Public perception @859. This is a large factor I skipped above. Flying public will know if they are booking flight on MAX. This could eat into Boeing's 'return to flight' scenario. To recapture public perception I can only think of Tex Johnson's 1955 barrel roll on behalf of Boeing. Likely because I am awfully fond of barrel rolls. C919s @859. I flew on that once. It was utilitarian. Boring. But perhaps that's a good thing for this industry.
Leadfoot could consider Tex Johnson a powerful totem. After Boeing, his last career move was developing aircraft ejection seats. Far-from-boring way to round out a career.
Written pledge of free patch support for as long as anyone cares to operate the type With free maintenance on those parts. Boeing can't afford to see another AoA-sensor related crash even if it's the result of bad airline maintenance. BA shareholders. See above. I'm sticking with my prediction of late 2019 if they get their preferred schedule. I'd be okay with them handing out scholarships at aeronautical schools in the hopes of eventually increasing the number of competent engineers and analysts involved in the certification process. Airbus doesn't have production capacity to capitalize on this. But COMAC does. That's a deep maybe. The DC-10 took a few bad wrecks early on. They fixed them and made them safe. But enough orders vanished that the type was not profitable for MD. A fine that forces them to sell off at least one significant business unit just to cover it. A fine bigger than the GDP of some smaller nations. Illinois lawyers speculatively (presciently?) threw parties when Boeing announced their HQ relocation to Chicago. I can't remember the exact detail, but there's something about Illinois tort law different from Washington that was predicted to work out quite poorly for Boeing if they were faulted in fatal crashes. Here we are. That's the real problem here- with the sheer quantity of 737s in the world and on the order book, there will be another crash. Statistics demand it, even in this golden age of air safety. It could be a museum-rated thunder guppy in Uzbekistan, but the next time somebody demonstrates the lithobraking system in one, they'll be back down to this moment in at least some of the public's eye, deserved or not.
Sooner or later, someone had to say "lithobraking" here MAX delivered = 371. On order >4500. One can't know what happens in Boeing meetings, but dang, how could they possibly make an 'engines done a little bit wrong' plane crash proof? If they do not, it is B-Bad. Truly they seem to plan to put themselves in the hands of elsewhere operators and maintainers. "AoA-sensor" @863. All MAXs have two, with one linked to MCAS. The AoA disagree indication is (currently) no more than that. Yer 'fly-by wire' planes (see Airbus) have 3 and voting. If Boeing goes to 3, it could not happen in 2019.
If I'm not mistaken, even one Airbus with 3 AoA sensors lost all usable signals from icing. Icing being what it is, that bird was high up and pilots intervened, saving the day. My point is that no matter how many sensors decorate your bird's skin, air is a wrong place for humans to be. We strive to make it less wrong by training the heck out of those in row zero.
I guess that wasn't Air France 447, which lost its airspeed indicators to icing, an already known problem. The only pilot on board who knew how to handle it, was off-shift and sharing a napping berth with his mistress. He didn't get back to the cockpit with enough time to spare, and the craft was lost. I'd suspect that the original training contract called for adequate training to operate the craft. Now that the original goalpost has been shown to not have been placed far enough downfield, I suspect the original trainer will have to buck up and cover that additional distance under the original contract.
They just won a many-million dollar military contract, with more likely to occur soon. They're such a big outfit that even with the superstar of one of their big divisions in trouble like this, they can handle some turbulence. Which says to me, we don't need to worry about being gentle with regulatory certification overhaul, criminal prosecution at the executive level or punitive fines. They really are that big. We should fix the system and let the improved system "encourage" them to fix themselves.
Another Boeing type, 787, was previously subject of a 'battery' of public attention and PChat posts. I was intrigued to learn that its AoA sensors are also duplicated, and a third synthetic AoA signal is derived from other instruments. This allows 'voting' as other companies do (notably Airbus). So one can imagine that a MAX revision (more comprehensive than apparently currently envisioned) is possible. It could be implemented if MAX's dual ADIRUs (air data inertial reference units) can get those signals required. It would not require installing a real third AoA to each airframe, which would involve much time and expense. Separately, it seems uncertain that FAA's reapproval will be trivially accepted by European Aviation Safety Agency (FAA counterpart there), when it is made. Apparently EASA accepted earlier FAA approvals as a matter of course. Also the vice versa?
Considering the sunk cost of the existing airframes, I'd expect Boeing and regulators would even go this route before submitting to Nader's "never fly again" demand.
Third AoA signal would be arguably compatible with Boeing philosophy. ??? if they'd consider it. Only thing I feel sure they would not consider is reverting 737 to engines that do not need to be corralled by software. That would leave A320 family alone with the more fuel-economical GE LEAP engines.
you called it but i never liked his killing the corvair, that was nice car. maybe he's wrong here too, and now there's an emotional connection
Jokes aside, Nader is fairly credited with inspiring a lot of automotive safety engineering. And once people saw some results it became a competitive differentiator. Volvo and Subaru practically built their brand identities on safety tech. His name even wound up on a common part. Google "Nader pin." They're on just about every car door on the planet now.
New comprehensive report telling of increased glacial melt around the Earth. All this despite the sun being in reduced Total Solar Irradiation for the past 12+ years: Global warming is shrinking glaciers faster than thought The mentioned 369 billion tons of yearly Earth glacial ice loss is equivalent to ~ 88 cubic miles or a melting ice cube, 4.45 miles, by 4.45 miles, by 23,500 feet high.
i demand a retraction ! .... & then there's these flyin corvairs .... 100hp - 225lbs. i've seen gyrocopter use, too don't count out their flyin' just yet
Flying winged Corvairs would have their flight distances shortened, because all the engine oil leaked out. Environmental disaster!
if you fail to properly maintain. a bad seal where one stains a case with ½ a quart is far from an environmental disaster. Getting a little hysterical? The Corvair engine is modified & derated for aeronautic purposes. FAA reg's require regular maintenance & inspection or it's a no-go. Unlike driving, where any tool can jump behind the wheel - aviation is a different animal. You'd do best to worry about roughly 100,000 main bearing seals out on the road that are currently leaking .... than a handful of modified Corvair engines. Pick yer battles .