[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by Sutripta

Don't aircraft have a wind powered turbine for some emergency power in case of total power loss. (Not that it would have been of much use in a low altitude/ low speed scenario)

Regards
Sutripta

Most planes use an Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), Ram Air Turbine (RAT) and battery power for various functions, including during engine failure.

The Gimli Glider incident is a well-known example of pilots using the RAT to power flight controls as a last resort.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Sutripta

Don't aircraft have a wind powered turbine for some emergency power in case of total power loss. (Not that it would have been of much use in a low altitude/ low speed scenario)

As mentioned Chetan Rao, most planes have APUs and or RAT’s. All planes have batteries.

Even the Concorde had a RAT. Third image down in this thread shows it:

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/comme...simulator.html (Experience: British Airways Concorde Simulator)

But the Concorde did not have an APU.

Boeing 747-400s do have APUs, but it can not be started in flight. They do not have a RAT. The engines will still provide enough hydraulic power when simply windmilling.

So there are several alternatives / variants to all these (emergency) back up systems.

Jeroen

[mazda4life]

As an ex-employee of a major Aersopace OEM, I am still grappling on how such design oversights can occur, I found this remarkable article in NYtimes - https://nyti.ms/2TILTPp

I am digressing , but in this era of agile driven software development we tend to cut corners in proper software testing, validation and documentation and an improper agile SW development practice can create havoc in the systems.

[V.Narayan]

I wonder how much of Boeing's rush-rush-rush pressure to get the MAX into service ASAP was driven by the fact that it is a listed company living by the quarter and financial investors with limited long term interest (for most of them) indirectly influence what management does or can do. When you run a business so many decisions are taken keeping the next 10 years in mind. With financial investors who are purely driven by RoI - short or medium - the perspective is totally different. They have the authority to box you in a direction or speed with no responsibility if things don't work out.

I am not absolving Boeing or the FAA for even a moment. Having dealt with both of them I am actually very sad to see this turn of events. The FAA it seems has been run down by a long line of political factors that didn't fund it. In fact the first time I sensed they weren't well funded was 2011 in a direct interaction.

For a long time I ran a mid-sized aviation business which dealt with and delivered on, amongst other things, flight safety in many forms. The attitude and unwillingness of my financial investors to understand that you can't rush things up when fine nuances of flight training or engineering are involved was pathetic. Hence my thought as to how much of this pressure was driven by the stock price. If Boeing had brought in the MAX say 9 months after the A320 Neo in my opinion (and this is only a personal opinion) they would not have lost out all their sales to Airbus because airlines using the 737 would prefer to wait a few months and not add another type to their fleet. Every new aircraft type in a fleet is like adding a whole new airline under your organization - very very expensive.

[AMG Power]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

When you run a business so many decisions are taken keeping the next 10 years in mind. With financial investors who are purely driven by RoI - short or medium - the perspective is totally different. They have the authority to box you in a direction or speed with no responsibility if things don't work out.

True.

And that is because they are not in the business one is in. Their business is to buy and sell companies.

Their focus is on that 3 month window when figures are released to the media and business decisions are taken to facilitate that result being good even though it may be very obviously harmful in the long term.

A 10 year horizon is an alien concept to them. They have a max of a 3 year window within which they would like to sell and exit and buy another company to sell. That is their business after all.

Part of the reason they are called vulture capitalists.

[balenoed_]

I was closely following discussion on this crash on several forums until few months back and then stopped. The discussions on popular aviation forums must have run into several pages by now.

Can someone who was following it provide a quick brief here on what possible conclusions is being arrived at? Or is it still around the same MCAS and blames on Boeing?

[speedmiester]

An update on the Boeing Saga

Boeing CEO admits that the Safety Warning feature in 737 Max Planes were a mistake.

Boeing CEO admits 737 MAX jet warning system 'mistake'

[Sutripta]

^^^
Admit to something minor to divert attention from something major? Plea bargaining (press version)?

Regards
Sutripta

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by mazda4life

I am digressing , but in this era of agile driven software development we tend to cut corners in proper software testing, validation and documentation and an improper agile SW development practice can create havoc in the systems.

Totally disagree. Cutting corners to beat your competition cannot be blamed on a development methodology. Agile, Waterfall or any other methodology cannot guarantee to stop this kind of behavior. Many manufacturers have done this, well before agile came into existence. If the certifying authority itself is in the manufacturers' influence, any extent of corner cutting is possible, irrespective of the methodology used.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by balenoed_

? Or is it still around the same MCAS and blames on Boeing?

On this blaming thing an interesting article on BBC

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/sd9...tle_over_blame

[mazda4life]

Originally Posted by A350XWB

Totally disagree. Cutting corners to beat your competition cannot be blamed on a development methodology. Agile, Waterfall or any other methodology .

I respect your opinion but having worked on aerospace projects with a OEM who has an average of 18% products in an aircraft , I stand by my theory that even the methodology used to develop software components do play a role in the overall quality of the product. In principle Agile is great but due to way sprints are planned there can always be scope for missing some implicit requirements and regression errors. But let’s wait for the complete RCA and looks like even Dreamliner has some issues.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

On this blaming thing an interesting article on BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/sd9...tle_over_blame

Jeroen, Thank you for sharing this article.

All, Interesting to observe how prejudiced attitudes of Trump's America are in the forefront of senators (like Sam Graves) who are pushing to blame the pilots because they were not white Americans! I would not be surprised if he is indirectly a large beneficiary from Boeing. For those Indians who don't know - large parts (though not all) of the American political system runs on a very well organized system of grease clothed in thin legitimacy.

In May, Graves insisted that “facts in the preliminary report reveal pilot error as a factor”. He went on to claim that “pilots trained in the US would have successfully been able to control this situation”. In my time I have employed pilots from well over a dozen countries - white, brown, black - men and women - including Ethiopians and cannot but whole heartedly disagree with Mr.Graves' statement.

I for one was always a fan of Boeing and enjoyed my business interactions with them and supported Boeing on this thread in the early stages of this tragic drama. With each passing month I realize that the Boeing I knew may have passed on.

Originally Posted by A350XWB

Totally disagree. Cutting corners to beat your competition cannot be blamed on a development methodology. Agile, Waterfall or any other methodology cannot guarantee to stop this kind of behavior. Many manufacturers have done this, well before agile came into existence.

Sir, while I appreciate your opinions I wonder if you are basing them on facts from your own experience - that usually helps on a forum discussion. Having run an aviation business deeply involved with flight safety & flight training related software, amongst other things, I can assure you quick methods like Agile while suitable for some products don't sit well with aviation related software development.

[the_skyliner]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

I for one was always a fan of Boeing and enjoyed my business interactions with them and supported Boeing on this thread in the early stages of this tragic drama. With each passing month I realize that the Boeing I knew may have passed on.

Couldn't agree more. Knowing Boeing for years now, I am really surprised to see the inaction in the beginning of this tragic events. However, passing the blame on pilots is an old habit of Boeing. I hope they learn from this tragedy.

And now they have Trump and his army of loyalists to support the blame-game. Which is not only wrong but is really bad for Boeing and American aerospace OEMs as they will lose customer confidence much faster than just accepting the mistake and committing to learn from it.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Having run an aviation business deeply involved with flight safety & flight training related software, amongst other things, I can assure you quick methods like Agile while suitable for some products don't sit well with aviation related software development.

Spot on. There is neither a need for speed nor is it well accepted in aerospace industry, especially when it comes to flying parts, like flaps, spoilers, etc.

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by mazda4life

I respect your opinion but having worked on aerospace projects with a OEM who has an average of 18% products in an aircraft, I stand by my theory that even the methodology used to develop software components do play a role in the overall quality of the product. In principle Agile is great but due to way sprints are planned there can always be scope for missing some implicit requirements and regression errors.

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

Sir, while I appreciate your opinions I wonder if you are basing them on facts from your own experience - that usually helps on a forum discussion. Having run an aviation business deeply involved with flight safety & flight training related software, amongst other things, I can assure you quick methods like Agile while suitable for some products don't sit well with aviation related software development.

Please go through the sentences I've highlighted in the respective posts and the answer is right there. A process can give you guidelines, but a lot depends on how you interpret and implement it. You cannot blame the process for it. In that way, Agile methods give you a lot more flexibility, which can affect both positively and negatively. In simple terms, it's how you do it. You can bend other processes/methods also in the same way.

And yes, I'm speaking out of experience (been doing Agile for more than 11 years, on mission critical software), although I cannot divulge more details

[Sutripta]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

In May, Graves insisted that “facts in the preliminary report reveal pilot error as a factor”.

Whatever else the report says, the pilots are going to be blamed. This will be spun to 'and nobody else is to blame'.

I for one was always a fan of Boeing and enjoyed my business interactions with them and supported Boeing on this thread in the early stages of this tragic drama. With each passing month I realize that the Boeing I knew may have passed on.

That does seem to be apparent for quite some time to any disinterested party.
Initially I too thought that under advice of counsel Boeing was being reticent, and thus losing the PR battle.

A small aside. Ethiopian first wanted to send the flight recorders to Germany for decoding. Germany said no thank you. It was then sent to France. Was Germany (ie its whole infrastructure) really unable to do the task, or is there
something more to it? I mean if there had been a 737 Max crash in Germany, would the authorities have sent the recorders to France or US?

Regards
Sutripta