Writing a counter-argument article(800-1000 words) by analysis a case file

Software Development Jordan Baxter

General Instructions 1. For each page, synthesize the reading and research by writing in complete sentences in essay format.

a. Use the green instructions in the notes below each page to focus your research and writing. b. Write about each question, prompt, or process provided in those notes. c. Write a full page of text with lots of detail (about 250 words).

i. Don’t generalize so much that your writing is devoid of detail. ii. Don’t repeat yourself.

d. Cite each source by adding a hyperlink in the Title of the Article or law. e. Do not change the template:

i. Text must be 14 point Lato left-justified type. ii. Refrain from adding extra margins or double spacing.

iii. Do not bullet the paragraphs. Write in essay format only. f. Add additional pages if you need more room.

2. Add all sources to the Bibliography page. a. Include author, year, title, publisher, and URL. b. Number or bullet them using the list button.

When in doubt, write to the instructor for clarification using the Canvas Inbox.

Historical Timeline

NOV 2010 JAN 2011 AUG 2011 MAY 2017 OCT 2018

In an article published by The New York Times titled: “Airbus Plans to Update A320,” author Jad Mouawad details the update of Airbus’ flagship domestic plane. Including a bigger engine that provided up to 15% better fuel efficiency. Airbus is Boeings’ biggest rival in airplane manufacturing. Airbus claims minimal need for pilot training with new engine.

Being incorrect in their predictions, Boeing decides to announce the launch of the 737 MAX program. In an article published by Vox titled: “The emerging 737 Max scandal, explained,” author, Matthew Yglesias reports that Boeing decided to release the plane without additional pilot training in order to compete with Airbus. With the new maneuvering characteristics of the plane, Boeing needed a way to avoid pilot training.

Lion Air flight 610 crashed into the Java Sea 12 minutes after take off. Killing all 189 people onboard. In a New York Times article published only 11 days after the crash titled: “What We Know About the Lion Air Flight 610 Crash,” author Megan Specia states that “The new plane’s automated systems may have played a role…”

In an article published by Leeham News and Analysis titled: “Boeing didn’t want to re-engine the 737–but had design standing by,” author Scott Hamilton summarizes Boeings’ hesitation to re-engine their 737. Stating that Boeing did not predict that the new Airbus A320neo would perform as well as Airbus claimed, and would not affect Boeings’ sales. But Boeing still designed a plane with a bigger engine, in the case that Boeings’ predictions were incorrect. This redesign moved the engine to sit higher on the wing. Which changes maneuvering characteristics.

First 737 Max delivery was completed to Malindo Air. According to Konstantin Kakaes in an article published in the MIT Technology Review titled: “A second 737 Max crash raises questions about airplane automation,” Boeings’ solution to the new maneuvering characteristics was to install the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system (MCAS). Which would take in pitch data from outside the plane and correct any deviations from the old 737 maneuvering characteristics.

Who, What , How, and Why?

The main story behind the Boeing 737 max scandal and the MCAS system behind it is the need for the MCAS system

in the first place. Boeing and Airbus are fierce rivals in the airplane manufacturing market. In 2010, Airbus

announced its plans to update the A320, their flagship domestic flight plane, with engines that would yield up to 15

percent better fuel efficiency. In The New York Times article titled: “Airbus Plans to Update A320,” author, Jad

Mouawad states: “Airbus and its main rival, Boeing, have been waging a war of nerves over who would announce

plans to update their short-range planes.” This announcement signaled the end of the war of nerves and spelled

trouble for Boeing. The engines that Airbus used to attain 15% better efficiency were larger than previous engines. It

was not an issue for Airbus to simply slide out the old engine and replace it with a larger one because the A320 had

longer landing gear and sat higher off the ground than the Boeing 737. Airbus also boasted that the engine swap

would not change the maneuvering characteristics of the plane, thereby eliminating the need for additional pilot

training. The 737, however, did not have this ground clearance. In an article published by Leeham News and Analysis,

titled “Boeing didn’t want to re-engine the 737–but had design standing by,” author Scott Hamilton quotes Mike Bair,

then head of the 737 program: “We figured out a way to get a big enough engine under the wing that even if we had

more space, we wouldn’t put a bigger engine.” The way the Boing team figured out how to get a bigger engine under

the wing of the 737 Max was to move the mounting point on the engine upward a few inches. Making the top of the

engine stick slightly above the wing and, more importantly, changing the maneuvering characteristics of the Max.

Who, What , How, and Why? [Cont’d]

Upon take off, while the plane was at full thrust, the nose of the plane had the tendency to pitch upward, causing the

Max plane to stall. This was a problem for Boeing, in order to compete with Airbus, they needed a plane with the

same maneuvering capabilities of the 737 so they could support the claim that the new 737 Max would require no

additional pilot training. This signifies a turning point in the scandal. Boeing was faced with two options, one option

was to go back to the drawing board and fix the problem at its source, which would have costed a considerable

amount of time and resources. The second was to place a band-aid on the problem, which is faster and cheaper, but

does not solve the core issue of the plane pitching upward. Being a company that has to remain competitive on the

market, Boeing decided to take the second option. In an article published by the MIT Technology Review titled: “A

second 737 Max crash raises questions about airplane automation,” author Konstantin Kakaes explains Boeings’

solution to the nose pitch problem: “The new “maneuvering characteristics augmentation system” [MCAS] was

designed to counteract that tendency.” MCAS was the band-aid that got the 737 Max planes into the air. It relied on

external sensor data to detect the event of the nose pitching upward and a subsequent stall. On October 29, 2018,

Lion Air Flight 610 took off from Jakarta’s Soekarno - Hatta International Airport. Kakaes states: “[Minutes after

takeoff] a faulty sensor erroneously reported that the airplane was stalling. The false report of a stall triggered an

automated system that tried to point the aircraft’s nose down so that it could gain enough speed to fly safely. The

pilots fought the automated system, trying to pull the nose back up. They lost.” The plane plummeted into the Java

Sea only 12 minutes after takeoff. Killing all 189 onboard, all for the sake of competition.

Consequences and Laws

The biggest impact on Boeing in all of this has been financial. The 737 Max planes have been grounded around the

world since March, and it is unclear when they will fly again. In an article published by The Washington Post titled:

“Boeing’s Grounded 737 Max — The Story So Far,” author Anurag Kotoky states that “Boeing has abandoned its

financial forecast for 2019 as it faces questions about the plane’s development and testing and its own transparency

-- as well as potentially sky-high payouts.” Meaning that Boeing will not be a competitor in the airplane

manufacturing market again anytime soon. And with the 737 Max planes being grounded until at least the end of

2019, Boeings’ mistake will propagate into the airline industry as well. As the airlines that bought the 737 Max will be

unable to begin recouping their expenses until the Max can fly again. A secondary consequence is potentially

directed toward the US Government. As Dominic Gates states in an article titled: “Flawed analysis, failed oversight:

How Boeing, FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system” written for The Seattle Times: “Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA) managers pushed the agency’s safety engineers to delegate safety assessments to

Boeing itself, and to speedily approve the resulting analysis.” Meaning that the FAA saw a conflict of interest in the

safety of the future passengers of the 737 Max, and ignored it, allowing Boeing to certify their own aircrafts. As of

this writing, the dust has not quite settled on this scandal. But in today's geo-political climate, it is unlikely that the

FAA will see any tangible change unless the US Government is pressured by foreign governments to do so.

Illustration

This illustration is a screenshot from

a Vox video that shows the Airbus

A320 (left) and the Boeing 737

(Right) with pre-modification engines

installed. In red is an outline of where

the bigger, more fuel efficient

engines would fall. Note the

A320neo still has enough space to

safely land a plane where the 737

does not.

© 2019 Vox Media, Inc. All Rights

Reserved

Airbus A320 Boeing 737

Ethical Analysis of the Major Player

Often, it is easy to want to blame a scandal on a single person. But the Boeing 737 Max scandal was the result of a top

to bottom systematic failure in the relationship between engineers, corporations, and the US Government. A single

individual that could be pointed out is Mike Bair. But even then, Bair was initially against re-engining the plane, and

wanted to begin work on the next 737 generation, which would have the newest engine, but would also be

redesigned from the ground up to support the engine. Only after “talking to its customers Boeing reached the

conclusion that airlines would not wait for them. Some critical mass of carriers (American Airlines seems to have

been particularly influential) was credible enough in its threat to switch to Airbus equipment that Boeing decided it

needed to offer 737 buyers a Boeing solution sooner rather than later.” (Yglesias 2019) If Bair would have put his foot

down, stating that he did not wish to be a part of re-engining the plane, he likely would have been fired. But then his

ethical conscious would less burdened under The Virtue Approach of the Markkula Center. This approach dictates

that we “act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of values like truth and beauty.” It is

clear that Bair did not act virtuously in this scenario. The key point in which he could have acted virtuously and

retained his job was in the FAA’s delegation of inspections to Boeing. If he had insisted upon an outside review of the

plane, this issue may have been caught and fixed before there were any casualties.

Bibliography

● "DATA MINING | The Checkout | ABC1". Youtube, 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2Kji24833Y. ● "Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence: Crash Course Computer Science #34". Youtube, 2019,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=z-EtmaFJieY. ● "Online Advertising: Crash Course Media Literacy #7". Youtube, 2019,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmRcoJZRXEY. ● D'Alessio, Francesco. "How Strava Makes Money Amazes Me - The Bottom Line - Medium". Medium, 2019,

https://medium.com/bestcompany/how-strava-makes-money-amazes-me-92ae7bfdc633. ● Gates, Dominic. "Flawed Analysis, Failed Oversight: How Boeing, FAA Certified The Suspect 737 MAX Flight

Control System". The Seattle Times, 2019, https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-th e-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/. Accessed 7 July 2019.

● Hamilton, Scott. "Boeing Didn't Want To Re-Engine The 737-But Had Design Standing By - Leeham News And Analysis". Leeham News And Analysis, 2019, https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/20/boeing-didnt-want-to-re-engine-the-737-but-had-design-standing-by/. Accessed 7 July 2019.

● Harvey, Michael. "How Crowdsourcing Is Shaping The Future Of Everything". Entrepreneur, 2019, https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/307438.

● Kakaes, Konstantin. "A Second 737 Max Crash Raises Questions About Airplane Automation". MIT Technology Review, 2019, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613106/a-second-737-max-crash-raises-questions-about-airplane-aut omation/. Accessed 7 July 2019.

Bibliography [Cont’d]

● Kotoky, Anurag. "Boeing’S Grounded 737 Max — The Story So Far". The Washington Post, 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/boeings-grounded-737-max-the-story-so-far/2019/07/04/bc7ed 860-9e52-11e9-83e3-45fded8e8d2e_story.html?utm_term=.c2771db1e895. Accessed 7 July 2019.

● Mouawad, Jad. "Airbus Plans To Update A320 With New Engine". Nytimes.Com, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/01/business/global/01airbus.html.

● Specia, Megan. "What We Know About The Lion Air Flight 610 Crash". Nytimes.Com, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/09/world/asia/air-lion-crash-610.html. Accessed 7 July 2019.

● Sullivan, Mark. "The 1996 Law That Made The Web Is In The Crosshairs". Fast Company, 2019, https://www.fastcompany.com/90273352/maybe-its-time-to-take-away-the-outdated-loophole-that-big-tec h-exploits?partner=rss&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=rss+fastcompany&utm_content =rss?cid=search.

● Thompson, Nicholas. "We Need To Have An Honest Talk About Our Data". WIRED, 2019, https://www.wired.com/story/interview-with-jaron-lanier/.

● University, Santa. "A Framework For Ethical Decision Making". Scu.Edu, 2019, https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/a-framework-for-ethical-decision-maki ng/.

● Yglesias, Matthew. "The Emerging 737 Max Scandal, Explained". Vox, 2019, https://www.vox.com/business-and-finance/2019/3/29/18281270/737-max-faa-scandal-explained. Accessed 7 July 2019.