Boeing 737 Max
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Friday, August 21, 2026 17:40
VIEWED: 21693
PAGE 14 of 22
I don't fly.
I don't care.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Didn't St Obama sign that budget? Doesn't the buck stop with the President?
Quote:So? What does that have to do with your idiocies about Trump being responsible for everything bad and St Obama responsible for nothing? What does that have to do with your huge and morally corrupt double standards?
Originally posted by SLOPPY:
First point: "The buck stops here" is President Harry S Truman's motto. Truman nuked hundreds of thousands of civilians.
Quote:Not only is that claim dishonest, it's severely factually wrong. The OMB (executive branch - in case you don't know it that's the presidential branch) creates the budget and proposes it to Congress. "The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 requires the President to submit the budget to Congress for each fiscal year". Then the CBO studies it and each house may or may not pass a version which may or may not be amended. "There is no obligation for either or both houses of Congress to pass a budget resolution. There may not be a resolution every year; if none is established, the previous year's resolution remains in force. For example, the Senate has not passed a budget resolution for FY2011, FY2012, or FY2013".
Originally posted by SLOPPY:
Second point: Congress writes the budget; not the President.
Quote:
Originally posted by SLOPPY:
I have heard a thousand times the President blamed for what Congress did. If the President does NOT sign the budget, it is equivalent to the President nuking the Federal Government. See Nagasaki, Hiroshima, and Truman for how destructive that is.
And then the president may veto the budget - as did Clinton ("Further information on the vetoed appropriations bills in 1995: United States federal government shutdown of 1995 and 1996") and St Obama (December 30, 2009: Vetoed H.J.Res. 64, a joint resolution making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2010, and for other purposes. Override attempt failed in House, 143–245, 1 present (260 needed).").
And guess what? The government wasn't annihilated in a governmental nuclear holocaust.
Quote:Jeeze - I don't know SLOPPY.
Originally posted by SLOPPY:
Third point: From years of experience, I know you will never stop misunderstanding how government works and who is responsible for what, 1kiki. Not understanding is one of your defining characteristics, along with your feeling that you know what you don't know.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Isn't it you who posted claims that are entirely wrong?
And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anyway - to get back to St Obama somehow not being responsible for the budgets he signed - yanno, especially the ones that underfunded the FAA that led to the manufacturer-driven approval procedure for the 737 Max -
Care to try again, SLOPPY?
The question - how is St Obama not responsible for the budgets he signed?
And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Federal investigators say the FAA’s Boeing 737 Max inspectors were insufficiently trained
The FAA’s Office of Audit and Evaluation in February said it found that 16 of 22 safety inspectors did not complete formal training while 11 of the 16 lacked flight-instructor certificates.
The FAA told a Senate panel in April 2019 that all Boeing 737 Max inspectors who worked on the Flight Standardization Board that sets pilot training and procedures were qualified, but the Special Counsel’s office said its findings contradicted that.
www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/federal-investigators-faas-boeing-737-max-insp
ectors-were-underqualified.html
The FAA and its European counterpart, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), were also called out for being aware of an unusual method for controlling the Max's nose angle, which may have been an issue in the recent disasters concerning the aircraft, a document shows.
Although the EASA said that the additional procedures and training would "clearly explain" to pilots the need to manipulate a rarely-used manual wheel, these were not listed in the flight manual, according to a copy from American Airlines seen by the Reuters news agency.
The EASA and FAA ultimately determined that the set-up was safe enough for the plane to be certified, however.
In the EASA document, the regulator said simulations showed the electric thumb switches could not keep the 737 MAX properly positioned under certain conditions, including those of the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes, according to the Indonesian preliminary report and a source with knowledge of the Ethiopian air traffic control recordings.
The flight conditions were similar to those described in the EASA document, a source at Lion Air told Reuters. The source said that training materials before the crash did not say the wheel could be required under those conditions but that Boeing advised the airline about it after the crash.
Boeing declined to comment on the EASA document or its advice to Lion Air, citing the ongoing investigation into the crash.
www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/investigator-inspectors-werent-qualified-73
7-max-work-190925041840797.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Boeing is expected to fix the 737 Max version of MCAS by making it work more like the one designed earlier for the KC-46.
https://qz.com/1718506/boeings-737-max-mcas-has-better-designed-milita
ry-forerunner/
Accident investigators looking into the 737 Max crashes have implicated a key system known as MCAS. Now it appears that a version of the system Boeing created years earlier for a military fuel tanker had a better design.
That’s according to a Wall Street Journal report published today on the system’s history and the push to build safeguards into it for the tanker, known as the KC-46A Pegasus. It’s a plane based off Boeing’s 767 passenger jet. Those safeguards were not incorporated into the version installed on the 737 Max. On both planes, the system is intended to combat the natural tendency of the airplane to pitch upwards.
Notably, pilots of the KC-46 are able to override the MCAS — or Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System — simply by pulling on the controls, the Journal reports. It quotes an Air Force procurement chief as saying, “We have better sensor data. But most importantly, when the pilot grabs the stick, the pilot is completely in control.”
On the 737 Max, by contrast, the MCAS remained active even if the pilots pulled on the controls. The system would repeatedly push the plane’s nose down.
The Journal also notes that the KC-46’s MCAS relies on two sensors measuring the plane nose angle and compares the readings from each, as Air Force Magazine reported in March. The 737 Max version relies on just one.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Boeing rejected 737 MAX safety upgrades before fatal crashes, whistleblower says
www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-whistleblowers-c
omplaint-says-737-max-safety-upgrades-were-rejected-over-cost/
A Boeing engineer submitted a scathing internal ethics complaint alleging that management had blocked significant safety improvements during the jet’s development.
The ethics charge, filed by 33-year-old engineer Curtis Ewbank, whose job involved studying past crashes and using that information to make new planes safer, describes how around 2014 his group presented to managers and senior executives a proposal to add various safety upgrades to the MAX.
A version of the proposed system, called synthetic airspeed, was already installed on the 787 Dreamliner, but not on the MAX.
The complaint, a copy of which was reviewed by The Seattle Times, suggests that one of the proposed systems could have potentially prevented the crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia that killed 346 people. Three of Ewbank’s former colleagues interviewed for this story concurred.
The details revealed in the ethics complaint raise new questions about the culture at Boeing and whether the long-held imperative that safety must be the overarching priority was compromised on the MAX.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This might be redundant. Who is really under the impression Boeing did not sell out their reputation with that last CEO, McNerney?
Originally posted by second:
Boeing rejected 737 MAX safety upgrades before fatal crashes, whistleblower says
www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-whistleblowers-c
omplaint-says-737-max-safety-upgrades-were-rejected-over-cost/
A Boeing engineer submitted a scathing internal ethics complaint alleging that management had blocked significant safety improvements during the jet’s development.
The ethics charge, filed by 33-year-old engineer Curtis Ewbank, whose job involved studying past crashes and using that information to make new planes safer, describes how around 2014 his group presented to managers and senior executives a proposal to add various safety upgrades to the MAX.
A version of the proposed system, called synthetic airspeed, was already installed on the 787 Dreamliner, but not on the MAX.
The complaint, a copy of which was reviewed by The Seattle Times, suggests that one of the proposed systems could have potentially prevented the crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia that killed 346 people. Three of Ewbank’s former colleagues interviewed for this story concurred.
The details revealed in the ethics complaint raise new questions about the culture at Boeing and whether the long-held imperative that safety must be the overarching priority was compromised on the MAX.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Boeing had promised the airlines that the MAX would be so minimally different from the prior 737 model that no additional pilot certification or flight simulator training would be necessary. In particular, Boeing promised to pay Southwest Airlines “$1 million per tail” if the FAA were to require expensive simulator training. Do the math: Southwest will buy 1,000 planes and get a rebate of $1 billion if Boeing adds the safety feature that would have prevented the crashes. What do you think management will do, if they are more concerned about their paycheck than your safety? Logic says no new safety features will be installed unless management is absolutely, positively, 100 percent sure that the safety feature will prevent a crash. Such certainty will never exist.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
This might be redundant. Who is really under the impression Boeing did not sell out their reputation with that last CEO, McNerney?
The MAX program leaders had always mandated that, if it’s not required for function or certification, it’s not going on the airplane.
www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-whistleblowers-c
omplaint-says-737-max-safety-upgrades-were-rejected-over-cost/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
FAA failed to properly review 737 MAX jet's anti-stall system
“The JATR team found that the MCAS was not evaluated as a complete and integrated function in the certification documents that were submitted to the FAA,” the 69-page series of findings and recommendations said.
“The lack of a unified top-down development and evaluation of the system function and its safety analyses, combined with the extensive and fragmented documentation, made it difficult to assess whether compliance was fully demonstrated.”
The report also questioned FAA’s limited staffing to oversee certification tasks it designated to Boeing and said there were an “inadequate number of FAA specialists” involved in the certification of the 737 MAX.
There were signs that Boeing employees conducting FAA work faced “undue pressure. ..which may be attributed to conflicting priorities and an environment that does not support FAA requirements,” it said.
www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-boeing-airplane-faa/faa-failed-to-prope
rly-review-737-max-jets-anti-stall-system-jatr-findings-idUSKBN1WQ0H8
--------
A review of the 737 Max approval found the FAA signed off on a plane it didn’t fully understand
The US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) delegated far too much of the certification process of the 737 Max plane to its manufacturer, Boeing, and didn’t comprehensively understand a new flight system on it that was later linked to two deadly crashes, the international panel that has been reviewing the plane’s approval process has found.
https://qz.com/1726157/
--------
Will JATR Report On Boeing 737 MAX Further Delay Relaunch?
If regulators lack confidence in Boeing’s ability to submit complete and reliable documentation of their testing, then they are bound to want to take a closer look at any new information they receive now. Even if that information is complete, to the best of Boeing’s ability, the collective of regulators are unlikely to uniformly agree to a rapid re-approval.
www.forbes.com/sites/marisagarcia/2019/10/11/will-jatr-report-on-boein
g-737-max-further-delay-launch/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/air-canada-scrubs-737-max-202557292.
html
Air Canada scrubs 737 Max from schedule until Feb. 14 amid lingering uncertainty
[The Canadian Press]
The Canadian PressOctober 16, 2019
Air Canada scrubs 737 Max from schedule until Feb. 14 amid lingering uncertainty
Air Canada will keep the Boeing 737 Max off its flying schedule until Feb. 14, citing "regulatory uncertainty" nearly a year after authorities across the globe banned the plane from the skies following two fatal crashes in five months.
The country's biggest airline had earlier scrubbed the 24 jetliners from schedules until Jan. 8. For now, major U.S. carriers hope to welcome the Max back into the fleet in early to mid-January.
The Boeing Co. has said it expects federal authorities to greenlight software changes to the aircraft, but regulators say they don’t have a set timeline.
Air Canada's chief commercial officer said the extension until Valentine's Day will give Air Canada "scheduling predictability" as it rolls out its new reservation system.
"We are taking this prudent step as a result of the ongoing regulatory uncertainty about the timing of the aircraft returning to service," Lucie Guillemette said in a release Wednesday.
The airline said it will lease two more wide-body aircraft at least through March Break to help compensate for the absence of the Max planes, which make up about 20 per cent of Air Canada's narrow-body fleet and would typically carry about 11,000 passengers per day.
WestJet announced in September it was removing the 737 Max from its schedule until Jan. 5.
Sunwing Airlines Inc. said in August that its four Maxes will be absent from the rotation until mid-May, with some 3,000 flights having been affected over the summer alone.
Last month, Air Canada's chief financial officer said he expected that Transport Canada may not approve the plane for takeoff until early next year.
Michael Rousseau noted his airline doesn't fly other 737 models, giving it an unenviably "unique" position relative to North American competitors as Air Canada's Max pilots sit relatively idle while those at rival carriers find more productive deployment in the cockpit of other 737 jets.
Air Canada faced a tougher third quarter because of the grounding, forecasting a two per cent decline in capacity from a year ago.
About 26 Max 8s were initially slated for delivery between the March grounding and mid-2020, but have been partly pushed back. The Airbus A320s they were set to replace are less fuel-efficient, piling on more costs.
Air Canada, like WestJet, has also had to lease aircraft and cancel some routes to compensate for the Max 8's absence.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 16, 2019.
Companies in this story: (TSX:AC, TSX:WJA)
Christopher Reynolds, The Canadian Press
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME