Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Breaking news: Ethiopian Airlines flight has crashed on way to Nairobi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by SmoothAir View Post
    So Robert ? - what happened in your case ? ... A Redwood ?
    Two switches!

    Leave a comment:


  • SmoothAir
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    Can't see the forest with all of those trees right in front of your face there can you? By the time you get into the left seat, you are supposed to be a pilot!
    So Robert ? - what happened in your case ? ... A Redwood ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    I don't think so. Boeing must know by now they can't wiggle out of this one. The evidence is too damning, too widely exposed. They will be held fully responsible for their negligence. The worst thing they can do now is too try to evade taking full responsibility, especially by shifting any blame to the pilots they killed. The best thing they can do, from a public relations standpoint, is to issue an unmitigated mea culpa while containing the blame to a specific aspect and purging that aspect as a means to publicly fixing the problem. In other words, they are doing this on the technical level by identifying the problem with MCAS and redesigning it, but they still haven't publicly addressed the problem on the decision-making level. The public now sees this as a result of either poor decision-making or corrupt or negligent decision-making. Boeing has to show the public that they have identified this aspect as well and made reparations. This means an admission of rotten leadership and a purge of that rotten leadership. Distinguish the company from the problematic aspects of its leadership. Pledge to restore the integrity and vision of the company. This is how they will win back the trust of the public.

    The Challenger disaster is a prime example of public damage control. The problem was 'management culture' that subverted safety. That culture was purged. The shuttle returned to glory, at least for a while. But there is a big difference between a publicly-funded government program and a publicly-traded company. There are pressures upon a publicly-traded company that corrupt attempts to come clean and there is less regulation and accountability to overcome them.

    The commercial (non-military) airframing industry is an oligopoly, and in the U.S. it is a monopoly. Boeing thinks they can afford to take a defensive and arrogant stance. Maybe they can, but I think it will hurt them through attrition. They are already on the back foot with respect to the competition. I mean, that's what got them into this whole mess. The -Max was a shining example of a reactionary response to crutch a lack of visionary thinking.
    The problem is that you are taking Boing and their executive management as separate entities. Which technically they are. Bt as long as they are in functions (i.e. they don't resign and are not removed), doing what you (and I) think should be done is digging a grave for themselves, even if it would be good for Boeing. SO who is going to take the decisions, take the actions, and state the statements, that you are proposing?

    I posted this almost 1 month ago:

    Boeing CEO's statements (paraphrasing):

    - We are sorry
    - MCAS action due to erroneous AoA values was a necessary part in the chain of events of both crashes.
    - This has to be fixed. We own it. We know how to do it. And we will do it so accidents like this never happen again

    Boeing CEO's non-statements

    - Not only we got the MCAS wrong. We got the product design, development, testing and certification wrong.
    - These kind of systemic process and policy gaps may have created and may create in the future more mistakes, which may include safety-critical issues.
    - Because of that we are reviewing the whole 737 MAX design, development, testing and certification process and the decisions that were taken.
    - We are also reviewing our design, development, testing and certification process and policies so flaws like this never happen again or, at minimum, they are not the result of active decisions taken.
    - We are at minimum partially responsible for the loss of the lives in these two crash. We recognize that and we are taking full accountability.
    - We are being sued by the families of the victims. But I can assure you that there will be no lawsuit.
    - That's because we recognize that their claim is fair, and we are going to honor them.
    - We are meeting individually and collectively with each and every next of kin and family of the victims of these 2 accidents, we are addressing their immediate needs and working out an economic compensation to their satisfaction.
    - Nothing will ever replace the lives lost, but the best we can do is take care of these families in a fair way, assume our responsibility, and make sure that we learn the lessons and identify, address, and fix the issues so as not only as there is never an MCAS accident again, but there is never another accident caused by bad product design, development, certification and testing. Then the loss of lives would not have been vain.
    - Boeing is suffering and will continue to suffer a lot from the mistakes we ourselves created, but we are learning from them and we will emerge from the crisis as a stronger company.
    - As the head ob Boeing, I am responsible for a leadership structure and style the led to these events. And I take full accountability.
    - Here is my undclinable resignation, and I will not accept any golden parachute.

    Leave a comment:


  • SmoothAir
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    And THIS is where experience comes into play. Not ALL of us sit back "fat dumb and lazy" like the nub thinks
    No Robert, Fat, Dumb and HAPPY - !

    You are obviously a super, experienced, and very very knowledgeable pilot - AFTER THE EVENT !!! - Amazing.........................................

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    It is suicidal to say "our irresponsible negligence killed 300+".
    I don't think so. Boeing must know by now they can't wiggle out of this one. The evidence is too damning, too widely exposed. They will be held fully responsible for their negligence. The worst thing they can do now is too try to evade taking full responsibility, especially by shifting any blame to the pilots they killed. The best thing they can do, from a public relations standpoint, is to issue an unmitigated mea culpa while containing the blame to a specific aspect and purging that aspect as a means to publicly fixing the problem. In other words, they are doing this on the technical level by identifying the problem with MCAS and redesigning it, but they still haven't publicly addressed the problem on the decision-making level. The public now sees this as a result of either poor decision-making or corrupt or negligent decision-making. Boeing has to show the public that they have identified this aspect as well and made reparations. This means an admission of rotten leadership and a purge of that rotten leadership. Distinguish the company from the problematic aspects of its leadership. Pledge to restore the integrity and vision of the company. This is how they will win back the trust of the public.

    The Challenger disaster is a prime example of public damage control. The problem was 'management culture' that subverted safety. That culture was purged. The shuttle returned to glory, at least for a while. But there is a big difference between a publicly-funded government program and a publicly-traded company. There are pressures upon a publicly-traded company that corrupt attempts to come clean and there is less regulation and accountability to overcome them.

    The commercial (non-military) airframing industry is an oligopoly, and in the U.S. it is a monopoly. Boeing thinks they can afford to take a defensive and arrogant stance. Maybe they can, but I think it will hurt them through attrition. They are already on the back foot with respect to the competition. I mean, that's what got them into this whole mess. The -Max was a shining example of a reactionary response to crutch a lack of visionary thinking.

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    I agree, but I suspect that he knows very well that they screwed up and this speech is PR and an attempt to economic and legal protection for the company and for the executives themselves. It is suicidal to say "our irresponsible negligence killed 300+". Boeing KNOW that they screw up, they KNOW how to fix it, and the WILL (else the plane will not be certified again except perhaps in the USA).
    well, it won't happen, but boeing should offer the families of each passenger and crew the immediate payment of $2,000,000.00 each; reimburse each Lion Air and Ethiopian the purchase cost of the aircraft they lost; and offer to pay the cost of the investigations. instead, they will deny liability, drag all the parties through the mud for years, spend 10s of millions in attorneys' fees, then settle anyway. the real problem is not about the money. it is with the ultimate denial of liability. at least in criminal proceedings a judge controls whether a plea bargain is accepted. in civil court, the judge has no control if the parties settle.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg gave a very disturbing press conference today. It was disturbing because it shows an executive leadership either still in denial or willing to downplay responsibility as well as publicly evade transparency with regard to the facts.

    It included this astonishing statement:


    The first part of that statement reveals the central flaw in Boeing's philosophy, which seems to provide the cool-headed, proficiency of pilots under immense stress as the only redundancy for certain critical system failures. We know that doesn't always work. The NSTB knows it, the FAA knows it and Boeing knows it. I can't even count how many times we've learned this hard lesson.
    It also entirely ignores the fact that 'these airplanes are flown in the hands of pilots' that were never told about the system in the first place, let alone provided a procedure to deal with any erroneous behavior.
    The second part is self-evidently disturbing. There was a HUGE slip involved in creating the MCAS system. That is, of course, why it is now being significantly modified.

    He also claimed that the Ethiopian pilots did not "completely" follow the procedures that Boeing had outlined. This is disturbing because Boeing still hasn't seemed to acknowledge that those procedures were the result of flawed or limited thinking. Thus, he gives us no reason to hope the procedures will be rethought.

    Overall, his statements seem to affirm my belief that the cancer at Boeing is rooted in its management culture which places the highest concern on preserving its near-term image to shareholders at the expense of safety and long-term outlook and that these tragic consequences have done nothing to purge that culture.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/29/inves...ing/index.html
    I agree, but I suspect that he knows very well that they screwed up and this speech is PR and an attempt to economic and legal protection for the company and for the executives themselves. It is suicidal to say "our irresponsible negligence killed 300+". Boeing KNOW that they screwed up, they KNOW how to fix it, and the WILL (else the plane will not be certified again except perhaps in the USA).

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    Boeing got the procedure wrong for this. They apparently did not think it through very well. Like you, they placed blind confidence in seasoned airmanship and human performance despite a maelstrom of tasks and concentration factors and all that we've learned about the effects they have on human performance.

    Now tell me who wasn't seeing the forest for the trees.
    what procedure is that? oh! the one they didn't write because they didn't tell anyone about the grossly flawed system/design they snuck in to avoid a proper review by supposedly impartial FAA peeps?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg gave a very disturbing press conference today. It was disturbing because it shows an executive leadership either still in denial or willing to downplay responsibility as well as publicly evade transparency with regard to the facts.

    It included this astonishing statement:
    "When we design these systems, understand that these airplanes are flown in the hands of pilots," he said. He added that Boeing was unable to find any "technical slip or gap" in building its MCAS software.
    The first part of that statement reveals the central flaw in Boeing's philosophy, which seems to provide the cool-headed, proficiency of pilots under immense stress as the only redundancy for certain critical system failures. We know that doesn't always work. The NSTB knows it, the FAA knows it and Boeing knows it. I can't even count how many times we've learned this hard lesson.
    It also entirely ignores the fact that 'these airplanes are flown in the hands of pilots' that were never told about the system in the first place, let alone provided a procedure to deal with any erroneous behavior.
    The second part is self-evidently disturbing. There was a HUGE slip involved in creating the MCAS system. That is, of course, why it is now being significantly modified.

    He also claimed that the Ethiopian pilots did not "completely" follow the procedures that Boeing had outlined. This is disturbing because Boeing still hasn't seemed to acknowledge that those procedures were the result of flawed or limited thinking. Thus, he gives us no reason to hope the procedures will be rethought.

    Overall, his statements seem to affirm my belief that the cancer at Boeing is rooted in its management culture which places the highest concern on preserving its near-term image to shareholders at the expense of safety and long-term outlook and that these tragic consequences have done nothing to purge that culture.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/29/inves...ing/index.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    No, and it never will. Just the way I like it. Very dangerous ��
    Does it mean no coffee maker either?!?!? NOOOOOooooooo!!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    I may just do that. Especially if there's no internet.

    In the meantime, we are discussing the tragic deaths of 346 people which was not simply the result of pilot error or 'inherent risk'. As time passes, it has become increasing clear that this was preventable by both design and procedure.

    Do have anything useful to add?
    No, you seem to already have all the answers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    You will NEVER be happy. I recommend you sell everything you own, and move to the North woods of Canada and live off the land
    I may just do that. Especially if there's no internet.

    In the meantime, we are discussing the tragic deaths of 346 people which was not simply the result of pilot error or 'inherent risk'. As time passes, it has become increasing clear that this was preventable by both design and procedure.

    Do have anything useful to add?

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    'mealstrom' is a human error, a 'typo', which I made despite having been a typing professional for over 25000 hours. Do you see my point?
    You will NEVER be happy. I recommend you sell everything you own, and move to the North woods of Canada and live off the land

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    You! And what is a mealstrom? Is that like a tornado full of food?
    'mealstrom' is a human error, a 'typo', which I made despite having been a typing professional for over 25000 hours. Do you see my point?

    Leave a comment:


  • elaw
    replied
    So for ADS-B out, you just periodically stick your head out the window and shout your lat/long, altitude, airspeed, and heading?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X