The software fix was of course a kludge for the engine mounting being forward and (I think worse for making the nose go up with higher thrust) lower than previous engines, but what's worse was the software was done badly (the way it overrides the pilot, AND there's no obvious or easy way for the pilot to bypass it) AND that it relied on only one airspeed sensor, especially when there were already two on the plane.
It's arguable the design was never properly certified, and the blame goes to the FAA as well as Boeing. For whatever reasons, they both dropped the ball.
And beyond the 737 Max:
Cellphones a flight danger? They could be on some Boeing jets
Engine problems: Boeing 777X won't take off this year | aeroTELEGRAPH
Cellphones a flight danger? They could be on some Boeing jets
Engine problems: Boeing 777X won't take off this year | aeroTELEGRAPH
Last edited:
.
Rather more to it than just that. The basic airframe geometry is based on an over 50 yr old design - when all engines where much smaller diameter, AND few airports had the loading ramps we take mostly for granted these days, meaning that entry door closer to the ground made for shorter staircases and marginally quicker loading times. Boeing certainly has other designs since then - some that they’ve sat on awaiting their assessment of market demand- but the 737 series remains the most widely used type in the history of commercial air flight.
I think the whole point of MCAS was to provide a software solution to revised aerodynamics that be would automatic, and transparent to the pilots - so much so that Boeing didn’t consider it necessary to include details in the operation manuals.
There has got to be a lot of incentive, and possibly pressure from airlines to retain the class type certification and avoid the millions of dollars in training costs and lost productivity borne by the airlines that any new design would entail.
Once the MCAS is fully vetted by FAA and other regulatory agencies, and to repeat my rant - all operational units updated with alert and bypass systems at no cost to the airlines - then things might get back to normal, but I’d still look for find other stocks to gamble on.
Sounds like this is not Boeing’s fault - but certainly a problem for them, and anyone currently or planning on using the GE9X.
Generally an airline will hire 7 crews per airplane. (14 pilots)
Those pilots need to go to training twice a year. (28 training events/plane/year)
The airplane will last, most likely, 30 years. (840 pilot training events over the life of the plane)
There are roughly 4000 737 Max on order. (3.36 million pilot training events over the life of those aircraft)
Assuming an assumed (and actually very, very low) cost of $3,000 per event, that's 10 billion dollars in training costs for the life of the fleet. 3000*3360000
(Don't even start to figure out what the plane will burn in fuel over its life, the number is astounding)
Those pilots need to go to training twice a year. (28 training events/plane/year)
The airplane will last, most likely, 30 years. (840 pilot training events over the life of the plane)
There are roughly 4000 737 Max on order. (3.36 million pilot training events over the life of those aircraft)
Assuming an assumed (and actually very, very low) cost of $3,000 per event, that's 10 billion dollars in training costs for the life of the fleet. 3000*3360000
(Don't even start to figure out what the plane will burn in fuel over its life, the number is astounding)
Last edited:
Airbus, on the other hand:
Airbus A350 software bug forces airlines to turn planes off and on every 149 hours • The Register
Airbus A350 software bug forces airlines to turn planes off and on every 149 hours • The Register
Whether training is paid for by the airlines or the manufacturers, the cost is ultimately passed on to the passengers who buy tickets.
In a general sense, this is without a doubt THE cause.
This response from Boeing is surely very inflammatory. I really think it's high time Muilenburg takes responsibility and resigns. Maybe fire a few middle managers first.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.