← Back to Squawk list

Boeing reportedly left engineers, officials unaware of 737 Max changes

提交時間：3年之前

Boeing's overestimation of the 737 Max's safety may have been prompted in part by a simple but dangerous problem: many of the people involved weren't aware of the changes. The New York Times has claimed that some engineers, testers and regulators were unaware Boeing had made the jet's MCAS anti-stall system far more aggressive. They operated on the assumption the technology relied on two sensors when it was using just one, and a "compartmentalized approach" to… (www.engadget.com) 更多...

Torsten Hoff

23 個會員評論

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

lynx318 3年之前 4

"Even the chief technical pilot who made the request might not have fully understood MCAS, as he primarily used flight simulators that didn't completely replicate the system."

So much for the 'we must have simulator training' argument.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

Mike Duralia 3年之前 2

Perhaps Boeing hired the former software engineer from Volkswagen?

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

lynx318 3年之前 2

Then they'd just smoke more, have plenty of power but poor economy.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Mike Duralia 3年之前 2

I was thinking more of different operation during "testing" than in the "real world"....

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

lynx318 3年之前 1

Sorta thought you might mean that. It's not that there was a test that was 'cheated' on, just that there wasn't a test that showed this problem. Again that is the FAA fault in all this.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

thumperii5631 3年之前 2

And this is a good reason why there should be a separate independent/segregated body to conduct final phase testing/verification on all aircraft systems like the military does. Where there is a (DT&E) Developmental side and there is a (OT&E) Operational testing sides in which they are two separated entities. OT&E has no direct influence from the manufacture, so thus they can find such "issues" without the main manufactures influence where as DT&E does as this is during the design and developmental phase

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

ffrcobra1 3年之前 5

So, who made the changes, if it wasn’t an engineer? They make it sound like it was just some guy pushing a broom on the factory floor.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

btweston 3年之前 -2

Reread the second sentence. Or just read the article. You clearly didn’t.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

ffrcobra1 3年之前 8

I did read the article and it doesn’t say who made the changes to the MCAS software. It says “Boeing”. I’m sure the “Boeing” they refer to included a host of engineers. At the same time the headline makes it sound like the problem wouldn’t have occurred if only s ngineers had been involved.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Jim Myers 3年之前 4

Where are all the "experts" that kept insisting that the problems with the 737 Max were simply the fault of the pilots?

Crickets...

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

JMARTINSON 3年之前 4

Asked and answered.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Tim Hollars 3年之前 2

What happened to "fly the plane"?

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

Jim Goldfuss 3年之前 5

Not as simple a statement as you put out there, especially since, even after Lion Air, a lot of information and procedures on the MAX had changed without notice. Did you know the STAB Trim switches were changed in regards to what they did ( and Boeing did not mention that)? Did you know that the MCAS response was double what originally was intended, was programmed that way, yet Boeing did not tell anyone, some who even worked inside Boeing). How difficult is it to control an aircraft that is trimmed full nose down? Do you know? Again, your simple comment may apply in a simple situation, but this was not one, and the onion layers seem to get pulled back more and more as we continue to learn more and more.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Stuart Hostetter 3年之前 1

Forget about my comments. Obviously not acceptable to the editors as they challenged inaccurate reports by the NYT on this matter.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Stephen Leftly 3年之前 10

You are clearly NOT following what is being uncovered. Boeing has misled, either deliberately or not, during this whole process and as each day goes past the media, including the NYT, is exposing the problems at Boeing. In a rush to market they cut corners and people died.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Stuart Hostetter 3年之前 -6

Lefty must be an ambulance chasing lawyer moving to the aircraft industry. How many segments did SWA make with the Mas 8 aircraft and no reports or other issues with MACS? They know how to fly and aircraft.
The two airlines that has incidents had pilots with very poor flight training and obviously lacked cockpit experience. It was pilot error for the most part. Boing did not mislead. If they did why didn't any other airline with significantly more hours in the air not have one reported incident. The media is not the best source of accurate information. Particularly the NYT.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

Stephen Leftly 3年之前 5

And there we have a classic example of an ad hominem attack from Stuart Hostetter. When the facts are against you attack the messenger.

All the world's certification bodies did not ground the plane because of poor pilot training nor to media reports. They grounded it because there is a problem.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Jim Goldfuss 3年之前 8

Stuart. Southwest was disturbed to find out about MCAS after the fact. It was not mentioned in flight manuals nor in maintenance manuals (very minor mentions). A program that manipulated flight control surfaces without direct pilot input should be conveyed to pilots and airlines. Failing to do so shows a complete disconnect with what they are doing and who they are serving. Pilot error may have been a part, but the situation they faced was problematic at best, even for US Pilots flying the same scenario, all acknowledging that without altitude, recovery was doubtful at best.

How many instances of runaway trim happened in US airlines since the MAX came out? Do you know? In the 2 accidents, the AOA sensor was defective or damaged. Did you know that that impacts Airspeed and altitude readouts as well? It is not just about responding to a runaway trim, there is much more involved. It was much more than just pilot error, and Boeing it appears raced to production a system that was not properly vetted and tested.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Mario Kropf 3年之前 2

That is an interesting perspective. About 50 airlines worldwide have grounded 360 new, perfectly safe aircraft because they realised that an Ethiopian captain with 8000hrs in his log obviously lacked cockpit experience and was poorly trained. Are they all waiting for the past three months that Ethiopian introduce a better training syllabus before they resume operations?

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

lynx318 3年之前 1

When two same model aircraft crash under similar circumstances, I'd want to ground any I had in my fleet too til the problem, be it mechanical OR pilot error/training, is rectified, period!

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Stuart Hostetter 3年之前 1

Ah yes the NYT the most accurate member of the open minded media.Of course they are right. According to lefty.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•上層•Report

Frank Scalise 3年之前 -3

Can somebody tell me at what point do mistakes like this or are they mistakes investigated to find if this could be a type of domestic or foreign terrorism depending on of course where the planes are manufactured or the person or persons that made this mistake and are they going to be held liable as in manslaughter voluntary or involuntary.

回覆 ↓•永久連接•Report

Boeing reportedly left engineers, officials unaware of 737 Max changes

23 個會員評論

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

登入