Boeing: Profits 1st, Safety 2nd? (Part 3)

Author	Message
Scrooge McDuck Send message Joined: 26 Nov 99 Posts: 1495 Credit: 1,674,173 RAC: 54	Message 2145732 - Posted: 28 Jan 2025, 13:27:40 UTC https://www.faa.gov/travelers/fly_safe/turbulence ID: 2145732 · Reply Quote

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31209 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32	Message 2145926 - Posted: 2 Feb 2025, 15:42:04 UTC I'm sure Martin will find some way to blame Boeing https://abcnews.go.com/US/plane-wing-strikes-ground-vehicle-injuring-driver-ohare/story?id=118357687 ID: 2145926 · Reply Quote

Scrooge McDuck Send message Joined: 26 Nov 99 Posts: 1495 Credit: 1,674,173 RAC: 54	Message 2145951 - Posted: 3 Feb 2025, 8:51:58 UTC Hardly, since the aircraft was a CRJ200. ID: 2145951 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2145994 - Posted: 3 Feb 2025, 22:50:50 UTC Last modified: 3 Feb 2025, 22:52:55 UTC Boeing rearranges some of the deckchairs? Boeing Acquires Spirit AeroSystems, While Boeing's 'Starliner' Unit Gets a New VP Meanwhile, the Directors and Chair continue to enjoy their costly cosy alternate dreamworld... ... Wasn't Spirit sold for profit supposedly for the very same reasons it is now being bought back?... Fly safe with that? Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2145994 · Reply Quote

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31209 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32	Message 2146077 - Posted: 5 Feb 2025, 23:26:36 UTC This just has to be Boeing's fault ... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/japan-airlines-delta-airlines-seattle-tacoma-rcna190358 ID: 2146077 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146081 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 1:11:47 UTC - in response to Message 2146077. Last modified: 6 Feb 2025, 1:12:52 UTC This just has to be Boeing's fault ... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/japan-airlines-delta-airlines-seattle-tacoma-rcna190358 Your comment in jest is quite a bit of a stretch... ... Unless you're referring to the wingspan of the Boeing 787-9 which is (unexpectedly? troublesomely??) much greater than that for their previous versions of passenger aircraft...? More seriously: The uptick in USA Air Traffic Control 'incidents', and USA airport Ground Control 'incidents', is worthy of another deadly thread. Fly safe?! Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146081 · Reply Quote

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31209 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32	Message 2146082 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 1:40:17 UTC - in response to Message 2146081. This just has to be Boeing's fault ... https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/japan-airlines-delta-airlines-seattle-tacoma-rcna190358 Your comment in jest is quite a bit of a stretch... ... Unless you're referring to the wingspan of the Boeing 787-9 which is (unexpectedly? troublesomely??) much greater than that for their previous versions of passenger aircraft...? Why heavens everyone knows the height of the 737 tail makes it impossible to be seen from a proper Airbus cockpit; why did Boeing make it so low ... . ID: 2146082 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146083 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 2:14:08 UTC - in response to Message 2146082. No Airbus was involved. Note how it is Boeing that hogs the news, and for all the wrong reasons... Fly safe folks! Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146083 · Reply Quote

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31209 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32	Message 2146087 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 6:37:30 UTC - in response to Message 2146083. No Airbus was involved. Never said there was, but still too low for a proper cockpit like an airbus. **only airbus are "proper" Boeing is therefore "improper," and numerous other derogatory adjectives. ID: 2146087 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146095 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 13:15:14 UTC - in response to Message 2146087. Oh... I take it that you are in some way upset about the Boeing 737 still keeping to an outdated 1960's layout, despite deadly reality over the intervening years demonstrating that newer safer cockpits are a 'better' way to fly...? Even Boeing themselves use better and safer cockpits in their other aircraft! Why not so for the ongoing saga of the Boeing 737? And then there is the corporate greed scrimping on every last fastener... So much so that the doors fall off!!! Fly safe with that? Fly safe folks?? Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146095 · Reply Quote

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31209 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32	Message 2146101 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 13:59:37 UTC - in response to Message 2146095. Ah, I see you dislike being "current and qualified" to be restricted to one aircraft type at a time. You need to take that up with insurance companies. ID: 2146101 · Reply Quote

Scrooge McDuck Send message Joined: 26 Nov 99 Posts: 1495 Credit: 1,674,173 RAC: 54	Message 2146112 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 17:01:32 UTC - in response to Message 2146095. Last modified: 6 Feb 2025, 17:17:26 UTC Even Boeing themselves use better and safer cockpits in their other aircraft! Why not so for the ongoing saga of the Boeing 737? They had three options when deciding on 737 Max, its cockpit or "NMA" (New Midsize Aircraft) instead. 737 Max retaining the NG cockpit and its type certificate (remember the large fleets of NGs at most major airlines) all-new design "NMA" with imponderable risks in design costs and time to market 737 Max with a modern cockpit; different type certificate; forcing customers to bear permanent costs of less flexibility deploying pilots If they had chosen option 2, without the Max, they would have lost the single aisle market almost completely to Airbus within a few years due to the superior A320/321neo with the possibility of winning back the market share of the larger A321neo a decade later (and provide 757 customers a modern replacement). You don't design two all-new airplanes within a decade (cf. 787). Boeing took the least risky option which would have proven to be right, if not this MCAS madness had happened which (beside the hundreds of victims) resulted in lost years in the competition with Airbus. In the end, the MCAS delays, penalties and compensation costs; the loss of market share outweighed all disadvantages and risks the "NMA" would have meant. A bitter fate. Boeing management could not have known this back then. Their decision to construct the 737 Max and retain the old cockpit was justified. But hiding MCAS from regulators as well as pilots to avoid strict review and simulator training for Max pilots was a grave mistake. ID: 2146112 · Reply Quote

Scrooge McDuck Send message Joined: 26 Nov 99 Posts: 1495 Credit: 1,674,173 RAC: 54	Message 2146113 - Posted: 6 Feb 2025, 17:10:40 UTC ID: 2146113 · Reply Quote

W-K 666 Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19585 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67	Message 2146130 - Posted: 7 Feb 2025, 1:12:08 UTC - in response to Message 2146113. Not much of an upgrade. You can do similar for a Cessna 172. ID: 2146130 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146297 - Posted: 11 Feb 2025, 13:53:46 UTC This one is scary... It has happened multiple times... It's happening... And... See for yourselves: This System KILLS in 39 Seconds and Nothing is Being DONE! So... Why is that still in operation? If it's Boeing 737, I ain't going! Fly safe folks... Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146297 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146303 - Posted: 11 Feb 2025, 18:35:55 UTC - in response to Message 2146297. Last modified: 11 Feb 2025, 18:39:31 UTC This System KILLS in 39 Seconds and Nothing is Being DONE! Simply deadly disturbing... The Airbus A320neo uses the same/similar system, but also has an "Emergency Ram Air" port... What are the Airbus procedures?... We have long had far better and safer ways as are already in use on more recent aircraft... Why stay with the deadly dangerous ways of decades ago? Fly safe?? Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146303 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146314 - Posted: 12 Feb 2025, 0:19:47 UTC And lingering on, we have: Boeing's 'Starliner' Also Experienced an Issue on Its Return to Earth wrote: "... unclear how a decision was made to waive a failure tolerance requirement on some of the thrusters without flight or qualification data to justify the decision. "These examples illustrate the panel's concern that, absent role clarity, risk management choices could unintentionally devolve to contractors, whose interests may not fully align with NASA's,"... ... also revealed that in addition to the thruster and leak issues on the propulsion module driving the decision to fly home without astronauts, Starliner had a new issue as it made its way back to Earth... ... "While the thruster issues have received considerable attention, the panel has previously noted other Starliner issues that require resolution prior to certification," it stated. That includes a battery redesign and work to strengthen the landing airbag apparatus... ... And so Boeing were pushing very hard to needlessly risk the lives of Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams... Fly safe with that?... Instead: Fly safe folks! Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146314 · Reply Quote

Gary Charpentier Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 31209 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32	Message 2146316 - Posted: 12 Feb 2025, 1:58:47 UTC - in response to Message 2146303. Why stay with the deadly dangerous ways of decades ago? You say decades? CFM LEAP-1B introduced 22 May 2017. Not even one decade. ID: 2146316 · Reply Quote

rob smith Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 7 Mar 03 Posts: 22735 Credit: 416,307,556 RAC: 380	Message 2146329 - Posted: 12 Feb 2025, 10:34:49 UTC - in response to Message 2146303. Given that the CFM 56 series of engines powers the vast majority of A32x neo (.7a) and B737 (.7b) max it would be interesting to compare the design packs that were delivered to Airbus and Boeing and what these packs say about the "self balancing" feature that both engine sub-types have. Were both manufacturers told that in the event of failure of a fan blade oil would leak into the inlet side of the engine compressor? I do find it somewhat worrying that in the event of a fan blade failure the self balancing feature causes the loss of oil from the (fan drive?) gearbox, and that this can enter the cabin & cockpit "fresh" air supply Bob Smith Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society) Somewhere in the (un)known Universe? ID: 2146329 · Reply Quote

ML1 Volunteer moderator Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 25 Nov 01 Posts: 21681 Credit: 7,508,002 RAC: 20	Message 2146330 - Posted: 12 Feb 2025, 10:35:24 UTC - in response to Message 2146316. Last modified: 12 Feb 2025, 10:39:44 UTC Why stay with the deadly dangerous ways of decades ago? You say decades? CFM LEAP-1B introduced 22 May 2017. Not even one decade. I'm talking about the use of jet engine bleed air, bypass air, to pressurise the cockpit and passenger cabin... There has long been the acknowledgement of the pilots, crew, passengers, all suffering from a toxic engine oil mist in the aircon air. All not healthy. Both Airbus and Boeing moved to using electrically powered aircon, for much cleaner air, for their later aircraft. And now... With the new engines on the Boeing 737 and on (some of?) the Airbus A320neo, the problem of engine oil in the aircon is now very potently deadly... A retrofit to go all electric for the aircon is all very doable... Yet that is not going to be done in the present way of things. The modified takeoff/landing procedures at least would avoid the dangers at the most demanding/critical parts of the flight... Yet there's a no-go for that even! A deliberate ploy to deny the problem? Is it the doomed scenario highlighted here what befell the latest 737 disaster in South Korea recently, that then forced the pilots to make such a desperately rushed landing? Fly safe?... Martin See new freedom: Mageia Linux Take a look for yourself: Linux Format The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3) ID: 2146330 · Reply Quote

©2025 University of California

SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.