We should really figure out what's going on with the 737-MAX8

[Recursion]

Because that's three nearly identical crashes immediately after takeoff.

[Dennis Donovan]

1. I think only 2, but I agree. Might want to ground them...

[2naSalit]

2. THese are the things I think about whenever I fly...

which makes me consider ground travel for most of my travel.

[California_Republic]

4. Was going to try a train until I saw 60 Minutes piece on positive train controls

[MH1]

44. Big difference between a train accident and a plane accident.

Most train accidents, most people live.

Most plane accidents, everyone dies.

I'm a big fan of train travel whenever possible vs. air travel. The Acela is great.

That said, we definitely need positive train control implemented everywhere.

Recent case in Philly (without PTC): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Philadelphia_train_derailment

8 people died. NOT all 233. Same class of accident on a plane? Everyone dies.

[jberryhill]

53. In 2017, there were 864 rail fatalities in the US

Can you remind me how many air fatalities there were in the US in 2017?

Hint: Zero.

And that's with more passenger miles logged on planes than trains.

[MH1]

54. True, but still, if the train derails, I have a chance.

It doesn't have to be logical. But in a way it might be. Forget one year. Let's look at a longer span of recent time. For major cities served by both air and train travel, how does the accident rate compare per vehicle, per trip between majo destinations? (not person or miles) I dunno, air travel probably still "wins". But my point is my odds aren't by headcount on a plane. It is the odds of whether I draw the plane that crashes, or not.

But anyway, traveling the Acela to Boston or points in between, is about a thousand times more comfortable than flying. So, yes please, despite which way the statistics go.

(I fly when I have to and don't worry too much. Just like trains better.)

[asm128]

57. And how many of those were actually from train crashes / accidents?

It is disengenous, at best, to say that trespasses, suicides, and collisions of cars parked on the tracks, etc., are the same thing as fatalities of train passengers due to train crashes.

[fescuerescue]

71. Yup

Not to mention I have a hard time believing that there were ZERO fatal accidents at any airport in 2017

Just the other day someone died from a jet ramp tire exploding.

It seems that airport deaths around airplanes aren't counted, but people jumping in front of trains is.

[EX500rider]

70. "Most plane accidents, everyone dies" Actually not so:

Tom Farrier, a retired USAF rescue helicopter pilot, provided some figures on Quora.

"In 2016 there were about 163 aviation 'accidents' worldwide, including those involving business jets and military transports as well as jet and propeller airliners.

"A grand total of 24 resulted in fatalities, meaning only about 15 per cent of all accidents in this grouping - which themselves are extremely rare events - actually resulted in lives being lost."

International aviation firm To70 found that fatal accidents occurred in just 0.18 per million flights, which equates to around one in every five million flights.



https://www.thesun.co.uk/travel/2535002/plane-crash-survival-rates-year-stay-safe/

[Adrahil]

20. Flying is the safest form of travel BY FAR

Don't fall for fear-mongering. You are far safer on an airliner than in a car.

[2naSalit]

25. I don't get that sense

of safety when I'm in the air. I still don't feel all that safe when someone else is in control of the vehicle, whether it's on the ground or in the air.And I have no desire to get on ship either. I take my chances by flying, which I do with great apprehension, but I would rather drive. After driving over 2,000,000 miles for hire, I feel much safer behind the wheel.

[Adrahil]

26. I understand.... but that is a psychological phenomenon.

You said the right word... you FEEL. But tons and tons and tons of data do not support your feelings.

Just simple, basic statistics show you are at least 200 times safer in a commercial airliner than in a car.

If you wish to indulge your feelings, that's up to you. But don't mistake emotion for facts. Most of us have some sort of irrational fear. Mine is bugs.

[2naSalit]

27. I don't see it as irrational at all

one bird gets sucked into an engine and it's not gonna be good or safe. Where I have had, because I was traveling too dangerously fast, had a bird crash through the windshield, and I was able to adjust and suffered no physical harm.

Same with trains, there's no place to jump if the thing leaves the rails. I have operated, briefly, other types of nonwheeled vehicles, I not only feel safer, I know that I am when I'm driving.

So, I disagree with the stats.

[jberryhill]

28. "I disagree with the stats"

As do climate change deniers, anti/vaxxers, creationists and assorted others who believe that how they feel about something measurable is on an equal footing with actual measurements.

[2naSalit]

30. So my not agreeing

means that I have caused deadly epidemics, caused untold numbers of people to jump into volcanoes and offer themselves up for sacrifice or caused children to die and it's all my fault that the climate is going to kill us because I don't agree that I am safer while flying. I see it as being safer by staying on the ground. okay then, that settles it.

[jberryhill]

31. Stats don't care if you "agree"

Last edited Mon Mar 11, 2019, 10:29 AM - Edit history (1)

I did not say that you cause epidemics or any of the other nonsense you are putting in my mouth.

I am simply pointing out that your decision to reject measurable reality because you don’t “agree” with it is a popular thing to do these days.

[dumbcat]

48. This

I am simply pointing out that your decision to reject measurable reality because you don’t “agree” with it is a popular thing to do theses days.

And we mock and denigrate republican when they do it.

[LongtimeAZDem]

59. +1

[2naSalit]

60. And I am saying that...

at least my conscious choice to not agree with them is not causing anyone any harm. My feelings do matter in that I don't feel safe, regardless of the stats and so will base my choices on that. Not that anyone else cares about my feelings, they still also, don't mater regarding the stats.

When it comes to issues that do matter to me and everyone else, I normally do agree with them when conducted properly.

[zipplewrath]

56. Try rephrasing

I presume what you mean is that you don't believe that the statistics are applicable to your situation. The statistics themselves aren't in dispute. But you "feel" that your behavior when driving causes you to actually have less risk than one of the safest forms of transportation ever created. That's one heck of an assertion. You'd have to be whole orders of magnitude safer in order to match the safety record of commercial air travel. This despite apparently "traveling too dangerously fast" in the past.

By the way, modern commercial aircraft are designed for bird strikes. It take a very large bird to cause catastrophic damage to an aircraft engine.

[jberryhill]

58. Which is even stranger, since...

...professional driving is one of the deadliest occupations there is.

[EX500rider]

72. "So, I disagree with the stats."

As in you think they aren't true or what?

International aviation firm To70 found that fatal accidents occurred in just 0.18 per million flights, which equates to around one in every five million flights.

[malaise]

3. Yep

This is a new aircraft and it should be grounded for now

[Adrahil]

21. They won't ground the fleet without common cause...

or more than two coincidental crashes.

FWIW, I know a guy on the Boeing incident investigation team and they are all over this. If there is an issue, they will find it.

[watoos]

51. They will find it because Boeing stock is crashing too.

[Adrahil]

55. No doubt corporate is feeling the squeeze

But in my experience, the actual investigative team has good isolation from the business side. These are some top engineers. They will prioritize finding the right technical cause, if they can.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

5. Two crashes.

Until we have an idea of what the causes were, suggesting they be grounded is premature.

[Recursion]

7. I thought the Papua New Guinea crash had the new firmware too?

It wasn't technically a MAX but it had the new control cycle.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

10. Then it's not aircraft type,

but a piece of equipment that's the common factor.

Actually, the only Papua New Guinea crash I find happened in 2009 and the equipment was a Twin Otter and probably didn't have the same firmware.

Unless you're referring to some other crash that I didn't find.

[Recursion]

12. Sorry! Cuba, not PNG. PNG was a landing incursion

(I work for a simulator manufacturer so we are elbows-deep in every accident there is)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubana_de_Aviaci%C3%B3n_Flight_972

This one may be different because there were reports of flames, but it was yet another radical attitude adjustment immediately after takeoff.

Boeing's response has been really problematic. At least on the full MAX series the same set of control inputs before the problematic update yield a nose up attitude but after the update yield a full-authority nose-down attitude. And this change was apparently never documented.

[cstanleytech]

18. That's one of the older generations of 737s though so if its related its more likely a component

rather than the plane design itself.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

19. From that Wiki article,

that crash was not of a MAX version.

I was an airline employee for ten years, so I cheerfully obsess on accidents.

[VarryOn]

6. No way I'd fly on one right now...

Lot's of travel coming up. I'll be checking before I board!

[Corgigal]

8. If it's the same diagnosis

as the Lion crash appears to be, it's horrifying. I worried back in the day about fly by wire but AI overriding human brains in an aircraft might not be the way to go.

[oldsoftie]

22. I agree. Along with total dependence on GPS.

ALL aircraft need manual controls because we never know when a computer will fail or a solar flare takes out satellites, etc.

[Recursion]

23. OTOH we never know when a human will have a stroke

That cuts both ways

[oldsoftie]

24. We could have BOTH, but if a commercial pilot has a stroke, he's got a copilot.

If the computer has a stroke, everyones screwed if theres no way for a human to take over manually

[Sgent]

38. True

but we have two of them who get physicals every 6 months (for airline flying) and grounded if they have almost any cardiac issues.

[Bengus81]

65. LOL...aircraft are NOT 100% dependent on GPS.

We still have NDB's from the 30's--non directional beacons. We still have VOR's and probably always will. We still have Outer/middle and inner markers as an aircraft is on final approach.

[oldsoftie]

69. I didnt mean they're that way NOW, but i've seen stories about no longer needing the "old" ways.

This was back several years and i think it was about an Airbus project.
But arent some aircraft no longer equipped with fly by wire controls? And if so, isnt THAT foolhardy too?

[dalton99a]

9. Brand-new aircraft, twice in a year

WTF

[B Stieg]

15. Exactly!

These are brand new aircraft and a new design.
This shouldn't happen. It's gotta be a design flaw.

[Bengus81]

64. Twice in only six months.........

[A HERETIC I AM]

11. "We"??!?

I think it's best left to Boeing and their engineers, frankly!

They'll sort it out, of this I have no doubt.

Remember when the new 777's were having battery issues? Fires and over heating problems? You don't hear about that much these days, do you? That's because they got it fixed.

They will do the same with this airframe as well, and in very short order, I can assure you.

[jmowreader]

34. IIRC the 787 was the one with the battery issues

[A HERETIC I AM]

35. Fair enough

The larger point still stands.

[Lancero]

37. We don't talk about the 787 issue much these days because none of the planes crashed.

All were safely landed, with no casualties.

Their are, however, three hundred and forty six reasons why we're hearing so much about the MAX8.

Edit - That said, the battery fire issue was hardly resolved. The 'solution' was to redesign the casings to better contain a fire and to provide improved warning systems to detect them. This does nothing to prevent the issue of the battery going up in flames - It just contains the damage.

[Sgent]

39. Boing

slow walked the 787 problems until Japan grounded the 787 for Japanese carriers.

[DoctorJoJo]

13. Trump Should Ask Barbara Boeing What Is Going On With Her Company!

[dalton99a]

16. He'll call her "Barbara Boing Boing"

[erronis]

17. Or as he likes to say: BB.

Next up, Vlad Boyfriend. Or Kimmy UnLover.

[SCVDem]

14. Even a fly by wire aircraft

Has 3000 psi of hydraulics moving the surfaces.

One can not fight that amount of pressure manually, even if they did have a cable override.

I wonder what's on the fdr and cvr orange boxes.

No secrets!

[riverwalker]

29. Nikki Haley is on the board of Boeing now

at $400K salary. Acting Sec of DoD Shanahan a former Boeing executive. Neither gives me much confidence they’ll do anything.

[cstanleytech]

36. I have plenty of confidence in them personally..........at collecting their salary.

[DFW]

32. Maybe Boeing should have spent a little longer in training pilots to fly their new toy

Of course, the pressure to bring it onto the market and into service ASAP must have been great. So great that a few hundred people had to die to bring it to someone's attention that not all pilots were familiar enough with the cockpit to categorically exclude any crashes--especially after the number of crashes climbed to one.

[SCVDem]

33. This is not pilot error.

After take off, the climb to altitude is gentle.

Fuel flow issues? We need the boxes.

[DFW]

52. I agree that it's not pilot error. I think it's Boeing error.

They need better instruction/instructors so that pilots do not get confused as to what to do in such situations. If it's a mechanical issue, the planes had no business being certified as airworthy before this was addressed, especially after the first crash.

[fescuerescue]

75. I don't think anyone knows what "this" is yet

Emergency procedures are written in blood they say.

Once they understand what the "it" is, you can bet the emergency procedures will be updated immediately and I do mean immediately.

[still_one]

76. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[nitpicker]

40. +1

[The Truth Is Here]

41. I recall that the Cayman Airlines recently started flying to Denver

Twice a week and I just checked their first three flights to Denver, and they did use a B73M for the first two flights but on March 9th they used a 732 instead. (737-200). I wasnt sure if they were ETOPS certified. Then I read that Cayman and China Airlines grounded their B73M for the time being.

[jberryhill]

49. They took delivery on two of them

....and grounded them the day after the second one arrived...

https://caymannewsservice.com/2019/03/second-max-8-arrives/

CAL’s second Boeing 737 Max 8 arrives at ORIA
Cayman News | 08/03/2019 | 51 Comments

https://caymannewsservice.com/2019/03/cal-grounds-max-8/

CAL grounds Max 8 after fatal crash
Cayman News | 11/03/2019 | 0 Comments

[muriel_volestrangler]

42. China, Indonesia and Ethiopia have grounded theirs

Aviation authorities in China, Indonesia and Ethiopia ordered airlines to ground their Boeing 737 Max 8 planes Monday after one crashed in Ethiopia, killing all 157 people on board.
...
Chicago-based Boeing said it did not intend to issue any new guidance to its customers. It does plan to send a technical team to the crash site to help Ethiopian and U.S. investigators.
...
Chinese carriers and leasing companies operate 96 Boeing 737 8 MAXs, according to the government, with dozens more believed to be on order. China Southern Airlines is one of Boeing’s biggest customers for the aircraft.

Indonesia also grounded 11 737 Max 8s for inspections to ensure flight safety and that the planes are airworthy, said Director General of Air Transportation Polana B. Pramesti.

https://www.apnews.com/881eadf66f684aef93998cbe1c8f6661

[Blue_Tires]

43. Probably just a software issue

[MoonRiver]

45. "just?"

That software issue has killed hundreds then. I also think they tried fixing it and another plane still crashed.

[Blue_Tires]

47. There hasn't been a fix, iirc

it would be incredibly difficult since they wouldn't even know what exactly to fix since the investigation of the first crash is still ongoing (and to be fair, nobody officially knows yet if MCAS is related to this crash as well). What Boeing HAS done in the meantime is given extra warnings and training to flight crews.

Right now Boeing is praying that whatever the issue is determined to be, it's easily fixable. If they have to stop production of the MAX and design a brand new short-haul carrier from the ground up (which will take years and cost tens of billions since the 737 platform can't be evolved any further), it could be the beginning of the end for them.

[EX500rider]

74. "nobody officially knows yet if MCAS is related to this crash as well"

Unlike as they were still on climb out and MCAS does not kick in with the flaps out.

[ecstatic]

46. I heard southwest bought a bunch of them

I already don't like their seating arrangements, so I'm definitely avoiding them until this is resolved.

[spanone]

50. Boeing just put out a statement....

Pretty Lame considering some nations are already grounding them

[Blue_Tires]

61. What would you expect them to say in an ongoing investigation?

[spanone]

63. How about grounding them before more people die? Err on the side of caution.

Individual nations are grounding them. I think the manufacturer should be ahead of that.

[Blue_Tires]

67. I'm with you, but Boeing isn't pulling their products from market unless by direct order

especially without concrete proof that the same issue was the cause of both crashes...

[spanone]

68. We should know soon...they found the boxes

[malaise]

73. They'll ground them when one crashes in the US

or some Europe.

[still_one]

77. That is what the FAA is suppossed to do, and they should do it

[Blue_Tires]

62. FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE (POTENTIAL) ISSUE IS:

https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/what-is-the-boeing-737-max-maneuvering-characteristics-augmentation-system-mcas-jt610/

[Bengus81]

66. Yep....hell leave a notch of flaps down and then kick in the auto pilot after a couple of minutes..

That would keep the MCA turned off.

[backscatter712]

78. Sounds like a system that needs some idiot-proofing.

One, Boeing didn't do nearly enough to educate pilots on this system, how it works, and how to react when it forces the nose down when it should not be forced down.

Second sounds like this system needs a software update to get it to behave better, especially during takeoffs and landings, and in situations where there's a possible sensor malfunction. Really, the automated systems on the aircraft should not fly the plane into the ground.

[Blue_Tires]

79. The other issue is trying to integrate/retrofit it to an airframe

whose design and technological foundation is from the mid-60s...