Back to Squawk list
  • 28

Boeing releases 'damning' employee correspondence about Max

Enviado
 
Boeing has released more than a hundred pages of documents to the US Congress, including internal text messages and emails which include language that mocks airline customers, the Federal Aviation Administration and other regulators, as the planemaker navigated the certification process of the now-grounded 737 Max. (www.flightglobal.com) Más...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


pthomas745
Pa Thomas 5
So damning the info is behind a paywall.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 4
As of 1740Z 10 January: There are images of 117 pages of Boeing internal documents (with some redactions such as names) not behind a paywall which I was able to access without any restrictions at :

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/boeing-documents-reveal-internal-communication-among-employees-about-737-concerns-f-a-a

And there is an article which is not behind a paywall at :
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/internal-boeing-documents-show-employees-discussing-efforts-to-mani/
ghstark
Greg S 1
Thanks for the links Frank, but the Washington Post is paywalled.
ghstark
Greg S 1
However, you do get something like 3 free articles a month. And you can bypass the paywall by using the Incognito mode of a recent model of Chrome browser. You can't uses Firefox's "Private Window" feature, it won't work.
nasdisco
Chris B 4
Dear Boeing:

If you have any more negative news releases to make, DO IT NOW!!! Get them all out of the way. Then and only then can you start the process of rebuilding your reputation.

Thank you
eagleboyjr
Todd Eagle 6
That's what is seems the interim CEO is doing. It seems Boeing voluntarily handed the emails over. It looks like the plan is to hand over as many documents with held by Muilenburg, prostrate itself in front of the FAA and the public, while dealing with the issue internally. The emails are indeed damning, damning enough for Boeing to refuse Muilenburg's severance package.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/10/business/boeing-ceo-muilenburg-severance/index.html
Quirkyfrog
Robert Cowling 4
But will they? Some of the worse CEO's got millions, and there was no attempt to limit it.

One health insurance company CEO who denied coverage to hundreds of thousands of customers had the brass balls to make lifetime healthcare coverage for him, his wife, and immediate family, upon his ouster.

Yeah, the man that killed people for profit, demanded that he not have to worry about anything being covered. What an ass...
blitzebill
Bill Christy 1
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/10/airplane-fuselage-supplier-spirit-aerosystems-lays-off-2800-wichita-due-boeing-737-max-production-cut/

Looks like he got his out-the-door gift from the Boeing Board.
ghstark
Greg S 1
Well, he is also the biggest individual shareholder of Boeing.
96flstc
96flstc 2
https://archive.org/details/boeingemailsocr/page/n1
andromeda07
andromeda07 3
The whole concept of a plane that's fundamentally out of balance is a problem. And to think you can try to pass that off without telling pilots is simply unethical.
Tinflyer
Tinflyer 1
The Max is most definitely not out of balance.
It’s unethical for you to be spreading this misinformation.
Do your research before commenting please.
MCAS was created to give pilots the same “feeling” as 737NG to keep the same type rating as all other 737s. The most basic certification of all commercially designed aircraft is they have to be inherently stable by design. Not dependent on software to do so. The aircraft would be 100% stable if Boeing decided to disable MCAS completely and force pilots to get a new type rating (defeats the purpose of designing the Max).
ghstark
Greg S 2
This is not entirely true. It depends on how you define "stable". MCAS was installed to correct a discontinuity during some high AoA maneuvers. You can call that an "instability" if you'd like, although I wouldn't. When the stick is pulled back smoothly the nose of the plane should also rise smoothly. However, in the MAX, during some maneuvers, the nose would rise smoothly and then unexpectedly "jump" up somewhat. It's possible the nose would jump up into or near a stall AoA. In addition, a discontinuity is in itself something of a black mark.
Tinflyer
Tinflyer 1
Please go watch this video and come back and tell me what you think.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4qDLR4s45U&list=PL6SYmp3qb3uPp1DS7fDy7I6y11MIMgnbO&index=14
chuboy91
Ciaran Chu 0
Not true. MCAS is required to meet certification standards because the location of the engines causes a pitch up moment under full thrust conditions. Without MCAS, the aircraft is not certifiable.
Tinflyer
Tinflyer 0
The location of the engines causes a pitch up moment under full thrust will give the pilots a different "feel" like I previously stated. This pitch up under full thrust is not unsafe and can be countered by flight crew. All aircraft with engines mounted under the wing do this to a certain degree.
The Max's larger engines creates a different "feel" from the 737NG that will trigger a different type rating. MCAS was created for the purpose of maintaining the same type rating and not needing additional simulator training.
Boeing could seek certification under a different type rating without MCAS if they chose to do so. Pressure from Southwest Airlines, Easyjet and other airlines forced them to maintain that type rating.
The Max is stable but I see you have your pitchfork out and there is nothing that can change the narrative.
Don't believe saome randon guy on the internet though.
Here is an expert aviation journalist (current 777 pilot with AA) that has released over 20 videos backed up by facts -- Federal Aviation Regulations, pilot checklists etc...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4qDLR4s45U&list=PL6SYmp3qb3uPp1DS7fDy7I6y11MIMgnbO&index=14
chuboy91
Ciaran Chu 1
The pitch characteristics of the 737 MAX without MCAS do not meet regulations.

"When Boeing set out to develop the 737 MAX, engineers had to find a way to fit a much larger and more fuel efficient engine under the wing. MCAS is a longitudinal stability enhancement. It is not for stall prevention (although indirectly it helps); it was introduced to counteract the non-linear lift generated by the LEAP-1B engine nacelles at high AoA and give a steady increase in stick force as the stall is approached as required by regulation."

From the Skybrary article on MCAS.
Tinflyer
Tinflyer 1
Well, one of Boeing's fixes is to severely water down the power of MCAS software to almost nothing and now require additional simulator training for pilots (against the airlines wishes).

My whole point to the OP is he stated the Max is"fundamentally out of balance". I stand by my point that it is not.
The regulation that is being referred to here is 14 CFR § 25.173.
The handling characteristic issue or "feel" does not meet the reg 14 CFR § 25.173 since stick forces requirements are not met but that does not make it fundamentally out of balance as OP stated above.

If Max never had MCAS installed then ET302 and JT610 tragedies would've never happened.

I seriously hope everyone watches this man's videos.Especially this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4qDLR4s45U&list=PL6SYmp3qb3uPp1DS7fDy7I6y11MIMgnbO&index=14

I am always happy to see intelligent debates on the internet.
Cheers
jwmson
jwmson 2
This Chicago based Boeing management was more interested in pushing the MAX out the door than in quality and safety. Were the results not so horrible, this would be like the pointy haired boss in the Dilbert cartoon strip!
rjensendds
Robert Jensen 1
BOEING USED TO BE THE BEST! THEY BECAME GREEDY AND LOST SIGHT OF EXCELLENCE...
THEY DESERVE TO BE HAMMERED BY THE FEDS AND GET BACK TO BASICS. FIRE THE SWAMP AND HIRE LEADERS WITH ETHICS AND MORALS..RETRAIN ALL PILOTS ARE BOEING'S COST.. RECERTIFY EVERYONE. PAY FOR LOST REVENUES FOR THE AIRLINES THAT BOUGHT THE MAX.. REGAIN THE PUBLIC'S TRUST. FLY BOEING EXECUTIVE'S FAMILIES AROUND THE COUNTRY TO DEMONSTRATE THE NEW SAFETY FEATURES... THAT'S THE ACID TEST !!!
teslataildragger
Willie Wonka 1
The fires in California brought Pacific Gas & Electric (PG & E)to its knees. Something I didn't think was possible. Now I wonder the if 737 Max could bring Boeing into equally uncharted corporate territory
Quirkyfrog
Robert Cowling 0
To all Boeing defenders: They LIED! They CHEATED! They LOST FOCUS, and chased MONEY!!!

End the crap, okay? How much more information do you require?

Boeing screwed the pooch, and it died many times over! And it went on for YEARS!!!
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
Don't you wish the acted more like our elected representatives in Washington?
Oh wait . . .

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]


joelwiley
joel wiley 9
Whataboutisms are a poor way of diverting the conversation from the subject at hand.
kbeller44
Kyle Beller 3
just shut up already. moron.
ghstark
Greg S 1
Do you have a better way for the aircraft to break during a too-hard landing? Would it be better if the fuselage snapped in half instead of the gear punching through?
CPsarras
So also did an SWA Boeing 737 a few years back, what's your point???

Entrar

¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos, y más!
Este sitio web utiliza cookies. Al usar y seguir navegando por este sitio, estás aceptando su uso.
Descartar
¿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