Boeing Passenger Jet Nearly Crashes Due To Software Glitch

Bruce66423 shares a report from The Independent: A potential disaster was narrowly avoided when a packed passenger plane took off just seconds before it was about to run out of runway because of a software glitch. The Boeing aircraft, operated by TUI, departed from Bristol Airport for Las Palmas, Gran Canaria on 9 March with 163 passengers on board when it struggled to take off. The 737-800 plane cleared runway nine with just 260 metres (853ft) of tarmac to spare at a height of 10ft. It then flew over the nearby A38 road at a height of just 30 metres (100ft) travelling at the speed of around 150kts (about 173mph). The A38 is a major A-class busy road, connecting South West England with the Midlands and the north.

The Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), part of the Department for Transport, said the incident was the result of insufficient thrust being used during take-off. Pilots manually set the thrust level following a software glitch that Beoing was aware of before take-off. “A Boeing 737-800 completed a takeoff from Runway 09 at Bristol Airport with insufficient thrust to meet regulated performance,” the AAIB report said. “The autothrottle (A/T) disengaged when the takeoff mode was selected, at the start of the takeoff roll, and subsequently the thrust manually set by the crew (84.5% N1 ) was less than the required takeoff thrust (92.8% N1 ). Neither pilot then noticed that the thrust was set incorrectly, and it was not picked up through the standard operating procedures (SOPs).”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Pew Research Finds 64% of Americans Live Within Two Miles of a Public EV Charger

“64% of Americans live within 2 miles of a public charging station,” Pew Research reported this week, citing a survey paired with an analysis of U.S. Energy Department data that found over 61,000 publicly accessible charging stations.

And those who live closest to public chargers “view EVs more positively.”

The vast majority of EV charging occurs at home, but access to public infrastructure is tightly linked with Americans’ opinions of electric vehicles themselves. Our analysis finds that Americans who live close to public chargers view EVs more positively than those who are farther away. Even when accounting for factors like partisan identification and community type, Americans who live close to EV chargers are more likely to say they:
– Already own an electric or hybrid vehicle
– Would consider buying an EV for their next vehicle
– Favor phasing out production of new gasoline cars and trucks by 2035
– Are confident that the U.S. will build the necessary infrastructure to support large numbers of EVs on the roads
The number of EV charging stations has more than doubled since 2020. In December 2020, the Department of Energy reported that there were nearly 29,000 public charging stations nationwide. By February 2024, that number had increased to more than 61,000 stations. Over 95% of the American public now lives in a county that has at least one public EV charging station.

EV charging stations are most accessible to residents of urban areas: 60% of urban residents live less than a mile from the nearest public EV charger, compared with 41% of those in the suburbs and just 17% of rural Americans.
California is home to about 25% of all of America’s charging stations, according to the report. But this means EV-owning Californians “might also have a harder time than residents of many states when it comes to the actual experience of finding and using a charger.”

Despite having the most charging stations of any state, California’s 43,780 individual public charging ports must provide service for the more than 1.2 million electric vehicles registered to its residents. That works out to one public port for every 29 EVs, a ratio that ranks California 49th across all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

At the other end of the spectrum, Wyoming (one-to-six), North Dakota (one-to-six) and West Virginia (one-to-eight) have the most ports relative to the much smaller number of EVs registered in their respective states.

Another interesting finding? “Attitudes toward EVs don’t differ that much based on how often people take long car trips.

“In fact, those who regularly drive more than 100 miles are slightly more likely to say they currently own an electric vehicle or hybrid — and also to say they’d consider purchasing an EV in the future — when compared with those who make these trips less often.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Feds Add Nine More Incidents To Waymo Robotaxi Investigation

Nine more accidents have been discovered by federal safety regulators during their safety investigation of Waymo’s self-driving vehicles in Phoenix and San Francisco. TechCrunch reports: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened an investigation earlier this month into Waymo’s autonomous vehicle software after receiving 22 reports of robotaxis making unexpected moves that led to crashes and potentially violated traffic safety laws. The investigation, which has been designated a “preliminary evaluation,” is examining the software and its ability to avoid collisions with stationary objects and how well it detects and responds to “traffic safety control devices” like cones. The agency said Friday it has added (PDF) another nine incidents since the investigation was opened.

Waymo reported some of these incidents. The others were discovered by regulators via public postings on social media and forums like Reddit, YouTube and X. The additional nine incidents include reports of Waymo robotaxis colliding with gates, utility poles, and parked vehicles, driving in the wrong lane with nearby oncoming traffic and into construction zones. The ODI said it’s concerned the robotaxis “exhibiting such unexpected driving behaviors may increase the risk of crash, property damage, and injury.” The agency said that while it’s not aware of any injuries from these incidents, several involved collisions with visible objects that “a competent driver would be expected to avoid.” The agency also expressed concern that some of these occurred near pedestrians. NHTSA has given Waymo until June 11 to respond to a series of questions regarding the investigation.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Minor Car Crashes Mean High Tech Repairs

“With all the improvements in car safety over the decades, the recent addition of a plethora of high tech sensors and warnings comes with increased costs,” writes longtime Slashdot reader smooth wombat. “And not just to have to have them on your car. Any time you get into an accident, even a minor one, it will most likely require a detailed examination of any sensors which may have been affected and their subsequent realignment, replacement, and calibration.” CNN reports: Some vehicles require “dynamic calibration,” which means, once the sensors and cameras are back in place, a driver needs to take the vehicle out on real roads for testing. With proper equipment attached the car can, essentially, recalibrate itself as it watches lane lines and other markers. It requires the car to be driven for a set distance at a certain speed but weather and traffic can create problems. “If you’re in Chicago or L.A., good luck getting to that speed,” said [Hami Ebrahimi, chief commercial officer at Caliber] “or if you’re in Seattle or Chicago or New York, with snow, good luck picking up all the road markings.”

More commonly, vehicles need “static calibration,” which can be done using machinery inside a closed workshop with a flat, level floor. Special targets are set up around the vehicle at set distances according to instructions from the vehicle manufacturer. “The car [views] those targets at those specific distances to recalibrate the world into the car’s computer,” Ebrahimi said. These kinds of repairs also demand buildings with open space that meet requirements including specific colors and lighting. And it requires special training for employees to perform these sorts of recalibrations, he said

“The change that we’ve seen in the last five years is greater than we’ve seen, probably, in the last five decades,” said Todd Dillender, chief operating officer of Caliber Collision, one of the biggest auto body repair companies in the United States with more than 1,700 locations across 41 states. […] With a rapidly changing industry, qualified auto body repair technicians are in short supply, just as they are in the engine repair business. That’s also led to upward pressure on pay in the industry as technicians have to be highly qualified and educated, Dillender said. That’s good for people who work in the industry, of course, but tougher for those who pay, and for the insurance companies who, in turn, pay for the repairs. A new study from consumer automotive group AAA says the cost to fix sensors and cameras in new vehicles “now accounts for more than a third of the post-crash repair costs,” reports CNN. However, “no one, including AAA, recommends not getting these features because of repair costs,” since many of them can cut crash rates in half and improve a car’s overall safety.

“They’re not going to prevent everything,” said Greg Brannon, director of automotive engineering at AAA. “And when you are in a crash, there are additional costs so it’s sort of the old ‘there’s no free ride’ when it comes to these things.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Air Industry Trends Safer, But ‘Flukish’ Second Crash Led Boeing to Mishandled Media Storm, WSJ Argues

There’s actually “a global trend toward increased air safety,” notes a Wall Street Journal columnist.

And even in the case of the two fatal Boeing crashes five years ago, he stresses that they were “were two different crashes,” with the second happening only “after Boeing and the FAA issued emergency directives instructing pilots how to compensate for Boeing’s poorly designed flight control software.

“The story should have ended after the first crash except the second set of pilots behaved in unexpected, unpredictable ways, flying a flyable Ethiopian Airlines jet into the ground.”

Boeing is guilty of designing a fallible system and placing an undue burden on pilots. The evidence strongly suggests, however, that the Ethiopian crew was never required to master the simple remedy despite the global furor occasioned by the first crash. To boot, they committed an additional error by overspeeding the aircraft in defiance of aural, visual and stick-shaker warnings against doing so. It got almost no coverage, but on the same day the Ethiopian government issued its final findings on the accident in late 2022, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, in what it called an “unusual step,” issued its own “comment” rebuking the Ethiopian report for “inaccurate” statements, for ignoring the crew’s role, for ignoring how readily the accident should have been avoided.

So the Wall Street Journal columnist challenges whether profit incentives played any role in Boeing’s troubles:

In reality, the global industry was reorganized largely along competitive profit-and-loss lines after the 1970s, and yet this coincided with enormous increases in safety, notwithstanding the sausage factory elements occasionally on display (witness the little-reported parking of hundreds of Airbus planes over a faulty new engine).

The point here isn’t blame but to note that 100,000 repetitions likely wouldn’t reproduce the flukish second MAX crash and everything that followed from it. Rather than surfacing Boeing’s deeply hidden problems, it seems the second crash gave birth to them. The subsequent 20-month grounding and production shutdown, combined with Covid, cost Boeing thousands of skilled workers. The pressure of its duopoly competition with Airbus plus customers clamoring for their backordered planes made management unwisely desperate to restart production. January’s nonfatal door-plug blowout of an Alaska Airlines 737 appears to have been a one-off when Boeing workers failed to reinstall the plug properly after removing it to fix faulty fuselage rivets. Not a one-off, apparently, are faulty rivets as Boeing has strained to hire new staff and resume production of half-finished planes.

Boeing will sort out its troubles eventually by applying the oldest of manufacturing insights: Training, repetition, standardization and careful documentation are the way to error-free complex manufacturing.
As he sees it, “The second MAX crash caught Boeing up in a disorienting global media and political storm that it didn’t know how to handle and, indeed, has handled fairly badly.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Boeing Now Also Ordered to Fix Anti-Ice System on 737 Max, 787 Jets

America’s Federal Aviation administration “will require a fix for a new 737 MAX design problem discovered by Boeing that, although it’s a remote possibility, could theoretically disable the jet’s engine anti-ice system,” reports the Seattle Times:

A different flaw in the MAX’s engine anti-ice system design drew scrutiny in January and forced the company to drop a request for an exemption from key safety regulations. And now, it’s not just the MAX with an engine anti-ice system problem. Airlines have reported a separate issue with a similar system on Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner that has caused what the FAA calls “relatively minor” damage to the engine inlets on some two dozen of these widebody jets in service.

Though the FAA considers neither problem to be an immediate risk to flight safety, in February it issued separate notices of two proposed airworthiness directives to require the fix for the engine anti-ice system on the MAX and to lay out inspection and repair procedures for that system on the 787, pending a redesign that provides a permanent fix… When there is an immediate safety risk, the FAA issues a more urgent emergency directive that must be acted upon before further flight. Jets are grounded until it’s dealt with. That’s not the case with these two proposed airworthiness directives. Indicating that the risk is considered slight, both of the proposed directives will be open for public comments until April. Only after that will action be mandated…

On the MAX, the proposed FAA directive states that Boeing identified a potential single point of failure when it reviewed the internal design of the unit that provides a backup power supply to aircraft systems if the primary electrical system fails. Such a failure could potentially result in the loss of the anti-ice systems on both engines, with no indication or warning that would alert the pilots, the FAA directive states… In November 2022, Boeing sent a service bulletin alerting airlines and describing the required fix, which the FAA will now mandate…

Unlike this MAX issue, the fault discovered on the 787 Dreamliner has resulted in actual damage to engines on passenger aircraft. The FAA airworthiness directive on the 787 states that “damage was found during overhaul on multiple inlets around the Engine Anti-Ice duct within the inlet aft compartment.” Rather than a production issue, it was a matter of the seals being insufficiently durable. Even when the plane was flying in dry air and the anti-ice system was not switched on, the seal degradation led to hot air leaking into the inlet compartment, “exposing inlet components to high temperatures,” the FAA states. Boeing said this resulted in “thermal damage and discoloration to a limited area of the surrounding composite and metallic structure inside the inlet….” The FAA’s proposed airworthiness directive warns that heat damage to the inlet structure could lead to “reduced structural strength and departure of the inlet from the airplane.”

“Departure of the inlet” is a bland way of describing the front of the pod around the engine fan detaching, potentially striking the jet’s wing, tail or fuselage. Such disintegration could result in “subsequent loss of continued safe flight and landing or injury to occupants,” the airworthiness directive states…

“A separate question is how this flaw with the 787 anti-ice duct seals and the single point of failure in the backup power supply on the MAX slipped through the FAA’s original certification of these aircraft.”

Business Insider also reports that Boeing “is holding off on a planned expansion of production for its 737 Max planes after an Alaska Airlines flight lost a chunk of the plane while airborne in January.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.