Plane Spotters Corner

[Halcyon]

Anyone watched the Netflix documentary "The Case against Boeing"?


An interesting documentary that suggests that when the Boeing and Mcdonnal Douglas merger happened all things went down hill and the once close team and safey conscious group changed to become one poowered by greed and proffit, cutting corners and maximising proffits.


As the A320 Neo arrived, Airbus was finally overtaking Boeing in orders and Boeing didnt have anything to compete with it.
Boeing took the old 737 design and stuck more efficient engines on it...however failed to forsee the challenges this would bring......for example the dreaded pitch problems and the invention on MCAS to counteract this.
It feels like it was rushed and as we all know anything that is rushed is usually not done well.
Not to forget the FAA either who seemed to have taken a back seat when they should have been more on it.
The aircraft could have been grounded a lot sooner in my opinion, especially after the first crash.

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Anyone watched the Netflix documentary "The Case against Boeing"?


An interesting documentary that suggests that when the Boeing and Mcdonnal Douglas merger happened all things went down hill and the once close team and safey conscious group changed to become one poowered by greed and proffit, cutting corners and maximising proffits.


As the A320 Neo arrived, Airbus was finally overtaking Boeing in orders and Boeing didnt have anything to compete with it.
Boeing took the old 737 design and stuck more efficient engines on it...however failed to forsee the challenges this would bring......for example the dreaded pitch problems and the invention on MCAS to counteract this.
It feels like it was rushed and as we all know anything that is rushed is usually not done well.
Not to forget the FAA either who seemed to have taken a back seat when they should have been more on it.
The aircraft could have been grounded a lot sooner in my opinion, especially after the first crash.

I watched this last night. Absolutely shocking. I knew the basics of the story, but the lengths Boeing went to cover up the new MCAS system it had added to the 737 Max 8 in order to avoid costly pilot retraining was shocking, as was its heel-dragging and obfuscation when the inquiry tried to hold it to account.

It was quite telling that in the days after the 737 was finally grounded, more and more pilots were refusing to fly them to their storage facilities.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by Chris

I watched this last night. Absolutely shocking. I knew the basics of the story, but the lengths Boeing went to cover up the new MCAS system it had added to the 737 Max 8 in order to avoid costly pilot retraining was shocking, as was its heel-dragging and obfuscation when the inquiry tried to hold it to account.

It was quite telling that in the days after the 737 was finally grounded, more and more pilots were refusing to fly them to their storage facilities.

Yes it is indeed shocking and some high up people at Boeing should be made responsable for the two crashes that killed everyone onboard.


It was very clear what they were doing to save time and cut corners to get the 737 Max out the factory as quickly as possible.
They felt threatened by Airbus taking the lead in sales and pushed the 737 Max out as quickly as possible.
Trying to pass off the changes made to the 737 as nothing major and that would need no additional training.


Any business that also dismisses people highlighting faults or problems will in the end be the ones with the biggest of problems.
In an industry where safety has to be paramount nothing should ever be missed or dismissed.


The company needs to re-focus and get people back at the healm who prioritise safety.


But equally the FAA need to be scrutinizing everything Boeing do.
I dont know if it was americans backing up americans or whether things had just become too trusting, but they need to delve into things a lot more closely.

[Hom3r]

Having worked in aviation for nearly 15 years I do know this.


If a plane has a fault, that means that 1 in a 1,000 will crash and kill all people on board.


Now say it would cost $10,000,000,000 to fix, but a crash pay out they would only payout $250,000,000 guess what is the cheapest option.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Having worked in aviation for nearly 15 years I do know this.


If a plane has a fault, that means that 1 in a 1,000 will crash and kill all people on board.


Now say it would cost $10,000,000,000 to fix, but a crash pay out they would only payout $250,000,000 guess what is the cheapest option.

Sad isn't it. It's a bit like the searching for MH370.
Malaysia Airlines aren't interested in searching anymore as if there was evidence found that they were to blame then there would be millions of law suits.

[Hom3r]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Sad isn't it. It's a bit like the searching for MH370.
Malaysia Airlines aren't interested in searching any more as if there was evidence found that they were to blame then there would be millions of lawsuits.

Sadly that the search area is to vast.

[Halcyon]

The Worlds only and largest ever plane, the Antonov 225 "Mriya" has been destroyed in a fire in the Ukraine during the ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia.


Sadly it was there for maintenance and could not fly out.



This aircraft has not only been used to shift some of the worlds largest cargo including other planes, trams, etc, but also for humanitarian aid delivering much needed supplies.


Another step backwards for the world of aviation.


I saw this beast of a plane land at East Midlands Airport and it is awesome.




NOTE: I am ofcourse aware that lives are much more important than a plane and some may say it doesnt matter about the plane, but still, it is a shame its gone.

[Hom3r]

There will be another one built, apparently it will cost $3 billion, and Russia will be made to pay for it.

[GrimUpNorth]

Some discussion the An-225 may not have been totally destroyed, first photos show the tail appears to be intact and I read something a couple of days ago saying they wouldn't know the extent of any damage until a full inspection could be carried out.

[Halcyon]

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth

Some discussion the An-225 may not have been totally destroyed, first photos show the tail appears to be intact and I read something a couple of days ago saying they wouldn't know the extent of any damage until a full inspection could be carried out.

Sadly, Completly destroyed.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Halcyon

Sadly, Completly destroyed.

Why would they do that? It's not that it was an asset that would play a pivotal role in winning or loosing the war.

[Halcyon]

Absolutely stupid of them to have destroyed this aircraft that they could have put to very good use themselves if they'd got to use it.


It was used many times to help with delivering vital supplies round the world.



It seems very unlikely but I hope a new and even better one can be built.

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth

Why would they do that? It's not that it was an asset that would play a pivotal role in winning or loosing the war.

You're assuming they planned to hit it, as opposed to just carelessly lobbing shells and missiles about the place ....

[Taf]

..

[Hom3r]

Originally Posted by Chris

You're assuming they planned to hit it, as opposed to just carelessly lobbing shells and missiles about the place ....

Well I guess the Russians were aiming all building and hangars.