737 Max Updates and Cancellations


Recommended Posts

As suspected, every hiccup, no matter how minor,  will be reported by the media.

WestJet halts Boeing 737 Max jet before takeoff after warning light in cockpit

 

Plane has already been serviced and is ready to go, says airline

CBC News · Posted: Jan 22, 2021 3:34 PM ET | Last Updated: 20 minutes ago
 
westjet-max-debut-20210121.jpg
A WestJet flight from Calgary to Toronto was cancelled on Friday when a warning light came on in the cockpit. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)

WestJet temporarily grounded a Boeing 737 Max jet that was supposed to fly from Calgary to Toronto on Friday after a warning light came on in the cockpit prior to takeoff.

Flight 658 was boarded and preparing to take off when a warning light came on.

 

"After a normal engine start, a standard function of the health monitoring system indicated a potential fault that needed to be verified and reset," WestJet spokeperson Lauren Stewart told CBC News.

"This process takes time and requires a subsequent engine run, which we do not perform with guests on board [so] in the interest of our guests' time, we cancelled Flight 658 and its return 665 (Toronto/Calgary), and we rebooked them on the next available flight to ensure a timely arrival in Toronto."

The airline says passengers were boarded onto a 787 jet and flew as planned within the hour. 

The jet in question has already been cleared and is on track for its next flight on Sunday.

The Calgary-based airline's fleet of Max jets were grounded for almost two years until earlier this month, when flight authorities cleared the jets for takeoff again.

The flight would have been only the third passenger flight at WestJet in the Max jets since the plane was approved for use again.

More to come

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 614
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Who cares how Southwest  feels.  They got what they demanded,  they get what they deserve. 

14,000 Words Of "Blame The Pilots" That Whitewash Boeing Of 737 MAX Failure The New York Times Magazine just published a 14,000 words piece about the Boeing 737 MAX accidents. It is headlined:

I'm genuinely curious on how they conduct these sim exercises. Having test pilots or FAA inspectors doing the flying isn't a proper assessment in my view.  It's like having a biased jury in a local tr

Posted Images

But the point is....you are trying to assure the public that an aircraft type is safe. It presumably has been gone over with a fine tooth comb.

Warning lights are not supposed to activate in the absence of a fault. If there is no fault, there is an electrical issue including the possibility of a defective sender.

Swap out the sensor/sender and all is well? Why did that sensor fail? 

To say; "All is well" is, in my opinion, too simple and cavalier a response.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

But the point is....you are trying to assure the public that an aircraft type is safe. It presumably has been gone over with a fine tooth comb.

Warning lights are not supposed to activate in the absence of a fault. If there is no fault, there is an electrical issue including the possibility of a defective sender.

Swap out the sensor/sender and all is well? Why did that sensor fail? 

To say; "All is well" is, in my opinion, too simple and cavalier a response.

This kind of thing happens when aircraft have been idle for long periods of time and while irritating is not really unexpected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Warning and caution lights illuminating are not unique to aircraft that have sat idle.  They can illuminate at anytime.  Light comes on, follow the checklist, talk to maintenance and go or no-go depending on the outcome.

Not really news-worthy.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vanishing point said:

Warning and caution lights illuminating are not unique to aircraft that have sat idle.  They can illuminate at anytime.  Light comes on, follow the checklist, talk to maintenance and go or no-go depending on the outcome.

Not really news-worthy.

Another fear mongering story from the media.

This is closer to a CTRL-ALT-DELETE in many cases, not even worthy of the check engine light on the car.

The lack of investigation from the media these days is enuf to make me vomit. There is nothing and I mean nothing to be gained from reporting this. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, AIP said:

Another fear mongering story from the media.

This is closer to a CTRL-ALT-DELETE in many cases, not even worthy of the check engine light on the car.

The lack of investigation from the media these days is enuf to make me vomit. There is nothing and I mean nothing to be gained from reporting this. 

Sadly there is, it is called "READERSHIP".   

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AIP said:

 

The lack of investigation from the media these days is enuf to make me vomit. There is nothing and I mean nothing to be gained from reporting this. 

These days?  When I understand the issue and the media is so far off, It has always made me wonder how accurate our media really is. 

On the flip side, I watched a Peter Mansbridge interview when he retired.  He was asked what his biggest regret on a story was. It was aviation related. He pointed out we won’t say much, if anything.  We might say we will have to wait for the accident report next year.  

That doesn’t work for someone working on a story with a three day life expectancy.  If I remember correctly he found an expert that later turned out to have less than stellar credentials.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, guys.....I repeat my comment about cavalier responses to warning sensors. I acknowledge readily that lack of use can result in "issues"....but they remain issues.

My wife was driving to work the other day when a number of warning lights came on including "check engine". I was reminded of a "Big Bang" episode when Sheldon got upset because Penny attached no significance to an engine warning light.....just before the car died.

I asked my wife to pull off the road and check oil. She did....ok. I called "resource" and was told okay to drive to work but.....Then time permitting, ran diagnostics. Defective sender rear wheel. Point is...there is a purpose for the existence of the senders and warning lights and they must be respected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amplifire To Launch New MAX 737 Return to Service Course

BOULDER, Colo., Jan. 25, 2021 /CNW/ — Amplifire is proud to announce it has worked with Canadian airline WestJet to develop a B737 MAX Return to Service course. The course will be used as a part of the training to help pilots prepare for the MAX return to Canadian skies. It is being distributed to WestJet pilots between December 2020 and March 2021.

WestJet_Image_3.jpg?p=publish&w=950 (PRNewsfoto/Amplifire)

The new course consists of two modules; one on Ground Operations and the other on Flight Operations which focus on the recent changes to the MCAS function. The Amplifire course is layered in between Boeing’s CBT modules and learning literature to act as a knowledge check and provide evidence of learning. Once pilots have mastered the course, they will receive simulator training to put their knowledge into practice and demonstrate proficiency. 

“Utilization of the Amplifire software tool provides user training using unique brain science-based learning and is a powerful tool for Evidence Based Training (EBT) that will use actual WestJet Pilot data to help Flight Operations shape dedicated areas of focus,” said Jimmy Dean Porter, WestJet’s Chief Pilot and co-developer of the course.

Built on the latest cognitive science principles, the platform’s algorithms adapt to fill each individual’s unique learning needs. Learner analytics provide valuable managerial insights into learner progress, mastery, struggle, and precision guidance for personalized coaching.

“We are honored to work with WestJet in deploying this course,” said Dan Morley, VP of Amplifire. “The platform is another tool that ensures the safety of WestJet’s guests and crews as they return their MAX aircraft to service.”

 “The work by Transport Canada and other independent regulators around the globe, in combination with our own preparation, processes and due diligence, gives us confidence in safely returning these aircraft to service,” continued Porter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, UpperDeck said:

Well, guys.....I repeat my comment about cavalier responses to warning sensors. I acknowledge readily that lack of use can result in "issues"....but they remain issues.

My wife was driving to work the other day when a number of warning lights came on including "check engine". I was reminded of a "Big Bang" episode when Sheldon got upset because Penny attached no significance to an engine warning light.....just before the car died.

I asked my wife to pull off the road and check oil. She did....ok. I called "resource" and was told okay to drive to work but.....Then time permitting, ran diagnostics. Defective sender rear wheel. Point is...there is a purpose for the existence of the senders and warning lights and they must be respected.

One should be aware of the purpose of and what is being conveyed to a warning light.

Your example of the check engine light is a good example.

If the check engine light comes on STEADY.  you are ok to operate the vehicle as normal but avoid hard acceleration and undue stress on the engine.  Have engine diagnosed when possible.

If the light is FLASHING.  Pull over immediately  and stop the vehicle.  have the vehicle diagnosed and repaired.

Same light two functions, two failure modes.

In the Cockpit when a light comes on, the number one reaction should be that the sensor has found a fault and something is wrong.  Shut her down and diagnose the issue.  PERIOD.

Too many times of my 30+ years have I seen the "Oh its just a sensor fault"  Really?  Prove it.  The only way to prove it is to do the procedure required to validate the fault.  anything else is cutting corners.

When the light comes on, you do the steps. PERIOD.

Yes we all get to know our respective planes quirks and know when it may be a bad sensor but we still go through the process, delay be damned.

/end rant

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't make the point very well apparently.

1000% the crew here did the right thing, as any of us would do, went back, had it investigated and cleared/fixed.

The point was that this was irresponsible of the media to consider this a story. sensationalism at best. More like fear mongering. Nothing new there.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

Boeing suffers massive $11.9 billion loss in 2020, largest in its history

Jan. 27, 2021 at 4:45 am Updated Jan. 27, 2021 at 6:08 am
 
 
Boeing 787s in various stages of completion in Everett. This final assembly line will close by March, when Boeing consolidates 787 production in South Carolina. (Mike Siegel / The Seattle Times, file)
 
 
 
1 of 2 | Boeing 787s in various stages of completion in Everett. This final assembly line will close by March, when Boeing... (Mike Siegel / The Seattle Times, file) More

Dominic Gates
By
Seattle Times aerospace reporter

Hit both by the grounding of the 737 MAX and the global pandemic that paralyzed its airline customers, Boeing suffered a massive net loss last year of $11.9 billion, the largest in its history.

In a message to employees Wednesday morning, chief executive Dave Calhoun called 2020 “a year of profound societal and global disruption, which significantly impacted our industry.”

The loss was amplified by a $6.5 billion write-off on the 777X program.

And the company reported $1.8 billion in additional accounting charges, including write-offs for the 737 MAX, the KC-46 Air Force tanker and the recent settlement of fraud charges with the Department of Justice, financial filings released Wednesday show.

A big setback for 777X

The giant 777X jet flew for the first time almost exactly a year ago and is being flight tested. Its entry into service is delayed two years into 2023, and its market has evaporated for the immediate future as the global pandemic left long-haul international passenger traffic nearly gone.

The large international carriers that ordered it are all in trouble and no longer want to take delivery for some years.

In addition, the botched certification of the 737 MAX ensures that regulators worldwide will take a prolonged and painstaking look at the 777X before they approve it to fly.

Boeing’s financial filing Wednesday notes that an updated assessment that the 777X will take longer to certify is “based on ongoing communication with civil aviation authorities” around the world.

Still, while some analysts had anticipated a possible write-off on the 787 Dreamliner program as it struggles with quality defects in production — the fourth quarter showed no such charge — the huge write-off on 777X came as a surprise to the market.

Calhoun told employees the 777X charge reflects “an updated assessment of global certification requirements, our latest assessment of COVID-19 impacts on market demand, and discussions with customers with respect to aircraft delivery timing.”

“We remain confident in the 777X,” he added.

Boeing also took a $744 million charge on the deferred prosecution agreement reached with the Department of Justice to allow it to escape a conviction on criminal fraud during certification of the 737 MAX.

This settlement consisted of a $244 million penalty for the criminal conduct plus $500 million to be set aside as additional compensation to the families of the 346 people who died in two MAX crashes.

In the final quarter of the year, Boeing also added a charge of $468 million for abnormal production costs on the 737 MAX stemming from the jet’s grounding. This is part of Boeing’s previous estimates of the cost of the MAX grounding, not in addition.

And the troubled KC-46 tanker program added a write-off of $275 million “primarily due to production inefficiencies including impacts of COVID-19 disruption,” Boeing said.

Finally, Boeing’s aftermarket service division — which for example provides spare parts and flight-operations support to airline customers — recorded a charge of $290 million driven by the impact to its markets of COVID-19.

 

In the fourth quarter, with a total of $8.3 billion in write-offs, Boeing had a net loss of $8.4 billion, or $14.65 per share, on revenue of $15.3 billion.

For the full year in 2020, the company showed a net loss of $11.94 billion, or $20.88 per share, on revenue of $58.2 billion.

During the quarter, Boeing’s cash on hand fell by $1.5 billion to $25.6 billion. And its debt swelled by $2.6 billion to $63.6 billion.

In consequence, Boeing’s net debt — its total debt minus its cash on hand — grew by $5 billion in the quarter to $38 billion.

A key metric that investors watch is Free Cash Flow (FCF), which is the cash generated by the business minus expenditure on plant and equipment. Boeing reported FCF at negative $4.3 billion for the fourth quarter and negative $20 billion for the full year.

The MAX is cleared to fly in Europe

On a day of historically bad financial news, Boeing got one solitary lift: as telegraphed earlier this week, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) approved the return to service of the upgraded Boeing 737 MAX.

“Following extensive analysis by EASA, we have determined that the 737 MAX can safely return to service,” said EASA executive director Patrick Ky in a statement. He added that this assessment was carried out in full independence from Boeing and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

EASA has demanded that Boeing make some additional design modifications within the next few years to address certain weaknesses in the MAX’s inherited avionics systems — including adding a third measure of the plane’s Angle of Attack, which the FAA did not require.

“At our insistence, Boeing has also committed to work to enhance the aircraft still further in the medium term, in order to reach an even higher level of safety,” Ky said.

The FAA and the aviation regulators of Canada and Brazil had earlier cleared the MAX to fly passengers again.

These four are the major aviation safety authorities from the countries that manufacture commercial jet planes in the West. Boeing must still await approval from other countries, particularly China, the world’s largest aviation market.

 
Dominic Gates: 206-464-2963 or dgates@seattletimes.com; on Twitter: @dominicgates.

 

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-suffered-a-massive-11-9-billion-loss-in-2020-the-largest-in-its-history/?utm_source=marketingcloud&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=BNA_012721130107+BREAKING+Boeing+suffers+a+massive+%2411.9+billion+loss+in+2020%2c+the+largest+in+its+hi_1_27_2021&utm_term=Active subscriber

Link to post
Share on other sites

Southwest Plans 737 MAX Return For Mid-March

AD

Southwest Airlines has today joined the throng of airlines reporting their earnings for 2020. The carrier posted a loss of $3.1 billion for the whole of 2020, $761 million of which was accrued in the fourth quarter. Nevertheless, Southwest has firmed up the date for the return of its beleaguered MAX aircraft, and will begin revenue service on March 11th.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

FAA Tracking All 737 Max Flights Around World With Satellites

From BNN Bloomberg – link to source story

Alan Levin, Bloomberg News | 19 February 2021

A Boeing Co. 737 max aircraft performs a flying display on the second day of the Farnborough International Airshow 2016 in Farnborough, U.K., on Tuesday, July 12, 2016. A Boeing Co. 737 max aircraft performs a flying display on the second day of the Farnborough International Airshow 2016 in Farnborough, U.K., on Tuesday, July 12, 2016. , Photographer: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg

(Bloomberg) — All Boeing Co. 737 Max flights around the world are being tracked by U.S. regulators who are keeping watch on the plane after its 20-month grounding.

The Federal Aviation Administration is using a network of satellites capable of tracking planes in even the most remote regions as if they were under surveillance by local radars, according to the agency. The data is being provided by Virginia-based Aireon LLC, the FAA said in an emailed statement on Friday.

Aireon, which reached an agreement in November to provide the FAA with expanded flight data, is tracking Max flights for unusual events, such as rapid descents, said Vincent Capezzuto, the company’s chief technology officer. The monitoring began Jan. 29, Capezzuto said during a Feb. 12 webinar hosted by Aviation Week.

“Recently, we engaged with them on a 737 Max monitor,” he said. “You can literally monitor it on a situational awareness display.”

If any unusual events occur on the plane, “safety engineers and inspectors will use the early notification to further analyze the incident,” the FAA said.

The Max was grounded worldwide in March 2019 after a second fatal crash in less than five months. The two incidents caused the deaths of 346 people. The FAA required extensive redesigns of the plane’s flight-control systems. Other regulators, such as the European Aviation Safety Agency, have also begun lifting the flight ban.

Aireon was formed in 2012 by Iridium Communications Inc. and Nav Canada, a nonprofit company that guides air traffic in Canada. A constellation of 66 satellites monitor radio beacons from aircraft, providing tracking data that is equivalent to existing ground stations.

The system is helping nations including Canada and the U.K. track planes over the ocean.

Within weeks of the Aireon system going live, its data was used by U.S. officials, before they’d entered into an agreement with the company, to justify grounding the Max after other nations had done so. The Ethiopian Airlines jet that crashed March 10, 2019, wasn’t tracked by local radar, but the Aireon system showed its flight path in detail.

©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mods, delete this as OT if need be, but there is a really large part of me that simply fails and maybe even rejects the capacity to comprehend the vast difference in a single countrys' responses to 346 fatalities and almost half-a-million fatalities. I simply don't know where to put these two blunt realities and the human toll of both.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don, I think this topic merits it another thread all of its own but I will make an initial, off the cuff comment.  I think the first tragedy hinges around corporate values and liability, the image of a company and the damage that image has received.  The other works around various facets of a national belief system and the values it places on societal responsibility and a host of other limiting dogmas.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Floyd - another thread certainly, & yes, understand both phenomena and how they both "explain", but the underpinnings, the "unsaid" of & within a culture or even a society "normalizes" one and reacts strongly to another. Anyway, I don't wish it pursued here but I was suddenly struck by the notion as I considered how the families left behind by both "events" answer the question.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.