The real reason Boeing’s new plane crashed twice

The real reason Boeing’s new plane crashed twice

This is an airplane engine. It’s sitting in a field in Bishoftu, Ethiopia—
part of the wreckage of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302, which crashed on March 10, 2019. 157 people died. This was just a few months after another flight,
Lion Air 610, crashed in Indonesia and killed 189 people. These two flights were operating the same
plane: The Boeing 737 MAX 8. And its engine is the key to understanding
why this particular plane has caused so many problems. But there’s nothing actually wrong with this
engine. In fact, airplane manufacturers raced to put
them on their new planes. That’s where the problem started. The two biggest airplane manufacturers in
the world are Airbus and Boeing. And they have a fierce rivalry. If one of them can offer a better plane, the
other could lose a lot of money. That’s exactly what was about to happen in
2010. Airbus announced that they would update their
most popular model, the A320, a single-aisle airplane that services many domestic flights. You’ve probably been on one. For this new plane, Airbus had a big update. It would have a new kind of engine. It was much larger than the previous engine, but it would make the plane 15 percent
more fuel efficient. And just as importantly, this upgrade wouldn’t
change the plane that much. A pilot could walk into the new model, with
little additional training, and be on their way. It was called the A320 NEO, and it would save
airlines a lot of money. This was a problem for Boeing. To compete with Airbus, Boeing’s obvious move
was to upgrade the engine on their single-aisle plane, the 737. But there was one issue. Here’s a sketch of the 737 next to the Airbus
A320. Notice how the 737 is lower to the ground
than the A320. This meant Airbus could slide a new engine
under the wing of their A320. But there wasn’t enough room under the wing
of the Boeing 737. But a few months later, Boeing’s product development
head had big news. He said: “We figured out a way to get a big
enough engine under the wing.” Their solution was to move up the engine on
the wing, so that it would be slightly higher and it would fit on their 737s. Here’s a promotional video of that updated
737 in the air. You can actually see that the top of the engine
is above the wing. Boeing called this model the 737 MAX. And just like Airbus with the A320, Boeing
said their new plane was so similar to its predecessor that pilots would only need minimal
additional training. The 737 MAX became the hottest selling plane
on the market. And it helped Boeing keep up with AirBus. Except, moving the engine up on the 737
had a side effect. When the 737 MAX was in full thrust, like
during takeoff, the nose tended to point too far upward, which could lead to a stall. This was a problem, because these planes were
supposed to behave exactly like the old ones. So Boeing came up with a workaround. Instead of re-engineering the plane, they
installed software that automatically pushed the nose downward if the pilot flew the plane
at too high of an angle. They called it the Maneuvering Characteristics
Augmentation System, or MCAS. But because Boeing was selling the 737 MAX
as pretty much the same plane as the 737, they didn’t highlight the new MCAS system. Many pilots only got a two-hour iPad course
before entering the cockpit for the first time. And the “training material did not mention”
the MCAS software. In 2018, several American pilots complained
to the federal government that the 737 MAX was “suddenly nosing down.” On October 29, 2018, Lion Air Flight 610 took
off from Jakarta. In the flight report, which shows the plane’s
altitude over time, you can see that the plane was in full thrust during takeoff. But at a certain point, the nose of the plane
kept lurching downward. The pilots couldn’t figure out why this was
happening. The captain “asked the first officer to check
the quick reference handbook.” They couldn’t find the solution. The pilots continued to fight with the MCAS. The plane struggled to gain altitude. Reports show it was likely because the computer
was getting incorrect sensor data, pushing the plane toward the earth below. 12 minutes after takeoff, the plane crashed
into the Java Sea. In the Ethiopia crash, the report shows that
the pilots were actually able to disable the MCAS, but it was too late to overcome the
malfunctioning MCAS sensors. For now, nearly every 737 MAX 8 in service
has been grounded. And the Federal Aviation Administration is
facing scrutiny over how they rushed this plane through certification. Boeing’s response has been to apply a software
update and make the MCAS “less aggressive,” while also saying they’ll increase pilot training
on how to turn it off. This problem started with a company’s race
to compete with its rival. It pushed them to pretend like their new plane
behaved exactly like their old one. Even when it didn’t.

100 Replies to “The real reason Boeing’s new plane crashed twice

  1. An app, basically … they used an app. This is not a RC plane, these are lives … hundreds of lives. Let's just see if anyone at all goes to jail.

  2. panorama BBC (best broadcaster in the world!) did a great documentary on this but I don't live UK so I can't upload it ? anyone able to do that ?

  3. Yeah when i heard the news of lion air (because i live in jakarta) i thought it was good and its show crash to the sea and thats why i fear of lion air when using Boeing

  4. So now the business, the money is more important than human lives. Shame on you Boeing. Just to compete with your rival, you rolled out an unstable technology that resulted in tremendous human loss. Disgusting!!

  5. Lets do the math oh how capitalist thinks, keep in mind that this is in no way shape or form factual, this is just satire.

    AirPlane sells at 121milj dollars, with ofc discount, so lets round up the plain cost to 100milj for sake of ease.
    Manufacturing costs should be around 50% of the price so we end up of profit of 50milj per plane
    Development costs lets say 5000milj or 5bilj.
    Plane sold +350 unites

    50milj * 350 = 17500milj or 17,5bilj of profits
    17,5bilj – 5bilj = 12,5bilj in profits

    victims 350, each family gaining +800k which will be 280milj in loses

    Airplane being grounded on airports estimated cost 6bilj in total to various companies (local newspaper count).

    12,5bilj – 280milj – 6bilj = 6,22bilj in profits

    So after all the s**t storm Boeing made a killing, pun intended.

  6. It is sheer folley to keep producing an aircraft with known (and unknown) faults. If the max needs hardware changes (which I suspect it might, given that we are fast approaching September and the "software fix" updates have gone very quiet), boeing would have alot of work to do retro fitting all the parked up planes. It may not even be financially viable or physically possible to re-engineer the max, what would boeing do then? It's a little late to start designing a new plane. Would they approach Airbus and build the Neo under licence in a new era of "collaboration"?

  7. Okay so why dont they increase the height of the plane instead to make room for the engine ? The fix isnt that amazing honestly.

  8. How did Boeing manage to escape unscathed? I havent seen any news that says boeing is getting punished for this. Correct me if I am wrong.

  9. Even 737 max changes name who want to test flight with new MCAS? No one wants to be the passenger anymore? should be totally abandoned,never be operated again.grounded forever.

  10. They wouldn't have sent the aircraft out if they didn't think it was ready. Even if for no other reason than that crashes are bad for business. Problem was they were wrong and the FAA apparently didn't catch it either. I'm confident the ensuing lawsuits and loss of money will ensure they will reassess their methods.

  11. If these ever take off again, it will only be in the US. No way European regulators will let this disgusting mistake fly again. As opposed to the Yanks, our regulators and watchdogs are not in the pocket of the very people they need to hold to account.

  12. Lives, mums, dads, teenagers, children, babies, elderly, PEOPLES LIVES < business competition for the sake of being better than a competitor everywhere despite their optimum markets being different

  13. the problem is not about the change to compete.but the lack of test flight for the boeing pilot to know about the side effect of the change.

  14. Ah, their solution: add more complexity with yet ANOTHER computer to figure out how to correct an inherent imbalance. Yep, that should work. Until it doesn't.

    Max 8 is toast. Even if the airlines and the pilots grin and bear it, the flying public won't. Bad juju.

  15. Boeing Murdered Almost 500 people in two crashes people lost their loved once and Boeing has done nothing much to help their families IATA has to take action and they have to be answerable

  16. It’s so frustrating because the people who’s lives were taken and their families will never get compensation and nobody will ever take the blame for it so it’s like the crashes happened just because it happened

  17. This plane should never fly. Why you say?. This plane is non-air airworthy in design. It can not fly as designed. And must have the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System too fly.

  18. The designer's thought we will make this non- flight worthy plane. flyable with a computer program to to compensate for its air unworthiness.

  19. Shame on you boeing i was a big fan of your 737's and now you do this guess il never go in a 737 goos thing my next flight is 767

  20. Sorta seems like the certification process should start with: 'Does it fly normal if humans are controlling it manually?' then move on to 'Cool, what software do you have to make the humans job less boring and error prone?'

  21. The switching off of MCAS does not add too much to safety, quite the opposite?!?!… while MCAS is working incorrectly. The plane is becoming unstable without MCAS because of its engines are placed too high. It is a trap which Boeing prepared for the pilots. They knew this from the beginning as they already received complains from pilots before first and second crashes. Let us see if justice is applied to highest placed officials the same way as to ordinary people. It is a mass killing for money. Boeing intentionally killed hundreds of people to gain more money…

  22. Air bus and the airlines are as bad – Airlines stop training pilots on how to pilot the planes manually and the MCAS on the airbus nearly cause s fatal accident on a Quantas fly

  23. Pilot : "Lets fly" ?
    Mcas: "im in bad mood, i think not this time" ?
    Pilot : "ahaha not funny!! Cmon" ?
    Mcas: "no, im serious!!" ?

  24. A total integrity failure, brought about through those responsible at Boeing being inexpert in aviation matters and failing to understand what piloting an aircraft demands.

    It does not demand software that removes any part of control from the pilot beyond simple assistance when demanded by the pilot and that assistance under his/her full control at all times!

    The Boeing company, the engineers and managers concerned should be summoned to a court hearing and prosecuted for manslaughter (negligent homicide I believe in the USA).

  25. Look does no one get your self hating. Boeing is a top job here. My husband is an engineer there. I know they do care that everything is perfect. If we buy American and build America there is no competition. Your so black and white. Like gelette. All you did was distroy American jobs and loose billions to china. Why dont you think for one minute.

  26. I wish I could go back in time and record all the high fives and and booyahs that went around the executive board room at Boeing when Mr. Bair, head of product development, announced: "Nah all the engineers are wrong, we can slap another engine on these puppies no problem! Don't worry about what some underling with some kind of degree says…"

  27. It is like a car relying solely on its ESP to not roll over in sharp turns. (Like the first ever made Mercedes A-Class).

  28. Undereducated pilots, in countries infamously known to rush pilot training. Blame Boeing? Don't be ridiculous..

    Indonesia is 9th place in amounts of airline accidents, amongst countries with a hundred times the amount of flights per year. (USA, Russia, Brazil and Canada)

    They kept sharply trying to correct the MCAS, while at FULL THROTTLE.

    It's desirable to let the engines stabilise at a moderate power setting, with the N1 equalised there, before advancing them to TOGA thrust. This is common practice, the fact that they went full throttle shows their lack of competence. Something bad was bound to happen, if not with the MCAS, it would probably nosedive, raise or just straight up stall in one of their many flights.

    Good job on you Boeing for taking responsibility for the accidents, though they can hardly be blamed on you.

  29. How do you exclude the most significant change in a how to operate airplane tutorial?!? It literally just killed over 300 people!! This is a crime!!!

  30. People Vs. Profits most times people lose out & profits vs safety wins until enough people are injured or killed had the first flight crash of the 737-Max been American's or white Europeans the planes may have been grounded faster .

  31. Scary when manufacturers put profit before people. Plus computers are doing far too much now. Pray for the victims.

  32. Y’all need to chill tf out. I know we all are worried but here are some things: Boeing planes are safe other than this one aircraft. I think they grounded all the 737 planes. Flying is safer than driving. Anything else to put on this list? Please comment below thank you for coming to my ted talk

  33. Flying unstable planes is always possible, you do not convert a warning system into a fly by wire system.A warning system a sensor and a buzzer, a fly by wire system many sensors cross checking each other for errors,

  34. Based on reports and whistleblower's testimonies Boeing had problems with design , safety and quality issues (dreamliner, 737 max), im just a bit aghast with some misplaced patriotism by some people here for insisting that Boeing can still be trusted . IF ITS BOEING IM NOT GOING!

  35. Oof, "plane" is not really a professional term. Aircraft, or airplane is.
    I'm not saying you can't ever say plane.
    But, not once was "aircraft" said, and rarely was "airplane".

  36. Some one at Boeing knew there was probability of this happening, they also knew they were up for a large bonus

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *