zoom321
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:33 am

RickNRoll wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
planecane wrote:
"Excuse?" I was pointing out that Boeing didn't intend to charge $100k for the AoA disagree warning.

To answer your question, there were other obvious indications of what was going on like stick shaker on one side only. Also, the Lion Air crew would have had absolutely no clue that an AoA disagree would have anything to do with a runaway stabilizer since MCAS was not disclosed at that time. The ET crew did recognize what they were dealing with, they just didn't respond in exactly the manner needed. In neither case would the AoA disagree alert have helped the crew to understand the situation. Would the ET crew have finished trimming out the MCAS nose down trim before they hit the cutout switches if a warning on the PFD said AoA disagree? There is no logical argument to say they would have.


Trying to babble yourself out of a concrete question. You are just making unsubstantiated statements. The AoA disagree warning would have come on straight after rotation before MCAS ambushed the frame and pilots. First harbinger of trouble. You can not know if it would have made a difference.

If Boeing would not have sabotaged the possibility of training for the MAX, pilots would have known that AoA failure and retracting the flaps would instantly lead to MCAS ambushing the safety of the airplane.


Exactly. Boeing gambled and chose to play dumb in the hope that the Lion Air accident was a once off. A full explanation of the MCAS failure mode would have made a difference.

Yes, some say mullenberg doesn't share as much blame as previous ceos while max was being designed. That may be true prior to Lion. Post Lion, B behaviour was indefensible.
Instead of focusing on making max as safe as possible then, the focus was on portraying the solution was long exising & simple.
Maybe that's why they didn't mention doing manual trim is near impossible in many conditions.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:44 am

PixelPilot wrote:
Agrajag wrote:
MSPNWA, it is my suspicion that you are paid by Boeing to be on these pages.

It is also clear that they are not getting value for money.


New acc, joined last month.
Does that make you airbus employee?

LOL. Children.

PR companies offering crisis management services use social media to disrupt and discredit contributors with anti-client views.

Doubt there were any sleepers on here pre-Lion, waiting for an event or crisis, but some new sign ups might fall into that category.

Best option (and expensive) is to hire established, credible posters (or legitimately acquire their ID's and p/w's). Apart from comparing posts (changes to spelling, grammar and writing style), site admin would have an idea if this has occurred from logon data.

How to pick? Reply to anti-client posts, but don't answer questions. Reply to posts with questions instead of answers. Partially affirm your stance, and then immediately raise conflicting issues. Often work in pairs - one raises issues / counters other posts, then second reinforces the first.

In situations like this, the Board has agreed a strategy, and every memo, press release, spoken word, is now managed by a joint legal / PR team. There will be agreed phrases, and scripted responses. If you can't remember the approved reply, you ignore, or no comment, can't because of pending legal action, or will get back to you.

The 'soft' targets are the flight crew involved, as they are not hear to defend action / inaction. Every 1% of blame you can shift to the flight crew (and by default from Boeing and the FAA), probably saves Boeing/FAA/insurers USD50m-100m.

The weak link in the 'blame the crew / training / pilot IQ / third world arguments', is they were flying earlier 737 versions, with less experience and hours, and no accidents. And pilots which Boeing now consider most at risk, based on profiling, are still flying these earlier versions, also with no accidents.

The variable is the MAX. Surely over time, the 737 family should get better, safer, more reliable, more fault-tolerant, not the reverse, a point poster Interested often repeated.

My grandfather always said mistakes define a man. Not making them. Everyone makes mistakes. But owning them. Saying you own them. Believing you own them. Even if it costs you your job. Another employer, who has made their own mistakes, will recognise and respect that honesty and integrity, and you won't be jobless for long. Must be a few executives looking in the mirror, wishing they had acted differently before lawyers and public relations turned them into puppets.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3309
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:06 am

beechnut wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
mysfit wrote:
I thought the CVR indicated the FO stated he couldn't turn the wheel.


No, the FO didn't say anything specifically about the trim wheel. It can't be confirmed that either attempted the maneuver. It may have occurred, but the information made public doesn't confirm it. Instead it raises doubts that it was attempted.


From the preliminary report:

At 05:41:46, the Captain asked the First-Officer if the trim is functional. The First-Officer has replied that the trim was not working and asked if he could try it manually. The Captain told him to try.At 05:41:54, the First-Officer replied that it is not working.


Beech


Thank you for confirming my statement

Please explain how this language in the report confirms that they used the trim wheels in an attempt to trim the aircraft, and while you're at it, go farther and explain how it confirms they used them to their full potential.

Agrajag wrote:
It is also clear that they are not getting value for money.

Wow. I have my suspicions about some posters in this forum. You're heightening those suspicions.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:17 am

smartplane wrote:

The weak link in the 'blame the crew / training / pilot IQ / third world arguments', is they were flying earlier 737 versions, with less experience and hours, and no accidents. And pilots which Boeing now consider most at risk, based on profiling, are still flying these earlier versions, also with no accidents.



One thing that people keep missing is that due to the reliability of modern airliners the instances when Pilots would have to rely upon their knowledge of Non-Normal procedures and having to fly the Airplane manually are thankfully few and far between. So there are not that many incidents when Pilots are required to call upon their training to save a flight.

If you would like an example of an ET pilot flying a perfectly good 737-800 into the ground - Please look at ET Flight 409 from January 2010.

That pilot went through the ET training system at about the same time as the Pilot of ET 302.

His apparent lack of manual flight skills and not adhering to procedure are very apparent.

ET and the Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority tried to pin it on Lightning and not ET training. That's a pretty long CVR transcript for the plane to have been taken down by lighting.

I have no doubt ET has a good training system for normal flight and pushing buttons - I'm not so sure about abnormal flight conditions or being able to control the aircraft manually.

ET's stated procedure for normal flight is engage the Autopilot at 400' AGL - just like what ET302 was trying to do even though it was prohibited by the Unreliable Airspeed checklist (and they should have disengaged the Autothrottle as well and not left it in TOGA - just like ET 409). If you are using the Autopilot for 99% of the flight you will never have a feel for the aircraft and your manual flying skills will suffer.

Both Pilots seem to have reacted in much the same manner - which makes sense given common type training at about the same time.

As another poster today mentioned a Pilot may have 10,000 Hours of experience but 9,800 of it is probably watching the Autopilot fly.

Oh yes - I almost forgot - Boeing is evil, and the Pilots lack of Flying skills and not following procedures had nothing to do with the crash...Yeh right - well Boeing did screw up big.

https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2010/et-b10 ... 125.en.pdf
 
User avatar
NWAROOSTER
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 2:29 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:38 am

In to the response immediately above by morrisond. You are completely correct about pilots not being able to fly aircraft in an emergency condition. Most of them do not hand fly an aircraft enough. Donal Nyrop former CEO of Northwest Airline always said the most important thing for a pilot is " to fly an aircraft." He was and still correct. :old:
Procrastination Is The Theft Of Time.......
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20956
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:21 am

smartplane wrote:
PR companies offering crisis management services use social media to disrupt and discredit contributors with anti-client views.

Doubt there were any sleepers on here pre-Lion, waiting for an event or crisis, but some new sign ups might fall into that category.

Even a paranoid has some real enemies.
-- Henry Kissinger
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
mysfit
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:22 am

What way, other than the wheel, is a manual attempt to trim?
 
mysfit
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:33 am

It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.
 
planecane
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:39 am

mysfit wrote:
What way, other than the wheel, is a manual attempt to trim?

The thumb switch is referred to as manual trim even though it is electric. It is manual in the sense that it isn't an automatic function like autopilot.

If a light bulb is on a timer then it turns on automatically. If you use a light switch you turn it in manually even though you don't physically screw the bulb in.
 
mysfit
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:53 am

planecane wrote:
mysfit wrote:
What way, other than the wheel, is a manual attempt to trim?

The thumb switch is referred to as manual trim even though it is electric. It is manual in the sense that it isn't an automatic function like autopilot.

If a light bulb is on a timer then it turns on automatically. If you use a light switch you turn it in manually even though you don't physically screw the bulb in.


Thank you.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1728
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 5:47 am

morrisond wrote:
smartplane wrote:

The weak link in the 'blame the crew / training / pilot IQ / third world arguments', is they were flying earlier 737 versions, with less experience and hours, and no accidents. And pilots which Boeing now consider most at risk, based on profiling, are still flying these earlier versions, also with no accidents.



One thing that people keep missing is that due to the reliability of modern airliners the instances when Pilots would have to rely upon their knowledge of Non-Normal procedures and having to fly the Airplane manually are thankfully few and far between. So there are not that many incidents when Pilots are required to call upon their training to save a flight.

If you would like an example of an ET pilot flying a perfectly good 737-800 into the ground - Please look at ET Flight 409 from January 2010.

That pilot went through the ET training system at about the same time as the Pilot of ET 302.

His apparent lack of manual flight skills and not adhering to procedure are very apparent.

ET and the Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority tried to pin it on Lightning and not ET training. That's a pretty long CVR transcript for the plane to have been taken down by lighting.

I have no doubt ET has a good training system for normal flight and pushing buttons - I'm not so sure about abnormal flight conditions or being able to control the aircraft manually.

ET's stated procedure for normal flight is engage the Autopilot at 400' AGL - just like what ET302 was trying to do even though it was prohibited by the Unreliable Airspeed checklist (and they should have disengaged the Autothrottle as well and not left it in TOGA - just like ET 409). If you are using the Autopilot for 99% of the flight you will never have a feel for the aircraft and your manual flying skills will suffer.

Both Pilots seem to have reacted in much the same manner - which makes sense given common type training at about the same time.

As another poster today mentioned a Pilot may have 10,000 Hours of experience but 9,800 of it is probably watching the Autopilot fly.

Oh yes - I almost forgot - Boeing is evil, and the Pilots lack of Flying skills and not following procedures had nothing to do with the crash...Yeh right - well Boeing did screw up big.

https://www.bea.aero/docspa/2010/et-b10 ... 125.en.pdf


That is pretty low comparing the two incidents. One purely a piloting error and another an emergency that was the result of a deliberate Boeing choice to put out a dangerous flight system. The problem is not that Boeing made a mistake. The hard over rudder brought down to 737s but that was due to an honest error in the design. The MAX problem is due to an intentional choice on the part of Boeing to put out a high risk design to maximise profits. I don't believe the engineers mad an honest error here but were directed to go with a compromised design.
 
Interflug74
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2013 10:53 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 6:15 am

https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/bo ... r-101.html

Boeing admits, that even the Software in the 737 Max Simulator was faulty, and thus did not act like an Max..

(sorry, only in german)
 
Agrajag
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:23 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 7:03 am

PixelPilot wrote:
Agrajag wrote:
MSPNWA, it is my suspicion that you are paid by Boeing to be on these pages.

It is also clear that they are not getting value for money.


New acc, joined last month.
Does that make you airbus employee?

LOL. Children.


In my case, ive been a reader here for many years but its has been the disgusting and shameful behaviour of Boeing in general and its lieutenants on here, in regards to these Max crashes, that has prompted me to sign up and call out. I know the same motivation applies to several other 'new account' holders. I hold no allegiance to any corporate entity or geographic location, that it childishness. I just hate to see corporate behaviour like Boeing's. It pertetuates a race to the bottom and that ultimately means we all lose. We deserve better standards.
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.
Slartibartfast had a point
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 7:06 am

planecane wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
planecane wrote:
"Excuse?" I was pointing out that Boeing didn't intend to charge $100k for the AoA disagree warning.

To answer your question, there were other obvious indications of what was going on like stick shaker on one side only. Also, the Lion Air crew would have had absolutely no clue that an AoA disagree would have anything to do with a runaway stabilizer since MCAS was not disclosed at that time. The ET crew did recognize what they were dealing with, they just didn't respond in exactly the manner needed. In neither case would the AoA disagree alert have helped the crew to understand the situation. Would the ET crew have finished trimming out the MCAS nose down trim before they hit the cutout switches if a warning on the PFD said AoA disagree? There is no logical argument to say they would have.


It is possible had AOA DISAGREE been displayed on JT043, the pilot would have recorded it, as well as IAS and Altitude, such that MX would have to address it prior to JT610 getting into the air and may well have resulted in MX taking the correct action. If AOA DISAGREE had been displayed in ET302, it might have coloured their appreciation of the situation and what subsequent actions they took.

Ray


MX replaced the AoA sensor so they knew there was a disagreement and they replaced the bad one.


No.. The sensor replacement was pre JT043 either with a sensor that was incorrectly released by MRO or installed incorrectly most likely.

Ray
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 7:27 am

MSPNWA wrote:
beechnut wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:

No, the FO didn't say anything specifically about the trim wheel. It can't be confirmed that either attempted the maneuver. It may have occurred, but the information made public doesn't confirm it. Instead it raises doubts that it was attempted.


From the preliminary report:

At 05:41:46, the Captain asked the First-Officer if the trim is functional. The First-Officer has replied that the trim was not working and asked if he could try it manually. The Captain told him to try.At 05:41:54, the First-Officer replied that it is not working.


Beech


Thank you for confirming my statement

Please explain how this language in the report confirms that they used the trim wheels in an attempt to trim the aircraft, and while you're at it, go farther and explain how it confirms they used them to their full potential.

Agrajag wrote:
It is also clear that they are not getting value for money.

Wow. I have my suspicions about some posters in this forum. You're heightening those suspicions.

There are only two options available: MANUAL electric TRIM and MANUAL TRIM wheel.

The Captain asked the First-Officer if the TRIM is functional. The First-Officer has replied that the TRIM was not working and asked if he could try it MANUALly. The Captain told him to try the First-Officer replied that it is not working.

I think it is unlikely that the F/O would use two different terms for the same function in the same sentence and would not asking the Capt. to confirm trying the same function is checked for a second time using two terms. But two terms are used. The only satisfactory conclusion is that the F/O is referring to both functions. The question is which term refers to which function.

My suggestion is that, remembering that it was FO that offered STAB TRIM CUT-OUT ~1 min. before hand and the Capt. seemed unsure in his response, that the Capt. was asking for confirmation that manual electric TRIM was not available, that the FO confirmed not working, because it was in cut-out, and then suggested to try MANUAL trim wheel -also not working.

Ray

From <https://www.airliners.net/forum/search.php?keywords=MANUAL+TRIM&t=1421471&sf=msgonly>
 
FlyingAY
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:26 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 7:44 am

NWAROOSTER wrote:
In to the response immediately above by morrisond. You are completely correct about pilots not being able to fly aircraft in an emergency condition. Most of them do not hand fly an aircraft enough. Donal Nyrop former CEO of Northwest Airline always said the most important thing for a pilot is " to fly an aircraft." He was and still correct. :old:


However, "to fly an aircraft" these days can be more equivalent to troubleshooting a computer system instead of flying Nyrop's grandfather's Cessna. And this is what makes it so important that all systems are described (including MCAS) and taught properly.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 7:45 am

Interflug74 wrote:
https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/boeing-fehler-flugsimulator-101.html

Boeing admits, that even the Software in the 737 Max Simulator was faulty, and thus did not act like an Max..

(sorry, only in german)



Amazing isn't it?! They can't even get sim software right let alone an airplane!
 
WIederling
Posts: 8489
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 8:55 am

mysfit wrote:
planecane wrote:
mysfit wrote:
What way, other than the wheel, is a manual attempt to trim?

The thumb switch is referred to as manual trim even though it is electric. It is manual in the sense that it isn't an automatic function like autopilot.

If a light bulb is on a timer then it turns on automatically. If you use a light switch you turn it in manually even though you don't physically screw the bulb in.


Thank you.


Discernible manual or (real) MANUAL ?

don't the trim switches reflect into FDR data?
Murphy is an optimist
 
xmp125a
Posts: 233
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 9:21 am

Interflug74 wrote:
https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/boeing-fehler-flugsimulator-101.html

Boeing admits, that even the Software in the 737 Max Simulator was faulty, and thus did not act like an Max..

(sorry, only in german)


Basically, 737 MAX simulators were just 737 NG simulators with big "MAX" splashed on? Quelle surprise. So if ET pilots would have a very recent training on the new simulator ET bought, they would still not be able to train for the MCAS failure...

I hope the whole MCAS thing as a systemic failure at Boeing will now really start to unravel... it was not just a piece of bad code, it was systemic failure across Boeing.
 
xmp125a
Posts: 233
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 6:38 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 9:49 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
kayik wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
It’s NOT pilot bashing, it’s pointing the truth of the their backgrounds. Do you think 153 hours is adequate flight time to pilot an airliner?

GF


How do you expect a pilot to start flying an airliner? 5000 hours coded in his/her genes? All pilots start with zero hours. It is pilot bashing.


I had about 4,500 hours before I got in the engineer’s seat. Average time for pilots hired at US legacy carriers is 8,000-10,000 with 2,000 turbine PIC time. Average for military heavy drivers is north of 3,000. You finish US military training with 250 hours, go to a conversion unit then top up training in unit. At an average of 30mph, your happy with a school bus driven by a 21-year old with 3,000 miles? The bigger issue is too much time be credited for watching the autopilot.

I’m actually in favor of structured ab initio training programs, but 150 hours is seriously insufficient time. The captain was flying solo once it went off the script. Have you flown a jet with inexperienced pilots across from you? An emergency is a serious challenge and I have been at 40W shutting down an engine with a 300 hour co-pilot.


Again. Airplanes have to be designed in the way that competent crews can fly them without the problem. Wanna declare most of the young 3rd world and European pilots incompetent to fly 737 MAX? Do it. Then don't be surprised when basically no one outside USA will order 737MAX and Boeing files for insolvency. Amateur flying is feasible route to commercial airliner only in USA, most of the world does not have that quite expensive hobby. You can't recruit EU pilot with 8000 hours as a barnstormer, simply because there are none available. Flying planes is not a widespread hobby anywhere else but USA. So Boeing has to make planes that can be flown by the pilots rest of the world recruits, or go out of business. And until the MAX, this was non issue!

With MAX, Boeing came from one of the safest airplanes to one of the least safe. I always felt safe when traveling on 737 (for example low cost EU carriers like RyanAir and EasyJet) simply because it was a good plane with great track record. Not anymore.

At the moment, FAA and NTSB are doing more for Boeing's prospective business than Boeing itself, I would argue that the Boeing is actively endangering its long term business because they don't want to take short term charge and admit and obvious and glaring mismanagement of 737 design.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 10:35 am

RickNRoll wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Trying to babble yourself out of a concrete question. You are just making unsubstantiated statements. The AoA disagree warning would have come on straight after rotation before MCAS ambushed the frame and pilots. First harbinger of trouble. You can not know if it would have made a difference.

If Boeing would not have sabotaged the possibility of training for the MAX, pilots would have known that AoA failure and retracting the flaps would instantly lead to MCAS ambushing the safety of the airplane.


Exactly. Boeing gambled and chose to play dumb in the hope that the Lion Air accident was a once off. A full explanation of the MCAS failure mode would have made a difference.

:checkmark: Not only that, but I highly doubt that a full explanation of the MCAS failure mode would have be certified by all the leading certification authorities.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 10:35 am

There is a difference between crashing a perfectly fine aircraft due to pilot error and making mistakes while trying to save a faulty aircraft. The second case is what happened with Ethiopian and Lion Air even it is not proved that the crews actually made mistakes. So the root cause for the crashes is not the pilots but the aircraft. The MAX is grounded because the root cause for the crashes is the bad design not the pilot trainig. Possible recovery is a training issue bad design that leads to critocal situations is 100% on the manufacturer.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 10:43 am

smartplane wrote:
PR companies offering crisis management services use social media to disrupt and discredit contributors with anti-client views.

Doubt there were any sleepers on here pre-Lion, waiting for an event or crisis, but some new sign ups might fall into that category.

Best option (and expensive) is to hire established, credible posters (or legitimately acquire their ID's and p/w's). Apart from comparing posts (changes to spelling, grammar and writing style), site admin would have an idea if this has occurred from logon data.

How to pick? Reply to anti-client posts, but don't answer questions. Reply to posts with questions instead of answers. Partially affirm your stance, and then immediately raise conflicting issues. Often work in pairs - one raises issues / counters other posts, then second reinforces the first.

In situations like this, the Board has agreed a strategy, and every memo, press release, spoken word, is now managed by a joint legal / PR team. There will be agreed phrases, and scripted responses. If you can't remember the approved reply, you ignore, or no comment, can't because of pending legal action, or will get back to you.

The 'soft' targets are the flight crew involved, as they are not hear to defend action / inaction. Every 1% of blame you can shift to the flight crew (and by default from Boeing and the FAA), probably saves Boeing/FAA/insurers USD50m-100m.

The weak link in the 'blame the crew / training / pilot IQ / third world arguments', is they were flying earlier 737 versions, with less experience and hours, and no accidents. And pilots which Boeing now consider most at risk, based on profiling, are still flying these earlier versions, also with no accidents.

The variable is the MAX. Surely over time, the 737 family should get better, safer, more reliable, more fault-tolerant, not the reverse, a point poster Interested often repeated.

.

Woow! Did you get all those information from first hand ?
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 11:02 am

morrisond wrote:
One thing that people keep missing is that due to the reliability of modern airliners the instances when Pilots would have to rely upon their knowledge of Non-Normal procedures and having to fly the Airplane manually are thankfully few and far between. So there are not that many incidents when Pilots are required to call upon their training to save a flight.

I already asked if some 737 pilots can explain in detail how a runaway stabilizer training simulator session are done in there airline. To date nobody responded. If this training is required, I highly doubt that pilots can avoid it without consequence. And it's Boeing work to define the non normal procedures and to create appropriate training to learn them. Boeing deliberately avoided to train the pilots for a new failure mode that would not even be allowed by the certification authorities in the first place.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 11:18 am

WIederling wrote:
don't the trim switches reflect into FDR data?

Yes, as long as both of the stab trim cutoff switches are _NOT_ in the cutoff position. If any of the stab trim cutoff switches are in cutoff position, no physical trim switches get any power, so it's not possible to detect them anymore and to record them in the FDR. The only remaining way to trim the stab are the stab trim wheels, so it's very clear that the pilot are talking about the stab trim wheels. There didn't work because of the high speed and extreme elevator position. The stab trim position is recorded by the FDR regardless of the stab trim cutoff switch position, so any stab trim moves from any source (AP, STS, MCAS, trim switch, trim wheels) are recorded.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 11:27 am

xmp125a wrote:
I always felt safe when traveling on 737 (for example low cost EU carriers like RyanAir and EasyJet) simply because it was a good plane with great track record. Not anymore.

Easyjet fleet is Airbus only since near a decade now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EasyJet#Fleet
 
morrisond
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 11:28 am

mysfit wrote:
It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.


You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.

Just to be clear - (I need to do this on every page) - Boeing was the root cause behind the planes crashing. However if the ET pilots were better trained they should have been able to save the aircraft. Pilots are there to save the aircraft when things go wrong.

They should have known all about MCAS at that point and the procedures that would have saved them. If they had done any of the following they would have probably survived: Not retracting the flaps, failure to maintain proper airspeed and keeping Autothrottle engaged, and not trimming out the control forces before cutting off the Electric Trim System.

They were basically 0 for 3. That is a failure in training and nothing to do with Boeing. These training issues seem to have a worldwide theme - it is not just third world airlines - as evidenced by the many postings on these forums with examples of what new pilots don't know.

This was not a difficult save and should have been easily saveable with the Knowledge the Pilots were supposed to have with there type rating. It's not as those the tail fell off or there was a fire or an uncontained engine failure severed all the hydraulics in one wing.

If they had taken full manual control (auto throttle off, AP off, Electric Trim off) the Plane was perfectly flyable and it should not be considered a stretch that a pilot can do that.

BTW Airbus pilots are required to perform at the same standard and Airbus is assuming as part of there design certification that 320 Pilots can fly in direct law mode (basically the same as 737 Manual flight) and have to control thrust manually and even have to use a trim wheel if things go wrong.

If pilots aren't required to be able to fly in full manual mode then you have to redesign the A320 as well.
 
PixelPilot
Posts: 252
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 11:45 am

smartplane wrote:
PixelPilot wrote:
Agrajag wrote:
MSPNWA, it is my suspicion that you are paid by Boeing to be on these pages.

It is also clear that they are not getting value for money.


New acc, joined last month.
Does that make you airbus employee?

LOL. Children.

PR companies offering crisis management services use social media to disrupt and discredit contributors with anti-client views.

Doubt there were any sleepers on here pre-Lion, waiting for an event or crisis, but some new sign ups might fall into that category.

Best option (and expensive) is to hire established, credible posters (or legitimately acquire their ID's and p/w's). Apart from comparing posts (changes to spelling, grammar and writing style), site admin would have an idea if this has occurred from logon data.

How to pick? Reply to anti-client posts, but don't answer questions. Reply to posts with questions instead of answers. Partially affirm your stance, and then immediately raise conflicting issues. Often work in pairs - one raises issues / counters other posts, then second reinforces the first.

In situations like this, the Board has agreed a strategy, and every memo, press release, spoken word, is now managed by a joint legal / PR team. There will be agreed phrases, and scripted responses. If you can't remember the approved reply, you ignore, or no comment, can't because of pending legal action, or will get back to you.

The 'soft' targets are the flight crew involved, as they are not hear to defend action / inaction. Every 1% of blame you can shift to the flight crew (and by default from Boeing and the FAA), probably saves Boeing/FAA/insurers USD50m-100m.

The weak link in the 'blame the crew / training / pilot IQ / third world arguments', is they were flying earlier 737 versions, with less experience and hours, and no accidents. And pilots which Boeing now consider most at risk, based on profiling, are still flying these earlier versions, also with no accidents.

The variable is the MAX. Surely over time, the 737 family should get better, safer, more reliable, more fault-tolerant, not the reverse, a point poster Interested often repeated.

My grandfather always said mistakes define a man. Not making them. Everyone makes mistakes. But owning them. Saying you own them. Believing you own them. Even if it costs you your job. Another employer, who has made their own mistakes, will recognise and respect that honesty and integrity, and you won't be jobless for long. Must be a few executives looking in the mirror, wishing they had acted differently before lawyers and public relations turned them into puppets.


You do realize that pretty much everything you said can be flipped to support the other side right?
Only facts stand. All this noise some of you make here like you know everything or have all the data at hand already supports only one conclusion that in today's age all you have to do is scream loud and somebody will give you a safe space and hold your hand and probably support your theory too.
Mistake is a mistake. Doesn't matter which "side" did it. Until we know all the facts, ALL THE FACTS, pointing blame directly at the side that suits your agenda (which ever it is) makes you no different from those you accuse of foul play.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8363
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 12:12 pm

morrisond wrote:
mysfit wrote:
It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.


You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.

Just to be clear - (I need to do this on every page) - Boeing was the root cause behind the planes crashing. However if the ET pilots were better trained they should have been able to save the aircraft. Pilots are there to save the aircraft when things go wrong.

They should have known all about MCAS at that point and the procedures that would have saved them. If they had done any of the following they would have probably survived: Not retracting the flaps, failure to maintain proper airspeed and keeping Autothrottle engaged, and not trimming out the control forces before cutting off the Electric Trim System.

They were basically 0 for 3. That is a failure in training and nothing to do with Boeing. These training issues seem to have a worldwide theme - it is not just third world airlines - as evidenced by the many postings on these forums with examples of what new pilots don't know.

This was not a difficult save and should have been easily saveable with the Knowledge the Pilots were supposed to have with there type rating. It's not as those the tail fell off or there was a fire or an uncontained engine failure severed all the hydraulics in one wing.

If they had taken full manual control (auto throttle off, AP off, Electric Trim off) the Plane was perfectly flyable and it should not be considered a stretch that a pilot can do that.

BTW Airbus pilots are required to perform at the same standard and Airbus is assuming as part of there design certification that 320 Pilots can fly in direct law mode (basically the same as 737 Manual flight) and have to control thrust manually and even have to use a trim wheel if things go wrong.

If pilots aren't required to be able to fly in full manual mode then you have to redesign the A320 as well.


Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.
 
maint123
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:05 pm

Interesting that many American supporters of Boeing keep on harping on pilots today not having the skill of manual flying. How do they propose the pilots acquire that skill? Switch off the electrical systems in flight to get real world manual skills?
Or try manual flying in simulators that are not designed to replicate the conditions they faced?
How exactly do the pilots get these skills.?
 
morrisond
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:21 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mysfit wrote:
It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.


You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.

Just to be clear - (I need to do this on every page) - Boeing was the root cause behind the planes crashing. However if the ET pilots were better trained they should have been able to save the aircraft. Pilots are there to save the aircraft when things go wrong.

They should have known all about MCAS at that point and the procedures that would have saved them. If they had done any of the following they would have probably survived: Not retracting the flaps, failure to maintain proper airspeed and keeping Autothrottle engaged, and not trimming out the control forces before cutting off the Electric Trim System.

They were basically 0 for 3. That is a failure in training and nothing to do with Boeing. These training issues seem to have a worldwide theme - it is not just third world airlines - as evidenced by the many postings on these forums with examples of what new pilots don't know.

This was not a difficult save and should have been easily saveable with the Knowledge the Pilots were supposed to have with there type rating. It's not as those the tail fell off or there was a fire or an uncontained engine failure severed all the hydraulics in one wing.

If they had taken full manual control (auto throttle off, AP off, Electric Trim off) the Plane was perfectly flyable and it should not be considered a stretch that a pilot can do that.

BTW Airbus pilots are required to perform at the same standard and Airbus is assuming as part of there design certification that 320 Pilots can fly in direct law mode (basically the same as 737 Manual flight) and have to control thrust manually and even have to use a trim wheel if things go wrong.

If pilots aren't required to be able to fly in full manual mode then you have to redesign the A320 as well.


Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.



The manual trim will work absolutely fine if you maintain control of your airspeed and trim out the control forces like you are supposed to do by procedure before turning electric trim off.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:25 pm

maint123 wrote:
Interesting that many American supporters of Boeing keep on harping on pilots today not having the skill of manual flying. How do they propose the pilots acquire that skill? Switch off the electrical systems in flight to get real world manual skills?
Or try manual flying in simulators that are not designed to replicate the conditions they faced?
How exactly do the pilots get these skills.?


By maybe spending more than 150 hours in training before being put in an 737 cockpit and relying on Auto-Pilot?

Practising in the SIM would be fine. All pilots should be able to take off complete a circuit and land in instrument conditions without the nannies. They are required to be able to do so by there license - it just seems like it is never practised anymore and that is a failure in regulation.

They should have to be able to do the above every 6 months or so as part of their check rides.
 
Buffalomatt1027
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:02 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:26 pm

[quote="maint123"]Interesting that many American supporters of Boeing keep on harping on pilots today not having the skill of manual flying. How do they propose the pilots acquire that skill? Switch off the electrical systems in flight to get real world manual skills?
Or try manual flying in simulators that are not designed to replicate the conditions they faced?

Even with the AA pilots complaints ...... the American airlines pilots like AA WN UA all had pilots that could handle the MAX and the current issues. ET and Lion could not.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:27 pm

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:

You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.

Just to be clear - (I need to do this on every page) - Boeing was the root cause behind the planes crashing. However if the ET pilots were better trained they should have been able to save the aircraft. Pilots are there to save the aircraft when things go wrong.

They should have known all about MCAS at that point and the procedures that would have saved them. If they had done any of the following they would have probably survived: Not retracting the flaps, failure to maintain proper airspeed and keeping Autothrottle engaged, and not trimming out the control forces before cutting off the Electric Trim System.

They were basically 0 for 3. That is a failure in training and nothing to do with Boeing. These training issues seem to have a worldwide theme - it is not just third world airlines - as evidenced by the many postings on these forums with examples of what new pilots don't know.

This was not a difficult save and should have been easily saveable with the Knowledge the Pilots were supposed to have with there type rating. It's not as those the tail fell off or there was a fire or an uncontained engine failure severed all the hydraulics in one wing.

If they had taken full manual control (auto throttle off, AP off, Electric Trim off) the Plane was perfectly flyable and it should not be considered a stretch that a pilot can do that.

BTW Airbus pilots are required to perform at the same standard and Airbus is assuming as part of there design certification that 320 Pilots can fly in direct law mode (basically the same as 737 Manual flight) and have to control thrust manually and even have to use a trim wheel if things go wrong.

If pilots aren't required to be able to fly in full manual mode then you have to redesign the A320 as well.


Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.



The manual trim will work absolutely fine if you maintain control of your airspeed and trim out the control forces like you are supposed to do by procedure before turning electric trim off.


I still hope that this design will never be certified again after the MAX. A back up system, a life line, that only works in a certain condition is a real shit design for the year 2019.

The fact that overspeed, a condition that can result of nose down trim, actually prevents reducing nose down trim is mindblowing
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8684
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:35 pm

If MCAS is such a botched design making the MAX so deadly, why would one crew have a jump seater disable the function then rather than return to base they continued their flight?
If cut-off renders the a/c uncontrollable, or roller coaster, why choose to continue the flight?
Is the rhetoric just a bit too high on how the a/c can be controlled once the cut-off switch is pressed?
Is the MAX flyable in manual trim mode?
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 1:53 pm

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Interesting that many American supporters of Boeing keep on harping on pilots today not having the skill of manual flying. How do they propose the pilots acquire that skill? Switch off the electrical systems in flight to get real world manual skills?
Or try manual flying in simulators that are not designed to replicate the conditions they faced?

Even with the AA pilots complaints ...... the American airlines pilots like AA WN UA all had pilots that could handle the MAX and the current issues. ET and Lion could not.


Please advise the flight numbers/reports where AOA failed high on US operated MAX A/C and were handled so that they might be researched. Assume there must be at least 3 of them.

Ray
 
zoom321
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:08 pm

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:

You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.

Just to be clear - (I need to do this on every page) - Boeing was the root cause behind the planes crashing. However if the ET pilots were better trained they should have been able to save the aircraft. Pilots are there to save the aircraft when things go wrong.

They should have known all about MCAS at that point and the procedures that would have saved them. If they had done any of the following they would have probably survived: Not retracting the flaps, failure to maintain proper airspeed and keeping Autothrottle engaged, and not trimming out the control forces before cutting off the Electric Trim System.

They were basically 0 for 3. That is a failure in training and nothing to do with Boeing. These training issues seem to have a worldwide theme - it is not just third world airlines - as evidenced by the many postings on these forums with examples of what new pilots don't know.

This was not a difficult save and should have been easily saveable with the Knowledge the Pilots were supposed to have with there type rating. It's not as those the tail fell off or there was a fire or an uncontained engine failure severed all the hydraulics in one wing.

If they had taken full manual control (auto throttle off, AP off, Electric Trim off) the Plane was perfectly flyable and it should not be considered a stretch that a pilot can do that.

BTW Airbus pilots are required to perform at the same standard and Airbus is assuming as part of there design certification that 320 Pilots can fly in direct law mode (basically the same as 737 Manual flight) and have to control thrust manually and even have to use a trim wheel if things go wrong.

If pilots aren't required to be able to fly in full manual mode then you have to redesign the A320 as well.


Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.



The manual trim will work absolutely fine if you maintain control of your airspeed and trim out the control forces like you are supposed to do by procedure before turning electric trim off.


Still making up stories. Simulations have shown manual trim not workable even at speeds below the ET flight.
And B procedure only talks about 'trim out the control forces before turning electric trim off' as a footnote.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8489
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:09 pm

PixelPilot wrote:
You do realize that pretty much everything you said can be flipped to support the other side right?


Who else would have the deep pockets to do that _and_ have a strong interest?
Murphy is an optimist
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3002
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:16 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
There is a difference between crashing a perfectly fine aircraft due to pilot error and making mistakes while trying to save a faulty aircraft. The second case is what happened with Ethiopian and Lion Air even it is not proved that the crews actually made mistakes. So the root cause for the crashes is not the pilots but the aircraft. The MAX is grounded because the root cause for the crashes is the bad design not the pilot trainig. Possible recovery is a training issue bad design that leads to critocal situations is 100% on the manufacturer.


Recommended pilot training is part of what Boeing is suppose to recommend and certification authorities require. After the Lion crast Boeing's advisory was ambiguous (and possibly self serving). There is no doubt had Boeing voluntarily grounded the MAX after the Lion event, announced the missing AoA disagree, had MCAS version 2 certified and installed we would be talking about a 6 week grounding and $1 billion rather than the estimated $5 billion in damages and other costs.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8363
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:34 pm

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:

You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.

Just to be clear - (I need to do this on every page) - Boeing was the root cause behind the planes crashing. However if the ET pilots were better trained they should have been able to save the aircraft. Pilots are there to save the aircraft when things go wrong.

They should have known all about MCAS at that point and the procedures that would have saved them. If they had done any of the following they would have probably survived: Not retracting the flaps, failure to maintain proper airspeed and keeping Autothrottle engaged, and not trimming out the control forces before cutting off the Electric Trim System.

They were basically 0 for 3. That is a failure in training and nothing to do with Boeing. These training issues seem to have a worldwide theme - it is not just third world airlines - as evidenced by the many postings on these forums with examples of what new pilots don't know.

This was not a difficult save and should have been easily saveable with the Knowledge the Pilots were supposed to have with there type rating. It's not as those the tail fell off or there was a fire or an uncontained engine failure severed all the hydraulics in one wing.

If they had taken full manual control (auto throttle off, AP off, Electric Trim off) the Plane was perfectly flyable and it should not be considered a stretch that a pilot can do that.

BTW Airbus pilots are required to perform at the same standard and Airbus is assuming as part of there design certification that 320 Pilots can fly in direct law mode (basically the same as 737 Manual flight) and have to control thrust manually and even have to use a trim wheel if things go wrong.

If pilots aren't required to be able to fly in full manual mode then you have to redesign the A320 as well.


Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.



The manual trim will work absolutely fine if you maintain control of your airspeed and trim out the control forces like you are supposed to do by procedure before turning electric trim off.


The main possibility for controlling airspeed is controlling pitch and that is shoot to hell by MACAS. Still trying to defend the indefensible.
 
mysfit
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 7:16 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:37 pm

morrisond wrote:
mysfit wrote:
It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.


You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.



A valid procedure based on exactly what data? What live tests? Because the smoking crater would contradict the notion of a valid procedure. If it were a legitimate. Tested. Valid procedure why was the plane grounded and remains so?

The plane was sold as only an iPads worth of training needed when that clearly was not the case. But yet the 2nd crash was entirely the result of a lack of training? Boeing screwed up. The FAA was complicit. The bulk of the problem rests with them and their abandonment of safety in the pursuit of money.
 
User avatar
sassiciai
Posts: 1081
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 8:26 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 2:43 pm

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Interesting that many American supporters of Boeing keep on harping on pilots today not having the skill of manual flying. How do they propose the pilots acquire that skill? Switch off the electrical systems in flight to get real world manual skills?
Or try manual flying in simulators that are not designed to replicate the conditions they faced?

Even with the AA pilots complaints ...... the American airlines pilots like AA WN UA all had pilots that could handle the MAX and the current issues. ET and Lion could not.

Of all the idiotic comments made on a.net, this has to be one of the most pompous and ludicrous "All America" comments. I am even annoyed that I take some time to respond to this juvenile or racist rubbish

Pilots the world around are tested and certified against standards. Some pilots are better than others. Geography plays no role in determining where the good ones come from, nor does it decide where the bad ones come from! Attempting some Hitler-esque "American better than the rest" is as objectionable as were Hitler's points of view

a.net will be a better place without your input, Sir!
 
morrisond
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:22 pm

zoom321 wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.





The manual trim will work absolutely fine if you maintain control of your airspeed and trim out the control forces like you are supposed to do by procedure before turning electric trim off.


Still making up stories. Simulations have shown manual trim not workable even at speeds below the ET flight.
And B procedure only talks about 'trim out the control forces before turning electric trim off' as a footnote.


Nope - not in the actual bulletin the crews were supposedly given its right in the first paragraph.
 
AirwayBill
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:26 pm

Buffalomatt1027 wrote:
Even with the AA pilots complaints ...... the American airlines pilots like AA WN UA all had pilots that could handle the MAX and the current issues. ET and Lion could not.


Funny to see how some individuals on here are gradually getting toxic and aggressive as more and more elements about Boeing's intentional negligence and shortcuts get revealed.

Beating around the bush with bad faith and exceptionally haughty jibber jabber on an online forum won't change the fact that Boeing is not getting the MAX back into the air before a good while, and deservedly so. :liar:
 
planecane
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:26 pm

mysfit wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mysfit wrote:
It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.


You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.



A valid procedure based on exactly what data? What live tests? Because the smoking crater would contradict the notion of a valid procedure. If it were a legitimate. Tested. Valid procedure why was the plane grounded and remains so?

The plane was sold as only an iPads worth of training needed when that clearly was not the case. But yet the 2nd crash was entirely the result of a lack of training? Boeing screwed up. The FAA was complicit. The bulk of the problem rests with them and their abandonment of safety in the pursuit of money.


The valid procedure was to run the runaway stabilizer NNC. The live test was Lion Air 043 when they had the exact MCAS induced issue but recovered and continued to the destination. They also used the manual trim wheel to trim the aircraft for the remainder of the flight so this is not the impossible task that some make it out to be. From the preliminary report on Lion Air 610, describing Lion Air 043 (emphasis added to show the use of the manual trim wheel):

The PIC then moved the STAB TRIM switches back to CUT OUT and continued with manual trim without auto-pilot until the end of the flight.

The pilot performed three Non-Normal Checklists (NNCs) consisting of Airspeed Unreliable, ALT DISAGREE, and Runaway Stabilizer


The plane was grounded and remains grounded because the original implementation of MCAS increased the likelihood of runaway stabilizer by what seems to be a few orders of magnitude. ET 302 demonstrated that there are likely training issues with crews dealing with a runaway stabilizer, even after the post Lion Air 610 EAD. Therefore, worldwide authorities don't want an aircraft in the air that has a relatively high incidence of a failure mode that crews have had extreme difficulty dealing with.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1178
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:29 pm

mysfit wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mysfit wrote:
It Frankly pisses me off to see people, and Boeing, try to pass the buck on training when they hid this new system in order to avoid having to train and inform crews about a system. AA pilots were pretty hot about it so please don't play that garbage about 3rd world training.

Boeing management and bean counters backed engineering into a corner and put predetermined limits on them out of greed. Customers can ask for the moon but when a company tosses safety out the window to meet that ask, it's on them.

Boeing screwed up. They risked their reputation chasing money and it blew up in their face. It's adding insult to injury trying to spin this on their customers and the dead. It's shameful. Those pilots missed critical training BECAUSE BOEING HELD IT BACK.




You missed the part that after the first crash ET had a valid procedure that would have saved the aircraft and ET proceeded to do little or maybe none at all training with their pilots on how to implement it if faced with the same situation.





A valid procedure based on exactly what data? What live tests? Because the smoking crater would contradict the notion of a valid procedure. If it were a legitimate. Tested. Valid procedure why was the plane grounded and remains so?

The plane was sold as only an iPads worth of training needed when that clearly was not the case. But yet the 2nd crash was entirely the result of a lack of training? Boeing screwed up. The FAA was complicit. The bulk of the problem rests with them and their abandonment of safety in the pursuit of money.


On ET if they had followed the Memory procedure for unreliable airspeed and they had not retracted the flaps they would never have gotten to MCAS.

This also required them to not use Auto Pilot or Autothrottle either.

So they botched the first procedure and then the second MCAS one by not putting the plane in trim.

Boeing could argue this in court and they would win on the first point - that being said I think they should just pay out and put it behind them.

They screwed up enough on the design that they should.

However that does mean that the crashes were also a result of pilot error and that training has to be made more stringent.
 
Saintor
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:34 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.



The manual trim will work absolutely fine if you maintain control of your airspeed and trim out the control forces like you are supposed to do by procedure before turning electric trim off.


The main possibility for controlling airspeed is controlling pitch and that is shoot to hell by MACAS. Still trying to defend the indefensible.


How about just manually throttling down...
 
planecane
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 3:49 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Your valid procedure, I assume the runaway trim procedure, seems to be a simple joke. Auto throttle off, electrical trim off gives you an unflyable frame, because manual trim will not work without the roller coaster maneuver and for that you need plenty of height above ground.

Failure with training for MCAS is all about Boeing and Boeing only. Boeing hid MCAS and made sure that a MAX simulator would not be able to show it.

You will not get away from that Boeing killed 189 people with their negligent design of MCAS and 157 more with their callous decision to not ground the MAX well knowing what happened to Lion Air.


It is not a joke. As I posted above, the procedure was used (including flying for hours with the manual trim wheel) on Lion Air 043 to recover from an MCAS-induced runawy stabilizer.

Here are the facts as I see them:

1) The design of the MCAS algorithm was horrible and incompentent.
2) MCAS does not introduce a new failure mode, it adds another source of runaway stabilizer.
3) MCAS appears to increase the likelihood of runaway stabilzer on a 737 by a few orders of magnitude.
4) An MCAS-induced runaway stabilizer is relatively easily recoverable using the runaway stabilzer NNC as evidenced by Lion Air 043.
5) Boeing didn't orignally document the slightly different symptoms of MCAS-induced runaway stabilizer vs. prior causes of it. This was added after Lion Air 610 by the EAD.
6) Neither the crew of Lion Air 610 or ET 302 correctly ran the runaway stabilizer NNC.

These facts lead me to the opinion that the drastically increased incidence of runaway stabilizer caused by MCAS (Boeing's fault), combined with inadequately trained (or incapable) crews led to the two crashes. I do not believe that either crew would have successfully responded to a runaway stabilizer caused by something other than MCAS. I believe that this statement applies to many other crews that fly the 737 (all series). Luckily, the other systems that can cause runaway stabilizer are designed correctly with an extremely low failure rate so very few crews have had to deal with it, and, again luckily, any that did were properly trained and capable.

Both Boeing and the pilots (especially the ET crew) were at fault for these crashes. If Boeing had designed MCAS properly (logically) then the crashes would not have happened. However, if the crews were properly trained and capable, the crashes still wouldn't have happened.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 508
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 5:19 pm

planecane wrote:
2) MCAS does not introduce a new failure mode, it adds another source of runaway stabilizer.

The 737-8/9 MAX introduce a new unsafe condition compared to the 737-800/900 NG: this is Boeing own description in the EAD-2018-23-51:

(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by analysis performed by the manufacturer showing that if an
erroneously high single angle of attack (AOA) sensor input is received by the flight control system,
there is a potential for repeated nose-down trim commands of the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing
this AD to address this potential resulting nose-down trim, which could cause the flight crew to have
difficulty controlling the airplane, and lead to excessive nose-down attitude, significant altitude loss,
and possible impact with terrain.


The fact the this unsafe condition is "repeated" is a new failure mode no possible on any 737 before. This is why the MCAS v2 will only generate a single AND command per high AoA cycle. I challenge anyone to find a training for that "repeated" failure condition. Still, no 737 pilot have yet described in details here what a simulator runaway stabilizer training session on his airline.
 
planecane
Posts: 1041
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q2 2019

Sun May 19, 2019 5:49 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
planecane wrote:
2) MCAS does not introduce a new failure mode, it adds another source of runaway stabilizer.

The 737-8/9 MAX introduce a new unsafe condition compared to the 737-800/900 NG: this is Boeing own description in the EAD-2018-23-51:

(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by analysis performed by the manufacturer showing that if an
erroneously high single angle of attack (AOA) sensor input is received by the flight control system,
there is a potential for repeated nose-down trim commands of the horizontal stabilizer. We are issuing
this AD to address this potential resulting nose-down trim, which could cause the flight crew to have
difficulty controlling the airplane, and lead to excessive nose-down attitude, significant altitude loss,
and possible impact with terrain.


The fact the this unsafe condition is "repeated" is a new failure mode no possible on any 737 before. This is why the MCAS v2 will only generate a single AND command per high AoA cycle. I challenge anyone to find a training for that "repeated" failure condition. Still, no 737 pilot have yet described in details here what a simulator runaway stabilizer training session on his airline.

You are nitpicking semantics. What is the PRACTICAL difference between a continuous uncommanded stabilizer movement and a repeated uncommanded stabilizer movement? They are both a runaway stabilizer and the same NNC is used to recover.

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