• 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

Thaedolus

Gold Member
I wonder if the issue due to bad maintenance by the airline.
The plane was practically brand new, and this is just a plug where another optional emergency exit can be optioned...not sure how much maintenance a stationary part bolted to the plane needs in the first months of service.
 

Nvzman

Member
These Max planes are death traps

If its Boeing, I ain't going.

No seriously, fuck those planes, especially Max(es). I also loves how it expose USA as a country unable to do anything with people who are rich and powerful. If they don't ground it forever, McDonell Douglas will kill more people*.

*Boeing built good planes, before the merger with McDonell Douglas (which famously built death traps like DC-10/MD-11). In that merger, exec from McDonell Douglas took leadership. And shit went south.
Not defending Boeing but calling the Max planes death traps is completely ignorant and stupid. The original fiasco with the Max planes was due to the pilots themselves trying to fight and overcorrect the system (which while originally flawed, was not the actual cause of the accidents), it was largely pilot error. This situation is like what, one out of millions and millions of Max flights going on since their introduction?
This is a fucked up situation but let's not say straight up stupid shit.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
Not defending Boeing but calling the Max planes death traps is completely ignorant and stupid. The original fiasco with the Max planes was due to the pilots themselves trying to fight and overcorrect the system (which while originally flawed, was not the actual cause of the accidents), it was largely pilot error. This situation is like what, one out of millions and millions of Max flights going on since their introduction?
This is a fucked up situation but let's not say straight up stupid shit.
That's actually categorically false, as even Boeing says their shitty, made on the cheap, single sensor, MCAS played a major role in the accidents, do you work as a Boeing lobbyist or something?

Boeing's focus on financial engineering over, you know, actual engineering is well known and it's been the case for decades. I would say it's only a matter of time before their shittiness causes planes to fall out of the sky, but, well, we're past that point.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
Not defending Boeing but calling the Max planes death traps is completely ignorant and stupid. The original fiasco with the Max planes was due to the pilots themselves trying to fight and overcorrect the system (which while originally flawed, was not the actual cause of the accidents), it was largely pilot error. This situation is like what, one out of millions and millions of Max flights going on since their introduction?
This is a fucked up situation but let's not say straight up stupid shit.
I mean, it has probably more accidents per flighthour than most other types, so...no mention the quality control, recalls and so on.
 

Alebrije

Member
Good my local airline uses Airbus planes, I usually sit on emergency exits rows because extra space...just imagine being resting and sudenttly feel something is sucking your soul...
 
Last edited:

Nvzman

Member
That's actually categorically false, as even Boeing says their shitty, made on the cheap, single sensor, MCAS played a major role in the accidents, do you work as a Boeing lobbyist or something?

Boeing's focus on financial engineering over, you know, actual engineering is well known and it's been the case for decades. I would say it's only a matter of time before their shittiness causes planes to fall out of the sky, but, well, we're past that point.
Again not defending Boeing but I already said that the sensor played a role but it was also a component of the two pilots not understanding the system correctly. This isn't even coming from me, this is something coming from close friends who actually work in the industry. But seeming as how you are being hysterical and just pulling shill-cards out I'm not expecting a rational conversation. So continue believing what you want to believe.
 

Nvzman

Member
I mean, it has probably more accidents per flighthour than most other types, so...no mention the quality control, recalls and so on.

... There's four incidents across multiple different models. That's it. The original 737 was arguably more temperamental than the new one. Two of which had no fatalities.

Previous models had more problems on a yearly basis with things like metal fatigue when they were allegedly "less cheaply made".
 
Last edited:

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.

was seriously considering buying Spirit cause had a feeling it was more of Boeing's fault. Now looks like they're admitting it was theirs.


jeZ1bQH.png
 

Chittagong

Gold Member
Again not defending Boeing but I already said that the sensor played a role but it was also a component of the two pilots not understanding the system correctly. This isn't even coming from me, this is something coming from close friends who actually work in the industry. But seeming as how you are being hysterical and just pulling shill-cards out I'm not expecting a rational conversation. So continue believing what you want to believe.

You really need to watch at least one YouTube documentary or read one article in addition to speaking with your friends. The feature was undisclosed to the airlines and the pilots to avoid a training cost of 1MUSD per livery. So they had no idea why the plane would be nosediving and how to resolve it. There was an obscure mention in the iPad manual about it but once your nose is pointing down there is rarely time to start swiping your iPad to figure out how to resolve something you were not told could happen. It was fucked up greed.

During certification of the MAX, Boeing requested and received permission from the FAA to remove a description of MCAS from the aircraft manual, leaving pilots unaware of the system when the airplane entered service in 2017.[126][127] Boeing had also knowingly withheld knowledge, for at least a year before the Lion Air crash, that a system to warn of a possible AoA malfunction did not work as advertised.[128]
 
Last edited:
You really need to watch at least one YouTube documentary or read one article in addition to speaking with your friends. The feature was undisclosed to the airlines and the pilots to avoid a training cost of 1MUSD per livery. So they had no idea why the plane would be nosediving and how to resolve it. There was an obscure mention in the iPad manual about it but once your nose is pointing down there is rarely time to start swiping your iPad to figure out how to resolve something you were not told could happen. It was fucked up greed.


In most other industries you can think of, what Boeing got away with would have been prosecuted with criminal charges. But because Boeing is Too Big to Failand they are so critical to the US Government as a defense contractor, they basically got away with a slap on the wrist.

Also, this documentary should be required viewing before anyone pretends they know what they are talking about

 
It's best to acknowledge the facts as they are presented and then go from there instead of trying to shoehorn your own narrative into the situation with ungrounded hypotheticals.

Sure, it may not be relevant to the discussion at hand but let’s not pretend, no one wants a diversity hire as a pilot.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Sure, it may not be relevant to the discussion at hand but let’s not pretend, no one wants a diversity hire as a pilot.

I don't care if pilots are diversity hires, as long as they are competent and qualified for the job. If you are referencing a case where underqualified pilots are hired at the expense of qualifications in order to fulfill diversity quotas, I don't see how that is relevant to this case seeing as it looks like Boeing's problem is not due to diversity hires, but due to maximizing profit by skimping on safety standards and best practices. If you have reports of Boeing utilizing underqualified diversity hires, then that's a relevant point, but absent that, it's "ungrounded hypotheticals" and pushing your own preconceived notions.
 
Last edited:

Embearded

Member
Not defending Boeing but calling the Max planes death traps is completely ignorant and stupid. The original fiasco with the Max planes was due to the pilots themselves trying to fight and overcorrect the system (which while originally flawed, was not the actual cause of the accidents), it was largely pilot error. This situation is like what, one out of millions and millions of Max flights going on since their introduction?
This is a fucked up situation but let's not say straight up stupid shit.

You and your friend are repeating the Boeing propaganda.

The pilots of Lion 610 were never informed about MCAS. Basically with the exception of Boeing test pilots, no other pilot in the world knew that a SW would take control of the horizontal stabilizer.

An internal official Boeing report said that the pilots who were facing MCAS malfunction had 10 seconds to react before it became fatal.
How do you expect 2 pilots who are getting multiple malfunctions at the same time, react correct to a situation when they don't even know the existence of the system it is triggering it?

After Lion crash Boeing issues guidelines to the pilots for such a case and they hear for the first time about MCAS.

Ethiopian 302 happens and the pilots response is correct, we know it from the black box.
They cut off the power to the trim so now MCAS cannot control the horizontal stabilizer because it doesn't get any electricity.
The pilots have to manually move the stabilizer at a correct position but plane speed is too high and it's like trying to move tons of cement with 1 hand.

It was Boeing from the beginning, they are the only ones to blame. Having a friend in the industry doesn't say shit, sorry.
We have the documents, their internal documents, that prove their intention to hide critical information to pilots.
 
I don't care if pilots are diversity hires, as long as they are competent and qualified for the job. If you are referencing a case where underqualified pilots are hired at the expense of qualifications in order to fulfill diversity quotas, I don't see how that is relevant to this case seeing as it looks like Boeing's problem is not due to diversity hires, but due to maximizing profit by skimping on safety standards and best practices. If you have reports of Boeing utilizing underqualified diversity hires, then that's a relevant point, but absent that, it's "ungrounded hypotheticals" and pushing your own preconceived notions.

They’re going to hire someone who scored worse an academic tests, fewer flight hours, and whatever other metrics they use to rate pilots because of the color of their skin. That’s what a diversity hire is. Yes, they will meet the basic minimum requirement to fly a commercial airline but they won’t be the best person for the job. That’s scary and I don’t want to fly on an airline that doesn’t consider safety to be paramount.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
They’re going to hire someone who scored worse an academic tests, fewer flight hours, and whatever other metrics they use to rate pilots because of the color of their skin. That’s what a diversity hire is. Yes, they will meet the basic minimum requirement to fly a commercial airline but they won’t be the best person for the job. That’s scary and I don’t want to fly on an airline that doesn’t consider safety to be paramount.
Then we're working on different definitions. A qualified candidate is a qualified candidate. Do you have evidence or reasonable cause to suspect that qualifications were lowered in this case? If not it's just baseless speculation. Try to focus on the actual documented problems, not imagined ones that trigger your suspicions.
 
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.

Thanks for posting this. Watched it yesterday and it's really good.
 

Heimdall_Xtreme

Jim Ryan Fanclub's #1 Member

An Alaska Airlines Boeing 737-9 MAX, registration N704AL performing flight AS-1282 from Portland,OR to Ontario,CA (USA) with 171 passengers and 6 crew, was climbing out of Portland's runway 28L when one of the cabin windows/emergency exits and its holding panel as well as parts of one un-occupied seat (seat row 26) separated from the aircraft, the passenger oxygen masks were released. The crew donned their oxygen masks, stopped the climb at about 16,000 feet, declared emergency reporting depressurization of the aircraft in a very noisy transmission, initiated an emergency descent to 10,000 feet and returned to Portland for a safe landing on runway 28L about 20 minutes after departure. No injuries are being reported. An emergency exit and whole panel at the left hand side of the aircraft was missing.

The NTSB have opened an investigation into the occurrence.

Passengers reported a boy sitting in row 26 had his t-shirt sucked off him while his mother was holding on to him to prevent him being sucked out, too. Several phones were sucked out as well.



6cktvegy.jpg


Further information:



The FAA have already issued an emergency AD:

m3uh3mvv.jpg

I wouldn't even get on that airline for free.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
In most other industries you can think of, what Boeing got away with would have been prosecuted with criminal charges. But because Boeing is Too Big to Failand they are so critical to the US Government as a defense contractor, they basically got away with a slap on the wrist.

Also, this documentary should be required viewing before anyone pretends they know what they are talking about

My favorite moment of the show is that forgotten ladder inside Vertical Stabilizer in 787 on its first flight, truly unbeatable. If that shit would fell, or got stuck in that vertical flap, it would be truly interesting first flight.

Just checked our flights for summer hols to Ibiza, boeing 737 max 8. Think I'll not mention this to the wifey, as she already hates flying.
Morgan Freeman Good Luck GIF
 
Last edited:

Thaedolus

Gold Member
"These things do happen, it's impossible to quantify how frequently".

…? Doesn’t seem very impossible at all to calculate the failure rate of a part if failures are reported.
I think that could be interpreted as far as anomalous events are concerned…you can certainly test for a failure rate given a number of use cycles within normal expected parameters, but when an entire flock of Canadian geese are ingested into the engines or smack into the windshield…kinda hard to say what’s gonna happen.
 

jufonuk

not tag worthy
Think its safer flying on the plane than cancelling the holiday, wifey would chop my balls off, as we've not been away for a few years.

TUI. Will never fly with ryanair.
They are a good company TUI. Never flown them. For me ryan offer the cheapest option so I fly them. Headphones in just chill in the plane lol.
 
I don’t fly often. When you buy tickets, does it tell you what model plane you will be flying on?

Would like to know so I can actively avoid the max planes
 

Happosai

Hold onto your panties

Great article on Bloomberg, you'll need to 🔨 the 💰🧱
This one may help those with the history going back to the Max 8.


Haven't read this in awhile but when they grounded the first time (after the two fatal incidents due to MCAS); they publicized all of the engineering mistakes for a commercial aircraft in the Boeing Max 8/9. They examined everything from rear stabilizer bolts to the awful mounting order of the engines to the wings. The best possible future would be to recall all of these jets, scrap them and build a fleet of reliable commuter jets. They'd need a fresh start meaning...fire those engineers and rearrange C-suite to prevent orders like this from ever happening again. Have the new engineers spend 6-months studying up and down the work behind the 787 Dreamliner. Start there. All that scrapped supply from the Max? More than enough for the prototype but literally starting from scratch.
 

Happosai

Hold onto your panties
You can look at the company to see what planes they have. And the name of the flight will allow you to see what plane will be used in sites like flightaware.
I've noticed they tend to stick with regional flight paths. E.g. -- LAX to DFW. Just my speculation but with such short commuting...you'd think they were concerned to push the Max to go the distance. Like I said in my above post...grounding simply isn't enough. Full recall of every Max, scrap them, get rid of every Boeing Max engineer / re-hire Dreamliner engineers and use what they can to build a prototype with the 787 in mind. It'd be a huge price to pay but there are investors, a board and reputation on the line right now. Then again, none of this will likely happen as most big businesses like this hate admitting when they screw up on a colossal scale.
 

Daneel Elijah

Gold Member
Last edited:

diffusionx

Gold Member
There seem to be two concurrent issues, one is the 737 Max plane is a piece of shit and the other is that maintenance is slipping. The 2nd problem is more likely a result of the actual airlines skimping on maintenance (possibly in violation of the law) andd the FAA not being able to properly regulate this for whatever reason, or worse looking the other way like some third world country (actually the third world countries might be doing a better job at this point). And I think the 2nd problem is actually far worse because it could affect literally every single plane in every single fleet.
 
Last edited:

Cyberpunkd

Member
There seem to be two concurrent issues, one is the 737 Max plane is a piece of shit and the other is that maintenance is slipping. The 2nd problem is more likely a result of the actual airlines skimping on maintenance (possibly in violation of the law) andd the FAA not being able to properly regulate this for whatever reason. And I think the 2nd problem is actually far worse because it could affect literally every single plane in every single fleet.
Not really, since you can have a plane designed so well that even if shit hits the fan it should still save the passengers.
 

Thaedolus

Gold Member
There seem to be two concurrent issues, one is the 737 Max plane is a piece of shit and the other is that maintenance is slipping. The 2nd problem is more likely a result of the actual airlines skimping on maintenance (possibly in violation of the law) andd the FAA not being able to properly regulate this for whatever reason, or worse looking the other way like some third world country (actually the third world countries might be doing a better job at this point). And I think the 2nd problem is actually far worse because it could affect literally every single plane in every single fleet.
I always think it's funny when people see regulators as just dead weight, an economic drag, or red tape when they...literally keep people alive. And my entire career is basically arguing with regulators, but I know they serve a purpose even if they can be a bit aggravating to deal with.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
I always think it's funny when people see regulators as just dead weight, an economic drag, or red tape when they...literally keep people alive. And my entire career is basically arguing with regulators, but I know they serve a purpose even if they can be a bit aggravating to deal with.

It reminds me of that time Dave Rubin was on Joe Rogan's show and was arguing that less building regulation would be best and the market would balance itself out, and Joe was just like, are you serious right now?
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
It reminds me of that time Dave Rubin was on Joe Rogan's show and was arguing that less building regulation would be best and the market would balance itself out, and Joe was just like, are you serious right now?
The thing with regulations is that they need to be clear, direct, easy to interpret and implement, and not require stifling levels of documentation, auditing, and oversight such that the barrier to entry is overwhelming and the cost to do business crushes competition. When 3 inspectors can look over the same project and arrive at 5 different conclusions as to deficits and failure to meet standards, it's frustrating for all of us.

I work in an immensely regulated field so am well aware of the benefits and downsides to all of this, its hard to really balance it.
 
Top Bottom