Chat Forum
It is currently Fri Feb 28, 2020 4:07 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 664 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2020 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5163
Location: 'ertfordshire
Sandstorm wrote:
Glaston wrote:
Started flying in 1964, days of BOAC


Phew! 10 years after the Comet exploded.

Ah, the first airliner I flew on :shock:
DanAir Gatwick to Corfu


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 2:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10733
Glaston wrote:
Boeing must be close to toast.
Well remember the DC10 stuff, simply you didn't fly airlines that had them.
Boeing had a reputation for standards.
Once you loose your reputation you are gone.
Would still fly 747 but not newer planes.
Started flying in 1964, days of BOAC and PAN AM.



TWA 800?

It is interesting that this accident was a precedent of what happened with the Max. There had been previous instances of fuel tank explosions, but the issues had been buried and hidden until that doomed flight.

This cost the whole industry a fortune, as the FAA enforced fuel tank inerting on all aircraft where it was not necessarily warranted. I remember having had a discussion around the early 2000 with an FAA inspector who was telling me how much cleaner the Airbus A320 tanks were in comparison to the B737 he had inspected.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 9:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21397
A 737 down in Iran. This time not a Max. Seems suspicious about the fact it was Iran but who knows these days. Won't help Boeing anyway


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
Boeing now reportedly saying that at a bare minimum Max pilots will require simulator time before being qualified on Max. Regardless of whether or not they sort the underlying flaws out, this causes problems:

1 - Boeing now have to pay an enormous sum of money to Southwest having previously guaranteeing to them that retraining would not be required
2 - There are currently only 2 Max simulators in the world - and they don't accurately represent what is now known to happen with MCAS. Building more will take a substantial amount of time


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 7:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 26327
Location: SOB>Todd
Is there any realistic way for a customer to know if they're meant to be flying on a Max or not?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 7:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:42 pm
Posts: 2396
Floppykid wrote:
Is there any realistic way for a customer to know if they're meant to be flying on a Max or not?


Some of the flightradar sort of stuff on the internet might have it, perhaps even on the ticket info. If not I'm sure you could ask on a plane nerds forum, also you can often tell from the seat reservation options they show you (I think)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 8:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10733
Saint wrote:
Boeing now reportedly saying that at a bare minimum Max pilots will require simulator time before being qualified on Max. Regardless of whether or not they sort the underlying flaws out, this causes problems:

1 - Boeing now have to pay an enormous sum of money to Southwest having previously guaranteeing to them that retraining would not be required
2 - There are currently only 2 Max simulators in the world - and they don't accurately represent what is now known to happen with MCAS. Building more will take a substantial amount of time


That is a huge bottleneck for the return of the Max to service. :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
Lemoentjie wrote:
Floppykid wrote:
Is there any realistic way for a customer to know if they're meant to be flying on a Max or not?


Some of the flightradar sort of stuff on the internet might have it, perhaps even on the ticket info. If not I'm sure you could ask on a plane nerds forum, also you can often tell from the seat reservation options they show you (I think)


If a customer flies a mixed fleet if NG and Max then it will be close to impossible. You can almost certainly tell at the time of hooking what the airframe is supposed to be, but I've been on flights out of Heathrow where the planned plane changed 4+ times on the day of departure. I've even boarded a Boeing that subsequently failed a preflight check, de-boarded, and ended up on an Airbus on the same flight number


Last edited by Saint on Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:43 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
TheFrog wrote:
Saint wrote:
Boeing now reportedly saying that at a bare minimum Max pilots will require simulator time before being qualified on Max. Regardless of whether or not they sort the underlying flaws out, this causes problems:

1 - Boeing now have to pay an enormous sum of money to Southwest having previously guaranteeing to them that retraining would not be required
2 - There are currently only 2 Max simulators in the world - and they don't accurately represent what is now known to happen with MCAS. Building more will take a substantial amount of time


That is a huge bottleneck for the return of the Max to service. :shock:


It's an.iff the charts bottleneck, assuming it even gets approved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19879
Saint wrote:
Lemoentjie wrote:
Floppykid wrote:
Is there any realistic way for a customer to know if they're meant to be flying on a Max or not?


Some of the flightradar sort of stuff on the internet might have it, perhaps even on the ticket info. If not I'm sure you could ask on a plane nerds forum, also you can often tell from the seat reservation options they show you (I think)


If a customer flies a mixed fleet if NG and Mad then it will be close to impossible. You can almost certainly tell at the time of hooking what the airframe is supposed to be, but I've been on flights out if Heathrow where the planned plane changed 4+ times kn the day of departure. I've even boarded a Boeing that subsequently failed a preflihht check, de-boarded, and ended up on an Airbus on the same flight number

Expect certain rival airlines to runs ads like "If they have Boeing, I'm not going"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:42 pm
Posts: 2396
Lots of 'interesting' messages being put out by Boeing in their move for transparency. From the BBC:

Quote:
One unnamed employee wrote in an exchange of instant messages in April 2017: "This airplane is designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys."

Another message dating from November 2015 appears to show how the company lobbied against the aviation regulator's calls for a certain aspect of simulator training.

"We are going to push back very hard on this and will likely need support at the highest levels when it comes time for the final negotiation," the message said.

In February 2018, a Boeing worker asked a colleague: "Would you put your family on a Max simulator-trained aircraft? I wouldn't."

"No," came the reply.


Oh well, suppose the engineers don't really know anything :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:25 pm
Posts: 479
Lemoentjie wrote:
Lots of 'interesting' messages being put out by Boeing in their move for transparency. From the BBC:

Quote:
One unnamed employee wrote in an exchange of instant messages in April 2017: "This airplane is designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys."

Another message dating from November 2015 appears to show how the company lobbied against the aviation regulator's calls for a certain aspect of simulator training.

"We are going to push back very hard on this and will likely need support at the highest levels when it comes time for the final negotiation," the message said.

In February 2018, a Boeing worker asked a colleague: "Would you put your family on a Max simulator-trained aircraft? I wouldn't."

"No," came the reply.


Oh well, suppose the engineers don't really know anything :roll:


I'm not sure what to make of some of it - some of it sounds like pretty run-of-the-mill bitching and griping between colleagues, especially the bolded part, however I'm surprised they were so candid about needing to pressure regulators (if that's what the phrase requesting support refers to) as this surely would be a red flag for any aero employee?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 3:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10733
inactionman wrote:
Lemoentjie wrote:
Lots of 'interesting' messages being put out by Boeing in their move for transparency. From the BBC:

Quote:
One unnamed employee wrote in an exchange of instant messages in April 2017: "This airplane is designed by clowns who in turn are supervised by monkeys."

Another message dating from November 2015 appears to show how the company lobbied against the aviation regulator's calls for a certain aspect of simulator training.

"We are going to push back very hard on this and will likely need support at the highest levels when it comes time for the final negotiation," the message said.

In February 2018, a Boeing worker asked a colleague: "Would you put your family on a Max simulator-trained aircraft? I wouldn't."

"No," came the reply.


Oh well, suppose the engineers don't really know anything :roll:


I'm not sure what to make of some of it - some of it sounds like pretty run-of-the-mill bitching and griping between colleagues, especially the bolded part, however I'm surprised they were so candid about needing to pressure regulators (if that's what the phrase requesting support refers to) as this surely would be a red flag for any aero employee?


A number of people don't realise that every single email they write on the company's computer is copied and archived, to be available in the event of a discovery. Private chats develop over company emails, and this type of comments surface.

Though they are likely to be bitching and griping between colleagues, they do tell a story which will be very helpful to the inquiry to assess responsibilities (from a legal perspective) and areas of improvement (from a safety point of view).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
Another day, another MAX problem. Thus time it's computer hardware related - it appears that the bootup self diagnostics aren't functioning correctly and may not be reporting faults in the system. Even given the apparently lax certification process how this slipped through is terrifying.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19245
I’ve emailed Boeing asking how much they would sell a Mothballed Max to me for so I can open an airline called ‘Air Buddy Holly’. I’ve indicated I could well go to £3k and that I’m a qualified 737 pilot with 10k hours.

Suspect they won’t reply :?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5163
Location: 'ertfordshire
backrow wrote:
I’ve emailed Boeing asking how much they would sell a Mothballed Max to me for so I can open an airline called ‘Air Buddy Holly’. I’ve indicated I could well go to £3k and that I’m a qualified 737 pilot with 10k hours.

Suspect they won’t reply :?

:lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10733
Now Boeing having to inspect Max fuel tanks for FODs apparently... Then you have TWA800 springing to mind again... the biggest cover up in the history of Boeing / FAA negligence which resulted in a costly fuel tank inerting program...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
TheFrog wrote:
Now Boeing having to inspect Max fuel tanks for FODs apparently... Then you have TWA800 springing to mind again... the biggest cover up in the history of Boeing / FAA negligence which resulted in a costly fuel tank inerting program...


That's an awfully dangerous production and QM process. I know that each production line is different, but Boeing is sounding more and more like it needs a complete company review


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17230
Location: balbriggan
Saint wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
Now Boeing having to inspect Max fuel tanks for FODs apparently... Then you have TWA800 springing to mind again... the biggest cover up in the history of Boeing / FAA negligence which resulted in a costly fuel tank inerting program...


That's an awfully dangerous production and QM process. I know that each production line is different, but Boeing is sounding more and more like it needs a complete company review

The idiot in chief is trying to save them by raising taxes on airbus so all is well (despite Boeing selling 0 plane in January if I read this properly).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19879
Saint wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
Now Boeing having to inspect Max fuel tanks for FODs apparently... Then you have TWA800 springing to mind again... the biggest cover up in the history of Boeing / FAA negligence which resulted in a costly fuel tank inerting program...


That's an awfully dangerous production and QM process. I know that each production line is different, but Boeing is sounding more and more like it needs a complete company review

This.


Not only can they not fix the initial problem, but more and more are coming to light - and without any compelling reason for not being discovered beforehand.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
Laurent wrote:
Saint wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
Now Boeing having to inspect Max fuel tanks for FODs apparently... Then you have TWA800 springing to mind again... the biggest cover up in the history of Boeing / FAA negligence which resulted in a costly fuel tank inerting program...


That's an awfully dangerous production and QM process. I know that each production line is different, but Boeing is sounding more and more like it needs a complete company review

The idiot in chief is trying to save them by raising taxes on airbus so all is well (despite Boeing selling 0 plane in January if I read this properly).


Strictly speaking, Boeing's net orders for 2019 were -87 - 246 new orders, less official cancellations, less orders now judged to be to risky to stay officially on the books lie the Jet Airways orders.

While they didn't take any orders in January they didn't lose any either, so that's got to be a silver lining for them

For comparison, Airbus booked a net 274 new orders. They're also doing their best to up A320 production beyond 60 a month, but that's not really helping them out to try and take any MAX business off Boeing - their order backlog is simply too long


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 5:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27172
Location: Chickenrunning...
Saint wrote:
For comparison, Airbus booked a net 274 new orders. They're also doing their best to up A320 production beyond 60 a month, but that's not really helping them out to try and take any MAX business off Boeing - their order backlog is simply too long


That Blindsider bloke spending too much time on the Bored.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17230
Location: balbriggan
Saint wrote:
Laurent wrote:
Saint wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
Now Boeing having to inspect Max fuel tanks for FODs apparently... Then you have TWA800 springing to mind again... the biggest cover up in the history of Boeing / FAA negligence which resulted in a costly fuel tank inerting program...


That's an awfully dangerous production and QM process. I know that each production line is different, but Boeing is sounding more and more like it needs a complete company review

The idiot in chief is trying to save them by raising taxes on airbus so all is well (despite Boeing selling 0 plane in January if I read this properly).


Strictly speaking, Boeing's net orders for 2019 were -87 - 246 new orders, less official cancellations, less orders now judged to be to risky to stay officially on the books lie the Jet Airways orders.

While they didn't take any orders in January they didn't lose any either, so that's got to be a silver lining for them

For comparison, Airbus booked a net 274 new orders. They're also doing their best to up A320 production beyond 60 a month, but that's not really helping them out to try and take any MAX business off Boeing - their order backlog is simply too long

I can't disagree with that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Feb 24, 2020 8:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 14434
Location: South Oxfordshire
First signs that airlines are getting very worried about the Max and whether passengers will actively try to avoid the plane. TUIFly today announced that they would be marketing flights as the 737-8; to be fair that's the official model number, but even so Boeing should be getting very worried.

Also, some rumours coming out of Montreal that Air Canada are gearing up to cancel their complete Max order and get by on a mix of second hand 320ceo and 330ceo until they can get some new 320neo


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 664 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BillW, Google Adsense [Bot], JB1981, mr flaps, Sonny Blount, Troll and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group