737 Max

User avatar
mik
Posts: 11629
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by mik »

Makes sense (to temporarily halt the production line) since they aren’t selling any.
drcarlos
Posts: 1352
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:17 am

Re: 737 Max

Post by drcarlos »

Orange Cola wrote: Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:37 am They’ve been building them at a reducing rate as they’ve filled up various places to stash them in. Either that or they’ve had to make further changes and the amount of re-work to existing planes which are sat around waiting has got too much for them to cope with.
Well they still aren’t certified. Once they get that cert they will have to put out a list of changes that were made I reckon, like some release notes before people will trust them again. Hope this doesn’t push operators that rely on them under.
User avatar
Orange Cola
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:56 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Orange Cola »

drcarlos wrote: Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:46 am
Orange Cola wrote: Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:37 am They’ve been building them at a reducing rate as they’ve filled up various places to stash them in. Either that or they’ve had to make further changes and the amount of re-work to existing planes which are sat around waiting has got too much for them to cope with.
Well they still aren’t certified. Once they get that cert they will have to put out a list of changes that were made I reckon, like some release notes before people will trust them again. Hope this doesn’t push operators that rely on them under.
I think they had a bit of a crisis in supplying replacement planes or extending contracts on existing ones to bridge the gaps between the current planes scheduled to go out of service (or be re-furbished to them go to another airline). I know the airlines themselves have also struggled with scheduling.

I haven’t read anything in the news about the expected timings around re-certification, has anyone seen anything?
Mustang GT 5.0 V8 -- Jaguar F-Pace
User avatar
mik
Posts: 11629
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by mik »

User avatar
Orange Cola
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:56 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Orange Cola »

I think people are wanting a good chunk of the board to follow him out the door too, too little too late I suspect.
Mustang GT 5.0 V8 -- Jaguar F-Pace
User avatar
Simon
Posts: 4737
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Simon »

I really question if I'd ever fly on the damn thing through choice. I see cabin crew at one or two US airlines are refusing to fly on it when it comes back to service. I don't blame them.
The artist formerly known as _Who_
User avatar
mik
Posts: 11629
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by mik »

It’s not intrinsically unsafe - once they address the stupid decisions made in the design process, and properly train the pilots in the way the systems work, I wouldn’t be concerned about flying in one.
User avatar
NotoriousREV
Posts: 6437
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:14 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by NotoriousREV »

mik wrote: Tue Dec 24, 2019 11:04 am It’s not intrinsically unsafe - once they address the stupid decisions made in the design process, and properly train the pilots in the way the systems work, I wouldn’t be concerned about flying in one.
I’d agree with this. If they’d got it back flying after 2 weeks, I might feel differently but failure isn’t an option this time round.
Middle-aged Dirtbag
User avatar
Simon
Posts: 4737
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Simon »

I understand the issues well enough, and yes, I understand how they're going to limit the power of MCAS through changes to the software, but I'ld like to see them go back and fit the optional AOA disagree light (a safety feature) to all planes regardless. Critical safety features should not be optional.
The artist formerly known as _Who_
User avatar
mik
Posts: 11629
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:15 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by mik »

I do not disagree with the above statement.

This was one of the stupid design decisions I mentioned earlier.
User avatar
jamcg
Posts: 3803
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by jamcg »

Simon wrote: Tue Dec 24, 2019 2:48 pm I understand the issues well enough, and yes, I understand how they're going to limit the power of MCAS through changes to the software, but I'ld like to see them go back and fit the optional AOA disagree light (a safety feature) to all planes regardless. Critical safety features should not be optional.
Funny thing is, it was discovered in the investigation some carriers paid for this and it wasn’t activated :roll:

All planes had the capability to have the warning, as it just came on the lcd screens, the feature just had to be enabled at stupid cost, just like a lot of car optional extras
User avatar
Swervin_Mervin
Posts: 4709
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 8:58 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Swervin_Mervin »

It's all well and good a few technically minded people perhaps being satisfied they might fly on them but general public? Unless the carriers are happy they think they can get them back into service without much public fuss there could still be very choppy waters ahead
User avatar
NotoriousREV
Posts: 6437
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:14 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by NotoriousREV »

I bet EasyJet are having a good laugh at Ryanair’s expense. Over a quarter of the fleet is waiting to be replaced.
Middle-aged Dirtbag
User avatar
scotta
Posts: 3010
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:28 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by scotta »

More test pilot complaints ignored in new messages.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... ations-faa
User avatar
jamcg
Posts: 3803
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by jamcg »

“This airplane is designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51058929
User avatar
GG.
Posts: 4606
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:16 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by GG. »

Not sure a business which is dependent on manufacturing hugely complex products, relying on systems and components fitting together with accuracy and to tight tolerances, was in particularly safe hands with an ex-CEO that couldn't even get his shirt collar circumference to within 3 inches of his own neck :lol: :?

Image

Image
User avatar
jamcg
Posts: 3803
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:41 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by jamcg »

User avatar
Simon
Posts: 4737
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:03 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Simon »

GG. wrote: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:02 pm Not sure a business which is dependent on manufacturing hugely complex products, relying on systems and components fitting together with accuracy and to tight tolerances, was in particularly safe hands with an ex-CEO that couldn't even get his shirt collar circumference to within 3 inches of his own neck :lol: :?

Image

Image
I'm with Dennis on this. I *HATE* things around my neck, which is why I now refuse to wear a tie, save for my own wedding, and a shirt should be comfortable not strangle you.

As for the debris in fuel tanks on new planes? Who can be surprised, really. The more I hear about Boeing's self-induced woes, the less I ever want to go on one of their planes.
The artist formerly known as _Who_
User avatar
scotta
Posts: 3010
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:28 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by scotta »

New bug found in 787 coding - requires to be turned off then on again...

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/04/0 ... tale_data/
User avatar
Orange Cola
Posts: 2232
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:56 pm

Re: 737 Max

Post by Orange Cola »

Well it’s not like they’re flying at the moment.
Mustang GT 5.0 V8 -- Jaguar F-Pace
Post Reply