Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max crashes killing 157

[Wally Fairway 5577]

5 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

How does Ralph Nader weigh in on this issue?

Is Ralph Nader still alive (ps - I had to look, I'm adding him to my 2020 list)

And since you made me look - here is what he has, recently, written about the 737 Maxx fiasco

https://nader.org/2019/08/14/with-the-boeing-737-max-grounded-top-boeing-bosses-must-testify-before-congress-now/

Quote

With the Boeing 737 MAX Grounded, Top Boeing Bosses Must Testify Before Congress Now

By Ralph Nader
August 14, 2019

Two Boeing 737 MAX crashes, one in Indonesia last October and one in Ethiopia this past March, took a combined 346 lives. Steady scrutiny by the media reported internal company leaks and gave voice to sidelined ex-Boeing engineers and aerospace safety specialists. These experts have revealed that Boeing’s executives are responsible because they chose to use an unstable structural design and faulty software. These decisions left the flying public, the pilots, the airlines, and the FAA in the dark, to varying degrees.

Yet Congressional Committees, which announced investigations months ago, still have not called on Dennis Muilenburg, the CEO of Boeing, or any member of Boeing’s Board of Directors to testify.

Given the worldwide emergency grounding of all 400 or so MAX aircraft and the peril to crews and airline passengers, why are the Senate and House Committees holding back? House Committee Chairman, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) wants to carefully prepare for such action after the staff goes through the much delayed transmission of documents from Boeing. Meanwhile, Senate Committee Chair Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) deferred to Boeing’s request to put off their testimony before Congress until the Indonesian government puts out its report on the Lion Air disaster, presumably sometime in October.

For more go to the link that Wally posted - lol.

 

[bschoolprof 6271]

WSJ with another article on the problems and potential fixes.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fixing-the-problems-with-boeings-737-max-11566224866?mod=hp_lead_pos8

Quote

Two fatal crashes of Boeing Co.  737 MAX exposed problems with the aircraft’s flight-control system, spurring aviation regulators to push for additional changes before the grounded plane can again fly with passengers.

Here’s a look at the problems and how Boeing plans to fix them.

PROBLEM 1

The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS): This stall-prevention system can mistakenly push the nose of the plane down repeatedly when fed erroneous data.

MCAS was designed to help pilots avoid a stall when the nose of the plane rises too quickly in certain conditions. But the system can misfire when operating off inaccurate sensor information, triggering erroneous automatic flight-control commands.

When the stall-prevention feature repeatedly pushes the nose of the plane down, pilots can struggle to counteract the commands and pull the nose of the plane up.

THE FIX

The system reacts with a less forceful nose-down command, and does it only once per activation, making it easier for pilots to control the plane. It also will rely on two sensors, rather than one, to verify data accuracy.

PROBLEM 2

Angle-of-attack disagreement: Not working was an alert system to warn pilots when the two angle-of-attack sensors show conflicting information, making it more difficult for pilots to diagnose flight-control problems.

Two vanes effectively measure to what degree the plane’s nose is angled up or down.

Because of a software error, there was no alert when the two sensors disagreed—unless airlines had paid extra to have a related option package installed.

THE FIX

Along with the redesigned software, pilots should be warned when angle-of-attack vanes provide conflicting information.

PROBLEM 3

Runaway stabilizer: A processor failure could lead to the flight-control computer commanding unintended horizontal stabilizer movement.

The horizontal stabilizer controls up and down movement known as pitch.

The computer problem could hobble the ability of pilots to respond quickly to the emergency.

THE FIX

Boeing intends to correct the problem with a software fix. If new hardware is required, it could delay the MAX's return for additional weeks or months.

PROBLEM 4

Trim wheel: At high speed, some pilots may lack the strength to manually counteract dangerous movements of the horizontal stabilizer.

When problems with the stall-prevention system arise, pilots are instructed to turn it off using switches found in the cockpit and turning the trim wheel to move the plane’s horizontal stabilizer.

But regulators are concerned some pilots may lack the strength to manually move the stabilizer at high speed.

THE FIX

Regulators are considering changes to an emergency procedure to ensure pilots react quickly and appropriately to avoid extreme situations requiring excessive manual strength.

 

Edited August 19, 2019 by bschoolprof

[retread 2951]

4 problems seems like a lot.

[RPM 26342]

16 minutes ago, retread said:

4 problems seems like a lot.

Didn't to Boeing when they sold em.

[XYZ 2154]

5 hours ago, HoustonFrog said:

Don’t disagree but there’s something far more evil about screwing around with the safety of metal tubes carrying hundreds of people at rapid speed where death is basically the only option if there’s a failure.

Screwing people out of money is criminal and should be prosecuted, but sticking people in an unsafe plane (something that makes many people very nervous as is) is just evil

 

Bet you a beer that NOBODY at Boeing gets indicted for this.

[RPM 26342]

56 minutes ago, XYZ said:

Bet you a beer that NOBODY at Boeing gets indicted for this.

That would be bad for the shareholders, unless they ever have to fly a MAX.

[McCroskey 1505]

Rumors now that the planes will be flying again by October.

[elfenix 34331]

Embraer and Bombardier provide fleet for Delta, Jet Blue, Frontier, Alaska, American, United and many others.

I've got some news for you.

 

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-releases/en/2018/07/airbus--majority-stake-in-c-series-partnership-with-bombardier-a.html

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1ST2O7

 

[Wally Fairway 5577]

15 hours ago, McCroskey said:

Rumors now that the planes will be flying again by October.

any rumors as to when they will be crashing again?
any rumors if the airlines will have to offer sales to entice people to get back on them?

I kid, I kid - I'd get one one, as long it is a US airline, or one where the pilots get simulator training

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13522]

On 8/19/2019 at 5:49 PM, XYZ said:

Bet you a beer that NOBODY at Boeing gets indicted for this.

Corporate personnel do not face indictments anymore for corporate bad behavior.  Sarbannes oxley was supposed to make CEOs accountable.  Amazing how zero of them have face criminal prosecution in 20 years. I guess they are all behaving.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

On 8/18/2019 at 11:30 AM, Fudge Nuggets said:

Usually you have to purchase your ticket before getting a look at the plane.

Plug the flight # into seatguru and it will tell you the plane.

[Your Mom 4849]

11 hours ago, Wally Fairway said:

any rumors as to when they will be crashing again?
any rumors if the airlines will have to offer sales to entice people to get back on them?

I kid, I kid - I'd get one one, as long it is a US airline, or one where the pilots get simulator training

 

There is not a max simulator owned by any airline in America today.   The only time it flies different from an older 737 is if you have it hovering a cunt hair above stall speed and if someone is flying it at that speed, well you wouldn’t want to be flying on that airline anyway regardless of what country they’re from.  The difference in flight characteristics between the older models and the max was detected by computers but not normally detected by even by test pilots.

737 pilots have been trained on runaway trim situations for 30+ years.   Runaway trim is not a new problem, it just has a new cause.   But the procedure to recover from it it’s exactly the same as it has always been whether you’re in  classic, an NG, or a Max. 

If the plane flies within the next year it’s all but guaranteed there will not be simulator training. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Your Mom said:

There is not a max simulator owned by any airline in America today.   The only time it flies different from an older 737 is if you have it hovering a cunt hair above stall speed and if someone is flying it at that speed, well you wouldn’t want to be flying on that airline anyway regardless of what country they’re from.  The difference in flight characteristics between the older models and the max was detected by computers but not normally detected by even by test pilots.

737 pilots have been trained on runaway trim situations for 30+ years.   Runaway trim is not a new problem, it just has a new cause.   But the procedure to recover from it it’s exactly the same as it has always been whether you’re in  classic, an NG, or a Max. 

If the plane flies within the next year it’s all but guaranteed there will not be simulator training. 

 What does that mean for pilots flying it without hours in the seat ?

[Your Mom 4849]

6 hours ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

Plug the flight # into seatguru and it will tell you the plane.

That will usually work but not always. You’d be surprised how often planes are swapped due to last-minute maintenance. The first time I flew a Max I was supposed to be in a 700.  It broke and we swapped. I didn’t even know it was a Max until I walked into the cockpit.  I guarantee you not one of the passengers knew it was a max unless they read the safety information card in the seat back pocket.

[Your Mom 4849]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

 What does that mean for pilots flying it without hours in the seat ?

I’m not sure what you mean by that.    Anyone flying it will have had plenty of hours in a 737 sim, just not a max sim.  The procedures for runaway trim are no different from one model to the next.   Boeing is changing all kinds of logic in the system but the pilot’s procedures are likely not going to change much.   Procedures get taught in the sim. Systems knowledge gets taught in the classroom or on the iPad.    Everything they are changing affects our systems knowledge but not much change to the procedures.   

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

18 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

I’m not sure what you mean by that.    Anyone flying it will have had plenty of hours in a 737 sim, just not a max sim.  The procedures for runaway trim are no different from one model to the next.   Boeing is changing all kinds of logic in the system but the pilot’s procedures are likely not going to change much.   Procedures get taught in the sim. Systems knowledge gets taught in the classroom or on the iPad.    Everything they are changing affects our systems knowledge but not much change to the procedures.   

 

I mean are they modifying the MCAS so much it won't be different than what they're used too ? The planes fly differently because of the over sized engines, and their placement on the fuselage, correct ?  I thought that was the whole reason for the changes to the MCAS ?

[Your Mom 4849]

 Nobody was ever used to the MCAS at all before because we didn’t even know it was on there. But there are other systems that also cause the trim motors to run automatically. Speed trim, mach trim, etc.  those systems are kind of like MCAS in that they will activate the trim without your input if deemed necessary.    But they just run in the background and you have no control over them.  

 I guess an analogy would be like the airbags in your car.   Suppose your current airbag model was  found it to be flawed and could kill you. So your car manufacturer redesigned the entire airbag system along with the logic that tells it when to deploy.    You still have the same switch in your dashboard that can turn the whole airbag system off and on but you can’t control the logic that tells the airbags when to deploy.   From the driver’s point of view nothing has changed with that airbag system. You’re still going to operate it or not operate it in the exact same manner you always have even though the internal logic is now different.   Your car manufacturer might offer you up some background information about how the new system works but you wouldn’t really need to learn anything about how to operate it since you don’t have control over it. 

 We don’t have any control over MCAS but we do have control over the entire trim system as a whole. There’s nothing new there. There have been other causes of runaway trim long before MCAS was around.  The procedure to recover from runaway trim is the same regardless of what’s causing it to runaway.  

 And the difference in flight characteristics, I’m being told at work, were so slight that most test pilots did not detect it but the computers that measure control forces did.    The difference in the way your car drives and the way your wife’s car drives is probably far greater than the difference between the feel of a 737-800 and a 737 Max8.    I never felt the difference other than the max being smoother.  

Edited August 25, 2019 by Your Mom

[retread 2951]

How much technical information will you get on the changes in MCAS? Have you gotten any of that yet?

[Wally Fairway 5577]

On 8/19/2019 at 5:54 PM, bschoolprof said:

WSJ with another article on the problems and potential fixes.

PROBLEM 4

Trim wheel: At high speed, some pilots may lack the strength to manually counteract dangerous movements of the horizontal stabilizer.

When problems with the stall-prevention system arise, pilots are instructed to turn it off using switches found in the cockpit and turning the trim wheel to move the plane’s horizontal stabilizer.

But regulators are concerned some pilots may lack the strength to manually move the stabilizer at high speed.

THE FIX

Regulators are considering changes to an emergency procedure to ensure pilots react quickly and appropriately to avoid extreme

 

Seems to me the Maxx pilots need to be doing thumb calisthenics, just in case they are facing a high speed horizontal stabilizer issue.

[Bobby_Batronic 1994]

Nothing a well applied piece of tape couldn’t handle. 

[DaysOff 7969]

How much technical information will you get on the changes in MCAS? Have you gotten any of that yet?

As much as you've read in the newspaper which is all you'd need. It's software. You can't touch it, smell it, or change it so who cares. This is still an old school mechanical airplane that literally has bicycle chains attached to pulleys and cables.

[Your Mom 4849]

On 8/24/2019 at 12:01 AM, retread said:

How much technical information will you get on the changes in MCAS? Have you gotten any of that yet?

We’ve gotten updates on the suggested new logic but nothing you probably haven’t read yourself already. 

When it’s all certified we’ll get a bulletin with a summary of it a a couple paragraphs about it on a new page in the manual. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

25 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

We’ve gotten updates on the suggested new logic but nothing you probably haven’t read yourself already. 

When it’s all certified we’ll get a bulletin with a summary of it a a couple paragraphs about it on a new page in the manual. 

Will there be a next of kin box to fill out ?

[Captainant 27741]

On 8/24/2019 at 10:31 PM, Your Mom said:

The difference in the way your car drives and the way your wife’s car drives is probably far greater than the difference between the feel of a 737-800 and a 737 Max8.

I don't think I could go from driving my wife's car to killing over 300 people in two crashes. And their pilots definitely noticed a bit of a difference. 

What's with the people tirelessly defending boeing on this shitshow? It's clear that the planes handled significantly differently and is evidenced by their bodycount.

[Bobby_Batronic 1994]

53 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I don't think I could go from driving my wife's car to killing over 300 people in two crashes. And their pilots definitely noticed a bit of a difference. 

What's with the people tirelessly defending boeing on this shitshow? It's clear that the planes handled significantly differently and is evidenced by their bodycount.

So an actual 737 pilot who has flown the MAX tells you that it flies the same, and doesn’t feel different, and you jump straight to “he’s defending Boeing”? Keep on surlying....

[retread 2951]

Who do you think will face repercussions for the tragedies? People at the top probably skate.

Maybe middle management that had the final signoff on the report that documented all the changes? As they ran simulations during design work, engineers changed the amount of authority that MCAS has, but many people didn't even know about that until after the crashes.

[Captainant 27741]

53 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

So an actual 737 pilot who has flown the MAX tells you that it flies the same, and doesn’t feel different, and you jump straight to “he’s defending Boeing”? Keep on surlying....

It's more the language he's using that is downplaying the severity of the fraud and dangerous behavior by boeing. The stakes for mechanical malfunction in a car vs the a plane are slightly different, which you of course understand to a far greater extent than I do.

I guess I'm just shocked to see so many pilots in this thread being ok (or at the very least, nonplussed) with boeing putting your personal safety at risk through fraudulent disclosures and outright lies so their shareholders can get a better return.

[Bobby_Batronic 1994]

21 minutes ago, Captainant said:

It's more the language he's using that is downplaying the severity of the fraud and dangerous behavior by boeing. The stakes for mechanical malfunction in a car vs the a plane are slightly different, which you of course understand to a far greater extent than I do.

I guess I'm just shocked to see so many pilots in this thread being ok (or at the very least, nonplussed) with boeing putting your personal safety at risk through fraudulent disclosures and outright lies so their shareholders can get a better return.

Maybe that should tell you that the professional pilots think that correct action makes all of Boeing’s misdeeds a moot point. Something I’ve been trying to convey since the beginning. 

[Captainant 27741]

18 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

Maybe that should tell you that the professional pilots think that correct action makes all of Boeing’s misdeeds a moot point. Something I’ve been trying to convey since the beginning. 

Or that some pro pilots all think they're hot shit and can do no wrong despite being normal humans like the rest of us?

So you're saying that boeing putting planes into active passenger service that don't have redundant telemetry systems or tooling to notify pilots of a discrepancy between sensors is a moot point? Or that putting it in the hands of pilots "lacking basic airmanship" (to borrow a batronic favorite) without any simulation time or additional training while effectively telling them it's just like driving their wife's car, when it's flight characteristics are fundamentally different save for a flawed MCAS system, is a moot point?

I don't understand your insistence and persistence at downplaying the fraud and malfeasance of boeing in all of this. Sure, there's probably more than a few situations where a big-dick alpha-pilot like yourself could have saved the whole plane and given everyone a handjob while shining their shoes, but I don't think we should bank on our backbone long-haul transit being saved by heroic pilots as the baseline when there's much improvement to be realized from simply making a good aircraft rather than a cheap one.

I'd really much rather prefer the aircraft manufacturer not save a few bucks and put peoples safety first instead of their shareholder wallets.

[gsoda3 3281]

he already said he thinks boeing messed up.  he also said the pilots messed up.  the pilots on this thread have also said those errors shouldn't have resulted in such a catastrophe because they're easily addressed mid-flight.  how are you not able to reconcile those three sentences?

[Your Mom 4849]

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

I don't think I could go from driving my wife's car to killing over 300 people in two crashes. And their pilots definitely noticed a bit of a difference. 

What's with the people tirelessly defending boeing on this shitshow? It's clear that the planes handled significantly differently and is evidenced by their bodycount.

Context man... context. You’re talking about the MCAS which I’ve repeatedly on this thread said is completely fucked and flawed. You quoted me talking about the basic flying charactistics of the airplane with regards to the bigger and more forward-placed. engines. 

[Captainant 27741]

4 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

he already said he thinks boeing messed up.  he also said the pilots messed up.  the pilots on this thread have also said those errors shouldn't have resulted in such a catastrophe because they're easily addressed mid-flight.  how are you not able to reconcile those three sentences?

 

40 minutes ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

Maybe that should tell you that the professional pilots think that correct action makes all of Boeing’s misdeeds a moot point. Something I’ve been trying to convey since the beginning. 

Because some folks here thinks that were it not for a better pilot, all of boeing's misdeeds and fraud would be a moot point. And I don't like the idea of hoping I have a good enough pilot to overcome design flaws every time I step onto a plane.

[Bobby_Batronic 1994]

31 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Or that some pro pilots all think they're hot shit and can do no wrong despite being normal humans like the rest of us?

So you're saying that boeing putting planes into active passenger service that don't have redundant telemetry systems or tooling to notify pilots of a discrepancy between sensors is a moot point? Or that putting it in the hands of pilots "lacking basic airmanship" (to borrow a batronic favorite) without any simulation time or additional training while effectively telling them it's just like driving their wife's car, when it's flight characteristics are fundamentally different save for a flawed MCAS system, is a moot point?

I don't understand your insistence and persistence at downplaying the fraud and malfeasance of boeing in all of this. Sure, there's probably more than a few situations where a big-dick alpha-pilot like yourself could have saved the whole plane and given everyone a handjob while shining their shoes, but I don't think we should bank on our backbone long-haul transit being saved by heroic pilots as the baseline when there's much improvement to be realized from simply making a good aircraft rather than a cheap one.

I'd really much rather prefer the aircraft manufacturer not save a few bucks and put peoples safety first instead of their shareholder wallets.

So two active 737 pilots who’ve flown the Max and another who is a current Airbus pilot, but is qualified in both airframes tell you repeatedly that the correct response to a runaway trim issue in the 737 likely saves the day, and you jump straight to your BS “big dicked pilot” routine defending Boeing? Kindly fuck off with that ill informed noise.

Maybe you’re only capable of considering a single concept at a time, but more likely you’re in butthurt internet mode. Again.  Not a single pilot here has defended Boeing. Particularly once their role in these accidents were brought to light. And not one pilot here has said that the crews in question responded well to the situation they were presented with. 

Now with regard to your apparent unease with confident pilots let me say this.  I don’t want to fly with anyone who feels unable to handle critical situations as they arise. In fact, I can’t think of one that I have flown with who thinks that way. Not anyone who’s lasted in aviation anyway. Here’s the rub, pilots feel they can handle what’s coming so long as they act appropriately. And that’s the difference between confidence and over confidence. A good pilot is a compartmentalizing, multitasking, resourceful team player, and you want that mofo to be a confident individual who doesn’t shrink into indecisive insecurity when things go pear shaped. Maybe you live and work in an environment where that kind of alpha personality isn’t appreciated or understood, but that’s who you want dragging your ass a round the sky. 

The fact that the two active 737 pilots are telling you that a small blurb in the manual or some iPad training is enough should inform you that it’s nit just batronic hero talk. 

Buh, buh Boeing!!! Yes, fucking acknowledged and agreed. Figure it out. 

[Your Mom 4849]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

 

Because some folks here thinks that were it not for a better pilot, all of boeing's misdeeds and fraud would be a moot point. 

Nobody thinks that. 

[Captainant 27741]

1 minute ago, Your Mom said:

Nobody thinks that. 

uhhhh, I literally quoted bobby saying just that lol. Unless I misunderstood his literal statement?

[Bobby_Batronic 1994]

45 minutes ago, Captainant said:

uhhhh, I literally quoted bobby saying just that lol. Unless I misunderstood his literal statement?

You literally misunderstood my statement.  Saying Boeings misdeeds are moot if the pilots respond correctly is in no way absolving Boeing of their actions or culpability in the accidents.  It's saying that proper pilot action overcomes Boeings failings.  Take some time and wrap you mind around it. No one is saying to let the design flaws go or to forget the actions of Boeing, the FAA or the airlines. 

Edited August 26, 2019 by Bobby_Batronic

[XYZ 2154]

Another dipshit comes out of the woodworks to acuse surly pilots of being Boeing apologists. Shocking.

[JimmyJames 12271]

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/how-much-was-pilot-error-a-factor-in-the-boeing-737-max-crashes/

Some people just want to save Boeing some money. Because that’s obviously the important thing here, after all. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 hour ago, XYZ said:

Another dipshit comes out of the woodworks to acuse surly pilots of being Boeing apologists. Shocking.

Well they are doing exactly that. Being Boeing apologists while maintaining they are far far superior pilots who would have clearly and obviously saved the day because they are so so great. 

[Braff Zacklin 13655]

The stupid is contagious.

[RPM 26342]

It will never happen, of course, but I'd feel better if somebody from Boeing went to jail over this. Profits > Safety = PMITAFP

[Hanrahan 1306]

uhhhh, I literally quoted bobby saying just that lol. Unless I misunderstood his literal statement?

The lack of self-awareness and Derka bullheadedness is appreciated. Keep telling the 737 pilots what’s really going on here.

[Telegraph_it 3359]

Good read. Echos what some of our Surly pilots have said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html

 

[elfenix 34331]

Alert | Text messages show Boeing employees knew in 2016 of problems that turned deadly on the 737 Max

Read the full story:

 

https://wapo.st/2oU9qng

 

 

"

Text messages between Boeing employees in 2016 indicate that the company was aware of major problems with an automated feature on the 737 Max jet that made the aircraft difficult to control, the messages show.

 

Safety investigators say the system, known as MCAS, had repeatedly pushed the noses of planes down in Indonesia and Ethi­o­pia, contributing to crashes that killed 346 people in the past year.

 

One text message with a misspelling said the feature was engaging “itself like craxy.” Another termed the problem “egregious.”

"

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

16 minutes ago, elfenix said:

Alert | Text messages show Boeing employees knew in 2016 of problems that turned deadly on the 737 Max

Read the full story:

 

https://wapo.st/2oU9qng

 

 

"

Text messages between Boeing employees in 2016 indicate that the company was aware of major problems with an automated feature on the 737 Max jet that made the aircraft difficult to control, the messages show.

 

Safety investigators say the system, known as MCAS, had repeatedly pushed the noses of planes down in Indonesia and Ethi­o­pia, contributing to crashes that killed 346 people in the past year.

 

One text message with a misspelling said the feature was engaging “itself like craxy.” Another termed the problem “egregious.”

"

Rut ro

[Cajun 11722]

20 minutes ago, elfenix said:

Alert | Text messages show Boeing employees knew in 2016 of problems that turned deadly on the 737 Max

Read the full story:

 

https://wapo.st/2oU9qng

 

 

"

Text messages between Boeing employees in 2016 indicate that the company was aware of major problems with an automated feature on the 737 Max jet that made the aircraft difficult to control, the messages show.

 

Safety investigators say the system, known as MCAS, had repeatedly pushed the noses of planes down in Indonesia and Ethi­o­pia, contributing to crashes that killed 346 people in the past year.

 

One text message with a misspelling said the feature was engaging “itself like craxy.” Another termed the problem “egregious.”

"

Uh, this seems bad.

Is this bad?

[NeverMarryAStripper 21920]

Only if you’re a Boeing shareholder

[C-Man 27254]

1 hour ago, elfenix said:

Alert | Text messages show Boeing employees knew in 2016 of problems that turned deadly on the 737 Max

Read the full story:

 

https://wapo.st/2oU9qng

 

 

"

Text messages between Boeing employees in 2016 indicate that the company was aware of major problems with an automated feature on the 737 Max jet that made the aircraft difficult to control, the messages show.

 

Safety investigators say the system, known as MCAS, had repeatedly pushed the noses of planes down in Indonesia and Ethi­o­pia, contributing to crashes that killed 346 people in the past year.

 

One text message with a misspelling said the feature was engaging “itself like craxy.” Another termed the problem “egregious.”

"

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 hours ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Only if you’re a Boeing shareholder

Or future ex Boeing emoloyee

[Captainant 27741]

2 hours ago, elfenix said:

One text message with a misspelling said the feature was engaging “itself like craxy.” Another termed the problem “egregious.”

 

idk, sounds like a lack of basic airmanship to me /s