The cockpit voice recorder data on the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 9 jet which lost a panel mid-flight on Friday was overwritten, U.S. authorities said, renewing attention on an industry call for longer in-flight recordings.

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) chair Jennifer Homendy said on Sunday no data was available on the cockpit voice recorder because it was not retrieved within two hours - when recording restarts, erasing previous data.

The U.S. requires cockpit voice recorders to log two hours of data versus 25 hours in Europe for planes made after 2021.

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has since 2016 called for 25-hour recording on planes manufactured from 2021.

“There was a lot going on, on the flight deck and on the plane. It’s a very chaotic event. The circuit breaker for the CVR (cockpit voice recorder) was not pulled. The maintenance team went out to get it, but it was right at about the two-hour mark,” Homendy said.

The NTSB has been vocal in calling for the U.S. to extend its rule to 25 hours. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) a month ago said it was proposing to extend to 25 hours – but only for new aircraft.

    • Red_October@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The reason the 737 has been redesigned and retooled and extended so many times is that certifying an entirely new airframe with the FAA is a wildly expensive and time consuming process. I’m not denying that Boeing has a lot of influence, but they clearly don’t own the organization that has been such a pain in their ass in the first place.

      • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I’ll remind you that pain in the ass was specifically protecting the public from everything the 737 Max has become. Now we see what happens once GWB et al have permitted ‘self-certification’ by Boeing-designated FAA proxies, on Boeing’s payroll.

        What a low-quality take, holy shit.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          He called them a pain in Boeing’s ass. He did not claim nor imply that was a bad thing. It wasn’t a low quality take, you just lack reading comprehension.

          • Vqhm@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            The other guy thought it was too much of a pain in the ass to even spell 737 correctly tho. But yes, some things absolutely should be a pain in the ass. Like when something going even slightly wrong will likely kill someone.

          • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            “Oh wahming’s such a pain in the ass, that’s why we love him”.

            “Wahming’s being a pain in the ass, it’s so great.”

            Yep. Reading comprehension.

            • wahming@monyet.cc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Jeez.

              He called the FAA a pain in Boeing’s ass, a company we hate. Not a pain in ours. Especially in the original context where he was denying that Boeing controls the FAA. How are you not getting it.

              • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                Some combination of being tired and too many to-dos.

                My comment was more about how the FAA had been coopted by the enemy, and it seemed like the guy was lambasting how expensive getting airframes certified by the FAA was, as if it was anything but an important and necessary expense. On re-read it still seems like that, but I also don’t care, don’t know you and also don’t care.

      • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Not just that, but all the tooling and manufacturing space needed is insanely expensive. The max mostly just needed tooling for the nacelles/pylons.