← Back to Squawk list
  • 11

Department of Justice says Boeing may be criminally liable in 737 Max crashes

Enviado
 
Boeing has violated a 2021 agreement that shielded it from criminal prosecution after two 737 Max disasters left 346 people dead overseas, the Department of Justice told a federal judge in a court filing Tuesday. (www.usatoday.com) Más...

Matt West
Adicto a las noticiasMaximizadoPromotorAnuncianteAutobiógrafo

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


mattwestuk
Matt West 20
Boeing truly needs to go back to their Engineer lead days. They had a true visionary leader within their grasp with Alan Mulally, but spurred him for a Jack Welch protege/wannabe.

They went from Mullany's "Working Together", the catchphrase of the 777, to Jim McNerney, acknowledging that “I'm sounding like Darth Vader here”.

Ford benefited greatly from Boeing's screw up with Mullany. Boeing? They're still paying the price of hiring nothing but Welch "proteges". That's not good for the future.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
mattwestuk
Matt West 5
Apologies for anytime Mullany appears. That is NOT the CEO I am referring to. It should be "Mulally" as stated in the first sentence.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
volvodadfast
Ichiro Sugioka 4
Yes, in Mulally I trust.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
greerbk
Greer Kemp 2
Yes I notice, irritatingly enough, that we can't edit our replies in case we hit the POST button a bit quick.... very annoying... does anyone know if its possible or how to do it?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
mikehe
Mike Hindson-Evans 10
Nope, once published you are stuck out there for ever. Encourages accuracy.

Well, we just have to get everything right before we ship things out to an unsuspecting public.

Oh, hang on a minute...!!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
COYOTEHUNTER
COYOTEHUNTER 2
Contact FlightAware directly, they will delete the post for you. They have helped me a couple of times.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
greerbk
Greer Kemp 2
Yes it wasn't that I want a post deleted, but it would be nice if we could easily edit posts - it's very easy to type something and then notice a spelling or grammar error etc - so the ability to clean up small errors would be very decent.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
raynetherwood
ray netherwood 0
Not good. Our “justice department” has sort of become the enemy across the board.

The law suits should be tossed. Turn off the AP, and FLY THE PLANE.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Decibel
Jim Nasby 7
Clearly you don't understand how MCAS works, as it was only enabled when flying manually.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maneuvering_Characteristics_Augmentation_System
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Nooge
Nooge 3
Clearly you don't understand how government protects us

WRITING like THIS reveals where you get your opinions
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

BillOverdue
Bill Overdue 2
Boeing needs no assistance going bankrupt. Stock is nearly 1/2 of what is was only 5 years ago!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Nooge
Nooge 1
Time to buy BA

BTW they will not go bankrupt
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
21voyageur
21voyageur -1
IMHO, shareholders would be better served if Boeing allowed its commercial business to fail and to focus on military contracts for 10-15 years. Perhaps phoenix back into commercial once the sour taste it has created in the commercial space has been digested and expelled. Airbus and Embraer would have to fill the void with COMAC flooding the market to keep things somewhat balanced. My 2 cents.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 3
Serving the shareholders is what got us into this mess.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
georgewilhelmsen
George Wilhelmsen -3
I'd appear as a friend of the plaintiff on this. This has nothing to do with the plane - it's basic flight training 101. You don't fight the autopilot. You reach down to the autopilot cutouts on the right side of the pedestal and shut it off.

These pilots weren't familiar with the plane, and that's their company's fault, not Boeing.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Report
Decibel
Jim Nasby 9
That's not completely accurate. Boeing literally sold the MAX as not requiring any pilot training as well as omitting details about MCAS from the manual. Obviously the airlines had a vested interest in not needing to train pilots, but it's ultimately Boeing's responsibility for deciding that the MCAS magic pixie dust didn't need to be disclosed.

Also, you need to at least do a tiny bit of research on MCAS - it operated *independently* of the autopilot, and would specifically attempt to over-ride control inputs when flying manually.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
georgewilhelmsen
George Wilhelmsen -2
The off switches on the back of the control console are unchanged from previous 737 versions. This has been confirmed, so why would you need additional training?

This is equivalent to a "Trim Runaway" which has specific instructions. Why the pilots didn't follow the Trim Runaway checklist and kill power to the system is not being evaluated. We're too busy trying to get Boeing sued.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Decibel
Jim Nasby 2
Fair, but that isn't really related to the AP.

Now I'm wondering how common trim runaway with the AP disengaged is...
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Decibel
Jim Nasby 3
That's not completely accurate. Boeing literally sold the MAX as not requiring any pilot training as well as omitting details about MCAS from the manual. Obviously the airlines had a vested interest in not needing to train pilots, but it's ultimately Boeing's responsibility for deciding that the MCAS magic pixie dust didn't need to be disclosed.

Also, you need to at least do a tiny bit of research on MCAS - it operated *independently* of the autopilot, and would specifically attempt to over-ride control inputs when flying manually.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
georgewilhelmsen
George Wilhelmsen -2
You are incorrect, and it has been proven and demonstrated.
You turn it off on the right side of the control column, on the back. Two switches on the back, and it's dead and gone.

As I should note, 2 US flight crews with the same problem did. Apparently, they had better training.

But you don't hear about them and those non-accidents because nobody died.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 2
First, nobody is arguing that the AP can't be turned off. The idea that it can't is stupid.

Second, we don't hear about those non-accidents because they flat out didn't happen, and for once we can thank someone other than Dominic Gates and his anonymous Boeing ex-employee sources for made up nonsense that has become fact through repetition. This time the credit goes to Dallas Morning News reporters Cary Aspinwall, Ariana Giorgi, and Dom DiFurio (“Several Boeing 737 Max 8 pilots in U.S. complained about suspected safety flaw"). They made a mistake that Gates never would: use of verifiable sources. Namely the ASRS database, which is available to the public.

I was in a cast and had nothing better to do, so I checked. They made it up. I can only assume that if traditional media wasn't gasping for it's last breath, all three of them plus their editor would now be selling insurance or real estate. Or tending bar, whatever, but not journalism.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
SteveDietrich
Steve Dietrich 1
Perhaps true but

1- reference to the system was deleted after Boeing's chief tech pilot used his self described "Jedi Mind Tricks to get the FAA to allow deletion of any mention of the system from the flight manual.

2- while description of the system was deleted from the flight manual Boeing failed to remove references in the index

3 - It's important to understand what was driving this . Boeing had contracts with the airlines that included a substantial penalty per ship if ANY simulator training was required for transitioning pilots

4- Boeing elected to allow ONE of two AOA sensors to trigger the system and also failed to activate a warning light to indicate that the system was operating on aircraft delivered to SWA . SWA had identified the risk inherent in the system that allowed on AOA sensor to initiate activation of the system which ran nose down trim at a high rate with no warning or indication it was activated.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
JMARTINSON
JMARTINSON 1
1. What reference? It's in the system differences manual on page 748.

2. What index?

4. Is "the system" mcas? I think you are confusing this with the missing aoa disagree alert on airplanes ordered without the aoa indicator, but this is not specific to SWA.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 10
This was filed by the DOJ on Tuesday, May 14, 2024.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
SteveDietrich
Steve Dietrich 1
As a cynic , this is an election year. Stuff like this makes lobbyists rich and politicians campaign funds full to the top.
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
BillOverdue
Bill Overdue 1
Not to worry, some people refuse to see what's "really" happening around them. It simply isn't what they were brainwashed to believe!
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report
Nooge
Nooge 2
What's "really" happening around us?
Responder ↓•Permalink•Padre•Report

Entrar

¿Olvidaste tu contraseña?
¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos y mucho más!
Únete a FlightAware
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de FlightAware.com. Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Descartar