entry into service, prior to the two major crashes, and they apparently never did. Why major issues with the MCAS only gained substantial attention after the two crashes seems a big question.

 

And then of course there's the point I made above re the FAA:

 

Quote

Not to mention their rather dubious and questionable move of publicly issuing a statement declaring the 737 Max aircraft was safe and airworthy -- in the wake of two successive major fatality crashes and multiple other governments and aviation agencies ordering the planes grounded within their jurisdictions.

 

Only to have Trump of all people pull the plug shortly thereafter via a presidential directive.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

BTW, just for the record:

 

Quote

The new series gained FAA certification on March 8, 2017.

 

https://boeing.mediaroom.com/2017-03-09-Boeing-737-MAX-8-Earns-FAA-Certification

 

Quote

To earn certification for the 737 MAX 8, Boeing undertook a comprehensive test program that began just over one year ago with four airplanes, plus ground and laboratory testing. Following a rigorous certification process, the FAA granted Boeing an Amended Type Certificate for the 737 MAX 8, verifying the design complies with required aviation regulations and is safe and reliable.

 

So the FAA review process seems to have started in the waning months of the Obama Admin, and then was finalized and approved early in the Trump Admin. Apparently with most of the review actually having been done by Boeing itself.

 

That quote above was the description from Boeing. But this more recently was the description from the Seattle Times, via a 3rd party source:

 

Quote

 

In one of the most detailed descriptions yet of the relationship between Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration during the 737 Max's certification process, the Seattle Times reports that the U.S. regulator delegated much of the safety assessment to Boeing and that the analysis the planemaker in turn delivered to the authorities had crucial flaws.

................................

Several technical experts inside the FAA said October's Lion Air crash, where the MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) has been clearly implicated by investigators in Indonesia, is only the latest indicator that the agency's delegation of airplane certification has gone too far, and that it's inappropriate for Boeing employees to have so much authority over safety analyses of Boeing jets.

 

 

https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/03/18/1730247/flawed-analysis-failed-oversight-how-boeing-faa-certified-the-suspect-737-max-flight-control-system

 

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[mooping20Baht]

+ According to Public Citizen:

    -Boeing donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration

    -The Boeing CEO visited Mar-a-Lago

    -Trump’s acting secretary of defense worked at Boeing for 30 years

    -Nikki Haley is about to join Boeing’s board

    -Trump has used Boeing products & sites as a backdrop for major announcements

[mooping20Baht]

https://www.businessinsider.com/boeing-ethiopian-crash-government-shutdown-delayed-plane-software-fix-2019-3?r=US&IR=T