The crew of a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 Max declared an emergency shortly after takeoff and returned to Orlando's main airport on Tuesday after reporting an engine problem, the Federal Aviation Administration said.
The FAA grounded this type of aircraft earlier this month following two fatal crashes of the popular model.
Airlines aren't allowed to fly passengers under the FAA's order. The Southwest plane, which was not carrying passengers, was bound for Victorville, Calif., where the carrier is storing the aircraft in a facility in the western Mojave Desert.
[...] The FAA said it is investigating the Southwest incident on Tuesday and that the issue was not related to other concerns about the 737 Max that led the agency to ground the plane.
Also at CNN.
See also: Boeing is handling the 737 Max crisis all wrong
Previously: Second 737 MAX8 Airplane Crash Reinforces Speculation on Flying System Problems
Boeing 737 Max Aircraft Grounded in the U.S. and Dozens of Other Countries
DoJ Issues Subpoenas in 737 Max Investigation
Pilot Who Hitched a Ride Saved Lion Air 737 Day Before Deadly Crash
Airline Cancels $4.9 Billion Boeing 737 MAX Order; Doomed Planes Lacked Optional Safety Features
Related Stories
All 157 passengers of an Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 died today, an accident that looks similar to the Indonesian Lion Air crash which caused 189 victims in October 2018.
The Ethiopian Boeing 737, a brand new plane, lost contact six minutes after departure from Bole International Airport; the 737 departing from Jakarta had done the same twelve minutes after taking off.
In both cases the weather was optimal and the pilots were experts. Ethiopian Airlines has a good safety record.
Both planes belong to the MAX variant, which features a "Manoeuvring Characteristics Augmentation System" software to increase safety. Depending on sensor input, such software lowers the nose of the airplane, to prevent stalling. Investigations into the first disaster suggest the pilot might have had trouble with the automatic systems over this issue.
The two black boxes (with cockpit voice and flight data respectively), are likely to be recovered.
Sources:
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/ethiopian-airlines-crash-news-latest-death-toll-addis-ababa-nairobi-boeing-737-max-a8816296.html
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/03/10/second-crash-of-new-boeing-737-max-8-aggravates-safety-concerns/
U.S. Grounds Boeing Planes, After Days of Pressure
After days of mounting pressure, the United States grounded Boeing's 737 Max aircraft on Wednesday, reversing an earlier decision in which American regulators said the planes could keep flying after a deadly crash in Ethiopia.
The decision, announced by President Trump, followed determinations by safety regulators in some 42 countries to ban flights by the jets, which are now grounded worldwide. Pilots, flight attendants, consumers and politicians from both major parties had been agitating for the planes to be grounded in the United States. Despite the clamor, the Federal Aviation Administration had been resolute, saying on Tuesday that it had seen "no systemic performance issues" that would prompt it to halt flights of the jet.
That changed Wednesday when, in relatively quick succession, Canadian and American aviation authorities said they were grounding the planes after newly available satellite-tracking data suggested similarities between Sunday's crash in Ethiopia and one involving a Boeing 737 Max 8 in Indonesia in October.
Previously: Second 737 MAX8 Airplane Crash Reinforces Speculation on Flying System Problems
Related: Boeing 737 MAX 8 Could Enable $69 Trans-Atlantic Flights
Justice Department issues subpoenas in criminal investigation of Boeing
US Justice Department prosecutors have issued multiple subpoenas as part of an investigation into Boeing's Federal Aviation Administration certification and marketing of 737 Max planes, sources briefed on the matter told CNN.
[...] Criminal investigators have sought information from Boeing on safety and certification procedures, including training manuals for pilots, along with how the company marketed the new aircraft, the sources said.
It's not yet clear what possible criminal laws could be at issue in the probe. Among the things the investigators are looking into is the process by which Boeing itself certified the plane as safe, and the data it presented the FAA about that self-certification, the sources said.
The FBI Seattle office and Justice Department's criminal division in Washington are leading the investigation.
See also: FAA: Boeing 737 MAX to get software update
Europe and Canada Just Signaled They Don't Trust the FAA's Investigation of the Boeing 737 MAX
Pilot Who Hitched a Ride Saved Lion Air 737 Day Before Deadly Crash:
As the Lion Air crew fought to control their diving Boeing Co. 737 Max 8, they got help from an unexpected source: an off-duty pilot who happened to be riding in the cockpit.
That extra pilot, who was seated in the cockpit jumpseat, correctly diagnosed the problem and told the crew how to disable a malfunctioning flight-control system and save the plane, according to two people familiar with Indonesia's investigation.
The next day, under command of a different crew facing what investigators said was an identical malfunction, the jetliner crashed into the Java Sea killing all 189 aboard.
[...] The previously undisclosed detail on the earlier Lion Air flight represents a new clue in the mystery of how some 737 Max pilots faced with the malfunction have been able to avert disaster while the others lost control of their planes and crashed. The presence of a third pilot in the cockpit wasn't contained in Indonesia's National Transportation Safety Committee's Nov. 28 report on the crash and hasn't previously been reported.
The so-called dead-head pilot on the earlier flight from Bali to Jakarta told the crew to cut power to the motor driving the nose down, according to the people familiar, part of a checklist that all pilots are required to memorize.
[...] The Indonesia safety committee report said the plane had had multiple failures on previous flights and hadn't been properly repaired.
Boeing takes $5 billion hit as Indonesian airline cancels 737 MAX order
Indonesia's largest air carrier has informed Boeing that it wants to cancel a $4.9 billion order for 49 Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft. Garuda Indonesia spokesperson Ikhsan Rosan said in a statement to the Associated Press that the airline was cancelling due to concern that "its business would be damaged due to customer alarm over the crashes."
Garuda had originally ordered 50 737 MAX aircraft, and Boeing delivered the first of those aircraft in December of 2017. The airline already operates 77 older Boeing 737 models; two of the aircraft ordered were conversions from earlier orders for 737-800s. Garuda also flies Boeing's 777-300 ER, and the company retired its 747-400 fleet in the last few years—so the airline was looking for an economical long-range aircraft to fill in gaps.
Doomed Boeing Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features That Company Sold Only as Extras
As the pilots of the doomed Boeing jets in Ethiopia and Indonesia fought to control their planes, they lacked two notable safety features in their cockpits. One reason: Boeing charged extra for them.
For Boeing and other aircraft manufacturers, the practice of charging to upgrade a standard plane can be lucrative. Top airlines around the world must pay handsomely to have the jets they order fitted with customized add-ons. Sometimes these optional features involve aesthetics or comfort, like premium seating, fancy lighting or extra bathrooms. But other features involve communication, navigation or safety systems, and are more fundamental to the plane's operations.
Many airlines, especially low-cost carriers like Indonesia's Lion Air, have opted not to buy them — and regulators don't require them. Now, in the wake of the two deadly crashes involving the same jet model, Boeing will make one of those safety features standard as part of a fix to get the planes in the air again.
See also: They didn't buy the DLC: feature that could've prevented 737 crashes was sold as an option
Previously: Second 737 MAX8 Airplane Crash Reinforces Speculation on Flying System Problems
Boeing 737 Max Aircraft Grounded in the U.S. and Dozens of Other Countries
DoJ Issues Subpoenas in 737 Max Investigation
Pilot Who Hitched a Ride Saved Lion Air 737 Day Before Deadly Crash
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/17/788775642/boeing-will-temporarily-stop-making-its-737-max-jetliners
Production will stop in January. The jets were grounded after two crashes that killed nearly 350 people. Despite being grounded, Boeing continued cranking the planes out at its factory near Seattle.
(The interview had more good information, but at time of submission, the transcript wasn't available. There may be better articles out there.)
There are. Here's one:
Boeing will suspend 737 Max production in January at CNBC:
Boeing is planning to suspend production of its beleaguered 737 Max planes next month, the company said Monday, a drastic step after the Federal Aviation Administration said its review of the planes would continue into next year, dashing the manufacturer's forecast.
Boeing's decision to temporarily shut down production, made after months of a cash-draining global grounding of its best-selling aircraft, worsens one of the most severe crises in the history of the century-old manufacturer. It is ramping up pressure on CEO Dennis Muilenburg, whom the board stripped of his chairmanship in October as the crisis wore on.
The measure is set to ripple through the aerospace giant's supply chain and broader economy. It also presents further problems for airlines, which have lost hundreds of millions of dollars and canceled thousands of flights without the fuel-efficient planes in their fleets.
Boeing said it does not plan to lay off or furlough workers at the Renton, Washington, factory where the 737 Max is produced during the production pause. Some of the 12,000 workers there will be temporarily reassigned.
Previously:
Boeing's 737 Max Troubles Deepen, Taking Airlines, Suppliers With It
Review of 737 Max Certification Finds Fault With Boeing and F.A.A.
American Airlines Says It Will Resume Flights With Boeing’s 737 Max Jets in January
AP Sources: Boeing Changing 737 Max Software to Use 2 Computers
Boeing Falsified Records for 787 Jet Sold to Air Canada
Boeing Pledges $100M to Families of 737 Max Crash Victims
Capt. 'Sully' Sullenberger and Boeing 737 Max News
Boeing’s Own Test Pilots Lacked Key Details Of 737 Max Flight-Control System
Boeing CEO Defends 737 Max Flight Control System
Analysis: Why FAA-Approved Emergency Procedures Failed to Save ET302
Initial Findings Put Boeing's Software at Center of Ethiopian 737 Crash
Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 Max Flight Makes Emergency Landing (While Carrying No Passengers)
Airline Cancels $4.9 Billion Boeing 737 MAX Order; Doomed Planes Lacked Optional Safety Features
Pilot Who Hitched a Ride Saved Lion Air 737 Day Before Deadly Crash
DoJ Issues Subpoenas in 737 Max Investigation
Boeing 737 Max Aircraft Grounded in the U.S. and Dozens of Other Countries
Second 737 MAX8 Airplane Crash Reinforces Speculation on Flying System Problems
Boeing's promised 737 Max production halt begins:
The airline manufacturer had announced last month it would stop making the troubled craft at least until it was no longer grounded, but hadn't set a date. However the line has officially stopped producing planes while Boeing officials wait for regulators to give it the OK to fly again.
[...] The latest update estimated the grounding would last through at least mid-2020, Boeing said in a statement Tuesday.
Boeing will reassign 3,000 workers after 737 MAX production halt
Boeing Co said it will reassign 3,000 workers to other jobs as it halts production of the grounded best-selling 737 MAX jet in mid-January.
The announcement came after American Airlines Group Inc and Mexico's Aeromexico disclosed they were the latest carriers to reach settlements with Boeing over losses resulting from the grounding of the 737 MAX aircraft.
Neither airline disclosed the compensation. A number of airlines have struck confidential settlements with Boeing in recent weeks. Boeing said it does not comment on discussions with airlines.
Boeing's biggest supplier lays off 2,800 workers because of 737 Max production suspension:
Spirit AeroSystems (SPR), which makes fuselages for the Max as well as other items for Boeing, announced Friday that it is furloughing approximately 2,800 workers. Shares of the Wichita, Kansas-based company fell more than 1% in trading.
"The difficult decision announced today is a necessary step given the uncertainty related to both the timing for resuming 737 Max production and the overall production levels that can be expected following the production suspension," Spirit AeroSystems CEO Tom Gentile said in a press release.
Boeing wants to resume 737 Max production months before regulators sign off on the planes:
(Score: 5, Insightful) by MostCynical on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:04AM (2 children)
Planes experiencing engine problems are meant to get back on the ground ASAP.
If this were any other plane, it wouldn't have made all the news feeds.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:05AM (1 child)
"Not being related to other concerns" sounds like bad news, actually.
It's not only the 'other concerns' to be... ummm, how to put it without sounding alarmist?... concerned about, but potentially a new one. (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 3, Informative) by MostCynical on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:31AM
CFM International LEAP-1B engines
Some problems..not many, but not "none". The LEAP engines are now over ten years old.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/faa-order-targets-turbine-cases-on-some-leap-1b-engi-454031/ [flightglobal.com]
https://www.mro-network.com/engines-engine-systems/cold-soak-software-fix-expanded-leap-1b-engines [mro-network.com]
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:49AM (1 child)
Okay, great. They're investigating it!
>and that the issue was not related to other concerns about the 737 Max that led the agency to ground the plane.
But how do they know that if they haven't investigated it yet?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:57AM
The FAA said it is investigating the Southwest incident on Tuesday
Boilerplate filler to impress the audience. An engine quit. They turned around and landed. The comment above explained why this is in the news.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 4, Interesting) by eravnrekaree on Wednesday March 27 2019, @01:19PM (7 children)
It has nothing to do with MCAS, indeed. I am sure 737 Max can be made a safe plane, provided that Boeing actually provides pilots information in the manual about *everything* including MCAS and anything else they have been keeping a secret, and installs all of the MCAS safety features such as MCAS disagree light and a well documented way to disable MCAS.
Lets review what was known previously. The fact is, Boeing was negligent because it is well known that Boeing DID NOT disclose that MCAS even existed or even how to turn it off or what it does to pilots in the manual prior to the LionAir crash. This sounds like it could be criminal negligence as this is critical and vital information. It did so for monetary reasons, it wanted to make the MAX seem exactly the same as a 737 so it left out anything that might give the impression that it was any different than a 737 so Airlines could think they could just take a pilot off of a 737 and drop him in a MAX without any significant retraining. Even if, they did not put mention of MCAS in training, they could have made a video about it and included a discussion of it in the manual.
The fact is, pilots being aware of MCAS what it does and how to disable it would have saved hundreds of lives, LionAir would have never have happened since the disagree notice could have issued a visual and verbal alarm in the cockpit and the pilot would have known how to disable MCAS and take manual control.
Many try to blame LionAIr on pilot error. it could not be pilot error because a pilot cannot properly respond to a failure condition of MCAS without knowing what it is and what it does and how to turn it off. The error was clearly Boeing failing to properly disclose MCAS, how to disable it and the failure to include disagree light as a standard feature.
To add to the possibility of criminal negligence, a disagree light would come at negligable cost to Boeing, it wanted to charge airlines a huge amount of money for it as a result of pure greed. This is despite it being a critical safety feature that could have saved lives.
Boeing was trying to play catchup with Airbus. Airbus used Pratt and Whitney engines which provide much higher fuel efficiency with engines of the same size allowing Airbus to just swap out the engines on the same airframe without major modifications to the craft.
Boeing was eager to play catch up because Airbus had a huge lead on them. So Boeing was pressured to get out a new version of 737 as quickly as possible and lead to them making a series of foolish decisions. Boeing however did not use this technology and instead had to go with bigger engines that made the aircraft unstable. It wanted to save money by not going with a new clean sheet redesign. It also wanted to market the airplane as a drop in replacement for 737 which did not require pilot retraining. So it added MCAS to make the Max seem to be the same plane to the pilot and also withheld the critical information about MCAS to pilots to give the false impression the plane did not require retraining in order to increase Boeings marketing
and profitability to the airlines. Thus Boeing made a series of what appear to be criminally negligent errors with a profit motivation.
Boeing is probably responsible for LionAir and this is a very serious scandal for Boeing and will likely due serious damage to its reputation.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @02:30PM (4 children)
But the Starliner capsule will be safe to fly to the ISS.
The SLS will fly humans on its maiden voyage -- if it ever has one.
If you think a fertilized egg is a child but an immigrant child is not, please don't pretend your concerns are religious
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday March 27 2019, @02:44PM (3 children)
Not true. EM-1 [wikipedia.org] is still planned to be an unmanned mission.
They are scheduled to launch humans on the second mission. Point out that other rockets require more stringent testing before humans can fly on them? Well, it's OK, because..... it reuses Shuttle parts!
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:09PM
Ah, okay. I had heard or read hints otherwise. And it was not hard for me to believe that SLS could get some special kind of exception.
After all, what are a few human lives when the cost of a single SLS test / demo launch is a billion dollars!
If you think a fertilized egg is a child but an immigrant child is not, please don't pretend your concerns are religious
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:10PM (1 child)
Wait until we get the new 2024 "Moon during my presidency" schedule.
At the rate they can build and launch SLS, and given they probably won't get a cash infusion, they're definitely going to cut corners somewhere and not test every piece once before putting live bodies on board.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:43PM
https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/26/18282598/nasa-mike-pence-vice-president-space-policy-lunar-landings-2024-gateway-sls-orion [theverge.com]
The Pence speech potentially ties into the previous story: White House Budget Request Would Move Launches from SLS to Commercial Providers [soylentnews.org]
But the SLS is propped up by Congress and is still central to the Moon plans:
Struggling with flat budgets, they say. It would be nice to see orbital BFR tests this year so that these articles are forced to mention it and not just Falcon Heavy. Under the current plans [wikipedia.org], Yusaku Maezawa and artists would fly around the Moon in 2023, sooner than any 2024 activity and probably sooner than an Orion crew launch (scheduled for 2022, expected to slip).
It's like the orbital profile was chosen as another jab at SLS (hopefully a nail in the coffin).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 27 2019, @03:23PM (1 child)
MCAS or not. Runaway trim is disabled by pulling the breaker. It hardly matters what causes it. The same rule would apply to any aircraft with electric trim controls.
Boeing is being victimized by cultural issues. Just look at the statistics over the last few years. All the fatal airline wrecks, including these, are happening in third world countries, which includes Russia, China, Brazil. This isn't Boeing's. or Airbus's fault. Third world pilots are little more than button pushers. Despite recent events, the safety record is a sound testament as to the reliability of the machinery. If a goat herder can fly 'em, anybody can.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by RS3 on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:37PM
You sound like the AC who eloquently explained to me much about bigger plane dynamics, trim, etc. If so, thank you again.
I understand your position, but I'm still torn. As an engineer, I feel it's my job to design UI to fit the human, including the general user. Of course much training is needed to safely fly any plane. You've established the fact (and I believe you) that some pilots aren't super astute. Given that fact, airplane manufacturers should design UI to be more foolproof. Killing a bunch of innocent people who have no say in how the plane is flown is not acceptable. Blaming deaths on inept pilots is not okay when the system could have been designed differently, in consideration of possibly inept pilots.
I wish they would release "black box" voice / data sooner. I'm very anxious to know what exactly those pilots thought was happening when the plane rotated itself so violently, and kept fighting the UI. I don't know, but I've gotten hints that big jets might have several levels of autopilot. Regardless, did they definitely turn all autopilots off? If so, then I strongly blame Boeing and MCAS.
Is "if the trim wheels start spinning wildly, in opposition to your direct command, turn off this switch" part of _all_ jet pilot training?
For me much of this whole thing comes down to who's right in the heat of the moment: the machine, sensors, and their product managers, or the human (pilot)?
We all know human error is often the major factor in many accidents. But when the human operator (pilot) repeatedly contradicts the machine's decisions, maybe the machine should disable itself and let the human know? From what I've read, we already have that behavior in many autopilot systems.
How about this point of view: I'm going to play the part of a QC design reviewer (Boeing, FAA, NTSB, whoever) talking to the 737 product design mgt. team: "Okay, you want the MAX plane to fly like a non-MAX. What is the contingency plan for when the MCAS fails during flight?"
Yes, you (or other AC) have established that engine thrust is a major factor in how big jets handle, so the pilots already know that. If I was a pilot, I'd rather know that "there's an automatic compensation system in this plane, and like any tech., it might fail and you'll have to be aware that engine thrust will affect this plane differently than you're used to." I'm pretty sure I could figure it out, as long as I'm told that is the case.
A couple of days ago I had to drive a fairly large rental vehicle 300+ miles. I'm not trained, nor used to such vehicles, but I'm astute enough to know it's different, it's going to take longer to stop, quick / jerky steering inputs might cause big disaster, too much side g-force also -> disaster, etc. But if I was wearing VR goggles that fooled me into thinking I was driving a Lambo, I surely would have wrecked.