He did.   That is recorded somewhere here.   This morning I pondered the creation of a short video that shows animations of the two crashes, debris fields and other heart string images/video separated by his comment about it being safe.

I doubt that after the initial MCAS activation that they ever had control over the plane.  I don't know what was volatile about their phase of flight.

Looks like several leasing companies.


737 MAX deliveries as of Feb 2019 before the grounding. Photo: Wikimedia

What is your professional flying or aircraft certification experience?

Man o man

Wall Street Journal article.

The Multiple Problems, and Potential Fixes, With the Boeing 737 Max

I was pondering the merit of their "4 second" assertion based off the transcript of the flight and voice data recorders. IIRC, it was something like 4 minutes from the first MCAS input to the crash. Of which there was around a 2 minute period where the pilots were fighting the plane with stab trim in the cutout position (which should mean MCAS couldn't actually change the stabilizer position).

Still, they were fighting it nonetheless. And I think during that time the stabilizer did move a few tenths in the nose down direction; all while their speed was climbing. Since MCAS would have been effectively disabled with the stab trim cut out, perhaps the small change in nose down attitude over those 2 minutes was actually the result of their increased airspeed. In that the increased speed then increased the pressure exerted on the stabilizer. Where the elevator was then "forced" in the nose down direction.

From my searches, I think the technical term for the above would be "blowback". Which would go along with the comments about how the pilots should have decreased their airspeed. As it would have made manual turning of the trim wheel more feasible. I'm sure the pilots attempted this. But if they were truly in a "blowback" type scenario, it's no surprise this would have been physically difficult.

My point being, they seem to have had more than 4 seconds to diagnose and (attempt to) correct the MCAS inputs. The co-pilot correctly hit the stab trim cutout. Which appears wasn't reactivated for a couple minutes. At which point MCAS trimmed again in the nose down position. But at that junction it was likely too late to save the aircraft. If they had attempted to decrease airspeed during those couple minutes, it may have been a different story. When exactly they reached the point of no return in relation to controlling the plane is up for debate. But it seems they had more than a few seconds to right the ship after the first MCAS input.

As for my "volatile" comment, that may not have been the best word choice. Perhaps "precarious" would have been better. What I was attempting to articulate is that being in the takeoff stage of flight, their altitude wasn't doing them any favors. By extension, yes, that means less time to recover. Still, the article’s blanket assertion that it only takes 4 seconds to doom a Max 8 flight strikes me as an overstatement. Even at the “volatile/precarious” stage in flight, the Ethiopian pilots seem to have had more time than that.

I'm far from an expert. I'd be hard pressed to even claim "stayed in a holiday inn last night" status . My primary gripe was with the state of media in this country. The Boeing situation has enough head-scratching moments when taken at face value. There's no need to interject or exaggerate claims in the reporting.

Put me down for “none”, and move on to whatever point of contention you likely have to offer.

This whole thing is a mess on all fronts. Boeing for their behavior before and after the crashes is an embarrassment. When the first one went down I told a coworker "watch, they promised some shit hole country jobs if they'd buy some airplanes". Sure enough they send flight control programming to India.

The plane in Indonesia had MCAS problems the two days prior to the crash. Rather than fix the sensor they just kept putting it in the air. One of the problems of selling your stuff to countries like Indonesia, once they take delivery your reputation is relying on their behaviors.

Ethiopia, I read an article where the captain was begging his managers for more training after the Indonesian flight. They told him everything was good and keep flying. Probably due to their ignorance, greed or reliance on Boeing's statement. Most likely a combination of all 3.

As much as I hate liberals, they're right to a certain extent that corporate greed is an evil thing. There's 3 companies involved here and all of their decisions were based on greed and the almighty buck. Boeing makes a ton of money but apparently it wasn't enough. A little more upfront investment on this would have saved them billions in cash and their reputation. But all that really matters to a lot of the decision makers is "what's the stock price doing today?".

Boeing to hire hundreds of temp employees for 737 MAX

By Dyer Oxley
August 20, 2019 at 1:58 pm

"Boeing is preparing to return the 737 MAX to service after months of the model being grounded across the globe. To accomplish this, the aerospace company is planning to hire hundreds of temporary workers.

Hundreds of temps will be hired for Boeing’s Moses Lake location. They will focus on avionics technicians, electricians, aircraft mechanics, airframe and power plant mechanics. On top of the temporary work, Boeing plans to pay for housing and a meal allowance, according to a Boeing spokesperson."

FAA says it will invite Boeing 737 MAX pilots from across the world for its crucial simulator tests

" The Federal Aviation Administration said on Thursday it would invite Boeing 737 MAX pilots from across the world to participate in simulator tests as part of the process to recertify the aircraft for flight following two fatal crashes.

Earlier, Reuters reported that the agency had asked the three US airlines that operate the MAX to provide the names of some pilots who had only flown the 737 for around a year, including at least one MAX flight.

In a statement, the FAA said it had not specified the number of required hours of flight experience, but said the candidates would be a cross-section of line pilots and must have experience at the controls of the MAX. "

Boeing 737 Max’s Certification Flight Likely to Occur in October

"The Federal Aviation Administration is likely to conduct its certification flight for Boeing Co.’s 737 Max in October, a key milestone toward returning the grounded jetliner to the skies, said people briefed on the matter.

That timing would be broadly consistent with Boeing’s estimate that the Max will return to service early in the fourth quarter, but may push the submission of a final certification package slightly beyond September, as the company previously estimated.

The U.S. planemaker is testing changes to the flight-control software architecture of its best-selling jetliner, which suffered two fatal crashes in a five-month span. Boeing engineers have almost worked their way through hundreds of queries fielded by the FAA from colleagues around the world, with few new concerns being raised at this point in the process, the people said. "

"The FAA is focused on ensuring that the revamped 737 Max systems meet safety requirements, and doesn’t have a timeline for returning the plane to service, according to a statement by the agency. FAA employees have already spent 110,000 hours working on the project, it said."

That is code for " We have an incestuous relationship with Boeing and will do whatever is needed to avoid a full new certification program."

American Airlines extends Boeing 737 Max cancellations through Dec. 3

"American Airlines announced Sunday it will extend cancellations of flights on the Boeing 737 Max through December 3.
While the announcement leaves open the possibility that American will resume flights on the plane for the busy holiday season, it also underlines the duration of the 737 Max grounding, which is now in its sixth month. Boeing originally hoped to get approval for the aircraft to fly again months ago.
American had previously canceled 115 daily flights on the aircraft through November 2. This latest move will result in approximately 140 canceled American flights per day, the airline said. Announcing the cancellations so far in advance gives American Airlines (AAL) time to assign new aircraft to 737 Max routes or rebook customers whose flights were canceled. American said customers on canceled flights can be rebooked or receive a refund.
United Airlines (UAL) took a similar step Friday, canceling 90 daily flights due to the 737 Max until December 19. "

sounds like the engineers that tried to make a place idiot proof proved they are one of them.

Boeing did that around 2000.  Bought a building in Bangalore and hired any Indian with a pulse if he could find a copy shop to print off a "degree" for him.  I've been told by a friend who was still working there that every programming job got shipped over.  His manager had to reclassify him (and hide the fact that he'd done it) as some sort of flight ops analyst to protect him from being laid off.

Boeing 737 Max Could Miss Another Crucial Travel Season

"Boeing 737 Max jets likely won't fly during the busy holiday travel season as global regulators reportedly want more information about the aerospace giant's proposed software changes. Boeing (BA) stock fell.

Regulators from the U.S., Europe, Brazil and elsewhere cut short an August meeting with Boeing over the lack of technical details and answers to specific questions regarding the proposed 737 Max software updates, sources told the Wall Street Journal.

Now Boeing must resubmit briefing documents with more details about the software changes and get the changes approved by the Federal Aviation Administration before a follow-up meeting. The FAA would also need to approve the new changes before simulator and flight tests of the final software revisions are scheduled."

United and Southwest Will Allow Passengers to Opt-Out of 737 Flights

"Even after Boeing’s beleaguered Boeing 737 Max jets return to the skies, some Stephen Brashearwary passengers won’t be expected to board them—at least if they’re flying United Airlines.

The policy is not new but reiterated this week by a United Airlines executive during an investor conference. CNN on Wednesday cited Boeing’s chief commercial officer Andrew Nocella as saying that if a United passenger arrives at a boarding gate “and it’s not an airplane you want to fly on for whatever reason, if it’s a Max, we’ll put you on another flight.”

United Airlines currently has 14 Max aircraft in its fleet. A spokesperson for the airline told Gizmodo by email that United Airlines will work with customers on rebooking their flight if customers don’t want to fly on a Max, but noted that it will work to inform customers ahead of their trip if they will be flying on one of the jets.

A Southwest Airlines spokesperson confirmed to Gizmodo that after the Boeing aircraft are again cleared for commercial use, the carrier will also offer customers “flexibility to change their itinerary” if they do not feel comfortable  flying on a Max jet. A spokesperson for American Airlines, which along with Southwest Airlines also has Max jets in its fleet, told Gizmodo in a statement by email that it has not made any official policy announcement for when the jets return to service."

Boeing 737 Max Faces These New Demands From European Regulator

"Europe's aviation regulator disclosed more demands before the Boeing 737 Max can return to service.

The European Union Aviation Safety Agency wants Boeing to perform in-flight maneuvers with the plane's updated flight-control system. It also wants those same tests with the system turned off, according to a presentation by EASA Executive Director Patrick Ky to the European Parliament Tuesday.

American Airlines Removes 737 Max From Flight Schedules—What Does That Mean For Holiday Travel?

"Holiday traveling just got a little more hectic.

American Airlines announced plans keep Boeing 737 MAX planes off flight schedules until December."

"....but American Airlines had the planes removed from its schedule through November 2. Now that has been extended through December 3."

Former Boeing Official Refuses To Comply In MAX Case Citing Self-Incrimination

"On the sixth of September, 2019, a former Boeing official refused to provide documents to investigators when compelled by a Department of Justice (DOJ) subpoena. Mr. Mark Forkner, who previously worked at Boeing as Chief Technical Pilot on the MAX project, cited his Fifth-amendment right against self-incrimination, reports the Seattle Times."

"While at Boeing, Mr. Forkner extensively worked on the 737 MAX program. Per his LinkedIn page, he was “responsible for simultaneously leading the international certification of the operational and training programs for the 737MAX”.

According to an investigation by the New York Times, in 2016 Mr. Forkner reportedly asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) if it would be okay to remove the MCAS from the pilot’s manual.

The request was eventually approved by the American regulators, under the assumption that the MCAS was a benign and rarely used system. An anonymous source told The Seattle Times that Mr. Forkner was frequently anxious about the deadlines and pressures faced in the MAX program.

Mr. Forkner’s attorney, David Gerger, told the New York Times that his client always “put safety first and was transparent in his work”."

I wouldn't take any of this literally.  Even when you assign a technical liaison to work with reporters and their questions, the published stories are most often incomprehensible to the very people that work on the projects.

GD: “Did you see the stupid stuff they reported about guns? What a bunch of dumbasses!”

Also GD: “Did you read that article about (insert product/company/subject that I don’t like)? Gospel truth!”

This isnt going away anytime soon...

In addition, news stories often have serious errors and often biases.

Gell-Mann amnesia.

Relatives of Passengers Killed in Boeing 737 Max Crash Protest in D.C.

"Families of the passengers who died in one of the Boeing 737 Max crashes lobbied Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao on Tuesday to slow what they consider a rush to let the plane fly again.

Two of the relatives who took part in the two-hour meeting in Washington said Chao promised that the government will take as long as necessary to ensure that the plane is safe but stopped short of agreeing to an entirely new, top-to-bottom review."

The MAX needs to be done with and never fly again.

Its one of the worst debacles ever and Boeing is just trying to save face. It was a flawed idea from the start, and whats worse is it seems like the FAA was in on it as well, simply rubber stamping Boeing.

ETA: I'll never fly on a MAX. Thats 100% certain.

Every exec responsible should be in prison.

I don't fly as much as I used to but I was thinking sort of the same thing about not wanting to fly on a MAX.
Surprised they haven't just dropped the whole MAX thing from the name and call it something else

Even though we have several members who have actually piloted them and say that it is a fundamentally good airplane?

I would hop on one operated by a US or European carrier right now.

Right now it is being scrutinized and vetted more than any other commercial airplane in service. If anything, once that process is complete, improvements have been made, it is deemed turd world proof and receives regulatory approval to return to service, it will arguably be the safest commercial airplane flying.

Also very ironic to see remarks like this on a forum dedicated to a product that had an even worse introduction to service.

I wouldn’t mind seeing McNerney loose his $3,000,000/year pension and otherwise get financially ruined, but exactly what provable crime would you be charging him with?

I won't have any reservations strapping into one when this is all over and done with.

Production of an unsafe aircraft. MCAS was a kludge designed to cover up an inherent flaw in the aircraft design. A kludge that was not disclosed so as to meet a "no new training required" objective.

We're not allowed to advocate summary executions, so prison would have to suffice.

Not that any CEO with millions to hire lawyers with friendly judges in their "campaign contribution" pockets would ever spend day one in general pop.

There is ZERO disincentive to produce crap in this country. Management can and does push junk through to get their bonuses, then bails before defective products ever hit the road. They pump stock. They get bonuses. Wall Street and Congressional insiders get rich. Regular investors get hosed. Regular employees get pink slips. Pax get uncontrolled flight into terrain.

It's a microcosm of what every company has become.

McNerney, the P&G marketing hack hired to run an airplane company should be tossed in a volcano. Minor injuries only.

Yes.

I work closely with Aviation stuff, and the whole thing and outcome doesnt give me the warm and fuzzies.

My biggest issue though is the plane is a bastard design with inherent problems which Boeing tried to solve with software. All as a way to avoid being left behind when Airbus beat them at their own game.

Lolz.
The MAX is just a 737 with more fuel efficient engines.  
You’re doing exactly the same thing that libtards do, when they so passionately espouse their opinions, based only on emotions, ignorance, hysteria, propaganda and hype.

Fwiw, I hate what Boeing did with the MCAS system, it was incredibly stupid.  I won’t defend them, but I will defend common sense.

Is that actually somewhere in the penal code?

The execution of it was obviously indefensibly poor, but how is MCAS any more of a kludge than any other anti-stall technology? Inherently flawed? Again, we have members here who have piloted the airplane and commented on how well it flies and fundamentally sound it is.

Those sound like Occupy Wall Street talking points.

Wonder how many fliers will opt out of taking the MAX and request another plane.

Perception is everything.

I wonder how many even know what kind of airplane the are flying on or could even tell the difference between a 737 MAX and a 737 NG. Or an A319/A320 for that matter.

My guess is only a few.

Very few.   There may be a couple that are so traumatized by the hype, indelibly in the hypocampus,  that they hyper-focus on it, but not many.

It’s not an issue at all, because it won’t be difficult to accommodate them on a different flight.

Gotcha.

Sounds like my attitude.    With first world western pilots and airlines it wouldn't bother me to fly on one once they get recertified.  They're going to be the most scrutinized airplane on the planet at that point.   On the other hand flying on some of third world airlines is going to bother me regardless of the airplane due to experience of the pilots, training, and maintenance.

Well that is certainly your prerogative.

While the implementation of MCAS was tragically and inexcusably terrible I don’t think that MCAS itself is a bad thing. Boeing is and will pay a price for their failure and contributing factor in those incidents, and it won’t be insignificant.

But out curiosity, what do you think Boeing should have done in that situation? Ceded the market to Airbus for 5-10 years while they developed a clean sheet design? Do you think the MAX was just a knee-jerk reaction without a significant amount of technical and business analysis? That Boeing knowingly risked the lives of the traveling public with an inherently problematic design? Do you think that fellow members here who have actually flown the MAX are being dishonest with their generally favorable opinions of the airplane?

No, its not "just a 737 with more fuel efficient engines"

The Anglo American legal tradition has a long history of general purpose criminal statutes, case law and legal principles, which render specific statutes essentially unnecessary.

RCW 9A.32.060
Manslaughter in the first degree.
(1) A person is guilty of manslaughter in the first degree when:
(a) He or she recklessly causes the death of another person; or
(b) He or she intentionally and unlawfully kills an unborn quick child by inflicting any injury upon the mother of such child.
(2) Manslaughter in the first degree is a class A felony.

RCW 9A.32.070
Manslaughter in the second degree.
(1) A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when, with criminal negligence, he or she causes the death of another person.
(2) Manslaughter in the second degree is a class B felony.

RCW 9A.08.010
General requirements of culpability.
…

(c) RECKLESSNESS. A person is reckless or acts recklessly when he or she knows of and disregards a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur and his or her disregard of such substantial risk is a gross deviation from conduct that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.
(d) CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE. A person is criminally negligent or acts with criminal negligence when he or she fails to be aware of a substantial risk that a wrongful act may occur and his or her failure to be aware of such substantial risk constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.
…

(4) Requirement of Wilfulness Satisfied by Acting Knowingly. A requirement that an offense be committed wilfully is satisfied if a person acts knowingly with respect to the material elements of the offense, unless a purpose to impose further requirements plainly appears.