• 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 76
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 3:43 pm

art wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
Boeing’s Own Test Pilots Lacked Key Details of 737 MAX Flight-Control System


https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeings-ow ... 1556877600


The start of the article says:

Boeing Co. limited the role of its own pilots in the final stages of developing the 737 MAX flight-control system implicated in two fatal crashes, departing from a longstanding practice of seeking their detailed input, people familiar with the matter said.

As a result, Boeing test pilots and senior pilots involved in the MAX’s development didn’t receive detailed briefings about how fast or steeply the automated system known as MCAS could push down a plane’s nose, these people said.


I thought it was the test pilots who recommended 2;5 degree pitch down per MCAS iteration ather than the original 0.6 degree (as reported). How could that be the case if they were not briefed on it? To me something does not stack up here.


This is old news guys, maybe re-hashed to suggest more than one or of two the test pilots were not told.

But also remember this was about the rate of change rather than the max deflection in a 9.26sec cycle. If my memory serves, the test pilots recommended that the rate of change needed to be greater and possibly over a more extensive part of the envelope after initial testing. The quote from at least one pilot was they were not then informed of, or tested, the change that had been made to address this recommendation.

It was suggested by other posters that the quoted test pilot may not have needed to know, but other test pilots may have been informed/tested the resultant implementation. As far as I know, none of the flight testing would have included fault condition testing.

Ray
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 3:56 pm

This has nothing to do with the topic being discussed, you are trolling.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
morrisond
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 3:58 pm

zeke wrote:
This has nothing to do with the 737 max grounding, by definition that is trolling.



Yes it does when People are suggesting that the 737 needs to be redesigned and won't be safe unless it has an FBW system. FBW systems can have bad software leading to unintended consequences as well.

LH1829 is an example of that.

The 737 can be made safe with a redesigned MCAS and without a Horizontal tailplane redesign.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:01 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
art wrote:
I thought it was the test pilots who recommended 2;5 degree pitch down per MCAS iteration ather than the original 0.6 degree (as reported). How could that be the case if they were not briefed on it? To me something does not stack up here.

Yep, lot's of contradictory info floats around. Stall prevention-not stall prevention, now this...

Interesting comments under the article. One claims that Boeing was under pressure to make its s/w team more 'diverse', even at cost of losing some experience. Not sure if that is true, but I can say with certainty that MCAS was written not by a brightest bunch.



Its the System Design for a hazardous categorised system that is plainly incompetent in my view. The software team, in all likelihood, would have precicely implemented the requirements they were given. This may be another subtle attempt to blame 'foreigners' with poor understanding, training and/or experience for everything.

Ray
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:03 pm

morrisond wrote:
zeke wrote:
FluidFlow

Stop feeding morrisond, I told him earlier on the thread he was wrong, provided the same reference that showed the crew were able to control the aircraft with elevator input.

They are trolling, this has nothing to do with MCAS, stop feeding their off topic lies and rants please.


Zeke - I'm not trolling - I'm trying to understand and you never answered my reply before - he brought it up not me. I'm trying to understand how an A321 FBW system would save the plane with two frozen AOA sensors at 1,000 AGL.


The system works perfectly fine at every speed. But a frozen sensor at 1'000ft AGL will never deliver a value that starts Alpha prot as the velocity of the aircraft at this flight level allows way higher AoA than a commercial aircraft should ever reach during a climb. Dont forget the sensor is frozen so it shows a legitimate AoA value for that phase and to leave this phase of the flight the aircraft has to reach way higher mach numbers which corresponds to higher flight levels.
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:26 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
art wrote:
I thought it was the test pilots who recommended 2;5 degree pitch down per MCAS iteration ather than the original 0.6 degree (as reported). How could that be the case if they were not briefed on it? To me something does not stack up here.

Yep, lot's of contradictory info floats around. Stall prevention-not stall prevention, now this...

Interesting comments under the article. One claims that Boeing was under pressure to make its s/w team more 'diverse', even at cost of losing some experience. Not sure if that is true, but I can say with certainty that MCAS was written not by a brightest bunch.



Its the System Design for a hazardous categorised system that is plainly incompetent in my view. The software team, in all likelihood, would have precicely implemented the requirements they were given. This may be another subtle attempt to blame 'foreigners' with poor understanding, training and/or experience for everything.

Ray

Doing things 'precisely', without giving it a second thought, is not a proper mindset for an engineer involved in airplane design. I don't care for foreigners, I'm one myself. But when focus is shifted from maintaining an experienced team to something else, that is bothering me.

And this has nothing to do with classification. Allowing for multiple repeated activation is STUPID in every context. It would still be stupid, even it was a code for ping-pong game on an XBox, controlling the position of an on-screen paddle.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:45 pm

morrisond wrote:
zeke wrote:
This has nothing to do with the 737 max grounding, by definition that is trolling.



Yes it does when People are suggesting that the 737 needs to be redesigned and won't be safe unless it has an FBW system. FBW systems can have bad software leading to unintended consequences as well.

LH1829 is an example of that.

The 737 can be made safe with a redesigned MCAS and without a Horizontal tailplane redesign.



Still nothing to do with the topic being discussed.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:48 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
Yep, lot's of contradictory info floats around. Stall prevention-not stall prevention, now this...

Interesting comments under the article. One claims that Boeing was under pressure to make its s/w team more 'diverse', even at cost of losing some experience. Not sure if that is true, but I can say with certainty that MCAS was written not by a brightest bunch.



Its the System Design for a hazardous categorised system that is plainly incompetent in my view. The software team, in all likelihood, would have precicely implemented the requirements they were given. This may be another subtle attempt to blame 'foreigners' with poor understanding, training and/or experience for everything.

Ray

Doing things 'precisely', without giving it a second thought, is not a proper mindset for an engineer involved in airplane design. I don't care for foreigners, I'm one myself. But when focus is shifted from maintaining an experienced team to something else, that is bothering me.

And this has nothing to do with classification. Allowing for multiple repeated activation is STUPID in every context. It would still be stupid, even it was a code for ping-pong game on an XBox, controlling the position of an on-screen paddle.


Oh well, I was trying to save you from a potential trap. I accept I failed.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:50 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
morrisond wrote:
zeke wrote:
FluidFlow

Stop feeding morrisond, I told him earlier on the thread he was wrong, provided the same reference that showed the crew were able to control the aircraft with elevator input.

They are trolling, this has nothing to do with MCAS, stop feeding their off topic lies and rants please.


Zeke - I'm not trolling - I'm trying to understand and you never answered my reply before - he brought it up not me. I'm trying to understand how an A321 FBW system would save the plane with two frozen AOA sensors at 1,000 AGL.


The system works perfectly fine at every speed. But a frozen sensor at 1'000ft AGL will never deliver a value that starts Alpha prot as the velocity of the aircraft at this flight level allows way higher AoA than a commercial aircraft should ever reach during a climb. Dont forget the sensor is frozen so it shows a legitimate AoA value for that phase and to leave this phase of the flight the aircraft has to reach way higher mach numbers which corresponds to higher flight levels.


That makes a lot of sense - Thank you for answering. Now I understand.

I guess the only possibility for Alpha Protection activating would have been a double bird strike taking out two AOA vanes - with the odds of that so low not needed to design around.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:54 pm

zeke wrote:
morrisond wrote:
zeke wrote:
This has nothing to do with the 737 max grounding, by definition that is trolling.



Yes it does when People are suggesting that the 737 needs to be redesigned and won't be safe unless it has an FBW system. FBW systems can have bad software leading to unintended consequences as well.

LH1829 is an example of that.

The 737 can be made safe with a redesigned MCAS and without a Horizontal tailplane redesign.



Still nothing to do with the topic being discussed.



Then please tell us all the parameters around the discussion.

Are we not allowed to talk about what is necessary to get the MAX safely back in the air?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 4:56 pm

morrisond wrote:
zeke wrote:
morrisond wrote:


Yes it does when People are suggesting that the 737 needs to be redesigned and won't be safe unless it has an FBW system. FBW systems can have bad software leading to unintended consequences as well.

LH1829 is an example of that.

The 737 can be made safe with a redesigned MCAS and without a Horizontal tailplane redesign.



Still nothing to do with the topic being discussed.



Then please tell us all the parameters around the discussion.

Are we not allowed to talk about what is necessary to get the MAX safely back in the air?


Refer to the OP by the moderator and the thread title.

You are not discussing what is necessary to get the Max flying again.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
airnorth
Posts: 375
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 5:15 pm

Curious if anyone has information or links to issues related to MCAS errors on the new build MAX planes still rolling off the production line. With all of the test flights, and painting trips, plus storage flights, that is quite a few hours of flight time.
Any news on testing of MCAS fixes?

Thanks.



Thanks
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 5:21 pm

airnorth wrote:
Curious if anyone has information or links to issues related to MCAS errors on the new build MAX planes still rolling off the production line. With all of the test flights, and painting trips, plus storage flights, that is quite a few hours of flight time.
Any news on testing of MCAS fixes?

Thanks.



Thanks


They have test flown the new FCC software already on a MAX 7.

https://www.sae.org/news/2019/04/boeing ... are-update
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
starrion
Posts: 1017
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:19 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 5:42 pm

I've seen a lot -a lot- of discussion, but where is Boeing and the Cert. Authorities in the process now? The last I heard was that Boeing had their proposed fix, and they had tested it, but where are they now?
Knowledge Replaces Fear
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 5:55 pm

starrion wrote:
I've seen a lot -a lot- of discussion, but where is Boeing and the Cert. Authorities in the process now? The last I heard was that Boeing had their proposed fix, and they had tested it, but where are they now?


The joint brains trust is reviewing everything, they have had their first meeting

“4/29/2019 12:30pm Update
The FAA has convened today’s initial Joint Authorities Technical Review (JATR) meeting as it evaluates aspects of the original certification of the Boeing 737 MAX’s automated flight control system. This gathering of international civilian aviation authorities and safety technical experts represents the best spirit of cooperation and collaboration that have contributed to aviation’s strong safety record. All participants are committed to a single safety mission, and will not rest where aviation’s safety record is concerned. We expect the JATR to engage in a free and candid discussion that exchanges information and improves future processes. Their work is not a prerequisite for the 737 MAX to return to service. The FAA will continue to share its technical experience and knowledge to support the international aviation community and, specifically over the next three months, the JATR participants.”

From https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=93206
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
planecane
Posts: 1153
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 6:02 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
art wrote:
I thought it was the test pilots who recommended 2;5 degree pitch down per MCAS iteration ather than the original 0.6 degree (as reported). How could that be the case if they were not briefed on it? To me something does not stack up here.

Yep, lot's of contradictory info floats around. Stall prevention-not stall prevention, now this...

Interesting comments under the article. One claims that Boeing was under pressure to make its s/w team more 'diverse', even at cost of losing some experience. Not sure if that is true, but I can say with certainty that MCAS was written not by a brightest bunch.



Its the System Design for a hazardous categorised system that is plainly incompetent in my view. The software team, in all likelihood, would have precicely implemented the requirements they were given. This may be another subtle attempt to blame 'foreigners' with poor understanding, training and/or experience for everything.

Ray

Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen. I used to work for a large corporations with thousands of engineers. When I was hired, an African American engineer was hired simultaneously. He was not a good engineer (not due to his race, he just wasn't very good). I was told flat out by a manager that the engineering management did not want to offer him a position based on interviews but they were ordered to by human resources.

I can guarantee you that Boeing hires some people based on their sex or race more than their skills. Not all of these will be bad hires but there will be some. If one of the bad hires is tasked with a critical design, "diversity" could very well be at fault.

I worked with plenty of good minority engineers, but I'm pointing out an example where someone would not have been hired at my former company if they weren't a minority.
 
MrBretz
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 6:31 pm

Planecane, your comment is off base. I was a software engineer and software engineering manager. I am Hispanic. I was never hired for my ethnicity. And in fact, I found most software engineers quite inferior to me. And my management almost always felt the same way. In engineering, you work as a group. And even if someone is not as good as the rest, design reviews sort the flaws and weak design and people out. I can’t tell you the number of times I have sat at reviews, noted flaws regardless of race/sex, etc. and informed the people. Do you really think someone would be afraid to point out flaws in an approach because the person was a minority? I have never seen that in any organization I have worked at. The flaws were just missed here. Sadly, we humans are not perfect. We examine, redesign, and make things better. That’s the engineering process.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 6:39 pm

planecane wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
Yep, lot's of contradictory info floats around. Stall prevention-not stall prevention, now this...

Interesting comments under the article. One claims that Boeing was under pressure to make its s/w team more 'diverse', even at cost of losing some experience. Not sure if that is true, but I can say with certainty that MCAS was written not by a brightest bunch.



Its the System Design for a hazardous categorised system that is plainly incompetent in my view. The software team, in all likelihood, would have precicely implemented the requirements they were given. This may be another subtle attempt to blame 'foreigners' with poor understanding, training and/or experience for everything.

Ray

Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen. I used to work for a large corporations with thousands of engineers. When I was hired, an African American engineer was hired simultaneously. He was not a good engineer (not due to his race, he just wasn't very good). I was told flat out by a manager that the engineering management did not want to offer him a position based on interviews but they were ordered to by human resources.

I can guarantee you that Boeing hires some people based on their sex or race more than their skills. Not all of these will be bad hires but there will be some. If one of the bad hires is tasked with a critical design, "diversity" could very well be at fault.

I worked with plenty of good minority engineers, but I'm pointing out an example where someone would not have been hired at my former company if they weren't a minority.


The trap is sprung!
 
airnorth
Posts: 375
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 6:41 pm

zeke wrote:
airnorth wrote:
Curious if anyone has information or links to issues related to MCAS errors on the new build MAX planes still rolling off the production line. With all of the test flights, and painting trips, plus storage flights, that is quite a few hours of flight time.
Any news on testing of MCAS fixes?

Thanks.



Thanks


They have test flown the new FCC software already on a MAX 7.

https://www.sae.org/news/2019/04/boeing ... are-update


Thanks Zeke!
 
Agrajag
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:23 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 6:49 pm

Boeing orginally intended, and presumably still intends, Max pilots to have their ongoing training and checks on NG simulators with no MCAS etc. If this is deemed unacceptable going forward, what is the production rate of Max sims?
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.
Slartibartfast had a point
 
morrisond
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 7:03 pm

I think Southwest will only have one by Winter.
 
sgbroimp
Posts: 202
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 7:22 pm

"I guess the only possibility for Alpha Protection activating would have been a double bird strike taking out two AOA vanes - with the odds of that so low not needed to design around."

Double bird strike wiping out equipment on both side of the aircraft? That seems Sully very unlikely Hudson doesn't ditching it?
 
Ryan877
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 2:47 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 7:35 pm

How long do you guys think this grounding will go on for?
 
planecane
Posts: 1153
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 7:43 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
planecane wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:


Its the System Design for a hazardous categorised system that is plainly incompetent in my view. The software team, in all likelihood, would have precicely implemented the requirements they were given. This may be another subtle attempt to blame 'foreigners' with poor understanding, training and/or experience for everything.

Ray

Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen. I used to work for a large corporations with thousands of engineers. When I was hired, an African American engineer was hired simultaneously. He was not a good engineer (not due to his race, he just wasn't very good). I was told flat out by a manager that the engineering management did not want to offer him a position based on interviews but they were ordered to by human resources.

I can guarantee you that Boeing hires some people based on their sex or race more than their skills. Not all of these will be bad hires but there will be some. If one of the bad hires is tasked with a critical design, "diversity" could very well be at fault.

I worked with plenty of good minority engineers, but I'm pointing out an example where someone would not have been hired at my former company if they weren't a minority.


The trap is sprung!


Trap? I'm not saying this had anything to do with the MCAS design and I have no direct knowledge about what goes on at Boeing. I provided an example of something that did happen at another large company (BTW, the manager that told me was a minority).

If you think these types of hiring decisions aren't sometimes made for diversity at all large corporations you are very naive.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 8:02 pm

planecane wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
planecane wrote:
Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen. I used to work for a large corporations with thousands of engineers. When I was hired, an African American engineer was hired simultaneously. He was not a good engineer (not due to his race, he just wasn't very good). I was told flat out by a manager that the engineering management did not want to offer him a position based on interviews but they were ordered to by human resources.

I can guarantee you that Boeing hires some people based on their sex or race more than their skills. Not all of these will be bad hires but there will be some. If one of the bad hires is tasked with a critical design, "diversity" could very well be at fault.

I worked with plenty of good minority engineers, but I'm pointing out an example where someone would not have been hired at my former company if they weren't a minority.


The trap is sprung!


Trap? I'm not saying this had anything to do with the MCAS design and I have no direct knowledge about what goes on at Boeing. I provided an example of something that did happen at another large company (BTW, the manager that told me was a minority).

If you think these types of hiring decisions aren't sometimes made for diversity at all large corporations you are very naive.

Naïve? maybe. But not enough to open a discussion on diversity in relation to MAX crashes and causes.

Ray
 
flybucky
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:44 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 8:11 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
I see no need at all for there to be a new thread! You only see a page of 50 replies each time, and if you're following it you go to the newest unread posting - so the thread could be 500,000 pages long and it would make literally no difference to me logging on and seeing the twenty new replies since I last logged in! On the old forum software, people had trouble viewing long threads (apparently - my browser never had an issue with them) so that's where this thread-breaking moderation behaviour comes from - but it's totally unnecessary on the current software, and actually makes it harder to keep track!

Agreed. Here's a practical reason for not creating new threads. There's a box at the top for "Search this topic". It's very useful to search for keywords previously mentioned in the thread. If you create a new thread, the posts in the old thread won't show up. This could lead to more duplicate posts.
 
flybucky
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:44 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 8:24 pm

axio wrote:
Something that puzzles me in the preliminary report is:
"At 05:43:11, about 32 seconds before the end of the recording, at approximately 13,4002ft, two momentary manual electric trim inputs are recorded in the ANU (aircraft nose up) direction. The stabilizer moved in the ANU direction from 2.1 units to 2.3 units."
If I understand correctly, if the stab trim is cutout, then the electric trim is disconnected ("If either switch is positioned to CUTOUT, both the autopilot and main electric trim inputs are disconnected from the stabilizer trim motor."). Does that mean that the stab trim was no longer cutout, or is manual electric trim different to main electric trim?

Also interesting is "At 05:41:46, the Captain asked the First-Officer if the trim is functional. The First-Officer has replied that the trim was not working and asked if he could try it manually. The Captain told him to try. At 05:41:54, the First-Office replied that it is not working.". They had confirmed stab trim cutout one minute earlier, so does this mean the Captain had forgotten (understandable in the situation, and possibly a double-check)? Or is this manual-electric as opposed to manual-manual (i.e. getting the handle out and manipulating the wheel)?

I suggest you post these questions to the ET302 thread since these are specific details about ET302 flight, and not MAX grounding.

Original ET302 thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1417519
These topics have already been discussed in the days following the release of the Preliminary Report. Use the "Search this Topic" feature to find previous discussions. For example, you could search for terms like "05:41:46". Or jump to Apr 4, 2019, which is when the PR was released.

New ET302 thread: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1421473
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 8:26 pm

Agrajag wrote:
Boeing orginally intended, and presumably still intends, Max pilots to have their ongoing training and checks on NG simulators with no MCAS etc. If this is deemed unacceptable going forward, what is the production rate of Max sims?


I think the likely hood of NG simulator being unacceptable for MAX training is even less than a single bird strike taking out both AOA vanes. I doubt any MCAS simulator training will be required -- what failure do you demonstrate with MCAS (2). Also if MCAS training were to be required there would probably be a work around in place to do it in an NG sim do to the lack of MAX sims available.

I think any simulator training to come out of this would probably be related to how to handle a stick shaker on takeoff with an airspeed disagreement -- never saw one of those in a simulator..
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 9:43 pm

sgbroimp wrote:
"I guess the only possibility for Alpha Protection activating would have been a double bird strike taking out two AOA vanes - with the odds of that so low not needed to design around."

Double bird strike wiping out equipment on both side of the aircraft? That seems Sully very unlikely Hudson doesn't ditching it?


For the Alpha protection to activate they would have to been taken out almost exactly the same way (in the same angle) because if the disagree is to much between the different angles the aircraft switches to alternate law.

On the new MCAS this would result in MCAS being deactivated.
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 9:45 pm

MrBretz wrote:
Planecane, your comment is off base. I was a software engineer and software engineering manager. I am Hispanic. I was never hired for my ethnicity.


Right on! I'm white male and I too was never hired for my ethnicity.

It is settled then. That proves that gender and ethnicity was never a consideration in hiring process. We can all move to other topics now.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 10:00 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
art wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
Boeing’s Own Test Pilots Lacked Key Details of 737 MAX Flight-Control System


https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeings-ow ... 1556877600


The start of the article says:

Boeing Co. limited the role of its own pilots in the final stages of developing the 737 MAX flight-control system implicated in two fatal crashes, departing from a longstanding practice of seeking their detailed input, people familiar with the matter said.

As a result, Boeing test pilots and senior pilots involved in the MAX’s development didn’t receive detailed briefings about how fast or steeply the automated system known as MCAS could push down a plane’s nose, these people said.


I thought it was the test pilots who recommended 2;5 degree pitch down per MCAS iteration ather than the original 0.6 degree (as reported). How could that be the case if they were not briefed on it? To me something does not stack up here.


This is old news guys, maybe re-hashed to suggest more than one or of two the test pilots were not told.

But also remember this was about the rate of change rather than the max deflection in a 9.26sec cycle. If my memory serves, the test pilots recommended that the rate of change needed to be greater and possibly over a more extensive part of the envelope after initial testing. The quote from at least one pilot was they were not then informed of, or tested, the change that had been made to address this recommendation.

It was suggested by other posters that the quoted test pilot may not have needed to know, but other test pilots may have been informed/tested the resultant implementation. As far as I know, none of the flight testing would have included fault condition testing.

Ray

From the Southwest email:
The deviation is detectable by test equipment, but not by most Pilots (it is in single digits of pounds of force).


So… a barely detectable deviation prompted test pilots to recommend a change to MCAS? If the deviation is so slight, then I would think it far more likely that engineers reviewing the test data would have recommended the change from 0.6 to 2.5.
 
MrBretz
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 03, 2019 10:11 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
MrBretz wrote:
Planecane, your comment is off base. I was a software engineer and software engineering manager. I am Hispanic. I was never hired for my ethnicity.


Right on! I'm white male and I too was never hired for my ethnicity.

It is settled then. That proves that gender and ethnicity was never a consideration in hiring process. We can all move to other topics now.


In case you missed it, planecane brought it up. I didn’t. And my comment didn't have much to do with hiring. It had to do with competence in the software engineering environment. It varies and has little do with race or sex. And if you have someone who is not quite up to snuff, such things as design/code/test reveiws, etc. let you work around the lower performing folks.

I do agree, let’s move on.
 
xmp125a
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 12:50 am

planecane wrote:
Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen.


1) First the obvious (for the moderators as well). This discussion is not off-topic, because the answer what needs to be done for MAX to be flying again is pretty simple: Boeing needs to show that they know and understand what caused the grounding and that remedied that.
2) Diversity cannot be factor here, because the embedded code for safety critical system is never done single-handedly by some coding monkey. The behaviour and interfaces have to be designed, specified, validated, then coded and tested. And reviewed. There are number of OKs and signatures such piece of code needs before it is accepted to production. If a "diversity hire" managed to pull this fckup on his/hers own then the Boeing system is truly broken and basically in tatters.
3) Now, in reference to 1 and 2, as the condition to fly again Boeing should demonstrate what went wrong in the 737MAX DESIGN PROCESS ... not what was wrong with MCAS. We all basically know what is wrong with MCAS. The billion dollar question is how on Earth was MCAS allowed to happen. and then what steps Boeing took that this does not happen again, and what revisions and checks have been done to assure there are no more hidden MCAS-like gremlins in 737MAX design.

I see that Boeing is totally unwilling to address these issues, and is instead arming the lawyers. Good. Let 737MAX remain grounded everywhere except USA then.Then they will listen.

I hope that EASA learned from trusting FAA too much, and that they demand that Boeing stops pretending that reducing MCAS authority from 2.4 to 0.6 is the fix. No it is not. Boeing design process is flawed and until they demonstrate that they a) fixed the process and b) reviewed ALL design decisions regarding 737MAX to verify there are no more hidden issues caused by the broken design process, 737MAX remain grounded.

It is pretty obvious that many at FAA and EASA are now well aware that if next 737MAX crashes due to design issues, that then aviation world would truly turn upside down.
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 2:02 am

xmp125a wrote:
planecane wrote:
Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen.


1) First the obvious (for the moderators as well). This discussion is not off-topic, because the answer what needs to be done for MAX to be flying again is pretty simple: Boeing needs to show that they know and understand what caused the grounding and that remedied that.
2) Diversity cannot be factor here, because the embedded code for safety critical system is never done single-handedly by some coding monkey. The behaviour and interfaces have to be designed, specified, validated, then coded and tested. And reviewed. There are number of OKs and signatures such piece of code needs before it is accepted to production. If a "diversity hire" managed to pull this fckup on his/hers own then the Boeing system is truly broken and basically in tatters.
3) Now, in reference to 1 and 2, as the condition to fly again Boeing should demonstrate what went wrong in the 737MAX DESIGN PROCESS ... not what was wrong with MCAS. We all basically know what is wrong with MCAS. The billion dollar question is how on Earth was MCAS allowed to happen. and then what steps Boeing took that this does not happen again, and what revisions and checks have been done to assure there are no more hidden MCAS-like gremlins in 737MAX design.

I see that Boeing is totally unwilling to address these issues, and is instead arming the lawyers. Good. Let 737MAX remain grounded everywhere except USA then.Then they will listen.

I hope that EASA learned from trusting FAA too much, and that they demand that Boeing stops pretending that reducing MCAS authority from 2.4 to 0.6 is the fix. No it is not. Boeing design process is flawed and until they demonstrate that they a) fixed the process and b) reviewed ALL design decisions regarding 737MAX to verify there are no more hidden issues caused by the broken design process, 737MAX remain grounded.

It is pretty obvious that many at FAA and EASA are now well aware that if next 737MAX crashes due to design issues, that then aviation world would truly turn upside down.


3a - Why did the system fault analysis glaze over the single-sensor input????
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 314
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 2:58 am

xmp125a wrote:
because the embedded code for safety critical system is never done single-handedly by some coding monkey.


In case of a MCAS I am thinking it was not even a code-monkey but an actual monkey.

3) Now, in reference to 1 and 2, as the condition to fly again Boeing should demonstrate what went wrong in the 737MAX DESIGN PROCESS ... not what was wrong with MCAS. We all basically know what is wrong with MCAS. The billion dollar question is how on Earth was MCAS allowed to happen. and then what steps Boeing took that this does not happen again, and what revisions and checks have been done to assure there are no more hidden MCAS-like gremlins in 737MAX design.

Yes. YES. Unfortunately Boeing's position is that nothing went wrong with MCAS and nothing went wrong with MAX. Not very reassuring to me.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 3:13 am

7BOEING7 wrote:
I think any simulator training to come out of this would probably be related to how to handle a stick shaker on takeoff with an airspeed disagreement -- never saw one of those in a simulator..


I think what most people do not realise if after the initial type rating most regulators have a very stock profile that pilots need to perform every 6 months and involves testing of the pilots skill rather than training.

The profile is something like a V1 engine failure climb and return for a single engine approach and missed approach, non precision approach and missed approach and then a LVP approach and landing.

Training for a runaway trim, airspeed unreliable etc is not required by many regulators after the initial type rating. Granted some airlines do do this sort or training, and LOFT exercises beyond the minimum requirements.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
morrisond
Posts: 1398
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 4:57 am

zeke wrote:
7BOEING7 wrote:
I think any simulator training to come out of this would probably be related to how to handle a stick shaker on takeoff with an airspeed disagreement -- never saw one of those in a simulator..


I think what most people do not realise if after the initial type rating most regulators have a very stock profile that pilots need to perform every 6 months and involves testing of the pilots skill rather than training.

The profile is something like a V1 engine failure climb and return for a single engine approach and missed approach, non precision approach and missed approach and then a LVP approach and landing.

Training for a runaway trim, airspeed unreliable etc is not required by many regulators after the initial type rating. Granted some airlines do do this sort or training, and LOFT exercises beyond the minimum requirements.


Zeke - would you agree that the lack of recurrent training on non-normal procedures after initial type rating is probably not the best idea?

Frankly that's not a very safe situation if that is the current state of training - but I thank you for having the guts to share it.

I calculated in the beginning of the other thread that adding $5 to every airline ticket would buy 3 hours of sim time for every pilot every month to practise non normal procedures. While that might be a little too much training do you agree it would go a long way to improving safety?
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13994
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 5:44 am

I won’t go around pointing fingers, however I think it would be fair to say an airline’s approach to providing services to passengers is also reflected on the training side.

Your larger full service airlines I would suggest would have crew in a simulator every 3 months and do LOFT exercises that cover non normal situations.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 651
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 9:22 am

xmp125a wrote:
planecane wrote:
Regarding the comments about diversity driving hiring in a major corporation, it definitely does happen.


1) First the obvious (for the moderators as well). This discussion is not off-topic, because the answer what needs to be done for MAX to be flying again is pretty simple: Boeing needs to show that they know and understand what caused the grounding and that remedied that.
2) Diversity cannot be factor here, because the embedded code for safety critical system is never done single-handedly by some coding monkey. The behaviour and interfaces have to be designed, specified, validated, then coded and tested. And reviewed. There are number of OKs and signatures such piece of code needs before it is accepted to production. If a "diversity hire" managed to pull this fckup on his/hers own then the Boeing system is truly broken and basically in tatters.
3) Now, in reference to 1 and 2, as the condition to fly again Boeing should demonstrate what went wrong in the 737MAX DESIGN PROCESS ... not what was wrong with MCAS. We all basically know what is wrong with MCAS. The billion dollar question is how on Earth was MCAS allowed to happen. and then what steps Boeing took that this does not happen again, and what revisions and checks have been done to assure there are no more hidden MCAS-like gremlins in 737MAX design.

I see that Boeing is totally unwilling to address these issues, and is instead arming the lawyers. Good. Let 737MAX remain grounded everywhere except USA then.Then they will listen.

I hope that EASA learned from trusting FAA too much, and that they demand that Boeing stops pretending that reducing MCAS authority from 2.4 to 0.6 is the fix. No it is not. Boeing design process is flawed and until they demonstrate that they a) fixed the process and b) reviewed ALL design decisions regarding 737MAX to verify there are no more hidden issues caused by the broken design process, 737MAX remain grounded.

It is pretty obvious that many at FAA and EASA are now well aware that if next 737MAX crashes due to design issues, that then aviation world would truly turn upside down.

:checkmark:
Well done post ! I fully agree.

Once again, this to bring on the table how risky is to release the 337 MAX before the JT610 and ET302 final reports are published in a context where Boeing are not willing to accept any error. How the FAA, EASA and others authorities can blindly trust Boeing without independent in deep analysis of how the design and safety assessment processes have go so wrong in so many ways ?
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 10:53 am

Arguably the most damning indictment made by the legal types to date. If you have the time, its worth a skimming one or other of the complaints linked in the report.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 08403.html

I've not seen any lawsuits that indict EA or Ethiopian government agencies yet?

Ray
 
MKKing
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 4:27 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 11:49 am

Some 400 Boeing 737 max with many airlines worldwide and 200 Boeing 737 ready to be delivered to airline companies, some 600 big planes have been grounded
 
zhetenyi1973
Posts: 5
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 7:08 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 12:08 pm

Hi, SW engineer here. First, everyone here should read these:

http://www.logikalsolutions.com/wordpre ... m-the-sky/

https://hypothesis-discovery.com/2019/0 ... e-product/

I agree that the MCAS situation is very close to the AGILE process.
I also think that only one person was responsible for the SW design and there
was only very few requirements.

It also seems that whoever wrote the code didn't know anything about flying.
I am not an aviator but even I know that pushing down the nose is dangerous
without considering other factors like airspeed and altitude.

I'd have also asked the person who gave the requirements why there was no
'nose up' command (after nose down) from MCAS. It looks like it is up to the
pilots to do that and this does not make any sense at all.

I also has a theory why MCAS uses the 2.5 units limit in an iteration. We know
0.6 was not enough, so what can be the next value? It's 2.5 because it is half
of 5. And 5 is the neutral position. So, just take half that value and that should
be enough. This is how AGILE works.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9059
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 12:14 pm

So do we think that the single person who wrote the code was somehow related to the pilots who initially tested and said revisions were required and did not think that they should be removed from the need to up trim?
Methinks we have a lot of information out there and need the officials to tell us what they deem to be official.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 12:27 pm

zhetenyi1973 wrote:
Hi, SW engineer here. First, everyone here should read these:

http://www.logikalsolutions.com/wordpre ... m-the-sky/

https://hypothesis-discovery.com/2019/0 ... e-product/

I agree that the MCAS situation is very close to the AGILE process.
I also think that only one person was responsible for the SW design and there
was only very few requirements.

It also seems that whoever wrote the code didn't know anything about flying.
I am not an aviator but even I know that pushing down the nose is dangerous
without considering other factors like airspeed and altitude.

I'd have also asked the person who gave the requirements why there was no
'nose up' command (after nose down) from MCAS. It looks like it is up to the
pilots to do that and this does not make any sense at all.

I also has a theory why MCAS uses the 2.5 units limit in an iteration. We know
0.6 was not enough, so what can be the next value? It's 2.5 because it is half
of 5. And 5 is the neutral position. So, just take half that value and that should
be enough. This is how AGILE works.


Unlikely. Its the System design that incompetent. If software was implemented in this way it would also be whoely non-compliant with the declared design and development standards the CEO would have had to resign 6 months ago.

Ray
 
kayik
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 1:14 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
Arguably the most damning indictment made by the legal types to date. If you have the time, its worth a skimming one or other of the complaints linked in the report.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 08403.html

I've not seen any lawsuits that indict EA or Ethiopian government agencies yet?

Ray


Very good reading. The complaints are well laid out showing the experience of the law firm in aviation. 3 of the 5 lawyers listed are military trained pilots. I am not sure whether they were top gun trained. :smile:

It looks like this is a law firm initiated move for a success fee.

Jury will be the key factor of success. Lawyers will aim to provoke empathy in Joes using the "extreme fear for 11 minutes prior to death" card.

Will be an interesting case to follow. Scriptwriters will be interested too.
 
Jetty
Posts: 975
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 12:27 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 1:18 pm

kayik wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Arguably the most damning indictment made by the legal types to date. If you have the time, its worth a skimming one or other of the complaints linked in the report.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 08403.html

I've not seen any lawsuits that indict EA or Ethiopian government agencies yet?

Ray
Very good reading.

:checkmark: They seem to understand MCAS

“the worst design in the history of modern commercial aviation”
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 2:50 pm

kayik wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Arguably the most damning indictment made by the legal types to date. If you have the time, its worth a skimming one or other of the complaints linked in the report.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 08403.html

I've not seen any lawsuits that indict EA or Ethiopian government agencies yet?

Ray


Very good reading. The complaints are well laid out showing the experience of the law firm in aviation. 3 of the 5 lawyers listed are military trained pilots. I am not sure whether they were top gun trained. :smile:

It looks like this is a law firm initiated move for a success fee.

Jury will be the key factor of success. Lawyers will aim to provoke empathy in Joes using the "extreme fear for 11 minutes prior to death" card.

Will be an interesting case to follow. Scriptwriters will be interested too.

Expect it to be settled out of court. Dont think Boeing wil want any of it contested in court wether confident in their position or not.

Ray
 
AVGeekNY
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 2:31 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 2:52 pm

Hi all--- I'm new to Airliners as a poster but long time reader. Forgive me if this was already discussed and posted but I suggest you read an article by a guy named Gregory Travis "How the Boeing 737 Max Disaster Looks to a Software Developer (and pilot)" that was published in IEEE Spectrum. It was also republished at this link …. https://medium.com/@gregoryreedtravis/t ... b1869839b6

After reading the article I'm not really sure if the 737Max can ever be as safe as its predecessors... I hope the pilots stand strong against the pressure from corporate dollars. I'd really be interested in feedback about this article from any 737 pilots.

A few excerpts from his long and very well written article.

Why would a commercial airliner with a long history of safety and reliability experience two recent fatal crashes within minutes of takeoff? Is it, in fact, a new aircraft, with fundamentally different handling characteristics that required fundamentally different operational software — and pilot training? And given the aircraft and airline industries’ inherent interest in safety, how could a new aircraft have been introduced into fleets worldwide without the requisite training? Differences in costs — and philosophies — between hardware and software provide an explanation.


EVERTHING about the design and manufacture of the MAX was done to preserve the myth that ‘it’s just a 737.’ Re-certifying it as a new aircraft would have taken years and millions of dollars. In fact, the pilot licensed to fly the 737 in 1967 is still licensed to fly all subsequent versions of the 737”

the 737 MAX the engine nacelles themselves can, at high angles of attack, produce lift (like a wing). And the lift they produce is well ahead of the wing’s center of lift, meaning the nacelles will cause the 737 MAX at a high angle of attack to go to a higherangle of attack. This is aerodynamic malpractice of the worst kind.
 
planecane
Posts: 1153
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 3:38 pm

Jetty wrote:
kayik wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Arguably the most damning indictment made by the legal types to date. If you have the time, its worth a skimming one or other of the complaints linked in the report.

https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-relea ... 08403.html

I've not seen any lawsuits that indict EA or Ethiopian government agencies yet?

Ray
Very good reading.

:checkmark: They seem to understand MCAS

“the worst design in the history of modern commercial aviation”


That is lawsuit hyperbole. The 787 original battery was a worse design. That could have caused an unrecoverable situation.

As bad as the MCAS logic was, it was recoverable in both cases. Not even by doing a NNC. Both crews could have continued to counteract the MCAS trim with the thumb switch. Why the lion air crew stopped trimming may never be known. It takes almost no physical effort so it couldn't have been exhaustion.

The ET crew seems to have turned off the electric trim before counteracting MCAS due to a misunderstanding or misapplication of the procedure.

Either way, since it was recoverable, and relatively simply so, MCAS is not the worst design in modern aviation.
 
Nils75cz
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2019 10:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 04, 2019 4:39 pm

Two downs in less than six months. Easily to counteract. Certainly. Top of the notch design.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 76

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos