Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
sadiqutp
Posts: 290
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2016 5:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:05 am

XRAYretired wrote:
.......... Sullenberger agreed, saying it's unlikely that more experienced pilots would have had different outcomes, adding, "we shouldn't have to expect pilots to compensate for flawed designs."
........


Well, Capt. Sullenberger did a complete 180 on his initial reaction after the ET crash.

Someone with only 200 hours would not know how to do that or even to do that. Someone with that low amount of time would have only flown in a closely supervised, sterile training environment, not the challenging and often ambiguous real world of operational flying, would likely never have experienced a serious aircraft malfunction, would have seen only one cycle of the seasons of the year as a pilot, one spring with gusty crosswinds, one summer of thunderstorms.

https://liveandletsfly.boardingarea.com ... 737-crash/
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:25 am

planecane wrote:
Why are you assuming nobody has interviewed the Lion Air 043 pilots?

Exactly, everyone just assumes rather than going by reality, at no time in any of my post did I say that they were not interviewed. What I did say is that I would rather have them tell how MCAS ver 1.0 worked with them at the helm versus experts programming on a simulator. I did also mention their initial incident report which another poster was kind enough to mention, still waiting for their full report, thought it would be out by now since no fatalities took place on their flight.
planecane wrote:
They don't need to testify in a dog and pony show Congressional hearing where none of the committee members know what a horizonal stabilizer is.
I can guarantee you that they were interviewed by the Indonesian investigators at bare minimum. Most likely they have been interviewed by the FAA, EASA, etc.

So this indicates that the un-grounding and adjustments to the FAA oversight will not change, since the folks who write the laws are just conducting a dog and pony show, but the experts that they bought in are the real deal, at least they got one thing right.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:33 am

RickNRoll wrote:
Sully is a credible expert witness. His evidence supports what we heard from other experts.

I would also like to know if his evidence is supported by the 3 pilots who survived the MCAS event, but it seems to ask for their input is not in the cards.
I think that is an error of not using the best source available, but it is what it is, I will let it go.
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:10 am

par13del wrote:
I would also like to know if his evidence is supported by the 3 pilots who survived the MCAS even

It really is irrelevant. I'd be curious to hear what they have to say, but ultimately it should not affect decision making process around resolving the problem.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19033
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 6:25 am

sadiqutp wrote:
Well, Capt. Sullenberger did a complete 180 on his initial reaction after the ET crash.


Unlike 90% of a.netters, maybe he can rationally change his mind and see things differently once more information becomes available?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
716131
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2017 11:51 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:53 am

During MAX grounding, LOT is leasing a 737-700 to cover the MAX grounding.

https://www.pasazer.com/news/41566/boei ... lot,u.html
If it's not Boeing, I'm not going!
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:48 am

Seattle Times? version of MCAS design and development story, subtly different to the NYT version. Apologies if already posted.
https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/t ... Q9DdfZFw2x

Ray
 
Ertro
Posts: 118
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:19 am

sadiqutp wrote:
Sullenberger agreed, saying it's unlikely that more experienced pilots would have had different outcomes, adding, "we shouldn't have to expect pilots to compensate for flawed designs."


Well, Capt. Sullenberger did a complete 180 on his initial reaction after the ET crash.

Someone with only 200 hours would not know how to do that or even to do that. Someone with that low amount of time would have only flown in a closely supervised, sterile training environment, not the challenging and often ambiguous real world of operational flying, would likely never have experienced a serious aircraft malfunction, would have seen only one cycle of the seasons of the year as a pilot, one spring with gusty crosswinds, one summer of thunderstorms.



That is not 180. At first he is saying 200 hours is not enough to handle any serious malfunctions and the new comment is that even more experienced pilots would not have been able to handle this particular even more serious malfunction.

There is no contradiction. He is staying in the original course and just going further.

Only if you read everything about how things affect Boeing you can read the first to be positive to Boeing and second one negative to Boeing but that is seriously misreading of what is being said. Stop thinking only about Boeing.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4090
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 1:41 pm

There has not been much if any discussion on the big ironies this whole debacle. MCAS was designed as a safety feature, kludge such as it is, but somewhat required by certification agencies. Second irony, Boeing as opposed to Airbus (and I have no opinion as to which is better) gives more latitude to pilots and less to automation.

snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

and a ps: the Seattle Times article is worth spending the time reading, it is fairly technical and somewhat damning.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1018
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 3:52 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
Seattle Times? version of MCAS design and development story, subtly different to the NYT version. Apologies if already posted.
https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/t ... Q9DdfZFw2x

Ray

:checkmark:
Many thanks for that link
There a lot of Boeing internals details on the MCAS, very interesting, a must read.
It support the scenario where time and money played a significant role in the process.
New to me that the KC-46 MCAS was a very different system that use both AoA sensors.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1018
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:04 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

No doubt that Boeing can do FBW the right way. Boeing's FBW system is used in the 777, 787 and 747-8.
In practice, the 737 and 767 are the last Boeing Commercial Airplanes non FBW design still sold today.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4090
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:13 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

No doubt that Boeing can do FBW the right way. Boeing's FBW system is used in the 777, 787 and 747-8.
In practice, the 737 and 767 are the last Boeing Commercial Airplanes non FBW design still sold today.


But .... and this is a question: I have read that even with FBW Boeing gives more control to the pilot, and Airbus gives more control to automation. This obviously is a matter of degrees, not absolute.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 4:22 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
There a lot of Boeing internals details on the MCAS, very interesting, a must read.
It support the scenario where time and money played a significant role in the process.
New to me that the KC-46 MCAS was a very different system that use both AoA sensors.


I can't believe changes to the MCAS design and scope of operation did not trigger complete reevaluation of risk analysis. How can Boeing defend their design process with a straight face? It is bad.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4282
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:38 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/boeing-updates-older-737-simulators-in-wake-of-fatal-max-crashes
Confirmed NG simulator did not accurately reflect manual trim wheel forces.

Ray


Yeah, and it's easier to turn than in a real aircraft in some circumstances.


You do realise that simulators are supposed to be accurate or more difficult to fly than the real airplane?
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11097
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 5:55 pm

737MAX storage has moved to the staff carpark at BFI

Image

https://twitter.com/Airplane_pic/status ... 44099?s=20
Forum Moderator
 
planecane
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:41 pm

par13del wrote:
planecane wrote:
They don't need to testify in a dog and pony show Congressional hearing where none of the committee members know what a horizonal stabilizer is.
I can guarantee you that they were interviewed by the Indonesian investigators at bare minimum. Most likely they have been interviewed by the FAA, EASA, etc.

So this indicates that the un-grounding and adjustments to the FAA oversight will not change, since the folks who write the laws are just conducting a dog and pony show, but the experts that they bought in are the real deal, at least they got one thing right.


The issue is that in order for the FAA to significantly change the way they operate will require a large increase in their budget. That's not likely to happen anytime soon. It would take a bi-partisan effort. Since neither crash occurred on US soil or a US airline, the political will for that type of bi-partisan agreement does not exist. Politicians are reactionary. When up for reelection it doesn't do them any good to point to how much they increased the butget of the FAA to improve the aircraft certification process. If a MAX owned by a US airline had crashed due to MCAS or if a MAX had crashed in the US then the politicians would want to show how much they did to correct the issue and protect US citizens.

I would expect essentially no changes, or certainly no useful changes. The hearings are just for the committe members to get on TV and in other press to show how hard they are working to solve issues.
 
hivue
Posts: 2076
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 8:57 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
Seattle Times? version of MCAS design and development story, subtly different to the NYT version. Apologies if already posted.
https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/t ... Q9DdfZFw2x

Ray


Great read. Very informative.

Boeing never flight-tested a scenario in which a broken angle-of-attack sensor triggered MCAS on its own, instead relying on simulator analysis, according to a person familiar with the process.


It would be very interesting to know what the sim analysis produced.

Hazardous events typically demand more than one sensor -- except when they are outside normal flight conditions and unlikely to be encountered, such as a wind-up turn.


Interesting. So single sensor input design of an airplane system which, if it fails, can result in a "hazardous" event does not automatically constitute engineering stupidity.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4110
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 10:00 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Seattle Times? version of MCAS design and development story, subtly different to the NYT version. Apologies if already posted.
https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/t ... Q9DdfZFw2x

Ray

:checkmark:
Many thanks for that link
There a lot of Boeing internals details on the MCAS, very interesting, a must read.
It support the scenario where time and money played a significant role in the process.
New to me that the KC-46 MCAS was a very different system that use both AoA sensors.

Yes, agree. Especially since the article is not jumping on the "Boeing is criminal" bandwagon, but gives a reasonable description of how sequence of events proceeded internally, without (too much) judgement.

Indeed must read. Thanks for the link XRAY!
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1018
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:00 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

No doubt that Boeing can do FBW the right way. Boeing's FBW system is used in the 777, 787 and 747-8.
In practice, the 737 and 767 are the last Boeing Commercial Airplanes non FBW design still sold today.


But .... and this is a question: I have read that even with FBW Boeing gives more control to the pilot, and Airbus gives more control to automation. This obviously is a matter of degrees, not absolute.

The difference is on the ability for the pilot to go outside the envelop protection in normal law. Airbus philosophy is that the normal law validation need to be robust enough to never let the pilot go outside of it. So there use a lot of redundancies to ensure that the normal law is safe. While Airbus accident/incident in normal law are possible (ex. F-WWKH, GXL888T, QF72) there are very rare and highly specific, most accident was in alternate or direct law where the pilot have more or full authority.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:13 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
There a lot of Boeing internals details on the MCAS, very interesting, a must read.
It support the scenario where time and money played a significant role in the process.
New to me that the KC-46 MCAS was a very different system that use both AoA sensors.


I can't believe changes to the MCAS design and scope of operation did not trigger complete reevaluation of risk analysis. How can Boeing defend their design process with a straight face? It is bad.
I don't recall them actually addressing that specifically.
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:18 pm

RickNRoll wrote:
I don't recall them actually addressing that specifically.

All the time. They keep insisting design and certification process was solid and they did nothing wrong.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:20 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
I don't recall them actually addressing that specifically.

All the time. They keep insisting design and certification process was solid and they did nothing wrong.

You do know that at this stage of things wrong is a legal term with legal ramifications?
Moral and commonsense are separate items.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 4282
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:22 pm

Interested wrote:
Going to be tricky NOT to drag normal 737's into the bad publicity

One thing that shouldn't happen is making it hard for the public to know what they are on and make a choice etc

I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1018
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun Jun 23, 2019 11:35 pm

par13del wrote:
ArgentoSystems wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
I don't recall them actually addressing that specifically.

All the time. They keep insisting design and certification process was solid and they did nothing wrong.

You do know that at this stage of things wrong is a legal term with legal ramifications?
Moral and commonsense are separate items.

Maybe Boeing expect to minimize legal liability by showing compliance with design and certification process. The can possibly prove that almost any details of the 737 MAX was in compliance and left only a few very specific issues to the critic. At that point there can try to redirect blame, for example to the FAA.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1706
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:03 am

snowkarl wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
mrbots wrote:
I'm seeing all this Sully stuff floating around everywhere now. I realize he has a long history as a pilot with time in the military, 30 years as a pilot for US Airways, and obviously the "Miracle on the Hudson" but does he have any history or experience flying 737s or did they just plop him in the simulator for the headlines? I feel they're just waving him around because he's probably the only pilot people have heard of instead of the usual that would probably be a subject matter expert on the specific airframe or it's predecessor. Sully said...and if Sully said it, then it must be true.


Good question about his 737 experience. We can assume he may have flown 737 classics, but that would been a long time ago and two generations behind the MAX.

The media treats him as if he's the expert on everything. He's a valuable resource on many things, but we know he's not an expert on flying the 737 NG or MAX. His opinion is noteworthy, but these aren't the words of a 737 pilot.


It doesn't matter if he's not an expert on those specific versions of the 737, he's an extremely decorated and experienced pilot with very educated opinions on aviation safety, especially when compared to the average anet poster.

I guess Neil Armstrong wouldn't be qualified to say that the space shuttle is unsafe because he's a simple Apollo astronaut...

Obviously it isn't true just because Sully said it but he is an authority on the subject and what he said is completely logical and that fact doesn't go away simply because you happen to disagree with it.


I think the fact Sully is most recently an Airbus pilot tests the adequacy of the training and documentation all the more - if a highly experienced Airbus pilot can go through the training, read the manuals, and fly the aircraft exactly the way Boeing envisages (i.e. handling the runaway trim), then great. If the same pilot does the same training, reads the same manual, and has the same crash as Lionair and Ethiopian, that probably suggests there's an issue. If an experienced MAX pilot, or even a recently experienced 737 pilot were to take his place, and avoid a crash, I'm not sure that proves quite as much?
 
packsonflight
Posts: 386
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:55 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:16 am

PixelFlight wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

No doubt that Boeing can do FBW the right way. Boeing's FBW system is used in the 777, 787 and 747-8.
In practice, the 737 and 767 are the last Boeing Commercial Airplanes non FBW design still sold today.


According to the article Boeing went with one sensor system in order not to lessen the dispatch reliability of the aircraft, and keep it simple.
If MCAS is dual sensor system and one AOA sensor fails the aircraft is AOG. if one sensor fails the aircraft can still be dispatched since one is enough according to MEL. If the MCAS sensor (the left one) fails, it is always the possibility to swap sensors so MCAS has the good one and the aircraft can stillfly.

this is according to normal aircraft design philosophy, if you need one system or part you put in two, so you can fly if one fails. If you need minimum 2 parts to fly, put in three so you can still fly if one fails.

At least it seems that Boeing had different ideas about redundancy or failure rate of the AOA sensors regarding dispatch reliability, than when they calculated the reliability of the MCAS system as a whole. I don't comprehend the calculated reliability of the MCAS system, to me it looks like it is more likely to win the jackpot three times in a row on your birthday, than a single failure of the MCAS system.

To me it looks like Boeing assessed the MCAS system a thousand times more reliable that the weakest link, the AOA senso.r
 
DenverTed
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:45 am

zkojq wrote:
Interested wrote:
Going to be tricky NOT to drag normal 737's into the bad publicity

One thing that shouldn't happen is making it hard for the public to know what they are on and make a choice etc

I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.

Isn't the manual trim wheel problem the same on the NG? Granted it was not put to the test for 22 years of NG service, but if it isn't up to spec and regs, I'm not sure they can ignore it. Maybe a slow fix like the fuel tank inert on the 747.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 468
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:49 am

packsonflight wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

No doubt that Boeing can do FBW the right way. Boeing's FBW system is used in the 777, 787 and 747-8.
In practice, the 737 and 767 are the last Boeing Commercial Airplanes non FBW design still sold today.


According to the article Boeing went with one sensor system in order not to lessen the dispatch reliability of the aircraft, and keep it simple.
If MCAS is dual sensor system and one AOA sensor fails the aircraft is AOG. if one sensor fails the aircraft can still be dispatched since one is enough according to MEL. If the MCAS sensor (the left one) fails, it is always the possibility to swap sensors so MCAS has the good one and the aircraft can stillfly.

this is according to normal aircraft design philosophy, if you need one system or part you put in two, so you can fly if one fails. If you need minimum 2 parts to fly, put in three so you can still fly if one fails.

At least it seems that Boeing had different ideas about redundancy or failure rate of the AOA sensors regarding dispatch reliability, than when they calculated the reliability of the MCAS system as a whole. I don't comprehend the calculated reliability of the MCAS system, to me it looks like it is more likely to win the jackpot three times in a row on your birthday, than a single failure of the MCAS system.

To me it looks like Boeing assessed the MCAS system a thousand times more reliable that the weakest link, the AOA senso.r

Kind of like a thrust reverser deployment is not crucial on landing, but if they don't consider a malfunction deployment in flight? Hopefully the process does look at worst case malfunctions at unintended times, not just loss of use at intended time.
 
airzona11
Posts: 1743
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 5:44 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 12:55 am

zkojq wrote:
Interested wrote:
Going to be tricky NOT to drag normal 737's into the bad publicity

One thing that shouldn't happen is making it hard for the public to know what they are on and make a choice etc

I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.


What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?
 
planecane
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:10 am

DenverTed wrote:
zkojq wrote:
Interested wrote:
Going to be tricky NOT to drag normal 737's into the bad publicity

One thing that shouldn't happen is making it hard for the public to know what they are on and make a choice etc

I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.

Isn't the manual trim wheel problem the same on the NG? Granted it was not put to the test for 22 years of NG service, but if it isn't up to spec and regs, I'm not sure they can ignore it. Maybe a slow fix like the fuel tank inert on the 747.


It seems to me the issue with the manual trim wheel is the same as the 737-100 in 1967. Honestly, to put in gearing that allowed for relatively easy movement of the stabilizer under extreme loads from being severly out of trim, at high speed or both would make the stabilizer move so little on each rotation of the wheel that it would take a crazy amount of cranking to move it. The problem with that is you pretty much make it useless under close to in trim situations where the current setup works just fine.

Even in the seattle times article linked above, it is clear that the intention of the runaway stabilizer procedure is to use the electric trim to get back into trim before using the manual wheel. Without access to schematics and design documentation, it seems to me that the case of a runaway stabilizer where the thumb switch can't be used to get back in trim before cutting off electric trim was determined to be extremely unlikely.
 
YYZatcboy
Posts: 1183
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:15 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:31 am

airzona11 wrote:
[

What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?


No. They would tell the passenger exactly what plane they were booking at all times, regardless if the frame had a crash or not.
DH1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30/50/80 717 727 735/6/7/8/9 744 762/3 77E/W 788/789 E40/75/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150
J/S DH8D 736/7/8 763
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:35 am

zkojq wrote:
Interested wrote:
Going to be tricky NOT to drag normal 737's into the bad publicity

One thing that shouldn't happen is making it hard for the public to know what they are on and make a choice etc

I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

Is it possible that this behaviour is / was driven by the pax themselves who:
1. Never read the emergency cards even told to do so - identifies the a/c
2. Never pay attention to the safety demonstration - identifies the a/c
3. Never obey instructions to turn off electronic devices
4. Never leave their bags when told to evacuate

Now we know never is a generalization and does not mean never, but if that is the way the majority behave why would we think they would be interested in a general announcement at the gate that a MAX is on the gate. Its the best way since a/c replacements take place all the time, what you book may not be available.
 
9Patch
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:43 am

planecane wrote:
The issue is that in order for the FAA to significantly change the way they operate will require a large increase in their budget. That's not likely to happen anytime soon. It would take a bi-partisan effort. Since neither crash occurred on US soil or a US airline, the political will for that type of bi-partisan agreement does not exist. Politicians are reactionary. When up for reelection it doesn't do them any good to point to how much they increased the butget of the FAA to improve the aircraft certification process. If a MAX owned by a US airline had crashed due to MCAS or if a MAX had crashed in the US then the politicians would want to show how much they did to correct the issue and protect US citizens.

This is speculation presented as fact. So I will speculate too.
I'm not sure the FAA needs a large increase in their budget.
Even if they do, I'm not sure that congress wouldn't act on it quickly, when the country's largest exporter needs the MAX returned to service ASAP.
 
JHwk
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:11 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:47 am

ArgentoSystems wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
There a lot of Boeing internals details on the MCAS, very interesting, a must read.
It support the scenario where time and money played a significant role in the process.
New to me that the KC-46 MCAS was a very different system that use both AoA sensors.


I can't believe changes to the MCAS design and scope of operation did not trigger complete reevaluation of risk analysis. How can Boeing defend their design process with a straight face? It is bad.

From the information presented in the article, this is where Boeing failed from an engineering standard of care.

It is also where I am concerned about Boeing’s ability to lift the grounding. The number of comments on the commercial priority over safety are really worrying.

Not to ignore the lives lost, but hopefully Boeing as a corporation has enough of a financial hit (outside of lawsuits) to re-think their safety culture. It obviously needs some serious work, and I think they have lost all moral authority for delegated certification.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10261
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:50 am

YYZatcboy wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
[

What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?


No. They would tell the passenger exactly what plane they were booking at all times, regardless if the frame had a crash or not.

Does not mean an a/c substitution would not take place due to IROPS, how many of us tried to book A380, 787, 777, A350 when first deployed and got unlucky due to a substitution, it happens, gate announcement is the best option to keep you off an undesirable a/c.
Now if you get regulators to ensure that what you book is what you get even if the delay is longer, that would work.
 
YYZatcboy
Posts: 1183
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 2:15 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:58 am

par13del wrote:
YYZatcboy wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
[

What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?


No. They would tell the passenger exactly what plane they were booking at all times, regardless if the frame had a crash or not.

Does not mean an a/c substitution would not take place due to IROPS, how many of us tried to book A380, 787, 777, A350 when first deployed and got unlucky due to a substitution, it happens, gate announcement is the best option to keep you off an undesirable a/c.
Now if you get regulators to ensure that what you book is what you get even if the delay is longer, that would work.


If it became required, I imagine an equipment swap would be paged out just like a gate change announcement, as well as announced in the terminal. No need to do anything fancy in that case, other than (again if this was required) allow passengers to re book at the gate if they were not comfortable. Its a bit over the top, but it can work with pre-existing technology and procedures.
DH1/3/4 MD11/88 L1011 A319/20/21/30/50/80 717 727 735/6/7/8/9 744 762/3 77E/W 788/789 E40/75/90 CRJ/700/705 CC150
J/S DH8D 736/7/8 763
 
planecane
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 1:58 am

9Patch wrote:
planecane wrote:
The issue is that in order for the FAA to significantly change the way they operate will require a large increase in their budget. That's not likely to happen anytime soon. It would take a bi-partisan effort. Since neither crash occurred on US soil or a US airline, the political will for that type of bi-partisan agreement does not exist. Politicians are reactionary. When up for reelection it doesn't do them any good to point to how much they increased the butget of the FAA to improve the aircraft certification process. If a MAX owned by a US airline had crashed due to MCAS or if a MAX had crashed in the US then the politicians would want to show how much they did to correct the issue and protect US citizens.

This is speculation presented as fact. So I will speculate too.
I'm not sure the FAA needs a large increase in their budget.
Even if they do, I'm not sure that congress wouldn't act on it quickly, when the country's largest exporter needs the MAX returned to service ASAP.


The reason given for the self certification is lack of funds. To go from the current state of affairs to having the resources to fully analyze aircraft for certification will take a huge increase in FAA employees.

As far as Congress acting, I'd be happy to place a friendly wager on that. Politicians primarily push legislation that will help them get reelected. Giving the FAA the necessary funding to improve aircraft certification isn't a popular issue since none of the crashes happened in the US or on a US airline.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4090
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:00 am

res FAA: at minimum FAA should appoint the Boeing certifyers, and those appointed people should report to the FAA not Boeing managers.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1868
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:29 am

frmrCapCadet wrote:
res FAA: at minimum FAA should appoint the Boeing certifyers, and those appointed people should report to the FAA not Boeing managers.


It's Quality Process 101.
 
User avatar
7BOEING7
Posts: 3039
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 2:54 am

frmrCapCadet wrote:
res FAA: at minimum FAA should appoint the Boeing certifyers, and those appointed people should report to the FAA not Boeing managers.


Was working fine until about 10 years ago, didn’t report to the FAA but they had your back. At least they said they did, fortunately never had to test that theory.
 
9Patch
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 4:52 am

planecane wrote:
As far as Congress acting, I'd be happy to place a friendly wager on that. Politicians primarily push legislation that will help them get reelected. Giving the FAA the necessary funding to improve aircraft certification isn't a popular issue since none of the crashes happened in the US or on a US airline.

Again, pure speculation on your part. Please provide some evidence funding to improve aircraft certification isn't a popular issue.
Voters will support safety regardless of where the recent crashes happened. Eight Americans died on Ethiopian Flight 302.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1318
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 5:43 am

packsonflight wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
snarky comment: if Boeing is going to follow an Airbus design preference they should do it right.

No doubt that Boeing can do FBW the right way. Boeing's FBW system is used in the 777, 787 and 747-8.
In practice, the 737 and 767 are the last Boeing Commercial Airplanes non FBW design still sold today.


According to the article Boeing went with one sensor system in order not to lessen the dispatch reliability of the aircraft, and keep it simple.
If MCAS is dual sensor system and one AOA sensor fails the aircraft is AOG. if one sensor fails the aircraft can still be dispatched since one is enough according to MEL. If the MCAS sensor (the left one) fails, it is always the possibility to swap sensors so MCAS has the good one and the aircraft can stillfly.

this is according to normal aircraft design philosophy, if you need one system or part you put in two, so you can fly if one fails. If you need minimum 2 parts to fly, put in three so you can still fly if one fails.

At least it seems that Boeing had different ideas about redundancy or failure rate of the AOA sensors regarding dispatch reliability, than when they calculated the reliability of the MCAS system as a whole. I don't comprehend the calculated reliability of the MCAS system, to me it looks like it is more likely to win the jackpot three times in a row on your birthday, than a single failure of the MCAS system.

To me it looks like Boeing assessed the MCAS system a thousand times more reliable that the weakest link, the AOA senso.r

That’s an interesting takeaway. So, is it safe to assume that MCAS v2.0 is going to reduce the dispatch reliability of the MAX (of versions with MCAS)? If so, I wonder if any of the sales contracts have clauses regarding reliability expectations.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4150
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 7:24 am

https://m.sohu.com/a/320971895_10001809 ... 00115_3w_a

In response to FAA staff report that the Max could be returned into service no later than December this year, China CAAC commented that it will not occur until flight safety problems are resolved
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate.
Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
art
Posts: 3359
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:17 am

Any indications as to

a) whether MCAS V2.0 submitted for approval will be accepted
b) when it is likely to be accepted (if acceptable) by FAA
c) when it is likely to be accepted (if acceptable) by other authorities (EASA etc)
d) how long after acceptance by first regulation authority (ipresumably FAA) it will appear on new builds
 
Interested
Posts: 887
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 12:19 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 8:54 am

airzona11 wrote:
zkojq wrote:
Interested wrote:
Going to be tricky NOT to drag normal 737's into the bad publicity

One thing that shouldn't happen is making it hard for the public to know what they are on and make a choice etc

I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.


What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?


Why does there have to be an accident to make it clear and easy to the public in the booking process what plane you will be flying on

Also when you buy a car now it has a safety rating - why not have the same for planes?
 
planecane
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:08 am

9Patch wrote:
planecane wrote:
As far as Congress acting, I'd be happy to place a friendly wager on that. Politicians primarily push legislation that will help them get reelected. Giving the FAA the necessary funding to improve aircraft certification isn't a popular issue since none of the crashes happened in the US or on a US airline.

Again, pure speculation on your part. Please provide some evidence funding to improve aircraft certification isn't a popular issue.
Voters will support safety regardless of where the recent crashes happened. Eight Americans died on Ethiopian Flight 302.

Please provide evidence that it is a popular issue. If you can't find polling (either media or done by politicians) about it that means it isn't. Which member of Congress has announced they are sponsoring a bill related to the FAA certification process?
 
uta999
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:10 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:15 am

Interested wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
zkojq wrote:
I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.


What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?


Why does there have to be an accident to make it clear and easy to the public in the booking process what plane you will be flying on

Also when you buy a car now it has a safety rating - why not have the same for planes?


BA sub aircraft all the time, from A319/A320 to A321 or NEO, NB sometimes even use a 777/787/77W. Then there's 777 to 744 or 77W, and 777 to 787. How are airlines supposed to keep their customers updated and for what purpose?
Your computer just got better
 
planecane
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:47 am

Interested wrote:
airzona11 wrote:
zkojq wrote:
I agree strongly on this one, but a lot of people on this site seem fine with dupeing customers and being untransparent about what aircraft type they're flying on.

At the end of the day, whether you think the MAX is safe or not, I don't see why anyone shouldn't support passengers being informed. And it's not even specific to the MAX, but should apply to all flights in general.

It sickens me to think that this might impact the reputation of the NG.


What are the airlines supposed to do? The precedent would be that every time an airliner is involved in an accident, the airline tells people when they book or board that plane?


Why does there have to be an accident to make it clear and easy to the public in the booking process what plane you will be flying on

Also when you buy a car now it has a safety rating - why not have the same for planes?


It is pretty clear on every airline website I've used if you view flight details or seat maps. The exception is Southwest where clicking on the flight number will show the information. However, with the MAX8 and -800 they probably have a decent number of on the fly swaps since that is the whole point of their fleet commonality.

As far as a safety rating, what would it be based on? Automobile safely ratings are based upon survivability in a crash, not the likelihood to be in a crash.

For aircraft you can't use hull loss rate because most are caused by factors other than the aircraft. You can't really try to do it based on design issues because all certified aircraft are supposed to meet the same safety requirements. After MCAS 2.0, the MAX won't be any less safe than the NG which has proven to be extremely safe.

Now I'm sure you will bring up the scenario of needing MCAS when it is disabled. The chain of events that would have to take place would be unbelievably unlikely. The pilots would have to be forced into an edge of envelope maneuver while diverting when they will know MCAS is unavailable and be told (by whatever NNC is created for the warning) not to perform the maneuvers that would require it.

Also, I'm 99% sure the regulations say a stall has to be recoverable. Even if lack of MCAS leads to a stall in some crazy chain of events, the pilots will be able to get out of the stall.

I would expect that after MCAS 2.0 there will never be a serious incident related to MCAS either activating erroneously or not being available. This includes the infinitesimal possibility of dual AoA failure where they are both reading an AoA below the activation trigger AND the pilots end up doing an edge of envelope maneuver. Even in that probably 1 in 10 billion scenario, a stall should still be recoverable.
Last edited by planecane on Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
AirwayBill
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:47 am

XRAYretired wrote:
Seattle Times? version of MCAS design and development story, subtly different to the NYT version. Apologies if already posted.
https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/t ... Q9DdfZFw2x

Ray


Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek says "MCAS on the KC-46 has two sensors and the system compares the two readings."

Boeing's proposed update to MCAS for the MAX will have the same.



The fixes include relying on two sensors rather than one, limiting MCAS to one rather than multiple activations, and revising the software.


So a 2nd sensor is about to be introduced as part of the fix.

That would directly contradict those who expected a simple software-tweak-and-we're-good-to-go, and probably cost quite a bit of time and money to design and implement on all aircraft. A good costly move, although Boeing camping on their positions by not fully accepting their share of liability is appalling.
 
planecane
Posts: 1559
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Mon Jun 24, 2019 9:53 am

AirwayBill wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Seattle Times? version of MCAS design and development story, subtly different to the NYT version. Apologies if already posted.
https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/t ... Q9DdfZFw2x

Ray


Air Force spokeswoman Ann Stefanek says "MCAS on the KC-46 has two sensors and the system compares the two readings."

Boeing's proposed update to MCAS for the MAX will have the same.



The fixes include relying on two sensors rather than one, limiting MCAS to one rather than multiple activations, and revising the software.


So a 2nd sensor is about to be introduced as part of the fix.

That would directly contradict those who expected a simple software tweak, and probably cost quite a bit to design and implement on all aircraft.


The second sensor is already on the aircraft (as it has been on every 737 since 1967). The software tweak will now compare them instead of just using one or the other.

Who is online

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