IADCAflyer

AA will probably start thinking about delaying further MD80 retirements for a bit.....

cmd320

That was also more than 50 years ago. Crashes were a bit more common back then.

IADCAflyer

No question it was long ago, but the question was asked without qualification, and responded to. The fact of the matter is that the ground near Bishoftu is still smoldering yet certain posters have already ascribed the crash to a design flaw.

Tilto007

5 crashes with no apparent explanation??Did I say design flaw??You should really not be drinking this early in the AM.All I said was I would not be flying this aircraft for now.

JetAway

Public opinion isn't a court of law and many won't base their decision to avoid this aircraft going forward based on "proof."

DrunkenDuck

aj411

worse yet. AA has made this the only aircraft between certain destinations (Like MIA Quito where I'm flying in May). In that case, in future customer will not only avoid the plane but the airline altogether if that is their only choice of aircraft. Now that would be very bad for business
AJ

chix

JDiver

The new 737 MAX flight control system has been implicated, and a number of pilots (AA and WN, though the UA pilot union has taken a contrarian position) have expressed concern about Boeing made significant changes in the automated flight control system, which “takes over” in extreme flight conditions - but can also be disconnected by the pilots so they can “hand fly” the aircraft - and those changes had not been disclosed to pilots.

Pilots are understandably a finicky lot who want to know everything about their aircraft and want to always have the option to have full control.

Link to good Seattle Times article, Dispute arises among U.S. pilots on Boeing 737 MAX system linked to Lion Air crash, Updated November 17, 2018 at 4:29 pm.

I’ve been flying since the 1940s, and it has been my personal policy to not fly a brand new aircraft type. Examples:

De Havilland DH-106 Comet I, the world’s first commercial jet aircraft. The early Comets has a fatal design failure causing unpredicted fuselage fatigue causing them to break up at altitude. After the fix, I flew in quite a few DH-106 Comet IVs.

Lockheed L-188 Electra. The early Electra, the first large commercial turboprop transport designed in America (I flew on a number of Vickers Viscounts) had an undetected design defect, wherein at a certain velocity and I ration frequency of engines in loosened mounts caused “whirl mode”, causing the wings to separate mid flight. I’ve flown in many Electras once the fix went in.

Boeing 747. The early 747-100s were unreliable and underpowered. A deceased friend of mine actually lost all four engines on a PA 747-121 over the U.K. and was able to bring it in to a safe landing (but passengers had to be bussed from the RAF base they landed at to London). Glamor be canned, I didn’t fly these for some years. Maybe my first was an Iberia 747-200 in the 1970s, and I’ve flown in many 747 models (the 747SP is my all time favorite, and so few passenger airlines fly the 747-8 I doubt I’ll ever fly in one.)

McDonnell Douglas DC-10. This revolutionary three engine aircraft had two major design deficiencies. The redundant control systems were adjacent to each other, and the baggage door was rigged in such a way ground crew sometimes failed to fully secure the hatch, which allowed an unsecured hatch to blow out and cause sudden decompression and collapse of the floor and cable ducting. I flew in many DC-10s after the fix was made to the baggage hatch. (I flew in a number of Lockheed L-1011 aircraft, arguably a more advanced and safer aircraft but held back from the market by both initial overweight design errors and its deficient Rolls Royce engines - the DC-10 middle engine pod allowed easier adaptation to other, more advanced engines use as well.)

Airbus A380. Another revolutionary design first delivered in 2007 to SQ. I didn’t fly in this one for several years, either.

Boeing 787 Dreamliner. The Dreamliner is a radical aircraft with the airframe made primarily with carbon composites. I finally flew in 787-8 and 787-9 last year, nine years after the original Dreamliner flew and seven years after FAA certification. After the carbon composite aircraft proved its worth, the flaws of the lithium ion battery system in the aft fuselage crown and Rolls Royce Trent 1000 engines came to light and were addressed. (I’m glad AA bought the GEnx engine variants, but I have flown in remediated BA 787-9.)

I’ve avoided the Oasis 737-800 for other reasons, though they’ll be impossible to avoid soon enough. It was the early Oasis birds modified by ATS at KPAE that demonstrated shoddy workmanship allowing improperly fastened and loose Space bins - and particularly the faulty wiring routing. I well remember the total loss of Swissair 111. (IMO, some fines and remediation need to be levied against ATS and some firings need to occur - including supervisors and inspection crew, and possibly managers who reasonably should have known what was going on. Possibly at AA as well. Two aircraft are two too many, and I doubt we will ever know if other faulty Oasis related installations have been or will be uncovered by AA.

As a onetime pilot and from an airline-owning family, I’m deeply conservative about flying in brand new aircraft with radical design variations from proven aircraft. I have personally lost friends and family members in aircraft accidents (all were caused by human factors, the commercial flights were LANSA 502 and PSA 182. (I think in the modern era and what I’ve flown, the Comet and Dreamliner are the most “different” and radical departures from what had been standard for years.)

Would I fly in the MAX? Would I actually walk away from a flight if AA substituted a MAX 8 for a 737-823? Not on AA, but I might if I was flying United, and though I’ve flown Lion Air once I’d book away from them as an airline for now. The 7Mx is not by any stretch of the imagination a radically new aircraft, I believe Boeing will fully disclose the afcs and it’s workings if it hadn’t already, and that AA pilots are aware of the issue and have it pretty well in hand. (To add: if the AA pilots felt the MAX 8 was inherently unsafe, you can be sure they’d refuse to fly it, because they do care about the passengers in their care and because their lives are on the line. And contrary to the belief of some, pilots are mostly not risk takers.)

jcatman

Fantastic post, JDiver.

IADCAflyer

I don't drink before noon, thanks. You stated, "Now that it is proving to be unsafe". So what would cause it to be unsafe if not a design flaw?

yolie

IADCAflyer

Someone else ran the numbers based on the EIS dates for the Max, and the number is like once in 375,000 takeoffs.

IADCAflyer

If there was an ordered shut down, my guess is that AA would start to shift fleet aircraft around - including halting all future MD-80 retirements, bringing viable MD-80s back from the desert, shifting 738 flying to MAX routes where the mission is not suitable for the MD80 (flights of long stage length or flights with a large water component), and awaiting FAA word.

econometrics

Having flown ET more than any other airline outside of AA or BA, this is so very sad. ET has a very good safety record in modern aviation, save an eerily similar 738 crash in 2010 with another pilot who had a lot of hours and experience (like this flight).

But the initial similarities to this crash and the Lion Air MAX 8 crash are very alarming.

I do hope AA, and the pilots who fly the AA MAX 8, are able to speak into this. Only the pilots who have experience on this new type can shed light into other, perhaps unpublished, issues with the MCAS system. Pure speculation, yes, but just too much similarity to the crash in October. Glad I don't have any MAX 8 flights upcoming, just for the extra peace of mind.