re: 737 Max software is still trying to Maximum Overdrive the plane

Sell, sell, sell!

quote:

---

This really is a disaster for Boeing. They chose a cheaper, more short-term plan that they knew wasn't the best option over doing the right thing and building a completely new airframe.

---

I’m glad it’s a disaster. They obviously needed to learn a lesson. It’s a shame that it’s at the expense of hundreds of lives. Maybe Boeing can get off their lazy fat asses now and do some real engineer work. Something they’ve been way behind the rest of the industry on for a while now. They’re just living on their brand name at this point and the work of the engineers and designers that came before them.

quote:

---

I've been reading that it's heading towards Boeing completely scrapping the plane. I know they've had to pay reimbursements to airlines that have purchased them to the tune of 40 some-odd billion dollars already

---

.

This is not true. The larger operators will be getting significant discounts on further deliveries. Also none of the major operators have MAX simulators. That will change and many will be free of charge.

In the desire to readily compete against its competitor, Airbus, Boeing rushed this design when in fact it should have gone back to the drawing board and come up with a totally new design, but that costs $$$. (In actuality whoever decided to shut down the 757 line should have been fired on the spot!) So they wanted an aircraft in the Airbus 321 size with fuel efficient engines like the Airbus has (neo). Nope. Don’t go back to the drawing board, just jimmy rig the design we have and add some software to overcome the design flaws, and, oh yeah, don’t disclose any of the problems all under the oversight of the Feds that are supposed to be watching out for the flying public’s a$$!
Then you have to factor in the SWA effect, since they are Boeing’s largest customer.
In an effort to keep training costs down Boeing acquiesced to SWA’s desire to keep their fleet limited to 1 type because each different type of aircraft requires extensive training which, yup, you guessed it, costs $$$. The newest model 737s flying around are still somewhat antiquated with regards to modern technology due to the fact if Boeing changed it too much, the FAA wouldn’t sign off on it being a common type to the original aircraft. So, they dumb down their product.
Thanks SWA!
But don’t blame SWA for all of Boeing idiotic and bonehead designs. While they build a very nice aircraft there’s a certain amount of pride that gets in their way from adapting tried and true technology, just because Boeing didn’t think of it 1st.
A perfect example is Airbus aircraft are all fly-by-wire, ie no cables and pulleys moving individual control surfaces. This allows Airbus to incorporate a side stick (all electronic) in lieu of a traditional yoke, thereby giving the pilots an unobstructed view of the instrumentation and a handy dandy tray table to work on. The technology isn’t all that new but even Boeing’s latest products (think 787) still have a traditional yoke. Why? What’s it’s purpose? It’s fly-by-wire too. Again, that’s just one example. Pride goeth.....
Seems like the Max is yet another example.

Fly by wire is gay. Can’t wait till terrorists start hacking airplanes and crashing them into sports venues and shite so you young’ns will finally get off your lame arse computer fetish.

quote:

---

even Boeing’s latest products (think 787) still have a traditional yoke. Why

---

That has nothing to do with why the Max is a flawed design.

The side stick is, however, a contributing factor in the Air France 447 Airbus A330 crash.

Was coming here to point that out.

All you self-righteous Boeing haters need to reserve some shade for Southwest Airlines. They are well known for putting their desire to save a few bucks on type-commonality ahead of safety interests. They are the largest 737 customer, only fly that one type of airplane and have no desire for Boeing to include anything in the certification of new 737 models that would require them to spend more $$$ on training, maintenance, scheduling etc.

I have flown the 787 and the 737 for my airline, and can tell you that the latest 737 cockpit/ human interface design could easily match that of the cutting edge Dreamliner if it weren’t for SWA. Anecdotally at least I’ve heard that their glass cockpit airplanes still display round dial facsimiles to promote commonality. As SWA and their ambitions to fly international/ Hawaii routes has grown, they have developed a requirement for larger/heavier/more fuel efficient 737’s. Boeing, in trying to satisfy their requirement while keeping SWAs costs down, came up with the Max.

I have flown the Max 7 or 8 times and think it’s a great airplane. If I have a real beef, it’s that they didn’t see fit to include the info on the MCAS system in the operating manual. IMO, that decision can once again be traced back to SWA’s, and hence Boeing’s, desire to keep the manuals and paperwork standardized across all models and make sure not to draw attention from the FAA which might lead to additional costs.

Not disagreeing that Boeing should have done a better job making sure MCAS couldn’t be crippled by a single input failure or that the FAA needs to do a better job of overseeing certification decisions, but SWA is at the root of much of this issue.

TIFWIW, just one line swines humble opinion.

Nobody forced other airlines to buy Boeing's product just because SWA has some quirks that they won't let go. Delta and AA and everyone else flying the Max could have said no. Blaming a customer for the failure of a shitty product is retarded unless you want to blame them for poor decision making in buying that product.

Boeing could have told SWA..."No, we've reached the max performance on that airplane, we cannot squeeze anymore out of safely." But in the interest of profits and trying to beat Airbus to market, they rushed a poorly designed airplane through a certification process and into service and then didn't even feel the need to tell it's customers about an entirely new system on the airplane.

The simple fact of the matter is that Boeing got lazy and stupid over the past decade and wasn't ready for new market demands with the correct product so they tried to force more out of the 737 than it's capable of. And hundreds are dead because of it.

I get you in a White Knight sort of way. It’s very easy to say that Boeing should just take the high ground and commit commercial suicide by refusing to produce a product that it’s customer base and by far its largest single customer are demanding that it build. Works great in a theoretical vacuum. Not so much in the real world of the markets, financing, board politics, stock price, etc. etc.

Unfortunately for your point of view the commercial viability of one of the largest manufacturing concerns in the US as well as one of the largest airlines airlines in the world drove the decision to produce the Max and try to make sure it stayed one type rating. Was that wrong? Was that a bad decision? If some software geek somewhere had written a few more lines of code to make sure it took more than one faulty AOA input to put the plane in the dirt we wouldn’t even be having this conversation and the Max would be the greatest thing since sliced bread??

I emailed SWA and gave them my rage for continuing down this path with the Max 8. They have not gone unnoticed but it is still Boeings responsibility to make sure they produce a plane that doesn't want to put the nose down that requires a software fix.