Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

Post Reply
Desert Rat
Posts: 1139
Joined: 08 May 2007, 09:38

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by Desert Rat » 11 Jan 2020, 15:02

That starts to smell coco-loco business, A/C CG/ behaviour is out of realistic figures in some flight configutation.
And nothing can be done about it...
I'll not flying it, although I did twice in the past.
...good luck Boeing

Bracebrace
Posts: 195
Joined: 04 Apr 2006, 00:00

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by Bracebrace » 11 Jan 2020, 16:43

Even in official mails, people will use "bar-talk". Like pilots judging their management... not always realistic as they hardly ever (rather never) know the complete story as to why certain decisions were/are taken.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 35948
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by sn26567 » 13 Jan 2020, 22:23

Boeing is facing a bill of more than US$8 billion in compensation for airlines with B737 MAX exposure, with the bill rising by $1 billion every month, says aviation economist Chris Tarry.

The FAA proposes a US$5.4 million civil penalty against Boeing for allegedly installing nonconforming slat tracks on approximately 178 B737 MAX, which Boeing subsequently presented as ready for airworthiness certification.
André
ex Sabena #26567

simnam
Posts: 15
Joined: 22 Feb 2018, 10:12

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by simnam » 14 Jan 2020, 15:58

Just re-read EASA certification requirement for large aeroplane (CS-25) and found CS25.672 on stability augmentation system, which ecompass MCAS imho.

It basically says that in case of malfunction of such a system,
- there must be a clear warning to the pilot
- it must be possible to counteract the system without exceptionnal skills by acting directly on the flight controls or by switching off the system
- it must be designed so that in case of failure the aircraft remains controllable

It's a really short summary, read the requirement fully if you need details

Even if it is not directly a failure of the MCAS but a failure of the AoA sensor that led to intempesstive actionning of the MCAS, Airworthiness Authorities clearly can show Boeing their system is unsafe and must be deeply reviewed, and not just by "pimping it", which would explain the time needed by Boeing to have this problem fixed.

CS 25.672 Stability augmentation and
automatic and poweroperated systems


If the functioning of stability augmentation or
other automatic or power-operated systems is
necessary to show compliance with the flight
characteristics requirements of this CS-25,
such systems must comply with CS 25.671
and the following:
(a) A warning, which is clearly
distinguishable to the pilot under expected
flight conditions without requiring his attention,
must be provided for any failure in the stability
augmentation system or in any other
automatic or power-operated system, which
could result in an unsafe condition if the pilot
were not aware of the failure. Warning
systems must not activate the control systems.
(b) The design of the stability
augmentation system or of any other
automatic or power-operated system must
permit initial counteraction of failures of the
type specified in CS 25.671 (c) without
requiring exceptional pilot skill or strength, by
either the deactivation of the system, or a
failed portion thereof, or by overriding the
failure by movement of the flight controls in
the normal sense.
(c) It must be shown that after any single
failure of the stability augmentation system or
any other automatic or power-operated system
(1) The aeroplane is safely
controllable when the failure or malfunction
occurs at any speed or altitude within the
approved operating limitations that is
critical for the type of failure being
considered. (See AMC 25.672 (c) (1).)
(2) The controllability and
manoeuvrability requirements of this CS-25
are met within a practical operational flight
envelope (for example, speed, altitude,
normal acceleration, and aeroplane
configurations) which is described in the
Aeroplane Flight Manual; and
(3) The trim, stability, and stall
characteristics are not impaired below a
level needed to permit continued safe flight
and landing.

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 35948
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by sn26567 » 14 Jan 2020, 22:47

American Airlines now anticipates that the resumption of scheduled commercial service on American’s fleet of B737 MAX aircraft will occur 04 June 2020.

Ryanair could receive its first deliveries of up to 10 grounded B737 MAX from Boeing by April 2020, says Chief Marketing Officer Kenny Jacobs, but cautioned that the timing was dependent on regulators. But Ryanair does not rule out closing more bases in Spain if there are more delays in deliveries of the B737 MAX.
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 35948
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by sn26567 » 15 Jan 2020, 16:04

The winter is warmer in Tel Aviv than in Warsaw
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 35948
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by sn26567 » 16 Jan 2020, 23:10

Southwest Airlines says it doesn’t expect the B737 MAX to be included in its flight schedule until early June 2020.
André
ex Sabena #26567

User avatar
sn26567
Posts: 35948
Joined: 13 Feb 2003, 00:00
Location: Rosières/Rozieren, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Boeing 737 (MAX) news

Post by sn26567 » 17 Jan 2020, 23:44

New software flaw could further delay Boeing’s 737 MAX

The issue involves how software on the plane checks itself to ensure it’s receiving valid data, said a person familiar with the issue who wasn’t authorized to speak publicly about it. It occurs when the system is initially starting up, the person said.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... 37-max-jet
André
ex Sabena #26567

Post Reply