• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boeing's Unsuccessful Attempt to Avert a Crisis

TU Curmudgeon said:
You heard wrong.



Please define "quickly". Please support that definition with a link to the appropriate FAA regulations.



Well, since what you "heard" about what caused the incident was incorrect, you might also suspect that what you "heard" about when the pilots were "switching to auto pilot" might well be just as accurate.

Maybe you should ask your "source" if they REALLY believe that Muslim Arabs aren't intellectually capable of handling anything more complex than a camel.
Click to expand...

Well since the source was a guy that they had on a national radio show, I don't think I can ask him that.
Not sure what the camel comment is supposed to imply here?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Grounding the aircraft would have (and will) cost Boeing a lot of money and might adversely effect its profit margin (to say nothing about its stock price).
Click to expand...

Which is the only thing that really matters. Seems like a crash of a major US airliner would have had an even larger affect on the bottom line though......
 
SCrider said:
Not defending Boeing here, but no company would have put out a press release like that. It's the FAA's job to regulate the industry.
Click to expand...

So if the company knows of a problem that could potentially cause fatal crashes (and is actively working on fixing it) but the FAA doesn't, it's just peachy-kean by you for the company to do nothing to reduce the chances of those fatal crashes occurring until it has worked out what the fix is?
 
SCrider said:
[/B]

Yep, that is the billion dollar question right there. Does Boeing have any legal liability here with the victims of these crashes? If an US plane had gone down you know they would be filing bankruptcy protection right now.
Click to expand...

With the potential sales losses and damage claims that are about to descend on Boeing's head, don't rule out a Chapter 11 filing.

Did you know that China is currently flight testing a domestically produced aircraft that will directly compete with the 737 MAX?

Now, if you assume that "materials" make up 50% of an aircraft's cost and "labour" makes up 50%, and if you assume that the cost of an aircraft is to build an aircraft in the US is US$10,000,000, and if you assume that the cost of "labour" in China is 50% of what it is in the US, how much would it cost to build that aircraft in China?

(US$5,000,000 + [US$5,000,000 / 2]) = US$7,500,000
 
SCrider said:
Well since the source was a guy that they had on a national radio show, I don't think I can ask him that.
Not sure what the camel comment is supposed to imply here?
Click to expand...

Well, since your "source" didn't know what he was talking about on one subject, I didn't think that it would be a wild stretch to conclude that he didn't know what he was talking about on another.
 
ajn678 said:
The most pathetic thing I saw through the whole thing was trying to blame the government shutdown for the crash. In all other situations these hypocritical rats call for the destruction of all mega corporations, yet when it benefits them, they take the side of a billion dollar mega corp because they have hatred for Trump.

Let it be clear. Boeing is responsible for the failures of the software. If there is any fault it should be attributed to them.
Click to expand...

Facts get in the way of your opinion.
 
The talk is that this version of the 737 actually was a NEW aircraft design with a bigger fuselage and bigger engines than the original 737. It was called the 737 anyway to make approval easier and so all 737 certified pilots could fly them. The flaw appears in the latter - pilots trained to fly original 737s with no training for the new bigger aircraft.

This has nothing to do with President Trump, though to Trump haters anything bad that happened in the universe is Trump's fault.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Quite right, Mr. Trump said that the aircraft should be grounded after he said that they shouldn't.
Click to expand...

Instead of you saying Trump did the right thing, you say Trump did a bad thing by grounding the planes.

When 40 other countries/groups have grounded the aircraft you have just said was safe, you look like a bit of an idiot if you continue to say it is 100% safe to fly, don't you?
Click to expand...

Are you calling me an idiot? Further your lying, post up where I said the the plans were safe. I would say your looking like a idiot if you continue making **** up

The FAA thought the planes for qualified to fly, But Trump grounded the planes anyway ahead of the FAA.

Surprise: Trump Kept 737 Max Jets Flying After Personal Call from Boeing C.E.O.
Click to expand...

From your link
With more countries grounding Boeing jets and with lawmakers, aviation workers, and consumers calling on the United States to do the same, the head of the aerospace giant on Tuesday made a personal appeal to President Trump.

I see Trump turned him down, Trump grounded the planes ahead of the FAA. You libs hate Trump so much you grab at anything in an attempt to kill Trump

Trump reportedly considered whether grounding Boeing 737 Max planes would spark panic and hurt the stock market
Click to expand...

From your link
Trump reportedly considered whether grounding Boeing 737 Max planes would spark panic and hurt the stock market.

Reportedly, maybe, could have said that, I think he said that, I'm a liberal and I say what was "reportedly" was fact. Gee you got anymore straws you want to pull. What should I be thinking here, Idiots.


Boeing’s CEO Personally Called Trump About the 737 MAX

From your link
Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg personally called President Donald Trump on Tuesday to guarantee the airworthiness of the Boeing 737 MAX, according to the New York Times.

Wow, Boeing's CEO called Trump, and what did Trump do. HE GROUNDED THE PLANES AHEAD OF THE FAA. That is what Trump did

The Times reported that Muilenburg and Trump were already scheduled to speak Monday after the president tweeted about aviation technology compromising passenger safety. “Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly,” Trump tweeted. “…The complexity creates danger.”

Did you read what is in bold from your own link. Trump tweeted about aviation technology compromising passenger safety. However according to you libs that hate Trump, he didn't mean what he said, in fact he said the opposite. You libs believe Trump could care less about passenger safety.

On the other hand, I will admit that there aren't very many reports about something that didn't happen - like a public announcement that he was NOT going to order the 737s grounded.
Click to expand...

"There are not very many reports about something that didn't happen" What about the ones that did report. Post them up.

Sure it does - AFTER China, the UK, the EU, Canada and more than 30 other countries had already done so.
Click to expand...

And Trump grounded the planes before our own FAA. But because of your hatred of Trump, it has to be Trump's fault, nothing else matters

Have you ever wondered why Boeing was working on a fix for a problem that didn't exist (as far as Boeing and the FAA were concerned) ever since the FIRST 737 MAX crashed?
Click to expand...

You have to take that up with Boeing and the FAA. But surely it's all Trump fault, no matter what.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
So if the company knows of a problem that could potentially cause fatal crashes (and is actively working on fixing it) but the FAA doesn't, it's just peachy-kean by you for the company to do nothing to reduce the chances of those fatal crashes occurring until it has worked out what the fix is?
Click to expand...


Not sure how you came to that conclusion from my post. Companies are profit driven they rolled the dice that they could get the fix done before any more planes crashed. They should pay a huge price fro that. My point has been that the FAA used to be the world wide leader in making these calls. Why did they drop the ball here?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Well, since your "source" didn't know what he was talking about on one subject, I didn't think that it would be a wild stretch to conclude that he didn't know what he was talking about on another.
Click to expand...

you are the one who brought up camels,Why? Many sources on TV and radio spoke without knowing the facts yet. They make the best guess based on their experience. I don't understand your hostility here.
 
Atomic Kid said:
That you never seem to have any idea what I or anyone else is saying when it doesn't comport to your own personal views doesn't come as a great shock to anyone here, I'm sure. Now you're posting 'questions' that hardly even make any sense.
Click to expand...

Typical liberal response, when you can't answer questions you resort BS. Answer the questions.
 
joko104 said:
The talk is that this version of the 737 actually was a NEW aircraft design with a bigger fuselage and bigger engines than the original 737. It was called the 737 anyway to make approval easier and so all 737 certified pilots could fly them. The flaw appears in the latter - pilots trained to fly original 737s with no training for the new bigger aircraft.

This has nothing to do with President Trump, though to Trump haters anything bad that happened in the universe is Trump's fault.
Click to expand...

Except he interjected himself into the conversation multiple times.
 
But jobs! But th job creators!...but, but profits you damn socialist.

So what if 356 died, Boeing creates thousands of jobs. Do the math Libtard...


:roll:
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Sure it does - AFTER China, the UK, the EU, Canada and more than 30 other countries had already done so.

Have you ever wondered why Boeing was working on a fix for a problem that didn't exist (as far as Boeing and the FAA were concerned) ever since the FIRST 737 MAX crashed?
Click to expand...

You are incorrect. 12 countries had already done so. Canada and the US grounded them on the same day.

2019 Boeing 737 MAX groundings - Wikipedia
 
ajn678 said:
THE FAA has to go through checks and balances for these things. Boeing does not. The moment they issue a public statement that these planes have issues, every major airline would stop flying them. They chose to not do this, most likely for profits, and people here are defending them because they hate Trump.
Click to expand...

No one is defending Boeing but the facts seem to indicate the CEO was in contact with Trump early on and he was on board with what ever Boeing wanted to do. The truth is the FAA should have grounded all the 737 M's after the first crash. The question in every grieving families mind is why this was not done and whether Trump's contacts with Boeing was the reason they did not.
 
Report: Boeing's Safety Analysis of 737 MAX Flight Control Had Crucial Flaws

Boeing Co's safety analysis of a new flight control system on 737 MAX jets had several crucial flaws, the Seattle Times reported on Sunday.
Boeing's safety analysis of the flight control system called MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) understated the power of this system, the Seattle Times said, citing current and former engineers at the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

The FAA also did not delve into any detailed inquiries and followed a standard certification process on the MAX, the Seattle Times reported citing an FAA spokesman.

The FAA declined to comment on the Seattle Times report but referred to previous statements about the certification process. It has said the 737-MAX certification process followed the FAA's standard certification process

The report also said both Boeing and the FAA were informed of the specifics of this story and were asked for responses 11 days ago, before the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines 737 MAX last Sunday that killed all 157 people on board. The same model flown by Lion Air crashed off the coast of Indonesia in October, killing all 189 on board.

Last Monday Boeing said it would deploy a software upgrade to the 737 MAX 8, a few hours after the FAA said it would mandate "design changes" in the aircraft by April.

A Boeing spokesman said 737 MAX was certified in accordance with the identical FAA requirements and processes that have governed certification of all previous new airplanes and derivatives. The spokesman said the FAA concluded that MCAS on 737 MAX met all certification and regulatory requirements.
Click to expand...

That is the entire article but if you want to read it for yourself:

UPDATE 1-Boeing's Safety Analysis of 737 MAX Flight Control Had Crucial Flaws - Seattle Times | Newsmax.com

There is also this about the trim tab jack-screw: Piece Found at Boeing 737 Crash Site Shows Jet Was Set to Dive

A screw-like device found in the wreckage of the Boeing Co. 737 Max 8 that crashed Sunday in Ethiopia has provided investigators with an early clue into what happened, as work begins in France to decode the black boxes recovered from the scene.

The position of the so-called jackscrew, used to set the trim that raises and lowers the plane’s nose, indicates the jet was configured to dive, based on a preliminary review, according to a person familiar with the investigation. The evidence helped persuade U.S. regulators to ground the model, said the person, who requested anonymity to discuss the inquiry.
Click to expand...

More at: Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

That url keeps coming up but it does go directly to the article.
 
Last edited:
Sabre said:
Report: Boeing's Safety Analysis of 737 MAX Flight Control Had Crucial Flaws



That is the entire article but if you want to read it for yourself:

UPDATE 1-Boeing's Safety Analysis of 737 MAX Flight Control Had Crucial Flaws - Seattle Times | Newsmax.com

There is also this about the trim tab jack-screw: Piece Found at Boeing 737 Crash Site Shows Jet Was Set to Dive



More at: Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Click to expand...

Somehow those articles have a distinct "It's OK for me to pee in a bottle and then dump it in your beer because there is no law that says that I can't. The law only says that I can't pee DIRECTLY into your beer." ring to them.
 
Born Free said:
Typical liberal response, when you can't answer questions you resort BS. Answer the questions.
Click to expand...

Try asking a coherent question first and then we'll see what we can do for you.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Try asking a coherent question first and then we'll see what we can do for you.
Click to expand...

You can't do anything, can't even answer a question. Then you go to your liberal playbook because you have no clue how to answer it. In this case you say, "try asking a coherent question" you libs will say anything to keep from answering. I've heard all you libs excuses to get out of answering.

Bye :2wave:
 
Sabre said:
Report: Boeing's Safety Analysis of 737 MAX Flight Control Had Crucial Flaws



That is the entire article but if you want to read it for yourself:

UPDATE 1-Boeing's Safety Analysis of 737 MAX Flight Control Had Crucial Flaws - Seattle Times | Newsmax.com

There is also this about the trim tab jack-screw: Piece Found at Boeing 737 Crash Site Shows Jet Was Set to Dive



More at: Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

That url keeps coming up but it does go directly to the article.
Click to expand...

I know the comparison may be a stretch but I can see haunting similarities to the cases involving McDonald Douglas’s dc-10 and the design flaw of the planes cargo door.
 
iguanaman said:
No one is defending Boeing but the facts seem to indicate the CEO was in contact with Trump early on and he was on board with what ever Boeing wanted to do. The truth is the FAA should have grounded all the 737 M's after the first crash. The question in every grieving families mind is why this was not done and whether Trump's contacts with Boeing was the reason they did not.
Click to expand...

The facts seem to, that is like, maybe, could be, I think, and all that opinion BS. The FACTS SEEM. OK get all those FACTS out and lets see.

Then you have the CEO in contact with Trump early on and he (Trump) was on with whatever boeing wanted to do. If that's not a ****ing pieces of **** comment, I don't know what is. But you said it, so Prove it. Prove exactly what Boeing wanted him to do. Get the proof out there. What did the CEO ask Trump to do. Come on prove what the CEO asked Trump to do that Trump was on board with.

Now that you're trying to find anything that may resemble a fact. Tell me the facts behind why Trump grounded the CEO planes before the FAA did. Could that be what the CEO wanted Trump to do? You surely have all the facts behind why Trump beat the FAA and you should have all the facts why the FAA was late in grounding the blanes. I ask you did the FAA do as the CEO of Boeing wanted them to do as he asked.

These are all easy questions to answer, and provide all the proof to back up your false claims.
 
Last edited:
beancounter said:
But jobs! But th job creators!...but, but profits you damn socialist.

So what if 356 died, Boeing creates thousands of jobs. Do the math Libtard...

:roll:
Click to expand...

I take it, that you want Boeing shut down, but you can't stop at Boeing you have to shut them all down as they all have accidents. Then no one can get hurt or anyone working for the industry. Then you can go onto car manufacturers and kill the auto industry. Do you know how many people are killed a year by autos? We're now saving lives but we're not done yet, all motorcycles and scooters, will be banned. Then take on all the school busses and city busses and cross country busses. THEN you can get every semi truck off the road. Wait you have to stop the space programs because havd died. All that I mentioned are people killers.
 
That's a pretty extreme (and incorrect) interpretation of what I wrote.

Grounding a single model of an aircraft until the cause of the crash, and a solution can be found has nothing to do with shutting the company down.

Born Free said:
I take it, that you want Boeing shut down, but you can't stop at Boeing you have to shut them all down as they all have accidents. Then no one can get hurt or anyone working for the industry. Then you can go onto car manufacturers and kill the auto industry. Do you know how many people are killed a year by autos? We're now saving lives but we're not done yet, all motorcycles and scooters, will be banned. Then take on all the school busses and city busses and cross country busses. THEN you can get every semi truck off the road. Wait you have to stop the space programs because havd died. All that I mentioned are people killers.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom