Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Prosecutors, Transportation Department Scrutinize Development of Boeing’s 737 MAX
Wall Street Journal ^ | 17 March 2019 | Andrew Tangel, Andy Pasztor and Robert Wall

Posted on 03/18/2019 3:57:48 AM PDT by Magnatron

Federal prosecutors and Department of Transportation officials are scrutinizing the development of Boeing Co.’s BA 1.52% 737 MAX jetliners, according to people familiar with the matter, unusual inquiries that come amid probes of regulators’ safety approvals of the new plane.

A grand jury in Washington, D.C., issued a broad subpoena dated March 11 to at least one person involved in the 737 MAX’s development, seeking related documents, including correspondence, emails and other messages, one of these people said. The subpoena, with a prosecutor from the Justice Department’s criminal division listed as a contact, sought documents to be handed over later this month.

It wasn’t immediately clear whether the Justice Department’s probe is related to scrutiny of the Federal Aviation Administration by the DOT inspector general’s office, reported earlier Sunday by The Wall Street Journal and that focuses on a safety system that has been implicated in the Oct. 29 Lion Air crash that killed 189 people, according to a government official briefed on its status. Aviation authorities are looking into whether the anti-stall system may have played a role in last week’s Ethiopian Airlines crash, which killed all 157 people on board.

The subpoena was sent a day after the Ethiopian Airlines crash a week ago.

(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aviation; boeing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: Bell Bouy II
“I am not really a pilot but did play one on FreeRepublic”

That's nothing. Media personalities play experts on EVERYTHING.

21 posted on 03/18/2019 7:47:56 AM PDT by neverevergiveup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cymbeline

“In normal flight the wings don’t need to be as large as they need to be during takeoff and landing.”

Yeah that is why we have flaps. Don’t quit your day job.

It is more to do with larger engines and the desire but Boeing and Airlines to not retrain pilots. This post is one of the best explanations I have seen so far.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3734243/posts?page=32#32


22 posted on 03/18/2019 8:30:42 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bell Bouy II
Ah, yes Alaska Air Flight 261, 1/31/2000. Ironically, if the pilots had done differently than the manual instructed, they might have landed quickly and survived.

Who could have foreseen that a supervisor would not replace an (expensive) part, as recommended by the maintenance guy?

Who could have predicted the "voluminous particulate matter" found in that craft's frequent flight area that would unexpectedly degrade the jackscrew lubricant?

And yet, it was the gubmint that as good as killed all 88 of 'em.

23 posted on 03/18/2019 8:36:41 AM PDT by rx (Truth Will Out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TalonDJ

“Yeah that is why we have flaps. Don’t quit your day job.”

I mentioned flaps in my post. I think comparing the 737 MAX’s wings with the older 737’s wings, flaps or no flaps, the 737 MAX’s wings are smaller.

A quote from the article you reference: “The fact that this airplane requires such jury rigging to fly is a red flag”

I wonder how the engines-off rate of descent of the two planes compare. I’ll bet the MAX drops like a rock.

After all’s said and done Boeing ends up with a huge PR problem. It’s a trickier plane to fly. The automation solution might make flying it even more tricky. Training probably is a cure.

Final result: we’ll get an even better MAX and Boeing will lose a few billion dollars.


24 posted on 03/18/2019 9:30:49 AM PDT by cymbeline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

“They will probably find a way to blame this on Trump. This model started selling in May 2016. If Trump had replaced all the Clinton/Bush/Obama FAA people in early 2016 they would have said that caused the design problems.”

I think you meant 2017 in each usage, though I was about to make a joke about Candidate Trump wielding so much power. :-)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_MAX


25 posted on 03/18/2019 9:42:34 AM PDT by treetopsandroofs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cymbeline

this is a wild ass guess, right? sort of like if I said it was little green men from mars.

same amount of evidence for both.


26 posted on 03/18/2019 10:12:23 AM PDT by JohnBrowdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cymbeline
”So Boeing puts a small wing on the 737 MAX and makes up for it by putting on more powerful engines requiring a greater angle of attack to make the small wings have the necessary lift at low speeds.”

That’s not how it works at all, and incidentally, the 737 Max has a slightly LARGER wing area than the 737-800, for example. Wing planform and airfoil design also have a large effect upon aerodynamic efficiency, aside from wing “size.” Sailplanes (gliders) have unusually long wingspans and very large wing areas for their size and weight, and they are the most aerodynamically effficient aircraft in the sky. Just look at the 787. While as a high-speed jet it uses a swept wing, that wing is much longer with a higher aspect ratio as compared to previous airliners. It’s essentially using a swept sailplane wing, and it’s very efficient.

27 posted on 03/18/2019 10:39:12 AM PDT by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: noiseman

“they are the most aerodynamically efficient aircraft in the sky”

The objective here is to move cargo as cheaply as possible at 500 mph.

Some of what I say is speculation from a non-expert.


28 posted on 03/18/2019 11:10:36 AM PDT by cymbeline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Magnatron

Training issue!

One of the Ethiopian pilots only had 200, yes only 200 flight hours. In the US, commercial pilots require 15,000 flight hours.


29 posted on 03/18/2019 12:10:34 PM PDT by Chgogal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Magnatron
There is a valid concern about the FAA being too deferential to Boeing. The U.S. is down to one airliner manufacturer (Boeing), and two military airplane manufacturers (Boeing and Lockheed).

As a result, the government sees its role is in part to drive business to these companies. They allowed Boeing to self-regulate its airliner business because any loss by Boeing is a loss by the U.S., and they balance Boeing and Lockheed in the military airplane space often buying Lockheed fighter airplanes then granting Boeing no-bid transport airplane contracts (like the 767 tanker).

In my opinion, the 737 MAX problem is not a major design flaw, it is something that can be fixed easily. Runaway trim caused by a faulty angle of attack sensor, combined with poor pilot training is readily fixable. Fix the sensor, perhaps add a redundant AOA sensor, train the pilots to disengage the MACA automatic trim system at the first sign of any concern. Perhaps modify the system to disengage based on pilot input to the control column as happens on earlier 737s which have a similar stall prevention system.

People are overreacting about the derivative design of the 737 Max. Airplane manufacturers have been building derivative designs for over 70 years, at least since the DC-6 was derived from the DC-4.

People are overreacting about the automated pitch control system of the 737 Max. Airplane manufacturers have been including automated stability for over half a century, at least since the DC-8's had such a system.

Yes, fix the FAA and the FAA's certification system. Yes, fix Boeing. Yes, fix the 737 Max. But everyone needs to realize this is not the end of an airplane or the end of a company.

30 posted on 03/18/2019 12:49:58 PM PDT by magellan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

I believe you added an extra zero. 1,500 hours seems to the be the current standard for non military flyers. Here is a dated article explaining some of the issues and flight training requirements.

http://fortune.com/2016/09/02/faa-regulations-copilot/


31 posted on 03/18/2019 1:24:39 PM PDT by EVO X
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rx

I don’t think they had a chance with that elevator trim control stripped.

Seems like it stabilized a little here and there but any disturbance could have upset it.

I’d have to look again, it seemed jammed at first, as I recall.

Yeah if they had left it alone at that point maybe they could have tried other ways to trim.

Pretty dang scary.


32 posted on 03/18/2019 2:01:02 PM PDT by SaveFerris (Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold ......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

200 hours in that type. As I understand it.


33 posted on 03/18/2019 2:02:55 PM PDT by SaveFerris (Luke 17:28 ... as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold ......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Magnatron

Link to avoid the WSJ’s paywall:

https://outline.com/Umr6nF


34 posted on 03/18/2019 3:12:34 PM PDT by upchuck (Home schooled kids are educated, not indoctrinated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: upchuck

Did they slam the door shut? It was open this morning.


35 posted on 03/18/2019 3:48:53 PM PDT by Magnatron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SaveFerris
The pilots' repeated exercising of the elevator trim control exacerbated the problem by creating unusual wear on the nitrited jackscrew, ultimately dooming the flight.

In their earlier double-check of Mechanic John Liotine's work, the supervisors didn't calibrate the test equipment properly, thus didn't believe the wear was outside normal parameters.

If they had listened to John Liotine, those 88 people wouldn't have died that day. Yay, John!

But the fact is that it was the ozone found in "chemtrails" that that craft had spent an inordinate amount of time following in and traversing that did in the lubricant, and then in turn, the treated jackscrew surface. The supervisors in part were probably somewhat reasonably extrapolating from the far less severe wear patterns they'd seen on jackscrews in several other of the Company's MD-83 aircraft.

Fortunately, the real problem was quickly fixed with a different lubricant far less susceptible to ozone.

36 posted on 03/18/2019 4:02:14 PM PDT by rx (Truth Will Out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
They will probably find a way to blame this on Trump. This model started selling in May 2016. If Trump had replaced all the Clinton/Bush/Obama FAA people an early 2016 they would have said that caused the design problems.

"# of seconds before President Trump gets blamed for this!

Thanks to Fiddlstyx for the above sad reality!

37 posted on 03/18/2019 4:14:06 PM PDT by Grampa Dave (After JussieÂ’s fake hate crime, hate crime fakers arenÂ’t taken seriously for even 1 minute now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Magnatron

Yes they did. Follow the link and see for yourself.


38 posted on 03/18/2019 5:06:32 PM PDT by upchuck (Home schooled kids are educated, not indoctrinated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: treetopsandroofs

You are correct. My brain knew it was 2017 but my fingers were thinking about how Trump was recently elected and inaugurated.


39 posted on 03/18/2019 7:52:33 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Mozart tells you what it's like to be human. Bach tells you what it's like to be the universe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Magnatron

One item to add to your list—corporate governance.

The Board of Directors is a pathetic combination of political hacks (to con regulators and help obtain military industrial complex contracts) and hedge fund hacks (to con big investors).

24/7 corruption—that is where we are today.


40 posted on 03/19/2019 5:52:16 AM PDT by cgbg (Democracy dies in darkness when Bezos bans books.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson