Great job and excellent engineering Boeing. Let's review. 737 max engines are heavier which changed the aerodynamics. That gave it a nose up attitude on takeoff. Awesome change. Who wouldn't want a plane that drives nose up on takeoff under full power? So then to prevent any stalls, you rely on a single angle of attack sensor. Way to build robust redundancy into the system! One sensor. So when that angle of attack sensor goes off, either by failure or actually being eally close to stalling, the computer takes over and rams the nose down automatically. Who wouldn't want a severe nose down override so close to the ground? Excellent design principles and safe engineering all the way around. Then within seconds the pilot is expected to override the mcas and recover. But what if sensor was fine and it was actually close to stalling? Way to go Boeing! Safety to the Max!
15 replies (most recent on top)
Told you so...
like i said, just get out of business/declare bankruptcy/dissolve the whole thing and let a new version of tesla build a plane that doesn't crash.
Tesla built a reuseable rocket that doesn't crash and without H1B
4 months ago by Anonymous
1 reaction (+1/-0)
Post ID: @Y4HwBMX-kfu
I worked on the 737 MAX, and was proud to see it roll-out. Then I worked on the 777X- the roll-out a somber experience, as the second MAX crash had just occurred. Now I see what I really worked on: profits for the rich, lies... The FAA and Boeing are bedfellows; I could whistle-blow (and still may) on things I have seen and heard, lately. The recent push to eliminate a lot of QA will allow more shoddy work from disengaged and uncaring employees (not everybody) sending oversized holes and FOD out the door. There have been so many scandals in the past few months (US military returning and rejecting 767 due to FOD, ethics investigations into Shanahan, 2 crashes, Boeing's response, the flap tracks, etc...) that just showing up for work feels like heading to a funeral. Maybe it's time this awful company reaps some of what it sows. P.S. I am seeking new employment.
Simple greed.
May God forgive them
However, they still must answer to the rules of law of being criminally negligent in pushing this stupid max as 2nd derivative of the original 37 classic. Those at the FAA who approved this without much of a wink should also go to jail so they can have plenty of time to really think about what they messed up, basically trading precious human life with the almight $ for their special club/relationship with Boeing (aka butcher of innocent lives)
To think I used to work at this company and was proud of being a part the 777 legacy. Very sad
Passengers might be willing to fly on a non MCAS 737 but realize one could be substituted on their route at any time for any number of reasons. Trying to change a flight at that point leads to untold complications. The common sense approach for thinking customers will be to avoid those airlines that fly any 737s.
I work at spirit aerosystems where the fuselage is built the company has came out and said the will continue to build 52 a month and store at our facility till Boeing is ready for them . 70% of the work force is on the 737 line limited space to store the fuselages , contractors have be released, and starting Monday 4/15/19 we will no longer be working any overtime and a slowing will start what that will be we will soon find out. No current demand for the 737 max could could cause problems here in Wichita ks the air capital of the world where spirit aerosystems employees over 14,000 workers . In my opinion we all need to worry!!
To the person curious of other's thoughts... my thoughts are: everything that Boeing plans hinges on the MAX returning to service. There is an international committee reviewing the safety of the design and whether or not it should fly again, period. The concept of a software fix to a flawed plane (too low, engines too big, etc.) may not pass China, the EUs, and the other countries involved in review. I personally think that it is too soon to get a read. Politically and economically speaking, China has reason to say: no. Best case scenario: Boeing really does reinvent and launch a safe MAX. Then we have: a class action lawsuit, 2 individual lawsuits, and whatever else is coming down the pike. In addition to the airlines losing money, public perception, etc.
I think if you work for Boeing- keep calm and carry on. Nothing is written in stone, yet. But this could be really, really, really bad for the company. I would not make any major purchases and sock that extra cash away.
Luckily there hasn't been any airframe failures. I work at Spirit Aerosystems where we produce the fuselage and quality takes a very noticible second to numbers. Its sad that we are forced to build an inferior product just so we can shove it down the line and make our numbers.
Sent this to DM at Boeing. This was written for your review several months ago, but I thought it pre-mature to send: now I don’t. New aircraft features shouldn’t cost people their lives. If MCAS is that much of an engineering mess, then it needs more than an adjustment to the software: IT NEEDS TO BE REDESIGNED!! Also, when engineering the system, keep in mind the following SPR (SIMPLE, PRODUCIBLE AND RELIABLE). Quite frankly, the MCAS is an unnecessary system. I worked for Boeing years ago in Philadelphia, and I can tell you I worked with some brilliant individuals, so it’s a matter of getting the right minds together (including those in your Supply Chain) to straighten it out. Also, keep in mind, with increased production rates come various problems, specifically, with quality, installation and integration and test.
From what I can see, it’s “blatantly apparent” that Boeing failed “miserably” disseminating the nature of the MCAS System and the specifics regarding who, what, when, where, why, important as it relates to pilots being able to properly understand and utilize the system. This is a “fundamental design principle” that was ignored. This is even more important when the system is a “new” or “updated” existing system. Pilots (in most cases) are not Engineers, but need to at least “fundamentally” understand all the systems on the aircraft. The aircraft in the Lion Air crash had issues on 3 separate flights on that particular aircraft before the ill-fated flight, and, quite frankly, should have never been cleared for flight, let alone the previous flight’s. Even with this being said, it doesn’t solve the possible inherent technical problems with the aircrafts system design. Where is the cross-check/redundancy to avoid such a hazard? Apparently, the MCAS system was “misfiring” because of a failed sensor (that was never “properly” fixed per manual instruction) that repeatedly pushed the nose of the aircraft down. If the pilots were “properly” trained (and there’s a lot to this as stated above), this would have never happened.
I’m sorry, but I think Boeing ‘Dropped the Ball”…..
Signed,
Former employee and investor.
Ham and Egg Engineering.
Estimates that the disruption to Boeing's business could last between six and nine months. It was previously forecasted three to six months of aircraft delays/disruption. It is now predicted it will take Boeing until 2021 to catch up on promised aircraft deliveries.
That's a big deal: The 737, which is Boeing's most profitable program, accounts for about 40% of the company's operating profit.
While there are plenty of traditional 737 models in service, nearly all of the new planes that Boeing is selling as part of the program are Max models.
Build rate drops from 52 airplanes per month to 42 airplanes per month and if we are lucky the problem is fixed in 4-6 months. If so the build rate will go up again.
However, the fact the company has made the call to drop from 52 airplanes per month to 42 airplanes per month tells me they are ready to drop the build rate again. They also have a doomsday plan.
I am curious what other opinions or scenarios if anyone has any thoughts.
If boeing go bankrupt, that's another sign of the great America failing again
like i said above, this seems like an easy problem. it's like a dramatic change in fairings or equivalent to it. i interpret fairings as a sort of flux that needs to be the same from front edge to rear, but this design violated it on a dynamical range. so the fix has to be in software. but software can only do so much because it relies on sensors.
the problem is the physical violation of fairing principle or something similar to it.
The software designers are not the problem; they were a solution to a problem. Unfortunately, the problem is bigger than a patch. I do not see an easy way through this, though Boeing seems to think public opinion is going to be restored with a repeated mantra: the Max is safe. The Max is not safe. It was a brand new plane thrown on an old frame with resulting issues. A fundamental design flaw was "worked around" to compete with Airbus. It is a shame. Corporate America trumps: safety, goodwill, trust, common sense... money talks.
what kind of people who assumed a position of authority and decided to be ignorant of design principles of all previous aircrafts, their design philosophy, their safety lessons?
Seems like people throwing bandage on a problem to me instead of following sound/reasonable design principles for safety.
like i said, just get out of business/declare bankruptcy/dissolve the whole thing and let a new version of tesla build a plane that doesn't crash.
Tesla built a reuseable rocket that doesn't crash and without H1B
Software engineers!