אתר זה משתמש בקוקיות. המשך השימוש והניווט שלך באתר מביע את הסכמתך לכך.
סגור
האם ידעת שמעקב הטיסות של FlightAware נתמך על ידי פרסום?
תוכל לעזור לנו לוודא ש-FlightAware יישאר חינמי בכך שתאשר קבלת מודעות מ-flightaware.com. אנו מתאמצים מאוד להקפיד על כך שהמודעות שלנו יהיו רלוונטיות ולא מטרידות כדי ליצור עבורך חוויית משתמש מעולה. מהיר וקל לכלול את המודעות של FlightAware ברשימה הלבנה ואפשר גם לשקול את האפשרות ליצור חשבונות פרמיום.
סגור
Back to Squawk list
  • 47

Boeing Opens Paris Air Show With 737 MAX Apology

נשלח לפני
 
Boeing have opened the first day of the Paris Air Show by apologizing for the two crashes involving their 737 MAX aircraft. As Airbus celebrate the launch of their latest model, the A321XLR, the mood in the Boeing camp is far more somber as they reflect on the 737 MAX disasters and how that will affect them going forward. While plane makers usually use the global stage of the Paris Air Show to demonstrate their newest and best technology, Boeing are using it for something else. Still reeling… (simpleflying.com) עוד...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Lib4ever
Maxwell Johnson 19
737 pilot here. No one gets a free pass on this one. The FAA has become slack and careless. Boeing made some serious errors and created the situation in which these disasters could occur. The performance of the pilots was shockingly inept. For all of Boeing's misdeeds and all the FAA's sloppy oversight, sharp, on the ball pilots could have completed these flights, written up the problems, and everyone could have gone on about their business. All the jeering and finger pointing accomplishes nothing. Everyone involved needs to get on the ball, fix the problems, and move on.
bettiem
bettiem 2
Agreed. And thank you. But in the matter of "and move on", I don't think that the fare-paying public will bother to get informed before choosing who's BUY button they click on.
roseney
Javier Roseney 1
I don't agree about the pilots. After seeing the simulations I can see where the pilots lost control of the situation but I am not sure If I were faced with the same situation, climbing at MCT and accelerating to 250k, and all of a suden the nose pitches down I could have reacted fast enough without knowing first about MCAS and the previous accidents. Lets look at the same scenario but this time with one pilot getting up to go to the lav. There is no way to retrim without the help of another pilot. Boeing should fix this design and get rid of the MCAS.
siriusloon
siriusloon 15
I can't wait to see what all the apologists who posted on here that it was anyone but Boeing's fault will say now that Boeing says it was indeed their fault. It must really suck to have your spin and excuses cut out from under you like that.
rebelx4xchrist
Paul Smith 4
I am pretty sure Boeing knew they were ultimately to blame for their lapse but their legal team would not allow them to admit that publicly for obvious legal reasons. I’m not sure if you’ve been aware but almost every company in the middle of a legal hurdle is slow to admit blame (in legal terms). Regardless this plane will surely be back in the air safer than ever.
KobeHunte
Kobe Hunte 1
Well said and very true. I am glad Boeing finally took full responsibility for the accidents.
jeliop
John Eliopoulos -2
They didn’t. The pilot have equal share in the accidents.
lynx318
lynx318 2
The pilots in only as much as the airlines and Boeing not giving them training.
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 1
The airlines then.
bettiem
bettiem 1
And the airlines. And does the FAA have a clear conscience? An aircraft that is aerodynamically and structurally sound does not crash except under extreme, extraordinary circumstances. As far as I can perceive, there was no factor that was either extreme or extraordinary about the flight crew. So how can the pilots be the cause? So we come back to Boeing and ask if something about the aircraft was extraordinary in such a way as to introduce unsound aerodynamics.
Quirkyfrog
Robert Cowling -5
This is face saving theatre. If the board had pushed out the CEO, and thins in management that were so laser focused on profit, THEN I'd believe it.

Nothing has changed, except they got caught sloppily killing people for profit.

I'm sure that the 'rot' is still there, and goes much deeper than anyone ever wants to admit.
bentwing60
bentwing60 -2
"It must really suck to have your spin and excuses cut out from under you like that".

Pretty raw. Don't know what you do for a living, tell the world, but I think I declared about the time this place started what I do. Flyin is a good game and there are those that really aren't suited for the game. You might be one. But there seem to be plenty here that know more than I or many others that comment here with some knowledge of settin a five piece harness on a shoddy day. And for the downvoting morons here, it is imperative to have some level of trust and faith in the equipment in which you do it. For you folks that want to destroy the reputation of a U.S. company that has taken Billions on profitable bidness trips, vacations, bereavement trips, whatever, The fact remains, they fessed up, the soy boys have lost a ton in the stock market and your high horse grows wearisome.
jeliop
John Eliopoulos -6
Nothing was cut out. Millions of flight hours resulted in TWO accidents flown by inept pilots from banana "republics". Go worship at your Airbus shrine.
bentwing60
bentwing60 -3
And what for profit company/corporation would belly up to the Bar without really having a thorough understanding of the events that lead up to the accidents? The lion Air boys were ready to shut down the search after the FDR was recovered and without recovery of the CVR even though everyone knew it couldn't be more than a few hundred meters away. And would prove that the crew hadn't a clue what was going on. The ethiopians sent the orange boxes to the EU to decode, thus depriving Boeing and the FAA of the original decode and another misdirect to attach all liability to Boeing. With the current and historical litigious designs by which the GA piston bidness was destroyed in the 80s, no one of sound mind would not assume a defensive posture until the relevant facts were known and the Boeing soy boys did own up to it when they knew it was in their self interest! That last sentence might indicate that this comment is not in support of Boeing and the soy boy management but more a refutation of the constant gangbanging of the circus in the stands. Even a loon might be right here, but it certainly doesn't display any consideration of objectivity.
kd7eir
Jim Myers -3
I came here to say exactly the same thing. I'm sure it will be nothing but silence from that crowd.
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
gorsedwa
gorsedwa 4
Let's talk about Boeing's attempt to drive Bombardier out of business with their vastly superior aircraft!
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 2
Bombardier is absolute garbage.
andromeda07
andromeda07 2
And did they apologize to the families of the victims?
lynx318
lynx318 1
Sorta but not what I'd fully accept.
-Greg Smith, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President of Enterprise Performance and Strategy, saying,
“The tragedy of Lion Air and Ethiopian accidents certainly weighs on all of us and words simply cannot express the sorrow and the sympathy that we feel for the families and the loved ones of those that were lost in these tragic accidents. These accidents have only intensified our efforts to ensure the highest level of safety and quality in everything we do.”
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 1
The same way Airbus apologized for Air France Flight 447 and it’s faulty frozen pitot tubes?
lynx318
lynx318 3
Last line of the apology...
"These accidents have only intensified our efforts to ensure the highest level of safety and quality in everything we do.”
Because this incident showed their lowest level.
northrivernw
steven iltz 1
Not many companies can take shots below the waterline especially in the airliner business and survive. It will take years to recover from the major mistakes that are self inflicted from trying to work around a design problem, and a common type rating requirement. The 737 series has been a great plane to fly, and a work horse, but its time for a new replacement that will allow additional growth options.
shenghaohan
Shenghao Han 1
Its a good start.

And I blame the legal team from delaying the marketing team’s damage control... (imagine handling 300+ lawsuits and potentially have past crashes come back to bite you), but still, now the ship is half way underwater...
twinsemi
Tom Winsemius 1
Legal just does what legal does. It is the top management that gives them their authority. Given the time frame for the original decisions, it is probably not the current CEO that caused this, but the previous one. For several years, Boeing did not have a technically trained CEO. Not only Boeing, but the crews, passengers and their families are paying the price for that mistake.
DSHartje
Dwight Hartje 1
Somehow I feel this apology while it is appreciated wasn't needed. I mean like Boeing has already multiple times "apologized" for the two MAX crashes and for sure when the software update is live and done the 737 MAX will become one of the safest aircraft to fly ever.
rebelx4xchrist
Paul Smith 7
I agree. I just think there is a big faction within the Aviation community that cares less about the loss of life and more about their insatiable thirst to see Boeing fail.. Not sure why but many have taken the manufacturer rivalries to a new level.
DSHartje
Dwight Hartje 11
Agreed. The whole Boeing vs. Airbus rivalry is not going away anytime soon as much as I really hate it and how really annoying it is as well. Plus frankly the industry needs Boeing and Airbus to stay in business to prevent a mononpoly.
redlegsfan21
Dan Betts 3
I used to be a "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going" guy but the company has seemed so corrupt and/or incompetent recently. The whole C-Series dumping issue, the issues with the KC-767, and the 737 MAX issues have seriously put bad light on Boeing. I don't know if Boeing being a US company means more light is shown on them compared to Airbus but Boeing just doesn't seem like a company I would want to deal with.
MultiComm
MultiComm 5
I understand that sentiment but as a 767 pilot, I still prefer the Boeing product over Airbus. I can’t realky compare my type with that of a Airbus as the 767 is old technology but if anything the control wheel logic is much more safety friendly so both pilots know exactly what is going on.
lecompte2
lecompte2 -1
Didn't work out too well in the swamp last month did it in a 767
smoke1
Burt Bujard Jr. 1
This is all irrelevant. 300 plus people lost there lives due to greed and competition. One day those Boeing seniors are going to meet their maker and have a lot to explain. I’ve always been a Boeing guy never flown on an Airbus and this hurts...I hope they get it right..
ceja111
Edgar Reyes 1
Not a bright move to bring the 737max to the air show. It shows still trying to push a defective plane after hundreds of people died for the profit mindset of the company. I guess the profit first mindset still there even the plane is still grounded. Change all top management BOEING. The action of bringing the killer plane to the show is not well taken by the public.
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 2
That’s why they sold two hundred of them, because it was a bad idea.
ceja111
Edgar Reyes 0
let see how many people will stay away from those 200
BluSTi
James Willich 2
I don't have any trips planned, but I'd get on a 737M without hesitation.
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 2
ceja111
Edgar Reyes 1
Sure JUUUSSSTTTT ME: Aparently you have not been reading lately. :)
( https://www.businessinsider.com/americans-dont-want-to-fly-boeing-737-max-survey-2019-3 )
( https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-boeing-737-max-fliers-avoid-20190604-story.html )
( https://bgr.com/2019/06/05/boeing-737-max-8-crash-reason-details/ )
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 2
I don’t read Communist propaganda, and neither should you. Got my vacation booked flying IN a 737 MAX.
ceja111
Edgar Reyes 1
So u do not have an open mind about the 737 max opinion of the public IN GENERAL because is comunist propaganda? u say, so LA TImes is a comunist propaganda u say? Here is the ling again since u niss it. Ok buddy u are just a Boeing employee or not too bright. C U.
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 2
Yes to everything (especially the LA Times!), but I’m not a Boeing employee and I’m not your buddy, clown.
johnnyg77083
John Giles 1
jcwyer
John Wyer 1
After reading this article and the comments below, I wholeheartedly agree that there were numerous "fault" producing instances involved here. Boeing primarily, but pilot training and skill sets definitely contributed to the issue. The FAA certainly shares some of the blame as well. I am glad to hear from veteran pilots on this issue. As a result of all this reportage and, sadly, huge loss of life, these and future Boeing planes will be even safer and I would not hesitate to fly a Boeing 737 800MAX in the future.
evacristina
Francisco Martinez 0
Runaway Stabilizer

1. Control column...Hold firmly
2. Auto pilot (if engaged)...Disengage
3. Autothrottle (if engaged)...Disengage
5. If runaway continues STAB TRIM CUTOUT (switches both)...CUTOUT

Any questions class?
lecompte2
lecompte2 2
What if the aircraft is 40 degrees nose up and approaching the stall, both engines at full power and you push forward with your tiny elevator. Then what, that's my question
evacristina
Francisco Martinez 1
That’s why MCAS is necessary. I was merely referring to the emergency procedures that every pilot should memorize to avoid another completely unnecessary loss of life.
lecompte2
lecompte2 1
Could it be this aircraft is so badly designed that a computer operated system is required to bring the nose down approaching a stall, and in his stall recovery the pilot applies full power the nose of the aircraft will come up making the situation critical ?
evacristina
Francisco Martinez 1
“IF” those scenarios ever happen, then the pilots will be to blame because, like Captain Joe likes to say “a good pilot is always learning”
bettiem
bettiem 0
I have a haunting hunch that consumers will not bother to be fully informed before making their choices when booking flights. Thus they will avoid flying Boeing, regardless of aircraft type, whenever they can. So I also bet that for civilian aircraft, Boeing will go down the toilet. - - Furthermore, I suggest that Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd. (COMAC) is adjusting plans to fill the opportunity gap. Interesting times!
kd7eir
Jim Myers -4
Once the stockholders sue the board and CEO for the BILLIONS in losses that they caused with this self-inflicted fiasco, I doubt that Boeing will ever be a major player in the international aviation industry again. The USA will continue to keep them on life support purchasing military aircraft, until a few military planes suffer the same fate as the 737 Max.

So far the only real ACTION that Boeing has taken is to discuss removing the word "Max" from the name of the affected aircraft.
rebelx4xchrist
Paul Smith 6
Boeing will be fine. I know many of you have a Bias against them but that holds no credence in the real world. A bump in the road but a valuable lesson to the industry. Who’s equally to blame for this is the politicians in Washington who willfully cut funding to the FAA year after year. If it were not for that (plus the untimely government shutdown) this possibly would’ve been fixed before any of these incidents occurred.
dav555
dav555 -5
Your assertion that the FAA funding reduction is equally to blame for Boeing's screw up is complete nonsense. The cut amounted to about 2% which should not affect any agency's ability to perform its job. Just cutting a tiny fraction of the lucrative benefits and salaries that federal govt. employees enjoy would accomplish that. Your post is clearly political propaganda. I'll bet that if this had happened, oh, about 3 years ago, you wouldn't have said a word.
rebelx4xchrist
Paul Smith 7
the FAA has continued to receive funding cuts for years. The change in procedure that ultimately led to the oversight during certification didn't happen overnight.
Quirkyfrog
Robert Cowling 4
Their, and most other agencies budget cuts started with 'Sequestration' under the GOP heavy congress in 2013. They seemed sure that by gutting funding across the board that they could prove, once and for all, that government doesn't work, and should be disbanded (drowned in a bathtub).

Sequestration hobbled much of the government, and worked more brutally than a tax cut to lower the levels of services being provided by government. Agencies found their budgets slashed, and had to try to carry on, with no hope of the end of it. Remember this every time this administration 'cuts budgets'. They are already working with the smallest budgets many agencies have ever had, and budgets are being chopped even more.

The FAA lets Boeing inspect its own aircraft, and the FDA lets meat packers inspect their own processing lines, and products, and pharmaceutical companies inspect their own products, among many ridiculous examples of 'trust' brought on by severe budget cuts. This kind of trust is unheard of in other countries. Who would think anyone could/should trust corporations at that level, but considering the budgets available, what other options are available, and it's a problem only geting worse.

Eventually someone has to pay for the operation of the government. Through money, or lives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_budget_sequestration_in_2013
dav555
dav555 1
I don't actually support cuts to important agencies like the FAA, however I worked for a federally-funded institution and have friends and relatives who work for the federal govt. and I can assure you that the employees have salaries and benefits, like pensions and health care coverage for life after only 20 years, tons of vacation and sick leave, and very good health insurance, all of which costs a tremendous amount of taxpayer money. If these salaries and benefits were brought in line with what most private sector employees get then the budgets could probably be cut by a lot more with no effect on the agency's ability to do its job. A similar situation occurred when the defense budget was cut by a small amount due to sequestration and the generals claimed that they would no longer be able to protect the country. No one thought about maybe closing some military bases in Europe which are no longer necessary, or getting better deals from military contractors and vendors. We will never get our deficit under control without budget cuts, but alas I don't think it will ever happen until there's a real debt crisis. This isn't a partisan issue so blaming it on the GOP isn't valid.

rebelx4xchrist
Paul Smith 3
Blaming Boeing (justified) but neglecting to also blame the agency in charge of oversight is in fact ignoring the big picture. If you add the FAA to the equation then you have to remember those who are in charge of funding them.
BluSTi
James Willich 1
Should we assume you've never taken a Tylenol since 1982?
jeliop
John Eliopoulos 0
😂😂😂Now the Eurotrash and their illegal subsidies talk.
lecompte2
lecompte2 -2
Boeing has willfully constructed a faulty and dangerous aircraft for financial gain. Management were advised of the design faults by their own engineers and continued anyway even hiding the existence of MCAS to purchasers and pilots, causing great prejudice to passengers and airlines even the death of hundreds of people. The FAA permitted Boeing this criminal behavior because of political reasons and incompetence. Boeing Management is still there probably trying to continue selling this faulty and dangerous aircraft. Some intervention is required here to stop this from continuing.

כניסה לאתר

עדיין אין לך חשבון? הירשם כעת (ללא תשלום) כדי ליהנות מתכונות מותאמות-אישית, מהתראות טיסה ועוד!