Bharat Rakshak

Zynda wrote:

nachiket wrote: Basically the FAA's safety inspectors are designated Boeing employees who have been vetted and certified by the FAA to act as its own representatives. But they are still being paid by Boeing!! So the people certifying Boeing's aircraft as safe are Boeing's own employees but they can give them an FAA certificate. Huge conflict of interest here but this has gone on for decades and it keeps getting worse.

Per my experience, this mechanism was designed to avoid huge costs incurred during FAA inspection/certification services. AFAIK, the product company is responsible for covering the travel, per diem, lodging & transportation costs of the FAA inspector as long as required apart from the hourly fees charged by the individual/FAA. For many small companies, this leads to huge costs. The above was seen as a compromise. Further, from what I understand, the designee mechanism also can speed up product development pace. The FAA probably wants to or can hire only so much people and with so many companies wanting to certify different products, the wait list for next available FAA personal can be long and thus delaying product development. The designee can help in alleviating the above. Many companies only invite FAA inspectors/certification folks only during final process while using designee folks for checking for compliance during the early & intermediate design process.

In theory, like you mentioned, the loyalty of the Designee rests with FAA while he is paid by the employer. In one of my peecha company, I knew many such designees. Most of them would refuse to sign or put down their name if they were not satisfied with the process/outcome. One of such person (a fav of mine) would say that if his names comes up as the person who was responsible for signing a faulty design/document, then it would become an express ticket to jail. Many of the other employees, particularly, from different departments would see these designees as an annoyance and nuisance even though they acknowledged the spirit of the intent behind such designee.

But it is possible in bigger OEMs like Boeing, which may have the clout to threaten to disrupt a person's career if that individual does not pay heed to organizations bigger picture or whatever, the designee mechanism may not be accomplishing the required intent. Perhaps, the FAA can re-examine on how to involve FAA inspectors/certification folks early on during the design & testing process.

nachiket wrote: They are still not doing this and claiming the problem will be resolved with a Software fix. I personally am going to avoid flying on the MAX even after it gets back into service if they go this route.

SriKumar wrote:

nachiket wrote: They are still not doing this and claiming the problem will be resolved with a Software fix. I personally am going to avoid flying on the MAX even after it gets back into service if they go this route.

I am thinking this will be the position of many people given BOeing's response after Lion Air crash (where they tried to blame the pilots AND tried to convince people the pilots were made aware of the new system, when they actually tried to do just the opposite.).

They still have not made a statement about how the MCAS controls the flight dynamics that clearly changed due to the engine moving forward. Unless that story comes out fully, we dont know what's going on.

(I am not convinced that the three things you listed is the sum total of all the current issues with the 787 MAX. I dont have proof, but I dont think that is the whole story. ).

nachiket wrote:To make matters much worse, they did not provide a simple off-switch for the system that did not also render another important flight control system inoperable.

Austin wrote:India deregisters first Jet Airways 737s

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... 7s-457393/

India’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has processed the deregistration of seven Boeing 737-800s, while it has received requests to deregister 13 more aircraft.

SriKumar wrote:

nachiket wrote:To make matters much worse, they did not provide a simple off-switch for the system that did not also render another important flight control system inoperable.

This is quite unbelievable, actually. It seems to suggest they dont fully know how their own systems are integrated.

They can come out with a new 'software fix', but questions will remain about their understanding of their control and actuator systems, their Q/A procedures, failure modes analysis and checks for malfunctioning inputs. These things point to fundamental, process issues and not an 'oversight' in software programming. SUch things take a long time to fix, starting with internal reviews of processes. For this reason, a 'software fix in a month from now' does not generate a lot of confidence. (From my perspective, there should also be an open, technical article on changes to flight characteristics due to engine moving front/larger diameter nacelle/longer plane in various flight regimes; for public review. There are enough professors out there who could (i) either write something, or (ii) critique what is written. Boeing should be the one to publish it, but I doubt they would do it.)

I know posters have said Ethiopian had 1 AoA sensor. Published reports show data from 2 AoA sensors, of which one malfunctioned badly. THe other one was fine. Saw it on the web.

Singha wrote:with 48 month construction time , turkiye has built a gigantic new airport in istanbul ... 2 runways (capacity of 6) ... 90 mil pax for now, 200 mil expansion limit. 150 aerobridges.

turkish airlines is already a giant with lot of routes.

BFM News
@NewsBFM
India's Jet Airways has extended its cancellation of all international flights until Thursday, as it fails to secure emergency funding from its lenders. Jet's debts now stand at more than US$1.2 billion, with all but 7 of its aircraft seized by creditors.

Singha wrote:with 48 month construction time , turkiye has built a gigantic new airport in istanbul ... 2 runways (capacity of 6) ... 90 mil pax for now, 200 mil expansion limit. 150 aerobridges.

turkish airlines is already a giant with lot of routes.

Austin wrote:The Unravelling Of Jet Airways, Revealed By A Pilot

https://www.ndtv.com/blog/the-unravelli ... topstories

srin wrote:I'm puzzled. In one of the fastest growing markets, why do these airlines (KF, AI and now Jet) so debt ridden and/or going out of business ? Are they selling tickets below cost to gain marketshare ?

Austin wrote:Negi , Not an easy decision to move if your next big carrier is all Airbus and you have then to move from B to A do the type ratings and stuff like that.

Many pilots are on loans either from training or personal which they have to make sure their EMI goes and prefer stability in their career so moving jobs is not easy and there is always hope things will be fixes.

I am wondering what happens to the 1000 Boeing Pilots who become jobess over night not to mention not paid for 3-4 months , Does the Aviation industry has the capacity to absorb them ? How many big airlines runs B versis A ?

Dileep wrote:It is my understanding that they are statically stable. There is no need or benefit to go otherwise. Remember that stabilizing under software control is energy inefficient. The constantly moving control surfaces cause extra drag etc.

Even the MAX should be stable normally, but go tits up and stall when going at high AoA and high engine thrust.

mmasand wrote:A lot of Boeing type rated pilots jumped ship and moved overseas, some opted in for the GoAir/Indigo bait offered. The Airbus boys are playing the wait and watch game if Vistara/Air Asia choose to bid for Jet's slots. These guys lived like kings even customising their roster and destinations, such was the rot in their operations.

The real losers are the administrative staff and technical ground crew who have nowhere to go in the interim but with skills transferable will most likely move out of aviation.

nits wrote: there are Lot of Trainees who paid jet in tune of 95 Laks for learning and becoming Pilots - Number is 150+ this trainees have already paid money for 2 years and have just cloaked 500 Flying Hours where as minimum is 1500 Hours of Flying for Pilot Licencse

Not only they have lost money but there training has stopped mid way... Sad

On one level, you could argue that this is a good sign for India: Its institutions are holding up. State-owned banks are Jet’s biggest creditors and they seem unwilling to throw more money at the airline without a clear revival plan. This is a big change from the past, when they kept supporting one of Jet’s rivals, the ill-fated Kingfisher Airlines Ltd., long after it seemed rational to do so.

In the end, however, the market wins out. If you are competing against low-cost airlines that still somehow provide equivalent service in economy class -- not to mention a full-service airline, Air India Ltd., that’s state-owned and can absorb whatever losses it wants -- you can’t dodge fate forever.

If Jet collapses, we should see its demise as another sign that sectors in even an increasingly prosperous India may not look like their counterparts elsewhere. Or perhaps we are just ahead of the times, and low-cost carriers may slowly eat away at full-service airlines across the world.

Many aviation experts believe the start of Jet's financial troubles can be traced back to the 2006 purchase of Air Sahara for $500 million in cash. Founder Naresh Goyal reportedly ignored the advice of professional associates who said he was paying too much. Market reaction to the deal was also decidedly mixed. The budget carrier was rebranded "JetLite" but it haemorrhaged money and in 2015, Jet wrote off its entire investment.

"Jet always catered to corporates and failed to recognise that low-cost carriers were attracting customers who were price sensitive," he added.

nachiket wrote:I dearly hope Jet's widebody fleet is picked up on the cheap by another Indian carrier. The banks will be auctioning off these jets pretty soon, if they haven't done so already. There isn't a single Indian private carrier with widebodies being operated or on order. It is basically just Air India now. Good chance for one of the new entrants to leapfrog the likes of Indigo without having to spend on expensive brand new B777s. Jet's 777's aren't that old and will have a lot of life left in them.

nits wrote:

mmasand wrote:A lot of Boeing type rated pilots jumped ship and moved overseas, some opted in for the GoAir/Indigo bait offered. The Airbus boys are playing the wait and watch game if Vistara/Air Asia choose to bid for Jet's slots. These guys lived like kings even customising their roster and destinations, such was the rot in their operations.

The real losers are the administrative staff and technical ground crew who have nowhere to go in the interim but with skills transferable will most likely move out of aviation.

there are Lot of Trainees who paid jet in tune of 95 Laks for learning and becoming Pilots - Number is 150+ this trainees have already paid money for 2 years and have just cloaked 500 Flying Hours where as minimum is 1500 Hours of Flying for Pilot Licencse

Not only they have lost money but there training has stopped mid way... Sad

nandakumar wrote:Other than an in flight meal and aerobridge embarkation/disembarkation (which incidentally helps an airline turn their aircrafts around faster) what is the difference between full service carriers and LCCs? My guess is around Rs 200 per passenger per flight. Jet's losses cannot be explained by this. Even if you add 50% load factor to their performance in 2017-18 and arrive at a figure of incremental costs for being a full service carrier losses exceed that.

nandakumar wrote:Other than an in flight meal and aerobridge embarkation/disembarkation (which incidentally helps an airline turn their aircrafts around faster) what is the difference between full service carriers and LCCs? My guess is around Rs 200 per passenger per flight. Jet's losses cannot be explained by this. Even if you add 50% load factor to their performance in 2017-18 and arrive at a figure of incremental costs for being a full service carrier losses exceed that.

chola wrote:

nandakumar wrote:Other than an in flight meal and aerobridge embarkation/disembarkation (which incidentally helps an airline turn their aircrafts around faster) what is the difference between full service carriers and LCCs? My guess is around Rs 200 per passenger per flight. Jet's losses cannot be explained by this. Even if you add 50% load factor to their performance in 2017-18 and arrive at a figure of incremental costs for being a full service carrier losses exceed that.

^^^ You are right. There is something very fishy here. I looked at their numbers and their passengers and revenue both doubled between 2010 and 2018. This is not an airline hemorrhaging paying customers as one might expect from a failing business. Until they stopped flights this month, they were the number 2 carrier in the nation with passenger growth in every year.

Jet always had unsavory rumors linking it to the desi underworld, especially the muzzi mafia under Dawood and Chakeel. One wonders if revenue were siphoned.

chola wrote:

nandakumar wrote:Other than an in flight meal and aerobridge embarkation/disembarkation (which incidentally helps an airline turn their aircrafts around faster) what is the difference between full service carriers and LCCs? My guess is around Rs 200 per passenger per flight. Jet's losses cannot be explained by this. Even if you add 50% load factor to their performance in 2017-18 and arrive at a figure of incremental costs for being a full service carrier losses exceed that.

^^^ You are right. There is something very fishy here. I looked at their numbers and their passengers and revenue both doubled between 2010 and 2018. This is not an airline hemorrhaging paying customers as one might expect from a failing business. Until they stopped flights this month, they were the number 2 carrier in the nation with passenger growth in every year.

Jet always had unsavory rumors linking it to the desi underworld, especially the muzzi mafia under Dawood and Chakeel. One wonders if revenue were siphoned.

ldev wrote:

chola wrote:
^^^ You are right. There is something very fishy here. I looked at their numbers and their passengers and revenue both doubled between 2010 and 2018. This is not an airline hemorrhaging paying customers as one might expect from a failing business. Until they stopped flights this month, they were the number 2 carrier in the nation with passenger growth in every year.

Jet always had unsavory rumors linking it to the desi underworld, especially the muzzi mafia under Dawood and Chakeel. One wonders if revenue were siphoned.

There were news reports about Etihad saying that if they took over the airline they will cancel all existing ground handling contracts. Maybe they suspect that something is not quite right there.