【Article/Observer Network Columnist Zhang Zhonglin】
On December 2, 2021, the Civil Aviation Administration of China issued the Airworthiness Directive on the 737MAX: Correction of Unsafe Status of the Maneuverability Enhancement System (MCAS) (hereinafter referred to as the Airworthiness Directive). It has attracted widespread attention because of its involvement with the Boeing 737MAX, which has been grounded for 997 days in China.
In the airworthiness directive, the Civil Aviation Administration of China clearly pointed out the major hidden dangers of the MCAS system of the Boeing 737MAX and the recognition of Boeing's subsequent rectification measures, and proposed that after completing the corresponding improvement measures, it is deemed to eliminate the unsafe state caused by MCAS, that is, it meets the airworthiness standards.
Although strictly speaking, the Boeing 737MAX has not yet resumed flight in China, and it still needs to complete modifications and crew training to officially resume flights, this airworthiness directive of the Civil Aviation Administration represents that Boeing has passed the most difficult hurdle on the road to China's resumption of flight.
If the Boeing 737MAX is a person whose driver's license has been revoked due to dangerous driving behavior, then this airworthiness directive is Boeing's admission ticket to retake the driver's license. And the Civil Aviation Administration's requirements for the 737MAX are all corrective measures that Boeing has taken and no additional requirements, so this exam is an open-book exam for Boeing - just write all the answers.
Boeing has been looking forward to this passage for almost 1,000 days
The global grounding of the Boeing 737MAX is undoubtedly the most influential thing in the global civil aviation industry in the 21st century, and since the world's civil aviation entered the jet age, it is the longest grounded aircraft among civil aviation airliners that have been mass-produced and put into commercial flight.
Two consecutive 737MAX accidents killed 346 people, including several Chinese citizens. Since then, countries around the world have attached great importance to the huge flight safety hazards of the Boeing 737MAX, and the Civil Aviation Administration of China is the first major civil aviation regulator in the world to announce the grounding of the 737MAX. The problems with the Boeing 737MAX and the MCAS system that directly caused the air crash have been mentioned many times in the past two years of articles, and will not be repeated here.
Introduction to mcas systems
Mocking the boeing 737 MAX
Is the 737MAX safe?
As the first regulator to ground the Boeing 737MAX, the Airworthiness Directive of the Civil Aviation Administration of China has a very high symbolic significance, in fact, it has ended the global grounding of the 737MAX. However, the Boeing crisis brought about by the Boeing 737 MAX scandal has not completely subsided at present, and its negative impact on Boeing will continue for a long time. One thing that concerns the public is: Is the Boeing 737 MAX safe after the return?
Let's start with the conclusion: security. In the wake of the Boeing 737MAX scandal, regulators conducted extremely rigorous reviews of the Boeing 737MAX, and the United States took the lead in organizing a multinational joint technical review panel, including China, to review the Boeing 737MAX. It can be said that no aircraft has undergone such extensive and rigorous review after the grounding of the Boeing 737MAX, every detail, every line of code has been placed under a magnifying glass, and even some problems that have not been cared about before have been dug up and rectified accordingly.
For the Boeing 737MAX, which is highly concerned by the public, any issues found in the review are zero tolerance. In particular, after the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was exposed to regulatory problems due to the 737MAX scandal, in order to save its own image, Boeing was not released, and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) will not miss the opportunity to rush this old rival to "fall into the rock", only in the case of really can not find a problem, the two world's most important regulatory agencies approved the resumption of the Boeing 737MAX (FAA approved the resumption of flight in December 2020, EASA approved the resumption of flight in January 2021).
If you can't trust the regulators in the United States and Europe, and worry about the behind-the-scenes transaction and release the water, then the airworthiness directive of the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) should now be assured, right? This is the least reason to let go of the regulatory authorities of the Boeing 737 MAX, but the American FAA should always trust its own Civil Aviation Administration of China. Moreover, if the Boeing 737MAX is also in an air crash due to the same problem (MCAS) after the resumption of flights, then the regulators who approve the resumption of flights will have to be "rolling heads". Even if Boeing, the PET of the US FAA, wants to release water, other regulators (especially the Civil Aviation Administration of China) will not get used to it.
The Civil Aviation Administration of China has always adhered to three principles for the resumption of the Boeing 737MAX: aircraft design changes must be approved for airworthiness; pilots must be re-trained in sufficient effectiveness; the investigation conclusions of the two accidents must be clear, and the improvement measures must be effective. Today, the Aviation Authority's Airworthiness Directive represents that the airworthiness approval for changes to the aircraft design is considered to be effective, and it can be said that it meets the requirements of the Civil Aviation Authority.
Of course, the boeing 737 MAX resumed flight does not mean that there will be no air crash in the future, after all, the reasons for the air crash are various, and there are human factors and material factors. Even if the air crash caused by the aircraft itself has mechanical failure, improper maintenance, icing and other factors, as long as the air crash caused by MCAS does not occur again, it means that the rectification measures are practical and effective.
Another Daily Crash?
Although the Boeing 737MAX has been granted permission to resume commercial flights in the near future, it is difficult to restore the confidence of passengers. Two consecutive air crashes and an overwhelming stream of media coverage and analysis by the media (including myself) have equated the Boeing 737MAX with unsafe (and even air crashes) in the minds of the people.
When I was interviewed by observers about the Airworthiness Directive of the Civil Aviation Administration and asked how I viewed the prospects of the Boeing 737MAX, I asked rhetorically: "After the resumption of flight, I dare to sit on the 737MAX, do you dare?" The interviewer laughed and said, "Of course, I don't dare." And this is also the prevailing mentality among the public (and global travelers): even if you fly, you don't dare to sit."
In the 1970s, McDonnell Douglas' new passenger aircraft, the DC10, which had not yet collapsed, suffered a number of air crashes due to various reasons, including human reasons and design flaws, resulting in the dc10 being grounded for rectification. Even if DC10 completes the modification and resumes, the public has great concerns about its security, avoiding it, and even gave it a nickname: Daily Crash (Daily Crash, the acronym is also DC).
DC10's dense list of accidents can't help but feel numb in people's hearts
The DC10's notoriety has led airlines to stay away, passengers to avoid it, and aircraft order cancellations have fallen to the bottom. McDonnell Douglas had to name the dc10 an improved version of MD11 to get rid of the negative image of Daily Crash, but it was unsuccessful, and eventually nailed McDonnell Douglas to the column of shame in history.
At present, if the Boeing 737MAX does not want to become the second "Daily Crash", then it can only pray that in the next few years, there will be any cause (even human reasons) caused by the air crash, because as long as the air crash people and public opinion first think of the Boeing 737 MAX defect caused by the air crash.
Due to the frequent occurrence of DC10 accidents, many heroic crews have also been indirectly achieved. For example, in the crash of United Flight 232, the three sets of hydraulic control systems of the aircraft were all damaged and unable to control the aircraft, and the crew used two engines to adjust the thrust to control the aircraft with the help of the flight instructor among the passengers, which created the "Sioux City Miracle" and once again confirmed the name of "Daily Crash".
"Sioux City Miracle"
The aftermath is gone
The grounding of the Boeing 737 MAX is over, but it's not the end or the beginning of the end, it's the end of the beginning. While the approval of the Civil Aviation Administration of China is an extremely important milestone for Boeing (perhaps second only to the approval of the resumption of flights in North America), the crisis is far from over for Boeing. Prior to the global grounding of the Boeing 737MAX, Boeing delivered a total of 81 737 MAX to Chinese customers (including leasing customers), while Chinese airlines had 97 737 MAX in operation (including aircraft leased by airlines from leasing companies).
The 97 Boeing 737 MAX, which were grounded for at least 33 months due to Boeing's own reasons, caused great damage to the airline, so the claim against Boeing is also extremely legitimate. Due to the grounding of the Boeing 737MAX, the delivery of the new aircraft was also stopped, which also brought certain losses to the airlines, breaking the rhythm of normal aircraft replacement, and it was also enough to claim compensation from Boeing as a loss. Coupled with the fact that the existing Boeing 737MAX needs to be upgraded and modified accordingly according to the requirements of the Airworthiness Directive, and the pilots are trained accordingly, there is a bunch of aftercare and compensation to be dealt with.
In addition to the aftermath and compensation of existing delivered aircraft, it is more important for Boeing to resume orders from the Chinese market. Although whether the Boeing 737MAX will resume is a purely technical issue, only the malicious foreign media will link the suspension of the Boeing 737MAX by the Civil Aviation Administration of China to the Sino-US trade war and the Sino-US dispute. But when China buys civil aviation aircraft, the political factor is indeed an important consideration. Some people often joke that China is "buying Airbus when relations with the United States are not good, and buying Boeing when relations with Europe are not good." While there are many considerations for buying an airplane, it is generally true in the general direction.
Chinese airlines stopped new orders for Boeing airliners after the U.S. launched a trade war in 2017. Since the beginning of 2018, there have been only 5 aircraft orders from China, two of which are cargo aircraft and three of which are leased by ICBC to Italian airlines. Even Boeing's most loyal customer in China, Xiamen Airlines, did not place an order for a single Boeing airliner during this period. It can be said that Boeing has not actually received new orders from China since 2017.
China, as Boeing's largest overseas customer outside the United States, has accounted for about 20% of Boeing's total aircraft orders in previous years. However, with the impact of the trade war coupled with the suspension of the 737MAX and the sharp decline in the aviation industry caused by the epidemic, Boeing completely lost a wealth of orders from China, while Boeing's old rival Airbus received nearly 300 large orders from China in the same period (2019).
While the covid-19 pandemic has led to a major recession in the global aviation industry, airlines around the world have little incentive to buy new aircraft, not to mention boeing's most important product, the Boeing 737MAX, which is now infamous and even worse, so China's support is particularly important for Boeing.
Precisely because China still has no intention of buying Boeing aircraft, resulting in the major benefit of obtaining China's airworthiness license in the capital market, Boeing's stock price rose by 7% that day, and fell again the next day (the stock price is still less than half of what it was before the 737MAX was grounded), which shows that investors are still not very optimistic about Boeing's future, unless Boeing can reopen the door to the Chinese market.
The good needle of the re-flight is only one day old
For Boeing, the glimmer of hope has appeared on the horizon, but the horizon is so far away. Just as the so-called 100 miles are half ninety, Boeing still has a long way to go to restore the Chinese market and regain the confidence of Chinese travelers and users. For Boeing, what needs to be done now should be to re-learn how to build safe aircraft, rather than thinking about "how fast and how to build new aircraft."
This article is the exclusive manuscript of the observer network, the content of the article is purely the author's personal views, does not represent the platform views, unauthorized, may not be reproduced, otherwise will be investigated for legal responsibility. Pay attention to the observer network WeChat guanchacn, read interesting articles every day.