morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 7:46 pm

DenverTed wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
and more aggressively using the electric trim which was operational throughout

GF

Which I think was another problem, the AD was very poor. After a crash, this is the AD? It should have been a foolproof recipe to avoid an MCAS problem.

1. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
2. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
3. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
4. Shut off both trim cut out switches quickly


What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 7:48 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

You can not keep from the smoke and mirrors.

Boeing sold minimal training to the airlines. Boeing sabotaged training for the 737MAX, because accepting that you need for more than minimal training for moving from NG to MAX would have cost Boeing millions.

The NG is not falling out of the sky regularly flown by the same pilots you choose to denigrate.

Ethiopian is one of the very few airlines having spend money to train there 737MAX pilots. Your steady denigration of Ethiopian to protect Boeing are getting absurd.

You hammer on the flight hours on the pilot. The USA Air Force has a similar system of intensive training and few hours. There your answer was that while accepting to know nothing about it, the training at the USA Air Force had to be much better.

I am tired off the declaration that trim runaway training is all that is needed when you encounter the MCAS failure mode. For the first you have to recognize the intermittent trim impulses of MCAS for what it is behind the at the same time active STS. For the second MCAS is trimming very fast and very aggressive.

To say it very simple, if Boeing had not this negligent design of MCAS, the Lion air accident would not have happened. If Boeing had taking action after the Lion air accident the Ethiopian airline accident would not have happened. Just simply allowing pilots to train on simulators that were similar to a 737MAX could have helped. But Boeing had to sabotage that by crippling the simulators.

You can keep your smoke and mirror tactics, but you will not be able to divert a iota of the blame from Boeing killing 350 people with an absurd design and inaction.


For a second I thought you were making a little bit of progress as I read iota as "a lot of" the first time through.

Have you read the FCOM bulletin that Ethiopian supposedly provided to it's Pilots? It's on the last two pages of the Preliminary report https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

How is that not clear in describing the failure mode and what to do about it on the second page under Operating Instructions?

Or are you saying this is beyond the ability of any pilot?

And just to be clear - I am not denigrating the Pilots - I am denigrating the ET training system (and I suspect the same of many others Worldwide) - there is a large but subtle difference - Pilots can't learn what they aren't being taught.


Smoke and mirrors and now gripping at the last straws. You are bringing the preliminary Ethiopian report. What a joke. How late in the game are you, after the two crashes??

It was the job of Boeing and the FAA to explain the working of MCAS and how one has to react in detail, BEFORE the first accident. It was the job of Boeing to include MCAS into the 737MAX simulator design. It is was the job of the FAA and Boeing to design robust training routines for MCAS.

In this jobs Boeing and the FAA failed miserably and perhaps deliberately, to keep the false narrative that the move from NG to MAX does need no training.


No one is disputing that they shouldn't have acted before the first accident - but what is missing from Page 32 and Page 33 of the report. Are you saying this beyond the ability of a Professional pilot to understand?

https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf
 
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 8:12 pm

morrisond wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
and more aggressively using the electric trim which was operational throughout

GF

Which I think was another problem, the AD was very poor. After a crash, this is the AD? It should have been a foolproof recipe to avoid an MCAS problem.

1. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
2. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
3. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
4. Shut off both trim cut out switches quickly


What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.
 
xmp125a
Posts: 233
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 8:16 pm

marcelh wrote:


Subtitle for this should be "Grandfathering bites back". As I understand, due to Boeing insistence on the fact that there is no material difference between NG and the MAX for the pilots, the old procedures have to be re-evaluated in the light of the MAX problems - because MAX depends on them (probably one of those is roller-coaster?).
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 8:18 pm

DenverTed wrote:
morrisond wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Which I think was another problem, the AD was very poor. After a crash, this is the AD? It should have been a foolproof recipe to avoid an MCAS problem.

1. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
2. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
3. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
4. Shut off both trim cut out switches quickly


What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.


It may not be the #1 item to do if the Plane is not out of trim. Pilots are smart enough to figure that out.

Well as the ET Pilots supposed had it for 4 months if they had questions like that they would have had plenty of time to discuss them in training and get any clarification from Boeing they needed.

Is it not conceivable that maybe - just maybe they never even received the procedure?
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 1253
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 8:21 pm

bgm wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
European lifting of the grounding could take a while. They are going to be doing a full internal review of the MAX.

https://www.eurocockpit.be/news/boeings ... ansparency


As predicted.

Boeing and the FAA are already well established bedfellows, so it'll get rubber stamped and back in US service pretty quickly. The rest of the world however will be placing greater value on people's lives and will be scrutinizing the MAX much more than Boeing (since the FAA delegates) will.


You need to provide a cite with factual evidence or direct quotes that Boeing and the FAA do not value human life as much as other countries.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 9510
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 8:25 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
bgm wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
European lifting of the grounding could take a while. They are going to be doing a full internal review of the MAX.

https://www.eurocockpit.be/news/boeings ... ansparency


As predicted.

Boeing and the FAA are already well established bedfellows, so it'll get rubber stamped and back in US service pretty quickly. The rest of the world however will be placing greater value on people's lives and will be scrutinizing the MAX much more than Boeing (since the FAA delegates) will.


You need to provide a cite with factual evidence or direct quotes that Boeing and the FAA do not value human life as much as other countries.


Com'on you know what he means. The FAA is under pressure for giving Boeing too much influence in the validation process. So there you have your evidence that the FAA didn't make sure that the MAX is as save as it could have been.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 8:40 pm

morrisond wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
morrisond wrote:

What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.


It may not be the #1 item to do if the Plane is not out of trim. Pilots are smart enough to figure that out.

Well as the ET Pilots supposed had it for 4 months if they had questions like that they would have had plenty of time to discuss them in training and get any clarification from Boeing they needed.

Is it not conceivable that maybe - just maybe they never even received the procedure?

Or even then, I just don't see how any MAX pilot wouldn't have thought of exactly what they would do after LionAir. That part is confounding.

On semantics, I think a runaway is a type of malfunction, but an erratic malfunction is not a runaway.
What are the different trims? Autopilot trim, with subsets of mach trim and speed trim. Then speed trim has subsets of speed trim and MCAS. Then there is Manual trim, and it has subsets of manual electric trim, and manual manual wheel trim?
 
planecane
Posts: 1014
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 9:15 pm

DenverTed wrote:
morrisond wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Which I think was another problem, the AD was very poor. After a crash, this is the AD? It should have been a foolproof recipe to avoid an MCAS problem.

1. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
2. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
3. You must use trim switch to regain neutral column force
4. Shut off both trim cut out switches quickly


What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.


I know this just keeps going in circles but the AD is not what was supposed to be followed. The AD directed updates to the FCOM and QRH. The updated runaway stabilizer procedure says that on the 737MAX you may experience uncommmanded nose down trim and that if you do, to perform the runaway stabilizer NNC. It didn't redefine runaway. It simply said that if there was uncommanded nose down trim to use the same procedure as a runaway. The word "can" does not appear in the runaway stabilizer NNC step 2, nor does it say anything about manual trim yet.

2 Autopilot (if engaged) . . . . . . . . . . . . .Disengage
Do not re-engage the autopilot.
Control airplane pitch attitude manually with
control column and main electric trim as
needed.


You don't get to anything about manual trim until after moving the switches to cutout.
 
Saintor
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 9:26 pm

mjoelnir wrote:

It was the job of Boeing and the FAA to explain the working of MCAS and how one has to react in detail, BEFORE the first accident. It was the job of Boeing to include MCAS into the 737MAX simulator design. It is was the job of the FAA and Boeing to design robust training routines for MCAS.

In this jobs Boeing and the FAA failed miserably and perhaps deliberately, to keep the false narrative that the move from NG to MAX does need no training.


And it was the job of the pilots (at least ET302) to follow simple procedures.

Maybe it was not specific about MCAS, but you are wrong... there WERE procedures from Boeing that if followed in that particular context, would have saved so many lives - including theirs. You can rant all day long, but bottom line is that *they didn't* for whatever reason.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 9:32 pm

planecane wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
morrisond wrote:

What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.


I know this just keeps going in circles but the AD is not what was supposed to be followed. The AD directed updates to the FCOM and QRH. The updated runaway stabilizer procedure says that on the 737MAX you may experience uncommmanded nose down trim and that if you do, to perform the runaway stabilizer NNC. It didn't redefine runaway. It simply said that if there was uncommanded nose down trim to use the same procedure as a runaway. The word "can" does not appear in the runaway stabilizer NNC step 2, nor does it say anything about manual trim yet.

2 Autopilot (if engaged) . . . . . . . . . . . . .Disengage
Do not re-engage the autopilot.
Control airplane pitch attitude manually with
control column and main electric trim as
needed.


You don't get to anything about manual trim until after moving the switches to cutout.

So the two ways to control an airplane are autopilot control and manual control.
Then the two manual trim methods are electric trim and manual trim. I would think it would be less confusing to rename the second method of manual trim something other than manual trim. To be consistent, "main electric" and "backup handwheel".
Where are we going? Hawaii, or Hawaii, Hawaii?
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3037
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 9:37 pm

DenverTed wrote:
"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.


The "bulletin" provides general background information (it is not a "checklist), the important part being -- if you have an uncommanded nose down trim and you also have one or more of the 9 listed items, do the RUNAWAY STABILIZER NNC. That's pretty explicid.

RUNAWAY STABILIZER NNC is the checklist -- it has memory items -- there is no "can".

Manual means manual trim wheels and electric means the "thumb switches" -- every 737 rated pilot should understand that, if not they don't belong in the cockpit.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 9:53 pm

7BOEING7 wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.


The "bulletin" provides general background information (it is not a "checklist), the important part being -- if you have an uncommanded nose down trim and you also have one or more of the 9 listed items, do the RUNAWAY STABILIZER NNC. That's pretty explicid.

RUNAWAY STABILIZER NNC is the checklist -- it has memory items -- there is no "can".

Manual means manual trim wheels and electric means the "thumb switches" -- every 737 rated pilot should understand that, if not they don't belong in the cockpit.

"Control airplane pitch attitude manually with
control column and main electric trim as
needed." So the two types of manual pitch trim control are electric trim, and manual trim? I still vote for a change in terminology. The autopilot switch still takes a manual action to flip. I think well defined terminology is important and can be improved on.
Then there are the switches, for motorized trim of main electric, and autopilot, which were changed to Pri and B/U. Maybe every switch now needs a B/U switch? What's up with that? Why not just go with one switch?
Last edited by DenverTed on Fri May 24, 2019 10:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8658
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 9:53 pm

DenverTed wrote:
What is not clear on Page 32 and 33 of this report? https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

"can" seems like an optional word, and it is buried pretty deep in the notes, not the #1 item to do.
Also, the term "manual" seems to have two meanings, which I think is confusing. I think they need to tighten up the technical writing, especially defining runaway and manual. For example, what's manual trim? Does manual mean non autopilot, or non electric, two very different things.[/quote]
What I think is missing here is that the AD was written for Boeing 737 pilots, not A3XX, Cessna, MS Flight Simulator or even us desk pilots, but 737 pilots.
So I would defer to those pilots in any opinion of whether the AD was understandable, clear as mud or crystal.
It was written for people who are already flying the a/c and have a understanding of what the AD is addressing.
 
bgm
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 10:03 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
bgm wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
European lifting of the grounding could take a while. They are going to be doing a full internal review of the MAX.

https://www.eurocockpit.be/news/boeings ... ansparency


As predicted.

Boeing and the FAA are already well established bedfellows, so it'll get rubber stamped and back in US service pretty quickly. The rest of the world however will be placing greater value on people's lives and will be scrutinizing the MAX much more than Boeing (since the FAA delegates) will.


You need to provide a cite with factual evidence or direct quotes that Boeing and the FAA do not value human life as much as other countries.


Factual evidence? The FAA and Boeing deemed the 737 MAX airworthy when it clearly was not, since 346 innocent victims lost their lives as a result. There’s your factual evidence.
████ ███ █ ███████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ [redacted]
 
Saintor
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 10:04 pm

bgm wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
bgm wrote:

As predicted.

Boeing and the FAA are already well established bedfellows, so it'll get rubber stamped and back in US service pretty quickly. The rest of the world however will be placing greater value on people's lives and will be scrutinizing the MAX much more than Boeing (since the FAA delegates) will.


You need to provide a cite with factual evidence or direct quotes that Boeing and the FAA do not value human life as much as other countries.


Factual evidence? The FAA and Boeing deemed the 737 MAX airworthy when it clearly was not, since 346 innocent victims lost their lives as a result. There’s your factual evidence.


Not evidence, just your opinion.
 
bgm
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 10:07 pm

Saintor wrote:
bgm wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

You need to provide a cite with factual evidence or direct quotes that Boeing and the FAA do not value human life as much as other countries.


Factual evidence? The FAA and Boeing deemed the 737 MAX airworthy when it clearly was not, since 346 innocent victims lost their lives as a result. There’s your factual evidence.


Not evidence, just your opinion.


Well then, oh wise one, pray tell why is the 737 MAX grounded worldwide? :duck:
████ ███ █ ███████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ [redacted]
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 10:12 pm

par13del wrote:
So I would defer to those pilots in any opinion of whether the AD was understandable, clear as mud or crystal.
It was written for people who are already flying the a/c and have a understanding of what the AD is addressing.

True, my quibbles with linguistics pale in comparison to the issues the AA or WN pilots have taken Boeing to task for. Plus if China, Europe, and Canada can understand it, there should be no problem and all systems are go.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3037
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 10:35 pm

par13del wrote:
What I think is missing here is that the AD was written for Boeing 737 pilots, not A3XX, Cessna, MS Flight Simulator or even us desk pilots, but 737 pilots.
So I would defer to those pilots in any opinion of whether the AD was understandable, clear as mud or crystal.
It was written for people who are already flying the a/c and have a understanding of what the AD is addressing.


:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

That same terminology has been around for 50+ years and has survived translation into several different languages without issue.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 10:59 pm

Once MCAS malfunction was recognized, wasn't the correct response, use the trim switch to neutral column force, turn off stab switches within five seconds, and then use the column to control pitch and land?
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3037
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Fri May 24, 2019 11:21 pm

DenverTed wrote:
Once MCAS malfunction was recognized, wasn't the correct response, use the trim switch to neutral column force, turn off stab switches within five seconds, and then use the column to control pitch and land?


Sorta. There's no 5 seconds in the checklist (but I understand where that's coming from) and manual stabilizer trim would be used for the rest of the flight as necessary, up until shortly before landing -- landing speed/configuration would be set up early so you are in trim (using manual trim) prior to landing, after which the control column would provide adequate control for approach and landing. (page32 of the preliminary report)
 
planecane
Posts: 1014
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:55 am

7BOEING7 wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Once MCAS malfunction was recognized, wasn't the correct response, use the trim switch to neutral column force, turn off stab switches within five seconds, and then use the column to control pitch and land?


Sorta. There's no 5 seconds in the checklist (but I understand where that's coming from) and manual stabilizer trim would be used for the rest of the flight as necessary, up until shortly before landing -- landing speed/configuration would be set up early so you are in trim (using manual trim) prior to landing, after which the control column would provide adequate control for approach and landing. (page32 of the preliminary report)


Actually, based on the checklist I think the "correct" procedure is to use the main electric trim to neutralize the control column force, disengage autothrottle and wait to see if the trim moves again. If it does, then move the cutout switches to cutout. The NNC says "If runaway continues..." before moving the switches. Therefore, I think the "correct" action is to wait (which will turn out to be 5 seconds). Therefore, it will be slightly out of trim (.27 degrees x however long it takes to move the switches) when the manual wheel is required.
 
zoom321
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 1:10 am

DenverTed wrote:
Once MCAS malfunction was recognized, wasn't the correct response, use the trim switch to neutral column force, turn off stab switches within five seconds, and then use the column to control pitch and land?

Very simple words aren't they ? one wonders why B can't even get the wordings right not only the first time but especially after JT crash.
Oh wait, we know why. It's because B wanted to hide mcas.
Then after the JT crash, B wants to say the solution is to follow 'existing' procedures, so it was the pilots' fault for not following them.
Changing words in manual is very easy. The hard part is explaining in courts why you need to change much if the existing procedures can solve the problem.
The rest was history, instead of these clear & simple steps in your post, the ET pilots had to learn psychic power within secs to decipher the procedure.
 
zoom321
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 1:12 am

7BOEING7 wrote:
par13del wrote:
What I think is missing here is that the AD was written for Boeing 737 pilots, not A3XX, Cessna, MS Flight Simulator or even us desk pilots, but 737 pilots.
So I would defer to those pilots in any opinion of whether the AD was understandable, clear as mud or crystal.
It was written for people who are already flying the a/c and have a understanding of what the AD is addressing.


:checkmark: :checkmark: :checkmark:

That same terminology has been around for 50+ years and has survived translation into several different languages without issue.

Yes, survived for 50+ years until max.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1133
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 5:27 am

marcelh wrote:

In all the back-and-forth time-wasting bickering discussion, it seems that this bit of news has gone relatively unnoticed. This reporting rather seems to call into question the recent suggestions that the FAA would lift the grounding in June. It also casts rather a shadow on the FAA's grandfathering system. And, this is the Wall Street Journal.

Here's a few notable quotes from the article:

A review of Boeing Co.’s 737 MAX jets has expanded to include emergency procedures used by pilots on earlier 737 models, further delaying the MAX’s return to service, according to U.S. government officials.

The Federal Aviation Administration hasn’t questioned the safety of older jets currently in service, these officials said, but the broadened review has become a significant factor in adding months to the time expected to get the grounded fleet of 737 MAX jets back in the air.

The agency, according to the officials, is re-evaluating assumptions and safety assessments stretching back to the FAA’s initial approval of 737 NG models in the late 1990s, and in some cases versions that flew many years earlier.

Some previously developed cockpit procedures are partly based on Boeing’s earlier assumptions that pilots would respond in just a few seconds to erroneous nose-down commands, the officials said, and the FAA is evaluating how realistic that might be.

The FAA is reassessing the extent of force required to manually counteract nose-down commands in extreme circumstances, by turning a wheel—known as the trim wheel—located between the pilots.

The FAA hasn’t decided whether to mandate new or revised training procedures for earlier 737 models as a result of the expanded studies, the government officials said. Airlines could also voluntarily adopt such changes. Regardless of whether the FAA mandates new or adjusted pilot training, it is likely to require changes to language in pilot manuals explaining emergency procedures.

Mr. Tajer said the existing checklist for the trim wheel procedure, which is what pilots reference and train to, might not include all the information aviators need. For example, some Boeing manuals say two pilots may be needed to manually turn the wheel. But other material provided to airlines for their manuals say merely that the wheel could be difficult to turn.

Over the years, FAA rules for approving new planes or derivatives of existing models typically barred emergency procedures requiring two pilots. “There’s signs of a potential weakness of that checklist,” Mr. Tajer said.
 
Virtual737
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 5:52 am

For those of you that are still giving Boeing's failures 3 words of narrative but the pilot's actions and the training of the airlines several thousand words:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/23/boeing-737-max-crashes-american-airlines-pilots-union-mcas

AA's pilot Union is basically slating Boeing for apportioning any blame whatsoever on the pilots due to both the initial design (or lack of) philosophy and the fact that their members had been complaining to Boeing for MONTHS.

Fair use excerpt:

"Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do, but that Boeing’s controversial anti-stall software (MCAS) forced the plane into such an aggressive nosedive that the pilots could not recover. “They had wired that thing so that it was irrecoverable. It just blew us away,” Tajer said."
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 6:03 am

Revelation wrote:
Reuters: Exclusive: FAA tells U.N. aviation agency 737 MAX ungrounding in U.S. could happen by late June - sources says:

U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) representatives told members of the United Nations’ aviation agency they expect an ungrounding of Boeing Co’s 737 MAX jets in the United States as early as late June, three people familiar with Thursday’s briefing said, though there is no firm timetable for the move.

So we have dates all over the place: June, August, October, next year, etc.

I personally don't have a hard time seeing the FAA making the late June date happen.

Of course, this doesn't mean all the airlines will work to that schedule, nor does it mean other nation's regulators will either.

This is consistent with what bob75013 posted earlier:

bob75013 wrote:

par13del wrote:
So nothing as yet from the two meetings being held today on the fate of the 737 MAX, hard to believe that there is no one there recording or posting live updates.


Well, the head of the FAA did tell US carriers that they would not need to extend the time in which MAXs are out of their schedules. So he expects them to be back in the air by August.

"Airlines that have taken the grounded Boeing 737 Max planes out of their schedules through the summer currently don’t need to extend flight cancellations of the popular jet, the acting head of the Federal Aviation Administration said Thursday."

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/23/faa-act ... plans.html


And CNN: FAA chief says nothing shows agency failed in review or certification of Boeing 737 MAX says:

Despite two crashes involving the Boeing 737 MAX, the acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration said he has not come across any information that suggests his agency failed to properly review and certify the aircraft.

"I have not seen anything that suggests that," Daniel Elwell said in an interview with CNN's Drew Griffin Thursday, though he said ongoing audits and reviews may find ways to improve his agency's processes.

Another case of mama saying her baby ain't ugly?


KDFW-TV in Dallas said in a news report a couple of days ago that it would require at least 150 hours for each grounded 3M8/3M9 to get the software updates installed, fluids and engines checked, and, presumably, for pilots to be re-trained and/or re-certified before they're back in the air. Just because someone says the grounding order could be lifted by the end of June (which I highly doubt will happen), that very likely means you might not see a 3M8/9 in the air for a couple months after the order is lifted.
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), 739 (DL), 712 (DL)
Next: AA: DFW-PHL (752), PHL-MIA (763), MIA-LAX (77W), LAX-DFW (789)
 
marcelh
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 6:16 am

Virtual737 wrote:
For those of you that are still giving Boeing's failures 3 words of narrative but the pilot's actions and the training of the airlines several thousand words:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/23/boeing-737-max-crashes-american-airlines-pilots-union-mcas

AA's pilot Union is basically slating Boeing for apportioning any blame whatsoever on the pilots due to both the initial design (or lack of) philosophy and the fact that their members had been complaining to Boeing for MONTHS.

Fair use excerpt:

"Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do, but that Boeing’s controversial anti-stall software (MCAS) forced the plane into such an aggressive nosedive that the pilots could not recover. “They had wired that thing so that it was irrecoverable. It just blew us away,” Tajer said."


Interesting... but the usual suspects at A.net will spin this into something that blame the pilots :duck:
 
DenverTed
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 6:36 am

So the certification of the hand trim wheel is in question? Which I assume was not self certified by Boeing but by the FAA on the 727 or 707, and in what year?
 
bgm
Posts: 2082
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 6:49 am

Saintor wrote:
bgm wrote:
Saintor wrote:

Not evidence, just your opinion.


Well then, oh wise one, pray tell why is the 737 MAX grounded worldwide? :duck:


If I would have to tell you, then I would have to explain to you also the difference between an apple and an orange. So I won't bother.


Uh-uh, you don't get away that easily. Try me. Go on, explain. I eagerly await your response.
████ ███ █ ███████ ██ █ █████ ██ ████ [redacted]
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1715
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 7:00 am

DenverTed wrote:
So the certification of the hand trim wheel is in question? Which I assume was not self certified by Boeing but by the FAA on the 727 or 707, and in what year?


The trim wheel changed signifcantly from the Classic to the NG. The larger instrument panel on the NG meant that the wheel had to be made smaller. It also had a damper added to it. Combine these two changes and the effort required to manually turn it goes up.
 
AirBoat
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 11:58 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 8:30 am

Note the sentence below:
The FAA is reassessing the extent of force required to manually counteract nose-down commands in extreme circumstances, by turning a wheel—known as the trim wheel—located between the pilots.
This is the hidden "approaching train smash"
The utube video from the American pilots assoc, mentions that they cant fly an aircraft that runs out of elevator authority at max down trim angle.
As I have mentioned before the higher forces to pull back on the control column is due to software protection of the elevator.
the solution is very simple. Put a stronger elevator on the 737, that can be used even at max nose down pitch.
After all the system is hydraulic, so power to move the elevator is not an issue.
The big problem is that at the time this solution was arrived at, the plane was in flight testing. Putting a stronger elevator on the plane would involve doing a complete re-design of fuselage aft of wing, plus wind tunnel tests plus fatigue tests and would have set the program back a few years.
To tell a pilot he has to trim to reduce stick forces is total nonsense. This is a work around to cover a problem. The only problem is that the problem is still there.

The MCAS failure has unfortunately exposed another area of the plane where a work around has been done.
rgds
 
kalvado
Posts: 1811
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 10:36 am

DenverTed wrote:
So the certification of the hand trim wheel is in question? Which I assume was not self certified by Boeing but by the FAA on the 727 or 707, and in what year?

Was a pretty obvious outcome once blowback became a concern. Probably was ok on smaller planes with roller coaster procedure in the manual. Larger planes require more force, along with modification of the wheel are balanced with reliable electric trim system. Will be quite a question for FAA to address given that NG is historically very safe plane, not warranting harsh moves
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 11:29 am

DenverTed wrote:
So the certification of the hand trim wheel is in question? Which I assume was not self certified by Boeing but by the FAA on the 727 or 707, and in what year?


But the hand trim wheel on the NG and than the MAX is not the same as on the 707 or 727. So the actual hand wheel in use today came in 1997 on the NG.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 11:55 am

Virtual737 wrote:
For those of you that are still giving Boeing's failures 3 words of narrative but the pilot's actions and the training of the airlines several thousand words:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/23/boeing-737-max-crashes-american-airlines-pilots-union-mcas

AA's pilot Union is basically slating Boeing for apportioning any blame whatsoever on the pilots due to both the initial design (or lack of) philosophy and the fact that their members had been complaining to Boeing for MONTHS.

Fair use excerpt:

"Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do, but that Boeing’s controversial anti-stall software (MCAS) forced the plane into such an aggressive nosedive that the pilots could not recover. “They had wired that thing so that it was irrecoverable. It just blew us away,” Tajer said."


It would be a lot easier to find Tajer credible if he actually knew that they didn't follow all procedures and that it is not anti-stall software.
 
Boeingphan
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 11:57 am

KDFW-TV in Dallas said in a news report a couple of days ago that it would require at least 150 hours for each grounded 3M8/3M9 to get the software updates installed, fluids and engines checked, and, presumably, for pilots to be re-trained and/or re-certified before they're back in the air. Just because someone says the grounding order could be lifted by the end of June (which I highly doubt will happen), that very likely means you might not see a 3M8/9 in the air for a couple months after the order is lifted.[/quote]


You do realize that 150hrs is nothing. At worst case you have 2 guys for less than 2 weeks worth of work and one plane is done. I keep seeing the 150hr as being some huge obstacle but my goodness its peanuts.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

ctrabs0114 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Reuters: Exclusive: FAA tells U.N. aviation agency 737 MAX ungrounding in U.S. could happen by late June - sources says:

U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) representatives told members of the United Nations’ aviation agency they expect an ungrounding of Boeing Co’s 737 MAX jets in the United States as early as late June, three people familiar with Thursday’s briefing said, though there is no firm timetable for the move.

So we have dates all over the place: June, August, October, next year, etc.

I personally don't have a hard time seeing the FAA making the late June date happen.

Of course, this doesn't mean all the airlines will work to that schedule, nor does it mean other nation's regulators will either.

This is consistent with what bob75013 posted earlier:

bob75013 wrote:


Well, the head of the FAA did tell US carriers that they would not need to extend the time in which MAXs are out of their schedules. So he expects them to be back in the air by August.

"Airlines that have taken the grounded Boeing 737 Max planes out of their schedules through the summer currently don’t need to extend flight cancellations of the popular jet, the acting head of the Federal Aviation Administration said Thursday."

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/23/faa-act ... plans.html


And CNN: FAA chief says nothing shows agency failed in review or certification of Boeing 737 MAX says:

Despite two crashes involving the Boeing 737 MAX, the acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration said he has not come across any information that suggests his agency failed to properly review and certify the aircraft.

"I have not seen anything that suggests that," Daniel Elwell said in an interview with CNN's Drew Griffin Thursday, though he said ongoing audits and reviews may find ways to improve his agency's processes.

Another case of mama saying her baby ain't ugly?


KDFW-TV in Dallas said in a news report a couple of days ago that it would require at least 150 hours for each grounded 3M8/3M9 to get the software updates installed, fluids and engines checked, and, presumably, for pilots to be re-trained and/or re-certified before they're back in the air. Just because someone says the grounding order could be lifted by the end of June (which I highly doubt will happen), that very likely means you might not see a 3M8/9 in the air for a couple months after the order is lifted.


That's 150 hours in total assuming only one person is working on it. They will have multiple people working on them at once - it won't take additional months.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:01 pm

RickNRoll wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
So the certification of the hand trim wheel is in question? Which I assume was not self certified by Boeing but by the FAA on the 727 or 707, and in what year?


The trim wheel changed signifcantly from the Classic to the NG. The larger instrument panel on the NG meant that the wheel had to be made smaller. It also had a damper added to it. Combine these two changes and the effort required to manually turn it goes up.


Assuming the gearing stayed the same.

Way early in this thread there was a report by a long time 737 pilot that the NG trim wheel was no harder to turn than the Classic Trim wheel - they must have changed the gearing so it takes more turns now.

That may be a certification issue if it is found that it takes too long - but the FAA would have tested that on NG certification.

Maybe they are just wanting the roller coster procedure back in the manual.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:12 pm

morrisond wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
For those of you that are still giving Boeing's failures 3 words of narrative but the pilot's actions and the training of the airlines several thousand words:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/23/boeing-737-max-crashes-american-airlines-pilots-union-mcas

AA's pilot Union is basically slating Boeing for apportioning any blame whatsoever on the pilots due to both the initial design (or lack of) philosophy and the fact that their members had been complaining to Boeing for MONTHS.

Fair use excerpt:

"Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do, but that Boeing’s controversial anti-stall software (MCAS) forced the plane into such an aggressive nosedive that the pilots could not recover. “They had wired that thing so that it was irrecoverable. It just blew us away,” Tajer said."


It would be a lot easier to find Tajer credible if he actually knew that they didn't follow all procedures and that it is not anti-stall software.

Those words are of the news organisation not Tajer. It is only your opinion regarding the performance of procedure.

For lack of credibility, that lies with those who just call all who don't agree with their position liars for which you have form and do so just about every day. Look in the mirror, you might see it.

Ray
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:17 pm

AirBoat wrote:
Note the sentence below:
The FAA is reassessing the extent of force required to manually counteract nose-down commands in extreme circumstances, by turning a wheel—known as the trim wheel—located between the pilots.
This is the hidden "approaching train smash"
The utube video from the American pilots assoc, mentions that they cant fly an aircraft that runs out of elevator authority at max down trim angle.
As I have mentioned before the higher forces to pull back on the control column is due to software protection of the elevator.
the solution is very simple. Put a stronger elevator on the 737, that can be used even at max nose down pitch.
After all the system is hydraulic, so power to move the elevator is not an issue.
The big problem is that at the time this solution was arrived at, the plane was in flight testing. Putting a stronger elevator on the plane would involve doing a complete re-design of fuselage aft of wing, plus wind tunnel tests plus fatigue tests and would have set the program back a few years.
To tell a pilot he has to trim to reduce stick forces is total nonsense. This is a work around to cover a problem. The only problem is that the problem is still there.

The MCAS failure has unfortunately exposed another area of the plane where a work around has been done.
rgds


You would have to trim (move the Stabilizer) a bigger Elevator as well - a bigger elevator would just make the plane more pitch sensitive which might violate some FAR's as well.

Needing to have to trim is not a bad thing as it helps to provide stability to the aircraft and a spot of neutral forces - if the controls get knocked it returns to that point and releases fatigue on the pilot. It also helps give you clues to what the plane os trying to do or what you are trying to do to it.

That being said there will probably never be another Non-FBW aircraft certified - however I like the idea where the FBW controls give feedback so it gives the pilots more clues on what is happening.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:27 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Virtual737 wrote:
For those of you that are still giving Boeing's failures 3 words of narrative but the pilot's actions and the training of the airlines several thousand words:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/may/23/boeing-737-max-crashes-american-airlines-pilots-union-mcas

AA's pilot Union is basically slating Boeing for apportioning any blame whatsoever on the pilots due to both the initial design (or lack of) philosophy and the fact that their members had been complaining to Boeing for MONTHS.

Fair use excerpt:

"Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do, but that Boeing’s controversial anti-stall software (MCAS) forced the plane into such an aggressive nosedive that the pilots could not recover. “They had wired that thing so that it was irrecoverable. It just blew us away,” Tajer said."


It would be a lot easier to find Tajer credible if he actually knew that they didn't follow all procedures and that it is not anti-stall software.

Those words are of the news organisation not Tajer. It is only your opinion regarding the performance of procedure.

For lack of credibility, that lies with those who just call all who don't agree with their position liars for which you have form and do so just about every day. Look in the mirror, you might see it.

Ray


I'm sorry - I read "Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do" - How is that not implying they followed all procedures?

That's not calling him a liar - it's just stating that he might not know all the facts.

He also calls it Anti-stall software which it is not.

How am I lying? Those were his words not the news organization.

Ray - you keep spouting personal opinions many times - which I give you proof are wrong and all we hear are crickets.

If you are implying that I am a liar - please provide an example of where I knowingly lied. Otherwise please stop with the personal attacks.
Last edited by morrisond on Sat May 25, 2019 12:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
art
Posts: 2907
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:38 pm

The question to me about the introduction of MCAS is this: why did Boeing conceal / fail to reveal the system to pilots?

If Boeing had let them know that there was something (that wasn't there on NG) that could actively trim the nose down for up to 10 seconds followed by 5 secs when it would be inert before repeating, the crew would have known what was happening if the aircraft repeatedly dropped its nose. That would have made an MCAS runaway identifiable with an easy low airspeed solution available - extend the flaps to deactivate MCAS. Not saying an NNC would not require more steps at higher airspeeds but higher airspeeds would suggest more height and more time to go through the NNC.
 
Rosso
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:55 pm

art wrote:
The question to me about the introduction of MCAS is this: why did Boeing conceal / fail to reveal the system to pilots?

If Boeing had let them know that there was something (that wasn't there on NG) that could actively trim the nose down for up to 10 seconds followed by 5 secs when it would be inert before repeating, the crew would have known what was happening if the aircraft repeatedly dropped its nose. That would have made an MCAS runaway identifiable with an easy low airspeed solution available - extend the flaps to deactivate MCAS. Not saying an NNC would not require more steps at higher airspeeds but higher airspeeds would suggest more height and more time to go through the NNC.



You don't fix engineering problems with software.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:55 pm

morrisond wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
morrisond wrote:

It would be a lot easier to find Tajer credible if he actually knew that they didn't follow all procedures and that it is not anti-stall software.

Those words are of the news organisation not Tajer. It is only your opinion regarding the performance of procedure.

For lack of credibility, that lies with those who just call all who don't agree with their position liars for which you have form and do so just about every day. Look in the mirror, you might see it.

Ray


I'm sorry - I read "Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do" - How is that not implying they followed all procedures?

That's not calling him a liar - it's just stating that he might not know all the facts.

He also calls it Anti-stall software which it is not.

How am I lying? Those were his words not the news organization.

Ray - you keep spouting personal opinions many times - which I give you proof are wrong and all we hear are crickets.

If you are implying that I am a liar - please provide an example of where I knowingly lied. Otherwise please stop with the personal attacks.

Twisting again. I did not call anyone a liar, nor would I stoop to such. I suggested you may lack credibility. My opinions are clearly stated as such, and if someone holds a different opinion I accept that is so. I will present considered evaluation of the data and interpretation, if that proves to be incorrect, or someone has a better solution then I accept it as such. I cant honestly remember anything that can be considered a 'proof'.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 12:58 pm

art wrote:
The question to me about the introduction of MCAS is this: why did Boeing conceal / fail to reveal the system to pilots?

If Boeing had let them know that there was something (that wasn't there on NG) that could actively trim the nose down for up to 10 seconds followed by 5 secs when it would be inert before repeating, the crew would have known what was happening if the aircraft repeatedly dropped its nose. That would have made an MCAS runaway identifiable with an easy low airspeed solution available - extend the flaps to deactivate MCAS. Not saying an NNC would not require more steps at higher airspeeds but higher airspeeds would suggest more height and more time to go through the NNC.


Yes Boeing really screwed up but not informing everyone on MCAS. That is probably why they will be found liable for the vast majority of the Lionair flight.

On ET though they gave a nice long description of the condition and what procedures could be followed to counteract it.

It's on Page 32-33 of the preliminary report. https://leehamnews.com/wp-content/uploa ... ET-AVJ.pdf

Extending flaps would have been a nice easy solution at low speed but doesn't work above flap extension speeds. They try to write one easy procedure to cover all normal situations.

However I don't think they ever envisioned anyone would leave TOGA thrust engaged the whole time and be in an Overspeed condition.
 
ctrabs0114
Posts: 885
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:09 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 1:16 pm

morrisond wrote:
ctrabs0114 wrote:
KDFW-TV in Dallas said in a news report a couple of days ago that it would require at least 150 hours for each grounded 3M8/3M9 to get the software updates installed, fluids and engines checked, and, presumably, for pilots to be re-trained and/or re-certified before they're back in the air. Just because someone says the grounding order could be lifted by the end of June (which I highly doubt will happen), that very likely means you might not see a 3M8/9 in the air for a couple months after the order is lifted.


That's 150 hours in total assuming only one person is working on it. They will have multiple people working on them at once - it won't take additional months.


That wasn't made clear in the reporting, but do you think they're going to rush things, all things considered? Maybe "a couple of months" was a little overboard of an assessment, but it's not going to be a quick process to get those planes airworthy, that's for sure.
2019: DAL, MCI, PHX, LAS, DFW, SAT, ORD, SLC, SEA, DTW; B73G (WN x3), B738 (WN, AA, DL), A20N (NK), MD83 (AA), B788 (AA x2), CS1 (DL), 739 (DL), 712 (DL)
Next: AA: DFW-PHL (752), PHL-MIA (763), MIA-LAX (77W), LAX-DFW (789)
 
SFOtoORD
Posts: 1082
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 1:33 pm

xmp125a wrote:
marcelh wrote:


Subtitle for this should be "Grandfathering bites back". As I understand, due to Boeing insistence on the fact that there is no material difference between NG and the MAX for the pilots, the old procedures have to be re-evaluated in the light of the MAX problems - because MAX depends on them (probably one of those is roller-coaster?).


Or, more simply, better to ensure investigators fully get to root cause and change all related software, systems, procedures and trainings. It’s a good thing.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1176
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 1:43 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
morrisond wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Those words are of the news organisation not Tajer. It is only your opinion regarding the performance of procedure.

For lack of credibility, that lies with those who just call all who don't agree with their position liars for which you have form and do so just about every day. Look in the mirror, you might see it.

Ray


I'm sorry - I read "Tajer said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do" - How is that not implying they followed all procedures?

That's not calling him a liar - it's just stating that he might not know all the facts.

He also calls it Anti-stall software which it is not.

How am I lying? Those were his words not the news organization.

Ray - you keep spouting personal opinions many times - which I give you proof are wrong and all we hear are crickets.

If you are implying that I am a liar - please provide an example of where I knowingly lied. Otherwise please stop with the personal attacks.

Twisting again. I did not call anyone a liar, nor would I stoop to such. I suggested you may lack credibility. My opinions are clearly stated as such, and if someone holds a different opinion I accept that is so. I will present considered evaluation of the data and interpretation, if that proves to be incorrect, or someone has a better solution then I accept it as such. I cant honestly remember anything that can be considered a 'proof'.


Hi Ray,

I think we were both guilty about not reading posts fully this morning. No - you did not call me a liar - just lacking in credibility.

I'm not making stuff up - it's all out there if you care to search for it. When I say I'm speculating (like below) I call it speculation.

For proof I can think of two things off the top of my head - You never replied many weeks ago when you asserted that the MAX dropped out of turns and that is why ET302 crashed and I gave you a possibly better explanation from the FDR traces in the preliminary report - nor when I sent you the PM on the Non-Normal airspeed procedure from another forum which I am not allowed to post here.

Then others were asserting that Pilots would never be able to handle stalls or approach to stall in an MAX as the light control forces or pitch instability as they called it would cause the pilot to pull into a stall so fast that it would be unrecoverable. I posted a video showing how much warning the pilots would have and all there were were crickets again.

I don't find the ET CEO credible at all as he continues to insist that there were no bird strikes and that all procedures were followed. Combine that with the AVHerald report that ET may never have supplied the proper procedure to its pilots - which if true - no wonder he is trying to deflect blame.

That is what they (ET) tried to do with ET409 as well - stating it was a lighting strike and not pilot error as the final report clearly shows.

I suspect we will never hear or be able to read the full CVR recording as the ET Civil Aviation Authority under pressure from ET will never release it. The FAA may not be able to release it publicly on their own.

I also find it curious how little we are hearing about the May 23 meeting. Presumably they all listened to the full CVR recordings and if there was a smoking gun further implicating Boeing I'm sure someone would have leaked something by now as there were representatives from 33 organizations there. Alternatively the recordings could have been very damning on both sets of pilots (or at least ET) but as that is against the public narrative of "It's all Boeing and the FAA's fault" we aren't hearing much at all.

All pure speculation though.
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1077
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sat May 25, 2019 1:52 pm

Rosso wrote:
art wrote:
The question to me about the introduction of MCAS is this: why did Boeing conceal / fail to reveal the system to pilots?

If Boeing had let them know that there was something (that wasn't there on NG) that could actively trim the nose down for up to 10 seconds followed by 5 secs when it would be inert before repeating, the crew would have known what was happening if the aircraft repeatedly dropped its nose. That would have made an MCAS runaway identifiable with an easy low airspeed solution available - extend the flaps to deactivate MCAS. Not saying an NNC would not require more steps at higher airspeeds but higher airspeeds would suggest more height and more time to go through the NNC.



You don't fix engineering problems with software.

We all waited 6 years for your first post!

Spot on!!

Hope the next one is either as sharp, or sooner than 2025!

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