Is safety an optional extra?

[ellal]

( i will not post the link to where this report can be read in order to protect it from Brexit infected trolls ) .

Yep, trust DP to bring it up first...

Again!

 

[bernardgreen]

Read Boeing's press release HERE

 

[SirGalahad]

One line from the preliminary report. AOA = angle of attack

At 05:38:44, shortly after liftoff, the left and right recorded AOA values deviated. Left AOA decreased to 11.1° then increased to 35.7° while value of right AOA indicated 14.94°. Then after, the left AOA value reached 74.5° in ¾ seconds while the right AOA reached a maximum value of 15.3°

Hence the MCAS system was getting invalid data which was indicating incorrectly to the MCAS that a stall was about to happen without the pilots being aware of it.

( i will not post the link to where this report can be read in order to protect it from Brexit infected trolls ) .

Still trying to defend Boeing.

The problem with that line of reasoning is this.

The MCAS only took data from one AOA sensor - a badly designed piece of s/w
The MCAS system was never tested with bad data - rushed self certification.
The pilots were unaware MCAS even existed.

Keep trying.

 

[bernardgreen]

Still trying to defend Boeing.

How on earth can you read that as being in defence of Boeing.

You might at a stretch consider it as defence of th MCAS system. It was NOT defence of the MCAS system

I personally consider Boeing management and to some extent the FAA as being guilty of serious ommissions and errors in both the design process and the approvals process.

 

[SirGalahad]

How on earth can you read that as being in defence of Boeing.

You might at a stretch consider it as defence of th MCAS system. It was NOT defence of the MCAS system

I personally consider Boeing management and to some extent the FAA as being guilty of serious ommissions and errors in both the design process and the approvals process.

I know a few ex Boeing Engineers and it's sad to hear the stories they tell of the madness of senior management to drive down costs and outsource - just look at the problems they had with the Dreamliner - sometimes the obsessive pursuit of quarterly sales growth leads to sub optimal outcomes.

 

[ellal]

Could this be Boeing's 'Comet moment'?

 

[durhamplumber]

The pilots were unaware MCAS even existed.

Hogsht

 

[bernardgreen]

Could this be Boeing's 'Comet moment'?

The Comet incidents were inflight break up of the aircraft fuselage due to metal fatigue and resultant cracking. At the time metal fatigue and crack formation were not fully understood.

The 737 MAX incidents are ( almost certainly ) due to the aircraft being unstable in flight and the less than perfect method of preventing that instability developing into a stall.

BOAC and De Havilland immediately and jointly grounded the Comets after the first loss.

Boeing defended the 737_MAX by refusing to ground the aircraft and tried to blame the pilots


The first production aircraft G-ALYP, scheduled on BOAC Flight 781 from Rome Ciampino to London Heathrow, was lost on January 10, 1954 by the fuselage breaking up in mid-air 20 minutes after taking off. BOAC voluntarily grounded its fleet and engineers suggested 60 immediate modifications to the design to rectify some of the design flaws that were believed to have caused the accident

Quoted from [url="https://aerospaceengineeringblog.com/dehavilland-comet-crash/"] HERE [/URL]

 

[big-all]

i remember it was cracks starting from the corners with the solution remove or strengthen the corners hence round or oval windows now

 

[ellal]

..

 

[ellal]

At the time metal fatigue and crack formation were not fully understood.

Any different from 'not understanding' software issues?

BOAC and De Havilland immediately and jointly grounded the Comets after the first loss.

"Despite an ongoing investigation, the BOAC recommended the Comet resume service by April 1954. It didn’t take long for their decision to prove fatally tragic.

For the sake of expediency, De Havilland implemented a series of modifications to the satisfaction of regulatory officials."

And yet another accident occurred!

Boeing defended the 737_MAX by refusing to ground the aircraft and tried to blame the pilots

Re the Comet: "Both early accidents were originally attributed to pilot error"


Sounds familiar?

“Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”

 

[EddieM]

Always issues in being a ground breaker, unknown unknowns, square windows are seemingly a bad thing on aircraft.

 

[SirGalahad]

Hogsht

As usual you are wrong but its what I expect from the dumbest poster on here.

 

[Brigadier]

Always issues in being a ground breaker, unknown unknowns, square windows are seemingly a bad thing on aircraft.

And in structurally-important elements of ships.

 

[durhamplumber]

As usual you are wrong but its what I expect from the dumbest poster on here.

We will disagree on that too.