Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:35 pm

shmerik wrote:
morrisond wrote:
No that is not what I said - I said I expected they would have crashed an NG that had a control issue (anything out of the ordinary) that day as well. I would extend that to any aircraft that they flew with a control issue.

Stop misrepresenting what I said.

People still can't get the basic concept that the crash rate is going down because planes are getting more reliable - not because Pilot's are getting any better.

If Pilot's actually had the abilities they were supposed to have It's possible we might not have seen any fatal crashes for quite some time.


OK - same difference, as pilots still encounter control difficulties at the same rate that they have been, let's see if the accident rate shoots up due to inexperienced crews


No - you are missing the point - excepting for MCAS - Pilots have not been experiencing control issues at the same rate as control systems have become more reliable over time.

They just don't have to deal with it like they would have 30-40 years ago when there were not as many redundancies built in.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:40 pm

sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)


NO

I'll be amazed but not surprised if anyone says Yes for if they don't that would destroy the narrative that Boeing is the only one to fault in these disasters.

If asked that question of many of the Boeing is the only one to fault crew and none of them will answer that question - which I take as a NO.
 
majano
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 3:03 pm

bgm wrote:
sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)


What if you don't have a wife? :duck:

Good question......
 
asdf
Posts: 696
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 3:17 pm

sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?


yes i would

because if you are afraid of the performance on one single crew and make you a picture of the complete airline from it then you would have do avoid Air France, German Wings, Aeormexico, Turkish Airlines, Emirates and so on (i only looked at accident and incidents between 2015 and 2019)
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1170
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 3:34 pm

morrisond wrote:
shmerik wrote:
767333ER wrote:
But should they not be in a cockpit that day or should they not be in the cockpit of a 737 MAX 8 that day? If they were flying a 737NG that day would they have crashed?

I look at it this way, a standard of training and quality exists in the pilot group of said airline long before the MAX has existed. It has lead to accidents over the years with some fatalities. It is logical to assume many lapses in safety happened that we will never find out about, this happens at every airline no matter how good or poor their training is. We can see over many years a statistical rate of how likely and incident is to happen and this has existed long before the MAX did.

Taking this notion, how has it changed with the introduction of the MAX? It seems to have gotten worse. The training quality was not good after the MAX and was not good with the MAX making it fairly constant and not as relevant in the discussion as the MAX itself because there is no evidence to show it has changed. What did happen is a new type was introduced that increased risk and we can see with poor training practices how badly it has. Again those poor practices are pre-existing so in the context of this crash it primarily is the MAX at fault and if we are talking strictly about ungrounding then it is Boeing that has to fulfill demands to achieve ungrounding, not airlines and their training. That is not to say that we can learn from this case about how to train and how not to train, but that’s something that there are plenty of examples of and really is nothing new. A new type shouldn't bring out failures in human factors that the outgoing design didn’t, especially In the context where they are considered the same. This is the issue that chiefly matters.


Well put.

It's as simple as this - if training has degraded to the point where there are crews are regularly put into the cockpit in a state in which they would crash any model aircraft (as morrison elaborated he believes the Lion Air crew would have crashed any plane they flew that day) then we should expect to see the accident rate skyrocket in the near future. As far as I'm aware there hasn't been any such increase after the MAX has been grounded, but time will tell...


No that is not what I said - I said I expected they would have crashed an NG that had a control issue (anything out of the ordinary) that day as well. I would extend that to any aircraft that they flew with a control issue.

Stop misrepresenting what I said.

People still can't get the basic concept that the crash rate is going down because planes are getting more reliable - not because Pilot's are getting any better.

If Pilot's actually had the abilities they were supposed to have It's possible we might not have seen any fatal crashes for quite some time.

You say you expect which is fair, but I do not expect such because a control failure on a 737NG for example will not involve a system that has no information published about it in the manual or malfunctions in a way that was not understood at the time. We cannot prove much by saying what if we changed the crew or what if the crew was on a different type of control failure. What we can prove is that if the MAX is taken out in the context of is accident and replaced by a 737NG for example an accident of this nature most certainly would not have happened. It would just follow the same level of rust any Lion Air flight goes by and that would most likely have not resulted in an accident.

Crash rates are going down because aircraft are getting designed with less allowance for risk, not necessarily because they are more reliable because that points more towards maintenance or issues that don’t cause accidents. Right now the A220 is unreliable due to engine issues, yet it it’s statistically safer than the 737 MAX.

I am reaffirming your statement that pilots are not getting better, although in some ways they are. You are mostly right which furthers my point that the chiefly relevant topic here is the 737 MAX design and not the crew because the MAX is the variable that has changed from the past.
Been on: 732 733 734 73G 738 752 763 A319 A320 A321 CRJ CR7 CRA/CR9 E145 E175 E190 F28 MD-82 MD-83 C172R C172S P2006T PA-28-180

2 ears for spatial hearing, 2 eyes for depth perception, 2 ears for balance... How did Boeing think 1 sensor was good enough?!
 
SRQLOT
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 3:34 pm

I definitely would not step onboard, and have told friends when they travel that way, not to fly Lion Air and before that Adam, Guarda, and others in that area, but also other Asian airlines as their pilots don’t know how to fly airplanes by hand. Definitely avoid any Russian airlines, then I avoid Air France, Turkish, and Aeromexico. And I understand that some airplanes have maintenance issues here and there as long as I hear they are fixed I don’t count that against the airlines. So yes I have my own black list.
LO LH CL BA AZ WN UA DL AA B6 NK G4 F9
717 733/7/8/9/M8 744 752/3 763 788 319/20/21 332/3 M90 RJ85 CR9 Q400 E7/95 (PA28,152)
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8358
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 3:52 pm

morrisond wrote:
Yes I believe that crew on that day if they were faced with anything out of the ordinary that relied on memory procedures or taking manual control of an NG would have crashed it as well.


The same captain flew 5100 hrs safely and FO flew 4000 hrs safely on NG. I am sure they faced and resolved their share of issues over 9000 hrs of combined NG flying.

Third world airlines don't write their own manual and train their crew on FSX. Civil aviation is one area where countries/airlines blindly follow manufacturers' recommendations. They may pick the easy options within recommended options. And, they spend $Millions on crew training.

You will have a hard time pinning blame on FO because of "one sneeze" and one "which memory item" phrase.
All posts are just opinions.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 590
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:17 pm

Second hearing is underway. DM just confirmed that he is to be held accountable but still earns 30 Million $ per year and has not had a pay cut!

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
shmerik
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun May 05, 2019 2:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:20 pm

morrisond wrote:
sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)


NO

I'll be amazed but not surprised if anyone says Yes for if they don't that would destroy the narrative that Boeing is the only one to fault in these disasters.

If asked that question of many of the Boeing is the only one to fault crew and none of them will answer that question - which I take as a NO.



After some brief searching on incidents at Lion Air and at Delta/Spirit (airlines I fly on most frequently) I'd say I'm fine with a family member or myself riding on a non-MAX Lion Air flight.

Seriously? Willing to write off an entire airline because a single crew crashed a plane that had an undocumented feature forcing the nose into the ground?
 
SunsetLimited
Posts: 901
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 6:20 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:21 pm

I’m looking forward to flying on a MAX when they come back. But then again, I didn’t have an issue flying on them before on WN, AA, etc. I only know of one person who has told me they won’t fly on them for a while. Everyone else I know in and out of the industry has said they’ll have no hesitation in boarding one. As for Lion Air, no thanks, regardless of the type!
Spread hope like fire.
 
sgbroimp
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:47 pm

Maybe one good thing that comes out of this is that the manufacturers lean a bit harder on the users and repairers of their products to be up to snuff. Are they legally liable for the folks that fly and fix? No. Does it make good business sense (and cheaper in the long run) to do what to can to help them be up to snuff? I believe so.
 
benbeny
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:49 pm

shmerik wrote:
morrisond wrote:
sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)


NO

I'll be amazed but not surprised if anyone says Yes for if they don't that would destroy the narrative that Boeing is the only one to fault in these disasters.

If asked that question of many of the Boeing is the only one to fault crew and none of them will answer that question - which I take as a NO.



After some brief searching on incidents at Lion Air and at Delta/Spirit (airlines I fly on most frequently) I'd say I'm fine with a family member or myself riding on a non-MAX Lion Air flight.

Seriously? Willing to write off an entire airline because a single crew crashed a plane that had an undocumented feature forcing the nose into the ground?

Because blaming pilots and airlines are easy, while blaming manufacturers are not. We haven't had a major screw ups from design error for such a long time till we almost forgot that design error exists ;)
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1321
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:51 pm

mmo wrote:
Again, having worked in countries similar to Indonesia, training, recurrent training and LPC/OPC process is very different than it is in more developed countries. Yes, Boeing dropped the ball on MCAS and the lack of system description. Perhaps their assumption of the situation would drive pilots to the NNC runaway trim checklist. But, MCAS malfunctions have occurred in developed countries without similar results and those countries have a very different approach to training than other regions of the world. And that's a good thing.

Do you have a source to back up that claim? I’ve not read about any other MCAS incidents having occurred besides the two accidents and the one other Lion Air flight.

Unless you can offer up some proof, then your claim is baseless.

Speaking of developed countries, let’s not forget that it was an Air Camada crew who very nearly caused the all-time worst civil aviation accident. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759
 
AABusDrvr
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:07 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Yes I believe that crew on that day if they were faced with anything out of the ordinary that relied on memory procedures or taking manual control of an NG would have crashed it as well.


The same captain flew 5100 hrs safely and FO flew 4000 hrs safely on NG. I am sure they faced and resolved their share of issues over 9000 hrs of combined NG flying.

Third world airlines don't write their own manual and train their crew on FSX. Civil aviation is one area where countries/airlines blindly follow manufacturers' recommendations. They may pick the easy options within recommended options. And, they spend $Millions on crew training.

You will have a hard time pinning blame on FO because of "one sneeze" and one "which memory item" phrase.


Not sure what the fo had been doing for that 4000 hours, but I'd expect him to be able to locate a checklist thats listed in the quick action index, on the front cover of the QRH. His training record also speaks volumes.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:10 pm

oschkosch wrote:
Second hearing is underway. DM just confirmed that he is to be held accountable but still earns 30 Million $ per year and has not had a pay cut!

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


John Hamilton looks like a deer caught in the headlights when any question is directed at him. Especially when asked about Mark Forkner requesting that all reference to MCAS be left out of all training material!

Got a bit heated when mentioned DM had not taken any reduction in salary even after the Lion Air crash, in fact he had received a $15M bonus!
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:12 pm

aerolimani wrote:
mmo wrote:
Again, having worked in countries similar to Indonesia, training, recurrent training and LPC/OPC process is very different than it is in more developed countries. Yes, Boeing dropped the ball on MCAS and the lack of system description. Perhaps their assumption of the situation would drive pilots to the NNC runaway trim checklist. But, MCAS malfunctions have occurred in developed countries without similar results and those countries have a very different approach to training than other regions of the world. And that's a good thing.

Do you have a source to back up that claim? I’ve not read about any other MCAS incidents having occurred besides the two accidents and the one other Lion Air flight.

Unless you can offer up some proof, then your claim is baseless.

Speaking of developed countries, let’s not forget that it was an Air Camada crew who very nearly caused the all-time worst civil aviation accident. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759

No entity or source has come forward having found any MCAS/AoA Failed high MCAS events other than the two subject events. Additionally, we have a report post Lion Air:-

'FAA managers worked with U.S. airlines to scour MAX flight records over the more than two years. They didn’t find any event revealing an MCAS malfunction similar to the one in the Lion Air dive.'
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/in-depth ... li=BBr5KbJ

P.S. There is only one identified 'similar event' identified by the JT investigation in the report. That is the ET event.

Ray
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 5:29 pm

767333ER wrote:
morrisond wrote:
shmerik wrote:

Well put.

It's as simple as this - if training has degraded to the point where there are crews are regularly put into the cockpit in a state in which they would crash any model aircraft (as morrison elaborated he believes the Lion Air crew would have crashed any plane they flew that day) then we should expect to see the accident rate skyrocket in the near future. As far as I'm aware there hasn't been any such increase after the MAX has been grounded, but time will tell...


No that is not what I said - I said I expected they would have crashed an NG that had a control issue (anything out of the ordinary) that day as well. I would extend that to any aircraft that they flew with a control issue.

Stop misrepresenting what I said.

People still can't get the basic concept that the crash rate is going down because planes are getting more reliable - not because Pilot's are getting any better.

If Pilot's actually had the abilities they were supposed to have It's possible we might not have seen any fatal crashes for quite some time.

You say you expect which is fair, but I do not expect such because a control failure on a 737NG for example will not involve a system that has no information published about it in the manual or malfunctions in a way that was not understood at the time. We cannot prove much by saying what if we changed the crew or what if the crew was on a different type of control failure. What we can prove is that if the MAX is taken out in the context of is accident and replaced by a 737NG for example an accident of this nature most certainly would not have happened. It would just follow the same level of rust any Lion Air flight goes by and that would most likely have not resulted in an accident.

Crash rates are going down because aircraft are getting designed with less allowance for risk, not necessarily because they are more reliable because that points more towards maintenance or issues that don’t cause accidents. Right now the A220 is unreliable due to engine issues, yet it it’s statistically safer than the 737 MAX.

I am reaffirming your statement that pilots are not getting better, although in some ways they are. You are mostly right which furthers my point that the chiefly relevant topic here is the 737 MAX design and not the crew because the MAX is the variable that has changed from the past.


You can say if you take a particular plane out of the Equation on almost any accident the result would have been different.

I highly doubt that on that day that crew could have handled a normal runaway elevator possibly brought upon by a mechanical failure on an NG. At the end of the flight - how did it not present as Runaway Elevator to the co-pilot? The elevator was all the way down, the controls were incredibly heavy - why was he not trimming more? Do you really think that after 22 times that the possibility it was something about the elevator not doing what it should do and turning it off is not a reasonable expectation? Or should the design have fault tolerant enough to get to 23?

OK - designed with less allowance for risk instead of more reliable - I'm fine with that wording.
 
hivue
Posts: 2078
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:18 pm

morrisond wrote:
I highly doubt that on that day that crew could have handled a normal runaway elevator possibly brought upon by a mechanical failure on an NG. At the end of the flight - how did it not present as Runaway Elevator to the co-pilot? The elevator was all the way down, the controls were incredibly heavy - why was he not trimming more? Do you really think that after 22 times that the possibility it was something about the elevator not doing what it should do and turning it off is not a reasonable expectation? Or should the design have fault tolerant enough to get to 23?


It's the pitch trim that "runs away," not the elevator.

This kind of gets to the heart of the matter, I think. In an NG with a case of runaway pitch trim it's likely that both the JT and ET crews would have gotten the airplanes on the ground safely, although it may very well have looked pretty ugly compared to what better trained crews at other airlines would have done. But with MCAS, no way. There was very little chance they would be able to cope with that, and in fact they didn't.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:31 pm

bgm wrote:
sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)


What if you don't have a wife? :duck:


Then would you book his wife on the Max?

For me, once that plane is certified, I'll have no qualms about flying on it. Lion air? I dont think so.
Last edited by JAAlbert on Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:34 pm

hivue wrote:
morrisond wrote:
I highly doubt that on that day that crew could have handled a normal runaway elevator possibly brought upon by a mechanical failure on an NG. At the end of the flight - how did it not present as Runaway Elevator to the co-pilot? The elevator was all the way down, the controls were incredibly heavy - why was he not trimming more? Do you really think that after 22 times that the possibility it was something about the elevator not doing what it should do and turning it off is not a reasonable expectation? Or should the design have fault tolerant enough to get to 23?


It's the pitch trim that "runs away," not the elevator.

This kind of gets to the heart of the matter, I think. In an NG with a case of runaway pitch trim it's likely that both the JT and ET crews would have gotten the airplanes on the ground safely, although it may very well have looked pretty ugly compared to what better trained crews at other airlines would have done. But with MCAS, no way. There was very little chance they would be able to cope with that, and in fact they didn't.


Yes - sorry runaway pitch trim.

I'll ignore JT for now as neither of us could say for sure what would have happened - we just have our beliefs.

ET is a lot easier though to say they would not have saved an NG with runaway trim either.

After MCAS had activated a few times on ET and they turned off the trim switches they would have been at the same condition as runaway trim on an NG with the Electric trim off - yet they did not save it.

Failure to put the plane back in trim before hitting switches/Failure to control airspeed/ possibly not being familiar with the backup trim system (same as on the NG), manual trim system possibly not working due to excessive speed would have caused them to crash an NG as well - for if they had turned the switches back on an NG the runaway pitch trim would have resumed resulting in putting them in the ground faster as it would have been one continuous pitch change motion.

They would not have saved an NG either.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:34 pm

bgm wrote:
sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)


What if you don't have a wife? :duck:


Then would you book his wife on the Max?

For me, once the Max is certified, I'll have no qualms about flying on it. Flying Lion air? I don't think so.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9645
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:39 pm

morrisond wrote:
hivue wrote:
morrisond wrote:
I highly doubt that on that day that crew could have handled a normal runaway elevator possibly brought upon by a mechanical failure on an NG. At the end of the flight - how did it not present as Runaway Elevator to the co-pilot? The elevator was all the way down, the controls were incredibly heavy - why was he not trimming more? Do you really think that after 22 times that the possibility it was something about the elevator not doing what it should do and turning it off is not a reasonable expectation? Or should the design have fault tolerant enough to get to 23?


It's the pitch trim that "runs away," not the elevator.

This kind of gets to the heart of the matter, I think. In an NG with a case of runaway pitch trim it's likely that both the JT and ET crews would have gotten the airplanes on the ground safely, although it may very well have looked pretty ugly compared to what better trained crews at other airlines would have done. But with MCAS, no way. There was very little chance they would be able to cope with that, and in fact they didn't.


Yes - sorry runaway pitch trim.

I'll ignore JT for now as neither of us could say for sure what would have happened - we just have our beliefs.

ET is a lot easier though to say they would not have saved an NG with runaway trim either.

After MCAS had activated a few times on ET and they turned off the trim switches they would have been at the same condition as runaway trim on an NG with the Electric trim off - yet they did not save it.

Failure to put the plane back in trim before hitting switches/Failure to control airspeed/ possibly not being familiar with the backup trim system (same as on the NG), manual trim system possibly not working due to excessive speed would have caused them to crash an NG as well - for if they had turned the switches back on an NG the runaway pitch trim would have resumed resulting in putting them in the ground faster as it would have been one continuous pitch change motion.

They would not have saved an NG either.


I would say, both crews would have crashed an NG with any technical problem as well. The CRM, the individual skill and the general piloting skills are insufficient to pilot an airliner.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:39 pm

morrisond wrote:
767333ER wrote:
morrisond wrote:

No that is not what I said - I said I expected they would have crashed an NG that had a control issue (anything out of the ordinary) that day as well. I would extend that to any aircraft that they flew with a control issue.

Stop misrepresenting what I said.

People still can't get the basic concept that the crash rate is going down because planes are getting more reliable - not because Pilot's are getting any better.

If Pilot's actually had the abilities they were supposed to have It's possible we might not have seen any fatal crashes for quite some time.

You say you expect which is fair, but I do not expect such because a control failure on a 737NG for example will not involve a system that has no information published about it in the manual or malfunctions in a way that was not understood at the time. We cannot prove much by saying what if we changed the crew or what if the crew was on a different type of control failure. What we can prove is that if the MAX is taken out in the context of is accident and replaced by a 737NG for example an accident of this nature most certainly would not have happened. It would just follow the same level of rust any Lion Air flight goes by and that would most likely have not resulted in an accident.

Crash rates are going down because aircraft are getting designed with less allowance for risk, not necessarily because they are more reliable because that points more towards maintenance or issues that don’t cause accidents. Right now the A220 is unreliable due to engine issues, yet it it’s statistically safer than the 737 MAX.

I am reaffirming your statement that pilots are not getting better, although in some ways they are. You are mostly right which furthers my point that the chiefly relevant topic here is the 737 MAX design and not the crew because the MAX is the variable that has changed from the past.


You can say if you take a particular plane out of the Equation on almost any accident the result would have been different.

I highly doubt that on that day that crew could have handled a normal runaway elevator possibly brought upon by a mechanical failure on an NG. At the end of the flight - how did it not present as Runaway Elevator to the co-pilot? The elevator was all the way down, the controls were incredibly heavy - why was he not trimming more? Do you really think that after 22 times that the possibility it was something about the elevator not doing what it should do and turning it off is not a reasonable expectation? Or should the design have fault tolerant enough to get to 23?

OK - designed with less allowance for risk instead of more reliable - I'm fine with that wording.

A fault tolerant design only gets to one (at most) and tells the crew there is a fault.

Ray
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 6:41 pm

morrisond wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Simply false: ET409 did not have "Automation breaks".


I corrected what I wrote that one time saying ET409 was a failure of Automation - I must have been suffering from Brain fade at that particular time. I described it properly many other times. The ET409 Captain flew a perfectly good airplane with all systems working into the ground in manual flight which is even worse as there was no systems failures to blame the crash on. He went through training at about the same time as the ET302 Captain.[/quote]
Your are just doing pure provocation on a thread where you perfectly known by the time that many contributors did not share your view. To make that you simply apply the definition you like to defend your point of view.

There is a lot of officials documents now that perfectly describes how the MCAS was not designed with enough safety and how that design did work exactly as badly designed. There was no break of automation, the automation was bad without any breakage of it.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:09 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
morrisond wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Simply false: ET409 did not have "Automation breaks".


I corrected what I wrote that one time saying ET409 was a failure of Automation - I must have been suffering from Brain fade at that particular time. I described it properly many other times. The ET409 Captain flew a perfectly good airplane with all systems working into the ground in manual flight which is even worse as there was no systems failures to blame the crash on. He went through training at about the same time as the ET302 Captain.

Your are just doing pure provocation on a thread where you perfectly known by the time that many contributors did not share your view. To make that you simply apply the definition you like to defend your point of view.

There is a lot of officials documents now that perfectly describes how the MCAS was not designed with enough safety and how that design did work exactly as badly designed. There was no break of automation, the automation was bad without any breakage of it.


Get real - you knew what I meant and by the way we were talking about ET409 which was an NG and it did not have MCAS. There was no break in automation on ET409 - I miss typed it that one time and if you look at where I wrote that initially you will see right after where I corrected it.

I have said many times the design of MCAS was inadequate and really stupid to only rely on one sensor.

You give me grief for trying to point out there were many factors to blame for both crashes yet every time your back to it's only Boeing at fault when you know there are many of us here that don't agree.

You are just getting mad as the official reports are proving me right that there are multiple factors.

Enjoy your next flight on ET or JT.
Last edited by morrisond on Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
art
Posts: 3459
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:10 pm

MartijnNL wrote:
morrisond wrote:
I totally second the 1,500 Hour requirement - with at least a few hundred in an actual aircraft and recurring training as well.

Having 200 hours and being put into a 737 is insane.

Not this again.

Installing MCAS on the 737 without telling anyone, that's insane.


Agreed. Were it any other OEM's product it would be equally condemnable.

What I find extremely tiresome is to read partisan nonsense critiicising/defending an OEM with no regard to being objective. It seems to me that there are many here incapable of objective analysis. For example, if an aircraft sadly crashes, there are many here whose first reaction is not to look at the facts and to attribute fault accordingly. Their first reaction is to identity the OEM and to respond positively or negatively accordingly. Such responses are more or less worthless.

Judgement determined by prejudice has little or no value.
 
User avatar
bgm
Posts: 2451
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:19 pm

art wrote:
MartijnNL wrote:
morrisond wrote:
I totally second the 1,500 Hour requirement - with at least a few hundred in an actual aircraft and recurring training as well.

Having 200 hours and being put into a 737 is insane.

Not this again.

Installing MCAS on the 737 without telling anyone, that's insane.


Agreed. Were it any other OEM's product it would be equally condemnable.

What I find extremely tiresome is to read partisan nonsense critiicising/defending an OEM with no regard to being objective. It seems to me that there are many here incapable of objective analysis. For example, if an aircraft sadly crashes, there are many here whose first reaction is not to look at the facts and to attribute fault accordingly. Their first reaction is to identity the OEM and to respond positively or negatively accordingly. Such responses are more or less worthless.

Judgement determined by prejudice has little or no value.


Welcome to the American mindset.
Really? Four more years of this?
 
AirBoat
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 11:58 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:20 pm

The Lion air pilot with the flu was pulling 105lbs on the yoke at times. That is pretty impressive for a sick guy.
The answer is maybe more simple. The pilots simply got tired of pulling back on the yokes.
When you have to pull that hard on the yoke, I do not think you are in a position to think of much else.
I would suggest that a learning experience would be for anyone to go the the gym, pick up a barbell keeping your arms bent and see how long you can hold it. 60 seconds??

From what I could gather, stick shaker, increases yoke force by a factor of 4, mcas increases yoke force by unknown amount and being out of trim increases yoke force.

I guess only national side rugby forwards need apply to be 737 pilots. the 50kg ladies should stick to airbus.
Looking at the possible yoke forces, how many current 737 pilots are strong enough?
 
User avatar
intrance
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 6:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:31 pm

Oh man, the discussion here is hilarious about whether or not to fly on the MAX again if it is deemed safe, or whether or not you would fly on Lion Air.

Humans have preferences. They may be based on pure emotion, perceived facts, gut feelings, hearsay, or whatever. That's all fine. Just don't go stating your preferences as a precursor to a fact ("I'm would never fly Lion Air, they are not safe"). There are idiots of every level, in every single airline in every single country of the world. You may not be aware of it, because you have no access to their training records before taking the flight, or experienced their personalities before the flight. Yet I can assure you that even in the big three US airlines there are plenty of idiots flying around, and it is easier for corporations to let them keep flying than to make another investment in a new pilot. HR departments and training will definitely not filter out all the idiots. Some even showed up in the NASA database, taking planes into the air which they did not know the systems of after their 1-hour iPad training and who were basically spending their flight thinking those famous words "what is it doing now". But aside from those, there will be plenty who have failed their command checks multiple times, who have had trouble during training, who have made mistakes in flight that have never been reported...

So... keep feeling safe in your bubble of "would never happen here because training". All that shows is that you do not know aviation history and have not learned from it. Idiots have been around everywhere and will be around everywhere, and a bad day can happen anywhere to any single pilot roaming the skies.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:40 pm

AirBoat wrote:
The Lion air pilot with the flu was pulling 105lbs on the yoke at times. That is pretty impressive for a sick guy.
The answer is maybe more simple. The pilots simply got tired of pulling back on the yokes.
When you have to pull that hard on the yoke, I do not think you are in a position to think of much else.
I would suggest that a learning experience would be for anyone to go the the gym, pick up a barbell keeping your arms bent and see how long you can hold it. 60 seconds??

From what I could gather, stick shaker, increases yoke force by a factor of 4, mcas increases yoke force by unknown amount and being out of trim increases yoke force.

I guess only national side rugby forwards need apply to be 737 pilots. the 50kg ladies should stick to airbus.
Looking at the possible yoke forces, how many current 737 pilots are strong enough?


No - it was the First Officer who didn't know how to offset the Yoke forces with electric trim who was pulling with 105 lbs of force - he did not have a stick shaker going off on his side.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:44 pm

intrance wrote:
Oh man, the discussion here is hilarious about whether or not to fly on the MAX again if it is deemed safe, or whether or not you would fly on Lion Air.

Humans have preferences. They may be based on pure emotion, perceived facts, gut feelings, hearsay, or whatever. That's all fine. Just don't go stating your preferences as a precursor to a fact ("I'm would never fly Lion Air, they are not safe"). There are idiots of every level, in every single airline in every single country of the world. You may not be aware of it, because you have no access to their training records before taking the flight, or experienced their personalities before the flight. Yet I can assure you that even in the big three US airlines there are plenty of idiots flying around, and it is easier for corporations to let them keep flying than to make another investment in a new pilot. HR departments and training will definitely not filter out all the idiots. Some even showed up in the NASA database, taking planes into the air which they did not know the systems of after their 1-hour iPad training and who were basically spending their flight thinking those famous words "what is it doing now". But aside from those, there will be plenty who have failed their command checks multiple times, who have had trouble during training, who have made mistakes in flight that have never been reported...

So... keep feeling safe in your bubble of "would never happen here because training". All that shows is that you do not know aviation history and have not learned from it. Idiots have been around everywhere and will be around everywhere, and a bad day can happen anywhere to any single pilot roaming the skies.


I don't doubt it all - that's why "Global training standards need to improve Worldwide" this is not only a third world training problem. It needs to be fixed with regulation - just like Boeing and the FAA need to be fixed.

Just hopefully on average on the big western airlines the average competency is better and chance doesn't give you a bad crew and the holes in the swiss cheese don't line up when something goes wrong.
 
jspurg15
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:04 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 7:57 pm

You guys probably already know, but the MAX designer has been fired... tbh I do not think the MAX will fly anytime soon. Thoughts?
 
mmo
Posts: 2059
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:04 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:02 pm

aerolimani wrote:

Do you have a source to back up that claim? I’ve not read about any other MCAS incidents having occurred besides the two accidents and the one other Lion Air flight.

Unless you can offer up some proof, then your claim is baseless.

Speaking of developed countries, let’s not forget that it was an Air Camada crew who very nearly caused the all-time worst civil aviation accident. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759


If you want sources, take a look at the ASRS reporting system. I'm not going to do all the work just to have people disagree with me. But since the introduction of the MAX 8 is a good place to start. Interestingly enough, after the MCAS became know there were 4 incidents reported, all handled as runaway trim.

What does the Air Canada incident have to do with MCAS?

If you are naive enough to believe the training standards across the world are the same, I have a bridge in NY City I'd like to sell to you.

XRAYretired wrote:
]
No entity or source has come forward having found any MCAS/AoA Failed high MCAS events other than the two subject events. Additionally, we have a report post Lion Air:-

'FAA managers worked with U.S. airlines to scour MAX flight records over the more than two years. They didn’t find any event revealing an MCAS malfunction similar to the one in the Lion Air dive.'
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/in-depth ... li=BBr5KbJ

P.S. There is only one identified 'similar event' identified by the JT investigation in the report. That is the ET event.

Ray


I would offer you the same response, check the ASRS and you will find what you are looking for.
If we weren't all crazy we'd all go insane!
 
rheinwaldner
Posts: 1863
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:08 pm

morrisond wrote:
Yes I believe that crew on that day if they were faced with anything out of the ordinary that relied on memory procedures or taking manual control of an NG would have crashed it as well

You must be joking. They faced three types of fault indications which were all false positives (ALT DISAGREE, IAS DISAGREE and stick shaker). But for the one fault, which silently worked to kill them, they got no warning. So the things they were lead to focus on were false trails and then only thing that really went havoc was working under the hood and it was undocumented and unteached.

Any pilot, who claims to handle incidents of this nature safely in my opinion is showing an unhealthy dose of over-confidence. Handling one warning is a no brainer. Handling multiple warnings might be more difficult. Handling multiple warnings which you sense they could be false alarms can quickly overwhelm any pilot. The workload to detect just whether the warnings are correct or false can be considerable.

Think also, what your statement would mean for the reliability of the NG vs the MAX, if you considered that the same kind of pilots has no issues to fly the NG safely. Crash rates of the NG as well as the crash rate of Lion Air are in the same ballpark as the global average.

morrisond wrote:
Training is relevant to the grounding as does anything need to change in training before RTS is a valid topic of discussion.

Only if you demand special training for the MAX. Accident statistics for the other planes are generally considered sufficient.

morrisond wrote:
Ironically as the Lion Air crew was so bad that may suggest Boeing is right and type specific training in the sim for the MAX with MCAS 2.0 is not needed.

This crew was not so bad as you like them to see because the MAX created an extremely challenging and fault provoking environment to them (see the explanation about the false positives above).

morrisond wrote:
As an airline you just have to make sure your crews could actually pass a real flight test including proper CRM procedures and not have the FLU before getting in the cockpit.

The flu is not mentioned as finding in this accident. You would come across more balanced and safety oriented, if you would more focus on the big findings of the report and not push the small or non-existing ones.
Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
 
kalvado
Posts: 2856
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:09 pm

mmo wrote:
aerolimani wrote:

Do you have a source to back up that claim? I’ve not read about any other MCAS incidents having occurred besides the two accidents and the one other Lion Air flight.

Unless you can offer up some proof, then your claim is baseless.

Speaking of developed countries, let’s not forget that it was an Air Camada crew who very nearly caused the all-time worst civil aviation accident. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759


If you want sources, take a look at the ASRS reporting system. I'm not going to do all the work just to have people disagree with me. But since the introduction of the MAX 8 is a good place to start. Interestingly enough, after the MCAS became know there were 4 incidents reported, all handled as runaway trim.

What does the Air Canada incident have to do with MCAS?

If you are naive enough to believe the training standards across the world are the same, I have a bridge in NY City I'd like to sell to you.

XRAYretired wrote:
]
No entity or source has come forward having found any MCAS/AoA Failed high MCAS events other than the two subject events. Additionally, we have a report post Lion Air:-

'FAA managers worked with U.S. airlines to scour MAX flight records over the more than two years. They didn’t find any event revealing an MCAS malfunction similar to the one in the Lion Air dive.'
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/in-depth ... li=BBr5KbJ

P.S. There is only one identified 'similar event' identified by the JT investigation in the report. That is the ET event.

Ray


I would offer you the same response, check the ASRS and you will find what you are looking for.

As far as I remember, none of those was a MCAS runaway event. But who said MAX has only one problem? We'll find out after the next crash, I'm afraid.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:13 pm

Forbes has, what appears to be' a good summary of the 'new' evidence presented in congress today.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremyboga ... d6ca004153


Too much gun smoke to see the guns?

Ray
 
Saintor
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:22 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
Forbes has, what appears to be' a good summary of the 'new' evidence presented in congress today.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremyboga ... d6ca004153

Ray


Thanks for posting that.

Interesting extract.

Under questioning, John Hamilton, chief engineer for Boeing’s commercial airplane division, who testified alongside Muilenburg, said that single points of failure are allowed in airplane design depending on the hazard assessment. Any dissent the committee could present on the final assessment that a single sensor was merited “highlights that our engineers do raise questions and it’s an open culture.”

In the event of an incorrect activation of MCAS, Boeing and FAA expected that pilots would be able to respond within four seconds to trim the stabilizer.
...
However, DeFazio noted that in the Ethiopian crash pilots are believed to have taken eight seconds to respond, and several outside reviews have suggested that Boeing’s assumptions of a uniform four-second response was unrealistic.
...
Hamilton acknowledged that engineers considered the impact of slow response times, but that simulator testing with a number of pilots supported its judgement that four seconds was a realistic expectation.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24373
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:35 pm

sgbroimp wrote:
Listen folks, lets take a poll right now: Keeping the Max out of the picture, would you book your wife as a passenger on an NG or any other line aircraft with a Lion Air crew?
(I would not as there are serious doubts that the average LA crew could handle much of any curve ball the aircraft or the weatherman throws at them.)

Answering the question about a wife is pretty easy.

Answering the question about an ex-wife is pretty complicated....
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
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:42 pm

kalvado wrote:
mmo wrote:
aerolimani wrote:

Do you have a source to back up that claim? I’ve not read about any other MCAS incidents having occurred besides the two accidents and the one other Lion Air flight.

Unless you can offer up some proof, then your claim is baseless.

Speaking of developed countries, let’s not forget that it was an Air Camada crew who very nearly caused the all-time worst civil aviation accident. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Canada_Flight_759


If you want sources, take a look at the ASRS reporting system. I'm not going to do all the work just to have people disagree with me. But since the introduction of the MAX 8 is a good place to start. Interestingly enough, after the MCAS became know there were 4 incidents reported, all handled as runaway trim.

What does the Air Canada incident have to do with MCAS?

If you are naive enough to believe the training standards across the world are the same, I have a bridge in NY City I'd like to sell to you.

XRAYretired wrote:
]
No entity or source has come forward having found any MCAS/AoA Failed high MCAS events other than the two subject events. Additionally, we have a report post Lion Air:-

'FAA managers worked with U.S. airlines to scour MAX flight records over the more than two years. They didn’t find any event revealing an MCAS malfunction similar to the one in the Lion Air dive.'
https://www.msn.com/en-ie/news/in-depth ... li=BBr5KbJ

P.S. There is only one identified 'similar event' identified by the JT investigation in the report. That is the ET event.

Ray


I would offer you the same response, check the ASRS and you will find what you are looking for.

As far as I remember, none of those was a MCAS runaway event. But who said MAX has only one problem? We'll find out after the next crash, I'm afraid.

This is the detailed analysis presented some time ago by Peter Lemme and friends.
https://www.satcom.guru/2019/05/737-pit ... dents.html
As far as the NASA dbase is concerned-

'NASA Accident Data Base
The 737 pitch trim system has been extremely reliable when looking at the US NASA accident database. I searched for accidents and incidents with stabilizer, trim, runaway and came up with numerous collisions on the ground (with A319, A321, 767, 777, A320, MD81, L1011, several 737 Vs 737, and even one with a Cessna 401). There were a couple of elevator malfunctions. A number of structural damage due to foreign objects or otherwise. But only two that involved trim itself, and neither a runaway.'


Ray
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24373
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:50 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
Too much gun smoke to see the guns?

Sparks but not flames, IMO.

As below, the Congressmen did not destroy plausible deniability, IMO.

They could have and should have asked more pointed questions, IMO.

Saintor wrote:
Thanks for posting that.

Interesting extract.
Hamilton acknowledged that engineers considered the impact of slow response times, but that simulator testing with a number of pilots supported its judgement that four seconds was a realistic expectation.

Given the report has nothing more, it seems the Congressmen didn't ask the questions that seem obvious to those of us in this thread, like how experienced were those pilots, and what scenario(s) were the pilots testing, i.e. single MCAS activation versus bad AoA causing multiple MCAS activations along with stick shaker, etc.

They should have at least made Hamilton or DM mouth the standard defense (we followed long-held regulatory standards / norms, etc) then ask if you followed the norms why did the plane crash.
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
 
Chemist
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:58 pm

zkojq wrote:
Chemist wrote:
1 - Exemption from some newer regulations is what grandfathering is all about. So lots of aircraft are exempt from all sorts of newer regulations. Are you suggesting that we cease producing any aircraft that have not been brought up to all current regulations?

Where on earth did I suggest that? I simply pointed out the fact that aircraft with more recent safety systems are safer than planes that don't have those safety systems.
.


That wasn't true for the 737 NG.
 
Chemist
Posts: 750
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 4:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:10 pm

AirBoat wrote:
The Lion air pilot with the flu was pulling 105lbs on the yoke at times. That is pretty impressive for a sick guy.
The answer is maybe more simple. The pilots simply got tired of pulling back on the yokes.


What's surprising is that trim's purpose is to relieve stick pressure. You would think you would hit electric trim until the pressure was relieved.
I learned about trim in my first 5 hrs in a Cessna 152.
 
shmerik
Posts: 68
Joined: Sun May 05, 2019 2:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:20 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
Forbes has, what appears to be' a good summary of the 'new' evidence presented in congress today.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremyboga ... d6ca004153


Too much gun smoke to see the guns?

Ray


Among the documents: A Boeing engineer expressed concern in a 2015 email that a flight control system that Boeing was developing for the new version of its bestselling plane could be unsafe due to its reliance on a single sensor.

The email from a member of Boeing’s aero-stability and control group questioned whether the MAX was “vulnerable to single AoA sensor failures with the MCAS implementation, or is there some checking that occurs?”


So for the Forkner messages we got the excuse that it was an unfinished version of the simulator that they were referring to... will be interesting to see if there's an excuse for this one.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2738
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Wed Oct 30, 2019 11:33 pm

shmerik wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
Forbes has, what appears to be' a good summary of the 'new' evidence presented in congress today.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremyboga ... d6ca004153


Too much gun smoke to see the guns?

Ray


Among the documents: A Boeing engineer expressed concern in a 2015 email that a flight control system that Boeing was developing for the new version of its bestselling plane could be unsafe due to its reliance on a single sensor.

The email from a member of Boeing’s aero-stability and control group questioned whether the MAX was “vulnerable to single AoA sensor failures with the MCAS implementation, or is there some checking that occurs?”


So for the Forkner messages we got the excuse that it was an unfinished version of the simulator that they were referring to... will be interesting to see if there's an excuse for this one.


Well at least one person in Boeing recognized the potential issue.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13961
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 31, 2019 12:33 am

It seems there is/was a culture of resisting and ignoring alarm signals, warnings from their own people. Did FAA designated certification people inside Boeing get these warnings/ doubts about the aircrafts safety? If not, why not? If they did, were those relevant concerns sidelined? Was there sufficient FAA oversight and what were priorities as communicated to those DOA people?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
DenverTed
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:25 am

Where's justice? Back to the Code of Hammurabi builders bore some personal responsibility for their product. Felicity Huffman goes to jail two weeks for cheating on an SAT. They want to send Lori Loughlin to jail for a good bit longer to make an example of her for lying about her children on the college crew team. Contrast that with 346 people dead. What price will McNerney, Muilenburg, Connor, or other execs who were at the helm of Boeing during the design of MAX pay? Get paid the big money, take the responsibility. Money was the justice for O.J. Simpson. Is 346 million from the personal pockets of Boeing executives asking too much? Watching these hearings, part of me says, no justice, no ungrounding. The other part of me says that the employees and the economy shouldn't be held hostage. But what other leverage is there? Like the financial collapse, once it's over everyone sails away Sot-free.
Last edited by DenverTed on Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9386
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:33 am

I fail to understand the 4 seconds reaction time for recognizing MCAS, recognizing it as a trim runaway and shutting of electrical trim completely, Boeing is talking about. One activation of MCAS runs 10 seconds. Does Boeing expected, that not even one activation of MCAS would ever run its course? What is the sense than in designing MCAS to run 10 seconds with one activation?
Why did Boeing removed the column cut out in regards to MCAS, that stops any automatic trim (in any frame but the 737MAX) and (I do not know if in all other frames) brakes the trim movement? To make it more difficult to stop of MCAS?

Somehow I can not find the logic in the design of MCAS and what Boeing imagined the pilots would do if MCAS ever activated.

I even have the feeling that the only purpose of the 3 or 4 seconds rule was to reduce the severity of the MAX event to get away with a single sensor, but that in reality every body believed, that pilots would not shut MCAS down before it run through at least one activation.
 
Saintor
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:35 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:37 am

keesje wrote:
It seems there is/was a culture of resisting and ignoring alarm signals, warnings from their own people.


I don't think so. It is about assessing the risks. If 90% of people say it is safe, I would say go ahead. If it is 65%, I would think again.

Whether it was 10% or 35%, Boeing lost but I wouldn't call it a culture of resisting. Airbus just does it the very same way. They were just luckier, despite they had quite similar episodes with automation, with nearly crashes. Fortunately for them (and all), they could count on more competent crews.
 
BravoOne
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 31, 2019 2:51 am

DenverTed wrote:
Where's justice? Back to the Code of Hammurabi builders bore some personal responsibility for their product. Felicity Huffman goes to jail two weeks for cheating on an SAT. They want to send Lori Loughlin to jail for a good bit longer to make an example of her for lying about her children on the college crew team. Contrast that with 346 people dead. What price will McNerney, Muilenburg, Connor, or other execs who were at the helm of Boeing during the design of MAX pay? Get paid the big money, take the responsibility. Money was the justice for O.J. Simpson. Is 346 million from the personal pockets of Boeing executives asking too much? Watching these hearings, part of me says, no justice, no ungrounding. The other part of me says that the employees and the economy shouldn't be held hostage. But what other leverage is there? Like the financial collapse, once it's over everyone sails away Sot-free.


Ted, get a grip, and you will realize theses individuals are not, and cannot be held individualy responsible fore these events. OJ has nothing to do with this subject.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9386
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:04 am

BravoOne wrote:
DenverTed wrote:
Where's justice? Back to the Code of Hammurabi builders bore some personal responsibility for their product. Felicity Huffman goes to jail two weeks for cheating on an SAT. They want to send Lori Loughlin to jail for a good bit longer to make an example of her for lying about her children on the college crew team. Contrast that with 346 people dead. What price will McNerney, Muilenburg, Connor, or other execs who were at the helm of Boeing during the design of MAX pay? Get paid the big money, take the responsibility. Money was the justice for O.J. Simpson. Is 346 million from the personal pockets of Boeing executives asking too much? Watching these hearings, part of me says, no justice, no ungrounding. The other part of me says that the employees and the economy shouldn't be held hostage. But what other leverage is there? Like the financial collapse, once it's over everyone sails away Sot-free.


Ted, get a grip, and you will realize theses individuals are not, and cannot be held individualy responsible fore these events. OJ has nothing to do with this subject.


Perhaps not spending the rest of their lives in a jail cell, but being the only employees of Boeing keeping their bonuses this year? One can talk about what consequences happen to persons responsible, but none?

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