Jump to content


Icon Important Announcement!


New registrations require administration validation. This may delay registration approvals.
Reach out to us on our Facebook Page for faster approvals


Photo

MH 737 max 8 poll


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

Poll: cancel max 8 order (48 member(s) have cast votes)

should MH switch its order to A320 neo

  1. maintain current frame order of Max (17 votes [35.42%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 35.42%

  2. convert current max frames to 787/777/797 & switch to n/b order to A320neo (31 votes [64.58%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 64.58%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 KK Lee

KK Lee
  • Platinum Member
  • 5,181 posts

Posted 27 June 2019 - 07:38 PM

Long before the Max disasters, Boeing had a history of failing to fix safety problems

https://www.washingt...m=.8561ce60655a

#62 Waiping

Waiping

    Model Collector/Spotter

  • Platinum Member
  • 5,715 posts

Posted 29 June 2019 - 07:53 AM

Another bad press for Boeing and this time involves US's strong ally and neighbour.  Apparently this is big news there.

 

Boeing falsified records for 787 jet sold to Air Canada. It developed a fuel leak

 

https://www.cbc.ca/n...-leak-1.5193550


Edited by Waiping, 29 June 2019 - 07:53 AM.


#63 Craig

Craig
  • Gold Member
  • 576 posts

Posted 29 June 2019 - 10:25 AM

For those who are championing to review contracts on a constant basis to ensure that MH gets the lowest possible cost, here's an article for you :)

 

 

Boeing's 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers

 

 

 

It remains the mystery at the heart of Boeing Co.’s 737 Max crisis: how a company renowned for meticulous design made seemingly basic software mistakes leading to a pair of deadly crashes. Longtime Boeing engineers say the effort was complicated by a push to outsource work to lower-paid contractors.

 



#64 Mohd Suhaimi Fariz

Mohd Suhaimi Fariz
  • Platinum Member
  • 2,673 posts

Posted 01 July 2019 - 08:26 AM

For those who are championing to review contracts on a constant basis to ensure that MH gets the lowest possible cost, here's an article for you :)

 

 

Boeing's 737 Max Software Outsourced to $9-an-Hour Engineers

 

 

 

But is $9 an hour engineer in India a poor quality compared to a $40 an hour engineer in America? Differing salary levels isn't a barometer for quality to be honest...



#65 Waiping

Waiping

    Model Collector/Spotter

  • Platinum Member
  • 5,715 posts

Posted 01 July 2019 - 08:34 AM

Maybe yes, remember our national day logo debacle?

#66 Craig

Craig
  • Gold Member
  • 576 posts

Posted 01 July 2019 - 09:46 AM

 

But is $9 an hour engineer in India a poor quality compared to a $40 an hour engineer in America? Differing salary levels isn't a barometer for quality to be honest...

I agree that different salary levels isn't a barometer, but in this case, they were trying to reduce cost (for more profits to please Wall Street, who knows?) and Boeing subcontracted their coding to another company. From Bloomberg's article:

 

Increasingly, the iconic American planemaker and its subcontractors have relied on temporary workers making as little as $9 an hour to develop and test software, often from countries lacking a deep background in aerospace -- notably India.

 

[...]

 

The coders from HCL were typically designing to specifications set by Boeing. Still, “it was controversial because it was far less efficient than Boeing engineers just writing the code,” Rabin said. Frequently, he recalled, “it took many rounds going back and forth because the code was not done correctly.”

 

 

I am sure Boeing engineers are able to code it properly (as they have for the past few decades) but getting lower cost coders seems a little bit too enticing. I'll give Boeing the benefit of the doubt that they assumed that the work of an outsourced coder and a Boeing coder are the same but it didn't turn out that way. Sometimes getting the lowest cost possible doesn't do great things for the company. Penny wise, pound foolish? 



#67 flee

flee
  • Platinum Member
  • 11,484 posts

Posted 01 July 2019 - 05:27 PM

But is $9 an hour engineer in India a poor quality compared to a $40 an hour engineer in America? Differing salary levels isn't a barometer for quality to be honest...

Yes, it may look like low cost in the US but in India, it is a good pay rate. Quality does not only depend on the work of the software engineer - quality control/assurance procedures in place at Boeing must also be robust to ensure consistent and high quality work is carried out.



#68 jahur

jahur
  • Gold Member
  • 929 posts

Posted 18 July 2019 - 02:26 PM

A321neo operators alerted over 'excessive pitch' anomaly

https://www.flightgl...tch-ano-459718/


Probably time for manufacturers to stop squeezing in too many seats and stretching the fuselage on narrowbody.
 

Am sure the superstrecthed max 10 or ryanair's max200 will be bound by even more problems.


Edited by jahur, 18 July 2019 - 02:27 PM.


#69 BC Tam

BC Tam
  • Platinum Member
  • 7,392 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:25 AM

Boeing takes $5bn hit over grounding of 737 Max

from: https://www.bbc.com/...siness-49026285

 

Big businesses will involve big sums of money I suppose :) 

Does it mean 42 planes are still rolling off the production line monthly ? If so, there must be hundreds of new build undelivered examples about already, in desert storage presumably - what a sight that would be



#70 JuliusWong

JuliusWong
  • Platinum Member
  • 2,865 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:43 AM

Boeing takes $5bn hit over grounding of 737 Max


from: https://www.bbc.com/...siness-49026285
 
Big businesses will involve big sums of money I suppose :) 
Does it mean 42 planes are still rolling off the production line monthly ? If so, there must be hundreds of new build undelivered examples about already, in desert storage presumably - what a sight that would be
Yes, they are still making B737max even though it has been grounded by authorities. Stopping production abruptly will have devastating effect on their suppliers. Many of those finished or partially finished aircraft are parked at parking lots. Few have been flown under special permit by FAA to deserts of designated airport airport for storage.

Boeing is cash rich, USD 5 billion is like peanut for them.

#71 flee

flee
  • Platinum Member
  • 11,484 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:57 AM

The final cost will be more than a clean sheet design for a B737 replacement. Boeing was penny wise, pound foolish.

#72 jahur

jahur
  • Gold Member
  • 929 posts

Posted Yesterday, 12:01 PM

The final cost will be more than a clean sheet design for a B737 replacement. Boeing was penny wise, pound foolish.

There:s no more redesigning available the 737max, it has been pushed to the absolute limit. Infact the 737ng was already pushing it over the stable frame 733s to 735s. The 737ng was lucky it had less power hungry engines as it carries less passengers and less range.

Design requirements to cater airlines bean counter demand would mean Boeing has to dump the 737 and come up with an entirely different narrowbody plane with taller sturdier landing gears. Cheaper fix would be to put a lower bypass engines but then boeing would already lose its narrowbody sales if they implement this airlines cant squeeze no more extra seats or range with this.

Putting up stable bug free automation to keep the "super long narrow fuselage and super small wings with big ass engines" plane stable is not a long term fix. So pretty much boeing is screwed at the moment.

On another look the a321neo are also at risk now even though they are fitted with taller landing gears and the engines are not angled upwards the plane has a tendency to nose up as well. You would wonder if all this stretched fuselage airframes are really stable enough to handle the new gen engines with such narrow wings installed.

Edited by jahur, Yesterday, 12:03 PM.


#73 flee

flee
  • Platinum Member
  • 11,484 posts

Posted Yesterday, 12:13 PM

I think the A321Neo's problem isn't that great because the plane is already 100% FBW. The B737 Max is not a FBW airframe and therein lies their problem - whatever MCAS is, it isn't fully integrated to the overall scheme of things. So it is a patch of a patch of a patch!

 

Flying inherently unstable FBW aircraft isn't something new. The principle was already tried and tested in many combat aircraft like the F-117, etc. It is easy to program the FBW algorithms to provide stable flight if you knew that the aircraft is unstable from the very beginning. I am sure that Airbus are already working on modifying the A320Neo's FBW system if they see a need for that.

 

Boeing panicked when Airbus launched the A320 Neo. Most of that has to do with greed - the then management took very fat bonuses due to the Max sales success. Had they gone ahead with development of a B737 successor then, they would have to put that bonus money into development costs for the new narrow body. Looks like the present management team with have to pay for the Max fix PLUS the development of the NSA. No more big bonuses for them! 



#74 jahur

jahur
  • Gold Member
  • 929 posts

Posted Yesterday, 12:36 PM

I think the A321Neo's problem isn't that great because the plane is already 100% FBW. The B737 Max is not a FBW airframe and therein lies their problem - whatever MCAS is, it isn't fully integrated to the overall scheme of things. So it is a patch of a patch of a patch!
 
Flying inherently unstable FBW aircraft isn't something new. The principle was already tried and tested in many combat aircraft like the F-117, etc. It is easy to program the FBW algorithms to provide stable flight if you knew that the aircraft is unstable from the very beginning. I am sure that Airbus are already working on modifying the A320Neo's FBW system if they see a need for that.
 
Boeing panicked when Airbus launched the A320 Neo. Most of that has to do with greed - the then management took very fat bonuses due to the Max sales success. Had they gone ahead with development of a B737 successor then, they would have to put that bonus money into development costs for the new narrow body. Looks like the present management team with have to pay for the Max fix PLUS the development of the NSA. No more big bonuses for them! 

An excessive pitch up characteristic when putting high thrust power should not have occurred on any commercial plane even with aid by Fly by wire. This is something you should only see on GA or military flying. You dont see that behaviour on the a380 or b777s.

Edited by jahur, Yesterday, 12:41 PM.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users