Author Topic: Boeing 737 Max again, it would be nice if the windows [door plugs] stayed in!  (Read 97603 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5338
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 737 Max again, it would be nice if the windows stayed in!
« Reply #300 on: June 09, 2024, 02:35:42 pm »
While I agree that Boeing should take responsibility for and replace/repair the faulty auto throttle (assuming that the faulty is in design or manufacture, not incorrect maintenance or the like), an operator who has been notified of the problem and not taken action is not blameless.
 

Offline jpanhalt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3613
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 737 Max again, it would be nice if the windows stayed in!
« Reply #301 on: June 09, 2024, 03:19:00 pm »
I agree on the maintenance, but the story I read indicated that in the shop the throttle servos were normal and no mechanical faults were found.  What surprises me is that the FAA didn't require Boeing to demonstrate that software was not the issue.  It's hard to imagine anything much worse than losing takeoff power after passing the no-stop point (V1), which presumably was met before the failures.
 

Offline CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5338
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 737 Max again, it would be nice if the windows stayed in!
« Reply #302 on: June 09, 2024, 05:45:19 pm »
I agree on the maintenance, but the story I read indicated that in the shop the throttle servos were normal and no mechanical faults were found.  What surprises me is that the FAA didn't require Boeing to demonstrate that software was not the issue.  It's hard to imagine anything much worse than losing takeoff power after passing the no-stop point (V1), which presumably was met before the failures.

The point for both entities (Boeing and the operators) is that there was an intermittent problem that affected flight safety (Quote you're "It's hard to imagine...").  Operator action could have been to ground the aircraft, do urgent pilot training, issue demand letters to Boeing, demand FAA action, threaten to buy no future Boeing aircraft and a whole list of other possibilities.

Apparently several different groups didn't feel this intermittent problem was urgent.  The one's I can name off the top of my head are Boeing, the FAA, the airline pilots association and the operators.  If everyone piles onto Boeing, even if Boeing solves their issues there will be a problem.  Unless you believe that Boeing can set an example that will be automatically followed by the entire industry.

It also appears to me that there is a rush to judgement on the root cause(s) of this problem.  Software may be the only issue.  But I haven't seen any analysis that shows that the software does what it does with ideal inputs from all sources.  Certainly an inappropriate SW response to a strange input is a fault and should be corrected.  But the source of the strange input should also be identified and eliminated.  The same logic that would say that fixing the "input" sources alone would be an inadequate response applies.

Other fixes seem to be in order.  In these days of nearly free solid state memory having a cockpit voice recorder limit of two hours when flights often last large multiples of that is incomprehensible.  There is a real argument for making the recorder retain all data from the current and the previous flight.    Data is the most critical item when solving any problem.
 

Offline jpanhalt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3613
  • Country: us
I don't disagree with you.  There are lots of entities at fault.

Boeing has a long, bad history of producing defective aircraft and letting customers solve its problems -- the B29 is one shining example.  Of course, that was wartime and exigencies took preference, but early on, as many flight crews were lost due to mechanical faults as due to enemy action.  It has an equally sordid history of using political connections.  Just ask Northrop (Jack Northrop died in 1981). 

I dealt with the FAA as an owner for over 20 years.  It comes down with both feet on GA and little guys, but apparently "trusted" Boeing.  But, the FAA is the Federal agency with responsibility for aircraft safety, and it should have done something.  Why did it take two fatal crashes and several other incidents for the FAA to act on the 737Max?  That recent loss of TO power due to an automated system could have ended much worse.  Our FAA already knew about it and did nothing in the interim.
 

Offline MT

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1652
  • Country: aq
Interview start at c:a 5 min
 

Online coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9922
  • Country: us
  • $
https://news.yahoo.com/news/finance/video/boeing-finds-flaws-787-jets-070657505.html


i refuse to pay someone THAT MUCH for turning a wrench.  ;D

I do that, when something is not worth working on and I am a hair from throwing it away
 

Offline GyroTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9740
  • Country: gb
Quote
... fasteners found to have been tightened from the wrong end...

Doesn't that loosen them? Or are they gripping the threaded end with mole grips?  :o :D
Best Regards, Chris
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7197
  • Country: ca
Coming Tuesday June 18, Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun will be testifying in front of the Senate subcommittee.
It will be a lovely nothing burger, like the last time. That FAA guy was a total worm, squirmed, lied about many things I recall in the video. It was like a bunch of snakes covering their ass and claiming safety was important etc. meanwhile hundreds dead.

Boeing CEO pay is 158x that of average Boeing worker turning a wrench.
Fuck engineering, just be a bean counter if you want the big money.
 

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14888
  • Country: fr
This is a caste system.
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7197
  • Country: ca
Hearing is live right now https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/
It's the usual, Calhoun talks about all the safety, quality etc. being looked at. But lots of evidence otherwise. He's never talked to a whistleblower, yet claims to listen to
them.
"What do you get paid?" $32.8M, +45% over last year, what is it you get paid to do?
Do you get paid for transparency? What about safety, is that a component of your salary? How's your stock doing? You should resign.
That was a good roast.

"we did not purchase the titanium, a sub-tier did", "it tests fine".
 

Online coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9922
  • Country: us
  • $
I wonder if the problem with these parts is that their under estimated.

I heard this all the time. Simple project. WHats that mean? They don't wanna pay the engineer.

Maybe the problem is that their looking at sheet metal like its supposed to be simple. The honest truth is that sheet metal is complicated. Most sheet metal stuff I measure is total trash, even expensive stuff. Try looking at it with a square.

I wonder if some kind of crap related to duct work is getting into the aerospace industry mentality.

Maybe its like paper (office) workers that just refuse to believe it can possibly be complicated because its too flat? Does that make humans assume that its going to be perfect? Thin flat parts are real trouble. I wonder if its their god damn ego of all things.

Kind of like "oh I have a metal overhang over my front door, that MUST mean its cheap and easy to put something that looks kind of similar on a plane. There is no way we will consider that formidable. I am too smart to fall for that. Look how cheap it is at home depot!!!"

I think this kind of like... comparison between similar concepts that have totally different difficulty levels is becoming more and more popular with people that are around computer information all the time. They are making judgements based on hearsay that they have no business making? Maybe 20  years ago they were still taking shop class so they kinda knew from experience that it might be 'one of those things' which makes them cautious around judging it because of some vague recollection about failing at doing something deceptively easy. But now many people have zero kinetic insight into manufacturing. I mean its possible they don't even handle paper, even paper money, let alone metal sheet. The idea of a formed sheet object is turning into a idealized abstraction? Is the idea that its a 'aged' 'well known' techniques can be conceptualized in words lead to decision making by assumptions and hunches based on rule of thumb on top of executive summary that lead to this chaos?


A trend in home goods is that everything is stiffened and made easier. People are no longer knotting, folding, bending, pressing things, its all available in ready made forms that are basically ideal. So they really might have NO FUCKIN IDEA how hard it can be. Laundry Line? Parchment paper? books >? paper bags? . This MUST trickle down into the ultra white collar echelons of boeing (finance). All these stupid things in your house are kinda related to making sense out of airplanes (they use wire pulley, bent flimsy metal, etc). You don't even need to deal with food items that are raw anymore, its trendy to order it cooked, delivered in a stiff plastic box. I assume at least some neurons were firing because the diagram they got reminded them of what their chicken breast was doing when they cut into it while it was still half frozen.......


It almost seems that like some people got so... pampered they can't like make good judgements about processes anymore. Kind of like how the asgard needed jack-o-niels low tech mentality to defeat the replicators with mechanical technologies. But maybe their not smart enough to realize that their not evaluating their decisions properly because its not known to them the amount of skill or whatever you wanna call it you lose living such a... optimized life.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2024, 02:58:09 am by coppercone2 »
 

Online tggzzz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19989
  • Country: gb
  • Numbers, not adjectives
    • Having fun doing more, with less
I wonder if the problem with these parts is that their under estimated.

I heard this all the time. Simple project. WHats that mean? They don't wanna pay the engineer.

...

Traditional ways to annoy:
  • mechanical engineer: ask why they don't simply do it with a piece of bent metal and some string
  • electronic engineer: ask why they dont simply do it with a microprocessor
... other examples welcome.
There are lies, damned lies, statistics - and ADC/DAC specs.
Glider pilot's aphorism: "there is no substitute for span". Retort: "There is a substitute: skill+imagination. But you can buy span".
Having fun doing more, with less
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6984
  • Country: hr
I wonder if the problem with these parts is that their under estimated.

I heard this all the time. Simple project. WHats that mean? They don't wanna pay the engineer.

...

Traditional ways to annoy:
  • mechanical engineer: ask why they don't simply do it with a piece of bent metal and some string
  • electronic engineer: ask why they dont simply do it with a microprocessor
... other examples welcome.

Here is simplified equation...

Ask any expert in their field : why they don't simply do it with......
 

Online tggzzz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19989
  • Country: gb
  • Numbers, not adjectives
    • Having fun doing more, with less
I wonder if the problem with these parts is that their under estimated.

I heard this all the time. Simple project. WHats that mean? They don't wanna pay the engineer.

...

Traditional ways to annoy:
  • mechanical engineer: ask why they don't simply do it with a piece of bent metal and some string
  • electronic engineer: ask why they dont simply do it with a microprocessor
... other examples welcome.

Here is simplified equation...

Ask any expert in their field : why they don't simply do it with......

Well, yes... but that is insufficient for watching a reaction when you tweak someone's tail  >:D
There are lies, damned lies, statistics - and ADC/DAC specs.
Glider pilot's aphorism: "there is no substitute for span". Retort: "There is a substitute: skill+imagination. But you can buy span".
Having fun doing more, with less
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7197
  • Country: ca
In the Senate hearing, you could see Boeing has failed in many areas - Engineering failed with MCAS and prob. the auto-throttle, Manufacturing failed to put in/tighten them bolts and do the rivets right, Quality missed all that, Supply Chain failed to verify components were legit etc. etc.
It's all mixed up and blended now into a "quality problem". I didn't see anything has changed over at Boeing for the better as far as "owning it". You get skewered if you rock the boat.

Even Starliner is stuck at the ISS now.

Engineering can be easily be undermined, corrupted by management. We see this with Boeing, Volkswagen, Stellantis etc. Whistle blowing is not the answer, RIP John Barnette, Joshua Dean.
Boeing could hire 1,000 new additional engineers and will still be unable to make a new aircraft - they have fired all the old guard, the wisdom has walked out the door and it will be Newbies at work - in an environment of bullying, pushing, forcing, rushing- cover your ass and profit are  goal #1.
 
The following users thanked this post: tom66, SeanB, SiliconWizard

Online vk6zgo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7653
  • Country: au
I wonder if the problem with these parts is that their under estimated.

I heard this all the time. Simple project. WHats that mean? They don't wanna pay the engineer.

...

Traditional ways to annoy:
  • mechanical engineer: ask why they don't simply do it with a piece of bent metal and some string
  • electronic engineer: ask why they dont simply do it with a microprocessor
... other examples welcome.

Ask an EE why they don't just use a bimetallic strip instead of frigging around with a microprocessor.
« Last Edit: June 20, 2024, 08:25:48 am by vk6zgo »
 

Offline Jeroen3

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4090
  • Country: nl
  • Embedded Engineer
    • jeroen3.nl
Yesterday I had an interesting discussion with the manager. (used to be engineer)

We're making some choices on connectors on a board, and he suggested we put the connector on the bottom side.
I said that would not be very wise with this connector because this specific connector is prone to field failure due when hand soldered. (board cracks) Bottom side components are always hand solders in our quantities.
He said that wasn't our problem. I asked why. He said "it's the problem of the cm".
I said that it is our problem, because when we pick a component with risk of fails, even though it's the CM's responsibility, our product still failed in the field.
He didn't agree on this view...   |O

I suspect boeing has a lot of this mindset. On paper it's someone elses problem, so we won't try to improve on it.

Well, paperwork doesn't keep planes in the sky or bridges right way up!
 

Offline iMo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4896
  • Country: vc
The mindset of the younger generation of technicians and engineers changed in the last say 25 years.
I can see it around me as well. I call it "The Era of Disposable Everything".
For them absolutely everything they produce (or they purchase/own) is just a short living "disposable product".
Perhaps it comes with the proliferation of an easy access to goods, technologies and information, imho..
PS: and of course the "agile mindset" contributes as well - where there is none high quality product at the end, but just never ending "iterations", as the old dinosaur would say  >:D
« Last Edit: June 20, 2024, 08:22:33 am by iMo »
 

Online coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9922
  • Country: us
  • $
I think part of it is marketing getting to people.

Marketing figured out how to make you think what you have will be basically useless in 10 years (so they have a subscription). Its a popular opinion now.

There is usually a few rapidly emerging markets where this is true. But they made people in general believe that its everything on the market.

 Another way to think about it is that if you bought a new refrigerator you basically are awesome, while from another frame of reference, which lost popularity, is that its proof you made a bad investment and had to replace a product, basically saying that your a sucker (thinking like this seems to be lumped into the "old and uncool" category).

But then its also companies, IMO Its possible for them to engineer themselves in a more sustainable way, that is to switch products or change market places instead of figuring out how to keep doing the same thing over and over again, when they saturate the market with quality goods. Some people say the business failed, but a more imaginative individual might think that its awesome that they solved the world's refrigerator problem, and that its time to tackle something else. Its crazy how predatory things feel :-DD
« Last Edit: June 22, 2024, 01:04:37 am by coppercone2 »
 

Offline CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5338
  • Country: us
Easy to pot shot from the sidelines.  But the good old and proven techniques won't deliver what the market demands.  For Boeing and Airbus one, two and three on the list are reduced operating costs, with safety, comfort and improved onboard entertainment some down the list from that.  These new aircraft have a generally similar layout, but are different in almost every way from their predecessors.  And use dramatically less fuel along with other operating cost savings.

So the engineers at both companies have had to adopt new materials, and new strategies to get those things.  The dinosaurs from my generation are capable of learning, but it is surprising how little of the skills used to design and manufacture aluminum structures transfer to composite ones.  Getting fewer salaries in the cockpit requires a lot of automation and software, something not in the core of the old crews skill set.  And remember that those old school engineers had their moments.  For those of the younger generation look up the Lockheed Electra, famous for disintegrating in the sky.  Or the DC-10 which had engines fall off.  It isn't just an American problem, remember the Airbus fun with AOA indicators that resulted in aircraft traveling from South America to Africa testing their hydrodynamic properties (they utterly failed).
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7197
  • Country: ca
"What the market demands"? I thought that was surviving, living through your flight, no crash, not sucked out the door, no PTSD  :-// It got overtaken by what the stock market demands - maximum short-term profit.

I've always engineered products for reliability and long life- but that's old school now. You would not believe the amount of flak I get for specifying Chemi-con/Nichicon capacitors instead of the "good enough" china specials that last precisely 3 years - and are 1/20th the price. The Consumer Attitude has permeated everything including management theory. Bean counters want it done as quickly and cheaply as possible, even though that has drastic consequences. As long as you can CYA.

Auto-throttle is to save fuel and engine wear and tear for takeoff (not sure why it's used for landing) . It's got serious problems, in service on the 737-800 to this day - who do you blame for that?
MCAS being outsourced to unqualified S/W people, on the cheap- what the market demands? No, I think it's the stock market justifying criminal action to feed their greed. As long as you an CYA.
Now Boeing is taking engineers out of other divisions to help out Commercial, oops should not have fired all those engineers. It's so much like a clown car.
Who would want to work as an engineer at Boeing?
 

Offline CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5338
  • Country: us
"What the market demands"? I thought that was surviving, living through your flight, no crash, not sucked out the door, no PTSD  :-// It got overtaken by what the stock market demands - maximum short-term profit.


It may have been overtaken, but it certainly isn't just the stock market.  Passengers demand low fares.  They choose less reputable airlines to get lower fares, so all the airlines have to at least be competitive on price.  And if you look, running an airline is a low margin operation averaged over time.  Remember the old joke:  How do you make a small fortune in the airline industry?  Start with a large one.

Your statement about safety is hyperbole.  While safety is important, it is like any other parameter.  A trade off.  The safest way to fly is to not fly at all, but folks all over the world accept the risk.  And what is the risk?  Watching the TV news this morning it stated that for the recent Memorial Day holiday 3 million passengers (in the US alone) boarded flights.  Now lets guesstimate some.  It would seem that if a peak day boards 3 million passengers, average days are probably somewhere around a million.   So easily 300 million boardings a year.  In the last decade by my recollection there have been about 400 people killed in airline crashes that were due to design flaws, and perhaps a thousand who have been terrified by a window blowing out or a strange maneuver in the sky caused by a design flaw.  So when you board an aircraft there is on the order of one chance in ten million of something bad happening due to errors in design and manufacture.  This is another example of the wide mismatches that often occur between perceived risk and actual risk.

One in ten million apparently isn't close to good enough for you.  What number do you find acceptable?  One in a billion?  One in a hundred billion?  Do you really think that Nichicon capacitors provide reliability numbers in that range?  I will readily agree that they are better than many alternatives, but are they really that good? 

Quick update.  A little googling showed that annual boardings in the US are over 800 million per annum, and worldwide totals are on the order of 4.5 billion.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2024, 06:44:42 pm by CatalinaWOW »
 

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7197
  • Country: ca
"What the market demands"? I thought that was surviving, living through your flight, no crash, not sucked out the door, no PTSD  :-// It got overtaken by what the stock market demands - maximum short-term profit.


It may have been overtaken, but it certainly isn't just the stock market.  Passengers demand low fares.  They choose less reputable airlines to get lower fares, so all the airlines have to at least be competitive on price.  And if you look, running an airline is a low margin operation averaged over time.  Remember the old joke:  How do you make a small fortune in the airline industry?  Start with a large one.

Your statement about safety is hyperbole.  While safety is important, it is like any other parameter.  A trade off.  The safest way to fly is to not fly at all, but folks all over the world accept the risk.  And what is the risk?  Watching the TV news this morning it stated that for the recent Memorial Day holiday 3 million passengers (in the US alone) boarded flights.  Now lets guesstimate some.  It would seem that if a peak day boards 3 million passengers, average days are probably somewhere around a million.   So easily 300 million boardings a year.  In the last decade by my recollection there have been about 400 people killed in airline crashes that were due to design flaws, and perhaps a thousand who have been terrified by a window blowing out or a strange maneuver in the sky caused by a design flaw.  So when you board an aircraft there is on the order of one chance in ten million of something bad happening due to errors in design and manufacture.  This is another example of the wide mismatches that often occur between perceived risk and actual risk.

One in ten million apparently isn't close to good enough for you.  What number do you find acceptable?  One in a billion?  One in a hundred billion?  Do you really think that Nichicon capacitors provide reliability numbers in that range?  I will readily agree that they are better than many alternatives, but are they really that good? 

Quick update.  A little googling showed that annual boardings in the US are over 800 million per annum, and worldwide totals are on the order of 4.5 billion.

Boeing is not an airline, they are an aircraft manufacturer. As their costs/prices/greed goes up, that trickles down to all airlines and their customers. It's pretty much a monopoly. Jumping ship to Airbus they have a backlog of 8,598 aircraft so you'll be waiting a while for new planes. No other choice yet.

When a corporation is badly managed - due to ineptitude, stupidity, greed, corruption - the end result is shoddy product. The big turd rolls out the door. Normally this is perfectly fine, people complain and grumble to no end (myself included) and not much changes.
Until there are injuries or deaths. This is the limit to shoddy that Boeing and the occasional car maker has crossed. We can argue the well known 'why' but consensus is Boeing's emphasis is on returning value to shareholders, executive compensation as priority #1 has another price that isn't directly evident and cannot be prosecuted.

One product I worked on, a malfunction could cause big explosions and I found the electronics design was shit, did not meet safety standards. Digging in, I found they had obtained a fake approvals certificate. So I refused to do any engineering or support on it, have anything to do with it.
The CEO's response? He pulled any claims that it was certified, and the old quote "Over 350 million hours of safe _____ ". Who needs any safety in design, any regulatory when there are no big incidents and this fabulous track record number proves that? It works great".

Let us walk into a casino with the same viewpoint. Are we entitled to win or lose, based on the payout history, the number of clients?
You seem to be saying deaths are acceptable, then forecast how many 737-related we'll see this year that are perfectly acceptable according to statistics of XX million boardings/year.
I'm saying engineers want zero deaths. How terrible to have your heart in your craft. Engineers have all the responsibility and none of the authority, and with finance bros, MBA's running things it's now impossible to do good work, as well as undesirable in terms of short-term profit.

Do you think Boeing Starliner is going to make it back in one piece? I think it's track record is pushing one boarding.  Are your safety "trade off" stats OK if the astronauts are killed?
 

Offline MT

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1652
  • Country: aq
In the Senate hearing, you could see Boeing has failed in many areas - Engineering failed with MCAS and prob. the auto-throttle, Manufacturing failed to put in/tighten them bolts and do the rivets right, Quality missed all that, Supply Chain failed to verify components were legit etc. etc. It's all mixed up and blended now into a "quality problem". I didn't see anything has changed over at Boeing for the better as far as "owning it". You get skewered if you rock the boat.
Even Starliner is stuck at the ISS now.
Engineering can be easily be undermined, corrupted by management. We see this with Boeing, Volkswagen, Stellantis etc. Whistle blowing is not the answer, RIP John Barnette, Joshua Dean.
Boeing could hire 1,000 new additional engineers and will still be unable to make a new aircraft - they have fired all the old guard, the wisdom has walked out the door and it will be Newbies at work - in an environment of bullying, pushing, forcing, rushing- cover your ass and profit are  goal #1.

The hearing sounded quite harsh as the CEO comes across as some mafia Don set into place by some banker mafia to wreck Boeing. So was he involved in the assassination of the whistle blowers.


600 suppliers not counting sub suppliers, 35 in china.

« Last Edit: June 22, 2024, 08:40:49 pm by MT »
 

Offline MT

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1652
  • Country: aq
Seams to be a protest at the hearing by some folks over the assassinated whistle blowers audience holding up signs!

 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf