- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
New software glitch found in Boeing's troubled 737 Max jet
Posted on 6/27/19 at 8:41 am
Posted on 6/27/19 at 8:41 am
quote:
A new software problem has been found in the troubled Boeing 737 Max that could push the plane's nose down automatically, and fixing the flaw is almost certain to further delay the plane's return to flying after two deadly crashes.
Boeing said Wednesday that the FAA "identified an additional requirement" for software changes that the aircraft manufacturer has been working on for eight months, since shortly after the first crash.
"Boeing agrees with the FAA's decision and request, and is working on the required software to address the FAA's request," Boeing said in a statement.
Government test pilots trying out Boeing's updated Max software in a flight simulator last week found a flaw that could result in the plane's nose pitching down, according to two people familiar with the matter. In both Max crashes, the plane's flight-control software pushed the nose down based on faulty readings from one sensor.
The people said fixing the issue might be accomplished through software changes or by replacing a microprocessor in the plane's flight-control system. One said the latest setback is likely to delay the plane's return to service by an extra one to three months. Both spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss aspects of the review process that are not public.
In a statement, the Federal Aviation Administration said it will lift its grounding of the plane only when it deems the jet safe — there is no set timeline.
LINK
I will avoid this jet at all costs for a while even after it's back in service.
10
Posted on 6/27/19 at 8:47 am to stout
quote:
In both Max crashes, the plane's flight-control software pushed the nose down based on faulty readings from one sensor.
Why aren't there 2 sensors?
Posted on 6/27/19 at 8:48 am to stout
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:01 am to GetCocky11
quote:
Why aren't there 2 sensors?
Quote from Seattle Times article;
"..a safety-analysis led by Boeing concluded there would be little risk in the event of an MCAS failure — in part because of an FAA-approved assumption that pilots would respond to an unexpected activation in a mere three seconds.
The revised design allowed MCAS to trigger on the inputs of a single sensor, instead of two factors considered in the original plan. Boeing engineers considered that lack of redundancy acceptable, according to proprietary information reviewed by The Seattle Times, because they calculated the probability of a “hazardous” MCAS malfunction to be virtually inconceivable.
Full Seattle Times article which seems to include new "insider" info:
LINK to Seattle Times - Inside story of MCAS
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:01 am to stout
How... is it possible that the FAA people are smarter than the Boeing people?
The fact that the FAA is finding these problems and having to tell Boeing to fix them, is very disturbing to me, and indicates a serious problem at Boeing. Either they are hiring incompetent people, they are suffering from poor leadership that is cutting corners, or both.
The fact that the FAA is finding these problems and having to tell Boeing to fix them, is very disturbing to me, and indicates a serious problem at Boeing. Either they are hiring incompetent people, they are suffering from poor leadership that is cutting corners, or both.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:04 am to BritLSUfan
quote:
Boeing engineers considered that lack of redundancy acceptable, according to proprietary information reviewed by The Seattle Times, because they calculated the probability of a “hazardous” MCAS malfunction to be virtually inconceivable.
well god damn
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:05 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
How... is it possible that the FAA people are smarter than the Boeing people?
The fact that the FAA is finding these problems and having to tell Boeing to fix them, is very disturbing to me, and indicates a serious problem at Boeing. Either they are hiring incompetent people, they are suffering from poor leadership that is cutting corners, or both.
This was my thought. If govt agencies are finding issues and telling Boeing, that makes me nervous for sure about the quality of the Boeing product.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:06 am to BritLSUfan
quote:
The revised design allowed MCAS to trigger on the inputs of a single sensor, instead of two factors considered in the original plan. Boeing engineers considered that lack of redundancy acceptable, according to proprietary information reviewed by The Seattle Times, because they calculated the probability of a “hazardous” MCAS malfunction to be virtually inconceivable.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:18 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
they are suffering from poor leadership that is cutting corners
This is what's going on at Boeing.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:19 am to stout
Airbus over here like
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:21 am to stout
Sounds like a political move at this point, makes it look like the FAA is doing something.
Said it could delay the recertification flight up to a week..
Everyone been speculating a return to service in August.
Said it could delay the recertification flight up to a week..
Everyone been speculating a return to service in August.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:22 am to stout
Thank God there are regulators in this case. Boeing is dropping the ball.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 9:43 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
Thank God there are regulators in this case. Boeing is dropping the ball.
Not to get all political talk on here, but when people are constantly saying we "need to reduce government regulation", I think of situations like this.
Yes, of course, in some instances, regulation can be overbearing. But, as history has shown time and time again, companies will do what makes them the most money, not what is in the best safety interest of their customers and employees. There needs to be a counterbalance to make sure the public interest is protected, ESPECIALLY in something as complicated as airplanes.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:02 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
overbearing. But, as history has shown time and time again, companies will do what makes them the most money, not what is in the best safety interest of their customers and employees.
Standby for the “but the free market fixes EVERYTHING” crowd to beat you down.
They are wrapping up their morning prayers to their Bezos idol but will be here shortly.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:04 am to BritLSUfan
quote:
Boeing engineers considered that lack of redundancy acceptable, according to proprietary information reviewed by The Seattle Times, because they calculated the probability of a “hazardous” MCAS malfunction to be virtually inconceivable.
Someone needs to tell Boeing when they're selling a product that involves handling sensitive cargo like hundreds of human lives at 40,000 feet in the air at 550+ mph, redundancy has to be at an absolute premium no matter how expensive it gets.
This isn't some shite like chevy delivery vans not having all the bells and whistles on the ground.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:05 am to stout
RIP "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" axiom.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:14 am to Walking the Earth
quote:
RIP "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" axiom.
Sure, Boeing fricked up with the max and it's not really surprising as it's a 60+ year old air frame that's been upgraded to the absolute limit.
Eventually some decades down the road, they're going to have to get rid of the 737 and build a new single aisle plane.
But they have no such issues with great planes the like the 787 dreamliner that Boeing has made a killing selling all over the world. The 787 opened up new long range routes that airlines could not justify serving with the 747, 777 and so on.
And the upcoming 777x looks incredible and they are going to be applying the same regulatory lessons with that as well.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:14 am to BritLSUfan
Boeing.... a company that has pioneered aviation and technology..... struggling to fix a sensor and software issue. Crazy world we live in.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:19 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
cutting corners
This is what happens when accountants, and not engineers make major decisions on building an airplane.
Posted on 6/27/19 at 10:25 am to Sentrius
quote:
Sure, Boeing fricked up with the max and it's not really surprising as it's a 60+ year old air frame that's been upgraded beyond the absolute limit.
Fixed....
Hence the (poorly executed) introduction of MCAS on an air frame design that reacted in an adverse way to the installation of new engines.
All in an effort to compete with the A320NEO.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News