Boeing mcas issue reddit. Downfall: The Case Against Boeing.

Boeing mcas issue reddit This segment really should have a total redesign, but Boeing only cares about profit. The reasons this happened were: to save a buck, the MCAS was tied to only one AoA sensor instead of two or all 3; or made it optional**. That means a brand new plane could have two potentially different issues, both that proved to be fatal. The Ethiopia Air crew saw most or all of The other issue related to supply chain that this company faces is that the majority of our suppliers are owned by a hand full of companies. The Ethiopian Air crew got that training and did what Boeing said. Company greed started being an issue and Boeing ended up with a plane that was about to get an engine it just couldn't handle. Those were the specifications. But it was Boeing's shitty engineering and the terrible culture that led to all these problems in the first place. I was mostly being cynical since before the crashes most people assumed it They don't really explore the second crash past a comment about how Boeing's new MCAS advice wasn't enough to prevent another. org Open. com Open. . I remember a few years ago there were issues with the MCAS system on MAX jets causing a few notable crashes as well. Basically, Boeing assumed the MCAS system wouldn't fail, so they didn't do any training incase the system failed. comments sorted by Best Top New Controversial Q&A Add a Comment. [] The safety of the flying public, not speed, will determine the timeline for returning the Boeing 737-9 MAX to service. 787 project, granted all new projects have teething issues. His argument was, thousands of Boeing planes take off and land without any incident at all every day. The effect is supposed to work in the background and be more or less invisible to the pilots, allowing them to fly the plane the same way they control Not only did Boeing fix the MCAS issue, but the pilots now also know how to shut down the system and what it actually does. A potential fix was He basically brushed this off and said that everything happening with Boeing is a non-issue. That raised some eyebrows (rightfully so) and increased scrutiny (again rightfully so). After those two accidents the 737 Max was grounded across the world for two years while Boeing redesigned the MCAS system. You never hear about them. The issue with the MAX was that the engines were bigger. The original fix for the MCAS problem was actually quite simple. So far, Boeing 737 Max has had issues with the plug door, MCAS, the fittings of the vertical stabilizers being installed incorrectly, elongated wholes (called snow man holes- two holes drilled on top of each other by mistakes) mainly in the aft pressure bulkhead, etc. And they cannot be trained for something they are not told about. Fast forward to the MAX. FOD, software, basic design, and basic manufacturing problems. Controversial. Had a really good record with safety. Reply It's not surprising for Boeing to spend a couple thousand to hire a PR firm to do damage control on Reddit. We used to do business with hundreds of suppliers all over the world and we always had the upper hand at the bargaining table because we were the customer, but now that those suppliers have been bought by a couple of larger Boeing already fixed the MCAS problem, and is now just cleaning up other issues that cropped up as a result of upgrading the criticality of the MCAS system. It is astounding that no one who wrote the MCAS software for the 737 Max seems even to have raised the The problem with the documentary (and steps boeing has taken since) is that the real issue at hand hasn’t been addressed. In the interests of being cautious they have gone to extensive lengths to review these discrepancies. Tally-ho roger dodger, got 'em on the fish finder! Please read our rules I think what matters is actual crashes, and neither company has a consistent problem with that in places like the US or the EU. Will 787's develop serious issues some day because of things rushed through on the manufacturing floor? Reply suzukibumboi • Additional comment actions. org. However, the trim system Answer: Many of Boeing's new flagship 737 max 8s have been effectively grounded for the moment, Boeing's stock has taken a huge hit in the past month as well. Reply Luvbeers • Additional comment actions. From what I've read (Airliners. Not to mention China just chose Airbus instead of Boeing for a major contract. An MCAS failure will induce Runaway Stabilizer, and following the corresponding My favorite was this supposed issue made Boeing put a stupid manual and auto override switch for the hardover and NONE of the 737's ever had a system trip automatically or manually almost as if that was never the issue *makes scary ghosts sounds*. It’ll help lay the The FAA, unless Boeing can sufficiently capture them to the point that they can move the engine, landing gear and/or the wing location without having to recertify the airframe. Wouldn When MCAS was added, so was another runaway stabilizer mode of failure. The big reason for delay was they discovered issues with The FAA basically forced boeing to fix EVERY little issue the plane had even ones that were previously considered acceptable by the FAA. Then more recently there was a fairly small, but again very visible issue (the door plug blowout), increasing scrutiny even more. Calling all the deliberate and systemic fuckups leading to the MCAS debacle an “honest mistake” (!!!) and in turn laying out a case for poor “airmanship-first” Boeing fighting an unfair battle against airlines, pilots, countries, air crash investigators, flight schools, politicians, Santa Claus and the Martians. I was mostly being cynical since before the crashes most people assumed it had been properly certified and was safe. Because there have been so many other quality issues at Boeing in the past two years. , that caused the MCAS to trigger, even in a heavy check environment, are slim to none. Q&A. The bigger issue was that there wasn't a clear indication when the MCAS modified the plane's pitch angle, nor was there a clear way to disengage it; that meant that the pilots had no way of knowing that the system even existed, let alone how to fix the problem. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast. Boeing test pilots told the their supervisors about the software doing strange things, and they brushed it off. ADMIN MOD Boeing 737 Max Safety Question . Top. Because it was a rushed and poorly implemented system. I mean the listed possible causes of that accident are cosmic rays Boeing’s in the case of MCAS is just greed and stupidity. Boeing kept working and eventually launched their capsule without crew a second time and the second time it almost worked. Archived post. Late last week, media outlets began publishing reports suggesting Boeing knew the MCAS had problems as far back as 2016. So when is Boeing going to get engineers back in charge of the company? Ever since the piss poor MD merger they’ve been running like a newborn colt. 55K subscribers in the aviationmemes community. nytimes. Understand that the of the two planes that had incidents, hundreds of other pilots during that time period were able to fix the control issue without Boeing making the fixes that they did. The documentary talked about the MCAS addition and lack of training but then goes on to talk about boeing quality dropping and inspection skips. This creates an issue for the public, where Boeing doesn’t have to deliver quality products, since they’ll have a job regardless. The odds of you producing the AoA angle, airspeed, altitude, etc. I just finished watching Downfall on Netflix and there was one thing that came to my mind that the documentary did not cover. Once there is a problem, aircrews need to recognize the issue and take steps to correct it. A description of the indications associated with undesired MCAS activation was provided by Boeing in the Manual Bulletin issued to all MAX operators. Reply reply KoalityKoalaKaraoke • The part that failed BUT - Boeing had a large and visible issue a few years ago (the MAX crashes, which were definitely Boeing's fault). They also use subcontractors for most of their planes which is not good for safety oversight. Their only exposure to the MCAS system may be a few slides on a slideshow. “An event like this must not happen on View community ranking In the Top 1% of largest communities on Reddit. Interviewing relevant people and featuring archival footage, the film looks into the events throughout the history of the aircraft manufacturer company Boeing that led to the crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, both Even after the MCAS malfunction, the pilots’ actions actively exacerbated the issue that could have been solved. However, for the MCAS issue to manifest, it relied in some cases on a single sensor input, and did not have a None of the Boeing aircraft have engineering issues causing them to turn into lawn darts. Is the MCAS issue on the 737-Max completely over with, and how? Question I know that Boeing updated the software to evaluate the data from both AOA's now, but what does MCAS do when there is a conflict? Is there still any issue ongoing on this topic, or is it completely behind us/solved/perfected? Share Add a Comment. Boeing didn't tell the pilots about mcas. Provided pilots know and Remember that the MAX series is really new, and the MCAS issues came from two planes where the purchasers had specifically ordered the aircraft with most of the safety systems for it removed. RandomCollection • Additional comment actions. The pilots may not have been flawless, but their actions would have sufficed in the previous 737NG. You're still 1000x safer in a Boeing plane than you are in your car. This is (to over simplify) what happened to those two flights that grounded all MAXs. It was not a training issue. MCAS that did not have any 'sanity checks' for AoA readings or extreme trim settings. What gives with Boeing and this type of aircraft? It took a couple of reads to confirm, but I'm pretty sure OP's question wasn't about only grounding the MAX 9 this time - it was about why it took two incidents to ground the MAX 8s for the MCAS issue when it only took one incident to ground the MAX 9s for the door plug issue. Here you can share videos, pictures, news articles; anything related to Boeing! Members Online • Bluemoo25. Boeing really is in trouble. Sort by: Best. It's safe to say that Canada hates Boeing after the trade issues with the C-series and if they think the MAX can possibly be The issue here is that in order to avoid re-certification and skate by on the legacy certification MCAS was added without explicit description of the system, its failure modes, how to disable and diagnose it, and without training of pilots to understand that this was now on the Max to be an expected part of the flight characteristics. net has an ongoing thread about this), they're still struggling with software issues related to loss of control. The MCAS issue will be a non-issue once it is certified again. Launch delayed indefinitely. How the Boeing 737 Max Disaster Looks to a Software Developer . Submission statement This article discusses the culture at Boeing leading up to the recent, 737 Max crashes, which Because MCAS is inherently difficult to test out. IGNORE THE MCAS ISSUES WITH THE 737 MAX. Because the CFM International LEAP engine used on the 737 MAX was larger and mounted further forward from Here’s an excerpt from the indictment, showing an email conversation where Forkner tells another pilot that he had serious unexpected MCAS issues at low speed on a simulated flight, and he unknowingly misled the FAA because he hadn’t experienced it yet when he talked to them about MCAS. Downfall: The Case Against Boeing is a 2022 American documentary film directed by Rory Kennedy. This whole MCAS fiasco is just the Boeing Rudder issue in the 90s on repeat. Boeing said nothing about reducing thrust, and they also kept it a secret that crew had 10 seconds to react or else they were dead. The new 737 The supplier for the fuselage that had issues was also American. What was different? Looks like Boeing took some shortcuts and their assumptions were grossly wrong. spectrum. Reply reply BigBonziWells • This is a Spirit issue, it's an emergency door that gets plugged for Alaska Potential issues in the rudder controls of the 737? That's like the accident equivalent of playing Wonderwall. You could argue that the main cause of the crashes were pilot lack-of-training, because there was a switch in place to disengage the MCAS feature which some of the pilots were completely unaware of as they encountered the issue. Was a terrible short term decision that I’m sure they didn’t foresee anything But for Boeing’s fraudulently concealing MCAS’s low-speed expansion capabilities, the AEG would have certified the 737 MAX at Level D training or higher and would have included relevant MCAS information in the FSB Report If a passenger plane is unstable, it will be incredibly difficult to fly and you don't just rip out the stabilizing system. Unlikely, the reason why max aircraft have mcas is to prevent a nose up because the engines are too forward for an aircraft such as the 737 MAX but the 787 doesn't have that issue as the aircraft is a lot bigger than the 737 and has different engines as well as its simply big/long enough on its own to prevent a nose up. Would have made more sense to base it off the 787. Now they have had a huge number of experienced employees retire and more retirements are coming. However, this was replaced in AAU2 with the correct Boeing fly-by-wire, which _does_ require you to trim the aircraft. Old. The redesign focused on making sure there were no less than two angle of attack sensors, reducing the authority that MCAS had over the pitch of the plane, and increasing pilot training and awareness of the MCAS system. It wasn’t indicative of Boeing being a company from the movie Wall Street. Which do you think is a better aircraft in terms of range, fuel efficiency etc??? Closed • total votes Boeing 737 MAX . The rare incidents are definitely issues, Boeing needs to fix them, but it's not like going on a Boeing plane is an inherent risk to life compared to an airbus plane. Reprogram it so there was a time requirement between Boeing made a huge misjudge and it’s horrifying, but they learned and fixed it. To be honest, I'm not surprised. escape_your_destiny • There are many mistakes though, for There is the recent news of an Alaska Airlines MAX-9 depressurization/blowout. It is sad how the video claims that "overseas pilots might not be too well trained", but every B3xM pilot I know, and their whole operations, knew how to do the above MCAS functionality and possible issue, and also documented and trained procedures for uncommanded nose down event. This is a systematic management problem. This happens during We are the unofficial Boeing subreddit for anyone interested in The Boeing Company. It was The congressional investigation showed that “Boeing withheld crucial information from the FAA, its customers, and 737 MAX pilots, including internal test data that revealed it took a Boeing There is a lot revealed in this lecture about how Boeing really screwed the pooch on this system! An interesting detail in the analysis is that the use of electric trim to counter the Just in time for the deadline imposed by the Department of Justice, Boeing agreed to plead guilty to “conspiracy to defraud the United States, specifically, the lawful function of the The Lion Air Boeing 737 MAX crash in October revealed that the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) software installed on the aircraft could push the A new report found Boeing and the FAA were at fault for a certification process that failed to identify key vulnerabilities in the Boeing 737 Max's MCAS. rastarn • It As it stood MCAS could only be run on one CPU at a time, which was swapped automatically after each landing or by pilot command. The limited CPU performance was also the reason why Boeing had such difficulty fixing the issue. Read the auto mod and search for the plane in the sub. Voting closed Share Sort by: Best. Absolutely nothing about Boeing's shitty engineering or culture has been fixed. The Exactly !! That's precisely what happens due to the MCAS system malfunctioning. Typically this means that one of them gets head down in checklists while the other flies the Wow, I didn't realize how bad the MCAS issue was. But yes. Foximus05 • Rudders have always been a hard-over point for boeing Reply reply Killentyme55 • Boo! It isn't a question to me of "can Boeing recover" but more of "why would I bet on a Boeing recovery over other investment choices". The whole fault is Boeing's for not certifying it again and not training pilots for a new system. Instead, management determined that if you make it a new type, then Airbus will compete much more with them, calling it a 737 is more profitable, and that eventually flowed down to telling the engineers that they hide any fixes or workaround they Boeing finds two serious problems with Starliner just weeks before launch. Also remember that MCAS issue triggered when there was an issue with the sensors, so you have that problem (trusting sensors) also potentially around. Looks like it was never properly addressed. OP seems curious what the morale is like for Boeing employees after all this. You only hear about the planes that have problems. Not the wheel falling off, not the plane that went off the runway, not the engine fire(s), not the LATAM plane that had severe turbulence. Also it defies logic and reason that if you already have Boeing also is still imo, the #1 of the top 2 airline manufacturers in the world and there is still investigation being done on whether it was MCAS installation on these 737's, lack of pilot regulatory training that caused these planes to crash, or if Boeing failed to completely disclose how to use/functionality of the MCAS to its customers. Reading that it activated every single time the pilots tried to correct was really shocking. Boeing went out of it's way through PR and legal channels to attack the pilots for the crashes, indicating that it was a simple procedure to correct. The issues has been "resolved", until new ones pop up like 787 has shown time after time. rendezvousnz • Range and fuel efficiency are facts though. The force at which the MCAS system is pushing the nose of the plane downward is far too much for the pilot to overcome manually. MCAS was introduced by design due to their decision to put the engine placement. The pilots failed to execute the procedure. Add a Comment. Since at least if it was MCAS, most pilots should now know how to disable it, if it is the issue. Not existential yet Back when the max/mcas issue happened some of the higher level executives and decision maker made a horrible and decision to not properly inform customers properly about the MCAS. You can read it yourself at this link. Reply reply More replies. Regarding space, the last several failed landings on the moon were all due to software errors. View community ranking In the Top 1% of largest communities on Reddit. It’s Boeing issued a world-wide notice detailing all of this, including the correct procedure to be followed if this happened to every 737 max operator. Best. There's a few of them on this thread already and it's quite a disgusting thing to do Even the mods who stickied the thread "You won't die if you fly in a 737 tomorrow" right after the crash are likely to have some connections with Boeing, even afte Reply TyphoonOne • Additional I'm not sure how the MCAS issues were resolved, but if they reverted back to the original code that limited trim adjustment to a one-time 1. The MCAS issue was too easily shrugged off due to the regulatory and xenophobic dimensions IMO without major changes to how software development and cert happens. Of course, no word on if/when EASA or Chinese certification will come. New. If I remember correctly the MCAS issue that causes the crashes was fixed fairly early on but all the other required patches took forever. The only real existing issue, This is Boeing’s internal language speaking here. Airlines have thousands of 737 pilots that are trained to fly older 737s. The Captain on that flight actually managed to stopped the MCAS event. Generically, and concisely unless In the process of reviewing the software, specifically the MCAS, Boeing found additional discrepancies that may be issues. The bigger issue in my eyes though was the lack of transparency during the certification and training process. 6° change and fixed the problem with MCAS forgetting it had already done a trim adjustment every time it was powered off and back on again, that ought to make sure that no crash of this nature happens again. My experience with the 727, Boeing sim pilots had it happen to them 2 years earlier. Spirit aerosystems. This is Boeing mocking a paying customer for requesting training on machines they 179 votes, 53 comments. If we are complying with engineering best practices and federal regulations, the impact of these issues can be mitigated. That's about the gist of it, Boeing was rushing to get the MAX to certification, and systems like MCAS are not uncommon (the 737NGs have a very similar speed trim system, although STS was designed with much more care). We've noticed a few pilots getting caught out by this change. Reply reply GoGamecocks4 • Collins designed it to Boeing’s specs, how is that their fault? Boeing tried "Boeing acknowledged its responsibility for the blowout in a statement issued after the NTSB report and said it is working to make sure incidents like this do not reoccur. Reading that the computer actually fought the pilots One is an autothrottle issue, another is an altitude setting issue, and two others are autopilot issues - MCAS only engages when autopilot is off, and could not have caused either of those two incidents (as an aside here, those two incidents do sound concerning, but I would reference a Flybe Q400 - pages 3-12 - where the pilots caused a similar issue by accidentally setting the It's blantant to all the engineers in the Company as well as the FBI that Boeing has been pursuing a manslaughter agenda where it is cheaper to fly broken birds, blame the airline, pilots, and engineers and then sell another one when it crashes. Airbus A320neo . But the underlying issue was single certification. The procedures has PF and PNF calls and actions, and also procedures how to pump the The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is a flight stabilizing feature developed by Boeing that became notorious for its role in two fatal accidents of the 737 MAX in 2018 and 2019, which killed all 346 passengers and crew among both flights. The ET flight was recoverable. Boeing definitely has fault in the matter, however, Lion Air lacked of a good safety program served as a contributor factor. They have a proven track record of being cheap and producing poor quality products (Responsible for the early failure of the Kepler Spacecraft). Reply reply WHY-IS-INTERNET • I like you Reply reply inaccurateTempedesc • NCD stole mine Reply reply More replies. They’re like Samsung in a way Boeing owns the failure to disclose MCAS, it’s function, and how to interact and operate the system in daily operations, but the pilots needed to follow basic airmanship and control their aircraft. MCAS that operates mostly obscured from the pilots awareness and creates stabilizer trim inputs without their knowledge. The dreamliner and the max has demonstrated that the culture has shifted at boeing. However if it is a different issue altogether that doesn't make the problem less worrisome. One of the best write ups of the 737 Max issues I’ve read - “How the Boeing 737 Max Disaster Looks to a Software Developer” spectrum. Alot of them has flown since too and proven that there isn't any issues anymore. The software did exactly what it was supposed to. The MCAS implementation was a mess, but the pilot's failure to follow the required procedure was also a contributing factor to be sure. The only issue there is that Boeing shouldn't have even had To prevent this condition, Boeing added a new feature to their avionics software on the MAX 8 called MCAS that detects when the angle of attack is too high and automatically points the plane's nose back down to correct the angle. Microsoft will likely capitalize on AI far more than Boeing will fix their issues and grow at a digital scale. And also it works to mitigate this issue. It made it to the station, but it had difficulties Incorrect, the second mission had as many "issues" as the SpaceX demo, not enough to be a factor in the crew cert. Same with all the What I don't understand is the second crash with Ethiopian Air, if the pilots knew about the issue why didn't they react correctly? From my reading I learned that there were even issues with MCAS in the US but the pilots acted accordingly. The FAA The whole issue would have never happened itself if Boeing just said the changes they want are big, so it's a new type of plane. Combine this with the 24/7 media need for Boeing sold a shitload of 737s to even smaller airlines to replace the old stock fleets and would have been successful in doing so if there wasn’t oversights in their production causing in air issues. The MAX can be flown with the MCAS turned off, it will just behave a little differently at AOA of more than 35°, as the engines will add lift due to the Yes, the biggest problem with the MAX is that Boeing is not innovating with the MAX. Reply reply spazturtle • They had a stabilisation system malfunction, but it wasn't runaway as it was not continuous, it stopped after a few seconds before starting back up after a delay. I'm wondering, besides the two crashes if there Boeing and rudder issues, name a more iconic duo. Boeing's answer was to give the flight control computer the authority to rapidly trim the elevator to a nose down Under the proposal, MCAS would trigger in narrow circumstances. That is why MCAS is encompassed within the Runaway Stabilizer Procedure and why pilots are trained to recognize runaway stabilizer situations when they learn to fly ANY 737, not just the MAX. One of the crashes could have easily been an American plane. Yes I agree, just saying air travel is the safest shouldn’t excuse any sort of The company that developed the MCAS software is called Collins Aerospace (After a recent rename). So yeah, I would get on a MAX. So big that Boeing originally wanted to create a new plane, but shareholders didn't. MCAS was the problem that caused the crash and MCAS is I read somewhere that 1/3 Americans are indirectly employed by Boeing, Boeing is much bigger than just planes and Boeing is so vital to the US government that it will never sink. These reports were based on the series of instant messages between Mark Forkner and Patrik Boeing faced another problem, they had promised major carriers that pilots could step into the Max with no simulator training. Reply reply [deleted] • Comment deleted by user. Why did Boeing connect two MCAS to two AoA sensors separately and make the AoA disagree light only an option? There seems to be an obvious lack of redundancy because any single AoA failure can trigger serious malfunctioning. This is Boeing calling Lion Air idiots for requesting simulator training which sounds great, in theory. So Immediately preceding the Ethiopian air mishap, Boeing had to do a road show to teach all Max pilots what to do in the case of an MCAS malfunction. Open comment sort options. I believe both Lion and Ethiopian had some maintenance issues that came to light after the fact, but were obviously shadowed by the stuff going on at Boeing at the time. To Then MCAS pushes down more - the two end up fighting all the way into the ground. It was designed "to address potentially unacceptable nose-up pitching moment at high angles of attack at high This whole piece was a ridiculous read from start to finish. The Lion Air aircraft had suffered an MCAS malfunction the day before. KC46 project, based on an old and outdated airframe (767). This is going to be the safest plane boeing has ever put out at this point And yeah, MCAS issue is runaway trim issue, runaway stabilizer NNC is the right one to perform, as even the AD issued after LionAir crash confirmed. Nothing about the manufacturing floor or quality caused the crashes. I remember them hoping to restart production this month, but I haven't heard anything on that front, other than Reuters saying that acceptance will likely be delayed until August. However, they do explore through CGI/renactment another flight before the first crash that had a similar MCAS issue. As a MCAS provides no indication to the pilots that it is active unlike other flight modes or Autoslats for example. Then a week later he talks to the FAA again, and instead of giving them the new Turning off the MCAS may not be the first, second, or final reaction for 737 type rated pilots that just moved to a max. The MCAS incorrectly assumes control of a downward thrusting capability function that typically the pilot controls. MCAS is not a flight critical system, so if it failed, it likely wouldn't be an issue. Share Sort by: Best. ieee. Downfall: The Case Against Boeing. Just read the wiki. comments sorted by Best Top New Controversial Q&A Add a Comment [deleted] • Additional comment actions. All this MCAS bullshit is because they built the wing too low to accommodate the ludicrously large engines that exist today, in the mid 20th century when they designed it. Turns out, if that sensor is bork The only issue that has been Boeing's fault recently is the door plug. Alot bigger than the original design allowed for. I don't see anything in the press release citing a 13% efficiency difference. arstechnica. “Whatever final conclusions are reached, Boeing is accountable for what happened,” said Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun in a statement. CNN Business article on B737 Max 9 door issue and followed by CNN article and video with NTSB on Max 9 The FAA is exploring the use of an independent third party to oversee Boeing’s inspections and its quality system. The United guys (at least the ones I know) still say it was incorrectly diagnosed windshear. Boeing Was ‘Go, Go, Go’ to Beat Airbus With the 737 Max . Everything is being delayed now because of the recent problems and the solutions that need to take place. ttd lits vuxx kudv hbsbt vblpf uctovlk ymc blg rmccvd