13 ms·
Canada grounds Boeing 737 Max 8
- cmurf 8y agoTrump says U.S. and Canada are simultaneously grounding 737 MAX 8 and MAX 9 aircraft, and have been coordinating it. I'm biased so I read that as Canada did it first and dragged the U.S. into it. Nevertheless, these planes are grounded once they reach their destinations today. And boy does this hurt Southwest the most of U.S. carriers.
- jackschultz 8y agoGotta ask, when's the time to buy Boeing stock? It's like all these things happen, stock gets dumped quickly, but it's not like this hurts the overall value of the company. Anyone have other examples of events like this taking down a big company's stock price for a limited time, but not affecting it overall?
- whttheuuu 8y agothis would absolutely hurt the overall value of the company
- Sohcahtoa82 8y agoYou would think so, but this graphic says otherwise https://i.imgur.com/ir65AOr.jpg https://i.imgur.com/ir65AOr.jpg
- Jach 8y agoTavis[0] buys every time a major data leak or whatever occurs. I don't think he's lost money yet... [0] https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1068631118960766976 https://twitter.com/taviso/status/1068631118960766976
- booleandilemma 8y agoJust look at Facebook’s recent history, plenty of examples there.
- found_reading 8y agoMinister is saying that he faced no pressure from US or Boeing.
- johan_larson 8y agoWe need a Pants on Fire emoji. Or maybe a Pinocchio Nose.
- shaki-dora 8y agoThis lazy cynicism makes absolutely no sense considering the very decision being discussed here.
- speg 8y agohttps://emojipedia.org/lying-face/ https://emojipedia.org/lying-face/
- rfugger 8y agoThey claim this is based on new "validated" satellite tracking data they received this morning showing similar altitude fluctuations to the Lion Air crash. Somehow every internet forum had this figured out within hours of the crash using public flight tracker data. I find it worrying that it took them so long to come to the obvious conclusion for lack of "validation" of widely known information, and that it took so long to validate this information given the potential risk to every passenger every time one of those planes takes off in the meantime. It seems clear that safety is being weighed against level of disruption, which may be justified, but they haven't been transparent about this calculation.
- whatshisface 8y ago>I find it worrying that it took them so long to come to the obvious conclusion Aviation regulators and internet forums are literally at the opposite end of the spectrum with regards to jumping to conclusions.
- jsharf 8y agoFrankly, it hasn't even been a week. Thousands of flights happen every day, and these two accidents were 5 months apart. If it takes 2 weeks to make the decision, that actually sounds quite rushed. In the meantime every pilot on the planet is probably paying attention so they know what to do if they find themselves in the same situation, so likely the risk has already gone down slightly. I think that waiting 2 weeks until we have better facts represents a very reasonable tradeoff between safety and paranoia. It sounds to me like grounding the plane is a good idea, but I don't know exactly how the anti-stall system works, and I have no context for making the decision.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- dmix 8y agoYep a lot of papers have mentioned how these groundings by airlines was a very rare occurrence. Especially without any FAA confirmation and the day after an accident.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- smaili 8y agoIt's very possible the "new information" may be what WSJ just reported: https://www.wsj.com/articles/pilot-of-crashed-ethiopian-airlines-jet-reported-flight-control-problems-11552473593 https://www.wsj.com/articles/pilot-of-crashed-ethiopian-airl... tldr - The pilot had reported flight-control problems and wanted to return to the airport
- war1025 8y agoI heard that part in the very first broadcast I heard about the crash Sunday morning, pretty sure.
- isostatic 8y agoNon-paywall: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/13/ethiopian-airlines-pilot-reported-flight-control-problems-before-crash https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/13/ethiopian-airl... > The airline is planning to send the 737 Max 8 plane’s flight data recorder to Europe rather than the US for analysis, he said. That seems to be shocking news. Is it that they don't trust the FAA?
- komali2 8y agoAlso, why not both? Is the data in some... Non-copyable format? Is the physical device needed for some reason?
- djrogers 8y agoNo, once the data is extracted it can be sent to any/everyone. One team has to be responsible for extracting the data though - it's not simply popping out an SD card and plugging it in to your MacBook like a DSLR, especially with potential damage to the device.
- giarc 8y agoThe "flight data recorder" is the physical product.
- mb101 8y ago
- r-s 8y agoSince its a ban on all Canadian airspace, will this effect American flights which pass over Canada? I imagine quite a few flights cross over the southern part of Ontario.
- js2 8y ago"This safety notice restricts commercial passenger flights from any air operator, both domestic and foreign, of the Boeing 737 Max 8 and 9 aircraft from arriving, departing, or overflying Canadian airspace," Transport Minister Marc Garneau said today.
- skookum 8y agoIf it were just southern Ontario that would be one thing. Every flight from the US west coast to Europe spends half (from SEA) to a third (from SFO or LAX) of its flight time in Canadian airspace. However all such flights would likely already be affected due to the widespread European bans. I have no idea if any of those routes were served by 737 Max 8s.
- tapland 8y ago2/3 of the fleet was reported grounded before Canada joined. I doubt many 737s pass Canada on their way to Europe but I found this: > When it comes to riskier transatlantic and trans-continental routes, Boeing's new narrowbody 737-Max and Airbus's A320neo family can now be employed due to tremendous leaps in engine reliability and fuel efficiency. That has resulted in a considerable expansion of long-haul routes utilizing narrowbody airliners. https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/08/16/transatlantic-in-a-737-the-new-trend-of-narrowbody-airliners-flying-long-haul-infographic/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/08/16/transa...
- howard941 8y agoThat's ETOPS. Engines Turn Or People Swim
- greeneggs 8y agoThere's a great visualization of the routes here: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/11/world/boeing-737-max-which-airlines.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/11/world/boeing-...
- TheArcane 8y agoAbout time. The transport minister must've had damning evidence given the stake Canada has in 737 Max 8 continuing to operate.
- mc32 8y agoThd FAA + NTSB need to do something. They need to investigate and review past investigations and come out with their findings, they can’t just say “we don’t believe it”. Even if they are right, the right thing to do is thoroughly review past incidents and issue a finding.
- wyldfire 8y agoI have no idea whether the correct default position should be to ground or not to ground these planes. But it's clear that the investigation is in-progress and their statement was not "we don't believe it" but "Thus far, our review ... provides no basis to order grounding the aircraft ... Nor have other civil aviation authorities provided data to us that would warrant action." > Even if they are right, the right thing to do is thoroughly review past incidents and issue a finding. Isn't that precisely what they're doing now? Also from the FAA's statement: "... if any issues affecting the continued airworthiness of the aircraft are identified, the FAA will take immediate and appropriate action."
- mc32 8y agoI agree that the NTSB doesn’t hesitate to make a call. What I’m saying is that in this case, a special case in that two aircraft have had similar crashes and pilots seem to indicate an issue, should prompt the NTSB + FAA to issue conservative guidance on this, i.e. be super cautious on the side of safety when there appears to be uncertainty.
- jdsully 8y agoThis goes beyond aircraft at the moment. The NTSB and America in general used to lead. Now it seems the world is going to get on without them.
- ncr100 8y agoThe US Government is sadly conflicted. FAA claiming there is "no evidence" of this aircraft having a systemic flaw. Meanwhile: Boeing brought $70B into Washington State's economy in one year. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeingrsquos-economic-impact-on-state-estimated-at-70b/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeingrsquos-economic-... Boeing is a major defense contractor, providing transportation, weapons, and other supplies to the US Military.
- mcv 8y agoFrom what I understand about the issue so far, the systemic flaw is not in the aircraft, but in the training of the pilots. Or the lack thereof. Boeing wanted the 737 MAX to be considered just another 737 that didn't require any new training, but there are apparently significant changes compared to other 737 models that leave pilots feeling ill-prepared.
- DoofusOfDeath 8y agoPerhaps I haven't followed the news closely enough, but wasn't the Ethiopian plane also spewing excess smoke at the time of the crash? If so, wouldn't that suggest a failure mode other than the one that's viewed as a training issue?
- xefer 8y agoThere were eye witness reports to that effect, but the proof would be in the flight recorders. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witnesses/ethiopian-plane-smoked-and-shuddered-before-deadly-plunge-idUSKBN1QS1LJ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witness...
- 8y ago
- js2 8y agoHaving read many commments on HN and elsewhere since the crash, I know I’m in the minority here when I say this but to me it seems like the US airlines and FAA are following their procedures, the same procedures that make the US airlines the safest in the world, while the rest of the world is, I don’t quite want to use the word panicking, but at least giving into pressure from people who aren’t aviation safety experts. I don’t think it’s a simple as saying the US airlines and FAA are simply being greedy and placing profit over safety. The obvious easy thing to do from a PR perspective is to ground the planes. That they aren’t doing so in the face of immense pressure tells me that they base their decision on facts and procedure, not what-ifs and public scrutiny. Let the downvotes begin.
- tapland 8y ago> the same procedures that make the US airlines the safest in the world Citation needed? > Let the downvotes begin. Bracing for impact doesn't invalidate the cause of it.
- js2 8y ago> Citation needed You’re probably asking for a citation that the US airlines are safest due to their procedures and not for other reasons. I don’t have a ready citation for that. But as to US airline safety: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielreed/2016/12/28/in-the-last-7-years-you-were-more-likely-to-be-run-over-by-a-car-than-to-die-in-an-airline-crash/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/danielreed/2016/12/28/in-the-la... > Bracing for impact doesn't invalidate the cause of it. Fair, I should have left that out, but I won’t ninja edit it on you now. (And I have no idea why you’re downvoted. I’ve upvoted your comment.)
- mijamo 8y agoYour link does not really help prove your point at all. Do you have a real source proving your point?
- tapland 8y agoThat link does not support your statement. There are countries with the same safety record and with a higher percentage of their airlines ranking higher in safety than US airlines. Lumping the US versus 'the rest of the world' together does not compare single countries against each other. The US is safe for air travel, but that does not show that it is the safest.
- eznoonze 8y agoThe "new information" part is just for face saving.
- sbarre 8y agoThe meeting with the Civil Aviation Experts Panel was literally yesterday. It's unnecessary to cast a cynical light on everything.
- JumpCrisscross 8y agoLet’s say these planes should have never been certified. What’s the financial damage to Boeing?
- seren 8y agoFrom what I quickly skimmed online, 5000 737 Max have been ordered at about $100 millions a piece, so loss of revenue around $500 billions.
- bpicolo 8y agoThat assumes none of those companies would order a different Boeing instead. They’re not exactly at a glut for options, and I imagine they still need airplanes
- leesec 8y agoWell, unless they can fix the problem and prove they're viable again.
- seren 8y agoIt is more a fantasy back of the envelope calculation than a real number, I can't imagine that Boeing won't be able to fix the issue. In the end, it might be some penalty paid to some companies, and a slightly tarnished image, but people will keep buying and flying Boeings.
- isostatic 8y agoSo far their stock has dipped to the level it was at the end of January. It's still 15% up on December.
- ww520 8y ago737 Max is their biggest order backlog. However, there's a lack of competition to Boeing (Airbus bowed out) so its stock has gone up and up. Not sure what will happen if 737 Max is sent back to the drawing board.
- matz1 8y agoBy now its safe to assume that most pilot will know about this specific issue and know how to handle it. Well, except those Ethiopian pilot. I don't see reason to ban.
- justicezyx 8y agoWow, I cannot believe your conclusion is that "most pilot will know about this specific issue and know how to handle it"...
- matz1 8y agoI mean I would not be afraid if I have to fly 737 Max 8 tomorrow
- juandazapata 8y agoPlease do.
- dubbel 8y agoThat feels like average software development mindset applied to airplanes to be honest. An airplane nosediving on sensor malfunction from time to time is not acceptable behavior that could be considered fixed by telling the pilots to disable the autopilot.
- matz1 8y agoOf course the sensor malfunction still need to be fixed but in the meanwhile the workaround can be used.
- magduf 8y agoAgain, this sounds like a typical software developer mindset: "let's just use a workaround!" That's OK if you're using an office software product; it's not OK for an aircraft carrying hundreds of people where one small problem can kill them all (plus more people on the ground). The correct procedure is to ground the plane until the problem is fully understood, and use different planes.
- jonahhorowitz 8y agoThe FAA hasn't had a confirmed director since the last one's term expired in January of 2018. I wonder what effect that has on their decision making.
- ineedasername 8y agoCan someone chime in on the following-- One possible lead in cause has to do with either software or sensors related to Angle of Attack (AOT). For such an intermittent bug in a safety-critical application, how do you even begin fixing it when reproducibility might be a 1 in 500,000 likelihood? (Obviously I'm not in software testing, but I'm curious how one approaches this problem.)
- peteradio 8y agoGet somebody who isn't a shit head to review the design. I bet it sucks the big one in ways that would be apparent to a real professional.
- rfugger 8y agoUsing flight data from two crashes?
- djsumdog 8y agoThere's another comment on how Southwest ordered retrofits of the AOA user interface and training for all pilots following the 2018 crash. One solution is to make that change global in a mass recall/retrofit, along with additional training; possibly even adding it as a situation in 737 simulators to judge how quickly pilots will react to it.
- Abott 8y ago"Metamorphic testing of driverless cars" is a very related article involving software testing and sensor problems for safety-critical autonomous vehicles. The article is available here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3241979 http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3241979 and a free copy is here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331289445_Metamorphic_testing_of_driverless_cars https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331289445_Metamorph...
- tinyhouse 8y agoThe right thing is to ground the plane. It's just one plane out of many. It doesn't matter if nothing is wrong with the plane. Until they have clear answers it's better to not take any risks with people's lives!. At this point it's even better for Boeing from every perspective. The plane cannot leave the US and most of US passengers avoid flying it anyway. I'm sure airline crews are also very unhappy that they need to fly it. I wouldn't be surprised if some US airlines would ground it if the FAA doesn't.
- DumbUser123 8y agoFrom a November 29, 2018 story - Southwest airlines were activating a factory-installed option on delivered aircraft to "guard against any erroneous sensor data that may activate the jet's controversial stall protection system..." https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/southwest-airlines-is-adding-new-angle-of-attack-indicators-to-its-737-max-fleet/ https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/southwest-airlines... The article notes that the airline has opted for an upgraded avionics suite that low-cost airlines have, for the most part, forgone.
- notJim 8y agoIs it normal for there to be this kind of obsession about a particular plane following a crash? I feel like I've never seen this before. I literally saw someone on Twitter suggesting that you print out a page of the manual and hand it to your pilot…
- tapland 8y agoNo. It's because lack of pilot training for this new airplane has been suggested as a cause.
- djsumdog 8y agoRead up on the DC-10. It had some pretty well known issues, such as cargo bay door latches failing and blowing open in flight.
- dahdum 8y agoThe obsession is because the plane is new (<2 years) and there have been two fatal crashes in the past 6 months, making it by far the most dangerous plane in the skies today.
- DavidSJ 8y agoWe don't know that it's the most dangerous plane in the skies today. It may be, and some of the publicly known facts are suggestive of that but not conclusive. What we know is that its accident rate is by far the worst, but on a small enough sample size that statistical anomaly cannot be ruled out.
- yingw787 8y agoAnd then there was one. I do wonder if we can halt and revert the deterioration of the Civil Service before the whole "civilization is two days worth of food and water" scenario arrives. If it does, I think it'll be through something that generates a disproportionate amount of fear and anxiety in people resulting in a significant impact to the economy in a sector where middle to upper class folks are heavily exposed to. I think back to the government shutdown earlier last year, ended because 10 air traffic controllers couldn't come to work at LaGuardia, resulting in a domino effect of backlogged air traffic across airport hubs and airspace restrictions (including for private jets), resulting in POTUS making nice with House Speaker a few hours later. So if you're concerned because Boeing's CEO is a Mar-A-Lago member with direct access to POTUS (who wants his club fees), and the Secretary of Transportation is the Senate Majority Leader's wife who is also lobbied by Boeing, and the FAA hasn't had an official administrator for two months, and the FAA can't approve safety fixes by Boeing due to government shutdowns, and aircraft manufacturing consolidation means Boeing is "too big to fail", I would just say "we" do have more power than we think.
- 40acres 8y agoCall me a partisan hack but the fact of the matter is this situation is murkier politically than a lot of other similar controversies. There is a direct conflict of interest between our president and the CEO of a major American multi-national country and due to an amazing lack of transparency we have no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes. President's divest from their holdings upon taking the office for a very specific reason, the fact that Boeing's CEO is a customer of one of the president's properties really should be scrutinized heavily. If these crashes happened on our soil there would be no doubt in my mind that this plane would be grounded.
- yingw787 8y agoIt's a conflict of interest of course. The good thing is that it hurts a lot of people, especially people with disposable income with the power to change things, and especially people with stores of capital/influence. It's like a SaaS product, where sales/marketing (the most important division of a company) literally cannot do their jobs if engineering-provided services go down. It's much less easy to gouge engineering in such a situation than say releasing a waterfall build, and having it fail after the sale. If POTUS & Co. restrained themselves to separating children at the border and disappearing them into pedophile rings that they may frequent later (https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/nyregion/children-separated-border-new-york.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/nyregion/children-separat...), people may not be as outraged, because it doesn't affect them. Instead, they flaunt their power in our faces, in a way that may affect our physical safety. They don't whisper, and that's good. What would be really concerning is if people think this is okay, and the people with means realize the only way to really stay safe in a world where laws don't mean too much is to become part of the government, like in Russia. Then you have things like ambulance limos (https://jalopnik.com/ultra-rich-russians-hire-fake-ambulances-to-drive-them-458478316 https://jalopnik.com/ultra-rich-russians-hire-fake-ambulance...). I wouldn't know how to work backwards from that.
- erokar 8y agoIf this Reddit comment is true it's pretty damning. https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/b08h03/737_max_mega_thread/eidycdx/ https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/b08h03/737_max_mega... Claims intermittent fluctuations in AoA can activate the MCAS. So no need for the AoA indicator to be faulty then, means the risk of falsa MCAS intervention higher than previously believed.
- breck 8y agoI'd bet against that rumor with 50 to 1 odds. If there really was such a memo going around Boeing that would certainly be leaked. The leaker would probably due so publicly as well, as they would literally save lives and easily be free from retribution.
- jacquesm 8y agoAnd then there were none: https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-eth...
- anigbrowl 8y agoLet's ignore this new information and just carry on our existing arguments - it's the only appropriate thing to do without a general regulatory theory.
- dang 8y agoThe discussion has moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19381931 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19381931, since there is new information.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- scottlocklin 8y agoWeylp, now the US has done it: https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/13/world/boeing-max-8-flights-suspended-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/13/world/boeing-max-8-flights-su...