Auto-throttle is used deliver the optimum power. Strangely not every take-off requires full power, nor does it require instant power. The best example for this was Concorde, if you applied full power at very low speed there was the risk that one might damage the undercarriage and brakes so the auto-throttle system waited until a certain speed had been achieved before ramping up to maximum dry power and then being able to engage the afterburners - this delay was normally below a second, and the take-off run only about ten seconds from brake release to weight off wheels.) But, as you say the pilot monitoring should be keeping a watch on the instruments to make sure that everything is in order

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Pilots innured to repeated failures and ad-hoc operation

translation: Normalization of deviance.

I think that we can agree that is the case.

I think that we can also agree that such 'normalization' is deadly dangerous...

So...


What must Boeing do to stop this particular 'normalization' continuing to be a danger on their present and future aircraft?

(Merely telling the pilots "Don't do that!" is not a safe 'solution'...)


Fly safe?...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Auto-throttle is used deliver the optimum power. Strangely not every take-off requires full power, nor does it require instant power...

Indeed so...

My understanding is that there is great financial pressure to minimize the maximum thrust demanded of the jet engines... This financial pressure will undoubtedly be reflected in the instructions given to the pilots...

Hence, rather than more safely using the minimum of available runway (leaving lots of room for an abort), instead, a maximum of safe runway is used... However, that reduces the safety factor down to the minimum that is required by regulations for safe operation for an abort... Which keeps the pilots under pressure and 'on their toes'...

And I believe the minimum thrust financial requirement is due to the leasing costs of the engines increasing with operating at increased thrust.


My own personal training was to take off from the very end of whatever runway, and use maximum safe power to make for as short a takeoff as possible, so as to have the maximum chances to abort safely for whatever reasons...

(And none of this sneaking onto a runway via an early taxiway to then barely scrape off the far end of the runway from a rolling start, just so as to shave off a few seconds of engine time...)


Whatever might you imagine might go wrong with squeezing all the margins down to the minimums?...

Fly safe??
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Quite Martin and Boeing doesn't instruct the pilots, their airline, the people who write their paycheck, does that instruction so how does Boeing solve bad operators? Refuse to sell to them?

Safe SOP calculates all the numbers in advance and the PM verifies that the PF has stuff set correctly. Obviously that doesn't happen on the budgets with their underpaid and rookie pilots.

Quite Martin and Boeing doesn't instruct the pilots, their airline, the people who write their paycheck, does that instruction so how does Boeing solve bad operators? Refuse to sell to them?

Safe SOP calculates all the numbers in advance and the PM verifies that the PF has stuff set correctly. Obviously that doesn't happen on the budgets with their underpaid and rookie pilots.

I assume the same happens over there, similar to this this headline in The Telegraph a few weeks ago,

‘BA pays pilots £90k, Ryanair £70k – I’m on £30k, which is a bit demoralising’

Another report of below spec assembly, this time with the 787 Dreamliner.
Exclusive: Boeing investigates quality problem on undelivered 787s

PARIS/WASHINGTON/MONTREAL, June 13 (Reuters) - Boeing (BA.N), is investigating a new quality problem with its 787 Dreamliner after discovering that hundreds of fasteners have been incorrectly installed on the fuselages of some undelivered jets, two people familiar with the matter said.
The latest in a series of manufacturing snags affecting the U.S. planemaker involves incorrect "torquing" or tightening in a Boeing plant of more than 900 fasteners per plane - split equally between both sides of the jet's mid-body, they said.

Also in NYT, Spirit Aerosytems finds Counterfeit documentation for Titanium used for Boeing and Airbus.
F.A.A. Investigating How Counterfeit Titanium Got Into Boeing and Airbus Jets

Some recently manufactured Boeing and Airbus jets have components made from titanium that was sold using fake documentation verifying the material’s authenticity, according to a supplier for the plane makers, raising concerns about the structural integrity of those airliners.

The falsified documents are being investigated by Spirit AeroSystems, which supplies fuselages for Boeing and wings for Airbus, as well as the Federal Aviation Administration. The investigation comes after a parts supplier found small holes in the material from corrosion.

In a statement, the F.A.A. said it was investigating the scope of the problem and trying to determine the short- and long-term safety implications to planes that were made using the parts. It is unclear how many planes have parts made with the questionable material.

“Boeing reported a voluntary disclosure to the F.A.A. regarding procurement of material through a distributor who may have falsified or provided incorrect records,” the statement said. “Boeing issued a bulletin outlining ways suppliers should remain alert to the potential of falsified records.”

Another report of below spec assembly, this time with the 787 Dreamliner.
Exclusive: Boeing investigates quality problem on undelivered 787s

PARIS/WASHINGTON/MONTREAL, June 13 (Reuters) - Boeing (BA.N), is investigating a new quality problem with its 787 Dreamliner after discovering that hundreds of fasteners have been incorrectly installed on the fuselages of some undelivered jets, two people familiar with the matter said.
The latest in a series of manufacturing snags affecting the U.S. planemaker involves incorrect "torquing" or tightening in a Boeing plant of more than 900 fasteners per plane - split equally between both sides of the jet's mid-body, they said.

[...]

Thanks for that.

Personally, I am not at all reassured by the blase tone of the Boeing PR-machine response...

Also note:

... FAA said in a statement that Boeing disclosed it may have "improperly installed fuselage fasteners on some 787" jets. "The FAA is investigating and is working closely with Boeing to determine appropriate actions and to ensure an immediate fix in the production system."...

... sources said the affected fasteners had been torqued from the wrong side, using the head instead of the associated nut.

In January, Boeing issued a bulletin to suppliers that laid out practices to ensure bolts are properly torqued following inspections of 737 MAX 9s grounded in the wake of the blowout...

... So this is a wider problem beyond the 787 and beyond only recently?...

My personal understanding is that "torquing" the head of a bolt rather than the nut holding the bolt in place can give a very different result... This might even damage or stress and weaken the fixtures...


How have such fundamental problems permeated throughout Boeing?...

... And the Boeing suppliers also??...


Fly safe??!!!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Meanwhile, we have:


FAA Boss Mike Whitaker Testified To Senate, DOJ Investigating Boeing Over Erased Security Footage!



There are some rather awkward reveals in there from the language used...

And the blow-out and investigation continues?


Fly safe?!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

This latest Boeing in-flight 'incident', to my personal understanding, is very spooky and scary:


Blancolirio - SWA 737 Max-8 "Dutch Roll" Incident
wrote:

... 181 folks on board between
Phoenix and Oakland on Southwest
Airlines flight 746 a Boeing 737 Max 8
experienced a Dutch roll regained
control and landed safely at the
destination a postflight inspection
revealed damage...

... the NTSB has opened an
investigation...

... but once again
of course the cockpit voice recorder
which still even though this is a brand
new airport airplane does not comply
with the recent
legislation has been overwritten this
2022 model aircraft still only
had a 2 hour capable voice recorder...

... as soon as we start talking
about the rudder PCU and 737s those of
you that have been around a long enough
time remember that we lost two 737s back
in the early '90s a US Airways and a
United Airlines one and there was a
couple other incidents where they
finally discovered or found after three
years of investigation that there was a
fundamental flaw in the power control
unit of those early 737 designs and
those power control units have been
completely redesigned...

That's a deadly 'ooooer' come back to haunt!...

Note how Boeing only 'fixed' the critically deadly problems after two 737 aircraft were completely destroyed in the 1990's, and similarly so again recently for the two 737 Max aircraft destroyed. All on board all lost their lives...


This is one that needs clearing before another "It'll never fail" claim from Boeing is demonstrated otherwise yet again...

How many more "Yet agains"?...


Fly safe?!
Martin

PCU: Hydraulic Power Control Unit

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Southwest Airlines plane that did a ‘Dutch roll’ suffered structural damage, investigators say

A Boeing 737 Max suffered damage to parts of the plane’s structure after it went into a “Dutch roll” during a Southwest Airlines flight last month, U.S. investigators said Friday.
The incident happened as the jet cruised at 34,000 feet from Phoenix to Oakland, California, on May 25, but Southwest did not notify the National Transportation Safety Board about the roll or damage to the jetliner until June 7, the NTSB said.
“Following the event, SWA performed maintenance on the airplane and discovered damage to structural components,” the safety board said.
The NTSB comment could suggest that the incident was more serious than previously known, but aviation experts said it was too soon to know for sure.

Design flaw or lack of maintenance? I'm guessing the latter.

Design flaw or lack of maintenance? I'm guessing the latter.

All bets are off until we find out more...

There's also possibilities of turbulence, (inadvertent) pilot input, structural fatigue, corrosion, and whatever else...


Whatever, I'm personally rating that one as serious and deadly until we know further/otherwise.

Also worryingly, how is Boeing still flying cockpit voice recorders with a mere 2 hours record time?! Are those still yet going onto new planes??!!!


Fly safe?...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

A bad week for Boeing as multiple 'mishaps' align:


Investigation launched after Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 drops 'within 400ft' of Pacific Ocean
wrote:

The jet plunged at a maximum descent rate of about 4,400ft per minute off the coast of Hawaii before climbing back up to safety. It comes after a series of concerns over the safety of Boeing MAX aircraft...

... During the go-around - when a plane flies back up in the air after deciding not to land - the first officer "inadvertently pushed forward on the control column while following thrust lever movement commanded by the autothrottle", according to a memo sent to pilots and seen by the Reuters news agency.

The action sent the aircraft dangerously close to hitting the Pacific Ocean.

Safety data confirmed the crew received a "DON'T SINK oral warning" followed by a "PULL UP oral warning", the memo said, but the first officer later said the crew did not hear the warnings.

There were no reports of injuries...

Boeing Starliner set for June 22 undocking, return to Earth, NASA says
wrote:

... The Boeing Starliner spacecraft is now scheduled to undock from the International Space Station and return to Earth on June 22 with its inaugural astronaut crew ... giving more time to finalize planning...

... NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams were launched aboard Starliner June 5 and arrived at the ISS the next day, following a 24-hour flight in which the spacecraft encountered four helium leaks and five failures of its 28 maneuvering thrusters...

... targeting a departure no earlier than June 22, leaving open an opportunity for further extensions of time at the ISS...

... The spacecraft during its time docked to the ISS has encountered more problems. A fifth leak of helium - used to pressurize Starliner's propulsion system thrusters - popped up, and separately an oxidizer valve has been stuck...

Boeing tells DOJ it did not violate deal after 737 MAX crashes...
wrote:

... The U.S. planemaker was responding to a Justice Department determination in May that Boeing violated a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement (DPA). The DPA had shielded the company from a criminal charge arising from fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019 that killed 346 people...

... The Justice Department found in May that Boeing had failed to "design, implement, and enforce a compliance and ethics program to prevent and detect violations of the U.S. fraud laws throughout its operations," according to a court filing.

However, Reuters earlier this month reported that Boeing executives are unlikely to be criminally charged over fatal crashes as the statute of limitations has likely passed...

Phew! To my reading, what an ongoing deadly dangerous mix!!

From the best of my most uneducated personal understanding and observation:

Mmmmm... Highly trained proficient pilots can indeed unwittingly do the unexpected due to being overwhelmed by workload, stress, fatigue, difficult flying conditions... That they claim not to have heard the cockpit warnings, and were emotional about seeing the danger when replayed on a simulation, suggests they were unaware of the danger... Again, to me that suggests they were overloaded/overwhelmed during those moments... Does that suggest a problem of cockpit design, operation, training, operating procedures?... They were a frightening few seconds away from all-lives-lost.

Meanwhile, the Boeing Starliner sounds more ramshackle and unsafe than my first jalopy! Except for that old high mileage beyond-end-of-life insurance write-off rust bucket, at least I could coast to a stop at the side of the road and pull out my toolkit to swap out the spark plugs and distributor cap for the required always carried spares, upon all-too-many random occasions... Really, whilst attempting reentry, do our adventurous astronauts have the option to "turn it off and on again" yet again?... Is this an extreme case of "normalization" of common parts suffering multiple failures???.... (Common mode failure...)

And will Boeing and the Boeing Directors continue to escape all responsibility?


Fly safe with that?!!!


Flying on a wing and a prayer?

I hope your tarot cards are playing out right??...

Fly safe?!...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Also worryingly, how is Boeing still flying cockpit voice recorders with a mere 2 hours record time?! Are those still yet going onto new planes??!!!

They were until the FAA changed the rule. https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/media/25-Hr-CVR_NPRM_Issuance.pdf
Remember for a public company never spend a dime more than mandated on safety equipment. If you do the shareholders sue for their lost profits.

Mmmmm... Highly trained proficient pilots can indeed unwittingly do the unexpected due to being overwhelmed by workload, stress, fatigue, difficult flying conditions... That they claim not to have heard the cockpit warnings, and were emotional about seeing the danger when replayed on a simulation, suggests they were unaware of the danger... Again, to me that suggests they were overloaded/overwhelmed during those moments... Does that suggest a problem of cockpit design, operation, training, operating procedures?... They were a frightening few seconds away from all-lives-lost.

Please tell me where you are finding the information on these specific pilots? Southwest does not have the best reputation* and has a severe shortage of pilots.
As to training procedures, that is 100% on the airline and their check airmen.
Not hearing the warning, well that goes hand in hand with not being prepared and briefing so you stay ahead of the airplane.
Fatigue and stress from too many hours, too many flights, not enough sleep, not enough time off, bad labor fights with the union, that sounds just like an airline that has too many routes and not enough employees and managers screaming do it or you are fired!

*Dozens of runway incursions recently.

Families of victims killed in Boeing 737 MAX crashes seek $37 billion fine.

The families of victims who were killed in two separate Boeing 737 MAX plane crashes are seeking a criminal prosecution and a fine of $US24.78 billion ($37.1 billion) against the aerospace company.

In a letter to the Justice Department released on Wednesday, the families' lawyer Paul Cassel wrote that a maximum fine of more than $US24 billion is "legally justified and clearly appropriate" because "Boeing's crime is the deadliest corporate crime in US history".

Mr Cassel is representing 15 families across the two fatal crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia.......

That is very much needed for the good of all, including to drag Boeing out of an ongoing tragedy.


For just two painful reminders of the present USA political-judicial 'games':

Maximus Aviation - Sen.Hawley & Blumenthal DESTROY Boeing CEO With Facts! While Calhoun Faces The Hard Truth Today

Maximus Aviation - Mr. Calhoun You're Making Me ANGRY! Absolutely SHOCKING Exchange Between Boeing CEO And Senator


All amidst some shocking business practices?

Fly safe with that???!!!

Fly safe...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Now the US DoJ is looking seriously at Boeing being charged with a number of criminal offences:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0666zr4010o

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Now the US DoJ is looking seriously at Boeing being charged with a number of criminal offences:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0666zr4010o

The US judiciary has the power to impose fines on Boeing that could threaten its existence?

That would never happen in Europe with Airbus; it is too closely intertwined with the national interests of the UK, DE, FR, ES.

Now the US DoJ is looking seriously at Boeing being charged with a number of criminal offences:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0666zr4010o

The US judiciary has the power to impose fines on Boeing that could threaten its existence?

Technically, but DOD would never let that happen, or they would have to do an ATT and split the company.