OT: Boeing 737 MAX

[goonster]

Originally Posted by saab2000

Critical situations can bring out the best and the worst in all of us and we can only hope we would know the right thing to do in this situation.

I've been in situations like this before, but of course in my case "critical" doesn't mean that hundreds of lives are at stake, merely that something relatively minor will flood or break.

What happened, mostly, is that I pushed the same useless button over and over, saying some variation of "why isn't it doing what it's supposed to be doing?"

With hindsight, it's always glaringly obvious.

[sitzmark]

Originally Posted by Black Dog

I agree with your statement that I bolded, however, isn't part of the issue at hand here is a system that was not disabled because the pilots we're not even aware that it existed and Boeing did not disclose in its flight manuals?

Possibly true - I have no personal knowledge of what is/is not in the flight manual. I would find it unacceptable that a pilot would fly any plane and not know the function of all switches or modules in the cockpit. What training/validation process would allow that? More than just the manufacturer is at fault if a pilot does not know all of the controls in his cockpit.

[unterhausen]

Originally Posted by Tony T

As a passenger, I would prefer my pilots to have these 2 indicators.

not only that, but if there is a disagreement, then the MCAS function shouldn't have the authority it currently has.

I saw that there is a grand jury looking into this and the FBI is possibly involved because of the Seattle Times story. This is contrary to normal crash investigation practice where people are not threatened with jail due to the expectation that they be fully honest with the investigation. Will be really interesting to see how this plays out.

[speedevil]

I was a flight instructor for a number of years (about 6000 flight hours in the logbook) and my biggest worry was signing off a student for their first solo flight.

I demonstrated spin entry and recovery, and would not sign a student off for solo flight until they had recovered from a spin.

Spin recovery is not intuitive, and must be learned. Demonstrating entry into a spin also shows the flight attitude that (can) precipitate a spin. Of course stall entry and recovery is demonstrated and practiced before we move on to spin entry and recovery.

I felt better as an instructor knowing that my students had shown me that they could recognize and recover from spins. I never want to receive THAT phone call. No instructor does.

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by speedevil

I was a flight instructor for a number of years (about 6000 flight hours in the logbook) and my biggest worry was signing off a student for their first solo flight.

I demonstrated spin entry and recovery, and would not sign a student off for solo flight until they had recovered from a spin.

Spin recovery is not intuitive, and must be learned. Demonstrating entry into a spin also shows the flight attitude that (can) precipitate a spin. Of course stall entry and recovery is demonstrated and practiced before we move on to spin entry and recovery.

I felt better as an instructor knowing that my students had shown me that they could recognize and recover from spins. I never want to receive THAT phone call. No instructor does.

The FAA no longer requires or recommends that flight students do actual spins during primary training. Apparently, they found that they were losing too many students (and instructors) by doing spins. Now "incipient spin" awareness is taught, including discussing spin recovery, without doing actual spins.

[djm]

Originally Posted by batman1425

As if their customer service wasn't bad enough... Another great reason to choose another carrier.

Originally Posted by Tony T

As a passenger, I would prefer my pilots to have these 2 indicators.

Traditionally airliners are flown with primary reference to airspeed rather than angle of attack which is why its display is not standard. The AOA sensors are principally used to drive stall warning and intervention systems (annunciators, audio alerts, stick shakers / pushers). Certainly a comparator between the AOA sensors should be a standard feature.

[alancw3]

what I have gleamed this morning is the plane did not have the two options that Boeing now offers as standard. or did not offer when. I would guess that this does not bode well for Boeing and rightfully so if true. so wait you have to offer an option to make a plane safe to fly? it will be interesting to see how this all plays out. mean while Boeing stock has tanked over the last two days. I personally would not fly on a 737max until this is resolved.

[sailorboy]

This may have killed more people more decisively than NOX has (though that's possibly debatable) but this is starting to look a lot like the dieselgate scandal in terms of corporate impact. Seems like some heads will have to roll at Boeing. Then again, different side of the political spectrum in charge now.

[glepore]

Found this link on another (porsche) board- https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/22/bj...-crash-part-2/

Very interesting theory indeed.

[saab2000]

Originally Posted by glepore

Found this link on another (porsche) board- https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/22/bj...-crash-part-2/

Very interesting theory indeed.

Interesting. Good article and written by someone with flight experience and an understanding of what’s happening.

Thanks for the link!

[fa63]

Someone tell me if I have this straight:

One way to fight a stall is to increase air speed, but if you increase it too much, you can get outside the safe flying envelope of the aircraft and cause blowback, which is just as dangerous?

[Louis]

Originally Posted by fa63

but if you increase it too much, you can get outside the safe flying envelope of the aircraft

This ^^^ is always the case.

If you think you're going to stall because you're getting bad data from your instruments, but aren't really going to stall, then you might try the wrong corrective action end up exceeding one of your airspeed limits.

But if you're truly about to stall then your likelihood of going too fast is just about zero.

Bottom line - the two conditions (stall and excessive speed) are not simultaneous, and in fact stalls are typically caused by airspeed being too low.

Caveat: I'm not a pilot.

[glepore]

Originally Posted by fa63

Someone tell me if I have this straight:

One way to fight a stall is to increase air speed, but if you increase it too much, you can get outside the safe flying envelope of the aircraft and cause blowback, which is just as dangerous?

xactly. Pull all ya want, but the elevators are friggin stuck. And you fly faster when the plane exhibits stall behavior, because. Its coffin corner.

[glepore]

Go over to pprune if you wanna od on this stuff. Cool place.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

The FAA no longer requires or recommends that flight students do actual spins during primary training. Apparently, they found that they were losing too many students (and instructors) by doing spins. Now "incipient spin" awareness is taught, including discussing spin recovery, without doing actual spins.

That's too bad...I agree, recognizing stall, pre stall conditions and reacting properly is the key but of the the guy really goons it up and spins that wee Cessna 152..it would be nice if the person knows how to recover. 'Just letting go of everything' won't necessarily lead to a early enough recovery.

I taught OOC/spin recovery in the mighty Combat Buckeye(T-2C) and even steely eyed fleet fighter guys sometimes gooned the recovery up and started whining like a nancy..Yup, spun the jet, even did inverted spins and tumbles..Stout little jet. Important to understand adverse yaw, proverse roll, etc. and what different control surfaces do when you stall and then spin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3XnBFDE_vQ

BTW-for the other, stall vs airspeed..there is such a thing as high speed stalls..you yank on so much G that the boundry layer DOES separate from the wings=stall..but really unusual for an airliner.