Valedix
Member
Hmm? Kid has his tshirt taken out from the window and the Mother was holding onto the kid.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
737Max: Boy sitting in row 26 had his t-shirt sucked off him while his mother was holding on to him - Alaska Airlines flight B39M
- Thread starter sono
- Start date
Tams
Member
Subcontracted out to lower costs and to avoid unions, done by business people in management.
Boeings were good (well, aforementioned DC-10s aside) back when Boeing did most of it in-house. They had actual engineers as management back then.
The 777 was the last airliner they designed and built before the change, and you can tell.
DeepSpace5D
Member
I always get aisle seats, so I don’t have to make anyone get up to use the restroom. But now I have another reason.
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
I didn’t know about this but since you posted it I watched it yesterday. Jesus fuck Boeing.
Tams
Member
HoodWinked
Member
Crazy
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Terminal speed and all that
CrankyJay™
Member
Huge lawsuit incoming.
NGL if that was my phone I'd be a bit mad it didn't autolock. What if I was browsing something.....sensitive in the privacy of my 16,000 foot high cabin and drop my phone???
Go_Ly_Dow
Member
Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout
Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout
The jet involved in Friday's incident had been prevented from long trips over water, US investigators say.
www.bbc.co.uk
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
This was released last April and I've read additional detail that the fitting should be of great concern. Yet, they shrugged THIS ONE off.Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout
Alaska Airlines plane had warnings days before mid-air blowout
The jet involved in Friday's incident had been prevented from long trips over water, US investigators say.www.bbc.co.uk
A supplier used a “non-standard manufacturing process” during the installation of two fittings in the rear fuselage, Boeing said in a statement to CNN.
Read somewhere in an aviation discussion that this was a stabilizer screw and fitting which was the mechanical issue with the 737Max.
This should be more troubling that the issue which happened with a dummy door collapsing from compression. Alaska Airlines Flight 261 is a grim reminder of how such a small mechanical piece (s) failure can lead to catastrophe.
TL;DR...stay off the 737Max. I've never had a fear of commercial aircraft and have been following aviation for nearly 20-years. No modern plane gives me the chills like this one.
RagnarokIV
Member
They better give out compensation for the phones. I'd be fucken pissed if mine got sucked out and damaged/lost.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Lessen learned that’s their settings fault not the phones.
Can’t believe people don’t put passwords on their phones lol
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
newtypepilot
Member
Those fucking ex-MD execs have destroyed this company.
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
Yes and no. Yes for those whose phones were unrecovered. No for the person with the recovered and working iPhone. iPhone did a few marketing ads on an 'unbreakable' iPhone a couple years back. Well...this one dropped 16,000 after being jettisoned from a plane on ascent. I don't think many manufacturers can boast that. Creative money there if they pitch that to Apple or sell the story to a large news outlet.
Last edited:
Jinzo Prime
Member
newtypepilot
Member
mcdonnell douglas
FullMetalx117
Member
Managing Director in the financial world... there is more than one path to get MD lol.
But as others have said, Boeing has been about financial engineering and shareholder returns for the past decade rather than actual mechanical/electrical/aerospace engineering. The doc did a good job explaining when that transition took place. Boeing planes haven't been quality in a long time.
Edit: LMAO in this case it was indeed McDondell Douglas. Regardless, Boeing is run by a much of financial MDs, not engineers.
Last edited:
JayK47
Member
The airlines are such a mess right now. You can't really trust the planes, the pilots, or the traffic controllers. The bar has been lowered and we will be paying for it with stuff like this. These people on the plane were lucky it was not way worse. Sure the crap out of everyone involved.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Alaska, United find loose hardware during inspection of 737 MAX 9s
Alaska Airlines and United Airlines said Monday they found loose hardware during inspections of their 737 MAX 9 aircraft.
www.seattletimes.com
Seattle Times usually has good coverage of Boeing for people who want to follow along. It's sad to see what has happened to what was one of the best companies on Earth. These days, I only want to fly on Airbus planes. You don't know if you can trust an airliner made by Boeing today and that's a long fall from the last century when you wanted to fly Boeing and nothing else.
Last edited:
newtypepilot
Member
natjjohn
Member
That’s a bummer. Fly southwest typically and want no part of this plane
Thaedolus
Gold Member
The crashes that occurred years ago appeared to be from a mistake in risk analysis leading to a design and training flaw…tragic mistake, but once you go back and reexamine everything for two years, should be good to go on that front.
Ongoing QC issues though…far more concerning. First that the supplier is making so many mistakes and second that Boeing wasn’t catching them and implementing immediate corrective actions
Ongoing QC issues though…far more concerning. First that the supplier is making so many mistakes and second that Boeing wasn’t catching them and implementing immediate corrective actions
jufonuk
not tag worthy
Boeing 737 Max 9: United Airlines finds loose bolts in jet inspections
Alaska Airlines also said it found loose hardware on some aircraft after a blow-out mid-flight over Oregon.
www.bbc.com
Bolts in need of "additional tightening" have been found during inspections of Boeing 737 Max 9s, United Airlines has said.
That’s fucking insane. Just that caused this. Someone couldn’t be assed to do their job correctly and now this.
So luckily not a design flaw just incompetence which can be solved.
Last edited:
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
MCAS is a critical system and it had a single point of failure (the angle of attack sensor). These need to be duplicated.
In order to camouflage it to avoid triggering pilot training they didn’t even have a switch to deactivate it - the only way was to turn off trim aid altogether.
This was not a failure of risk analysis, this was deliberate malfeasance. After the first crash the FAA sent a risk analysis to Boeing that this would happen on average every two years. And when the Ethiopian plane crashed, they still blamed the pilots.
HoodWinked
Member
Not sure if this is true but the fuselage is built and delivered by Spirit Aerospace but Boeing likely has to remove the doors to add trim and make other modifications so if it's a problem with quality control it would be on Boeing.
Otherwise do the bolts come loose on thier own. Maybe temperature cycling or pressure cycling or vibrations.
Otherwise do the bolts come loose on thier own. Maybe temperature cycling or pressure cycling or vibrations.
Embearded
Member
Boeing internally had written reports warning about MCAS since 2011 and they chose to ignore them.
They were forced to hand over emails and internal documents. The case is very well documented today and we know exactly what caused the death of those people:
Greed.
Thaedolus
Gold Member
See the first part- lack of redundancy in a critical failure point- was where I thought this was a risk analysis failure. But if what you’re saying is true- that they recognized it and tried to work around it in that way- then yeah, shit. That’s diabolical. Just add the second sensor, dipshits
Embearded
Member
The knew before the accident.
They were informed by their engineers and at some point they even turned down the suggestion for audio alert in the cockpit that MCAS is triggered.
Boeing didn't want to inform the pilots about MCAS. They lied to FAA about the invasive nature of MCAS and FAA agreed to leave it out of the manual so pilots wouldn't know about it.
Then, they made MCAS 4 times more invasive than it already was to make take off stability better and they never told FAA.
FalconPunch
Member
Loose bolts on the door.... Imagine the rest of the plane. Boeing is done. Garbage company. Until they change management, it's best to just fly only with Airbus.Boeing 737 Max 9: United Airlines finds loose bolts in jet inspections
Alaska Airlines also said it found loose hardware on some aircraft after a blow-out mid-flight over Oregon.
Bolts in need of "additional tightening" have been found during inspections of Boeing 737 Max 9s, United Airlines has said.
That’s fucking insane. Just that caused this. Someone couldn’t be assed to do their job correctly and now this.
So luckily not a design flaw just incompetence which can be solved.
CrankyJay™
Member
Bruh, they better be giving out compensation for pain and suffering from the PTSD everyone is going to have, especially that kid and mom.
Daneel Elijah
Gold Member
The story is quite crazy when you think about it hard. They were pressed by time and wanted to make the plane fast to stay close to Airbus. During test they found out that the plane was not acting like the 737 NG, the predecessor of the MAX, in some situations. Their solution: a software that would hide that from the pilots. Because if any pilot had to do some training to use the new plane, they had 1 million to pay per plane to one of their customers. They told stuff to the regulator, saying that it was no big deal, then make changes that they did not disclose to them that make it a really big deal. Namely making this stupid software able to control the plane a lot more than it should. No pilot knew of MCAS before the first crash, I think. Imagine finding yourself figthing against the plane, and it not moving as it should? That is what happened to the plane that crashed.
There is a good documentary on Netflix, but I really liked this one, on Youtube:
I recommend it if you want to know more about the 737 MAX problems.
Plane crash rates by model
Chart listing the rate of plane crashes involving passenger fatalities in fatal events per million flights for selected airliner models.
"
Aircraft models have no fatal events involving airline passengers:
- Airbus: A220, A319neo, A320neo, A321neo, A340, A350, A380
- Boeing: 717, 747-8, 787
- Embraer: ERJ 135, ERJ 140, ERJ 145
Fatal crash rates per million flights
| Model | Rate | Flights | FLE* | Events |
| Airbus A300** | 0.61 | 6.51M | 3.99 | 7 |
| 0.30 | 6.06M | 2.00 | 2 | |
| 0.46 | 12.57M | 5.99 | 10 | |
| 1.35 | 4.74M | 6.39 | 9 | |
| 0.09 | 119.0 | 10.58 | 14 | |
| 0.19 | 10.26M | 1.99 | 2 | |
| 0.44 | 26.8M | 11.86 | 15 | |
| 0.50 | 76.61M | 38.6 | 51 | |
| 0.62 | 58.29M | 36.43 | 50 | |
| 0.15 | 79.60M | 11.99 | 19 | |
| 0.07 | 100.3M | 7.19 | 12 | |
| 3.08 | 0.65M | 2.00 | 2 | |
| 0.24 | 238.84M | 58.4 | 83 | |
| 1.02 | 12.98M | 13.23 | 26 | |
| 0.06 | 8.42M | 0.50 | 2 | |
| 0.22 | 25.0M | 5.41 | 9 | |
| 0.28 | 20.0M | 5.50 | 6 | |
| 0.18 | 11.11M | 2.01 | 3 | |
| 0.58 | 62.59M | 36.40 | 45 | |
| 0.64 | 9.30M | 5.91 | 15 | |
| 0.37 | 2.79M | 1.02 | 3 | |
| 0.26 | 46.38M | 11.94 | 18 | |
| UNK | UNK | 3.38 | 5 | |
| UNK | UNK | 3.10 | 4 | |
| 0.39 | 11.56M | 4.49 | 6 | |
11.36 | 0.09M | 1.00 | 1 | |
| 0.03 | 16.67M | 0.44 | 1 | |
| 1.62 | 9.53M | 15.45 | 21 | |
| 0.18 | 11.11M | 2.01 | 6 | |
| 0.47 | 5.40M | 2.54 | 5 | |
| 0.19 | 11.2M | 2.10 | 3 |
*** No longer in commercial service
Insane Metal
Member
Insane number.Plane crash rates by model
Chart listing the rate of plane crashes involving passenger fatalities in fatal events per million flights for selected airliner models.www.airsafe.com
"
Aircraft models have no fatal events involving airline passengers:
- Airbus: A220, A319neo, A320neo, A321neo, A340, A350, A380
- Boeing: 717, 747-8, 787
- Embraer: ERJ 135, ERJ 140, ERJ 145
Fatal crash rates per million flights
** No longer in production
Model Rate Flights FLE* Events Airbus A300** 0.61 6.51M 3.99 7 0.30 6.06M 2.00 2 0.46 12.57M 5.99 10 1.35 4.74M 6.39 9 0.09 119.0 10.58 14 0.19 10.26M 1.99 2 0.44 26.8M 11.86 15 0.50 76.61M 38.6 51 0.62 58.29M 36.43 50 0.15 79.60M 11.99 19 0.07 100.3M 7.19 12 3.08 0.65M 2.00 2 0.24 238.84M 58.4 83 1.02 12.98M 13.23 26 0.06 8.42M 0.50 2 0.22 25.0M 5.41 9 0.28 20.0M 5.50 6 0.18 11.11M 2.01 3 0.58 62.59M 36.40 45 0.64 9.30M 5.91 15 0.37 2.79M 1.02 3 0.26 46.38M 11.94 18 UNK UNK 3.38 5 UNK UNK 3.10 4 0.39 11.56M 4.49 6 0.03 16.67M 0.44 1 1.62 9.53M 15.45 21 0.18 11.11M 2.01 6 0.47 5.40M 2.54 5 0.19 11.2M 2.10 3
*** No longer in commercial service
Also I'm 38 and I remember hearing about the Fokker 100 accidents when I was a kid:
The first one was absolutely horrible stuff.
Last edited:
ChoosableOne
ChoosableAll
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
Models like the 747-100/200/300 are some of the earliest of the fleet and most are retired at this point. I point this out because that 1-rate may scare some. They (the early 747s) were documented by cases spanning nearly half-a-century.Plane crash rates by model
Chart listing the rate of plane crashes involving passenger fatalities in fatal events per million flights for selected airliner models.
"
Aircraft models have no fatal events involving airline passengers:
- Airbus: A220, A319neo, A320neo, A321neo, A340, A350, A380
- Boeing: 717, 747-8, 787
- Embraer: ERJ 135, ERJ 140, ERJ 145
Fatal crash rates per million flights
** No longer in production
Model Rate Flights FLE* Events Airbus A300** 0.61 6.51M 3.99 7 0.30 6.06M 2.00 2 0.46 12.57M 5.99 10 1.35 4.74M 6.39 9 0.09 119.0 10.58 14 0.19 10.26M 1.99 2 0.44 26.8M 11.86 15 0.50 76.61M 38.6 51 0.62 58.29M 36.43 50 0.15 79.60M 11.99 19 0.07 100.3M 7.19 12 3.08 0.65M 2.00 2 0.24 238.84M 58.4 83 1.02 12.98M 13.23 26 0.06 8.42M 0.50 2 0.22 25.0M 5.41 9 0.28 20.0M 5.50 6 0.18 11.11M 2.01 3 0.58 62.59M 36.40 45 0.64 9.30M 5.91 15 0.37 2.79M 1.02 3 0.26 46.38M 11.94 18 UNK UNK 3.38 5 UNK UNK 3.10 4 0.39 11.56M 4.49 6 0.03 16.67M 0.44 1 1.62 9.53M 15.45 21 0.18 11.11M 2.01 6 0.47 5.40M 2.54 5 0.19 11.2M 2.10 3
*** No longer in commercial service
However, I've never seen anything like rate & FLE of the Max. When there were the 3 incidents (probably more) with MCAS (2 of which were fatal); that's when the fleet should have been pulled from all ordering charters stat. Yet, once 2020 passed...Boeing slipped these back in and MCAS supposedly fixed but numerous more concerning issues with the engineering. In short, the Max was rushed into production due to Boeing's pressure to compete with Airbus and once problems were visible -- they weren't willing to pull these things out due to the billions invested.
Over 200 737 MAX are in service and probably more which had been ordered. I'd like to track what flight paths are most frequent for those in operation likewise.
Ownage
Member
The 787 is a great plane. Always love flying it.Plane crash rates by model
Chart listing the rate of plane crashes involving passenger fatalities in fatal events per million flights for selected airliner models.
"
Aircraft models have no fatal events involving airline passengers:
- Airbus: A220, A319neo, A320neo, A321neo, A340, A350, A380
- Boeing: 717, 747-8, 787
- Embraer: ERJ 135, ERJ 140, ERJ 145
Fatal crash rates per million flights
** No longer in production
Model Rate Flights FLE* Events Airbus A300** 0.61 6.51M 3.99 7 0.30 6.06M 2.00 2 0.46 12.57M 5.99 10 1.35 4.74M 6.39 9 0.09 119.0 10.58 14 0.19 10.26M 1.99 2 0.44 26.8M 11.86 15 0.50 76.61M 38.6 51 0.62 58.29M 36.43 50 0.15 79.60M 11.99 19 0.07 100.3M 7.19 12 3.08 0.65M 2.00 2 0.24 238.84M 58.4 83 1.02 12.98M 13.23 26 0.06 8.42M 0.50 2 0.22 25.0M 5.41 9 0.28 20.0M 5.50 6 0.18 11.11M 2.01 3 0.58 62.59M 36.40 45 0.64 9.30M 5.91 15 0.37 2.79M 1.02 3 0.26 46.38M 11.94 18 UNK UNK 3.38 5 UNK UNK 3.10 4 0.39 11.56M 4.49 6 0.03 16.67M 0.44 1 1.62 9.53M 15.45 21 0.18 11.11M 2.01 6 0.47 5.40M 2.54 5 0.19 11.2M 2.10 3
*** No longer in commercial service
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
Likewise, jumbo and amazing if you get a wing seat to see the span of those up close. I believe this was one of Boeing's last great planes. That's where they should have thought when engineering Max...
Different generation though. I know one of the many engineers who worked on the Dreamliner and he's moved on from Boeing some years now.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
It's still waaaaay safer than driving. Ever wonder why they let you have a baby sit on your lap for free. It's not safe, if anything happens to the plane that baby will be bouncing around like a beach ball. But it is still much safer than just the chance of a parent choosing to drive instead.
Thaedolus
Gold Member
Thanks for posting this, some stuff I misremembered or never even knew about
Unknown Soldier
Member
NTSB focus on Boeing, Spirit assembly work after Alaska Airlines blowout
Initial NTSB findings focused squarely on the manufacture and installation of the door plug that fell off the Alaska Airlines 737 MAX 9 aircraft, leaving a gaping hole in the passenger cabin wall.
www.seattletimes.com
The noose is quickly tightening here for Boeing. I'm not sure how we can trust the airworthiness of any 737 MAX if we do find out this was a systematic problem with assembly at Spirit and Boeing, I wonder what else was made hastily and with slipshod quality on those planes?
crazepharmacist
Member
Good thing those diversity requirements didn’t start yet.
Thaedolus
Gold Member
Sounded like a female pilot on the ATC recording…
crazepharmacist
Member
So? Could be a merit based hire if she started before the new change.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked