GDR

AC says that they will retain Transat as a separate entity. I'm curious as to how that will work. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me not to merge Transat into Air Canada and operate them as part of AC Vacations. Another option I suppose would be to move some AC aircraft into Transat and move AC Vactions to Transat. Anybody have any insights regarding this?

That is disappointing as I think this aircraft is a huge opportunity for the company. The arrangement at the back of the Max is terrible and I can't quite conceive of how this could be worse.

Would you please take the link that you copied off my erroneous link out of your post. Thanks again for the correction. Greg

Here's another perspective: https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/08/article/a-kluge-too-far-boeing-makes-more-737-max-software-fixes/ Thanks BD. That should correct it. Greg

Here's a very interesting piece on Boeing. https://mattstoller.substack.com/p/the-coming-boeing-bailout

With the time that this is asking for what seems like a basic software fix makes me wonder if there isn't something in the overall design of the Max is basically flawed. Is it possible that the instability of the Max with its larger engines is going to preclude the aircraft coming back in service. Frankly, I doubt this is the case but I'm starting to wonder.

Didn't you have Alcock as an instructor at some point or other Kip?

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/transat-q2-profits-plunge-as-air-canada-takeover-talks-continue-1.1272829 Transat Q2 profits plunge as Air Canada takeover talks continue MONTREAL -- A Quebec developer seeking to outbid Air Canada with a takeover proposal for Transat AT Inc. says he will hand a formal offer to the tour operator before Transat's exclusive talks with Air Canada end on June 26. "We will file one, because they'e asking for one," Group Mach Inc. chief executive Vincent Chiara told The Canadian Press. "We don't have any obligation toward Air Canada to respect an agreement." Transat began exclusive talks with Air Canada on May 27 after the country's largest airline made a bid of $13 per share or about $520 million. Last week Mach announced in a press release a higher offer of $14 per share or $527.6-million, which includes trying to convince the Quebec government to finance nearly one-quarter of the purchase. Transat chief financial officer Denis Petrin said the company has "taken note of the press release" but has not received a formal proposal. "Should any further acquisition proposal be communicated to the company before or after the end of the exclusivity period, it will be addressed by our board of directors in consideration of their duties and obviously the agreement with Air Canada," Petrin said on a conference call with investors Thursday. Under its offer, Mach committed to keep Transat's head office, executive team and decision-making hub in Montreal -- all essential, it said, if the Montreal developer hopes to get the $120 million in financing it seeks from Quebec. Chiara, who told The Canadian Press he aims to continue Transat's current business operations -- with no layoffs or selloffs planned -- said Thursday he spoke with Quebec Economy Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon since his initial expression of interest June 4. Key to the deal would be proposed minority partner TM Grupo Inmobiliario, a Spanish real estate developer that would roll over its three hotels in Mexico to Transat, according to Chiara, who has criticized how Transat is handling its $750-million plan to develop a hotel chain in the Riviera Maya and the Caribbean. TM would contribute about $15 million in cash in exchange for a minority equity stake in Transat after the proposed agreement closed, Mach said. That would cover the $15-million break fee -- built into the Air Canada arrangement -- that Transat would incur by accepting the higher bid. "While the due diligence resulting from the letter of intent signed with Air Canada is also underway, we remain focused on achieving the improvements set out in our strategic plan," Transat chief executive Jean-Marc Eustache said in a statement. The company continues to face fiscal challenges. It said fuel prices and exchange rates contributed to a drop in year-over-year profits last quarter, which nonetheless beat analysts' expectations amid higher revenues.\ Net income attributable to shareholders fell 71 per cent to $2.27 million in the quarter ended April 30, down from $7.94 million in the same quarter last year, the company said. On an adjusted basis, Transat lost $6.31 million or 17 cents per share for the quarter compared with an adjusted loss of $456,000 or one cent per share during the same period in 2018. That beat analysts' expectations of a loss of 23 cents per share, according to Thomson Reuters Eikon. Revenue rose more than three per cent to $897.4 million from $867.2 million. The Montreal-based company said aircraft fuel costs rose nearly 12 per cent year over year last quarter to $118.9 million. Transat offers vacation packages, hotel stays and air travel under the Transat and Air Transat brands to some 60 destinations in more than 25 countries in the Americas and Europe.

AEF is my go to sight to find out information on events concerning aviation. I'm now long retired from a profession which I loved and this site keeps me in touch with that profession. Moderating is a largely thankless job and maybe this thread should be about showing that we are thankful for the job that is being done even if once every few years an inadvertent mistake is made. Greg

Another take on it. It looks like the functionality of the stab switches was altered with the Max. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-11/boeing-dangerously-altered-mcas-toggle-switches-737-max-deadly-crashes Boeing Altered Critical MCAS Toggle Switches On 737 MAX Before Deadly Crashes When Boeing transitioned from the 737 NG model to the 737 MAX, designers altered a toggle switch panel that could have prevented both of the deadly crashes over the last year in Ethiopia and Indonesia, killing a combined 346 people, according to an investigation by the Seattle Times. On the 737 NG, the right switch was labeled "AUTO PILOT" - and allowed pilots to deactivate the plane's automated stabilizer controls, such as the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), suspected to be the culprit in both crashes. The left toggle switch on the NG would deactivate the buttons on the yoke which pilots regularly use to control the horizontal stabilizer. On the 737 MAX, however, the two switches were altered to perform the same function, according to internal documents reviewed by the Times, so that they would disable all electronic stabilizer controls - including the MCAS and the thumb buttons on the yoke used to control the stabilizer. (Dimas Ardian / Bloomberg) Former Boeing flight-controls engineer Peter Lemme, a harsh critic of the MAX design, first raised questions over the switch alteration on his blog, and says he doesn't understand why Boeing made the change. Boeing told the Times that they had historically called for pilots to flip both switches to disable a problematic or "runaway" stabilizer, so the button change matched that procedure, adding that the two switches "were retained for commonality of the crew interface." "Boeing strongly disagrees with any speculation or suggestion that pilots should deviate from these long-established and trained safety procedures," the company added. During the October Lion Air flight, pilots were reportedly unaware of the MCAS system - while the day before, an off-duty pilot with knowledge of the stabilizer controls helped pilots disable the system on the same plane. Data from the flight revealed that the repeated commands from the MCAS system sent the flight from Bali to Jakarta plummeting into the sea. After they were able to manually control the stabilizer, the Ethiopian Airlines pilots appear to have flipped the cutoff switches back on, reactivating the MCAS system. Shortly after, it entered a fatal nosedive which killed all 157 people aboard. "When you’re pulling on the column with 80-100 pounds of force trying to save your life, your troubleshooting techniques are very weak," said aviation consultant Doug Moss. "You need some gut-level instinctive things to do to solve the problem." Notably, the FAA did not notify pilots that the functionality of the switches had been altered, simply noting in its documentation the labeling change "Stab Trim cutout switches panel nomenclature."

I'm not so sure in this case Don. Everybody who I run into and knows that I flew ask me about the 737 Max. (Thanks to what you and others have posted on this forum I can fool them into thinking that I know what I'm talking about.) I don't know if there has ever been as much wide spread negativity about a specific aircraft before. I think it's going to take a while before the flying public forgets about this.

Thanks Don I sure admire how you have kept up with the technical aspects of our profession. I did kinda wonder about a soft ware designer,s acumen in all of this. I sure wish we had stuck with, what I understand to be the original plan, the Neo. I guess Boeing made an offer we couldn't refuse. I'm heading over today to your neck of the woods to spend Easter with my son and his family including two new great grand-kids. I'm no longer a relative but an ancestor. Thanks again Don Greg

The things that I found interesting was that, assuming he is correct, I hadn't realized thrust line had changed that much. Also I also thought that some of his comments on Boeing's philosophy were interesting.

Came across this article and found it informative and interesting. https://spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/how-the-boeing-737-max-disaster-looks-to-a-software-developer

Can someone tell me if the the cut out switches are only on the Max or did previous generations of 737's have something similar.