Ethiopian Airlines 737 crashes on way to Kenya 157 onboard.

[Yossarian]

I don't think the FAA and Boeing would conspire to bring an unsafe plane on the market, but it's easy to see how one could have gotten to market without undergoing strict enough scrutiny.

In 2005, the regulator shifted its approach for how it delegated authority outside the agency, creating a new program through which aircraft manufacturers like Boeing could choose their own employees to be the designees and help certify their planes.

...“It’s a very cozy relationship,” said Jim Hall, the former head of the National Transportation Safety Board. “The manufacturer essentially becomes both the manufacturer and the regulator, because of the lack of the ability of government to do the job.”

Boeing Flights Grounded Across the Globe, but Not in the U.S.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I’d be absolutely gobsmacked if two of the worlds biggest aviation outfits have been involved in a safety scandal of any proportion, let alone colluding in covering up fatal accidents. I think there’s a lot of uninformed speculation going around at the moment which is being fuelled by social media. We don’t even know that the two crashes were caused by the same thing yet.

Thirty years ago would you have believed that priests were fucking choir boys, and the church was covering it up?

 

[Spymaster]

Thirty years ago would you have believed that priests were fucking choir boys, and the church was covering it up?

I would have and did, absolutely, 100%.

The trouble with all the stuff floating around about Boeing and the FAA at the moment is that it doesn’t pass the basic “who gains what at what cost?” tests, and they all reek of anti American conspiraloonery. There are likely several dozen more feasible explanations than “Boeing and the FAA are collaborating in covering up corporate murder/man slaughter” but that’s not the way the internet works. What happens is that a few knobs start some rumours on aviation forums (largely populated by Walts) which get repeated on Twatter and similar and within a few days we are where we are, discussing nutbag theories on the net.

Let’s remember that several hundred people have lost their lives and a few thousand people will be mourning the victims. Out of respect for them this should be approached in a measured, scientific manner, without the wanky agenda driven nonsense that has come to accompany these events in recent years.

 

[Sasaferrato]

I would have and did, absolutely, 100%.

The trouble with all the stuff floating around about Boeing and the FAA at the moment is that it doesn’t pass the basic “who gains what at what cost?” tests, and they all reek of anti American conspiraloonery. There are likely several dozen more feasible explanations than “Boeing and the FAA are collaborating in covering up corporate murder/man slaughter” but that’s not the way the internet works. What happens is that a few knobs start some rumours on aviation forums (largely populated by Walts) which get repeated on Twatter and similar and within a few days we are where we are, discussing nutbag theories on the net.

Let’s remember that several hundred people have lost their lives and a few thousand people will be mourning the victims. Out of respect for them this should be approached in a measured, scientific manner, without the wanky agenda driven nonsense that has come to accompany these events in recent years.

I have not said, nor do I believe that that the FAA are in collusion with Boeing, even in these somewhat unprincipled times, such a thing is unthinkable.

What I do believe, because it is fact, is that there is an inherent and very nasty flaw in this aircraft, a flaw that Boeing have been aware of for quite some time. Boeing have been aware of the flaw for long enough to install a virtually undocumented system to try and counteract it.

 

[Teaboy]

Personally I think they should have all been grounded by now. Two very new airliners crashing in similar fashions in recent times is virtually unheard of. People first and all that.

 

[2hats]

The US Senate are holding an aviation safety hearing on this today.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Customer has just sent me this snap...




Hope her flight arrives safely, she's not paid for her ticket yet...

 

[Teaboy]

Well she's clearly got past the take-off phase which seems to be when it normally crashes.

 

[2hats]

An Ethiopian Airlines representative has stated that they will send the DFDR and CVR overseas for analysis (not having the facilities to conduct such locally), hinting that possibly they have the AAIB or BEA in mind.

 

[co-op]

I could see them taking their eye off the ball accidentally - but a deliberate conspiracy to conceal fatal flaws? I don't think it passes the smell test.

The options aren't a total binary here though (ie "totally innocent" vs "deliberate conspiracy to conceal dangerous flaws"). People, especially under institutional pressure, can convince themselves that they are acting rightly and morally when they aren't doing so by other peoples standards.

If it's right that there was a "minor glitch" (or whatever) and they designed a piece of software that appeared to remedy that issue then it's very easy to believe that there's nothing to report, nothing to explain. Just business as normal.

I'd hate to be someone in the decision-making chain of this plane's safety and compliance etc, you'd be fucking sweating now, thinking shit I hope I haven't fucked up here. And of course not just because your arse is on the line but because you don't want those deaths on your conscience.

 

[T & P]

An excellent and informative article here on what might be wrong with the MAX...

https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/1006811-paulo-santos/5280437-boeing-might-wrong-737-max

 

[Lancman]

I'm sorry Sas, it's time to think the unthinkable. The FAA is suffering financial cut-backs (somebody's going to have to pay for that wall) and one of the things that they've done is to outsource part of their regulatory authority to outside consultants. Some of these consultants are Boeing employees; who else has a better knowledge of how the 737 works? That Wall Street Journal Yossarian quotes is well worth a read.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

I'm sorry Sas, it's time to think the unthinkable. The FAA is suffering financial cut-backs (somebody's going to have to pay for that wall) and one of the things that they've done is to outsource part of their regulatory authority to outside consultants. Some of these consultants are Boeing employees; who else has a better knowledge of how the 737 works? That Wall Street Journal Yossarian quotes is well worth a read.

Wow, hadn't read that. That's pretty chilling stuff.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Perhaps pilots should simply refuse to fly the fucking things.

I doubt if any airline would take disciplinary action given the current situation. Flying is potentially hazardous enough without flying and aircraft where there are severe doubts about its airworthiness.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Perhaps pilots should simply refuse to fly the fucking things.

I doubt if any airline would take disciplinary action given the current situation. Flying is potentially hazardous enough without flying and aircraft where there are severe doubts about its airworthiness.

Have a nosey at employment contracts US pilots are made to sign. Doubly chilling.

 

[2hats]

Canada just banned 737-MAX with immediate effect. That leaves the US as the odd one out.

Canadians refer to new tracking data which would suggest a similar problem to the Lion Air crash.

e2a: sounds very much like the main investigatory bodies (TSB, clearly, and probably BEA, NTSB, AAIB) have got their hands on the flight's ACARS data and have completed some analysis of that leading them to some preliminary conclusions about the circumstances of the accident (parallels with JT610). In fact (warning: speculation ahead), I wouldn't be surprised if (can think of some good reasons why) the ACARS data was in the hands of the AAIB first leading to the early CAA decision and then they in turn informed the TSB. Possibly the NTSB is now chewing over the same...

2e2a: subsequent comments to reporters by the Canadian Minister of Transport, Marc Garneau (first Canadian in space, btw), are not inconsistent with the speculation above

 

[Teaboy]

An excellent and informative article here on what might be wrong with the MAX...

https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/1006811-paulo-santos/5280437-boeing-might-wrong-737-max

Its obviously involves speculation but it's very interesting. Even if half of it turns out to be correct its very worrying.

 

[editor]

An excellent and informative article here on what might be wrong with the MAX...

https://seekingalpha.com/instablog/1006811-paulo-santos/5280437-boeing-might-wrong-737-max

Interesting stuff:

On a per flight crash rate, a typical modern aircraft like the A320 series or the Boeing 737 series (ex-the first few models from the 60s/70) would show a 0.11-0.15 crash rate per million flights. Currently, the Boeing 737 sits at a massive 4 crashes per million flights. Moreover, the crash rate on those other modern jets often includes exogenous causes.

 

[2hats]

Interesting stuff:

737-MAX - same order as the 747 and both far better than Concorde...

 

[2hats]

Sounds like (Reuters report) the CVR and DFDR are going to be read back by the BFU (Germany).

 

[T & P]

Sounds like (Reuters report) the CVR and DFDR are going to be read back by the BFU (Germany).

Is that normal procedure, or a not-to-subtle message that the Ethiopians don't trust the integrity of the FAA and would rather send the boxes to a 'neutral' country?

 

[editor]

737-MAX - same order as the 747 and both far better than Concorde...

But Concorde's one crash was due to crap on the runway.

 

[2hats]

Is that normal procedure, or a not-to-subtle message that the Ethiopians don't trust the integrity of the FAA and would rather send the boxes to a 'neutral' country?

The Ethiopians are, by international agreement/law (the accident happened to an airliner registered to them in their airspace, so they lead), entitled to outsource any part (or all) of the enquiry to any body they so choose. They can choose to turn the entire investigation over to anyone else they want. Sending the flight recorders for data recovery to a competent body in an independent country is not unheard of. Note in the US it would be the NTSB, not the FAA, involved in the data recovery.

But Concorde's one crash was due to crap on the runway.

Or due to the vulnerability of the tank placing and design. FOD is a fact of aviation life.

 

[dylanredefined]

The Ethiopians are, by international agreement/law (the accident happened to an airliner registered to them in their airspace, so they lead), entitled to outsource any part (or all) of the enquiry to any body they so choose. They can choose to turn the entire investigation over to anyone else they want. Sending the flight recorders for data recovery to a competent body in an independent country is not unheard of. Note in the US it would be the NTSB, not the FAA, involved in the data recovery.

Or due to the vulnerability of the tank placing and design. FOD is a fact of aviation life.

Had been happily flying around for 30 plus years before this so called vulnerability became apparent. The 737 was 4months old.

 

[Spymaster]

Or due to the vulnerability of the tank placing and design. FOD is a fact of aviation life.

Yeah but it does feel a little unfair that that one accident can give it one of the worst safety records of all commercial types due to its relatively limited usage and it can never regain its reputation.

 

[2hats]

The 737 was 4months old.

Or 50+ years

Yeah but it does feel a little unfair that that one accident can give it one of the worst safety records of all commercial types due to its relatively limited usage and it can never regain its reputation.

Such is the deliciously devious deceptive draw of statistics.

 

[mauvais]

Is that normal procedure, or a not-to-subtle message that the Ethiopians don't trust the integrity of the FAA and would rather send the boxes to a 'neutral' country?

There are maybe three organisations in the world that have the expertise and capability to do detailed crash investigation. The UK's AAIB, the US's NTSB and France's BEA. Germany's BFU perhaps to a slightly lesser extent. There are others but they have less invested and often defer to the first three mentioned. Countries that don't manufacture aircraft usually have next to nothing.

 

[2hats]

There are maybe three organisations in the world that have the expertise and capability to do detailed crash investigation. The UK's AAIB, the US's NTSB and France's BEA. Germany's BFU perhaps to a slightly lesser extent. There are others but they have less invested and often defer to the first three mentioned. Countries that don't manufacture aircraft usually have next to nothing.

I suspect the TSB, ATSB and MAK-IAC might argue otherwise.

 

[mauvais]

I suspect the TSB, ATSB and MAK-IAC might argue otherwise.

Maybe. But you only need look back through major historic aviation accidents in other countries to see who investigations were handed to. Not, for example, the Australians.

 

[2hats]

Maybe. But you only need look back through major historic aviation accidents in other countries to see who investigations were handed to. Not, for example, the Australians.

They've tended to be (though are not always) handed to another major party to the investigation (country of airframe origin, country of engine origin, country of aircraft registration, country of aircraft operator, etc).