Boeing 787 radio software safety fix didn't work, says Qatar
- Reference: 1744139977
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/04/08/boeing_787_radio_software_patch/
- Source link:
In February, the US Department of Transportation issued an [1]advisory [PDF] about a problem with the aircraft's electronics that was causing VHF radio traffic to unexpectedly switch between active and standby mode. In practice, this means pilots constantly have to check their radio settings to make sure all messages from air traffic control are received, and multiple cases of this unwanted switching have been reported.
"The FAA has received reports indicating that VHF radio frequencies transfer between the active and standby windows of the TCP [tuning control panel] without flightcrew input," the dept said.
[2]
"The flightcrew may not be aware of uncommanded frequency changes and could fail to receive air traffic control communications. This condition, if not addressed, could result in missed communications such as amended clearances and critical instructions for changes to flight path and consequent loss of safe separation between aircraft, collision, or runway incursion."
[3]Boeing going backwards as production's slowing and woes keep flowing
[4]Boeing again delays the 777X – the plane that's supposed to turn things around
[5]Boeing to reacquire spun-off supplier Spirit AeroSpace to shore up safety
[6]Boeing's Starliner may fly again, pending fixes to literally everything
Boeing issued a software fix to stop the mode changes and, according to Uncle Sam, the update will take 90 minutes to install with an estimated cost of $127.50 per aircraft, with 157 US airplanes reportedly vulnerable. The problem affects 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 aircraft.
The unsafe condition still exists on airplanes
America's aviation watchdog the FAA has asked for feedback from airlines by April 14 on the situation, and Qatar Airways isn't waiting that long. It has already warned the patch isn't working as it should: The radios still change mode without warning.
"Qatar Airways flight crew are still reporting similar issues from post-mod airplanes. [Qatar Airways] already reported the events to Boeing/Collins aerospace for further investigation and root cause determination," the airline [7]said .
[8]
"As of now, Qatar believes that the issue is not completely addressed, and the unsafe condition still exists on airplanes."
Neither Qatar, Boeing, or the FAA representative were available for comment on the issue. Collins is a software provider for Boeing. ®
Get our [9]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-26/pdf/2025-03081.pdf
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Z_WcgiwH9rM3nvuVUjxcggAAAwk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/15/boeing_airbus_commercial_deliveries_2024/
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/14/boeing_layoffs_delays/
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/01/boeing_reacquires_spirit/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2025/03/28/boeing_starliner_fixes/
[7] https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FAA-2025-0204-0005
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Z_WcgiwH9rM3nvuVUjxcggAAAwk&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: 90 Minutes to install a patch????
You're assuming this software system is made up of individual executable files, each of which can be indiviually-replaced.
It might be one big blob, such as a Forth system with the editing features and the dictionary stripped out (because Collins doesn't want anyone accessing the source).
As much as I love working on/with computers, I would not want to fly on a plane where a random person or even flight crew could pop down to a Forth prompt and start messing with that software. One ignorant/careless/malicious FORGET command would be a potential disaster.
Sounds like Boeing has really gone . . .
. . . into the Qatar.
I am in IT
and I am so fed up with software not being done right. It is not boeing well...
TCP == "Tuning Control Panel"
Per the FAA's PDF.
"Portishead Radio, Portishead Radio,
Get me my girl on the line.
Portishead Radio, Portishead Radio,
I'm having to wait a long time.
Yankee Romeo Sierra Tango.
Yankee Romeo Sierra Tango.
Golf Hotel to Foxtrot Lima Sierra,
Golf Hotel to Foxtrot Lima Sierra.
Portishead, this is Mike Sierra Zulu Juliet,
I've been trying hard but I can't get through.
..." -- Mike Batt
Radio stuff
On the occasional times that I board a commercial air carrier it always astonishes me how many of the other cattle assume that they know more about radio transmissions' possibly deleterious effect on the the controls of the aircraft that texting, emailing and just plain phoning some random person is more important to them than our collective safety.
I'm amenable to the argument that the risk is negligible. I reject entirely the idea that this entirely avoidable risk should affect me personally. Just fuck off.
-A.
'Loss of safe separation between aircraft'...is not what we want to hear...
...neither is, "This flight will be on a Boeing aircraft."
with an estimated cost of $127.50 per aircraft
Cost for who? Surely not the airlines. Isn't Boeing's reputation bad enough without charging to fix a manufacturing defect that could cost them billions in wrongful death lawsuits?
And should the airlines be considering grounding these aircraft until there is a proper fix?
Maybe Boeing is using Broken Window Theory economics. Crash a plane, sell a new one.
Re: with an estimated cost of $127.50 per aircraft
If Boeing are making the airlines pay the cost of installing the patch, I'm sure they'll make amends by offering an equivalent customer credit. $127.50 discount off the cost of a new 737-MAX isn't to be sneezed at. And if you buy multiple planes, why, the savings just stack up!
Oh great
I wrote the audio part of an air traffic control program. We had backup communications channels on each card, backup cards, backup racks of cards and two generators. Then the plane manufacturer stuffs it up.
90 Minutes to install a patch????
What on Earth are they playing at? You could install a full featured operating system onto a PC in less time than that.
Might it possibly be that they've taken a cue from Microsoft, and they're reinstalling the entire program rather than patching it?