Boeing 737-MAX certification tests this week (6/29-7/1)

[cg]

perhaps tomorrow afternoon for the flights starting. Local ATC & ADSB sites could be neat to monitor

Boeing 737 MAX certification flight tests to begin Monday: sources

Pilots and test crew members from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing Co are slated to begin a three-day certification test campaign for the 737 MAX on Monday, people familiar with the matter told Reuters.

www.foxbusiness.com

chris

 

[slicerwizard]

ATC: "Uh, why are you guys upside down?"

 

[a417]

 

[prcguy]

I would monitor ground crash crews.

 

[JDrisc3480]

I am not sure a 3 day certification test is going to be sufficient considering these planes had been flying for a while when they started having problems

 

[cg]

As I understand it, the 737 went through significant testing (normal) when it was first released. They are not being forced to recertify every part of the aircraft. This new testing has to do with the systems that failed and the corrections made to it.
However, the European Aviation folks are changing their certification process and rather than rubber stamping the FAA approval, they will have their own.
Some real good explanations from a pilot can be found on a series of videos from a pilot, Juan Browne on his YouTube channel

chris

 

[RaleighGuy]

First recertification flight tests underway for the Boeing 737 Max. N7201S, A9A618, Callsign BOE701, flying from Seattle to Moses Lake.

 

[cg]

Today's test flight?

ADS-B Exchange - track aircraft live

ADS-B Exchange - track aircraft live - aircraft flight history

tar1090.adsbexchange.com

chris

 

[garys]

It's not a popular opinion, but I believe that sub standard pilot training by third world airlines had more to do with the crash than faults with the aircraft. Many of those airlines don't have the flight simulators that US carriers are required to have.

I don't expect that Boeing or the FAA will find any major issues with the plane.

 

[Xray]

Obviously not the greatest time to get a fleet of aircraft back in the air, gotta happen sometime though.

Most folks don't seem to be aware but the original 737 had a pair of horrific crashes as well involving large fatalities, aircraft would become highly unstable on approach and basically become uncontrollable and dive ,,, They grounded the fleet but couldn't find the problem [according to memory] Happened again but this time pilot was able to recover and bring it in, was some rod in the rudder system that was failing - They corrected it and turned out to be one of the safest, most successful civil aircraft in history.

 

[kruser]

It's not a popular opinion, but I believe that sub standard pilot training by third world airlines had more to do with the crash than faults with the aircraft.

I don't expect that Boeing or the FAA will find any major issues with the plane.

Like this? Almost 1 in 3 pilots in Pakistan have fake licenses, aviation minister says

 

[garys]

Yeah, like that. And likely worse.

Like this? Almost 1 in 3 pilots in Pakistan have fake licenses, aviation minister says

 

[spanky15805]

...why didn't Boeing just keep producing the 757-200??? I guess they would've tried to stuff a pair of Trent 1000's under those wings...

 

[Floridarailfanning]

It's not a popular opinion, but I believe that sub standard pilot training by third world airlines had more to do with the crash than faults with the aircraft. Many of those airlines don't have the flight simulators that US carriers are required to have.

I don't expect that Boeing or the FAA will find any major issues with the plane.

You're definitely correct about sub-par training for some pilots, however, Boeing now has a well-established history of cutting corners during the development and manufacturing phases. This is on full display with the 737 Max grounding and the Air Force KC-46 tankers which had tools and trash left inside the fuselage.

Boeing knew full well that moving the engines forward caused a significant change in the performance of the aircraft which is blatantly evident by their hasty implementation of MCAS. The FAA is also to blame for their apparent lack of oversight of Boeing's design and manufacturing process and wrongfully certified the plane, to begin with.

The manufacturing faults Boeing got away with in the '90s and early 2000s on the NG fleet established an internal culture that allowed such mistakes to be glossed over. Boeing has been lucky not to have had major issues with the poorly built 737 NG's or with the 787's aside from the Lithium battery fires.

 

[garys]

Because passenger airlines weren't happy with operating costs. Freight companies like FedEx found them more efficient to operate which is where a number of them have ended up on secondary leases.

...why didn't Boeing just keep producing the 757-200??? I guess they would've tried to stuff a pair of Trent 1000's under those wings...

 

[garys]

Yes, the KC-46 issues were more disturbing than the MAX issues even though no lives were lost.

Apparently the corporate culture changed when the accountants took over management from the engineers. The company seems to be moving back with the firing of the CEO and other personnel changes.

Of course Airbus had similar issues some years back with a similar type of flight control system. In that case, one of the problems was with hardware, but others were that without some of the optional software installed, the system acted in the exact opposite way when the "stick" was pushed down than it did with the software installed. In one case an Asian airline didn't bother to buy the flight simulator recommended and used another airlines to save money.

The problem there was that the other airline DID have the optional software. So, the pilots were trained to do the exact wrong thing when the alarm went off. Which just caused the problem to be unmanageable.

You're definitely correct about sub-par training for some pilots, however, Boeing now has a well-established history of cutting corners during the development and manufacturing phases. This is on full display with the 737 Max grounding and the Air Force KC-46 tankers which had tools and trash left inside the fuselage.

Boeing knew full well that moving the engines forward caused a significant change in the performance of the aircraft which is blatantly evident by their hasty implementation of MCAS. The FAA is also to blame for their apparent lack of oversight of Boeing's design and manufacturing process and wrongfully certified the plane, to begin with.

The manufacturing faults Boeing got away with in the '90s and early 2000s on the NG fleet established an internal culture that allowed such mistakes to be glossed over. Boeing has been lucky not to have had major issues with the poorly built 737 NG's or with the 787's aside from the Lithium battery fires.

 

[737mech]

You're definitely correct about sub-par training for some pilots, however, Boeing now has a well-established history of cutting corners during the development and manufacturing phases. This is on full display with the 737 Max grounding and the Air Force KC-46 tankers which had tools and trash left inside the fuselage.

Boeing knew full well that moving the engines forward caused a significant change in the performance of the aircraft which is blatantly evident by their hasty implementation of MCAS. The FAA is also to blame for their apparent lack of oversight of Boeing's design and manufacturing process and wrongfully certified the plane, to begin with.

The manufacturing faults Boeing got away with in the '90s and early 2000s on the NG fleet established an internal culture that allowed such mistakes to be glossed over. Boeing has been lucky not to have had major issues with the poorly built 737 NG's or with the 787's aside from the Lithium battery fires.

Not sure I'm aware of any "Manufacturing Faults Boeing Got Away With" on the NG? Most of what I see with the NG were improvements to the Classic 737-300/500 model. In 1997 when the first NG was in service with SWA there were noticable improvements. In fact I just saw N701SW today still flying around safely. I am aware of mods and improvements to fix things like gear shutter and Elevator flutter but nothing that elevated to safety of flight mandatory? I've been working on the NG's since 1997. I'd be very interested to hear the details you are talking about because it is my line of work to fix and sign for the safety of the aircraft everyday. I would hate to find out there's something I should be looking for and I'm not. Get my drift?

 

[Floridarailfanning]

Not sure I'm aware of any "Manufacturing Faults Boeing Got Away With" on the NG? Most of what I see with the NG were improvements to the Classic 737-300/500 model. In 1997 when the first NG was in service with SWA there were noticable improvements. In fact I just saw N701SW today still flying around safely. I am aware of mods and improvements to fix things like gear shutter and Elevator flutter but nothing that elevated to safety of flight mandatory? I've been working on the NG's since 1997. I'd be very interested to hear the details you are talking about because it is my line of work to fix and sign for the safety of the aircraft everyday. I would hate to find out there's something I should be looking for and I'm not. Get my drift?

I get your drift!

There is good documentation that Boeing used defective structural components made by AHF Ducommun on at least 32 (but likely many more) NG's which had been hand fabricated VERY poorly when they should have been CNC milled. Ducommun and Boeings QC failed to find the defective parts though Boeing employees stated many of the parts needed to be hammered forcefully into place when they should have fit easily. Employees also stated that the holes had been drilled in the wrong locations and burs not removed from the parts. I have also seen claims by some former Boeing employees which indicated the parts had been sanded down and that fillers had been used to make the parts look better, rather than fixing defective units.

There is quite a bit of info out there if you google Boeing AHF Ducommun Defective Parts.

I don't know if Boeing ever fixed or repaired the affected aircraft, but from what I've read on the matter over the last several years I don't think they have.

 

[737mech]

Yeah I looked at the article and read the info it seems that stuff was cleaned up, more oversight, more FAA watching etc'. No reason to think there is a problem flying around today. No airlines have reports or findings or crashes due to this vendor's parts. It was a wistle blower thing in 2000 and they sent a whole team of guys to take a look at it from FAA/NTSB/Airline Reps and Boeing. It's not what you say a "Culture of cover up" at Boeing in today's manufacturing. 737 MAX recertified can't wait to see them again they are Awesome Planes!!