nehalem
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 7:39 pm

kalvado wrote:
StTim wrote:
Dominion301 wrote:
My apologies if this has already been posted, but there is now speculation that bird strikes to the MCAS sensor might have caused the crash: https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... n-airlines



I don't know what to make of this.


Personally what difference does this make. A bird takes out a single sensor and the plane turns into a death ride. MCAS implementation still at fault.

Boeing lawyers will play bird strike as an act of God to relieve company liability.


Because a bird running into a plane is clearly an unforeseeable event that Boeing shouldn't be expected design for :lol:
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1716
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 7:48 pm

morrisond wrote:
This can be the thread where you Boeing bash all day long and we will make another one about training?

Would that make you happy?

I don't believe that anybody is happy about any aspect of the MAX grounding.

It is clear, that on-topic posts in this thread predominantly won't paint a nice picture of Boeing. That is inevitable. Similar like the A380 production stop thread about Airbus.

This thread here by nature is a hard topic for Boeing, so even from neutral commenters a lot of critical voices should be expected and Boeing and their supporters IMO simply need to bear it. Would there be no failure on Boeings side, there would be no complaints. But if the level of Boeings failure and the level of warranted complaints are in a balance, the result would obviously be some hard stuff for faithful Boeing fans.

But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing. Go and count the posts that would belong in the ET crash thread! The posts in this thread are about 70-90% off topic. The zeal how you and other posters try to make this thread appear more pleasant for Boeing than deserved, is admirable. But please don't forget, the MAX grounding is unprecedented in impact, duration and financial damage. A bit more self reflection and humility would make Boeings position much more friendly.

As explained earlier: training (and hence safety overall) in general is good enough. On a worldwide scale aviation safety is exceptional (and better than ever). The MAX is grounded because it had dangerous and serious design flaws. The design was so bad and lacking totally the usual fault tolerance, that with an unseen rate pilots were trapped in it. It was to be expected, that the worst pilots were trapped first. But this is not the point. The point is, that the same kind of pilots happily contributed and contribute to the supreme safety records of the NG and the A320s. Therefore the common denominator was not bad training, it was the MAX. Therefore the MAX is grounded and all this is not painting a nice picture of the rushed development and certification. Bear it like a man!

For complaints about ET pilots, the thread about the crash would be the intended place.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
kalvado
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 7:55 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
morrisond wrote:
This can be the thread where you Boeing bash all day long and we will make another one about training?

Would that make you happy?

I don't believe that anybody is happy about any aspect of the MAX grounding.

It is clear, that on-topic posts in this thread predominantly won't paint a nice picture of Boeing. That is inevitable. Similar like the A380 production stop thread about Airbus.

This thread here by nature is a hard topic for Boeing, so even from neutral commenters a lot of critical voices should be expected and Boeing and their supporters IMO simply need to bear it. Would there be no failure on Boeings side, there would be no complaints. But if the level of Boeings failure and the level of warranted complaints are in a balance, the result would obviously be some hard stuff for faithful Boeing fans.

But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing. Go and count the posts that would belong in the ET crash thread! The posts in this thread are about 70-90% off topic. The zeal how you and other posters try to make this thread appear more pleasant for Boeing than deserved, is admirable. But please don't forget, the MAX grounding is unprecedented in impact, duration and financial damage. A bit more self reflection and humility would make Boeings position much more friendly.

As explained earlier: training (and hence safety overall) in general is good enough. On a worldwide scale aviation safety is exceptional (and better than ever). The MAX is grounded because it had dangerous and serious design flaws. The design was so bad and lacking totally the usual fault tolerance, that with an unseen rate pilots were trapped in it. It was to be expected, that the worst pilots were trapped first. But this is not the point. The point is, that the same kind of pilots happily contributed and contribute to the supreme safety records of the NG and the A320s. Therefore the common denominator was not bad training, it was the MAX. Therefore the MAX is grounded and all this is not painting a nice picture of the rushed development and certification. Bear it like a man!

For complaints about ET pilots, the thread about the crash would be the intended place.

You are a bit late for the show. There were two independent threads, ET crash and grounding. THere were same people posting same things in both, so two got merged (not sure if it was is mod or public decision). Blame assignment is a very hot topic as it will directly affect financial burden Boeing has to shoulder, and possibly the future of the company. Same is true about grounding and return to flight.
It makes some sense that both are sort of fused together...
 
morrisond
Posts: 1206
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 8:15 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
morrisond wrote:
This can be the thread where you Boeing bash all day long and we will make another one about training?

Would that make you happy?

I don't believe that anybody is happy about any aspect of the MAX grounding.

It is clear, that on-topic posts in this thread predominantly won't paint a nice picture of Boeing. That is inevitable. Similar like the A380 production stop thread about Airbus.

This thread here by nature is a hard topic for Boeing, so even from neutral commenters a lot of critical voices should be expected and Boeing and their supporters IMO simply need to bear it. Would there be no failure on Boeings side, there would be no complaints. But if the level of Boeings failure and the level of warranted complaints are in a balance, the result would obviously be some hard stuff for faithful Boeing fans.

But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing. Go and count the posts that would belong in the ET crash thread! The posts in this thread are about 70-90% off topic. The zeal how you and other posters try to make this thread appear more pleasant for Boeing than deserved, is admirable. But please don't forget, the MAX grounding is unprecedented in impact, duration and financial damage. A bit more self reflection and humility would make Boeings position much more friendly.

As explained earlier: training (and hence safety overall) in general is good enough. On a worldwide scale aviation safety is exceptional (and better than ever). The MAX is grounded because it had dangerous and serious design flaws. The design was so bad and lacking totally the usual fault tolerance, that with an unseen rate pilots were trapped in it. It was to be expected, that the worst pilots were trapped first. But this is not the point. The point is, that the same kind of pilots happily contributed and contribute to the supreme safety records of the NG and the A320s. Therefore the common denominator was not bad training, it was the MAX. Therefore the MAX is grounded and all this is not painting a nice picture of the rushed development and certification. Bear it like a man!

For complaints about ET pilots, the thread about the crash would be the intended place.


Well you can bury your head in the sand and think there are no issues in training. I have said many times that Boeing really screwed up and these crashes would not have happened if it hadn't been because of MCAS. That's manning up - I'm not here trying to defend Boeing - I'm trying to get people to realize that training needs to be looked at as much as Boeing and the FAA.

You are really being blind if you think the ET Pilots did everything right and aren't at least a contributing factor to the fatal crashes. Boeing 100% owns the issue that led to the crashes but I doubt they will ever be found 100% guilty of the end result.

There have been so few crashes because aircraft are so reliable that there haven't been opportunities to see that there are serious issues in Pilot training. AF447, Colgan 3407, ET 409 and ET302 are prime examples of the failure in the worldwide training system and all crashed at least in part due to Pilot error. Lionair is debatable as I have said many times.

So ET has a fleet of about 112 Aircraft vs a Worldwide fleet of about 23,600 - so they have about .5% of the Worldwide fleet with an incident rate of 50% of the Worldwide Pilot Error Fatals in the last 10 years - so 100x the Industry Average. That is not a good number or indicative of a great training system.

I know the number above is highly selective - however it's about as good as People taking the MAX crash rate and extrapolating it into the future forever, but it is food for thought.

If you don't think the ET pilots did anything wrong - please define what level of competency and what level of Emergency they should be expected to have/handle.

Just remember that all aircraft were certified assuming the ET pilots could handle the emergency they were faced with. If you want a lower standard then it's most likely all aircraft need to be redesigned.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 3518
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 8:42 pm

SEU wrote:
morrisond wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Because they looked out of the window and could see they were clearly not in a stall situation?
Morrisond assures us that the numerous clues on approach to stall are so blindingly obvious that they cannot be missed. He has stalled a Cessna dozens of times. :yes:
Apart from the stick shaker, what indications of an approaching stall did they have?


Yeah, I get that.
Hindsight is a such a beautiful thing.



Nice personal attack BTW.

That being said I'll bet you I practised it more (stalls) than either of the ET pilots plus full spins which I doubt they did.

If you think I'm inexperienced just remember both ET pilots had marginally more hours and they were put into the cockpit of a 737. So if you think I'm inexperienced WTH are they doing in the cockpit of a 737.

And just for the record - on a 737 there is the stick shaker - loud audio alarms and voice warnings and the frame also buffets as you approach stall - if you miss those blindingly obvious clues then you really don't belong in the cockpit.


You are making blind assumptions, both those pilots had in total 10k hours of flying time between them (over a year in the air). What experience do you have ?

Boeing is to blame. Give up.


Yes, one had 9,700 hours and the other 300 hours. And watching an autopilot for 9,000 hours doesn’t count the same. I still think the telling fact is they tried engage the autopilot in the first minute of lift off with a number basic flight control and indication problems, just the time hands on flying is required.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21180
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 8:48 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing.

Well, that's a mighty uncharitable characterization, one that in my mind nullifies the rest of your post.

For the record, I do not "try to distribute blame away from Boeing".

I'm trying to understand what things Boeing expected of the pilots, and how their actions or inactions played a role in these accidents.

I go back to the NYT article about the meeting between Boeing and AA pilots which had this quote from Boeing VP Mike Sinnett:

“The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: “Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that’s how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together.”

Here we have a Boeing VP telling us that the airplane was certified based on both the system and the pilot working together.

We already also have Boeing admitting that they put too much workload on the pilots.

Exploring the breakdown in the system and the pilot working together to me will tell us a lot about how the grounding will get resolved and thus is on topic.

I'm also very interested in high level corporate strategy in general, and Boeing's approach to this situation in particular, and I think you find my writings on this to not be apologetic with regard to Boeing, unless you are one of the "line them up and shoot them" people that pop up in this thread from time to time.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
kalvado
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 8:55 pm

Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing.

Well, that's a mighty uncharitable characterization, one that in my mind nullifies the rest of your post.

For the record, I do not "try to distribute blame away from Boeing".

I'm just trying to understand what things Boeing expected of the pilots, and how their actions or inactions played a role in these accidents.

I go back to the NYT article about the meeting between Boeing and AA pilots which had this quote from Boeing VP Mike Sinnett:

“The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: “Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that’s how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together.”

Here we have a Boeing VP telling us that the airplane was certified based on both the system and the pilot working together.

We already also have Boeing admitting that they put too much workload on the pilots.

Exploring the breakdown in the system and the pilot working together to me will tell us a lot about how the grounding will get resolved and thus is on topic.

What Boeing VP is missing is training for specific system, engineers being trained to analyze system operation and provide certifiable design; system integrators being trained to maintain and design integrity during development and production. Unfortunately, MCAS fiasco demonstrated severe lack of training in Boeing white collar workforce. This also questions training of Boeing management in their skillset to coordinate and lead large-scale processes. This is probably a bigger concern than one brought up by one of poorly trained Boeing VP.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:00 pm

Going forward, Boeing needs to define "runaway" in technical terms. From a general linguistics standpoint, I think malfunction and intermittent are more precise words unless runaway is specifically expanded on.
 
planecane
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:08 pm

art wrote:
On a different tack, without discussing the minutiae of MCAS design and implementation - or any other particular system, will the scrutiny of the processes involved in MAX certification result in further elements of the 737 MAX being subject to investigation?

The logic would be that if MCAS was deemed adequate for certification but on subsequent investigation proved not to be so, how does one know that other systems deemed adequate for certification using the same methodology really were?

That is a slippery slope. Logically, you'd have to reopen certification on every model (Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, etc.) that was certified with the same methodology. The possibility of a hidden issue is not unique to the 737MAX. You can't have it isolated to the 737MAX only because one issue became unhidden.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:11 pm

Revelation wrote:
“The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: “Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that’s how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together.”


Wrongly, that was a bad assumption. The flight crews may have been trained for a speed trim stab malfunction, but it happened how many times? Maybe once, so there was no data on whether and how fast a crew could recognize an intermittent malfunction of the speed trim system,or perhaps the mach trim auto-system as well.

They wrongly assumed it was training to react to an intermittent stab malfunction that had produced forty years of safety, when in fact it was the reliability of the system up to that point.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:16 pm

Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing.

Well, that's a mighty uncharitable characterization, one that in my mind nullifies the rest of your post.

For the record, I do not "try to distribute blame away from Boeing".

I'm trying to understand what things Boeing expected of the pilots, and how their actions or inactions played a role in these accidents.

I go back to the NYT article about the meeting between Boeing and AA pilots which had this quote from Boeing VP Mike Sinnett:

“The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: “Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that’s how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together.”

Here we have a Boeing VP telling us that the airplane was certified based on both the system and the pilot working together.

We already also have Boeing admitting that they put too much workload on the pilots.

Exploring the breakdown in the system and the pilot working together to me will tell us a lot about how the grounding will get resolved and thus is on topic.

I'm also very interested in high level corporate strategy in general, and Boeing's approach to this situation in particular, and I think you find my writings on this to not be apologetic with regard to Boeing, unless you are one of the "line them up and shoot them" people that pop up in this thread from time to time.


I have to agree rheinwaldner, a relentless barrage of: if the pilots had not done everything wrong, the frames would have been easy to safe. Regarding Boeing, I am one of the line them up and shoot them guys. Until the Lion Air crash I can accept negligence. The behavior of Boeing after the Lion Air crash is just callous disregard for the lives being lost on the 737MAX.
 
kalvado
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:22 pm

planecane wrote:
art wrote:
On a different tack, without discussing the minutiae of MCAS design and implementation - or any other particular system, will the scrutiny of the processes involved in MAX certification result in further elements of the 737 MAX being subject to investigation?

The logic would be that if MCAS was deemed adequate for certification but on subsequent investigation proved not to be so, how does one know that other systems deemed adequate for certification using the same methodology really were?

That is a slippery slope. Logically, you'd have to reopen certification on every model (Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, etc.) that was certified with the same methodology. The possibility of a hidden issue is not unique to the 737MAX. You can't have it isolated to the 737MAX only because one issue became unhidden.

Development of complex system is as much about proper procedure as it is about proper result. Boeing MUST demonstrate that they followed proper procedure, MUST identify where they slipped in the procedure in MCAS design and why it couldn't happen elsewhere in the design.
So recognizing MCAS as a critical mistake is a required part of proving the design. Since Boeing is not willing to do that, ANY part of MAX design can - and SHOULD be questioned as improper.
Yes, it is slippery slope, and Boeing seems willing to take that ride.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3766
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:37 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
ET302 _DID_NOT_STALL_ !!!!! How hard is that to understand, really ? :banghead:
There no point to do a NCC that do not correspond to the situation.

I understand perfectly well that ET 302 did not stall. But the sticker shaker was active through out the ET 302 flight.

With an active stick shaker, why were the Flaps retracted?

Please do not say to avoid the Flaps 5 placard. The ET crew had complete control of pitch and power at Flaps 5. Speed was controllable below the Flaps 5 placard by referencing either Left or Right Airspeed indicators. It was the perfect set up to conduct the "Airspeed Unreliable" NNC.


Perhaps because the other stick shaker was not active, and there were plenty of other clues that even a non-pilot would easily learn in 5 minutes that there was no stall (or even approaching stall).
Perhaps you missed this post #870: https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1421471&start=850

I'll repeat the important part:
AABusDrvr wrote:

I'll again include this snippet from an airplane operating manual.

"Checklists cannot be created for all conceivable situations and are not intended to replace good judgment.
In some situations, at the captain’s discretion, checklist deviation(s) may be necessary."



One might arrive at the conclusion that with only one stick shaker active, the above quote may carry some weight.

Or does Boeing perhaps have a checklist for single 737 stick shaker?

In any case, how would the ET crew have known (and apply "good judgment") that MCAS would become alive when the flaps were retracted . . . ?
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 553
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:41 pm

planecane wrote:
art wrote:
On a different tack, without discussing the minutiae of MCAS design and implementation - or any other particular system, will the scrutiny of the processes involved in MAX certification result in further elements of the 737 MAX being subject to investigation?

The logic would be that if MCAS was deemed adequate for certification but on subsequent investigation proved not to be so, how does one know that other systems deemed adequate for certification using the same methodology really were?

That is a slippery slope. Logically, you'd have to reopen certification on every model (Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, etc.) that was certified with the same methodology. The possibility of a hidden issue is not unique to the 737MAX. You can't have it isolated to the 737MAX only because one issue became unhidden.

I would be pretty sure that Boeing will have done/be in progress of an extensive review as a responsible organisation would do. Flap system and Simulator problems already known may well be evidence of this. I would expect this approach will be applied to other recent upgrades.

If its a slippery slope, then down it we should go.

Ray
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3766
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:56 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
SEU wrote:
You are making blind assumptions, both those pilots had in total 10k hours of flying time between them (over a year in the air). What experience do you have ?


About 90K hours of Part 25 airplane design & performance, safety and certification experience.

While I agree that Boeing had a major role in the JT610 and ET302 crashes, both crews made fundamental errors as well.


While I won't dispute ET crews may have made (fundamental) error(s), we simply don't have any hard evidence for that at this moment.

We only have a lot of questions like why did they do this, why did they do that, why didn't they follow this checklist etc.

We don't know why they made their choices they made. Heck, we don't even have a CVR transcript. Way too early to put any sort of blame at the pilots at this stage.

But apparently for some that won't stop them for putting the crew under the bus.

The crew(s) that can't speak for themselves. The crew(s) that paid the ultimate price for their actions.
And which we don't yet know for sure if they were wrong, or if any different crew wouldn’t do the same thing.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3338
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 9:56 pm

PW100 wrote:
Perhaps because the other stick shaker was not active, and there were plenty of other clues that even a non-pilot would easily learn in 5 minutes that there was no stall (or even approaching stall).


The issue with that line of thinking is that there's no such thing an "erroneous" stick shaker. Either it's working correctly and you're in a stall situation, or it's not working correctly and something serious is wrong with the aircraft. Playing doctor, ignoring checklists, and continuing the mission isn't the correct approach.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21180
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:00 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
I have to agree rheinwaldner, a relentless barrage of: if the pilots had not done everything wrong, the frames would have been easy to safe. Regarding Boeing, I am one of the line them up and shoot them guys. Until the Lion Air crash I can accept negligence. The behavior of Boeing after the Lion Air crash is just callous disregard for the lives being lost on the 737MAX.

Your advocacy for homicide based on your personal suspicion of negligence and without due process is noted.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Saintor
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:03 pm

PW100 wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:
SEU wrote:
You are making blind assumptions, both those pilots had in total 10k hours of flying time between them (over a year in the air). What experience do you have ?


About 90K hours of Part 25 airplane design & performance, safety and certification experience.

While I agree that Boeing had a major role in the JT610 and ET302 crashes, both crews made fundamental errors as well.


While I won't dispute ET crews may have made (fundamental) error(s), we simply don't have any hard evidence for that at this moment.


Let the evolution of air speed talk by itself...
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:05 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
PW100 wrote:
Perhaps because the other stick shaker was not active, and there were plenty of other clues that even a non-pilot would easily learn in 5 minutes that there was no stall (or even approaching stall).


The issue with that line of thinking is that there's no such thing an "erroneous" stick shaker. Either it's working correctly and you're in a stall situation, or it's not working correctly and something serious is wrong with the aircraft. Playing doctor, ignoring checklists, and continuing the mission isn't the correct approach.


Stick shaker is a stall warning. If there is no stall, the stick shaker warning is erroneous. Yes there is something wrong with the frame, but not what the warning indicates. A wrong warning is a very dangerous thing, in the worst case pushing you to do something that is not indicated by the situation. When you are not in stall it is hardly appropriate to run a maneuver to get out of stall.
AoA disagree, the function disabled by Boeing without telling anybody, could have helped in this case. A warning that AoA disagree will lead to MCAS and aggressive nose down trim would also have helped. Both a responsibility of Boeing.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:08 pm

Saintor wrote:
PW100 wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:

About 90K hours of Part 25 airplane design & performance, safety and certification experience.

While I agree that Boeing had a major role in the JT610 and ET302 crashes, both crews made fundamental errors as well.


While I won't dispute ET crews may have made (fundamental) error(s), we simply don't have any hard evidence for that at this moment.


Let the evolution of air speed talk by itself...


The evolution of airspeed is a result of the nose down trim MCAS action. Again a Boeing's responsibility. The main factor to control speed is to control of pitch. A point were the automation gone amok overruled the pilots.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I have to agree rheinwaldner, a relentless barrage of: if the pilots had not done everything wrong, the frames would have been easy to safe. Regarding Boeing, I am one of the line them up and shoot them guys. Until the Lion Air crash I can accept negligence. The behavior of Boeing after the Lion Air crash is just callous disregard for the lives being lost on the 737MAX.

Your advocacy for homicide based on your personal suspicion of negligence and without due process is noted.


You coined the phrase, I just reused it. I assume you used it metaphorically, so did I.
 
Saintor
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:14 pm

The evolution of airspeed is a result of the nose down trim MCAS action


Wrong. It is the result of a crew in an horrible situation who didn't monitor their speed, care or know to turn off the auto-throttle. Boeing can thrive on this gross negligence.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:17 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing. Go and count the posts that would belong in the ET crash thread! The posts in this thread are about 70-90% off topic. The zeal how you and other posters try to make this thread appear more pleasant for Boeing than deserved, is admirable. But please don't forget, the MAX grounding is unprecedented in impact, duration and financial damage. A bit more self reflection and humility would make Boeings position much more friendly.

Every 1% of blame deflected to birds, pilots, God, other OEM's do it:

Saves Boeing, the FAA and their insurers up to USD100m.

Reduces the time before the MAX is back in the air.

Reduces the number of modifications and costs to have the MAX declared airworthy.

Reduces collateral damage on new models like the X and A322, which may need expensive, and time consuming changes.

Reduces collateral damage on existing models which may need expensive modifications and re-work.

If MAX crashes had occurred in the USA, with US crew, and predominantly US passengers, would the same posters now blaming foreign crews, be calling for respect for the crew - await the official findings. Or if it had been an A320 overseas - OEM to blame. Or an A320 in the USA - lifetime grounding of the A320 and recognise the crew for great airmanship.

It's difficult to be impartial, which is why most posters would make bad police, judges, peer reviewers or airworthiness inspectors. But don't discount that some on here are being paid to persuade.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:21 pm

Saintor wrote:
The evolution of airspeed is a result of the nose down trim MCAS action


Wrong. It is the result of a crew in an horrible situation who didn't monitor their speed, care or know to turn off the auto-throttle. Boeing can thrive on this gross negligence.


Thrust has far less influence on speed than pitch, reducing thrust pitches the nose further down. Again a red herring in the relentless attacks on the crew. Boeing is responsible for MCAS and the sudden aggressive nose down pitch commands.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3766
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:27 pm

Saintor wrote:
PW100 wrote:
OldAeroGuy wrote:

About 90K hours of Part 25 airplane design & performance, safety and certification experience.

While I agree that Boeing had a major role in the JT610 and ET302 crashes, both crews made fundamental errors as well.


While I won't dispute ET crews may have made (fundamental) error(s), we simply don't have any hard evidence for that at this moment.


Let the evolution of air speed talk by itself...


It is my understanding (may be wrongly) that upto the first MCAS cycle, ET airspeed evolution was "reasonably" in line with normal practice after stickshaker activation and AoA disagree.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
Saintor
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:41 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Saintor wrote:
The evolution of airspeed is a result of the nose down trim MCAS action


Wrong. It is the result of a crew in an horrible situation who didn't monitor their speed, care or know to turn off the auto-throttle. Boeing can thrive on this gross negligence.


Thrust has far less influence on speed than pitch, reducing thrust pitches the nose further down. Again a red herring in the relentless attacks on the crew. Boeing is responsible for MCAS and the sudden aggressive nose down pitch commands.


Possibly, but a better crew would have [easily] contained it. Those accidents happened ONLY in third-world.

That's sad, but the bottom line.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:47 pm

Saintor wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Saintor wrote:

Wrong. It is the result of a crew in an horrible situation who didn't monitor their speed, care or know to turn off the auto-throttle. Boeing can thrive on this gross negligence.


Thrust has far less influence on speed than pitch, reducing thrust pitches the nose further down. Again a red herring in the relentless attacks on the crew. Boeing is responsible for MCAS and the sudden aggressive nose down pitch commands.


Possibly, but a better crew would have [easily] contained it. Those accidents happened ONLY in third-world.

That's sad, but the bottom line.


Some USA crews tried it on simulators, being aware of everything that had happened with hindsight after the fact, and just managed. to avoid crash. So that easily is again a part in the relentless attacks on the crews in defense of Boeing.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21180
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:48 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I have to agree rheinwaldner, a relentless barrage of: if the pilots had not done everything wrong, the frames would have been easy to safe. Regarding Boeing, I am one of the line them up and shoot them guys. Until the Lion Air crash I can accept negligence. The behavior of Boeing after the Lion Air crash is just callous disregard for the lives being lost on the 737MAX.

Your advocacy for homicide based on your personal suspicion of negligence and without due process is noted.

You coined the phrase, I just reused it. I assume you used it metaphorically, so did I.

Yet you're willing to apply such a phrase to yourself... :scratchchin:
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3338
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:50 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
The evolution of airspeed is a result of the nose down trim MCAS action. Again a Boeing's responsibility. The main factor to control speed is to control of pitch. A point were the automation gone amok overruled the pilots.


Misrepresenting the events of the crash and misrepresenting the main two factors that control speed isn't a good idea if you want to have any credibility on the matter.

No wonder this thread has gone so far downhill.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 10:56 pm

Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Your advocacy for homicide based on your personal suspicion of negligence and without due process is noted.

You coined the phrase, I just reused it. I assume you used it metaphorically, so did I.

Yet you're willing to apply such a phrase to yourself... :scratchchin:


So start crying about the unfairness of other peoples callous opinions. I on the other hand have the feeling the people killed on those two 737MAX do not really matter to many of the posters here. Defense of Boeing matters.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1750
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:05 pm

morrisond wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
morrisond wrote:
This can be the thread where you Boeing bash all day long and we will make another one about training?

Would that make you happy?

I don't believe that anybody is happy about any aspect of the MAX grounding.

It is clear, that on-topic posts in this thread predominantly won't paint a nice picture of Boeing. That is inevitable. Similar like the A380 production stop thread about Airbus.

This thread here by nature is a hard topic for Boeing, so even from neutral commenters a lot of critical voices should be expected and Boeing and their supporters IMO simply need to bear it. Would there be no failure on Boeings side, there would be no complaints. But if the level of Boeings failure and the level of warranted complaints are in a balance, the result would obviously be some hard stuff for faithful Boeing fans.

But what we see on the other hand is a large majority of posts by Boeing apologists who try to distribute blame away from Boeing. Go and count the posts that would belong in the ET crash thread! The posts in this thread are about 70-90% off topic. The zeal how you and other posters try to make this thread appear more pleasant for Boeing than deserved, is admirable. But please don't forget, the MAX grounding is unprecedented in impact, duration and financial damage. A bit more self reflection and humility would make Boeings position much more friendly.

As explained earlier: training (and hence safety overall) in general is good enough. On a worldwide scale aviation safety is exceptional (and better than ever). The MAX is grounded because it had dangerous and serious design flaws. The design was so bad and lacking totally the usual fault tolerance, that with an unseen rate pilots were trapped in it. It was to be expected, that the worst pilots were trapped first. But this is not the point. The point is, that the same kind of pilots happily contributed and contribute to the supreme safety records of the NG and the A320s. Therefore the common denominator was not bad training, it was the MAX. Therefore the MAX is grounded and all this is not painting a nice picture of the rushed development and certification. Bear it like a man!

For complaints about ET pilots, the thread about the crash would be the intended place.


Well you can bury your head in the sand and think there are no issues in training. I have said many times that Boeing really screwed up and these crashes would not have happened if it hadn't been because of MCAS. That's manning up - I'm not here trying to defend Boeing - I'm trying to get people to realize that training needs to be looked at as much as Boeing and the FAA.

You are really being blind if you think the ET Pilots did everything right and aren't at least a contributing factor to the fatal crashes. Boeing 100% owns the issue that led to the crashes but I doubt they will ever be found 100% guilty of the end result.

There have been so few crashes because aircraft are so reliable that there haven't been opportunities to see that there are serious issues in Pilot training. AF447, Colgan 3407, ET 409 and ET302 are prime examples of the failure in the worldwide training system and all crashed at least in part due to Pilot error. Lionair is debatable as I have said many times.

So ET has a fleet of about 112 Aircraft vs a Worldwide fleet of about 23,600 - so they have about .5% of the Worldwide fleet with an incident rate of 50% of the Worldwide Pilot Error Fatals in the last 10 years - so 100x the Industry Average. That is not a good number or indicative of a great training system.

I know the number above is highly selective - however it's about as good as People taking the MAX crash rate and extrapolating it into the future forever, but it is food for thought.

If you don't think the ET pilots did anything wrong - please define what level of competency and what level of Emergency they should be expected to have/handle.

Just remember that all aircraft were certified assuming the ET pilots could handle the emergency they were faced with. If you want a lower standard then it's most likely all aircraft need to be redesigned.


Beating a dead horse still. Training is vital and Airbus has already acknowledged that they think the current standards are cause for concern. I agree.

The current state of quality process management does not believe we should rely on "heroes" though, and the FAA says that the average pilot should be the target of standards, not the best. Not everyone is a Sully and it would be interesting to know how many pilots could have done as well as he did.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/i-ve-be ... 51n7q.html

The similar in effect to the MCAS failures when the A330 in the QF72 goes nose down by itself gives you an idea of what happens to the mind of a pilot when the plane tries to kill him. It's a lot to deal with as well as try to keep everyone alive.

By this time, my cage has been rattled. I've been sucker-punched twice, powerless to stop the aircraft's illogical and violent behaviour. How many more times will this happen? I can't and don't dwell on this question, but it's a critical situation when I, the captain of the plane, become an ineffective observer. I feel betrayed by the automation, which has twice taken control of the plane away from me. How can it fail in such a complex and aggressive way? I don't feel safe at all.

Something is moving on my chest above my left shirt pocket. I look down and am at first shocked, then wryly amused to see my shirt fluttering. The fabric above my company wings is pulsating rapidly in synch with my pounding heart, and there's a drumming in my ears. I've never experienced this extreme heart rate before; I estimate it's at least 200 beats-per-minute. My life is at risk, so my body is responding.
Last edited by RickNRoll on Tue May 21, 2019 11:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21180
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:05 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
You coined the phrase, I just reused it. I assume you used it metaphorically, so did I.

Yet you're willing to apply such a phrase to yourself... :scratchchin:


So start crying about the unfairness of other peoples callous opinions. I on the other hand have the feeling the people killed on those two 737MAX do not really matter to many of the posters here. Defense of Boeing matters.

OK then, I'll take it at face value that your newly voiced sympathy for accident victims is more genuine than your emnity for so many things you've repeated so many times on this forum.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:21 pm

OldAeroGuy wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
I still will believe both of you only when you will be able to describe in detail how is done a 737 NG/MAX runaway stabilizer training session on a simulator.


Is this the sort of thing you're looking for?

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

Yes and no. You post Mentour Pilot description, while my intent was to know your description of your experience, since you claim to have so much of it. Still hope you will do.

About the Mentour Pilot description, I observe those points:
1) Cockpit was quiet, without any alarm, or anything other than the runaway stabilizer. (JT043, JT610, ET302 faced alarms, disagree, stick shaker early after the rotation).
2) The first runaway stabilizer trim is only about 5 seconds, at variable speed. (AoA high MCAS run for ~9 seconds at full sped)
3) All others runaway stabilizer trim are very small and, except for the second, there is a lot of time between them (AoA high MCAS reset after 5 seconds and run for ~9 second at full speed).
4) The pilots did not executed the indented note of the NCC (the one that can be interpreted as optional): there did not corrected the stab trim before using the cutoff switches.
5) The pilots needed about 80 seconds to use the cutoff switches. (AoA high MCAS will not give you so much time without correction).
6) The trim wheels was hard and slow to use by a single pilot. (I don't know there speed at this moment).

It's not difficult to understand that this kind of training is not enough for what happened to JT043, JT610 and ET302.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:28 pm

Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Yet you're willing to apply such a phrase to yourself... :scratchchin:


So start crying about the unfairness of other peoples callous opinions. I on the other hand have the feeling the people killed on those two 737MAX do not really matter to many of the posters here. Defense of Boeing matters.

OK then, I'll take it at face value that your newly voiced sympathy for accident victims is more genuine than your emnity for so many things you've repeated so many times on this forum.


Yes victims first of Boeing's negligent design and than the callous disregard in taking no action after the Lion Air accident.
 
planecane
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:39 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Saintor wrote:
The evolution of airspeed is a result of the nose down trim MCAS action


Wrong. It is the result of a crew in an horrible situation who didn't monitor their speed, care or know to turn off the auto-throttle. Boeing can thrive on this gross negligence.


Thrust has far less influence on speed than pitch, reducing thrust pitches the nose further down. Again a red herring in the relentless attacks on the crew. Boeing is responsible for MCAS and the sudden aggressive nose down pitch commands.


This post is exactly what I mean about people with an anti-Boeing agenda posting authoritative sounding things that are not correct. There is a difference between PITCH and PITCH TRIM. If you look at the FDR traces, the PITCH TRIM was positioned nose down by MCAS. The pilots were fighting this with the control column (and some electric trim). The PITCH remained at or above the angle that it was prior to MCAS kicking in for just about the entire time until the final MCAS nose down PITCH TRIM command about 20 seconds before impact.

Therefore you are wrong about MCAS causing the evolution of the airspeed, which continued to increase while the PITCH was neutral or even 5-10 degrees nose up.

Your post is essentially making things up in order to absolve the crew of any possible mistakes.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:41 pm

RickNRoll wrote:
https://www.smh.com.au/national/i-ve-be ... 51n7q.html

The similar in effect to the MCAS failures when the A330 in the QF72 goes nose down by itself gives you an idea of what happens to the mind of a pilot when the plane tries to kill him. It's a lot to deal with as well as try to keep everyone alive.

By this time, my cage has been rattled. I've been sucker-punched twice, powerless to stop the aircraft's illogical and violent behaviour. How many more times will this happen? I can't and don't dwell on this question, but it's a critical situation when I, the captain of the plane, become an ineffective observer. I feel betrayed by the automation, which has twice taken control of the plane away from me. How can it fail in such a complex and aggressive way? I don't feel safe at all.

Something is moving on my chest above my left shirt pocket. I look down and am at first shocked, then wryly amused to see my shirt fluttering. The fabric above my company wings is pulsating rapidly in synch with my pounding heart, and there's a drumming in my ears. I've never experienced this extreme heart rate before; I estimate it's at least 200 beats-per-minute. My life is at risk, so my body is responding.

:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:
Yes, the human factor is very important when you want to understand pilots actions in an accident. So it must be taken in account far before in the design, tests, safety assessment, certification, documentation, training...

But it seem useless to expect the robots posting here to learn that humans are not robots, including human pilots. :melting:
 
jollo
Posts: 361
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:41 pm

Revelation wrote:
I go back to the NYT article about the meeting between Boeing and AA pilots which had this quote from Boeing VP Mike Sinnett:

“The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: “Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that’s how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together.”


Here we have a Boeing VP telling us that the airplane was certified based on both the system and the pilot working together.



I really fail to understand how a flight envelope protection system aggressively trimming nose down just a few thousands of feet off the ground meets the design criteria of "working together" with the pilot.

Not to mention how I really, really find it hard to understand how a potentially catastrophic automation was certified (not only deisgned, reviewed and approved but also independently certified) running off a single input channel architecture with no data sanitation and no manual override.

I absolutely agree training standards should be beefed up worldwide. Any profit based on training cost cuts should be actively resisted and reversed. However, you should be arguing this to the Boeing execs that built the MAX business case around the "no sim training needed!" imperative.
 
planecane
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:45 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Saintor wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

Thrust has far less influence on speed than pitch, reducing thrust pitches the nose further down. Again a red herring in the relentless attacks on the crew. Boeing is responsible for MCAS and the sudden aggressive nose down pitch commands.


Possibly, but a better crew would have [easily] contained it. Those accidents happened ONLY in third-world.

That's sad, but the bottom line.


Some USA crews tried it on simulators, being aware of everything that had happened with hindsight after the fact, and just managed. to avoid crash. So that easily is again a part in the relentless attacks on the crews in defense of Boeing.


Please post links to the sources of these simulator sessions. I have not seen one where they simulated recovery from the beginning of the MCAS-induced runaway stabilizer. I have seen the aviation week simulator session where they started with the electric trim cut off and recovered using the manual trim wheel and roller coaster procedure from higher altitude.
 
planecane
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:50 pm

jollo wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I go back to the NYT article about the meeting between Boeing and AA pilots which had this quote from Boeing VP Mike Sinnett:

“The assumption is that the flight crews have been trained,” Mr. Sinnett said in the meeting. He added later: “Rightly or wrongly, that was the design criteria and that’s how the airplane was certified with the system and pilot working together.”


Here we have a Boeing VP telling us that the airplane was certified based on both the system and the pilot working together.



I really fail to understand how a flight envelope protection system aggressively trimming nose down just a few thousands of feet off the ground meets the design criteria of "working together" with the pilot.

Not to mention how I really, really find it hard to understand how a potentially catastrophic automation was certified (not only deisgned, reviewed and approved but also independently certified) running off a single input channel architecture with no data sanitation and no manual override.

I absolutely agree training standards should be beefed up worldwide. Any profit based on training cost cuts should be actively resisted and reversed. However, you should be arguing this to the Boeing execs that built the MAX business case around the "no sim training needed!" imperative.



On the training front, you are missing the big picture. In my opinion, the training issues that exist are not specific to the 737MAX. We can't know for sure until the final reports on both crashes, but I do not believe, based on available evidence, that either crew would have recovered from a runaway stabilizer in a 737NG given all other factors being the same at the time of the runaway. The runaway stabilizer NNC is supposed to be a memory item. If my belief is proven by the final reports with full CVR transcripts, it is highly concerning that there are issues with an NNC that is a memory item.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 550
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Tue May 21, 2019 11:56 pm

morrisond wrote:
I'm trying to get people to realize that training needs to be looked at as much as Boeing and the FAA.

Maybe. But to date there not so much public calls to look at the training. (not even from Boeing).

If we take the hypothesis that training need to be improved, can you describes more specifically what change you recommend for what procedure ?
Because by looking at the current worldwide safety records, it make me wonder what procedure training improvement will be the most effective to increase safety. :?:
 
morrisond
Posts: 1206
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 12:12 am

mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

So start crying about the unfairness of other peoples callous opinions. I on the other hand have the feeling the people killed on those two 737MAX do not really matter to many of the posters here. Defense of Boeing matters.

OK then, I'll take it at face value that your newly voiced sympathy for accident victims is more genuine than your emnity for so many things you've repeated so many times on this forum.


Yes victims first of Boeing's negligent design and than the callous disregard in taking no action after the Lion Air accident.


Umm - they published procedures that if they had been followed we would not be having this discussion.
 
kalvado
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 12:58 am

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
OK then, I'll take it at face value that your newly voiced sympathy for accident victims is more genuine than your emnity for so many things you've repeated so many times on this forum.


Yes victims first of Boeing's negligent design and than the callous disregard in taking no action after the Lion Air accident.


Umm - they published procedures that if they had been followed we would not be having this discussion.

Too bad Boeing technical writers couldn't put together an unambiguous text without internal contradictions. Definitely a training issue, as with most Boeing workforce. And too bad distinction between runaway stab and MCAS is too big.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8413
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:13 am

planecane wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Saintor wrote:

Possibly, but a better crew would have [easily] contained it. Those accidents happened ONLY in third-world.

That's sad, but the bottom line.


Some USA crews tried it on simulators, being aware of everything that had happened with hindsight after the fact, and just managed. to avoid crash. So that easily is again a part in the relentless attacks on the crews in defense of Boeing.


Please post links to the sources of these simulator sessions. I have not seen one where they simulated recovery from the beginning of the MCAS-induced runaway stabilizer. I have seen the aviation week simulator session where they started with the electric trim cut off and recovered using the manual trim wheel and roller coaster procedure from higher altitude.


Read the thread, was posted here, why should I do that work for you?
 
planecane
Posts: 1073
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:16 am

mjoelnir wrote:
planecane wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

Some USA crews tried it on simulators, being aware of everything that had happened with hindsight after the fact, and just managed. to avoid crash. So that easily is again a part in the relentless attacks on the crews in defense of Boeing.


Please post links to the sources of these simulator sessions. I have not seen one where they simulated recovery from the beginning of the MCAS-induced runaway stabilizer. I have seen the aviation week simulator session where they started with the electric trim cut off and recovered using the manual trim wheel and roller coaster procedure from higher altitude.


Read the thread, was posted here, why should I do that work for you?


Because none of the simulations I've seen posted have attempted to simulate recovery starting from the beginning of the MCAS runaway. If you know of one, then I'd like you to point me to it since you are using them as part of your argument that they "just managed to avoid crash." That is only relevant if they are simulating starting from the point of failure.
 
WPIAeroGuy
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:52 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:17 am

planecane wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Saintor wrote:

Wrong. It is the result of a crew in an horrible situation who didn't monitor their speed, care or know to turn off the auto-throttle. Boeing can thrive on this gross negligence.


Thrust has far less influence on speed than pitch, reducing thrust pitches the nose further down. Again a red herring in the relentless attacks on the crew. Boeing is responsible for MCAS and the sudden aggressive nose down pitch commands.


This post is exactly what I mean about people with an anti-Boeing agenda posting authoritative sounding things that are not correct. There is a difference between PITCH and PITCH TRIM. If you look at the FDR traces, the PITCH TRIM was positioned nose down by MCAS. The pilots were fighting this with the control column (and some electric trim). The PITCH remained at or above the angle that it was prior to MCAS kicking in for just about the entire time until the final MCAS nose down PITCH TRIM command about 20 seconds before impact.

Therefore you are wrong about MCAS causing the evolution of the airspeed, which continued to increase while the PITCH was neutral or even 5-10 degrees nose up.

Your post is essentially making things up in order to absolve the crew of any possible mistakes.


Yup, this seems to be a huge misconception with a lot of people here, as well as a huge misconception with the public. As seen in the Mentour Pilot videos, the stab trim doesn't instantly pitch the nose down, because the the pilot is holding the stick and can increase the elevator deflection to maintain pitch angle.
-WPIAeroGuy
 
morrisond
Posts: 1206
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:25 am

kalvado wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

Yes victims first of Boeing's negligent design and than the callous disregard in taking no action after the Lion Air accident.


Umm - they published procedures that if they had been followed we would not be having this discussion.

Too bad Boeing technical writers couldn't put together an unambiguous text without internal contradictions. Definitely a training issue, as with most Boeing workforce. And too bad distinction between runaway stab and MCAS is too big.


You are thinking of the AD and not what was actually in the FCOM that the pilots rely on which has return the trim to neutral in the first paragraph - not much ambiguity in that.
 
kalvado
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:50 am

morrisond wrote:
kalvado wrote:
morrisond wrote:

Umm - they published procedures that if they had been followed we would not be having this discussion.

Too bad Boeing technical writers couldn't put together an unambiguous text without internal contradictions. Definitely a training issue, as with most Boeing workforce. And too bad distinction between runaway stab and MCAS is too big.


You are thinking of the AD and not what was actually in the FCOM that the pilots rely on which has return the trim to neutral in the first paragraph - not much ambiguity in that.

Thanks for proving my point. There shouldn't be twenty different versions describing same procedure. Hire qualified document control professionals, good technical writers, qualified engineers. This is not rocket science after all, this is a catastrophic lack of training among Boeing workforce!
 
morrisond
Posts: 1206
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:52 am

kalvado wrote:
morrisond wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Too bad Boeing technical writers couldn't put together an unambiguous text without internal contradictions. Definitely a training issue, as with most Boeing workforce. And too bad distinction between runaway stab and MCAS is too big.


You are thinking of the AD and not what was actually in the FCOM that the pilots rely on which has return the trim to neutral in the first paragraph - not much ambiguity in that.

Thanks for proving my point. There shouldn't be twenty different versions describing same procedure. Hire qualified document control professionals, good technical writers, qualified engineers. This is not rocket science after all, this is a catastrophic lack of training among Boeing workforce!


So the pilots are going to ignore what is in there manuals and go by the AD? That's really weak.
 
kalvado
Posts: 1879
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 1:56 am

morrisond wrote:
kalvado wrote:
morrisond wrote:

You are thinking of the AD and not what was actually in the FCOM that the pilots rely on which has return the trim to neutral in the first paragraph - not much ambiguity in that.

Thanks for proving my point. There shouldn't be twenty different versions describing same procedure. Hire qualified document control professionals, good technical writers, qualified engineers. This is not rocket science after all, this is a catastrophic lack of training among Boeing workforce!


So the pilots are going to ignore what is in there manuals and go by the AD? That's really weak.

I am not acquitting pilots of all blame, I am just bringing up the topic of Boeing workforce qualification. Everyone pretends MCAS is a mistake - no, it has to be a systematic failure due to poor training!
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1750
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Wed May 22, 2019 2:05 am

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Revelation wrote:
OK then, I'll take it at face value that your newly voiced sympathy for accident victims is more genuine than your emnity for so many things you've repeated so many times on this forum.


Yes victims first of Boeing's negligent design and than the callous disregard in taking no action after the Lion Air accident.


Umm - they published procedures that if they had been followed we would not be having this discussion.


Umm - they published a procedure that waited for MCAS to try to plant the plane in the ground when there was another procedure available that would have prevented it ever activating. Going for the minimal response to safety was what got us here in the first place.

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