CAA bans Boeing 737 max 8

endure

GCM
What I find difficult to understand is airlines don't seem to be cancelling their orders with Boeing. This may be due to Boeing having very tight contracts but when the likes of RyanAir say they have problems and may lay off staff because they can't get the aircraft I would have thought they would be trying to source elsewhere.

Now I appreciate that the likes of Airbus can't just pull up replacement aircraft off the parking lot but with such doubt as to whether the Max will ever fly again then new suppliers would be my thoughts and I would be letting Boeing know that, along with court cases for loss of business.

If a company has always flown Boeing moving to Airbus requires an enormous investment in aircraft, spares, training and infrastructure. It's not something you can do in a few weeks.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
If a company has always flown Boeing moving to Airbus requires an enormous investment in aircraft, spares, training and infrastructure. It's not something you can do in a few weeks.
I understand, but if Boeing's planes keep falling out of the skies* I hope it is being considered!

* I know there are more than a few Boeing's flying quite well, just this model that seems to have issues. Still......
 
What I find difficult to understand is airlines don't seem to be cancelling their orders with Boeing. This may be due to Boeing having very tight contracts but when the likes of RyanAir say they have problems and may lay off staff because they can't get the aircraft I would have thought they would be trying to source elsewhere.

Now I appreciate that the likes of Airbus can't just pull up replacement aircraft off the parking lot but with such doubt as to whether the Max will ever fly again then new suppliers would be my thoughts and I would be letting Boeing know that, along with court cases for loss of business.
If I recall correctly, one or more airlines have already cancelled plans to sign contracts to buy Boeing 737 Max and gone to Airbus instead.

However, they can't return the planes they've already got, and to get out of existing contracts they must have a reason that will stand up in court. Boeing will plead various excuses, and it would take years to go through court such that by the time there is a court decision the current problems will either be resolved or Boeing will have gone bankrupt.

Boeing is apparently expected to compensate the airlines financially somehow, although it may be in the form of discounts rather than cash compensation. They are also reportedly going around to the cheaper airlines and offering them even deeper discounts to try to sign them up for new orders.

I suspect this incident is going to hurt Boeing's bottom line enough that the upper management will decide that engineering, R&D, QA, service, training, and other such departments will have to be cut to make up for it. That in turn may hurt their new product development for years to come, and offer an opening for Airbus to get even further ahead of them.
 

Dafty duck

War Hero
What I find difficult to understand is airlines don't seem to be cancelling their orders with Boeing. This may be due to Boeing having very tight contracts but when the likes of RyanAir say they have problems and may lay off staff because they can't get the aircraft I would have thought they would be trying to source elsewhere.

Now I appreciate that the likes of Airbus can't just pull up replacement aircraft off the parking lot but with such doubt as to whether the Max will ever fly again then new suppliers would be my thoughts and I would be letting Boeing know that, along with court cases for loss of business.
Which is why I can't understand IAG's order for 200 of them.
 
There is an interesting article here on the latest problems discovered with Boeing's 737 Max.
The reporting on this story is very detailed and provides clear explanations of very technical subjects. It also corrects inaccurate news stories about another problem that had been reported by other news sources.

The main new item here is that while technically Boeing may have redundant computers (two computers performing the same task) in their plane which can take over in the event that a flight computer fails, it doesn't do this automatically.

Instead, only one computer is in use at a time and the pilot must first land the plane and switch over the computers manually before taking off again. This is not what most people today understand "redundancy" as being.

Apparently this design dates back to the early days of the Boeing 737 when planes were less automated, which explains why it seems so archaic in a supposedly modern plane.

This may also explain why Boeing weren't so concerned about having only one of the two sensors being able to trigger the MCAS system on its own. I turns out that the sensor was not the only single point of failure in in the system. The computer it was connected to was as well.

Boeing is apparently re-writing the software to have both computers running simultaneously and monitoring each other. This sounds like a non-trivial task (to put it mildly), which may help to explain the long delay in getting the plane back into service.

It does make me wonder however how well this major change will be checked in the rush to get it completed.

A new problem was recently discovered in June with respect to a fault which can happen if a cosmic ray flips certain bits in memory. This is a problem which is more common in aircraft than it is on the ground because planes flying at high altitude are exposed to more cosmic rays.

Under this scenario it can cause the switches which cut out the MCAS system to be disabled, making it impossible for the pilot to turn off the MCAS system while attempting to recover from an MCAS sensor induced dive into the ground.

The response to this discovery seems to be that this is something that probably won't happen very often. However, this scenario would appear to be fortuitously addressed by the above mentioned change in the system design which will have two computer systems operating simultaneously.

There are more details in the news story, including corrections of earlier incorrect press reports of problems. This includes the confusing "the computer is slowing down because it is overloaded" story which appears to have had no basis in reality but instead was a different problem altogether.

I would recommand reading the full story.
 
Not 737, but I came across this a few years ago and it popped up again...I also love the "cheery" music they have at the end of the video..
 
Canadian airlines don't foresee the Boeing 737 Max 8 returning to service until 2020, even if it is approved as safe before then.

One airline, Westjet, has announced it won't fly them before January 2020. Air Canada has previously announced the earliest date as being January 2020. Sunwing said it won't be before May.

The above of course assumes that safety approval by Transport Canada to fly the planes comes before the end of the year and that no further problems are found.

A senior Westjet executive said that once the plans are ready for service they will face an additional problem, that of convincing passengers to fly in them.
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
EASA will not accept the FAA sign off on the 737 and Boeing will have to undergo seperate EASA Certification


Its going to be a long time before we'll see them flying again over here
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Seattle's take on EASA position

Well hope they don't repeat Air NZ's test flight accidents...


 
Do you understand comprehension?

I never said Air NZ directly flew the flight...the plane was bought by ANZ and then leased to another outfit and was being returned back...so was going through a test flight.
 
Do you understand comprehension?

I never said Air NZ directly flew the flight...the plane was bought by ANZ and then leased to another outfit and was being returned back...so was going through a test flight.
He wasnt the only person to read it and think you meant it was NZs accident
 

Latest Threads

Top