Ethiopian 737-8 MAX down. No survivors.

Boeing had better hurry up and do what they need to do to get the MAX's back in service. I've heard that several airlines, including Icelandair and Fly Dubai, are seriously considering cancelling their MAX orders and ordering A321s instead.

It is also appearing increasingly that Boeing made a massive error in judgment by terminating 757 production when they did. I think they should have considered updating the 757 by adding new engines and reconfiguring the wing for better efficiency.

 

The problem with that logic is that the customers didn't want a 757 either, they wanted a 737 to have commonality with the rest of their fleet.

 

Re: Southwest Airlines.

 

So how many turns of the manual trim wheel are required for 2 degree of trim?

I think it will be a good while before this plane flies again and TBH it’s reputation is done.
There was a comment in one of the reports of systemic failures and what else was missed?
This is far wider than MCAS and that’s not a quick fix.

 

Yes, Southwest has been a major driver of the 737 for fleet commonality yet it was Continental that switched their 757 order to 737-800s that was a particular blow to the program. BUT Boeing waited and waited for more 757 orders that would not materialize. The significant order that would have kept the production going was Northwest. Northwest finally decided to make their order but it was after the shut down was already set.

In retrospect Boeing should have kept the 757 going as the market eventually wanted its long range with a narrow body attributes. But, who knew in 2004 when production ended that 10+ years later the marketplace would mutate that much?

 

You have to wonder if Southwest's demands are restricting Boeing too much in the world market

 

Maybe... but SW has almost 800 737's.
They fly more pax in the US than any other airline.

Certainly don't want to ignore them....

 

The other way to answer the SW question would be if a completely new design would provide such an improvement in operating economics that it would out justify a fleet changeover?

 

on the other hand if there were a new and more effective/effcient aircraft, a startup without the southwest 737 legacy costs would have an advantage and could build its fleet around that, therby forcing southwest to phase out 737's for 7-7's.

At some point southwest and others have to move on from the 737, all boeing needs then is something better and the a320 line so that they boeing gets the buisness.

put another way, if/when the 737 is discontinued airlines like southwest have to move on, they will have choice what to move to, the airbus as their new fleet or the new boeing. if the boeing is aleap forwards thats where theyl go.
At this point though, boeing profits off the 737 have to be way better than amortising the cost of a new aircraft, esp as purchase cost has to be competitive with airbus. On the otehr hand if they dont do somethign new all the buisness will slowly migrate to airbus.

So its a timing and relevant tech decsion, imo thats already a decision being taken too late.

At this point the 737s days have to be numbered.

 

Boeing should have been working on their 737 replacement from the moment that they committed to building the MAX as, effectively, an interim airplane.

 

There is a story that Boeing had worked extensively on a 737 successor as the next project after the 787. But, it never went forward because it could not deliver a sufficient enough operating cost improvement over what reengining and using the 2nd generation winglets would deliver.

Now, if Boeing can get the Max10 articulated main gear worked out then bigger diameter engines and the engine placement could be possible across the board as a generational development for all the 737s.

For the airlines the calculation is operating cost per seat mile coupled with acquisition cost. The far higher airframe cost that would come with an all new design would have to be offset by a significantly lowered seat mile cost. This is currently part of the challenge that Boeing is trying to navigate with the Middle of Market model that they have been working on.

 

That startup is called "JetBlue" and guess what, Southwest is still doing find and still flying 737s.

 

And JetBlue has an entirely Airbus fleet.

 

Which they got at VERY discounted prices. It was a no brainer at the time.

 

Actually, about 1/4 of their fleet are Embraer 190/195's.

 

Not when they started, or for their first several years.

 

AoA sensor teardown by 800 lb gorilla (hypothesizing not endorsed by FAA/Boeing):

 

https://www.aerospacetestinginternational.com/news/software/boeing-admits-737-max-simulator-flaws.html

Rgds

 

One family of deceased pax is suing Boeing for 'at least' $276 million....just one pax.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-lawsuit/french-widow-sues-boeing-for-at-least-276-million-over-ethiopian-crash-idUSKCN1SR1ER

 

Isn't there still the ICAO limit for international passenger liability claims? Besides, the lawsuit can ask for whatever amount it wants but what it wins after jury judgement, appeals and final negotiation is likely to be far less, if any. And, in this case with the AOA being taken out by a bird strike and crew issues there may be a lot of mitigating actions that greatly diminish Boeing's liability.

 

Not sure but i would think any limitation is for the Airline who sold the tickets i believe the first tier in Europe is Euro 135 K with no limit above that. Boeing have admitted some liability in this case.

Ask yourself the question would you be happy with $50 K if you lost your nearest and dearest?

The bird strike has been denied by Ethiopian.In any case the MCAS was a flawed design which should never have passed certification.

I am tired of reading Boeing statements about safety is our priority blah blah blah

They deserve any financial penalty they get.I hope they lose billions over this.

Hundreds of people are dead.

 

Boeing is extremely lucky that there is currently no viable 3rd option narrowbody of similar size to the 737/320, else they would probably lose everything, not just billions. I bet chinese are working like crazy to get the C919 certified and flying, if the grounding/issues continues, they might get lucky.

 

WASHINGTON—Boeing’s reimbursements to airlines for 737 MAX-related service disruptions will approach $1.4 billion assuming the grounded fleet is back in service by October, Bloomberg analysts calculate.

“We estimate the cost based on typical operating profit per aircraft, per day and benchmarked to Southwest Airlines, the largest operator of the MAX,” with 34 aircraft, Bloomberg analysts wrote in a May 22 note.

Bloomberg notes that compensation is expected to take several forms, including order modifications, and won’t be fully allocated until “expected deliveries are made,” which would take another year. Boeing halted MAX deliveries when the fleet was grounded, but has continued to produce them.

The 370-aircraft MAX fleet has been grounded since mid-March in the wake of two fatal accidents in five months. Airlines have scrambled to cover for the loss in capacity by extending leases, deferring maintenance, re-shuffling aircraft assignments, and canceling flights while Boeing attempts to get the fleet cleared to fly again. The manufacturer has finished proposed flight-control software upgrades aimed at getting the fleet flying again. FAA is reviewing the package, and will discuss progress with global regulators on May 23.

The return-to-service timeline remains hazy. Most airlines have removed MAXs from schedules into August at least. Getting fleets back in service is expected to take about a month, so regulators would have to grant an all-clear by late June or early July for these plans to work. FAA is expected to be the first or among the first to remove its operations bans.

“Once the FAA signs off on MAX’s airworthiness, we think the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) could follow in short order,” Bloomberg said. “It may come with a public show of the depth of their review, but we believe EASA will be hard-pressed to hold out without a very good reason because it wants to maintain good working relations with U.S. regulators.”

Still to be determined: the depth of training that pilots will undergo before returning to MAX flight decks. A preliminary report by an FAA-led evaluation group concluded that simulator sessions are not necessary to understand the MAX’s maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS) that is being modified, but some regulators are expected to require them.

Simulator availability is an issue. In North America, only one of the five MAX major operators—Air Canada—has a MAX simulator.

The possible simulator scenarios add yet another question. The MCAS is part of the speed trim system, and when working as designed, is not noticeable to pilots. Failure modes, such as faulty angle-of-attack data feeds that trigger the system, are one possibility, but Boeing’s redesigned software has three layers of redundancy that are designed to keep the system from mis-firing, as it did in both the October 2018 crash of Lion Air Flight 610 and the March 2019 Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 (ET302) accident. In both cases, faulty angle-of-attack data triggered MCAS, and the system—believing each aircraft was nearing a stall—automatically moved the horizontal stabilizer to direct the nose down.

Boeing has confirmed that one MAX simulator issue is being addressed. The software logic was not able to accurately simulate aerodynamic loads on the horizontal stabilizer and how they affect turning the aircraft’s manual trim wheels.

“Boeing has made corrections to the 737 MAX simulator software and has provided additional information to device operators to ensure that the simulator experience is representative across different flight conditions,” the manufacturer said. “These changes will improve the simulation of force loads on the manual trim wheel.”

The manual-trim process is believed to have been part of the ET302 accident sequence, and is prominently featured on the runaway-stabilizer checklist that is the remedy for an MCAS-related misfire. However, it is not clear whether the mis-calibrated simulators misled any operators on the ease of the procedure, or whether operators incorporated the manual trimming process into their MAX simulator sessions.

 

Boeing 737 Max:
The FAA says “there is no fixed timetable for grounding to be lifted”. US Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) acting director general Dan Elwell said if it took a year for the grounding order to be lifted "so be it".

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48371100

Rgds