jollo
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 8:12 am

aerolimani wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
Would you prefer your bureaucrats be less qualified, or take a less direct interest in important issues? Perhaps it’s just envy that your résumés don’t look like his.


I'd rather they stick to the facts. No need for all the extra expressions. To say that the Max would have to be the safest plane in the sky to get recertification would imply that the other aircraft are somehow less safe.

His job is more than just technical, addressing engineers and pilots. He must also engage in public relations. It’s pretty classic US-style PR to make statements in a hyperbolic manner. I think the theory is that it demonstrates confidence. I can’t say that the style appeals to me either, but I accept it as the norm.


I also would appreciate less bombast and a more to the point mission statement. After all, the fact he'll be ready to put his family on the newly re-certified MAX will do very little for me when I'll be trying to decide whether to put MY family on the thing.

I hope that he will:
  • check that the redesigned MCAS 2.0 has dual input channels with input validation (or - next acceptable alternative - control output comparison) and will automatically disable itself in an input (or output) disagree scenario;
  • check that the redesigned MCAS 2.0 has control authority limited to the intended use case. Come to think to it, I would also like him to check that the "intended use case" for MCAS is finally stated unambiguously;
  • check that pilots are getting full documentation on what MCAS is, how it's supposed to work and its failure modes;
  • check that Boeing has restored the function of the NG's STAB TRIM A/P CUT OUT switch - or equivalent - re-enabling pilots to disable all FCC trim control inputs WITHOUT loosing electric manual trim (those small manual trim wheels should really be a last, last, last resort);
  • check that the "Runaway Stabilizer " NNC has been finally updated out of the 60' - when the most probable cause for a trim runaway were stuck switches - to the twenty-first century - when the most probable cause are haywire automations
  • ensure that pilots will get appropriate training and simulator time for the revised NNC and to manage safely "MCAS out" contingencies - e.g. new memory items to stay clear of the flight envelope areas where MCAS is intended to activate

His extensive qualifications are not strictly required to run this checklist, but they can't hurt.

As FAA chief, I would also like him to mandate an extra focus on checking the merit of any "no sim training required!" claims for new "grandfathered" models.

As for communication style, I agree that you should always be aware of the cultural background of the speaker, and "translate" accordingly in your head: claims of successful achievements coming from the USA should be cut down by 50%, lack of a negative statement coming from Japan doesn't mean it's not a "no", "we're on time and on budget" coming from Italy means no more than 100% over time and/or over budget, etc.
 
blueflyer
Posts: 4121
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 4:17 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 10:42 am

par13del wrote:
If you read the article, you would see that the Canadians are doing flights for check captains etc. one would think that such flying is more dangerous than a transit flight with flaps down.

May have been to prepare for the great Southern transition. Add Air Canada to the list of airlines sending their MAX to a hot, dry climate. 3 or 4 aircrafts have been flown South to MZJ in the past week, with more to follow.
https://www.wingsoverquebec.com/?p=8903
The Trump/Johnson special relationship: Special people on both sides of the Atlantic
 
LondonAero
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 4:55 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 11:29 am

I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088
 
cuban8
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 7:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 12:44 pm

LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


For sure it will add some cost. The more regulations, the more cost. That being said, I believe only an aviation professional will know the sensor/training or other additional regulatory requirements when it comes to the MAX. As many have stated, very few from the general public will even know the difference between a B737NG and a B737MAX. So from a general public point of view, this is a non-issue.
When business goes to hell, you get rid of three things. Your private jet, your yacht and your mistress..........and most importantly in that order.
~ Russian Billionaire ~
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:00 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Revelation, prior it seems as though program senior engineers reported to program managers. The Senior Engineer for Boeing was not out of the loop, but was in the loop via program managers. The difference sounds subtle, but I think it is important. Just as Boeing FAA appointed compliance people did not report directly back to the FAA but only through program managers.

I think this is the kind of change many people on this thread were calling for, yet we see it gets next to no reaction.

mjoelnir wrote:
International Panel Set to Criticize FAA’s Approval Process for Boeing 737 MAX Jets

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... _lead_pos3

The JATR panel does not seem to be impressed by the certification process of the FAA and Boeing.

I don't have a WSJ subscription but Reuters ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethi ... SKBN1W202X ) gives its rendition:

As part of the panel’s findings, the task force will call out the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for what it says is a lack of clarity and transparency in the way the agency delegated authority to Boeing to evaluate certain flight-control features, the Journal reported on Monday.

The final conclusion in some of these essential design changes did not receive adequate attention from the FAA, the report added.

The panel is expected to call for greater data-sharing and transparency among different governments, WSJ reported, with the draft report recommending reviewing and updating FAA guidance and day-to-day certification procedures to ensure the agency’s early involvement in new onboard systems.

I see a bunch of scolding, but I don't see the kind of changes people have been calling for here, such as going back to the system where Boeing designated representatives reported to FAA managers instead of Boeing managers. I'm not sure what if any impact the JATR report is going to have, other than to provide something more for bureaucracies to chew through. At the end of the day a lot of what FAA does is mandated by Congress, and I'm not seeing anything in these early reports that mandates Congressional involvement or actions.

But at least Reuters had some really cool photos of all the planes parked at the Boeing ramp at Moses Lake:

Image

Creative use of the SAC bomber trees to hold all the 737s still rolling off the production line.

Image

More photos shown if you click on the Reuters link then click on the photo at the start of the article.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:37 pm

aerolimani wrote:
His job is more than just technical, addressing engineers and pilots. He must also engage in public relations. It’s pretty classic US-style PR to make statements in a hyperbolic manner. I think the theory is that it demonstrates confidence. I can’t say that the style appeals to me either, but I accept it as the norm.

Yeah, well such did not work out well for the existing head honcho at Boeing, so maybe we should start demanding that technical people who are in charge of something have a professional PR person with them at all times to clear what they say to the public, you know like how you have your lawyer do the talking.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:43 pm

cuban8 wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


For sure it will add some cost. The more regulations, the more cost. That being said, I believe only an aviation professional will know the sensor/training or other additional regulatory requirements when it comes to the MAX. As many have stated, very few from the general public will even know the difference between a B737NG and a B737MAX. So from a general public point of view, this is a non-issue.

Let's not overlook those companies who buy aircraft for lease, imagine that industry will have to get further restricted as a US company will not want to go through the additional expense of using a EASA certified plane in the USA and vice versa.
However, it would be good for the OEM's if the head honchos value new sales versus support and maintenance of older aircraft, could severely limit the secondary market or create a new bloc, FAA, EASA, Others.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 1:52 pm

par13del wrote:
Yeah, well such did not work out well for the existing head honcho at Boeing, so maybe we should start demanding that technical people who are in charge of something have a professional PR person with them at all times to clear what they say to the public, you know like how you have your lawyer do the talking.


Then shooting both would make things so much easier. .-))))))))
Last edited by WIederling on Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Murphy is an optimist
 
planecane
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:04 pm

LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8746
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:08 pm

planecane wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.


It is very simple. EASA does want 3 sensors and 3 sensors are on all frames developed under the EASA certification authorities.

But EASA accepts two sensors, when additional safety features provide a similar safety standard as 3 sensors.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:09 pm

par13del wrote:
Let's not overlook those companies who buy aircraft for lease, imagine that industry will have to get further restricted as a US company will not want to go through the additional expense of using a EASA certified plane in the USA and vice versa.
However, it would be good for the OEM's if the head honchos value new sales versus support and maintenance of older aircraft, could severely limit the secondary market or create a new bloc, FAA, EASA, Others.

On the flip side, the world's biggest A320 operator is a US airline, needing the FAA to double check EASA's work is going to add cost and delay to US adoption of any new Airbus features.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8842
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:17 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
planecane wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.


It is very simple. EASA does want 3 sensors and 3 sensors are on all frames developed under the EASA certification authorities.

But EASA accepts two sensors, when additional safety features provide a similar safety standard as 3 sensors.


3 sensors must not mean 3 sensors of the same type. 2 AoA sensor and one g-meter would do for MCAS.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:29 pm

planecane wrote:
The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.


I'd go for the original EASA offering and avoid the flapperized version.
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/swift/ ... ter18.html

Quite often viewpoints and/or mementos are represented in
a way to make them appear senseless or unreasonable.

Tiny omission here or there, creative embellishment in another place
and voila. ..
Murphy is an optimist
 
planecane
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:29 pm

seahawk wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
planecane wrote:

The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.


It is very simple. EASA does want 3 sensors and 3 sensors are on all frames developed under the EASA certification authorities.

But EASA accepts two sensors, when additional safety features provide a similar safety standard as 3 sensors.


3 sensors must not mean 3 sensors of the same type. 2 AoA sensor and one g-meter would do for MCAS.


no, it wouldn't. MCAS is needed in low speed situations that don't have enough g force to trigger it. That's why the g-force sensor was removed to start with. Also, a completely different sensor doesn't make it redundant.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:36 pm

planecane wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.

It would certainly make no sense to say three sensors are an absolute requirement and completely ridiculous to allow a retro-fit over time if it is not safe to fly. Oh, they didn't!

'EASA is also examining whether Boeing’s use of two vanes is sufficient, Northcote said. The regulations don’t necessarily require an additional one must be added. Safety could be addressed “through improvement of the flight crew procedures and training, or through design enhancements, or a combination of the two,” EASA said.
EASA said two vanes are considered “the bare minimum requirement to meet the safety objectives,” and in the agency’s experience “an architecture with three vanes can more easily be found compliant with the regulation.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-k0e0frs7

Ray
 
planecane
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:51 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
planecane wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.

It would certainly make no sense to say three sensors are an absolute requirement and completely ridiculous to allow a retro-fit over time if it is not safe to fly. Oh, they didn't!

'EASA is also examining whether Boeing’s use of two vanes is sufficient, Northcote said. The regulations don’t necessarily require an additional one must be added. Safety could be addressed “through improvement of the flight crew procedures and training, or through design enhancements, or a combination of the two,” EASA said.
EASA said two vanes are considered “the bare minimum requirement to meet the safety objectives,” and in the agency’s experience “an architecture with three vanes can more easily be found compliant with the regulation.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-k0e0frs7

Ray


I should have dug up the WSJ article first before commenting based on the summary posted. It is clear that the author misunderstood the EASA statement and summarized it wrong.
 
LondonAero
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 4:55 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:30 pm

This is the quote from the article. Seems fairly clear to me? "Even after EASA gives the green light, agency officials are expected to push for significant additional safety enhancements to the fleet. Most prominently, EASA has proposed to eventually add to the MAX a third fully functional angle-of-attack sensor—which effectively measures how far the plane’s nose is pointed up or down—underscoring the controversy expected to swirl around the plane for the foreseeable future."
 
airnorth
Posts: 388
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 3:40 pm

blueflyer wrote:
par13del wrote:
If you read the article, you would see that the Canadians are doing flights for check captains etc. one would think that such flying is more dangerous than a transit flight with flaps down.

May have been to prepare for the great Southern transition. Add Air Canada to the list of airlines sending their MAX to a hot, dry climate. 3 or 4 aircrafts have been flown South to MZJ in the past week, with more to follow.
https://www.wingsoverquebec.com/?p=8903


I saw both C-FTJV, and C-GEHY were flown to MZJ yesterday.

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... v#221ffb73

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/airc ... y#221fde12
 
kalvado
Posts: 2106
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:18 pm

planecane wrote:
seahawk wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:

It is very simple. EASA does want 3 sensors and 3 sensors are on all frames developed under the EASA certification authorities.

But EASA accepts two sensors, when additional safety features provide a similar safety standard as 3 sensors.


3 sensors must not mean 3 sensors of the same type. 2 AoA sensor and one g-meter would do for MCAS.


no, it wouldn't. MCAS is needed in low speed situations that don't have enough g force to trigger it. That's why the g-force sensor was removed to start with. Also, a completely different sensor doesn't make it redundant.

Compare to this situation:
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2008/07/ ... ology.aspx
 
planecane
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:43 pm

kalvado wrote:
planecane wrote:
seahawk wrote:

3 sensors must not mean 3 sensors of the same type. 2 AoA sensor and one g-meter would do for MCAS.


no, it wouldn't. MCAS is needed in low speed situations that don't have enough g force to trigger it. That's why the g-force sensor was removed to start with. Also, a completely different sensor doesn't make it redundant.

Compare to this situation:
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2008/07/ ... ology.aspx


That was for a once in history event. The MCAS situation was 2 crashes in less than 6 months. It was reasonable to assume another center tank explosion wouldn't happen for a long time.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2106
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 4:50 pm

planecane wrote:
kalvado wrote:
planecane wrote:

no, it wouldn't. MCAS is needed in low speed situations that don't have enough g force to trigger it. That's why the g-force sensor was removed to start with. Also, a completely different sensor doesn't make it redundant.

Compare to this situation:
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2008/07/ ... ology.aspx


That was for a once in history event. The MCAS situation was 2 crashes in less than 6 months. It was reasonable to assume another center tank explosion wouldn't happen for a long time.

There were at least 4 such events.
TWA800 in 1996,
TG114 in 2001 https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 20010303-1
PR143 in 1990: https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19900511-1
and (outside of civil aviation) a B-52 in 1988
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:05 pm

LondonAero wrote:
This is the quote from the article. Seems fairly clear to me? "Even after EASA gives the green light, agency officials are expected to push for significant additional safety enhancements to the fleet. Most prominently, EASA has proposed to eventually add to the MAX a third fully functional angle-of-attack sensor—which effectively measures how far the plane’s nose is pointed up or down—underscoring the controversy expected to swirl around the plane for the foreseeable future."

My question would be, does the existing computer infrastructure have the processing power and memory to handle the 3 sensors, I would suspect that if the computers have to be updated it would be a major re-certification effort, I stand to be corrected.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:20 pm

LondonAero wrote:
This is the quote from the article. Seems fairly clear to me? "Even after EASA gives the green light, agency officials are expected to push for significant additional safety enhancements to the fleet. Most prominently, EASA has proposed to eventually add to the MAX a third fully functional angle-of-attack sensor—which effectively measures how far the plane’s nose is pointed up or down—underscoring the controversy expected to swirl around the plane for the foreseeable future."
So they would allow it to resume flying but require modifications by a later date (kind of like an AD)? Would this be making a safe aircraft even safer? :duck:
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
planecane
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:32 pm

par13del wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
This is the quote from the article. Seems fairly clear to me? "Even after EASA gives the green light, agency officials are expected to push for significant additional safety enhancements to the fleet. Most prominently, EASA has proposed to eventually add to the MAX a third fully functional angle-of-attack sensor—which effectively measures how far the plane’s nose is pointed up or down—underscoring the controversy expected to swirl around the plane for the foreseeable future."

My question would be, does the existing computer infrastructure have the processing power and memory to handle the 3 sensors, I would suspect that if the computers have to be updated it would be a major re-certification effort, I stand to be corrected.


If I was coming up with a design to add a 3rd sensor, what I would do is add a separate AoA processing module that contains its own redundant processors. The input to the module would be the 3 AoA vanes. It would process the data with an algorithm to mitigate a single failed sensor. The output would be sending the correct AoA to both FCC inputs. If the AoA processing module determines that it can not be confident in the correct value it would output a different AoA (by more than 5 degrees) to each of the two FCC inputs. This will cause the FCC to disable MCAS and warn of an AoA disagree. There would have to be some way for the sensor to alert that it has detected a failure of a sensor even when it is able to output a correct value based upon the other two.

This type of approach would mean that the FCC software does not have to be updated so the AoA processing module can be developed and certified as a standalone component. I don't imagine the existing FCC architecture can accept another AoA sensor input let alone have the processing power to properly interpret a 3 sensor system.
 
Jamie514
Posts: 150
Joined: Thu May 18, 2017 4:36 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 12:00 am

par13del wrote:
Well if you read my post you would see that I said if the NG could be used, they could lease or pay a fee at another airline, fact is that they had / have an alternative to using the MAX.
As I said, personally I think is is a bad idea when alternatives are available.


Sure, the alternatives all cost an awful lot more, and raise many questions as to effectiveness (would AC pilots using NG of another airline have to follow that carriers specific operating procedures; does that meet the requirements of the familiarity training), time and money costs (would AC leasing a NG be feasible with the remaining time of the grounding, develop their own manuals for the below wing differences etc), and who would pay for this. Should Boeing? Given Transport Canada was willing to grant the flight waiver, coupled with the precedent of US carriers having flown planes for the purposes of maintenance and storage etc., I'm not so sure they would.

Speaking of storage, alternatives to desert storage exist too. Following your personal logic, shouldn't we be storing the MAX in-situ where ever possible and avoiding all non-essential flight ops? Yes, it costs more to re-activate later, the climate will wear the planes a bit more, but WN CFO is confidently assuming "beginning to mid-November" return to service. Surely it is a bad idea to fly them at all then, when alternatives are available.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 2:28 am

Jamie514 wrote:
Speaking of storage, alternatives to desert storage exist too. Following your personal logic, shouldn't we be storing the MAX in-situ where ever possible and avoiding all non-essential flight ops? Yes, it costs more to re-activate later, the climate will wear the planes a bit more, but WN CFO is confidently assuming "beginning to mid-November" return to service. Surely it is a bad idea to fly them at all then, when alternatives are available.

As far as I know, all the a/c that WN and the other USA carriers have flown to the desert are still there and have not been moved, no check flights, proficiency flights nada, same in Europe, where they were given permission for ferry they have remained.

As we have seen, Boeing is hiring folks to be stationed at Moses Lake to be on hand to start getting a/c in flyable condition if and when the fix is approved, time will tell if they actually request permission to ferry them back to bases to implement the fix. In any event, what AC is doing are not ferry flights, as I said, in my opinion its a bad idea, cheaper than leasing yes, cheaper than trying to get the crew time at another airline, yes, but to me it just looks bad.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 5:46 am

https://komonews.com/news/business/hous ... ed-737-max

So Dennis is invited, but will he go there without being forced to testify?

A congressional committee investigating the grounded 737 Max is asking Boeing Chairman and CEO Dennis Muilenburg to testify at a hearing next month. The House Transportation Committee said Tuesday that Chairman Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., "formally invited" Muilenburg to a hearing on Oct. 30. The committee also wants to hear from John Hamilton, the chief engineer of Boeing's commercial airplanes division.

Boeing did not immediately say whether Muilenburg or Hamilton would testify.
 
Ugly51
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 7:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 7:39 am

oschkosch wrote:
https://komonews.com/news/business/house-panel-asks-boeing-ceo-to-testify-about-grounded-737-max

So Dennis is invited, but will he go there without being forced to testify?

A congressional committee investigating the grounded 737 Max is asking Boeing Chairman and CEO Dennis Muilenburg to testify at a hearing next month. The House Transportation Committee said Tuesday that Chairman Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., "formally invited" Muilenburg to a hearing on Oct. 30. The committee also wants to hear from John Hamilton, the chief engineer of Boeing's commercial airplanes division.

Boeing did not immediately say whether Muilenburg or Hamilton would testify.


Let's see if they take the 5th Amendment. Just like one of Boeings test Pilot's did. He is now flying as a First Officer with Southwest.
 
jollo
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 8:51 am

planecane wrote:
If I was coming up with a design to add a 3rd sensor, what I would do is add a separate AoA processing module that contains its own redundant processors. The input to the module would be the 3 AoA vanes. It would process the data with an algorithm to mitigate a single failed sensor. The output would be sending the correct AoA to both FCC inputs. If the AoA processing module determines that it can not be confident in the correct value it would output a different AoA (by more than 5 degrees) to each of the two FCC inputs. This will cause the FCC to disable MCAS and warn of an AoA disagree. There would have to be some way for the sensor to alert that it has detected a failure of a sensor even when it is able to output a correct value based upon the other two.

This type of approach would mean that the FCC software does not have to be updated so the AoA processing module can be developed and certified as a standalone component. I don't imagine the existing FCC architecture can accept another AoA sensor input let alone have the processing power to properly interpret a 3 sensor system.


Technically, your approach would be correct: replace the physical sensor input with the output of a stand-alone pre-processor component emulating a virtual fail-safe sensor. Not being handicapped by vintage technology, such a pre-processor could also include a predictive filter for best-effort output value estimation in multiple sensor failure scenarios (approximating a fail-safe-fail-operational architecture, which even modern FBW airliners still do not have).

However, this is a purely fictional scenario for 3 reasons:
  • EASA will NOT require a 3-sensor retrofit for the MAX, nor for any currently certified 2-sensor design; the notion is pure BS spun up to paint an USA vs. EU narrative
  • there's no such component certified for civilian aviation applications yet; certification would take multiple years at best
  • even if a certified component was available, what you are proposing would be a major redesign of MAX's air data architecture, voiding grandfathering and requiring re-certification

I like the idea, but it won't happen.

Anyway, IMO there's no need for a 3rd AoA sensor, nor for a wing-box+MLG+engine mount redesign, nor for NSA-or-nothing fantasies: the MAX will be re-certified worldwide and will prove itself safe enough just with a competently redesigned and certified MCAS 2.0, with adequate pilot training and with a large helping of transparency.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 9:22 am

XRAYretired wrote:
planecane wrote:
LondonAero wrote:
I see that in the WSJ article overnight regarding the JATR - at the end the journalist states that they have heard that Canada will require SIM training before plane gets back in the air and that EASA will likely require a 3rd sensor at some point (potentially retroactively installed after the plane is allowed to fly). Was trying to think about how this might all work? Does the FAA really want multiple different global regimes? How will the aircraft be sold across geographies with multiple hardware set ups? Will the public fly a plane that they know has 2 sensors when they also know that a 3rd sensor is waiting installation? sounds complex and expensive.

Any thoughts?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/internatio ... 1568666088


The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.

It would certainly make no sense to say three sensors are an absolute requirement and completely ridiculous to allow a retro-fit over time if it is not safe to fly. Oh, they didn't!

'EASA is also examining whether Boeing’s use of two vanes is sufficient, Northcote said. The regulations don’t necessarily require an additional one must be added. Safety could be addressed “through improvement of the flight crew procedures and training, or through design enhancements, or a combination of the two,” EASA said.
EASA said two vanes are considered “the bare minimum requirement to meet the safety objectives,” and in the agency’s experience “an architecture with three vanes can more easily be found compliant with the regulation.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-k0e0frs7

Ray


In my opinion EASA is laying the ground works to justify sim training. If you look at the explanation EASA gives:
Safety could be addressed “through improvement of the flight crew procedures and training, or through design enhancements, or a combination of the two,” EASA said.
it is obvious, that design enhancements will be fought hard over by Boeing, because that is expensive and would push RTS at this point far into 2020 (outside the US.), but if flight crew procedures and training is enhanced enough to compensate the inherent safety flaws of a two sensor design, than the MAX will be allowed to fly again. How do you make sure such crew procedures are trained to be able to compensate the two sensor design? Simulator training.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13273
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 9:53 am

FluidFlow wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
planecane wrote:

The EASA part makes absolutely no sense. How could they justify it being safe enough to fly but require a 3rd sensor to meet safety requirements? Either a 3rd sensor is needed or it isn't.

It would certainly make no sense to say three sensors are an absolute requirement and completely ridiculous to allow a retro-fit over time if it is not safe to fly. Oh, they didn't!

'EASA is also examining whether Boeing’s use of two vanes is sufficient, Northcote said. The regulations don’t necessarily require an additional one must be added. Safety could be addressed “through improvement of the flight crew procedures and training, or through design enhancements, or a combination of the two,” EASA said.
EASA said two vanes are considered “the bare minimum requirement to meet the safety objectives,” and in the agency’s experience “an architecture with three vanes can more easily be found compliant with the regulation.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... s-k0e0frs7

Ray


In my opinion EASA is laying the ground works to justify sim training. If you look at the explanation EASA gives:
Safety could be addressed “through improvement of the flight crew procedures and training, or through design enhancements, or a combination of the two,” EASA said.
it is obvious, that design enhancements will be fought hard over by Boeing, because that is expensive and would push RTS at this point far into 2020 (outside the US.), but if flight crew procedures and training is enhanced enough to compensate the inherent safety flaws of a two sensor design, than the MAX will be allowed to fly again. How do you make sure such crew procedures are trained to be able to compensate the two sensor design? Simulator training.


A two step approach is possible to. Accept a fix for now, including training requirements. And an AD of a more robust solution being implemented at the next check. I think Boeing / FAA won't ignore or fight EASA requirements very hard. They are not in a position to do so.

Image
Moose lake, indeed "cool" pictures Revelation, but we can do without..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17631
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 9:58 am

keesje wrote:
Moose lake


It looks like Moses Lake to me! :wink2:

There's over 100 MAX there now.
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.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3939
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 10:12 am

B777LRF wrote:
More on the EASA reservations

From Flight Global: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ge-460726/

Fair use excerpt:

CRITICAL SYSTEMS

Regarding the second condition – EASA's "own, independent review" into the 737 Max – "what we were saying was, okay, in the 737 Max there were obviously some things which were not working on safety-critical systems".

Ky states that its decision to investigate systems beyond the MCAS was prompted by the question: "What proves to us that there are not other areas where there would not be disfunctioning [sic] systems as well?"

He explains that the Max systems EASA has focused on comprise "displays, alerting systems, autopilot and air data systems".

EASA decided to recertify those "safety-critical" parts, Ky states.

It therefore communicated "70 test points" on 22 May, covering normal and abnormal operating conditions, and simulator evaluations were completed in June and July.

"On our findings, we found significant technical issues [with the 737 Max]," Ky says. "Basically, we identified critical items that absolutely need to be corrected before the aircraft can be considered for return to service."

The significant technical issues found by EASA included: "A lack of exhaustive monitoring of the system failures, resulting in stabiliser runaway; too high forces needed to move the manual trim wheel in case of a stabiliser runaway; too late disconnection of autopilot near stall speed (in specific conditions); and too high crew workload and risk of crew confusion in some failure cases."

Questions about manual trim have been prominent, with some pilots reporting that manually trimming the Max can be nearly impossible in some high-speed conditions due to excessive force against the horizontal stabiliser.

EASA's findings were communicated to Boeing and the FAA in July. "On this basis, Boeing did some work," Ky explains.

Of the solutions proposed by Boeing, EASA notes good progress on changes to the flight control computer architecture; some progress on the simplification of crew procedures and associated training; and "no appropriate response to angle-of-attack integrity issues".

"There is still a lot of work to be done," Ky asserts.

EASA will "continue to work with Boeing and assess fully what they are proposing", he states. "We will perform flight tests when all of those activities have been successfully finished, and from those flights tests, we will be able to define crew training requirements."

Ky did not give an indication of the likely timescales involved, only reiterating that EASA's four conditions for the Max's return were still to be met.


-----------------------------------------

Forget about Q4 for RTS anywhere else than, maybe, in the continental US. In fact, forget all about RTS anywhere outside the US until such time Boeing has swallowed its pride and starts working in earnest addressing the points raised by EASA. You may bet your last Dollar, no regulator outside the US will accept the Max until such time these issues have been resolved. And since that's where around 90% of their backlog for the model lives, one would suggest that is the only prudent course of action.

------------------------------------------

From the same article, on JATR:

At the same time, several of those agencies are part of the FAA's Joint Authorities Technical Review panel, which is yet publish its recommendations on the Max.

The panel "expects to submit its observations, findings and recommendations in the coming weeks", the FAA said in a statement on 30 August. Its recommendations could affect both the future of how the FAA conducts safety certification and could influence how soon regulators from other nations return the aircraft to service.

The FAA's certification of the Max does not require the panel to first finish its review.

But as Ky states: "It is very likely that international authorities will want a second opinion, or a further opinion [once the FAA clears the Max]. It was not like this a year ago."


-----------------------------------------

This tells us two important things:

1: The FAA are still living in a bubble.
2: The Max will not be certified outside the US until the JATR have submitted their recommendations, making the entire effort of estimating a RTS date futile.



Good post. It's refreshing to see some cold harsh truth amongst all the conjecture and BS here.


bob75013 wrote:
Let's talk about Boeing's stock price being unlinked to reality about November 1 - when it is about $420 and MAXs are flying.


This is one of those statements you read which will age really badly.


xwb777 wrote:
The United Arab Emirates Civil Aviation regulator will wait until Q1 2020 to allow the first B737MAX to take off to the skies or fly through the UAE airspace.


Very interesting. The UAE is the affected nation that has by far the closest relationship between a 737MAX carrier and a regulator. For sure a good sign if they're doing decent scrutiny - certainly not what I expected to be honest.
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 11:06 am

keesje wrote:
A two step approach is possible to. Accept a fix for now, including training requirements. And an AD of a more robust solution being implemented at the next check. I think Boeing / FAA won't ignore or fight EASA requirements very hard. They are not in a position to do so.

A two step approach may be fine, if by next check you mean D that will be years down the road. First they would have to make the hardware changes in the production line, my thinking is that the hundreds already completed but sitting idle would not be included as airlines are waiting and hurting financially for those frames. Since the hardware change has to be implemented on a test frame and the a/c certified, if computer updates (not software but processor or memory) are involved, that will take even more time, in the interim, additional a/c are being produced, at 40+ per month, the longer the certification process the more a/c to be modified down the road.
It may be safer and more easily match the EASA requirements, but if we have close to 500 or more version 1.0 MAX a/c flying around for a number of years before the refit.....Now if they mandate that it must be done as soon as possible, then the certification time and ease of installation become a more major and pressing financial driver.
Will be interesting to see EASA's final on the 3 sensor approach.
 
Skyteam10001
Posts: 135
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 8:32 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 11:27 am

I have been following this thread almost religiously for the past months.

This morning the NYT came out with this article which I don't believe has been posted on here before. I am a NYT subscriber so I hope one of the the links below works for all of you.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... e=Homepage

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... ashes.html

The article is interesting in the sense that it brings a very different POV on the story from what we have read in the press before, and namely seems to validate key arguments some of the posters have been doing on here: that it isn't Boeing's fault, that it's all down to bad training and bad airmanship.

I for one find the piece incredibly one-sided which I didn't expect from the NYT. Adding to this that it is the writer's first article for the NYT Magazine. I am surprised things like Boeing's non disclosure of the MCAS system is considered not a big deal.
I will let you guys comment!
A
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 11:55 am

In Reuters: Lone 737 MAX criss-crossed Canada for pilot checks during grounding we read:

As North America’s sole MAX operator which had not flown the earlier 737NG, Air Canada cannot use that model to maintain the qualifications of its check or trainer pilots, the company said.

So regulator Transport Canada authorized a select group of Air Canada’s check pilots to fly the grounded jet, which was also conducting maintenance flights, the airline said.

All the jets have the same control software suspected of contributing to the accidents, which Boeing is now in the process of revising to smooth its impact. However, some pilots have said existing procedures can prevent similar accidents.

Confirms we have MCAS 1.0 planes flying without falling out of the sky.

However, it seems TC may be pushing the envelope a bit:

However, one U.S. carrier questioned by Reuters said such flights would not be possible in the United States where pilot training was not included in a list of exemptions to the ban issued by the Federal Aviation Administration.

“Pilot currency isn’t a listed exemption in the U.S. order,” an FAA spokeswoman confirmed.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 12:09 pm

Skyteam10001 wrote:
The article is interesting in the sense that it brings a very different POV on the story from what we have read in the press before, and namely seems to validate key arguments some of the posters have been doing on here: that it isn't Boeing's fault, that it's all down to bad training and bad airmanship.

I for one find the piece incredibly one-sided which I didn't expect from the NYT. Adding to this that it is the writer's first article for the NYT Magazine. I am surprised things like Boeing's non disclosure of the MCAS system is considered not a big deal.
I will let you guys comment!
A

William Langewiesche is not well known to the general public, but should be familiar to people who read about aviation.

https://medium.com/@mwichary/the-willia ... d5d06d0e04 contains a nice summation of a few of his aviation articles.

His dad Wolfgang wrote the famous "Stick and Rudder" book, he is listed as co-author in modern revisions.

His point of view, "Malfunctions caused two deadly crashes. But an industry that puts unprepared pilots in the cockpit is just as guilty." will not be popular here.

I could not read the article, but the intro makes it clear he is no fan of Lion Air's approach to human resources:

Lion Air is an aggressive airline that dominates the rapidly expanding Indonesian market in low-cost air travel and is one of Boeing’s largest customers worldwide. It is known for hiring inexperienced pilots — most of them recent graduates of its own academy — and for paying them little and working them hard. Pilots like Suneja who come from the outside typically sign on in the hope of building hours and moving on to a better job. Lion Air gave him some simulator time and a uniform, put him into the co-pilot’s seat of a 737 and then made him a captain sooner than a more conventional airline would have.

Sooner or later the article will appear as a reprint and it'll be interesting to read the whole thing.
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
 
ArgentoSystems
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 12:40 pm

Skyteam10001 wrote:
I have been following this thread almost religiously for the past months.

This morning the NYT came out with this article which I don't believe has been posted on here before. I am a NYT subscriber so I hope one of the the links below works for all of you.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... e=Homepage

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... ashes.html

A


The author seem to put a lot of work into this incredibly long piece. However I had to stop reading after this passage:

On occasion, however, it may start running on its own volition and prompt the airplane to nose up or down. That’s a runaway trim. Such failures are easily countered by the pilot — first by using the control column to give opposing elevator, then by flipping a couple of switches to shut off the electrics before reverting to a perfectly capable parallel system of manual trim. But it seemed that for some reason, the Lion Air crew might not have resorted to the simple solution.


So simple, a child could have saved that plane!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2106
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 12:49 pm

Skyteam10001 wrote:
I have been following this thread almost religiously for the past months.

This morning the NYT came out with this article which I don't believe has been posted on here before. I am a NYT subscriber so I hope one of the the links below works for all of you.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... e=Homepage

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... ashes.html

The article is interesting in the sense that it brings a very different POV on the story from what we have read in the press before, and namely seems to validate key arguments some of the posters have been doing on here: that it isn't Boeing's fault, that it's all down to bad training and bad airmanship.

I for one find the piece incredibly one-sided which I didn't expect from the NYT. Adding to this that it is the writer's first article for the NYT Magazine. I am surprised things like Boeing's non disclosure of the MCAS system is considered not a big deal.
I will let you guys comment!
A

Airmanship is a great thing.. But anyone ever heard about journalistship?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:00 pm

kalvado wrote:
Airmanship is a great thing.. But anyone ever heard about journalistship?

As the 4th or 5th estate (depending on where you are) their credentials are usually not questioned, unless of course it is Fox News in which case, all bets are off.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:11 pm

ArgentoSystems wrote:
Skyteam10001 wrote:
I have been following this thread almost religiously for the past months.

This morning the NYT came out with this article which I don't believe has been posted on here before. I am a NYT subscriber so I hope one of the the links below works for all of you.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... e=Homepage

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/maga ... ashes.html

A


The author seem to put a lot of work into this incredibly long piece. However I had to stop reading after this passage:

On occasion, however, it may start running on its own volition and prompt the airplane to nose up or down. That’s a runaway trim. Such failures are easily countered by the pilot — first by using the control column to give opposing elevator, then by flipping a couple of switches to shut off the electrics before reverting to a perfectly capable parallel system of manual trim. But it seemed that for some reason, the Lion Air crew might not have resorted to the simple solution.


So simple, a child could have saved that plane!

[sarcasm continue] :bomb:
Are we talking about a plane that is so simple to flight that a child can save it from an AoA fault, or about a plane that require highly experienced pilots ?
Or is that rhetoric imply that some pilots are less capable than a child ?
[sarcasm abort] :tapedshut:


Did the article take in account that the JT610 pilots faced many alarms ?
Did the article take in account the inability to trim with the wheels at high speed ?
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1700
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:14 pm

Revelation wrote:
In Reuters: Lone 737 MAX criss-crossed Canada for pilot checks during grounding we read:

Confirms we have MCAS 1.0 planes flying without falling out of the sky.

However, it seems TC may be pushing the envelope a bit:



Statistically they know they are safe though, if they only fly a few hundred hours there is still thousands to go before it becomes dangerous and the MAX is due crash again.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1557
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:18 pm

enzo011 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
In Reuters: Lone 737 MAX criss-crossed Canada for pilot checks during grounding we read:

Confirms we have MCAS 1.0 planes flying without falling out of the sky.

However, it seems TC may be pushing the envelope a bit:



Statistically they know they are safe though, if they only fly a few hundred hours there is still thousands to go before it becomes dangerous and the MAX is due crash again.

You're joking, right?

Anyway, it appears the FAA is going to be meeting with other international regulators next week. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani ... ar-AAHrrvC
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2106
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:38 pm

enzo011 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
In Reuters: Lone 737 MAX criss-crossed Canada for pilot checks during grounding we read:

Confirms we have MCAS 1.0 planes flying without falling out of the sky.

However, it seems TC may be pushing the envelope a bit:



Statistically they know they are safe though, if they only fly a few hundred hours there is still thousands to go before it becomes dangerous and the MAX is due crash again.

This is NOT the logic to follow. Each flight is as dangerous (or as safe) as the one after 1000000 cycles - assuming nothing changes between those flights, of course.
This is about risk assessment and mitigation - no-pax flights (much lower cost of the crash), most flying over sparesly populated areas (reducing cost of consequencies), probably specific training for pilots to watch out closely for certain things, specific pre-flight checkup before each flight, and maybe something else.
So while overall crash probability is unacceptably high for regular ops, total risk of a few flights is not that high.
You may rephrase that as "insurance bill for few flights is acceptable, but regular ops will be unprofitable".
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:38 pm

par13del wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Airmanship is a great thing.. But anyone ever heard about journalistship?

As the 4th or 5th estate (depending on where you are) their credentials are usually not questioned, unless of course it is Fox News in which case, all bets are off.

This author is a pilot and grew up in an aviation family, and has a long list of credentials including journalism awards.

Clearly this is an unjustified "kill the messenger" reaction.

enzo011 wrote:
Statistically they know they are safe though, if they only fly a few hundred hours there is still thousands to go before it becomes dangerous and the MAX is due crash again.

Right, Transport Canada is known for authorizing flights of planes due to crash again, NOT!

kalvado wrote:
This is NOT the logic to follow. Each flight is as dangerous (or as safe) as the one after 1000000 cycles - assuming nothing changes between those flights, of course.
This is about risk assessment and mitigation - no-pax flights (much lower cost of the crash), most flying over sparesly populated areas (reducing cost of consequencies), probably specific training for pilots to watch out closely for certain things, specific pre-flight checkup before each flight, and maybe something else.
So while overall crash probability is unacceptably high for regular ops, total risk of a few flights is not that high.
You may rephrase that as "insurance bill for few flights is acceptable, but regular ops will be unprofitable".

Personally I believe that TC is 100% confident that these pilots with their level of training will not crash due to flying a 737 with MCAS 1.0, regardless of potential body count or property damage.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
kalvado
Posts: 2106
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:51 pm

Revelation wrote:
par13del wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Airmanship is a great thing.. But anyone ever heard about journalistship?

As the 4th or 5th estate (depending on where you are) their credentials are usually not questioned, unless of course it is Fox News in which case, all bets are off.

This author is a pilot and grew up in an aviation family, and has a long list of credentials including journalism awards.

Clearly this is an unjustified "kill the messenger" reaction.

Being a pilot says nothing about author's "airmanship", as he nicely proves in the article. Sully ay be the only person in US with "airmanship" proven in action.
Awards can easily come from being scandalous and unprofessional, as opposed to rigorous reporting.

My message was totally different, though. Is there any other mass profession where specific talent is required, as opposed to regular trainable skill?
Policemanship, teachership, doctorship, janitorialship? Drivership, maybe? Flightattendantship?
Entrepreneurship is the only one I can think of the top of my head - but what is the success rate of startups, do you remember?
Seeking for specific talent is OK for austonauts - while there are at most few thousand people who flew to the orbit as a peak of their career; for hundreds journalists of top tier newspapers. Not sure how many pilots are there, but million worldwide is probably about right. There are no that many people with specific talents...
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:53 pm

scbriml wrote:
keesje wrote:
Moose lake


It looks like Moses Lake to me! :wink2:

There's over 100 MAX there now.

There's over 100 MAX "mooses" there to pasture :-)
Murphy is an optimist
 
morrisond
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 1:56 pm

kalvado wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
In Reuters: Lone 737 MAX criss-crossed Canada for pilot checks during grounding we read:

Confirms we have MCAS 1.0 planes flying without falling out of the sky.

However, it seems TC may be pushing the envelope a bit:



Statistically they know they are safe though, if they only fly a few hundred hours there is still thousands to go before it becomes dangerous and the MAX is due crash again.

This is NOT the logic to follow. Each flight is as dangerous (or as safe) as the one after 1000000 cycles - assuming nothing changes between those flights, of course.
This is about risk assessment and mitigation - no-pax flights (much lower cost of the crash), most flying over sparesly populated areas (reducing cost of consequencies), probably specific training for pilots to watch out closely for certain things, specific pre-flight checkup before each flight, and maybe something else.
So while overall crash probability is unacceptably high for regular ops, total risk of a few flights is not that high.
You may rephrase that as "insurance bill for few flights is acceptable, but regular ops will be unprofitable".


At this point with MCAS well known and understood it should not be considered risky to fly a 737 MAX with MCAS 1.0 with no passengers. The Boeing workaround does work. If the senior pilots of AC were faced with a MCAS situation I have no doubt they could handle it. Just like they would be able to handle an engine out.

Even if they were forced to turn off Electric Trim it should really now by a non-event to fly it with the manual trim.

Who knows - maybe they turned off Manual Trim entirely for the flight or flew with the flaps in Notch 1 just to be double sure.

Is this good enough for passenger service - of course not.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 2:00 pm

kalvado wrote:
Being a pilot says nothing about author's "airmanship", as he nicely proves in the article. Sully ay be the only person in US with "airmanship" proven in action.
Awards can easily come from being scandalous and unprofessional, as opposed to rigorous reporting.

My message was totally different, though. Is there any other mass profession where specific talent is required, as opposed to regular trainable skill?
Policemanship, teachership, doctorship, janitorialship? Drivership, maybe? Flightattendantship?
Entrepreneurship is the only one I can think of the top of my head - but what is the success rate of startups, do you remember?
Seeking for specific talent is OK for austonauts - while there are at most few thousand people who flew to the orbit as a peak of their career; for hundreds journalists of top tier newspapers. Not sure how many pilots are there, but million worldwide is probably about right. There are no that many people with specific talents...

IMO a lot of the reporting in this space has been flawed because the journalists involved have little or no aviation training, and are under time pressure to get a story to press.

Clearly this article does not suffer from those concerns.

I would say it is opinionated, but if you read his father's book, it advocates that pilots have a deep "stick and rudder" understanding of aviation, so the article's approach is no shock to me.

I would say his dad's book is a classic in the aviation field, but does cause a lot of controversy, because not everyone agrees that such an approach is the right one.

I know from personal experience that at least three people involved in my training as a glider pilot recommended that I purchase and read the book, and indeed I did so.

I can also say others told me not to bother reading that outdated nonsense.

Unfortunately, I found a lot of diametrically opposed opinions during my gliding training, so I went to a commercial operator and just did what their staff wanted done to get my license.

The commercial operator had a copy of "Stick and Rudder" on the book shelf behind his desk! :biggrin:
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
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3216
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q3 2019

Wed Sep 18, 2019 2:32 pm

Just a note on accessing New York Times articles. While you cannot use 'private' or 'incognito' modes anymore, you are allowed about 4 articles a month (and each browser can do so, I keep a couple on my desk-top, also iPhone). In addition there are library services available that allow text only downloads). I no longer use the NYT as my primary news source, but do check out what they have a couple times a week. The Guardian (open) and Financial Times allows a few articles a month. There are more reliable sources than I have time to read.

And on topic, the linked NYT Magazine article probably is a 'must read'. (that doesn't mean you have to agree with it)
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)

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