US aviation regulator issues safety bulletins over flaws in software updates for Boeing 747, 777, 787 airliners
- Reference: 1608129012
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/12/16/boeing_software_updates_faa_warning/
- Source link:
Recent updates to the Boeing 777 and 787 autothrottle have changed how the safety-critical systems operated, prompting a warning from the FAA to airlines advising them to carefully read updates from Boeing about the flaws.
The FAA [1]stated in November: "The 787 Flight Management Block Point 4 (FMF BP4) software currently installed introduced an auto-throttle software anomaly, which disables one element of the automatic throttle disconnect logic."
The special airworthiness information bulletin (SAIB) continued: "Several in-service reports have been received from operators that the auto-throttle remained engaged in the IDLE mode when the flight crew advanced the thrust levers to conduct a balked landing. Once airborne, the thrust levers moved back to idle."
This is comparable to your car engine falling back to idle while you're joining motorway traffic. The consequences of a power loss during a go-around were vividly illustrated in 2018, when a British Army Watchkeeper drone crashed after its operators cut power to idle and failed to realise what they'd done: [2]it was destroyed .
Meanwhile, an SAIB published for the Boeing 747 at the same time as the 777/787 bulletin said that the most recent version of the Jumbo Jet's flight control software caused both onboard flight management computers (FMC) to fail and reset while on approach to land.
We can handle these failures, say pilots
With questions hanging over Boeing's software development practices ever since the crashes of two 737 Max airliners that killed nearly 350 people, the latest two SAIBs from the FAA will leave members of the public raising their eyebrows.
A Boeing spokesman told The Register :
Safety is and always has been Boeing's top priority. We are focused on continuously improving safety and quality as we deliver on our commitments to customers around the world. We work with the FAA to monitor the Boeing fleet for potential issues and take appropriate actions to address them. For more information about these issues, we'll refer you to the AIR-20-19 and AIR-20-18 bulletins, which include notification of operators and guidance for flight crew operations. As both bulletins indicate, we are working closely with suppliers to correct the software.
Experienced aircrew The Register spoke to downplayed both software flaws.
A 787 pilot explained what a balked landing is and how the autothrottle is normally used during one: "For a normal go-around (to all intents and purposes that's one initiated before the flare at about 30ft) the autothrottle remains connected and commands a thrust target which gives about 2000ft/min rate of climb. Pushing a TOGA [takeoff/go-around] switch a second time commands full thrust."
"In the event of a balked landing (which is anywhere between the flare and reverse thrust selection) the procedure is to apply full thrust and simultaneously disconnect the autothrottle to ensure that the thrust levers don't retard automatically. Once we're away from the ground we push a TOGA switch, which brings back the autothrottle and flight director guidance."
Flight directors tell the pilot how to manoeuvre the aeroplane to follow the pre-programmed flight route. They are explained in depth in the video below:
[3]Youtube Video about flight director usage
Insisting that the bulletin hadn't affected how his airline carried out go-arounds, the 787 pilot said: "I assume that it's less because of autothrottle anomalies and more to do with the fact that the easiest thing to do is keep it simple and fly manually instead of second-guessing the automation, as an Emirates 777 crew [4]learned to their cost a few years ago ."
Meanwhile, flight computer failures didn't faze another pilot who we asked about the 747 software flaw.
"In all honesty it sounds like the 'Jet Powered Seneca' scenario," the British aviator told The Register , referring to the Piper Seneca piston aeroplane often used in commercial pilot training. "You still have a fully functional aircraft, you've just lost the toys… on a scale of 1-10 with 1 being 'meh, I'll finish my lunch first' and 10 being 'screaming mayday down the frequency' I'd call it a 4."
While not a type-rated 747 pilot, he said the basic principle in a dual FMC failure scenario would be for the human flight crew to take over from the computers and use their finely honed skills to safely land the airliner and its passengers.
Boeing's software development process has come under intense scrutiny since the two 737 Max crashes. The controversial airliner is [5]due to return to airline service in coming months , with Irish operator Ryanair having pledged to buy at least 75 over the next few years. ®
Get our [6]Tech Resources
[1] https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/(LookupSAIBs)/AIR-20-19?OpenDocument
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2019/08/29/wk050_full_daib_crash_report_aberporth/
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0DUrjCqzkA&t=100
[4] https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/emirates-777-crash-probe-revisits-pilot-awareness-of-design-logic/136614.article
[5] https://www.theregister.com/2020/11/25/easa_737_max_return/
[6] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
" Safety The cake is and always has been Boeing's top priority."
TFTFY
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
My initial thought was a harsher "Bullshit" for that one, but yeah - agree.
Saying "Safety is our priority" means nothing without actions to back it up.
Until Boeing stop cutting corners to maximise profit and start testing their shit properly, these will remain completely empty and baseless words...
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
>Safety is and always has been Boeing's top priority.
True, however McDonnell-Douglas is now in charge
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
"Safety is and always has been Boeing's top priority."
These are words I've been told to say. Are they supposed to mean something?
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
>These are words I've been told to say. Are they supposed to mean something?
Yes it means the person saying it isn't an engineer and doesn't understand engineering
An engineer would never say that, because then you would build aeroplanes out of rock with no wings or engines. Making them as safe as possible while still economic to operate is the top priority.
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
If this is them with safety as their TOP priority, I dread to think what state the rest of their priorities are!
Re: A Boeing Spokesperson said:
"Safety is and always has been Boeing's top priority."
Yeah! Right after profits, government handouts and keeping the shareholders happy.
If I was a purveyor of travel insurance, I would load any premium that covered a Bo(e)ing flight.
You mean they *haven't* learnt their lesson?
Can't say I'm surprised.
Put their PHBs on an affected (or is that infected) plane and fly them around for a while and see if they change their tune.....
Software Bugs
Yet more software bugs in safety critical systems. One really does have to wonder at the imbeciles that create this, test it & then release. There is so much software released now with major flaws and it barely causes a raised eyebrow.
I am not blaming Agile directly but it has a lot of input in the shite that is spewed out now. That and far too many people in the chain of creation, evaluation and approval just don't get the plot. Software is seen as easy to fix and is why so much of the expensive quality control around hardware systems has gone.
It is a cultural issue driven by the numbers of people in the system now who have never ever had to go and remake an entire part on workshop machines because the cocked up.
Ok, so the claim is these faults aren't serious because any half-decent pilot can cope...
However, these are defects within safety-critical avionics. Totally unacceptable.
And yet people complain about updates to Microsoft Flight Simulator causing problems, it's called realism!!
The pilot comments rely on the pilot making the correct and immediate response to an unexpected response of the avionics. All very fine until the pilot doesn't.
The only way to get manglement to get their finger out and actually treat safety as a priority would be to ground the fleet forthwith every time one of these comes to light with criminal prosecutions of anyone trying to prevent them coming to light. The resulting drop in share price would lead to the shareholders ensuring change - and maybe a change in management, not just behaviour.
Ironically for free-market capitalist American types - if there really was a genuine market for jets they would be safer AND there would be no need for an FAA
If a Boeing crashed and they couldn't convince the customers that they had fixed the problem then the customers would all switch to one of the 100s of other competitors and Boeing would go bust.
Boeing joke
Q: What weights nothing but when loaded on board an airplane prevents it from taking off?
A: Software.
Common platform?
This appears to be the flight management computer (FMC) and although auto-throttle has been around a long time, the flight control computers are in the 777 and 787 (although different) but the 747 is not a fly by wire aircraft and therefore does not require them.
It would not surprise me if this is a common platform across the models and it is highly likely to be made by a different company.
This does not excuse Boeing who are supposed to run these in the rigs and exercise them against all possible issues (including the specific scenario addressed) and if there are issues go back to the supplier and tell them about it.
Note that Boeing would have sent whatever company it is a requirement specification (which used to be great from them but not now, it appears) for whatever upgrades they were suggesting.
It is not unusual for features to be added to avionics over the life of the aircraft (and they are often subject to redesign due to obsolescence) but I find it interesting (and appalling at the same time) that such a pretty standard issue clearly did not get thoroughly tested.
A Boeing Spokesperson said:
Safety is and always has been Boeing's top priority.
This is a lie.