[libranof1987]

UK bans 737 Max planes in its air space. What this means is, not only are UK carriers grounding the planes, other carriers coming into UK are also being sent back. Turkish Airlines flight 1997 for eg.

This is bound to throw the global aviation industry into mayhem with airlines having to keep their schedule on a truncated fleet.

This is probably the first mass grounding of planes since the Dreamliner battery explosion problem.

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-n...ash/index.html

[BoneCollector]

The FAA has issued a press note. They're at the crash site along with NTSB and are working on it. They'll be issuing a statement as and when they come across something new.

[voldemort]

Originally Posted by Hayek

Was just looking at data on fatal hull losses for various aircraft. At 2, the 737 Max is now equal to the 777, which has been operating for a couple of decades now.

According to Wikipedia, there are 7 hull loss incidents for the 777.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing..._and_incidents

I too would avoid the 737 MAX.

Originally Posted by ferrarirules

Boeing has issued the following release in relation to the ET 302 crash. The release seems more of a PR exercise to calm down investor nerves.

Statements like "designed to make an already safe aircraft even safer" clearly show that there is something amiss which needs to be addressed by a software upgrade. Two brand new planes crashing with four months of each other is no small coincidence. It is time Boeing finishes the investigation and the relevant fixes before more innocent lives are lost.

Source

Something's definitely amiss; Boeing has implicitly acknowledged that they're aware of a problem.

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

The FAA has issued a press note. They're at the crash site along with NTSB and are working on it. They'll be issuing a statement as and when they come across something new.

Attachment 1858709

Surprised that FAA has not yet grounded the 737 MAX. I mean, alarm bells are ringing everywhere anyway.

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

As of now, many countries have banned 737 MAX in their airspace or have grounded them. These include airlines from Singapore, Australia, China, Cayman islands, Indonesia, Mongolia, South Korea, Ethiopia and Mexico . The pilot body of Argentina has refused to fly B737 MAXs.

Germany too has joined the crowd.

https://www.businessinsider.in/Germa...w/68380053.cms

[pandey.jai]

DGCA has grounded 737 max. Saw this on Twitter:

DGCA has taken the decision to ground the Boeing 737-MAX planes immediately. These planes will be grounded till appropriate modifications and safety measures are undertaken to ensure their safe operations. (1/2)


As always, passenger safety remains our top priority. We continue to consult closely with regulators around the world, airlines, and aircraft manufacturers to ensure passenger safety. (2/2)

Source:
https://twitter.com/moca_goi/status/1105527436345860101

[BoneCollector]

Originally Posted by pandey.jai

DGCA has grounded 737 max. Saw this on Twitter:




Source:
https://twitter.com/moca_goi/status/1105527436345860101

But looks like SpiceJet is still flying them. I find it surprising considering that DGCA has said that it's order is effective immediately.

[moralfibre]

Looks like USA, India, China and some countries from far east continue to operate the B38M!



Guess Spicejet will soon come under fire for this because there is an order issued by DGCA to ground the planes effective immediately. News Link.

[pandey.jai]

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

But looks like SpiceJet is still flying them. I find it surprising considering that DGCA has said that it's order is effective immeditately.
[/center]

I'm no expert but could this be one of the cases where even though the Twitter account has made the communication, the official written notification should be sent by the regulator to the industry for it to be acted upon.

I doubt tweets are considered official orders. We're not there yet (thankfully!)

[saket77]

Originally Posted by BoneCollector

But looks like SpiceJet is still flying them. I find it surprising considering that DGCA has said that it's order is effective immediately.

DGCA has given a timeline of wednessday, that is today by 4 PM to ground the said aircraft to Spicejet. This is so as to provide time for return of enroute aircrafts from International skies and to reach hangers/ maintenance or parking facilities.

Regards,
Saket.

[libranof1987]

Quick question: if grounding the planes is an extreme knee-jerk reaction, how feasible (safe) is turning off MCAS until the fix is found?

My (layman) question: is the risk of flying with MCAS << risk of flying without MCAS?

[longhorn]

DCGA asks all 737 Max aircraft to be grounded by 4 PM today and rightly so. Don't know why it took this long for them to do it. Anyways better late than never.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...?homepage=true

[A350XWB]

Originally Posted by voldemort

Surprised that FAA has not yet grounded the 737 MAX. I mean, alarm bells are ringing everywhere anyway.

Don't be surprised. FAA is one of the most criticized bodies for standing with the manufacturers when they should actually be concerned about people's safety. There are common problems like people with conflicting interests at key positions, buckling under pressure from manufacturers and/or pilot unions etc. (Read)
As an example, in case of Turkish Airlines Flight 981 (Ermenonville air disaster) there were several recommendations from the NTSB (which can only give recommendations and not enforce) after American Airlines Flight 96 which suffered similar issue. But FAA, instead of enforcing a change, agreed with the manufacturer McDonnell-Douglas that everything is fine, which resulted in the death of 346 people, in one of the worst aviation accidents in history. This disaster could have well been avoided if FAA stood with the NTSB, rather than the manufacturer. Excerpt from wikipedia -

In the aftermath of Flight 96, the NTSB made several recommendations. Its primary concern was the addition of vents in the rear cabin floor that would ensure that a cargo area decompression would equalise the cabin area, and not place additional load onto the floor. In fact, most of the DC-10's cabin floor had vents like these, only the rear section of the aircraft lacked them. Additionally, the NTSB suggested that upgrades to the locking mechanism and to the latching actuator electrical system be made compulsory. Despite this, the FAA also agreed with McDonnell-Douglas' assessment that additional floor venting would be too expensive to implement, and did not demand that this change be made.

[sgiitk]

@BoneCollector; I heard only Indigo & Jet were affected. Are you sure the Spice unit is not another variant. If so it may not be affected.

Also, the bug appears to be software related. Too much automation!

[airbus]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

@BoneCollector; I heard only Indigo & Jet were affected. Are you sure the Spice unit is not another variant. If so it may not be affected.

In India only SpiceJet and Jet Airways operate Boeing 737 Max. Jet Airways planes are already grounded due to their financial condition. So, only SpiceJet will be impacted by grounding Boeing 737 Max in India.

IndiGo has Airbus and ATR in its fleet. Here is data from Wikipedia.

[Jeroen]

What the various aviation authorities around the world are doing is remarkable to say the least. Grounding a complete aircraft fleet is only done when there a structural faults with high risk.

Last European grounding was the Concorde, after the crash in Paris in 2000. In the USA you need to go back to the DC10 disaster in 1979.

All though we still need to see the final report on the Lion Crash, measures had been taken to deal with the problem if it would occur again.

With respect the the Ethiopian crash there are three possibilities

1) the cause is different to the Lion crash, you need to investigate it further
2) the cause is identical to the Lion crash, in which case we need to understand why the new procedures did not work or weren’t applied
3) The cause is identical, the pilots used the new procedure correctly and it did not work

Only the latter case would normally be considered for grounding a fleet.

The notion and public cry of “Safety must come First” sounds good but is naive. If safety must come first, we must immediately ground every plane in the world and never fly again. That is the only way to ensure no more people die in aviation related accident.

Safety is always a balance between many different factors. What I find disturbing is that aviation authorities are now grounding a fleet of aircraft, based on public opinion. That is the easy way out. If anything happens they can sit back and say we did what we could.

If anything that is what makes this event unique. We see aviation authorities buckling to public pressure. Never happened before. Their responsibility is to make the best, most informed rational decision. That is damn difficult and it often means going against various groups/stakeholder wishes.

Grounding a fleet of aircraft under the pretence of safety above everything is too easy a way out for (government) aviation authorities. They need to, as in the past, come to a careful balanced judgement. So far only the FAA holds true to what an aviation authority is supposed to be doing.

They should have stuck to their guns. If a carrier decides to keep its plane on the grounds, because of concerns of its passenger, that would have been very different.

Jeroen

[saket77]

Originally Posted by libranof1987

Quick question: if grounding the planes is an extreme knee-jerk reaction, how feasible (safe) is turning off MCAS until the fix is found?

My (layman) question: is the risk of flying with MCAS << risk of flying without MCAS?

I think airlines, until advised by OEM may not be adept enough about the technicalities involved in switching the MCAS on or off by themselves. They may not know the parameters controlled by MCAS in detail and until the maker of the plane, here Boeing, itself comes out and states that it is safe to fly without MCAS with manual intervention of pilots.

But as far as I know about this system, without it functioning, the nose has a tendency to pitch up in some instances where a low air speed can result in a stall. How feasible it is for the pilots to control that throughout the flight is something we don't know. And no airlines will like to take that risk with such a call without any advisory by the OEM

Regards,
Saket