Politics, Religion & Controversy Politics | Religion | Controversy (Non-Corvette)

Trump ISSUES EO, grounds the 737 MAX FLEET...

 
Old 03-13-2019, 03:56 PM
  #41  
Texan79423
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Apr 2017
Posts: 794
Thanked 48 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Watching CNN this morning they were on Trump for not grounding the planes. Mention the temp FAA director, said Trump talked with his buddy the president of Boeing and all was good with the planes. Then said there may be some collusion to keep the planes flying as Boeing contributed 1 million to trumps campaign. Give me a fukiin' break. Next they will speculate Trump used something to cause the crashes.
Texan79423 is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:00 PM
  #42  
gs568
CF Senior Member
 
gs568's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jun 2001
Location: 24 Willie Mays Plaza S.F. California
Posts: 44,248
Thanked 35 Times in 20 Posts
Default

The President doesn't get good press no matter what choice he makes. Libs and never Trumpers are petty like that.

Hopefully they will quickly find out the cause and things can get back to normal.
gs568 is online now  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:02 PM
  #43  
RandolphB
CF Senior Member
 
RandolphB's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2010
Location: Oviedo
Posts: 12,555
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 68/70Vette View Post
I'm guessing Boeing's upper management owns these problems. The automated stall-recovery feature that, caused the Lion crash, had a single point failure....the Angle of Attack sensor. If this sensor fails, the whole anti-stall feature fails as it did in the Lion crash. Aircraft software, hardware features have to be designed to be man rated since human lives are involved. Implementing this stall recovery feature with no redundancy was incompetent. Insisting on a feature without redundancy sounds like a decision a manager would make to save money.
Untrue. The crash report is no where near final. The whole AOA sensor thing is media BS, from people who wouldn't know a compressor stall from a Black Water Tank in aviation. Bad pilots from third world countries is the problem. There's a reason those countries don't want Boeing to get the flight recorders, it makes them look as lax as they actually are.
RandolphB is online now  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:02 PM
  #44  
Walford
CF Senior Member
 
Walford's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2002
Location: Half-drunk. Will travel.
Posts: 65,097
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Paging Grumpy! Can the FAA just pull planes out of the sky like that? Maybe Trump issued the EO because the FAA's options were more limited than that?
Walford is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:05 PM
  #45  
66jack
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
66jack's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 14,774
Thanked 267 Times in 241 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by krystal View Post
you didn't......but it's hard to miss the political angle in a thread entitled "no 737s allowed into kanaduh"
that was 'kanaduh's' decision not the usa...the grounding came later..
66jack is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:06 PM
  #46  
66jack
CF Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
66jack's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 14,774
Thanked 267 Times in 241 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by krystal View Post
you didn't......but it's hard to miss the political angle in a thread entitled "no 737s allowed into kanaduh"
that was 'kanaduh's' decision not the usa...the grounding came later..
66jack is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:07 PM
  #47  
Krystal
CF Senior Member
 
Krystal's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,856
Thanks: 0
Thanked 59 Times in 47 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RandolphB View Post
Really? I know far more about aircraft safety as an FAA certified Airframe and Powerplant mechanic than you will ever know. To top this, I have read the NTSB crash reports daily for probably 20+ years. Grounding these aircraft is beyond stupid. FACTS show that 89.4% of all aircraft crashes are pilot error. That can include an unqualified pilot in the seat of the aircraft. That doesn't make it a bad aircraft, that makes it a bad pilot.

Maintenance is responsible for .5% of all crashes, and design flaws less than that. The reason everybody is freaking out and blaming the plane is the same as always, pilots don't like hearing they don't do a good job. The pilots in both these crashes had extremely low hours total compared to US pilots of the same aircraft model. 99% chance they were Pilot Mill pilots with a minimum of time under their belts, taking the third world path to PIC.

So based on FACTS, there shouldn't be a grounding of aircraft, but all pilots should be grounded until they can be retested. Is that going to ever happen? Pilot's union. No damn way.

Funny how everybody is still blaming the aircraft when reports on the second crash were that the engines were smoking and spitting out parts. Sully might be able to tell people why they do that. Of course, he also knew how to fly an aircraft that happened to.
I have no doubt that you do know far more about air planes than most......but you are in direct conflict with the former transportation Secretary Ray Lahood and now also the current Transportation Secretary and President of the United States.......oh, and just about every other body in countries around the world who make the calls on this stuff.......but yeah I get it.

As a guy with an inside view of the mechanical situation in an air craft you still feel confident for some reason I can't begin to fathom that you know all about the potential software problems here that sure sounds like it's outside the scope of your practice as a mechanic.

This issue that keeps coming up and getting lots of "play" about the software that may need a "fix" and/or the training that flight crews have done to ready themselves for this NEW situation in what is a relatively new air craft in service...... it sure sounds like something that might give you pause before speaking so very confidently.

Is the air craft flawed?
You could certainly call that one faster than most I'm sure.

I gotta tell you.......I can't tell if you're actually THAT KNOWLEDGEABLE or if you're just THAT ARROGANT s you type your response.

Your claim of air craft mechanical knowledge certainly lends weight to what you type but I didn't read in what you wrote that you are a software guy or knowledgeable about this one scenario in this one new aircraft.

Again.......when 1 or 2 people are in conflict with your opinion I can certainly respect the idea you will stick to your guns..........but now the entire world full of people who make the calls on this stuff are saying, "You're WRONG!"

......so I gotta ask.

Why so sure what can you tell me that I'm not hearing.......what are all these people missing that they have it so very wrong?
Krystal is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:20 PM
  #48  
Low12s
CF Senior Member
 
Low12s's Avatar
 
Member Since: Sep 2004
Location: Life isn't about waiting for the Storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the Rain.
Posts: 46,914
Thanked 9 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Krystal View Post
Thank GOD you aren't making these decisions.

Safe air travel is no place to draw lines over something as absolutely STUPID as various versions of political opinion.
As a frequent flier, I applaud this decision.
Low12s is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:21 PM
  #49  
Axelrod
CF Senior Member
 
Axelrod's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2005
Location: North East
Posts: 7,663
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Let's suppose for a second that the NTSB/FAA (insert whatever other "intelligent" agency) already has the black box information.

The media spin is the media spin and is often times wrong. I have not seen anything related to "reporting" that the black box info has been fully digested, regurgitated to the powers that be, and a decision was made.

Does that make sense?
Axelrod is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:35 PM
  #50  
Grumpy
MONARTOR
 
Grumpy's Avatar
 
Member Since: Aug 2001
Location: What I know, is dwarfed by what I pretend to know
Posts: 193,175
Thanked 35 Times in 16 Posts
Cruise-In 5-6-7-8 Veteran
St. Jude '03-'04-'05-'06-'07-'08-'09-10-'11-12-'13-'14-'15-'16-17-'18
NCM Sinkhole Donor

Default

Originally Posted by Walford View Post
Paging Grumpy! Can the FAA just pull planes out of the sky like that? Maybe Trump issued the EO because the FAA's options were more limited than that?
yes they can
Grumpy is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:37 PM
  #51  
jim2527
CF Senior Member
 
jim2527's Avatar
 
Member Since: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa Florida
Posts: 15,520
Thanked 161 Times in 141 Posts
Default

CNBC was talking about this today. Boeings Board of Directors is heavily loaded with ex-presidential appointees/aids/whatever. Must have been a lot of lobbying to keep those in the air.
jim2527 is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:44 PM
  #52  
steve_n_houston
CF Senior Member
 
steve_n_houston's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2000
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 17,123
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

If the threshold is two incidents, including incidents under sketchy circumstances, and we pull the product off the market -- get ready to stop buying any form of transportation, most items of food, prepare to live under a bridge since houses will be no more but wait, bridges will be gone too, so maybe just a grass bed on an empty field, but only so long as the grass wasn't treated with anything.

And the list goes on.
steve_n_houston is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 04:53 PM
  #53  
TCracingCA
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Sep 2002
Location: Hacienda Heights CA
Posts: 19,943
Thanked 295 Times in 262 Posts
Default

Heck Liberals, lets get Robert Mueller to investigate, so it can be blamed on Trump!
TCracingCA is online now  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:43 PM
  #54  
Mr D.
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
Mr D.'s Avatar
 
Member Since: Mar 2002
Location: Huntsville AL
Posts: 27,216
Thanked 228 Times in 211 Posts
Default

Lot of drama in this thread, Trump made the right call. New aircraft just don't fall out of the sky and two within 6 months for what appears to be the same reason = aircraft defect or pilot training issue or combination of the two. My guess is the later.
Mr D. is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:53 PM
  #55  
RandomTask
CF Senior Member
 
RandomTask's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2008
Location: Alexandria VA
Posts: 10,918
Thanked 99 Times in 80 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 7vettes View Post
Flying over the varmit infested Jungles, Plains and Savannas of the dark continent has never been on my bucket list, especially on some national-flagged airline like Ethiopian.

But Boeing has some explaining to do.
Ethiopian Airlines is actually near the top as far as safety for airline companies. . .

https://www.airlineratings.com/safety-rating-tool/
RandomTask is online now  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:57 PM
  #56  
SilverC1
CF Senior Member
 
SilverC1's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2005
Location: SF Bay Area California
Posts: 10,951
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Even when the FAA was still saying there was no need to ground the aircraft, they were making some statements about possible software issues (and possibly training on the new SW, as well), and that Boeing had until the end of April to fix those issues. That seemed unusual to me - stating a belief that there was a SW-related problem, but at the same time declaring the planes to be air-worthy. They were also possibly linking the SW issue(s) to the earlier Lion Air crash, but not necessarily to the Ethiopian crash. (In the sense that the recent SW update was a partial response to the Lion Air crash.)

I don't know about the accuracy of this source or the specific article (from yesterday), but it also has some numbers on how many planes are in various US carrier's fleets.

Southwest has 34 Max 8's, apparently.

https://gizmodo.com/boeing-promises-...max-1833224836

I'm also pretty sure that the airlines were seeing lots of queries from ticketed passengers, trying to find out whether their upcoming flight was on a Max-8 (and maybe Max-9's, as well), so they could try and change flights. If a lot of that was happening, then the airlines might as well support the grounding.

Maybe this is an over-reaction, but the fallout from another crash would have been monumental, so I don't fault the decision at all...

From a selfish perspective, I have four Southwest flights coming up in the next month or so, and am feeling a bit reassured by the grounding decision.

Last edited by SilverC1; 03-13-2019 at 06:03 PM.
SilverC1 is online now  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:08 PM
  #57  
basicstrategy777
CF Senior Member
Support Corvetteforum!
 
basicstrategy777's Avatar
 
Member Since: Oct 2006
Location: Glastonbury CT.
Posts: 9,651
Thanked 22 Times in 21 Posts
St. Jude Donor '11-'12-'13-'14-'15-'16-'17
Default

Logic and lack of facts says he should not have done it.....but I'm glad he made the decision to do it...what's the real harm.....he may have saved some lives.....he probably didn't....but maybe he did........he made a decision......anybody can make the right decision with all the facts in......you need someone at the helm that can make a mostly right decision with not all the facts......those are the great ones.

777
basicstrategy777 is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:26 PM
  #58  
abusdriver
CF Senior Member
 
abusdriver's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2014
Posts: 460
Thanked 33 Times in 19 Posts
Default

Just remember. 89.4% of all crashes are pilot error.
Yeah...and 89.4% of all statistics are made up on the spot!

Grounding a fleet without data is stupid.
Just like blaming this on pilot error before all the facts have come to light is stupid.

Why don't you wait for the accident investigators to finish their work before you come to any more startling conclusions?


abusdriver is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:33 PM
  #59  
F4Gary
CF Senior Member
 
F4Gary's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2001
Location: Grapevine Tx
Posts: 3,227
Thanked 103 Times in 76 Posts
2018 C3 of Year Finalist
2016 C3 of the Year Finalist
Default

Originally Posted by 68/70Vette View Post
I'm guessing Boeing's upper management owns these problems. The automated stall-recovery feature that, caused the Lion crash, had a single point failure....the Angle of Attack sensor. If this sensor fails, the whole anti-stall feature fails as it did in the Lion crash. Aircraft software, hardware features have to be designed to be man rated since human lives are involved. Implementing this stall recovery feature with no redundancy was incompetent. Insisting on a feature without redundancy sounds like a decision a manager would make to save money.
The airplane is still flyable. You identify the problem, turn that system (electric trim) off and fly the jet manually. I'd much rather have to deal with this problem vs an engine or cargo fire.
F4Gary is offline  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:34 PM
  #60  
Gordon Shumway
CF Senior Member
 
Gordon Shumway's Avatar
 
Member Since: Feb 2008
Location: Ocala FL
Posts: 21,621
Thanked 9 Times in 2 Posts
Default

If you look in the dictionary under "cash cow" you will find a picture of a Boeing 737. They have built and sold over 10,000 of that airframe in the last 50 years. That is more than a little remarkable, and hard to imagine they won't navigate through this kerfuffle.
Gordon Shumway is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Trump ISSUES EO, grounds the 737 MAX FLEET...


Sponsored Ads
Vendor Directory

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: