Well yeah, true. But if Airbus hadn't built a better airplane than Boeing, then Boeing wouldn't have had to get a bigger engine, thus causing all the problems. Lol. So I can hear Boeing blaming Airbus for this.
Wait, he was on a boeing 737 max that crashed or was he lucky enough to be not on one of those? If he was tho, rip to him 🙏. Boeing should be charged so much money for everyone who died in the crashes.
My teacher lost two cousins in the Ethiopian crash. She was so broken that day when she told us. It hurt seeing her cry like that, I'm pretty sure she left early that day.
As an Indonesian, I'm still bitter about this event. I just hate the fact that Boeing employees turned down Indonesian pilots request for more training and mock them instead. I'm crying just by watching this. The arrogance of those people. How dare
@@RazvanMaioru Not when the feature is badly documented, you are under stress and every millisecond counts. It means one more thing to diagnose and rule out.
@@Avengerie it's the same trim cutoff switch as on previous models. You use it in the same circumstances (trim runaway), it's in the same place, it's the same switch, it takes the same amount of time to use it (the expected time it would take pilots to notice a failure, diagnose it and then use this switch is 3 seconds), and the same amount of time is required. The same memory checklist applies. How is this a worse design in any way? Or "one more thing to diagnose and rule out"?
I knew someone who was on the Ethiopia flight. A beautiful young woman who was trying to make a positive influence in the world. RIP Samya Stumo. You are remembered 😞
oh yeah, thanks to power point slides , software update can fix many things including constipation, strokes , blockages, kidney stones and many more be it an airplane or a human.
No, Boeing took accountability and it has done its re certification flight and passed it. Yes it was rushed but the MCAS wasn’t supposed to behave like that which was a SOFTWARE error not a human error. The other problem is a lot of those obscure Asian/African airlines don’t give their pilots as good of training as we would get in the US because they just don’t have the money to provide it.
Jordan Wong I’m not and I’m not saying that it wasn’t their fault and they could’ve done a lot more testing but the majority of plane crashes happen in countries with less money because of the lack of training that they give their employees. Look it up if you don’t believe me.
@@RIPped I don't think he worded his statement properly, but he's not entirely wrong. Boeing undoubtedly takes a majority of the blame here for over selling a product which in turn took the lives of so many people. However there are proper procedures in place for virtually any situation or system failure, including the MCAS. A properly trained pilot needs to know exactly what to do in case of an MCAS failure and all the other pilots that experienced and complained about it, managed to fly their planes without any real danger to the plane or lives on board.
Part of the problem was that since Boeing had promised a delivery date and minimal pilot training, they did not push for more training on the MCAS, and kept it secret for the most part. Other research also shows that test pilots on simulators in the Seattle location were pushing for more R&D, as they we encountering similar issues when initially testing the MAX. But HQ in Chicago either didn’t get the message, or didn’t care. This was an institutional failure by Boeing, caused primarily by the need to keep market share.
Keep in mind that for an American company, non-Americans are not people. Or at least not important people. That's why the USA didn't even want to ground this plane.
You are right, can't cut corners. The airlines hired pilots that I would never hired when I was the chief pilot of an airline. Those guys should never been in the cockpits.
What’s heartbreaking about this is that when news of the Lion Air crash first broke, many people thought the problem lay with the quality of the pilots and the airline, and that it was a “3rd world country problem”. At the time, only a few questioned the responsibility of Boeing. Those poor pilots were doing everything they could to control a plane that Boeing intentionally hid important info about :( RIP :(
Actually the vast majority of industry professionals still place the majority of the blame on the pilots. As Jay Jay said, this failure is very similar to runaway trim which has been around for a very long time. The lion air report glosses over some terrifying mistakes made by that crew
3 of my relatives have passed away in this accident and now knowing the cause was something like this making it more ironically and depressed. Those are souls, waited by their family but never came home.
And how should that work? Yeah obviously it is a thing you should wish for but unfortunately very unrealistic. For one in such cases usually not one person is guilty, but many people just a little bit, but usually no one enough that he can be held accountible. And even if it would be the case that someone has a high enough degree of accountabilty for this, it is hard to prove if not even impossible to find out. Just look at the "simple" question is the FAA guilty for not properly validate the plane for flying or is Boeing responsible because they did not test enough for themselfes? Is the engineer the bad guy even if he honestly believed that the MCAS would be a good system or the guy who decided that now further training is necessary? Obviously nothing we can answer here, but it isn't very likely that such question can be conclusively answered by an investigation committee.
@@yourlocalramen1660 sure. But it is not likely that a criminal case will ever be filed. There will be a (or multiple) civil lawsuit against Boeing which certainly will be successfull. But even if a single person will be accused getting certain proof that this person was aware of all the problems and clearly decided to ignore them. This will be mostly impossible. For one there are multiple circumstances which lead to the accidents, not just the technical flaws in the 737 Max. Then there are many different technical design faults which lead to the accident. Then it was mostly certified by the FAA and all changes that were not recertified do not formally require a recertification. And the FAA has issues in itself for one their conflicting functions (controlling and promote the aeronautic industry), also recent law changes lead to a more or less the self certification by the airplane manufacturer. So I doubt there is even a person or a group of people which can be singled out to be liable in some way. But even if you can find some, will be very hard to prove that in a criminal case. They would have to interview hundreds of people, which probably neither want to incriminate them selves or their coworkers. I don't say that there definitely aren't people which could be clearly be viewed as guilty from an ethical/morally standpoint. Especially if they put money before people's safety, but again this not really something that can be brought before a criminal court.
As long as you're a large multinational company. If you're a single individual or a small mom and pop company you'll get the book thrown at you. There are different sets of rules based on your net value.
They wanted to make something to rival Airbus. They did not have time, so they decided to cut the time needed to find and eliminate any problems. 2 planes crushed, they did not have to. The greed of Boeing officials killed innocent people.
And some people still say "if we got rid of all regulations the market will take care of everything!" THIS is why we need regulations. Those companies can make their profits back. We CAN NOT get those peoples lives back.
Well no, you're argument completely fails because we have extremely strict regulations and this still happened. Maybe in a world without regulations, it wouldn't have happened.
@@tomsriver2838 David is partly right - in an true open market there would be no protection for the airplane manufacturers either, they would have been fully open to be sued into the ground by airlines and passengers. We lack this today.
David because whenever there is a single loophole in regulations companies are not abusing that loophole to the absolute legal extend - and often beyond that... They don’t care about anything asides from making as much money as possible. That’s why we need regulations - to keep their raging hunger for money under control.
ya that's what got me too the most, it's so tragic and the people responsible so far just get away with putting all those people in danger and causing their deaths
@@ava.and.jasper The people in the commercial aircraft industry are not pushing things under the rug to save money. The safety culture there is the best in the world, from engineers to flight crews everybody is focused on getting the job done every time and upgrading aircraft and procedures before tragedy strikes. The pilots of these two crashed aircraft had the training to react to this problem, but problems almost never happen during flight and pilots are sometimes caught off guard. (it's a strange side effect of being part of the safest industry). And yes, there was an unforeseen problem with the MCAS system and the manufacture was working on a solution before the first crash. It is safe to fly and getting safer all the time.
Captain Jack Aubrey of the Royal Navy You’d be surprised what pilots can pull off to save passengers especially when crash landing. Terrifying? Yes. Survival? Actually somewhat likely (given the circumstances in which the plane crashes/lands).
@@firestorm8268 you don't actually experience any noticeable Gs in a linear dive. G forces are most experienced when entering and pulling out of a dive via the change in acceleration.
@@Skyried exactly. It would be the opposite of G force if the plane was depending rapidly people might even lift out if their seats and feel like there's no gravity and your whole stomach feels like it's going to come out of your mouth. Probably one of the most terrifying feelings in the world that's the whole "thrill" of roller costers
The pilots were told about it, just not trained properly by their respective airlines. It was a chain of events that led to the crashes, not just the MCAS.
Same. Those people were terrified the entire time because I guarentee everyone of them knew that it was not normal. Boeing needs to compensate every single surviving family for what they did to them and their loved ones by cutting corners.
@@dave6429 The plane remained around 2,000 to 3,000 feet in the air i believe, as it failed to ever reach its designated altitude for that part of the flight, and the was plane traveling unusually fast according to the control tower, so you can only imagine the terrible amount of anxiety the passengers were experiencing :/
It is, and they should be, but honestly do you think they will be held liable? Things will be settled out of court (for an ungodly sum of money), and then it's back to business as usual.
Thanos dies to Thor before the opening credits, but he has already destroyed the stones. The rest of the movie centers around using the Quantum Universe to retrieve the stones from the past timeline. Natasha and Clint go to retrieve the soul stone, with Clint sacrificing Natasha to access it. Stark builds a gauntlet to wield the retrieved infinity stones to reverse the snap. Banner has become Hulk permanently, but retains his intelligence and memories as Professor Hulk. Captain America fights Captain America in the Quantum Universe Captain America in the other universe wields the Mjolnir and shield, but Thor still has the Stormbreaker Other universe Captain America wears the old comic suit
You kidding? I'd fly it today as long as the crew was properly certified as they would have been if these were American-based airlines. These crashes were caused by pilot error. At worst, the MCAS issue should have been a mild inconvenience and easily dealt with by exiting procedures for runaway trim regardless of the system responsible for it. But the pilots didn't handle the situation correctly and hundreds of people died as a result.
@@icemachine79 The pilots weren't allowed to. The computer has more span than the yoke, therefore, can override any input from the pilots. It was later proven, that even switching the system "off" wasn't enough to restore full control to the pilot, since, switching it off is a software command, rather than a hard transfer switch. Any error in software, or hardware malfunction, and the pilots cannot regain control. It's not like the "auto-pilot" in a Cessna, or Piper, though it should be!
@@vincentrobinette1507 None of what you said is accurate as demonstrated by the safe landing of the SAME Lion Air plane that encountered the SAME problem but luckily had a much more competent crew in charge on that particular flight. All they had to do was follow the runaway trim checklist to deactivate the electric trim system (which automatically disabled all MCAS commands) and manage their airspeed correctly in order to operate the trim manually. Unfortunately, after the plane landed safely and was checked in for repairs, Lion Air's maintenance staff failed to fix the faulty AoA sensor and illegally returned the plane to flight status. The next crew to pilot the plane then failed to follow the proper checklist for runaway trim which eventually resulted in a crash. The Ethiopian Airlines crew failed to throttle back at any point during the flight (lack of basic airmanship b/c co-pilot only had 200 hours in ANY cockpit) which made it almost impossible to manually trim the aircraft. The captain followed the proper checklist but his co-pilot was totally useless leaving him oversaturated with tasks. Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines are the companies that should be held to account for these deaths, not Boeing.
I wonder what the pilot was thinking during their final moments. It’s so difficult accepting your fate but trying to remain calm for the sake of your passengers. RIP the innocent souls that were lost. 💔
he means the plane was too low to the ground for the new engine therefore couldn't get enough lift so they developed a software that pilots were not properly trained about
@@chateaupig826 Actually, the engines were too large, placed further forward on the wing for this reason, and actually created lift. Not a large amount of lift mind, the aircraft wasn't unstable.. but in order to ensure NG pilots can have the same common type rating on the Max, MCAS was used to slightly counter the front lift created by the engines, purely to make the aircraft feel like an NG.
The 737 Max is like a car that veers left because of a structural defect. Instead of correcting the defect structurally, the manufacturer decides it's cheaper to install a computer software that forces the steering wheel towards the right whenever it senses that the car is going too much to the left. Will you feel safe in such a car? After two crashes with this car, the manufacturer decides that he'd better have the software depend on two sensors instead of just one. Now when these sensors disagree, the software simply switches off. So you are then left with a car that structurally veers left and no software interference. The manufacturer is sure you'll feel it's safer now and will resume buying his car. Furthermore, the manufacturer claims that because his car will eventually have undergone such massive scrutiny, it must surely become one of the safest cars to hit the road! And it will gain this great reputation without the expense of structurally correcting the structural flaw. As always, he says, safety is his top priority!
@@InfantrySider Carter, what you say is actually worrying. If the people at Boeing still think that the Max crashes are due to bad piloting, it means they consider the Max already safe, and its worldwide grounding a big mistake! This means Boeing has still learned nothing, and this unfortunately makes a third crash with the Max all the more likely!
Waaaaay worse than a handful of people. (1) Having only one sensor, (2) selling additional safety lights (In the cockpit) as extras, (3) cheaping out on buying the extra safety measures, (4) Boeing approving Boeing for safety, (5) Airlines to training pilots (The MCAS was in the quick reference but not the training), (6) An airline using the same plane KNOWING it had a problem that was luckily avoided on a previous flight. (7) Faulty software that in the event of two sensors disagreeing does not disable the MCAS system and not warning lights. Pretty much everybody messed up.
As someone who' have close friends in Boeing I can tell you this: The airlines and region's aviation rules decide which equipment package to get. Most Boeing 737 Max8s in the U.S. have three computers for example so when a sensor give a false reading it has to have two out of the three systems to agree with the sensor data in order for MACS to make adjustments. Pilots also have higher training times in the U.S. and having training of what to do when MACS fails which is shut it off and take manual control. The two crashes both planes the airlines only had one computer both times the computer malfunctioned on the previous flights but no mention was made to the second flight crew that coming on and ultimately was on the planes when they crashed. Lastly for one of the flights (I think Ethiopia Air) one of the pilots didn't know anything about the 737 Max 8 before coming on board. As result when MACS starts getting faulty readings and adjusting the course of the plane you have the crews trying to fight MACS manually instead of shutting down the flight computer and flying the plane manually while restarting the system. I don't think that this is Boeing's fault it's more of negligence on the Airlines.
My brother was a lead software engineer for Boeing during the "problem solving" phase after they were all grounded. He was a part of the team that found the solution. Now he works for IBM.
not at all it doesnt even talk about the fact only the right side was showing bad data and had the pilot and FO cross checked there instruments they would seen this the ETH flight the Captain had only ~1500 hours TOTAL and FO just north of 500 in the US you need 1500 hours TOTAL time JUST get a FO job small airline the cause of the crash was inexperience
Elios0000 that’s in the Ethiopian airlines case. The captain in flight 610 is a veteran pilot with almost 8000 flight hours, and the FO has around 5000. They have no idea MCAS even existed. Also. MCAS takes data from the left side(captain’s data). Knowing the sensors disagree also wouldn’t have helped. Considering.. you know the problem is with the MCAS automatically trimming their aircraft down.
US pilots: Hey, our planes keep nosing down and nearly killing us. We should stop flying them Boeing: Is this some poor joke I'm too rich to understand
@@NickyD Half the story only. But you're actually half right: - The top engineer was only trained to coal plants. - And the Reactor 4 was actually faulty.
No, the Lion Air mechanics who cleared an unairworthy plane for flight and the Ethiopian Airlines who hired a first officer with only 200 hours' flying time and allowed him to fly passengers on a plane he didn't know how to operate should go to prison.
Back in 2020 when this MCAS system which crashed two Boeing 737 MAX airliners was all the rage I said:"It's the MCAS system now, and they'll fix it, *but who knows what kind of other design errors will emerge in the future?* " Looks like I was right. How I wish I had been wrong.
This V12 1600 hp engine didn't fit under the hood in this camper van, so we just put it loosely right behind the driver, and made sure you could only give maximum thrust, and it fit nicely
BlueGraySkies Definitely not. A lot is left out. Here is a playlist from start to finish of documentation and exploration from a highly experienced pilot. ruclips.net/p/PL6SYmp3qb3uPp1DS7fDy7I6y11MIMgnbO
@@Coffeebean1985 ruclips.net/video/HBqDcUqJ5_Q/видео.html He's a pilot and goes through the accident report in detail explaining most things. His other videos also keep you abreast with current developments in the matter.
@@Coffeebean1985 i give this general advice: if you won't trust Fox because (duh) of the obvious ideological bias, then be aware vox also has a bias, because it has a specific world view. Everyone does. So on a story about plane crashes, maybe you should seek out actual professionals in that field who are aware of the complexities governing the industry, instead of a 6 minute summary by persons who did research on a topical issue to get views as a part of their business model and magically has formed an opinion. Or don't. And continue the polarization plaguing our societies. The choice is yours.
Someone should be held responsible for that. A company killed over 300 people for trying to make quick profit, how is that not treated as a criminal offence is beyond comprehension
Kravuis Disturbed I would be willing to bet that those who lost their lives would much rather have the truth invested in than to have VOX and other media telling fallacious stories that mislead the public because they are clueless with physics, engineering, and investigative reporting. Fortunately, the actual crash investigation teams and the courts are likely to get closer to the big picture, which will inevitably be one of shared blame where Boeing and the regulators and the airlines and the pilots all need to take some corrective actions. Dealing with reality is what will honor those who died and their families.
M Penner Nice one, but unfortunately for you not true. VOX didn't make up anything. Boeing made the flawed MCAS system and told no one about it. That's the problem and it's the media's task to report on this. Nothing's wrong with this video.
OMFG! 2 hours iPad training? LOL! Even we (tramdrivers in Prague) have longer and deeper training when something comes (is implemented) to our trams. I'm shocked!
are they serious ? they have the lives of hundreds of passengers and pilots get trained with a tablet !!! oh my gosh !!! I hope Boeing trial will get live broadcast , so that their responsibility will get revealed to the face of the world
That’s a bit misleading, they had 2 additional hours of training for the max but they have months of training for the 737. Really Boeing should’ve just trusted pilots to know how to nose down.
@@Powderlover1 www.theairlinepilots.com/forumarchive/b737/b737memoryitems.php#i Those are just the memory items. Although pilots are supposed to know that (thus the name: "MEMORY items") in this case they did NOT. Even if they know the memory items but haven't practiced it in the simulator they are not properly trained. I'm sure any pilot would agree. Knowing how to do something and training to be able to do it in a crisis are two very different thing. Note the final item on the list: *STABILIZER TRIM WHEEL - GRASP and HOLD* You go ahead and try that.
@@tunkunrunk I think we can all agree they weren't trained properly. In the us idk how it works but in Europe it's generally the airlines which trains pilots afaik.
You should also add that for a critical system like this, no redundant sensors were added to catch errors that could lead to a catastrophic failure. Oh wait, it was avaible but as an option package that included an extra sensor and disagree light to let pilots know where the problem is coming from. None of the planes that crashed had this package. It was pure greed that led so many lives to be lost.
Wow, I didn't know about that, but yes as Harjeenvan said, something so critical shouldn't have been optional. And worryingly the fact those upgrades existed means people knew a failure like this could happen.. Very concerning that they went ahead anyway and didn't even mention mcas in the training material.
i think all the B737 Max have a second AoA-sensor, but the MCAS only used one of them because the sensors are connected to different flight computers. Now there was an update so both sensors are used. The option package showed the live-data from the sensor on the screen in the cockpit. But don't quote me on this, i'm not sure.
Its really easy to see the number of deaths as statistics, until you realize that the individual death is actually a person that once lived a happy life with their beloved friends and family. It doesn't matter how much deaths are there, what is important that it actually happened and how it could actually be prevented but was ignored.
So blame the president of the US for crashes In other countries? FAA shouldn’t be rushing their inspections over one person on the FAA not whomever was “interfering”
@@logansenkier8036 The Boeing 737 MAX certification granted under cronies appointed by Trump ,Daniel Elwell . He even just an acting administrator . Imagine 3 years into his presidency the FAA top management filled by an acting administrator . What did Trump says , appointing acting Cabinet heads grants "more flexibility" . We all know what this is all about, to served his interest . Until Boeing 737 max crash , he know he f**ked up . After the crash which destroyed Boeing and FAA reputation then the FAA finally get the permanent member .
yeah like seriously, all those rioting on the streets around the world for one black man. here 300 more souls and people just pretend to care. People can say that's only because he represent a race or movement something.... well that could be US on those planes! they represent us, no matter who we are
@@aoinatasha1313 Also the same for environment and climate change. People be like "Oh no, we need to act quickly" while in reality they're throwing their Cheetos bag on the side of the road while looking at their phone
@@Nicksmith_j7r I am not being greedy I am stating facts. That aircraft had been flying for over thirty years. Obviously it was due to maintenance, weather, or human error. Do some research before you make assumptions like that
"Many pilots only got a two hour I-pad course before entering the cockpit for the first time" (3:42) This is what happens when you care more about profits than people.
Actually theres great safety features that can be implemented in planes,and are not just because they cost companies money. Its just interfering with their profit.Simple example of how they work.
So Airbus made a high-quality product. And then Boeing had to improvise with a quickly rushed product. Yet everyone bought the Boeing? It´s crazy how often this kind of thing happens.
@Zane Huston I am a software developer, hardware engineer and systems research & development specialist. Boeing engineers could not even develop proper maths to predict a disable-mechanism for software-driven sensors (of which at least one of them generated faulty data). This could have easily prevented if Boeing: 1) Engineered a plane whose older model wasn´t not only physically different (fuselage) but also the Turbine Engine physical differences (which decreased stability overall and made the fuselage from an aerodynamics point of view, unstable if ON TOP OF THAT, the nose and the tail of the plane were to move forwards and backwards, gathering strain onto fuselage itself, and then, such tension would move onto bigger turbines, causing the plane to lose horizontal alignment). 2) They suddenly moved from fat-like to thinner fuselages. Where is the physics formula, or calculus explained by them behind the different plane designs they took. Why are they only talking about software improvements. On what basis? Seriously. They should've just simply invested and outsourced some of the designs of the MAX 737 and a lot of feedback should have come first before they went selling these killing flying machines. Also, Boeing death track record still holds the highest in the planet (flying wise). I mean Boeing should just close all together and outsource at least the maths behind their designs. The moment I heard Boeing was making crew capsules I knew Boeing was killing people out there for money. I mean I grew up staring thousand of deaths in lieu of Boeing "half baked" plane designs. These people are criminals and they should be charged for what they are doing worldwide. Airbus is still one of the safest plane makers out there. BTW.
Refusing to buy Boeing products will cause huge unemployment rates in America and weaken the country's relations with foreign countries because Boeing has numerous factories around the globe and different states in America. Sadly US government is forced to buy from Boeing.
all FAA approved aircraft are quality.. otherwise they wont be airworthy, and if you mean airbus replacing an engine on a plane is quality, I don't even know why you made this comment.
I have piloted both AIRBUS and BOEING aircraft, as well as LOCKHEED, MCDONNELL,DOUGLAS, and CONVAIR. BOEING is second to none. Many commercial pilots have a saying------ If it ain't Boeing, we ain't going.
This happens quite often, the problem is they say it is the same when it isn't. Imagine you are riding a bike and then all of a sudden they change the size of one of the wheel and say it is still the same bike.
Boeing logic: 1. Lets reuse an aircraft design from 1967 to save cost, put 2 huge new engines that does not really fit and thereby make the whole aircraft unstable. 2. Then we create a secret software MCAS to stabilize the aircraft. 3. To save even more cost we make the extremely critical MCAS system only rely on a single sensor. (Industry standard is normally 2 or as Airbus does, 3). 4. To make even more money, lets sell the sensor malfunction warning system as an option, but still not tell about what MCAS does. 5. To save even more cost lets make sure MCAS is not described in the manual, nor include any mention about it in the 2hour Ipad training video to pilots. 6. Lets save even more cost by not having ANY indicator to the pilot that the MCAS system is active, and that the pilot is no longer in control of the aircraft. 7. To save even more cost, lets tell FAA that the aircraft is perfectly safe and approve it ourselves. 8. When the first aircraft crashed, lets blame it on pilot error. 9. When the second aircraft crashed, lets pretend it was minor glitch but hint that a very minor software upgrade might be needed. Try to minimize lawsuits but using very cryptic weasel language. 10. Finally lets pretend that this unstable aircraft, relying on a single sensor will become “the safest aircraft ever designed “ and force everyone to continue flying it.Lets pay FAA bribes to certify it. 11. Lets tell the world that Boeing cares about safety first..... This is total greed and deception. Boeing’s CEO and FAA’s chairman should be sent to prison. All Boeing 737 MAX 8 should be grounded permanently. Boeing! Do the right thing-Design a new safe, fuel efficient aircraft. Until then....I will avoid this model like the plague.
Excellent summation, and it has got worse with the parsimonious penny pinching, money focused accountants took over and shipped the company to Chicago, away from the aeronautical focus of Seattle.... Because money is the most important thing right? Quality second. Compare and Audi to a Ford? Compare an Airbus to a Boeing, for years now the quality finish within the cabin is a give away...Quality control matters NOT just making dollars, Chicago.
@Dan Krohn I didnt say that they made no mistake I am saying it is a factor but main problem is MCAS AND Ethiopian airlines is still under investigation (Wikipedia)
At the minute of 12, the MCAS decided to take control of the plane completely. It locked the wheel and pilots cannot do anything to prevent the plane from crashing
I remember coming home one day and seeing my mom crying while the news was playing on TV after finding out one of her relatives passed. It was just devastating.
As someone who's been flying planes for many years, I'll always prefer Airbus. They're actually well thought through products tailored to pilot's needs. I will never ever trust Boeing again, they're dead to me.
@@kaziiqbal7257 They used to be a company centered around engineering. Now it's Mcdonell Douglas 2.0, they only cares about about results for the rich shareholders
@@PatricksFinanzen as a pilot in training, ill fly any boeing aircraft before the max. Aircraft such as the 777 and earlier 737s i trust becuase they're from an era where boeing was still ran by engineers
Luxor Soundslikeacoolname my question was in regard to the fact, that even if a pilot doesn’t want to fly a Boeing the only choice would be to resign! I doubt an airline asks its pilots, which plane should be bought next before the purchase or order?!? Pilot is a Job, like any other. If you don’t own the airline or the plane, there won’t be much rights to decide on a type or brand of plane!
What I also find kind of frightening is that where he says "several pilots complained to the federal government". FFS, if you have pilots complaining to the FG about a plane characteristic,which I think is doubtful they do often, what is happening here. I would love to know what was the reaction or if there even was any.
The reason why we didn't see a response from the federal government is because the current administration left the FAA without a head after the old one resigned well over a year ago. Since then FAA fines for violations had dropped more than 88% and the FAA didn't have the leadership to be able to respond to these complaints.
@@zlz95 China is capitalist to the core, yet they have the sensibility to ground a plane that is broken and not risk accidents, the United States on the other hand, as much as they like to portray China as crap, care about human life a lot less.
The reason why the US aviation administration refused to ground the Boeing planes is because their CEO visited Trump multiple times to reassure him to let the planes fly in the US, and Trump can't say no to rich guys that pay generously at his Mar A Largo club. But Trump only gave in to grounding the planes due to public pressure, not because of ethical or legal reasons. US was the last country to implement the ban, which speaks volumes of how little regard Trump has for civilian lives of his own citizens. Even the Chinese, however bad their human rights record is, was on the side of safety over profit. But Trump is on a lower bar, that he put profit over lives. On top of that, the software fixes were available in early 2019, but because of the US government shut down (instigated by Trump for his stupid useless wall), it caused a delay in the testing and roll out of the altered software system by months.
can various *governments* of all countries wherever these coffins were supplied not file en-masse lawsuits? or similar to class action suits which they have in Divided States of Murica? the certifying and monitoring bodies, be it FDA or pharma industry bodies, are all sold out, lethargic or corrupt and incompetent. Bringing them to book or making them change their ways is important too.
I am glad SOMEONE realizes what the REAL problem was. At it's most basic level you are 100% spot on correct. They made a very poor engineering decision (to save money) and decided to fix the resulting bad outcome with software. Dumb + Dumb = Stupid. Whatever they lose as a result will not be enough.
@Fred I am well aware that all modern planes use fly by wire. The fly by wire technology originally came from the Apollo space program. Fly by wire flight research was conducted at Dryden flight research center. One of the issues they encountered was the experimental planes would oscillate up and down in a wave pattern. This issue was overcome by tweaking the software. The first commercial aircraft...was from airbus....that debuted fly by wire technology had its issues as well. The flight crew reported that the engines failed to respond when TOGA power was applied. The captain throttled back to idle and throttled up again. As the engines were finally spooling up the plane crashed and three people onboard were killed. The lack of response from the throttle would indicate an issue with the fly by wire system. Flight computers have their own limitations. An example of this was Air France flight 447. Their autopilot kicked off due to the failure of a pitot tube from icing. This gave the computer inconsistent speed readings. The computer didn’t know how fast the plane was flying and could no longer fly the plane. This issue that the 737 Max is experiencing is a computer issue. The computer is malfunctioning and forcing the plane to do something that it isn’t suppose to do. Did Boeing rush the plane to production...yes. Should pilots have been better informed about this new software.....yes Should they have had more training....yes.
There’s so many things going on: 1. Put the engine in a position that causes problems. 2. Try to fix that problem with automated software. 3. Don’t mention the software anywhere. 4. Let the software depend on only one sensor. 5. Don’t train the pilots. So many things done horribly wrong. All this because they want to match the competition. How do you flout so many regulations and think everything will be okay. Or, maybe, they just don’t care.
since authorities and republicans won't take action, what can we do to punish BOEING? I want to try and only take flights on airbus planes, but that means nothing as the message will never reach them, the planes are already sold.
Minimizing cost is normal in any enterprise. Failure and miss judgement can happen even if for non profit. At least fear of loosing profit give incentive not to screw up.
@@aeonjoey3d Let's keep a cool head! Boring didn't address it intentionally. Also, the people who made the design decisions are probably no longer with the company. For instance their CEO & the whole top management, who made the decision concerning the aircraft, has changed a few years ago.
@@xnopyt22 Involuntary manslaughter is the killing of a human being without intent of doing so, either expressed or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories, constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.
Cat Lover who? Airbus? If so then you can’t send the Boeing executives to jail with that logic. They are both multi-billion dollar corporations. If we were talking Embraer or Fokker or something then that argument is more viable.
imagine when you buy a car, then suddenly your car crashes into a wall beyond your control. You ask the car manufacturer, then they say there is an auto driving system that they never told you that it exists. and here are still many people who defend Boeing's mistakes? good job
Toyota were fined a billion dollars over the drive-by-wire throttles. www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/toyota-reaches-12-billion-settlement-to-end-criminal-probe/2014/03/19/5738a3c4-af69-11e3-9627-c65021d6d572_story.html
That, unfortunately is not a suitable ultimate approach that repects the true needs of the whole industry and humanity. We need both Airbus and Boeing as they help to keep each other from becoming dangerous global monopolies. This, and more are socio-economic necessities that befall all humanity in our times. However, that also is far from adequate control of the industry. Ultimately the needs and ardour of the adequyacy are much greater than that, and so I refer you to my paste-posted comment here as of Feb 23, 2020 for the morte extensive details.
@@celinak5062 the entirety of our economy revolves around competition between firms. It is a due process of innovation and economic acceleration. To say that the competition incentivises greed doesn't change the fact rivalry is here to stay for our economy. Anyone can criminalise anything. Boeing had the right intentions, done in tbe wrong way.
@@fakename287 no the intention was to stay ahead of their competitors. They actively tried whatever measure they could to avoid anything that would compromise that. They straight up did not inform anyone about the new IT system in their plane as that would've gotten in the way of them trying to minimise additional training required.
But author is actually wrong. If they put engine higher than it was - it is closer to center of mass and pitch moment should be smaller. BUT! The actual problem is not only on higher pitch moment (which is due to higher thrust - not engine height!) - but in wake turbulance behind much bigger engine on high AOA: it strikes right into stabilizer and impacts its performance badly, so they decided to "help pilot not to get on high AOA" and yep, pretend like there is nothing happend/changed. So MCAS is the answer of bad plane behaviour on high AOA due to bigger engines that is also moved far away from wing - not to higher pitch moment.
@@Jen-Yueh_Hu response was directed to Marc; while I agree that air travel should be technically safe which it is -- far saver than driving your car around town or in the country -- I disagree with you that the 737max was engineered to take as much risk as possible -- that is 1000% wrongly thought and stated!!! however I respect your right to have your opinion even though facts will not support that opinion; all the very best and drive safe
@@Johnny-dp5mu My comment was referring to the fact that fighter jets are designed to take as much risk as possible. Furthermore, commercial planes are used at a far higher rate than military planes. Even if they have the same probability of failure, the occurrence of incidents would still be higher for the commercial plane, which is why commercial planes need to have a higher standard of safety than military planes.
Boeing lied. People died.
Max Profit. Min Responsibility.
Well yeah, true. But if Airbus hadn't built a better airplane than Boeing, then Boeing wouldn't have had to get a bigger engine, thus causing all the problems. Lol. So I can hear Boeing blaming Airbus for this.
@@trevorjameson3213 i know what you mean, but that doesnt make any sense
Yes right now hope they all get locked up
@@trevorjameson3213 if boeing does that that’s the dumbest reason i’ve ever heard
Yup
A high school class mate of mine was on one of these planes. When it happened so close to you, the number of deaths meant something to you.
Wait, he was on a boeing 737 max that crashed or was he lucky enough to be not on one of those? If he was tho, rip to him 🙏. Boeing should be charged so much money for everyone who died in the crashes.
My teacher lost two cousins in the Ethiopian crash. She was so broken that day when she told us. It hurt seeing her cry like that, I'm pretty sure she left early that day.
Glitch tragic... I hate it so much that people have to day because some rich people want even more money
As an Indonesian, I'm still bitter about this event. I just hate the fact that Boeing employees turned down Indonesian pilots request for more training and mock them instead. I'm crying just by watching this. The arrogance of those people. How dare
So sorry for the loss :(
Terrifying. Imagine the pilot having to battle a plane trying to nosedive
@Tatsujiro Kurogane a painful one
omfg that's a horrible vision the plane crached at 1000 klm/h they found the engine 10 meter under the ground :-O
😐 all because of the mcas... wow just wow.
@Untrepid One no mph klmph
@Untrepid One Why ? 🤔
Who’s here in 2024 when the 737 Max is still a safety menace?
Emergency door flew away on 5th January this year and all 737 MAX were grounded for inspection
Makes me sad to see a great American manufacturer to go down like that. They need radical changes in the management.
@@RandomGuy9 Yeah, they’ve focused too much on short term profits
@@RandomGuy9they used to be a lot better than this. Of course, then they got infected by McDonnell Douglass and their culture.
@RandomGuy9 Not the manufacturer only, the FAA. It's a swamp of corruption and a lustrious relationship between corporations and government.
MCAS: Money comes above safety
Good one
Sadly that's the truth
Epic 🥲
Clever
MCash
They violated one of the most basic premises of aircraft design. You do not ever trust just one sensor to feed info to a critical system.
There's still a very simple off switch though
@@RazvanMaioru Not when the feature is badly documented, you are under stress and every millisecond counts. It means one more thing to diagnose and rule out.
@@Avengerie it's the same trim cutoff switch as on previous models. You use it in the same circumstances (trim runaway), it's in the same place, it's the same switch, it takes the same amount of time to use it (the expected time it would take pilots to notice a failure, diagnose it and then use this switch is 3 seconds), and the same amount of time is required. The same memory checklist applies. How is this a worse design in any way? Or "one more thing to diagnose and rule out"?
@@RazvanMaioru Do you work for Boeing PR? Two pilots had a lot more than 3 seconds to figure this out and didn't.
@@lixloon Then they shouldn't have their type rating, if they can't properly fly that plane.
I knew someone who was on the Ethiopia flight. A beautiful young woman who was trying to make a positive influence in the world. RIP Samya Stumo. You are remembered 😞
A software update might fix doors popping out mid-flight.
BRILLIANT! Best post!
🤣🤣💀💀
oh yeah, thanks to power point slides , software update can fix many things including constipation, strokes , blockages, kidney stones and many more be it an airplane or a human.
And wings coming apart mid flight. DEI baby.
😭😭😭😭
More than a year later - still no accountability, no arrests - just more excuses.
No, Boeing took accountability and it has done its re certification flight and passed it. Yes it was rushed but the MCAS wasn’t supposed to behave like that which was a SOFTWARE error not a human error. The other problem is a lot of those obscure Asian/African airlines don’t give their pilots as good of training as we would get in the US because they just don’t have the money to provide it.
@@Reidhirsch You must be a Boeing employee with the way you attribute blame away from Boeing
Jordan Wong I’m not and I’m not saying that it wasn’t their fault and they could’ve done a lot more testing but the majority of plane crashes happen in countries with less money because of the lack of training that they give their employees. Look it up if you don’t believe me.
@@RIPped I don't think he worded his statement properly, but he's not entirely wrong. Boeing undoubtedly takes a majority of the blame here for over selling a product which in turn took the lives of so many people. However there are proper procedures in place for virtually any situation or system failure, including the MCAS. A properly trained pilot needs to know exactly what to do in case of an MCAS failure and all the other pilots that experienced and complained about it, managed to fly their planes without any real danger to the plane or lives on board.
Part of the problem was that since Boeing had promised a delivery date and minimal pilot training, they did not push for more training on the MCAS, and kept it secret for the most part. Other research also shows that test pilots on simulators in the Seattle location were pushing for more R&D, as they we encountering similar issues when initially testing the MAX. But HQ in Chicago either didn’t get the message, or didn’t care. This was an institutional failure by Boeing, caused primarily by the need to keep market share.
The pictures of shoes and wallets of the passengers is so depressing.
yeah, 😥 especially the baby shoes ,
It shows how unpredictable the life is ...
It’s a loot box
especially the Hello Kitty Wallet.
Rather sad than depressing to me
"We couldn't fix your brakes so we made your horn louder...."
Exactly. Very good example.
thanks so much, clever makes me smile.
"We couldn't fix your plane so we just made it beep before it falls apart..."
Nail on the head bro
TRUE
If it's a Boeing, I'm not going.
same
😂😂
I know what this rhymes with 😂🤣
Bars
😂😂
This is what happened when companies put profits ahead of people's lives.
haha Ford Pinto go brrrrrr
Thats what every company does
@@TheGreatCooLite yeah and after that they can lose everything to their competitors.
You should live in Cuba for a few weeks.
@@johnames6430 the truth is hard to handle isn't it?
When you are carrying people, you cannot cut corners. Period.
Couldn't agree more. Just to make a few more dollar. :(
Keep in mind that for an American company, non-Americans are not people. Or at least not important people. That's why the USA didn't even want to ground this plane.
You are right, can't cut corners. The airlines hired pilots that I would never hired when I was the chief pilot of an airline.
Those guys should never been in the cockpits.
Too right -challenger shuttle accident 85 another onev
@@charliebrown6161From what I can tell, It's not that the pilot's did a poor job, it's that they weren't alerted of the software
Oh look. People died because someone else wanted more money.
capitalism...
Such a new concept!
BBB 👎️ (Boeing Behaving Badly )
but the free market will protect us
Competition is good,well thats what they told us.
Guess who is back in the news?
who eminam ?
What’s heartbreaking about this is that when news of the Lion Air crash first broke, many people thought the problem lay with the quality of the pilots and the airline, and that it was a “3rd world country problem”. At the time, only a few questioned the responsibility of Boeing.
Those poor pilots were doing everything they could to control a plane that Boeing intentionally hid important info about :( RIP :(
They should’ve known about a runaway stab tho. It’s very similar and they trained for it
Actually the vast majority of industry professionals still place the majority of the blame on the pilots. As Jay Jay said, this failure is very similar to runaway trim which has been around for a very long time. The lion air report glosses over some terrifying mistakes made by that crew
@@chrisbowpiloto The Ethiopian crew followed the runaway stabilizer checklist... and still crashed.
@@cityuser well they did half of it, and then undid it... That does not count as "doing the procedure" in this industry
@@James-jx3ro I’m not saying Boeing is innocent. I’m just saying the pilots also had a role in the accidents.
3 of my relatives have passed away in this accident and now knowing the cause was something like this making it more ironically and depressed. Those are souls, waited by their family but never came home.
sad to hear that
Sad bruh
may Allah bless ure family and your beloved ones.. I'm sorry for this loss
which one? the Lion Air one or the Ethopian one?
I am so sorry... 🙏🙏🙏
MCAS
M-May
C-Crash
A-Any
S-Second
Hey, that's actually pretty good
Fact bro
So many people died bc someone didn't say the new feature they put in their plane
nice Ctrl V
Another Boeing just went down today🤐
MCAS: might crash any second
Flew on fly Dubai’s 737 max and I was so scared
Imagine many people died because of a guy wanted to compete his rival and gain more money
It's a story that's happened again and again throughout history
same as airbus
@@myusername3689 well a few thousand people died of famine but socialism is good
i never liked boeing and here they are doing this its sad. no hat though i still have respect for boeing. This is a reason why the a320 is better.
it's called a war
To all those souls who died on these planes, I’m sorry that you haven’t been given justice. Accountability is needed.
Yeah it sad man
And how should that work? Yeah obviously it is a thing you should wish for but unfortunately very unrealistic. For one in such cases usually not one person is guilty, but many people just a little bit, but usually no one enough that he can be held accountible. And even if it would be the case that someone has a high enough degree of accountabilty for this, it is hard to prove if not even impossible to find out. Just look at the "simple" question is the FAA guilty for not properly validate the plane for flying or is Boeing responsible because they did not test enough for themselfes? Is the engineer the bad guy even if he honestly believed that the MCAS would be a good system or the guy who decided that now further training is necessary? Obviously nothing we can answer here, but it isn't very likely that such question can be conclusively answered by an investigation committee.
@@lal12 uhhhh, ever heard of lawsuits?
@@yourlocalramen1660 sure. But it is not likely that a criminal case will ever be filed. There will be a (or multiple) civil lawsuit against Boeing which certainly will be successfull. But even if a single person will be accused getting certain proof that this person was aware of all the problems and clearly decided to ignore them. This will be mostly impossible.
For one there are multiple circumstances which lead to the accidents, not just the technical flaws in the 737 Max. Then there are many different technical design faults which lead to the accident. Then it was mostly certified by the FAA and all changes that were not recertified do not formally require a recertification. And the FAA has issues in itself for one their conflicting functions (controlling and promote the aeronautic industry), also recent law changes lead to a more or less the self certification by the airplane manufacturer.
So I doubt there is even a person or a group of people which can be singled out to be liable in some way. But even if you can find some, will be very hard to prove that in a criminal case. They would have to interview hundreds of people, which probably neither want to incriminate them selves or their coworkers.
I don't say that there definitely aren't people which could be clearly be viewed as guilty from an ethical/morally standpoint. Especially if they put money before people's safety, but again this not really something that can be brought before a criminal court.
If not in Earth, they will get justice in the Judgement Day
300+ people died and no one is going to jail or no accountability!! Money over lives anytime I guess.
The FAA is in Boeing's pocket as well as the US government. That's the real problem.
Welcome to the US...where corporations write our bills and make our laws.
As long as you're a large multinational company. If you're a single individual or a small mom and pop company you'll get the book thrown at you. There are different sets of rules based on your net value.
The CEO at least got fired :/
Yet a Brazilian maintenance guy went to jail for forgetting to take duct tape off a sensor when servicing a plane.
They wanted to make something to rival Airbus. They did not have time, so they decided to cut the time needed to find and eliminate any problems.
2 planes crushed, they did not have to.
The greed of Boeing officials killed innocent people.
Exactly. Pure greed… what other problems might this airplane family have, rather not find out the deadly way.
And some people still say "if we got rid of all regulations the market will take care of everything!" THIS is why we need regulations. Those companies can make their profits back. We CAN NOT get those peoples lives back.
Well no, you're argument completely fails because we have extremely strict regulations and this still happened. Maybe in a world without regulations, it wouldn't have happened.
@@David-ud9ju Are you really that dumb ?
@@tomsriver2838 David is partly right - in an true open market there would be no protection for the airplane manufacturers either, they would have been fully open to be sued into the ground by airlines and passengers. We lack this today.
David because whenever there is a single loophole in regulations companies are not abusing that loophole to the absolute legal extend - and often beyond that... They don’t care about anything asides from making as much money as possible. That’s why we need regulations - to keep their raging hunger for money under control.
@@David-ud9ju the FAA did not have the money to conduct safety checks according to the regulations and had to rely on Boeing for that.
Dang, the shoes and personal items from the people onboarding hit hard.
Yeah, seeing that Hello Kitty bag made me tear up.
That was creepy
ya that's what got me too the most, it's so tragic and the people responsible so far just get away with putting all those people in danger and causing their deaths
@@ava.and.jasper Not a lawyer in the whole of the 7 kingdoms is going to get them out of this one.
@@ava.and.jasper The people in the commercial aircraft industry are not pushing things under the rug to save money. The safety culture there is the best in the world, from engineers to flight crews everybody is focused on getting the job done every time and upgrading aircraft and procedures before tragedy strikes. The pilots of these two crashed aircraft had the training to react to this problem, but problems almost never happen during flight and pilots are sometimes caught off guard. (it's a strange side effect of being part of the safest industry). And yes, there was an unforeseen problem with the MCAS system and the manufacture was working on a solution before the first crash. It is safe to fly and getting safer all the time.
Being in a crashing plane seems like one of the most terrifying things that could possibly happen. I feel so sorry for those people.
Captain Jack Aubrey of the Royal Navy You’d be surprised what pilots can pull off to save passengers especially when crash landing. Terrifying? Yes. Survival? Actually somewhat likely (given the circumstances in which the plane crashes/lands).
Yeah it must be just impending doom with those g forces as the plane dived
@@firestorm8268 you don't actually experience any noticeable Gs in a linear dive. G forces are most experienced when entering and pulling out of a dive via the change in acceleration.
@@Skyried exactly. It would be the opposite of G force if the plane was depending rapidly people might even lift out if their seats and feel like there's no gravity and your whole stomach feels like it's going to come out of your mouth. Probably one of the most terrifying feelings in the world that's the whole "thrill" of roller costers
Decending
2 years since the crashes and I’d like people to know we are still remembering the victims :(
"Let's add some new software and not tell the pilots."
@@spidercubed9718 Yes, but this wasn't junk. It was incredibly important
im thinking about the satanic mandela effect moving the turbine to the front of the wing instead of underneath
Yep, scandalous. But that's going to bite them sorely in the ba**s as a consequence.
The pilots were told about it, just not trained properly by their respective airlines. It was a chain of events that led to the crashes, not just the MCAS.
@@BloatedBumbleBee to kill over 300 people in 5 months
4:08 That altitude chart gave me a creepy feeling, just thinking about the people on-board, not knowing that they would eventually end up in the sea.😔
Same. Those people were terrified the entire time because I guarentee everyone of them knew that it was not normal. Boeing needs to compensate every single surviving family for what they did to them and their loved ones by cutting corners.
The only mistake on the graph is that they did not show numbers for the altitude
@@mikellbart2185 Yes I agree with you. This chart should have included the aircrafts altitude for better/clearer reference.
@@dave6429 The plane remained around 2,000 to 3,000 feet in the air i believe, as it failed to ever reach its designated altitude for that part of the flight, and the was plane traveling unusually fast according to the control tower, so you can only imagine the terrible amount of anxiety the passengers were experiencing :/
pretty sure people knew after the first few rollorcoaster drops
this is a crime and Boeing should be liable.
It is, and they should be, but honestly do you think they will be held liable? Things will be settled out of court (for an ungodly sum of money), and then it's back to business as usual.
@@gfimadcat That is just how the US deals with stuff like this
Americans..
@@Martin0202M Precisely, see WW2.vietnam etc
I totally agree with you
"Boeing or I'm not going" has turned into "Boeing? I'm not going."
And as usual, they'll get away with it.
@Jake Johnson Uh... they don't make anywhere near that many models.
It won't be that easy. People forget until they don't...
ToO bIg To fAiL
Thanos dies to Thor before the opening credits, but he has already destroyed the stones. The rest of the movie centers around using the Quantum Universe to retrieve the stones from the past timeline.
Natasha and Clint go to retrieve the soul stone, with Clint sacrificing Natasha to access it.
Stark builds a gauntlet to wield the retrieved infinity stones to reverse the snap.
Banner has become Hulk permanently, but retains his intelligence and memories as Professor Hulk.
Captain America fights Captain America in the Quantum Universe
Captain America in the other universe wields the Mjolnir and shield, but Thor still has the Stormbreaker
Other universe Captain America wears the old comic suit
@@laughingoctopus8556 Broooooo!!!! Who are you?
Boeing's CEO walked away with 63 million dollars after this
@@californiapoppy he's rich that's how :(
@@californiapoppy He was removed by the board of directors. He got 63 million in stock buybacks and pensions
They force him to resign by give him 63 mil . Those a hole worry about ceo lawsuit than all victim family lawsuit
And many corpses
That the boeing style
When the 737Max is certified safe and ready to fly, the CEO of Boeing AND his family should be on that "new and improved" plane!
💯 💯
thats why the board is playing musical chairs no one want to fly in it
You kidding? I'd fly it today as long as the crew was properly certified as they would have been if these were American-based airlines. These crashes were caused by pilot error. At worst, the MCAS issue should have been a mild inconvenience and easily dealt with by exiting procedures for runaway trim regardless of the system responsible for it. But the pilots didn't handle the situation correctly and hundreds of people died as a result.
@@icemachine79 The pilots weren't allowed to. The computer has more span than the yoke, therefore, can override any input from the pilots. It was later proven, that even switching the system "off" wasn't enough to restore full control to the pilot, since, switching it off is a software command, rather than a hard transfer switch. Any error in software, or hardware malfunction, and the pilots cannot regain control. It's not like the "auto-pilot" in a Cessna, or Piper, though it should be!
@@vincentrobinette1507 None of what you said is accurate as demonstrated by the safe landing of the SAME Lion Air plane that encountered the SAME problem but luckily had a much more competent crew in charge on that particular flight. All they had to do was follow the runaway trim checklist to deactivate the electric trim system (which automatically disabled all MCAS commands) and manage their airspeed correctly in order to operate the trim manually. Unfortunately, after the plane landed safely and was checked in for repairs, Lion Air's maintenance staff failed to fix the faulty AoA sensor and illegally returned the plane to flight status. The next crew to pilot the plane then failed to follow the proper checklist for runaway trim which eventually resulted in a crash. The Ethiopian Airlines crew failed to throttle back at any point during the flight (lack of basic airmanship b/c co-pilot only had 200 hours in ANY cockpit) which made it almost impossible to manually trim the aircraft. The captain followed the proper checklist but his co-pilot was totally useless leaving him oversaturated with tasks. Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines are the companies that should be held to account for these deaths, not Boeing.
I wonder what the pilot was thinking during their final moments. It’s so difficult accepting your fate but trying to remain calm for the sake of your passengers. RIP the innocent souls that were lost. 💔
It’s depressing seeing all those wallets, shoes and plushies just laying there
Seeing those toys are the most depressing things I've seen
Yes my neighbour was one of them
Aflax News i am sorry
ir i saw that i would just steal those wallets
It is, and seeing so many just proves how many significant lives were lost in that crash, it’s extremely depressing.
Just seeing those baby shoes in the wreckage is heartbreaking......
737 max is safely flying again
@@likebotting784 shut up
@@AvishekTravels no u
@The secular humanist so in any moment some 787 or 737 max could just burst in flames like swissair 111?
@@thisaccounthasbeensuspended i dont know much about the issue, but maybe. Or it could lose power to important areas
Can’t software their way out of an engineering problem.
Catalina i sorry what
he means the plane was too low to the ground for the new engine therefore couldn't get enough lift so they developed a software that pilots were not properly trained about
@@chateaupig826 Actually, the engines were too large, placed further forward on the wing for this reason, and actually created lift. Not a large amount of lift mind, the aircraft wasn't unstable.. but in order to ensure NG pilots can have the same common type rating on the Max, MCAS was used to slightly counter the front lift created by the engines, purely to make the aircraft feel like an NG.
chateau pig thanks
Exactly
If you can't keep your plane in the air without a software preventing the plane from crashing, YOUR DESIGN IS JUNK.
Given that out of over 16,000 737s built since 1960 there’s only been 502 incidents. I wouldn’t say it’s junk.
@@marcbrady7241 Now they also fall apart.
@@epoxy1710 Not yet confirmed all the details of this. This might not be Boeings fault. Wait until we know everything before making assumptions.
@@marcbrady7241 Still a door ripped off the plane. Smells Flight 811 all over again.
@@epoxy1710Most likely a quality control issue meaning it's not tied to specifically the 737 max.
The 737 Max is like a car that veers left because of a structural defect. Instead of correcting the defect structurally, the manufacturer decides it's cheaper to install a computer software that forces the steering wheel towards the right whenever it senses that the car is going too much to the left. Will you feel safe in such a car?
After two crashes with this car, the manufacturer decides that he'd better have the software depend on two sensors instead of just one. Now when these sensors disagree, the software simply switches off. So you are then left with a car that structurally veers left and no software interference. The manufacturer is sure you'll feel it's safer now and will resume buying his car.
Furthermore, the manufacturer claims that because his car will eventually have undergone such massive scrutiny, it must surely become one of the safest cars to hit the road! And it will gain this great reputation without the expense of structurally correcting the structural flaw. As always, he says, safety is his top priority!
This was amazing lmao
Winning bigly is the point if you are a lazy executive.
...swish.
Nothing but net.
👍👍
@@InfantrySider Carter, what you say is actually worrying. If the people at Boeing still think that the Max crashes are due to bad piloting, it means they consider the Max already safe, and its worldwide grounding a big mistake! This means Boeing has still learned nothing, and this unfortunately makes a third crash with the Max all the more likely!
It's time to start sending multinational executives to jail. People need to be responsible for their decisions and the consequences of those decisions
Pax Webb and you will be decide who is going to jail and who is not
If only it was that simple.
Waaaaay worse than a handful of people. (1) Having only one sensor, (2) selling additional safety lights (In the cockpit) as extras, (3) cheaping out on buying the extra safety measures, (4) Boeing approving Boeing for safety, (5) Airlines to training pilots (The MCAS was in the quick reference but not the training), (6) An airline using the same plane KNOWING it had a problem that was luckily avoided on a previous flight. (7) Faulty software that in the event of two sensors disagreeing does not disable the MCAS system and not warning lights. Pretty much everybody messed up.
for sure
As someone who' have close friends in Boeing I can tell you this: The airlines and region's aviation rules decide which equipment package to get. Most Boeing 737 Max8s in the U.S. have three computers for example so when a sensor give a false reading it has to have two out of the three systems to agree with the sensor data in order for MACS to make adjustments. Pilots also have higher training times in the U.S. and having training of what to do when MACS fails which is shut it off and take manual control. The two crashes both planes the airlines only had one computer both times the computer malfunctioned on the previous flights but no mention was made to the second flight crew that coming on and ultimately was on the planes when they crashed. Lastly for one of the flights (I think Ethiopia Air) one of the pilots didn't know anything about the 737 Max 8 before coming on board. As result when MACS starts getting faulty readings and adjusting the course of the plane you have the crews trying to fight MACS manually instead of shutting down the flight computer and flying the plane manually while restarting the system. I don't think that this is Boeing's fault it's more of negligence on the Airlines.
I like how you present this article with diagrams and side comparisons.
Its by far the best article on the 737 Max 8 crisis.
jatelo maber maduong'
True
My brother was a lead software engineer for Boeing during the "problem solving" phase after they were all grounded. He was a part of the team that found the solution. Now he works for IBM.
Nice
Great. So what you're doing except playing video games whole day and night?
@@SychoSamNPC life is better than whatever you do!!
Good. Their stuff doesn't fly.
My cousin was in that Lion Air 610 flight, i felt very sad to see my uncle, aunt, and his pregnant wife cry at his funeral
That's hard... 💔
My condolences...
I want to see consequences for the responsible
Liar
@@collinoverby68 how do you know
@4:10 that infographic was brutal. Whoever did that visualization, really managed to tell the story.
not at all it doesnt even talk about the fact only the right side was showing bad data and had the pilot and FO cross checked there instruments they would seen this the ETH flight the Captain had only ~1500 hours TOTAL and FO just north of 500 in the US you need 1500 hours TOTAL time JUST get a FO job small airline the cause of the crash was inexperience
@@Elios0000 spoken like a true pilot, what did you fly? Your Ford Fiesta?
Elios0000 that’s in the Ethiopian airlines case. The captain in flight 610 is a veteran pilot with almost 8000 flight hours, and the FO has around 5000.
They have no idea MCAS even existed. Also. MCAS takes data from the left side(captain’s data). Knowing the sensors disagree also wouldn’t have helped. Considering.. you know the problem is with the MCAS automatically trimming their aircraft down.
my heart sunk when i saw the plane sink :(
@@robroilen4441 you working for boeings pr department? Tell them to focus on testing and the pr will look at after itself
US pilots: Hey, our planes keep nosing down and nearly killing us. We should stop flying them
Boeing: Is this some poor joke I'm too rich to understand
Huge American Companies can bet anything for money
Trump: "planes are just TOO complicated nowadays, it's NOT Boeing's fault"......
Low time inexperienced 3rd world pilots crashed....never happened in America. Truth is its not MCAS its alt capture on the autopilot.
Yes and the American pilots didn’t crash. 2 Stab Trim to Off.
The UnknownSG: This is my uninformed hot take on the situation.
Me: Sigh.
When an engineering company runs by an accountant...
This.
The fact that they didn't write down the MCAS In the training book sounds like what they did in Chernobyl plant reactors.
great comparison.
but chernobyl was human error
Nicky D That’s just half the story
@@NickyD
Half the story only.
But you're actually half right:
- The top engineer was only trained to coal plants.
- And the Reactor 4 was actually faulty.
@@NickyD and they hid it from the rest of the world.
Actually felt physically sick when the infographic got to 4:42... those poor souls...
yes , caught in the middle of a plane price war. Manslaughter charges should ensue.
The silence is so creepy.
It touched my heart :(
i went to the comments to see if anyone felt the same too,
Dude I swear I felt the same way.
Boeing executives should go to prison.
No, the Lion Air mechanics who cleared an unairworthy plane for flight and the Ethiopian Airlines who hired a first officer with only 200 hours' flying time and allowed him to fly passengers on a plane he didn't know how to operate should go to prison.
icemachine79 You obviously don’t know the specifics. Next, please.
@@icemachine79 dude Boeing literally said it was their fault did you even watch the video
@@bodystomp5302 I figured you wouldn't reply. Somewhere inside that tiny brain of yours you know I'm right.
Herman A last time I check mass slaughter is a crime
Back in 2020 when this MCAS system which crashed two Boeing 737 MAX airliners was all the rage I said:"It's the MCAS system now, and they'll fix it, *but who knows what kind of other design errors will emerge in the future?* "
Looks like I was right. How I wish I had been wrong.
The latest is a quality problem. I don't think that's really better at all, but it's something.
boeing: the engine used to not fit but we shoved it in there and it actually worked
Well said.
This V12 1600 hp engine didn't fit under the hood in this camper van, so we just put it loosely right behind the driver, and made sure you could only give maximum thrust, and it fit nicely
Well, it didn’t really work....
S. S. Cookies I know.
The designer of the 737 MAX is a black man.
The most comprehensive video I’ve seen on the issue so far, great work
BlueGraySkies
Definitely not. A lot is left out. Here is a playlist from start to finish of documentation and exploration from a highly experienced pilot.
ruclips.net/p/PL6SYmp3qb3uPp1DS7fDy7I6y11MIMgnbO
This is actually the dumbed down version - there are other less produced videos out there, but far more detailed from actual 737 pilots.
YOU ARE AN IDIOT's IDIOT!
I've seen many video about this topic, but this is the best I've watched so far.
Then you should watch more widely.
@@DrG65199 Perhaps this is not the best ever, but what's wrong with this video?
@@DrG65199 which videos do you recommend?
@@Coffeebean1985
ruclips.net/video/HBqDcUqJ5_Q/видео.html
He's a pilot and goes through the accident report in detail explaining most things. His other videos also keep you abreast with current developments in the matter.
@@Coffeebean1985 i give this general advice: if you won't trust Fox because (duh) of the obvious ideological bias, then be aware vox also has a bias, because it has a specific world view. Everyone does. So on a story about plane crashes, maybe you should seek out actual professionals in that field who are aware of the complexities governing the industry, instead of a 6 minute summary by persons who did research on a topical issue to get views as a part of their business model and magically has formed an opinion.
Or don't. And continue the polarization plaguing our societies. The choice is yours.
Someone should be held responsible for that. A company killed over 300 people for trying to make quick profit, how is that not treated as a criminal offence is beyond comprehension
MCAS= May Crash Any Seconds
Kravuis Disturbed Media Creates All Stories. VOX just made up this explanation.
@@mpenner2124 Well explained that to 346 poor lost soul.
Kravuis Disturbed I would be willing to bet that those who lost their lives would much rather have the truth invested in than to have VOX and other media telling fallacious stories that mislead the public because they are clueless with physics, engineering, and investigative reporting. Fortunately, the actual crash investigation teams and the courts are likely to get closer to the big picture, which will inevitably be one of shared blame where Boeing and the regulators and the airlines and the pilots all need to take some corrective actions. Dealing with reality is what will honor those who died and their families.
M Penner Nice one, but unfortunately for you not true. VOX didn't make up anything. Boeing made the flawed MCAS system and told no one about it. That's the problem and it's the media's task to report on this. Nothing's wrong with this video.
@@AMSFlyer Maybe if I comment "iT's pILot ErRor aNd tHiS sYstEm iS gOOd aS guCCi" maybe he will likes it.
My teacher lost both of her cousins in the Ethiopian crash. She was so heartbroken when she told us. One of them had a child on the way back home....
346 lives were lost just because a company wanted to sell the most aircrafts...
I mean... Millions of lives were lost for similar reasons.
I'd say capitalism was the overall cause, but* you won't believe me ( - _ -)
100 million died because some wanted to ban profits
Nope their lives where lost because pilots weren't trained by the airline.
This reminds me of the DC-10 story. They were rushing the plane and it had fatal consequences
And now they’re falling apart in the air…
Are they that terrible!?
OMFG! 2 hours iPad training? LOL! Even we (tramdrivers in Prague) have longer and deeper training when something comes (is implemented) to our trams. I'm shocked!
Yeah that's why the planed crashed.
are they serious ? they have the lives of hundreds of passengers and pilots get trained with a tablet !!! oh my gosh !!! I hope Boeing trial will get live broadcast , so that their responsibility will get revealed to the face of the world
That’s a bit misleading, they had 2 additional hours of training for the max but they have months of training for the 737. Really Boeing should’ve just trusted pilots to know how to nose down.
@@Powderlover1 www.theairlinepilots.com/forumarchive/b737/b737memoryitems.php#i
Those are just the memory items. Although pilots are supposed to know that (thus the name: "MEMORY items") in this case they did NOT.
Even if they know the memory items but haven't practiced it in the simulator they are not properly trained. I'm sure any pilot would agree.
Knowing how to do something and training to be able to do it in a crisis are two very different thing.
Note the final item on the list:
*STABILIZER TRIM WHEEL - GRASP and HOLD* You go ahead and try that.
@@tunkunrunk I think we can all agree they weren't trained properly. In the us idk how it works but in Europe it's generally the airlines which trains pilots afaik.
You should also add that for a critical system like this, no redundant sensors were added to catch errors that could lead to a catastrophic failure. Oh wait, it was avaible but as an option package that included an extra sensor and disagree light to let pilots know where the problem is coming from. None of the planes that crashed had this package. It was pure greed that led so many lives to be lost.
"Pay extra to not die as easily as you would with the regular package due to a system we installed but didn't tell you about"
@@Chris-rg6nm not almost, it Is Criminal
Wow, I didn't know about that, but yes as Harjeenvan said, something so critical shouldn't have been optional. And worryingly the fact those upgrades existed means people knew a failure like this could happen.. Very concerning that they went ahead anyway and didn't even mention mcas in the training material.
@@robroilen4441 Nah, according to the 737 Max 8 design, they are expendable, as are the passengers...
i think all the B737 Max have a second AoA-sensor, but the MCAS only used one of them because the sensors are connected to different flight computers. Now there was an update so both sensors are used.
The option package showed the live-data from the sensor on the screen in the cockpit.
But don't quote me on this, i'm not sure.
Its really easy to see the number of deaths as statistics, until you realize that the individual death is actually a person that once lived a happy life with their beloved friends and family. It doesn't matter how much deaths are there, what is important that it actually happened and how it could actually be prevented but was ignored.
"One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic."
- Joseph Stalin
Thank you Vox for providing the information necessary to understand what was going on with this situation in a digestible, aesthetic way.
and people wonder industries need so much regulation. THIS is exactly why. Greed kills.
Indeed. As an aviation major, a lot of the regulations made by the FAA aren't created until a life is taken.
Certain industries... yes. All? not so much. But flying and transportation definitely needs one of the most regs
@@patrickflores1714 It was Trump interference in the FAA
So blame the president of the US for crashes In other countries? FAA shouldn’t be rushing their inspections over one person on the FAA not whomever was “interfering”
@@logansenkier8036 The Boeing 737 MAX certification granted under cronies appointed by Trump ,Daniel Elwell . He even just an acting administrator . Imagine 3 years into his presidency the FAA top management filled by an acting administrator . What did Trump says , appointing acting Cabinet heads grants "more flexibility" . We all know what this is all about, to served his interest . Until Boeing 737 max crash , he know he f**ked up . After the crash which destroyed Boeing and FAA reputation then the FAA finally get the permanent member .
noone :
B737 Max : oh look a penny
WHY
Lion air and Ethiopian airlines: "Oh look a penny!"
Why would you make me laugh about something like this.
Change that 737 max into MCAS please
you know
this is funny
Probably the best Vox video in a long time.
Agree!
Try blancolirio channel for more detailed info.
Every video someone says “best video in a while”
Agree
because every vox videos are 🔥🔥🔥
Sadly this is actual again, this time the fuselage disintegrated!
Boing is becoming a liability to the public transport
Boeing be like: "The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of 189 passengers is a statistic"
yeah like seriously, all those rioting on the streets around the world for one black man. here 300 more souls and people just pretend to care. People can say that's only because he represent a race or movement something.... well that could be US on those planes! they represent us, no matter who we are
@@aoinatasha1313 Also the same for environment and climate change. People be like "Oh no, we need to act quickly" while in reality they're throwing their Cheetos bag on the side of the road while looking at their phone
- Stalin.
@@aoinatasha1313 i
Now a lot more in crash 3
RIP to the Indonesian crash victims.
@@TreeSymphony52 The Indonesian one wasn’t a MAX and is no way Boeing’s fault.
@@Cal90208 yep it was 737-500, also he could be referring to the old lion air crash one.
@@Nicksmith_j7r I am not being greedy I am stating facts. That aircraft had been flying for over thirty years. Obviously it was due to maintenance, weather, or human error. Do some research before you make assumptions like that
@@dava_arvarabi Possibly yeah
@@Nicksmith_j7r The recent crash was an old 737, doesn't have an mcas
"Many pilots only got a two hour I-pad course before entering the cockpit for the first time" (3:42)
This is what happens when you care more about profits than people.
Very true. Also, the thought of pilots being educated via an iPad course is pretty damn terrifying
training is an airline issue not a manufacturer issue.
Many pilots also have this 2 hour change when going from a 737-800 to 900 and vice versa.... are they less safe to fly?
Actually theres great safety features that can be implemented in planes,and are not just because they cost companies money. Its just interfering with their profit.Simple example of how they work.
Generally speaking, corporations that care more about people than profits go bankrupt very quickly. That's just how capitalism works.
A cautionary tale of technology and competition. Sad story well told
So Airbus made a high-quality product. And then Boeing had to improvise with a quickly rushed product. Yet everyone bought the Boeing? It´s crazy how often this kind of thing happens.
@Zane Huston I am a software developer, hardware engineer and systems research & development specialist. Boeing engineers could not even develop proper maths to predict a disable-mechanism for software-driven sensors (of which at least one of them generated faulty data). This could have easily prevented if Boeing:
1)
Engineered a plane whose older model wasn´t not only physically different (fuselage) but also the Turbine Engine physical differences (which decreased stability overall and made the fuselage from an aerodynamics point of view, unstable if ON TOP OF THAT, the nose and the tail of the plane were to move forwards and backwards, gathering strain onto fuselage itself, and then, such tension would move onto bigger turbines, causing the plane to lose horizontal alignment).
2)
They suddenly moved from fat-like to thinner fuselages. Where is the physics formula, or calculus explained by them behind the different plane designs they took. Why are they only talking about software improvements. On what basis?
Seriously. They should've just simply invested and outsourced some of the designs of the MAX 737 and a lot of feedback should have come first before they went selling these killing flying machines.
Also, Boeing death track record still holds the highest in the planet (flying wise). I mean Boeing should just close all together and outsource at least the maths behind their designs. The moment I heard Boeing was making crew capsules I knew Boeing was killing people out there for money. I mean I grew up staring thousand of deaths in lieu of Boeing "half baked" plane designs. These people are criminals and they should be charged for what they are doing worldwide.
Airbus is still one of the safest plane makers out there. BTW.
Refusing to buy Boeing products will cause huge unemployment rates in America and weaken the country's relations with foreign countries because Boeing has numerous factories around the globe and different states in America. Sadly US government is forced to buy from Boeing.
all FAA approved aircraft are quality.. otherwise they wont be airworthy, and if you mean airbus replacing an engine on a plane is quality, I don't even know why you made this comment.
@@ReasonsWhy1 That's why the FAA is now in big troubles I suppose? Because they do their job properly?
I have piloted both AIRBUS and BOEING aircraft, as well as LOCKHEED, MCDONNELL,DOUGLAS, and CONVAIR. BOEING is second to none. Many commercial pilots have a saying------ If it ain't Boeing, we ain't going.
Boeing put Profits before Saftey, 346 people died as a result.
Shakeel Ullah not safety just training
@@williamwatkins1996 aka money
marcostj01 no money needed all they had to do was tell the pilots hey this is new blah blah blah no big deal though
yeah thats mass wreckless homicide actually.
also if one of those two airplanes that crashed was American it would be a whole other story.
“We couldn’t put an engine above the wing so we just slapped it on top”
-Boeing
U stupidp
You mean below the wing?
@@lowbudgetname2745 stupidp
This happens quite often, the problem is they say it is the same when it isn't. Imagine you are riding a bike and then all of a sudden they change the size of one of the wheel and say it is still the same bike.
Yup! I think the engineers were just eating up burgers..
Coming here again after Max9 issues 😢
Even though that’s a completely different issue?
@@marcbrady7241 it's still Boeing and FAA rushing to clear them off to fly again
@@marcbrady7241still dangerous tho
Boeing logic:
1. Lets reuse an aircraft design from 1967 to save cost, put 2 huge new engines that does not really fit and thereby make the whole aircraft unstable.
2. Then we create a secret software MCAS to stabilize the aircraft.
3. To save even more cost we make the extremely critical MCAS system only rely on a single sensor. (Industry standard is normally 2 or as Airbus does, 3).
4. To make even more money, lets sell the sensor malfunction warning system as an option, but still not tell about what MCAS does.
5. To save even more cost lets make sure MCAS is not described in the manual, nor include any mention about it in the 2hour Ipad training video to pilots.
6. Lets save even more cost by not having ANY indicator to the pilot that the MCAS system is active, and that the pilot is no longer in control of the aircraft.
7. To save even more cost, lets tell FAA that the aircraft is perfectly safe and approve it ourselves.
8. When the first aircraft crashed, lets blame it on pilot error.
9. When the second aircraft crashed, lets pretend it was minor glitch but hint that a very minor software upgrade might be needed. Try to minimize lawsuits but using very cryptic weasel language.
10. Finally lets pretend that this unstable aircraft, relying on a single sensor will become “the safest aircraft ever designed “ and force everyone to continue flying it.Lets pay FAA bribes to certify it.
11. Lets tell the world that Boeing cares about safety first.....
This is total greed and deception. Boeing’s CEO and FAA’s chairman should be sent to prison. All Boeing 737 MAX 8 should be grounded permanently.
Boeing! Do the right thing-Design a new safe, fuel efficient aircraft. Until then....I will avoid this model like the plague.
Right. Avoid flying on 'em. The market can settle this REALLY quick!
All B373's are positive STABLE moron!
Couldn't have said it better myself!
Excellent summation, and it has got worse with the parsimonious penny pinching, money focused accountants took over and shipped the company to Chicago, away from the aeronautical focus of Seattle.... Because money is the most important thing right? Quality second. Compare and Audi to a Ford? Compare an Airbus to a Boeing, for years now the quality finish within the cabin is a give away...Quality control matters NOT just making dollars, Chicago.
Excellent list! All the truth is right there. Thanks.
I find it disturbing how after 12 minutes the plane just went straight down... Imagine how scary that felt...
Fac du
@Dan Krohn the pilots weren't even taught how to turn it off. Cant exactly blame them for lacking knowledge they were explicitly not given.
@Dan Krohn You cant blame them, They dont have knowledge of the MCAS System. Even they tried their best at the given situation
@Dan Krohn I didnt say that they made no mistake
I am saying it is a factor but main problem is MCAS
AND Ethiopian airlines is still under investigation (Wikipedia)
At the minute of 12, the MCAS decided to take control of the plane completely. It locked the wheel and pilots cannot do anything to prevent the plane from crashing
I remember coming home one day and seeing my mom crying while the news was playing on TV after finding out one of her relatives passed. It was just devastating.
As someone who's been flying planes for many years, I'll always prefer Airbus. They're actually well thought through products tailored to pilot's needs. I will never ever trust Boeing again, they're dead to me.
What more could you expect from American companies?
@@kaziiqbal7257 They used to be a company centered around engineering. Now it's Mcdonell Douglas 2.0, they only cares about about results for the rich shareholders
So let me ask this, Iff younger a pilot for an airline and the purchase Boeing planes you gonna quit?
@@PatricksFinanzen as a pilot in training, ill fly any boeing aircraft before the max. Aircraft such as the 777 and earlier 737s i trust becuase they're from an era where boeing was still ran by engineers
Luxor Soundslikeacoolname my question was in regard to the fact, that even if a pilot doesn’t want to fly a Boeing the only choice would be to resign! I doubt an airline asks its pilots, which plane should be bought next before the purchase or order?!? Pilot is a Job, like any other. If you don’t own the airline or the plane, there won’t be much rights to decide on a type or brand of plane!
3:33 no MCAS means “MAY CRASH ANY SECOND”
EDIT: holy most likes I ever got thanks!
Yeah I think they need a new acronym.
Lol
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 good one 😂😂
Ashton Manivanh At gaming suits it a lot!
Good job dood
What I also find kind of frightening is that where he says "several pilots complained to the federal government". FFS, if you have pilots complaining to the FG about a plane characteristic,which I think is doubtful they do often, what is happening here. I would love to know what was the reaction or if there even was any.
FAA is not there for safety but for helping companies make money
@@meowmeow2759 Not really
The reason why we didn't see a response from the federal government is because the current administration left the FAA without a head after the old one resigned well over a year ago. Since then FAA fines for violations had dropped more than 88% and the FAA didn't have the leadership to be able to respond to these complaints.
Changes take time to do phone isn't working on this software patch for nearly six months now
@@BigBootyMuncher69 bullshit, you mean to tell me no one had any idea what to do ?
How MCAS works:
M = money
C = comes
A = above
S = safety
Sooo 346 lives for the cost of who can sell the most aircraft...
*wow Boeing you really did it this time*
I mean, they're going to get away with it.
After more than 300 people died.
They "fixed it with a software update"
How...:(
Cause that’s how many things are fixed
...they will do like Jesus made wine from water.
A R you can fly Boeing it’s the same as airbus but not this model
No, they didn't because it's still not flying
@A R I hear you but airbus had a similar issue that killed hundreds but they keep it hush hush.
Seeing the belongings of people lined up like that really breaks my heart...
your heart would definitly break if you saw all the personal belongings of car crash victims lined up, yet you dont hear anybody talking about that.
Really? Because it didn't affect me at all.
Yes, they are playing games with you. Sadly, again politicizing a tragedy.
And now there killing whistle blowers for calling them out on there greed
when china gov suspended all its 737max in first place, america media said that "overreact".
Well, it's called "capitalism".
@@zlz95 China is capitalist to the core, yet they have the sensibility to ground a plane that is broken and not risk accidents, the United States on the other hand, as much as they like to portray China as crap, care about human life a lot less.
better be safe than sorry.
The reason why the US aviation administration refused to ground the Boeing planes is because their CEO visited Trump multiple times to reassure him to let the planes fly in the US, and Trump can't say no to rich guys that pay generously at his Mar A Largo club. But Trump only gave in to grounding the planes due to public pressure, not because of ethical or legal reasons.
US was the last country to implement the ban, which speaks volumes of how little regard Trump has for civilian lives of his own citizens. Even the Chinese, however bad their human rights record is, was on the side of safety over profit. But Trump is on a lower bar, that he put profit over lives.
On top of that, the software fixes were available in early 2019, but because of the US government shut down (instigated by Trump for his stupid useless wall), it caused a delay in the testing and roll out of the altered software system by months.
can various *governments* of all countries wherever these coffins were supplied not file en-masse lawsuits? or similar to class action suits which they have in Divided States of Murica?
the certifying and monitoring bodies, be it FDA or pharma industry bodies, are all sold out, lethargic or corrupt and incompetent.
Bringing them to book or making them change their ways is important too.
Fixing a hardware problem with a software fix 🤔
Like downloading more RAM...
I am glad SOMEONE realizes what the REAL problem was. At it's most basic level you are 100% spot on correct. They made a very poor engineering decision (to save money) and decided to fix the resulting bad outcome with software. Dumb + Dumb = Stupid. Whatever they lose as a result will not be enough.
@Jacob it has been said that a pilot would not be able to fly the B2 with out its flight computer.
@@babybrat2958 the plane is DESIGNED that way this was a FIX and a crappy one
all modern planes are fly by wire
@Fred I am well aware that all modern planes use fly by wire. The fly by wire technology originally came from the Apollo space program.
Fly by wire flight research was conducted at Dryden flight research center. One of the issues they encountered was the experimental planes would oscillate up and down in a wave pattern. This issue was overcome by tweaking the software.
The first commercial aircraft...was from airbus....that debuted fly by wire technology had its issues as well. The flight crew reported that the engines failed to respond when TOGA power was applied. The captain throttled back to idle and throttled up again. As the engines were finally spooling up the plane crashed and three people onboard were killed. The lack of response from the throttle would indicate an issue with the fly by wire system.
Flight computers have their own limitations. An example of this was Air France flight 447. Their autopilot kicked off due to the failure of a pitot tube from icing. This gave the computer inconsistent speed readings. The computer didn’t know how fast the plane was flying and could no longer fly the plane.
This issue that the 737 Max is experiencing is a computer issue. The computer is malfunctioning and forcing the plane to do something that it isn’t suppose to do.
Did Boeing rush the plane to production...yes.
Should pilots have been better informed about this new software.....yes
Should they have had more training....yes.
"This is an airplane engine"
Well, it _was_
A bit of hammer action and it'll look good as new.
A lil bit of bynamic balancing and a fresh paint job and it's good as new
I'm sure with the right software update to mcats it will be fine
It´s still an engine. Just not working.
@@bowlchamps37 Spot on! My thoughts exactly.
There’s so many things going on:
1. Put the engine in a position that causes problems.
2. Try to fix that problem with automated software.
3. Don’t mention the software anywhere.
4. Let the software depend on only one sensor.
5. Don’t train the pilots.
So many things done horribly wrong. All this because they want to match the competition.
How do you flout so many regulations and think everything will be okay. Or, maybe, they just don’t care.
If they placed the MAX’s engine below, the engine would scrape the runway before even flying.
So many lives lost, because companies take shortcuts....just for profit. Wrong incentives, wrong outcomes.
since authorities and republicans won't take action, what can we do to punish BOEING? I want to try and only take flights on airbus planes, but that means nothing as the message will never reach them, the planes are already sold.
Minimizing cost is normal in any enterprise. Failure and miss judgement can happen even if for non profit. At least fear of loosing profit give incentive not to screw up.
They didn't do it for profits. They did it for survival against a competition that was getting a lot of money from a foreign government.
@@aeonjoey3d
Let's keep a cool head! Boring didn't address it intentionally. Also, the people who made the design decisions are probably no longer with the company. For instance their CEO & the whole top management, who made the decision concerning the aircraft, has changed a few years ago.
I agree with everything you said but also how many times do companies do stuff like this and nothing goes wrong? How are you supposed to know?
Boeing and it’s executives should be charged with manslaughter for those two crashes
@@xnopyt22 Involuntary manslaughter is the killing of a human being without intent of doing so, either expressed or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories, constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.
Then airbus should too for their many crashes. Same with almost all aircraft companies
@@slimaa2261 too much money to go to jail
Cat Lover who? Airbus? If so then you can’t send the Boeing executives to jail with that logic. They are both multi-billion dollar corporations. If we were talking Embraer or Fokker or something then that argument is more viable.
@@slimaa2261 👌😄
imagine when you buy a car, then suddenly your car crashes into a wall beyond your control. You ask the car manufacturer, then they say there is an auto driving system that they never told you that it exists. and here are still many people who defend Boeing's mistakes? good job
Toyota were fined a billion dollars over the drive-by-wire throttles.
www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/toyota-reaches-12-billion-settlement-to-end-criminal-probe/2014/03/19/5738a3c4-af69-11e3-9627-c65021d6d572_story.html
@@markmark5269 Yes, and it was not proven that the malfunction even existed. Only the victim claimed that the car ran away.
Yeah, right, Toyota simply agreed to pay 1.2 Billion because they are nice guys.
That's 1.2 BILLION.
Joe, surprised how many people don't know to hold the start button in for 2 to 3 seconds. Works for your computer too when it's frozen..
yeah i heard this somewhere in youtube
AND NOW THEY’RE SPONTANEOUSLY DEPRESSURISING MID AIR
Boeing new slogan: "If it's Boeing I ain't going"
Ivo Martins count me in
If it’s Boeing I’m taking the bus
To be honest, now whenever I book a domestic flight I ensure that it's not a Boeing.
their anthem: flo-rida "it's going down for real"
That, unfortunately is not a suitable ultimate approach that repects the true needs of the whole industry and humanity. We need both Airbus and Boeing as they help to keep each other from becoming dangerous global monopolies. This, and more are socio-economic necessities that befall all humanity in our times.
However, that also is far from adequate control of the industry. Ultimately the needs and ardour of the adequyacy are much greater than that, and so I refer you to my paste-posted comment here as of Feb 23, 2020 for the morte extensive details.
Brand Competition is not the problem. Cheating your way to getting ahead js the real issue here
Brand competition incentivise it tho
@@celinak5062 the entirety of our economy revolves around competition between firms. It is a due process of innovation and economic acceleration. To say that the competition incentivises greed doesn't change the fact rivalry is here to stay for our economy. Anyone can criminalise anything. Boeing had the right intentions, done in tbe wrong way.
@@justinraphael3959 Boeing did not have the right intentions. The right intention would be building a good airplane that doesn't kill people.
@@LimeyLassen yes, that was their intention, they just so happened to fail absolutely miserably
@@fakename287 no the intention was to stay ahead of their competitors. They actively tried whatever measure they could to avoid anything that would compromise that.
They straight up did not inform anyone about the new IT system in their plane as that would've gotten in the way of them trying to minimise additional training required.
" . . . instead of re-engineerring the plane". Pretty much says it all.
Boeing came up with a workaround.
But author is actually wrong.
If they put engine higher than it was - it is closer to center of mass and pitch moment should be smaller.
BUT! The actual problem is not only on higher pitch moment (which is due to higher thrust - not engine height!) - but in wake turbulance behind much bigger engine on high AOA: it strikes right into stabilizer and impacts its performance badly, so they decided to "help pilot not to get on high AOA" and yep, pretend like there is nothing happend/changed.
So MCAS is the answer of bad plane behaviour on high AOA due to bigger engines that is also moved far away from wing - not to higher pitch moment.
Boeing just killed a whistleblower
Likely
You can not use a computer to compensate for a design flaw.
@@timotejkrajcovic Are you seriously comparing an equipment designed to take as much risk as possible to something that should be as safe as a bus?
nonsense
@@Johnny-dp5mu To whom are you referring?
@@Jen-Yueh_Hu response was directed to Marc; while I agree that air travel should be technically safe which it is -- far saver than driving your car around town or in the country -- I disagree with you that the 737max was engineered to take as much risk as possible -- that is 1000% wrongly thought and stated!!! however I respect your right to have your opinion even though facts will not support that opinion; all the very best and drive safe
@@Johnny-dp5mu My comment was referring to the fact that fighter jets are designed to take as much risk as possible. Furthermore, commercial planes are used at a far higher rate than military planes. Even if they have the same probability of failure, the occurrence of incidents would still be higher for the commercial plane, which is why commercial planes need to have a higher standard of safety than military planes.