Another 737 MAX-8 down

a reply to: Zaphod58

The report said someone did receive the "missing data" for the end of the flight and that changed Boeings decision to keep the 737 max 8 flying. So you think the NBR is wrong? Here is the transcript about the former CIA director phone scam attempt, have to wait for tonights report.

nbr.com...

a reply to: Slichter

It wouldn't be the first time, and won't be the last. Check my posts in this thread and you'll see the image posted of their vertical speed. I don't see how one more line going down to the ground changes anything when the rest of the data already superficially matches the Lion Air crash.

Vietjet signs deal for 100 airplanes, increasing order with Boeing to 200 airplanes

Is something deeper going on? I owe this link to Bill1960 who linked this in the Q thread earlier this afternoon.

a reply to: TheGoondockSaint

The only way there's something deeper going on is if airlines start cutting orders, forcing Boeing to offer a discount for new aircraft.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Trump did what the FAA seemingly couldn't do...the right thing!

Ground that aircraft! ...until the cause of these in-flight issues are identified with certainty and fixed!

FAA = Failing Again and Again!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Which was brilliant. Boeing and the FAA have been saying the aircraft is airworthy, which until they can prove MCAS played a role in this crash too, it technically is, so they couldn't come out and suddenly ground them. They painted themselves into a corner and set up a lose-lose situation. Trump ordering them grounded gave them an out. It still hurts, but nowhere near as much as it could have.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You said it exactly right...

"Boeing and the FAA..." You could have stopped right there, as it says it all! Even got the order of precedence right too.

Ok, I was asked to comment. First and foremost, I'm not some tin foil hat wearing guy. I've spent a lot of time in government service. Trust me put nothing past them. I also know quite a bit about aircraft and systems. Auto flight compensation systems have been in use since the 70s. F-117, B-2, F-22 and F-35 either can't fly or will be extremely difficult to fly without them. That's what the MCAS system does. Now can there an anomaly that fights the pilot? absolutely. It can be delinked or if you will manual reversion. Now for the tin foil hat. Summit in Vietnam yields 20 Billion deal for 100+ 737 MAX jets. Summit falls apart except the deal. First jet fell out of sky just before the summit next one after. Everyone around the world grounds them. Except the FAA, NSTB and Boeing why? A real safety issue of that magnitude they would have been the first to do it. Why did Trump announce it????? More there than meets the eye

a reply to: Bill1960

Why did Trump announce it???

Because...he's not getting his bed feathered by not announcing it, that's why.

Bigger question...why didn't the FAA announce it first??? I get the NTSB, but the FAA??? NTSB doesn't make policy, but the FAA does.

Two brand new aircraft, of the same model, "auger-in" shortly after takeoff, within 12 months of each other. Both seemingly having altitude stability issues. An AD is issued after the Lion Air crash, calling for "re-training" (not fixing the aircraft or the problem, but "re-training" the pilots to fly a faulty system). And then a 2nd one augers-in.

Seems to me the FAA thought they could hide behind the usual NTSB finding of 'Pilot Error'...didn't heed the re-training and therefore their error. Politics. Screw the backwards FAA! They should have been the 1st to call this one...not Trump. Trump doesn't know shinola about airplanes, but apparently he knows more than the FAA! The EU should have been the FAA's first clue (and no, it wasn't about Airbus).

And it wasn't just pressure from Boeing, but even more so pressure from the airlines like UA and others who fly a whole bevy of these Max's.

The FAA bowed to profits through special interest. Trump bows to Americans and safety.

a reply to: Bill1960

MCAS is designed to prevent a stall, it only does that, which is different from what you mentioned.

Something other than MCAS is involved. The transponder data published by FlightRadar24 cuts off before impact while the aircraft is in a climb. The pilots were also trained in MCAS, and how to react if it started trying to pitch the aircraft down. All airlines were given training on the system and how to disable it, which is as simple as inputting manual trim or throwing two easy to reach switches. Either they pencil whipped their training, they totally forgot their training, or something other than MCAS caused it.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Don't forget the MCAS software update this week and Boeing blaming the FAA government shutdown for the rollout delay.

www.wired.com...

Balls have been dropped.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

There was more than just retraining planned. The software upgrade Boeing just rolled out was supposed to have been done sooner, but the shutdown kept it from being formally approved for rollout until now.

a reply to: WalterDoLittle

In this case Boeing is right about the shutdown. They couldn't install the upgrade without approval, and you can't get approval if the approving agency is closed.

Of course if they'd gotten it right from the start, it wouldn't have mattered, but I've rarely seen aircraft software right on the first try.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Not all of the FAA was shutdown. Air traffic controllers kept working due to being essential personnel.
With the software update being developed because testing was able to proof a link between the Lion Air crash and the MCAS, they clearly knew it could be a danger. The FAA would have returned to work if it was an emergency, if Boeing raised the alarm. But I doubt they did. Plus, they could've issued a bulletin to advice the operators to ground the plane. But they didn't.

a reply to: WalterDoLittle

No, but only essential personnel were working. Code verification isn't considered essential.

Lion Air was initially considered an anomaly because the left side AoA sensor was causing problems for four flights prior to the crash. It wasn't considered an emergency fix because of that. They thought that with the training they'd have enough time to roll the software out and fix it that way. At the time no one thought to ground them.

If this flight proves to be the same cause, then they should have moved faster, but hindsight is always 20-20. The decision was made with the information at the time.

a reply to: moebius

Hmm.. And some People Wonder Why Others have a Distinct Fear of Flying .............

I still have not seen a cause yet.
Were the recorder(s) data released Yet?

Last I heard, Amazon Prime was brought down by a down burst of weather. Is that the final answer?

Nothing more... let's be patient and see.

a reply to: Bigburgh

Atlas was a flight control issue.

These recorders haven't even left Ethiopia to be decoded yet.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Okay, but the regulatory side of FAA wasn't shut down, as they are the governing oversight.

ETA...Botton line; FAA is hiding behind excuses on this one!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

As I said, essential personnel were working. The software certification, at that time, wasn't considered essential.

I've seen a lot of FAA screw ups over the years, and would be just as happy to see them disbanded and started over, but I just can't bring myself to slam them this time.