OT: Boeing 737 MAX

[AngryScientist]

this simulator demonstration is probably misleading, but it sure makes it seem like in the LA crash there was gobs and gobs of time to react.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/closer-loo...163717356.html

[Tony T]

Originally Posted by Tony T

"In its statement, the F.A.A. said that it had “no basis to order grounding the aircraft.”
"Boeing reiterated in a statement late Tuesday that it had “full confidence” in the 737 Max 8. It noted that the F.A.A. had taken no action and “based on the information currently available, we do not have any basis to issue new guidance to operators.”
"For decades, the F.A.A. has used a network of outside experts, known as F.A.A. designees, to certify that aircraft meet safety standards. In 2005, the regulator shifted its approach for how it delegated authority outside the agency, creating a new program through which aircraft manufacturers like Boeing could choose their own employees to be the designees and help certify their planes."

NYT: F.A.A. Approval of Boeing Jet Involved in Two Crashes Comes Under Scrutiny

[redir]

BI is reporting that the pilots were consulting the flight manual while struggling with the plane to look for answers. I thought manuals were for lawn mowers ***... I mean I get it, every plane has a manual but having to consult it in the midst of a crash?

Boeing is still denying that they have any responsibility here. I can only hope this hits their bottom line hard. I realize that may sound cruel in that they do employ a lot of people but lets face it, in our laissez-faire free market leaning democracy we put the responsibility of safety on them and in such a system, in theory, they should suffer the consequences financially so as to mend their ways.

It's one thing to own up but they are sticking to the corporate denial.

https://www.businessinsider.com/lion...0UMChBj0pq0rJY

[AngryScientist]

Originally Posted by redir

I thought manuals were for lawn mowers ***... I mean I get it, every plane has a manual but having to consult it in the midst of a crash?

i dont know the particulars of this situation, nor do i know the mandates of the commercial industry, but in the NAVY....

you memorize everything, but you still pull out the book (maybe the tablet these days...) and go through the emergency procedures line by line. circle/X every step. that type of training eliminates human factor errors. even if you have the emergency procedure memorized, when in a critical situation, you dont want to forget step 52A or do it after 52B.

i only say that because, pulling out the manuals is not necessarily indicative of a crew who doesnt know their stuff.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

i dont know the particulars of this situation, nor do i know the mandates of the commercial industry, but in the NAVY....

you memorize everything, but you still pull out the book (maybe the tablet these days...) and go through the emergency procedures line by line. circle/X every step. that type of training eliminates human factor errors. even if you have the emergency procedure memorized, when in a critical situation, you dont want to forget step 52A or do it after 52B.

i only say that because, pulling out the manuals is not necessarily indicative of a crew who doesnt know their stuff.

In military(USN and USAF)aviation, you have 'bold face' emergencies that you knew backwards and forwards. 'BoldFace' because they were "boldface" in the pocket checklist..BUT we did a weekly boldface exam before flying each monday..It had to be perfect, perfect..or you sat down that day.

'stick forward neutral lateral, lock your harness, rudder opposite turn needle/yaw'...etc..

And if you got that "fire light", you did the 'boldface'..

Throttle idle
Check light out
Test firewarning system
If light still on, or fire warning fails
Shut effected engine down.

A-4 was even better

Firelight
-engine idle
-check light out
-if light on and secondary indications
-eject

Then it was get the book out because you 'aviate, navigate, communicate', in that order..

BUT you knew the manual(NATOPS) very, very well. Tested often, system knowledge, pressures and temps, etc..you knew. Best way to understand what was going wrong was knowing the systems of the jet perfectly.

BUT back to 737 'emergency'...big nose down, uncommanded pitch, while on autopilot..turn it off...

[ultraman6970]

Question, no idea about planes ok?

A software update could fix the problem??? Probably could be a lot more than that but in simple words (easier to say than done) a software update could fix the problem??

Second question... isnt negligence to have the plane lift off not manually? I mean the pilot started the plane off the runway in autopilot instead of flying that manually till they got to the right altitude?? To me is the same stuff than let a car with autopilot... this reminds me Bucks rogers in the 25th century... the future pilots sucked because were in autopilot, buck was acing because he was always in manual....

[redir]

Originally Posted by AngryScientist

i dont know the particulars of this situation, nor do i know the mandates of the commercial industry, but in the NAVY....

you memorize everything, but you still pull out the book (maybe the tablet these days...) and go through the emergency procedures line by line. circle/X every step. that type of training eliminates human factor errors. even if you have the emergency procedure memorized, when in a critical situation, you dont want to forget step 52A or do it after 52B.

i only say that because, pulling out the manuals is not necessarily indicative of a crew who doesnt know their stuff.

The Seattle Times did an excellent article on this. Apparently Boeing didn't think it was important that pilots even know about this feature since it was designed for extreme circumstances and would take over on it's own... Crazy.

https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...POKThwbyg4tSq4

Since MCAS was supposed to activate only in extreme circumstances far outside the normal flight envelope, Boeing decided that 737 pilots needed no extra training on the system — and indeed that they didn’t even need to know about it. It was not mentioned in their flight manuals.

Minimizing MAX pilot transition training was an important cost saving for Boeing’s airline customers...

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by ultraman6970

Question, no idea about planes ok?

A software update could fix the problem??? Probably could be a lot more than that but in simple words (easier to say than done) a software update could fix the problem??

Second question... isnt negligence to have the plane lift off not manually? I mean the pilot started the plane off the runway in autopilot instead of flying that manually till they got to the right altitude?? To me is the same stuff than let a car with autopilot... this reminds me Bucks rogers in the 25th century... the future pilots sucked because were in autopilot, buck was acing because he was always in manual....

Not an airline guy but I don't think there is an 'automated' takeoff..yes, 'automated' landings to touchdown but not T/Os..Pretty sure..GregL or Saab will know.

Think a software fix plus pilot training will fix this...I don't think it's an inherently poor design..the 737Max8..but just my opinion.

This was 'software'

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...1D3A&FORM=VIRE

This too..BTW-the Gripen pilot walked away from this.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...16C9&FORM=VIRE

[redir]

Hardware too. They consider this system to be critical enough that people can die but yet they place all the reliability on one sensor, what if it fails?

[saab2000]

There's no such thing as an "Auto Takeoff" and my airline doesn't use the Autoland feature, rather we use a Head Up Guidance System (HGS) and all landings are hand flown.

I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of what an autopilot is or does. It is a "dumb" feature of the airplane that simply allows the pilots to take their hands off the yoke. It will climb, descend and turn based only on instructions from the pilots. Pilot commands (of FMC commands) are sent to a feature called the Flight Director and the autopilot just follows these commands.

Much of the flight is pre-programmed using the FMC (Flight Management Computer) and pilots may modify the programming for speed or altitude or other parameters like, for example, a crossing restriction in a descent. The pilots can also override the FMC by engaging a lateral or vertical mode, commanding a turn or climb or descent. Finally, the pilot can override everything by disengaging the autopilot and auto throttle and flying completely by hand.

This technology makes flying much safer because the crew can monitor the flight and have a much greater oversight of what is happening. It is neither necessary nor desirable to have the pilots flying an airliner manually for more than just short periods of time during NORMAL operations, which is 99.999% of the time. Some folks like to fly more or less by hand but it is rare that a pilot will fly more than the first few minutes by hand and even more rare in modern aviation that he or she will fly a full arrival by hand. The autopilot flies very smoothly and most flying is done with the autopilot with lateral and vertical guidance being commanded electronically by the pilots or FMC, with pilots monitoring the airplane when the FMC is guiding it.

[MattTuck]

Originally Posted by redir

BI is reporting that the pilots were consulting the flight manual while struggling with the plane to look for answers. I thought manuals were for lawn mowers ***... I mean I get it, every plane has a manual but having to consult it in the midst of a crash?

Boeing is still denying that they have any responsibility here. I can only hope this hits their bottom line hard. I realize that may sound cruel in that they do employ a lot of people but lets face it, in our laissez-faire free market leaning democracy we put the responsibility of safety on them and in such a system, in theory, they should suffer the consequences financially so as to mend their ways.

It's one thing to own up but they are sticking to the corporate denial.

https://www.businessinsider.com/lion...0UMChBj0pq0rJY

Agree with what Angry said, the bird strike scene from Sully shows how quick they pull out the manual and how they go through it. These planes are so complex now, the decision trees are too much for a person to memorize and recall accurately under stress.


On the point about the market disciplining Boeing. Yes, they will feel the sting as orders get cancelled, they'll suffer reputational damage, and you can bet that international regulators (both from the EU and China) will use this to weaken Boeing while boosting their home aerospace champions. However, I'm not sure I'd describe the system as laissez-faire, so much as a corruption/failure of the regulatory system we have (had?) in place.

[redir]

Originally Posted by saab2000

There's no such thing as an "Auto Takeoff" and my airline doesn't use the Autoland feature, rather we use a Head Up Guidance System (HGS) and all landings are hand flown.

I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding of what an autopilot is or does. It is a "dumb" feature of the airplane that simply allows the pilots to take their hands off the yoke. It will climb, descend and turn based only on instructions from the pilots. Pilot commands (of FMC commands) are sent to a feature called the Flight Director and the autopilot just follows these commands.

Much of the flight is pre-programmed using the FMC (Flight Management Computer) and pilots may modify the programming for speed or altitude or other parameters like, for example, a crossing restriction in a descent. The pilots can also override the FMC by engaging a lateral or vertical mode, commanding a turn or climb or descent. Finally, the pilot can override everything by disengaging the autopilot and auto throttle and flying completely by hand.

This technology makes flying much safer because the crew can monitor the flight and have a much greater oversight of what is happening. It is neither necessary nor desirable to have the pilots flying an airliner manually for more than just short periods of time during NORMAL operations, which is 99.999% of the time. Some folks like to fly more or less by hand but it is rare that a pilot will fly more than the first few minutes by hand and even more rare in modern aviation that he or she will fly a full arrival by hand. The autopilot flies very smoothly and most flying is done with the autopilot with lateral and vertical guidance being commanded electronically by the pilots or FMC, with pilots monitoring the airplane when the FMC is guiding it.

Given that then how much of a treat is stall really? I mean if the plane is 99% self guided then surely it will not guide itself into a stall. Do environmental conditions create situations where stall can occur? It seems to me that the only reason why they needed this system was because they modified an existing air frame design to fit new engines.

Originally Posted by MattTuck

Agree with what Angry said, the bird strike scene from Sully shows how quick they pull out the manual and how they go through it. These planes are so complex now, the decision trees are too much for a person to memorize and recall accurately under stress.


On the point about the market disciplining Boeing. Yes, they will feel the sting as orders get cancelled, they'll suffer reputational damage, and you can bet that international regulators (both from the EU and China) will use this to weaken Boeing while boosting their home aerospace champions. However, I'm not sure I'd describe the system as laissez-faire, so much as a corruption/failure of the regulatory system we have (had?) in place.

Yet at the same time all we have to do down here on earth is say, Ok Google or Hey SIRI and we get answers pretty quick.

[saab2000]

Stalls are generally not a threat but mountain wave turbulence at high altitude is no joke and can cause the indicated airspeed to fluctuate by +/- 20 knots or sometimes even more. And when the window between low speed stall and high speed Mach buffet is only 30-40 knots or less it’s a serious thing. High altitude flight enters a regime called Coffin Corner for a reason.

Stall awareness, prevention and recovery is a cornerstone of aviation training.

[echappist]

Originally Posted by MattTuck

Agree with what Angry said, the bird strike scene from Sully shows how quick they pull out the manual and how they go through it. These planes are so complex now, the decision trees are too much for a person to memorize and recall accurately under stress.


On the point about the market disciplining Boeing. Yes, they will feel the sting as orders get cancelled, they'll suffer reputational damage, and you can bet that international regulators (both from the EU and China) will use this to weaken Boeing while boosting their home aerospace champions. However, I'm not sure I'd describe the system as laissez-faire, so much as a corruption/failure of the regulatory system we have (had?) in place.

insofar as the net result is concerned, difference without distinction, and that's assuming there is a difference in the first place

end result is that Boeing essentially self-certifies

[alancw3]

this cannot be good for being and rightfully so:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/20/asia/...ntl/index.html