Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:03 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
Boeing already ask workers and suppliers to keep everything secret. What would you expect ? That Boeing will attack anyone that try to analyse there total failure to communicate reliable and verifiable information since a full year on all there ongoing aircraft developments ?

Boeing asked "to protect the company’s reputation" not "to keep everything secret", but IMO both would be legitimate requests from an employer to an employee.

Most employees sign NDAs when hired and these often include clauses to protect the company's reputation.

frmrCapCadet wrote:
speedbored wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Human's just aren't good enough or fast enough to handle complex systems especially when they do unexpected things

Humans are far far better at dealing with systems "when they do unexpected things" than any autonomous system can be.

Until we have true artificial intelligence, systems can only be programmed to handle expected things.

Though I do not doubt that we should be able to design systems that will be able to cope with "expected things" better than most pilots could.


There are any number of military planes which 100% rely on computers to do the flying as I understand. The pilot tell the computers what it wants the plane to do. FBW in civil aviation already means that the computers can do 100% of the flying in some cases.

Not really.

FBW exists to deal with aerodyamic control and have advanced to the point to deal with aircraft such as F117 that cannot be flown without computers making all the minute adjustments to keep the "Hopeless Diamond" flying in the right orientation.

Commercial airliners have "flight management systems" that handle all the routine aspects of navigation and feed the autopilot to do the actual flying but it was a human who did the command function and it's a human that acts as backup when things go wrong.

It's the same idea as military drone: it can fly with zero pilots on board but it's a human that does the command function and takes over if things go wrong.

https://www.flightglobal.com/systems-an ... 05.article tells us:

Lohwasser says that the eventual target is for a fully-autonomous aircraft that does not require pilots. “Even in the single-pilot operating case, you have to create dual safety. Our ambition is that single-pilot operation must be safer than current aircraft.”

Airbus is investigating single-pilot operation of freighter aircraft as “a stepping stone” to this arrangement on passenger aircraft, says Lohwasser. “It will not be a one-step approach [to single-pilot passenger operations].”

So the first step we should see is single pilot operation of freighters, and that will only happen after they can show this mode of operation is safer than current dual pilot operation.

PixelFlight wrote:
The problem is that the duration of the "temporarily suspend production" is entirely in the hand of Boeing to comply with regulation and that Boeing not only failed since a full year to reach that goal, but give no insight about what are the problems exactly and how there could be resolved in a way that regulators publicly agree with. The alarming part is not a "temporarily suspend production", but the lack of the part that communicate a plausible roadmap to terminate the "temporarily suspend production". The worst part in a communication is the missing one.

Boeing has been asked (commanded?) by the FAA Administrator to stop releasing time line estimates. Its hands are tied.
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
 
NonTechAvLover
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2019 5:09 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:08 pm

par13del wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
The reason for the slip in RTS should be clear, Boeing's relationship with FAA has become contentious with the FAA Administrator opening up the scope of the work by deciding to do
Your analysis stand from the Boeing only point of view. The saving you see from your Boeing only point of view is a loss for many many others. The effect outside Boeing is real and alarming. So alarming in fact, that it will probably be an important political subject, in addition to the fact that this grounding is already the subject of multiples hearings.

So what would you suggest Boeing do? As a public traded company they have to provide guidance to their investors on the state of affairs, the FAA wants them to cease and desist their PR on RTS, so what do you suggest?


The FAA cannot tell Boeing to violate its disclosure obligations under U.S. Securities laws. It can ask Boeing to refrain from making statements aimed at putting the FAA under pressure or misleading in terms of the timing of RTS. Every situation can be disclosed in a fair manner, but you cannot always be honest and use disclosure as a PR tool simultaneously.

While B believes it will be able to satisfy the requirements of regulatory agencies in the U.S. and outside [indicate objective or soft timeframe] for returning the MAX to service, there can be no guaranties that such return to service will happen in this or any other timeframe.

If necessary, you add a sentence about the rigorous requirements of the FAA.

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

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:20 pm

par13del wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Your analysis stand from the Boeing only point of view. The saving you see from your Boeing only point of view is a loss for many many others. The effect outside Boeing is real and alarming. So alarming in fact, that it will probably be an important political subject, in addition to the fact that this grounding is already the subject of multiples hearings.

So what would you suggest Boeing do? As a public traded company they have to provide guidance to their investors on the state of affairs, the FAA wants them to cease and desist their PR on RTS, so what do you suggest?

A public traded company not only can communicate about the risks, but is required to do so to there investors. The problem is that Boeing have recently presented the risk as the FAA, witch is wrong, so the FAA have rightfully reacted by asking then to stop doing so. Boeing have to communicate about the real internal problems instead of presenting itself as a victim of the FAA.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9645
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:26 pm

The shut down is just the solution that costs the least money right now. It is not a sign of technical problems with the MAX that Boeing would be unable to fix. Most likely the RTS will happen soon.
 
Interested
Posts: 887
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 12:19 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:26 pm

If Boeing were serious about makIng Max one of the safest planes every to fly it would ensure it jumps through every hoop the FAA asks it to jump through and every hoop EASA asks it to jump through

The fact it's all still cat and mouse apparently suggests nothing has changed

Boeing need new management and leadership

Who can come in and create a new, honest and transparent relationship with the regulators

Regulators aren't the enemy. Not when lives have already been lost and more lives are at stake in the future.

Boeing needs regulating more than ever right now.

The Boeing shareholders should be enormously relieved that some people who care about safety external to Boeing are actually getting involved trying to improve things

That will do Boeing far more long term good than letting the Boeing management team force any more of their own solutions through
Last edited by Interested on Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
Noshow
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:26 pm

I agree I miss more information on all the subject, issues and progress.
It might very well be a legally motivated strategy: Blame the slow bureaucracy instead of spilling too many details that can backfire as people might ask for compensation and such.
 
Interested
Posts: 887
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 12:19 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:29 pm

seahawk wrote:
The shut down is just the solution that costs the least money right now. It is not a sign of technical problems with the MAX that Boeing would be unable to fix. Most likely the RTS will happen soon.


All of the above pure speculation on your part. You have no idea and are just hoping it's that. I do hope writing its makes you feel better?

It's possible the truth is the exact opposite.

I have no idea either.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9645
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:32 pm

Interested wrote:
seahawk wrote:
The shut down is just the solution that costs the least money right now. It is not a sign of technical problems with the MAX that Boeing would be unable to fix. Most likely the RTS will happen soon.


All of the above pure speculation on your part. You have no idea and are just hoping it's that. I do hope writing its makes you feel better?

It's possible the truth is the exact opposite.

I have no idea either.


Right, any prediction on the future is speculation, however considering the huge amount of engineering talent at Boeing it is much more likely that they have a solution than that they do not.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1170
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:37 pm

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I am speculating if Boeing is ready with solutions for the 737, if the regulators should pull some of the exemptions. I would have done that in there case, the famous plan B.

EICAS is integrated on the P-8, so most of the work, but certification is done. That would also include more advanced flight computers.
Has Boeing worked on the trim wheel, being able to present a solution, if one regulator insist on change?
Has Boeing worked on a solution(s) for the protection of the control wire ropes for the control surfaces?


Or is Boeing trying to brazen it out?


More automation is not necessarily the right answer. Ask yourself why the 737 NG which has less automation than the A320 has a lower crash rate.

From this great article in the Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2017/09/the-tragic-cras ... automation

"AF447 precipitated the aviation industry’s growing concern about such “loss of control” incidents, and whether they’re linked to greater automation in the cockpit. As technology has become more sophisticated, it has taken over more and more functions previously performed by pilots, bringing huge improvements in aviation safety. In 2016 the accident rate for major jets was just one major accident for every 2.56 million flights. But while overall air safety is improving, loss of control incidents are not. In fact, they are the most prevalent cause of fatalities in commercial aviation today, accounting for 43% of fatalities in 37 separate incidents between 2010 and 2014.

Loss of control typically occurs when pilots fail to recognize and correct a potentially dangerous situation, causing an aircraft to enter an unstable condition. Such incidents are typically triggered by unexpected, unusual events – often comprising multiple conditions that rarely occur together – that fall outside of the normal repertoire of pilot experience. For example, this might be a combination of unusual meteorological conditions, ambiguous readings or behavior from the technology, and pilot inexperience – any one or two of which might be okay, but altogether they can overwhelm a crew. Safety scientists describe this as the “Swiss cheese” model of failure, when the holes in organizational defenses line up in ways that had not been foreseen. These incidents require rapid interpretation and responses, and it is here that things can go wrong.

Our research, recently published in Organization Science, examines how automation can limit pilots’ abilities to respond to such incidents, as becoming more dependent on technology can erode basic cognitive skills. By reviewing expert analyses of the disaster and analyzing data from AF447’s cockpit and flight data recorders, we found that AF447, and commercial aviation more generally, reveal how automation may have unanticipated, catastrophic consequences that, while unlikely, can emerge in extreme conditions.

Imagine having to do some moderately complex arithmetic. Most of us could do this in our heads if we had to, but because we typically rely on technology like calculators and spreadsheets to do this, it might take us a while to call up the relevant mental processes and do it on our own. What if you were asked, without warning, to do this under stressful and time-critical conditions? The risk of error would be considerable.

This was the challenge that the crew of AF447 faced. But they also had to deal with certain “automation surprises,” such as technology behaving in ways that they did not understand or expect."

That kind of sounds like what happened with MCAS 2.0 in the simulator - they made it more complex and there was just too much stuff happening at once.

Which brings me back to my default - if anything remotely weird happens - Just hit a Big red button (which I think should be in all planes) that turns off all the nannies and fly the plane manually (straight and level) to give you the time to diagnose what is going on.

Sometimes simpler is better - KISS - Keep it Simple Smartguy - Assuming 737 Stall behaviour is controllable remove MCAS and just give all pilots EET(Stall) training.

Have a great day.

Did I not grill you just a few days ago for claiming that aviation crash rates mainly have come down because of increase in automation? This does not follow.

A button to shut off the control “nannies” you say? Well that’s exactly what the AF447 A330 did automatically. It did exactly as it should, there was not supposed to be any element of surprise there nor was there any inherent risk as the aircraft was not actively doing anything other than being fully at the mercy of the cockpit controls.

AF447 still fails to be relevant here. This is a case where the crash actually was chiefly caused by flight crew incompetence unlike the MAX crashes. The reliance on automation has not necessary made skills worse, it has just changed the skills needed to fly. The first rule they always say about flying an A320 for example is to fly it like any other plane. So whether it be in normal law or direct law, the flight law should not matter if that is the philosophy meaning the automation hasn’t changed much of that operation. Where automation has changed things is the management of the systems, stuff pilots don’t need to be doing anyway if a computer can handle it. Where on the 737 you have to set the pressurization, on newer Boeing’s and Airbuses you don’t have to do it. It’s the pain in the butt stuff like that that has been automated as well as the removal for the need to apply actual force to flight controls. Other than flight envelope protection, nothing else has been added that makes a pilot worse. That’s all up to individual choice of how much they choose to handfly.

Automation keeps things simpler, that’s why it was invented. If the stall characteristics are good, it’s still noncompliant with regulation; can they waive that regulation?
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?!
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2569
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:39 pm

Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
The pilots of the first crash did not have a a chance, they didn't even know the system existed.

If the pilots of the first crash had no chance i.e. zero odds of survival, then the flight before them would have crashed too, adding a third pilot with zero odds of survival still results in zero.


* with a faulty sensor.

Which you know. This is the kind of nitpicking that detracts value from the discussion.
 
User avatar
speedbored
Posts: 2230
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:42 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
speedbored wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Human's just aren't good enough or fast enough to handle complex systems especially when they do unexpected things

Humans are far far better at dealing with systems "when they do unexpected things" than any autonomous system can be.

Until we have true artificial intelligence, systems can only be programmed to handle expected things.

Though I do not doubt that we should be able to design systems that will be able to cope with "expected things" better than most pilots could.


There are any number of military planes which 100% rely on computers to do the flying as I understand. The pilot tell the computers what it wants the plane to do. FBW in civil aviation already means that the computers can do 100% of the flying in some cases.

True.

But they usually crash when a serious "unexpected thing" happens.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:44 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
The pilots of the first crash did not have a a chance, they didn't even know the system existed.

If the pilots of the first crash had no chance i.e. zero odds of survival, then the flight before them would have crashed too, adding a third pilot with zero odds of survival still results in zero.

* with a faulty sensor.

Both JT flights I'm referring to flew with the same faulty sensor.

767333ER wrote:
The first rule they always say about flying an A320 for example is to fly it like any other plane.

What if you have little to no experience flying "any other plane", and most of your experience is on highly automated planes?
Last edited by Revelation on Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
PixelFlight
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:50 pm

Revelation wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Boeing already ask workers and suppliers to keep everything secret. What would you expect ? That Boeing will attack anyone that try to analyse there total failure to communicate reliable and verifiable information since a full year on all there ongoing aircraft developments ?

Boeing asked "to protect the company’s reputation" not "to keep everything secret", but IMO both would be legitimate requests from an employer to an employee.

This is not so normal to have to remain that to all the employees. To anyone outside of Boeing, this strongly suggest that the employees really have information that hurt the company’s reputation. My opinion is that this is the continuity of the devastating communication practice that Boeing have used for far too long. My feeling is that Boeing executives failed to provides reliable information inside Boeing that would have placed the employees in a position allowing them to communicate good progress in there respective fields.
NDA is usually for a completely different purpose: protect trade secret, not reputation.
:stirthepot: 737-8 MAX: "For all speeds higher than 220 Kts and trim set at a value of 2.5 units, the difficulity level of turning the manual trim wheel was level A (trim wheel not movable)." :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2569
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:53 pm

Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
Revelation wrote:
If the pilots of the first crash had no chance i.e. zero odds of survival, then the flight before them would have crashed too, adding a third pilot with zero odds of survival still results in zero.

* with a faulty sensor.

Both flights flew with the same faulty sensor.


And the first crew had no idea MCAS existed. But please continue .. :roll:
 
lowbank
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:56 pm

seahawk wrote:
Interested wrote:
seahawk wrote:
The shut down is just the solution that costs the least money right now. It is not a sign of technical problems with the MAX that Boeing would be unable to fix. Most likely the RTS will happen soon.


All of the above pure speculation on your part. You have no idea and are just hoping it's that. I do hope writing its makes you feel better?

It's possible the truth is the exact opposite.

I have no idea either.


Right, any prediction on the future is speculation, however considering the huge amount of engineering talent at Boeing it is much more likely that they have a solution than that they do not.



Working in the industry as I do, I suggest the problem is way more complex than they are letting on.

Not having a RTS plan after months of grounding suggests to me we are still 6 months away from RTS.

Stopping production means hundreds of workers being sacked. Ramping beck up afterwards take years.

This is getting really bad for Boeing.

I feel really sad for them, we need a strong a Boeing in the world.
Every days a school day.
 
planecane
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 5:58 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
speedbored wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Human's just aren't good enough or fast enough to handle complex systems especially when they do unexpected things

Humans are far far better at dealing with systems "when they do unexpected things" than any autonomous system can be.

Until we have true artificial intelligence, systems can only be programmed to handle expected things.

Though I do not doubt that we should be able to design systems that will be able to cope with "expected things" better than most pilots could.


There are any number of military planes which 100% rely on computers to do the flying as I understand. The pilot tell the computers what it wants the plane to do. FBW in civil aviation already means that the computers can do 100% of the flying in some cases.


Even in cable and pulley designs, isn't a computer doing 100% of the flying with AP engaged?
 
planecane
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:01 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
* with a faulty sensor.

Both flights flew with the same faulty sensor.


And the first crew had no idea MCAS existed. But please continue .. :roll:


Which lends credence to Boeing's position during certification that they didn't need to know and would recover with the runaway stabilizer NNC...

Yes, I know, 3rd pilot, blah blah blah. It doesn't change the fact that they had no idea MCAS existed and were able to recover from an MCAS failure.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:06 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
Revelation wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Boeing already ask workers and suppliers to keep everything secret. What would you expect ? That Boeing will attack anyone that try to analyse there total failure to communicate reliable and verifiable information since a full year on all there ongoing aircraft developments ?

Boeing asked "to protect the company’s reputation" not "to keep everything secret", but IMO both would be legitimate requests from an employer to an employee.

This is not so normal to have to remain that to all the employees. To anyone outside of Boeing, this strongly suggest that the employees really have information that hurt the company’s reputation. My opinion is that this is the continuity of the devastating communication practice that Boeing have used for far too long. My feeling is that Boeing executives failed to provides reliable information inside Boeing that would have placed the employees in a position allowing them to communicate good progress in there respective fields.
NDA is usually for a completely different purpose: protect trade secret, not reputation.

NDAs establish and enforce a confidential relationship, and other forms of employment contract have confidentiality clauses as well.

It's normal for employees to have information that can hurt the company’s reputation.

I can think of stuff I have in my head that would damage the reputation of pretty much every employer I've worked for over four decade's time.

What is different is many of these employees are feeling upset about losing work and/or being relocated to keep their jobs.

Given this, it's not surprising that these feelings will cause some to want to say bad things about their employers.

You are free to have the opinion that reminding employees of their obligations is some form of cover up, but that's not the only way to look at it.

JetBuddy wrote:
Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
* with a faulty sensor.

Both flights flew with the same faulty sensor.

And the first crew had no idea MCAS existed.

Yet were still able to save the plane, which is the point I've been making all along.
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
767333ER
Posts: 1170
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:13 pm

Revelation wrote:
What if you have little to no experience flying "any other plane", and most of your experience is on highly automated planes?

If someone who has flown other types goes on an A320 and says you fly it the same as any other plane, then it is not significantly different to fly than any other plane. If red apples and yellow apples both taste like apples because those who have tried both say so, then does someone who has only tried red apples have a good idea of what yellow apples taste like. I would say there’s merit there.

From what I understand, once you get the flight planning set up and basically understand difference in terminology and auto flight mode selecting logic, flying an A320 isn’t really any different than a 737 except that there is less systems management such as electrical because it’s automatic. The actually hand flying is basically the same other than FBW not requiring much muscular force. As well, the trim is automatic just like on the 737 if you fly it with CWS on. This is all off topic and I didn’t mean to say much of anything other than that it is fallacious logic to look at AF447 and come to the conclusion that automation has cause more crashes because the difference between having flight augmentation on and off is so great (this is not he case is what I’m saying) especially after being the same person that said automation is the main cause of decreasing accident rates over the last 30 years.
Revelation wrote:
Yet were still able to save the plane, which is the point I've been making all along.

With 3 crew members in the cockpit with one that had no task and was nut under the workload the active pilots were and was able to be of use.
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?!
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2569
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:23 pm

Revelation wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Both flights flew with the same faulty sensor.

And the first crew had no idea MCAS existed.

Yet were still able to save the plane, which is the point I've been making all along.


We're talking about two different things. I'm talking about the first MCAS crash vs the second MCAS crash. That was the point I made from the beginning.

Now that I understand what you're arguing, I see your point.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:37 pm

planecane wrote:
#3 was reportedly already done with pilots recovering but some doing the wrong procedures. The last 3 boxes aren't really tasks, the final 2 are after the grounding is lifted.

Some of the items are not linear. Training requirements and certification flights can be done simultaneously and likely will be.

It is not really a revelation they the grounding can continue through Q1 since reports are the best case is halfway through Q1 if everything goes perfectly.

I think the big change came after Dickson brought DM into the office for a chat.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boei ... SKBN1YG26J says:

(Dickson) added there are nearly a dozen milestones that must be completed before the MAX returns to service. Approval is not likely until at least February and could be delayed until March, U.S. officials told Reuters.

I'm thinking March is pretty optimistic given that they are targeting global RTS.

767333ER wrote:
Revelation wrote:
What if you have little to no experience flying "any other plane", and most of your experience is on highly automated planes?

If someone who has flown other types goes on an A320 and says you fly it the same as any other plane, then it is not significantly different to fly than any other plane.

If you are a 200 hour graduate of Lion City or other similar programs, your "other plane" time is going to be pretty insignificant, IMO.

767333ER wrote:
With 3 crew members in the cockpit with one that had no task and was nut under the workload the active pilots were and was able to be of use.

The point I was questioning is the one that said the second JT crew had "no chance" given we know the first crew were able to fly the plane to its destination. I don't think adding the third pilot with no work load is the thing that changed the odds from zero to non zero. I think adding the right person to the cockpit is what made the difference, even if he was the CA or FO and there was no third pilot in the cockpit. The transcript shows the CA of the crashed flight had poor CRM skills (he did not describe what he was doing before handing off to the FO) and the FO was not performing to an acceptable standard (he could not remember memory items, took several minutes to find the procedure the CA was requesting). Adding a third pilot like either of these would IMO not change the odds.
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
 
morrisond
Posts: 2731
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:48 pm

767333ER wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
I am speculating if Boeing is ready with solutions for the 737, if the regulators should pull some of the exemptions. I would have done that in there case, the famous plan B.

EICAS is integrated on the P-8, so most of the work, but certification is done. That would also include more advanced flight computers.
Has Boeing worked on the trim wheel, being able to present a solution, if one regulator insist on change?
Has Boeing worked on a solution(s) for the protection of the control wire ropes for the control surfaces?


Or is Boeing trying to brazen it out?


More automation is not necessarily the right answer. Ask yourself why the 737 NG which has less automation than the A320 has a lower crash rate.

From this great article in the Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2017/09/the-tragic-cras ... automation

"AF447 precipitated the aviation industry’s growing concern about such “loss of control” incidents, and whether they’re linked to greater automation in the cockpit. As technology has become more sophisticated, it has taken over more and more functions previously performed by pilots, bringing huge improvements in aviation safety. In 2016 the accident rate for major jets was just one major accident for every 2.56 million flights. But while overall air safety is improving, loss of control incidents are not. In fact, they are the most prevalent cause of fatalities in commercial aviation today, accounting for 43% of fatalities in 37 separate incidents between 2010 and 2014.

Loss of control typically occurs when pilots fail to recognize and correct a potentially dangerous situation, causing an aircraft to enter an unstable condition. Such incidents are typically triggered by unexpected, unusual events – often comprising multiple conditions that rarely occur together – that fall outside of the normal repertoire of pilot experience. For example, this might be a combination of unusual meteorological conditions, ambiguous readings or behavior from the technology, and pilot inexperience – any one or two of which might be okay, but altogether they can overwhelm a crew. Safety scientists describe this as the “Swiss cheese” model of failure, when the holes in organizational defenses line up in ways that had not been foreseen. These incidents require rapid interpretation and responses, and it is here that things can go wrong.

Our research, recently published in Organization Science, examines how automation can limit pilots’ abilities to respond to such incidents, as becoming more dependent on technology can erode basic cognitive skills. By reviewing expert analyses of the disaster and analyzing data from AF447’s cockpit and flight data recorders, we found that AF447, and commercial aviation more generally, reveal how automation may have unanticipated, catastrophic consequences that, while unlikely, can emerge in extreme conditions.

Imagine having to do some moderately complex arithmetic. Most of us could do this in our heads if we had to, but because we typically rely on technology like calculators and spreadsheets to do this, it might take us a while to call up the relevant mental processes and do it on our own. What if you were asked, without warning, to do this under stressful and time-critical conditions? The risk of error would be considerable.

This was the challenge that the crew of AF447 faced. But they also had to deal with certain “automation surprises,” such as technology behaving in ways that they did not understand or expect."

That kind of sounds like what happened with MCAS 2.0 in the simulator - they made it more complex and there was just too much stuff happening at once.

Which brings me back to my default - if anything remotely weird happens - Just hit a Big red button (which I think should be in all planes) that turns off all the nannies and fly the plane manually (straight and level) to give you the time to diagnose what is going on.

Sometimes simpler is better - KISS - Keep it Simple Smartguy - Assuming 737 Stall behaviour is controllable remove MCAS and just give all pilots EET(Stall) training.

Have a great day.

Did I not grill you just a few days ago for claiming that aviation crash rates mainly have come down because of increase in automation? This does not follow.

A button to shut off the control “nannies” you say? Well that’s exactly what the AF447 A330 did automatically. It did exactly as it should, there was not supposed to be any element of surprise there nor was there any inherent risk as the aircraft was not actively doing anything other than being fully at the mercy of the cockpit controls.

AF447 still fails to be relevant here. This is a case where the crash actually was chiefly caused by flight crew incompetence unlike the MAX crashes. The reliance on automation has not necessary made skills worse, it has just changed the skills needed to fly. The first rule they always say about flying an A320 for example is to fly it like any other plane. So whether it be in normal law or direct law, the flight law should not matter if that is the philosophy meaning the automation hasn’t changed much of that operation. Where automation has changed things is the management of the systems, stuff pilots don’t need to be doing anyway if a computer can handle it. Where on the 737 you have to set the pressurization, on newer Boeing’s and Airbuses you don’t have to do it. It’s the pain in the butt stuff like that that has been automated as well as the removal for the need to apply actual force to flight controls. Other than flight envelope protection, nothing else has been added that makes a pilot worse. That’s all up to individual choice of how much they choose to handfly.

Automation keeps things simpler, that’s why it was invented. If the stall characteristics are good, it’s still noncompliant with regulation; can they waive that regulation?


I didn't write any of that - that's a direct quote from Aviation researchers in the article from the Harvard Business Review. That is there opinion that Automation is not everything and that aviation crash rates have come down from automation.

They are saying the downfall of Automation is a loss of connection with the machine have you have so little time actually flying it.

When you get a second read the article - it's a good one.
 
pune
Posts: 392
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:18 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:58 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
par13del wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Your analysis stand from the Boeing only point of view. The saving you see from your Boeing only point of view is a loss for many many others. The effect outside Boeing is real and alarming. So alarming in fact, that it will probably be an important political subject, in addition to the fact that this grounding is already the subject of multiples hearings.

So what would you suggest Boeing do? As a public traded company they have to provide guidance to their investors on the state of affairs, the FAA wants them to cease and desist their PR on RTS, so what do you suggest?

A public traded company not only can communicate about the risks, but is required to do so to there investors. The problem is that Boeing have recently presented the risk as the FAA, witch is wrong, so the FAA have rightfully reacted by asking then to stop doing so. Boeing have to communicate about the real internal problems instead of presenting itself as a victim of the FAA.


Probably a naive POV, but aren't shareholders/stockholders supposed to be the owners of a company and the management is someone to whom you have given the authority to run the airlines or whatever product that the company sells. So from a stock-holder perspective couldn't they (the shareholders) ask for any internal documentation, whether under NDA or otherwise ? I am sure if not all but at least some would be genuinely interested to know what is wrong in the company and what else is being kept under wraps. The way things are going, it is possible that we (the paying customers and aviation followers) may never know what actually happened, unless of course a 3rd crash happens where they may be forced to share much more than what they have shared atm.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2731
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 6:59 pm

planecane wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Both flights flew with the same faulty sensor.


And the first crew had no idea MCAS existed. But please continue .. :roll:


Which lends credence to Boeing's position during certification that they didn't need to know and would recover with the runaway stabilizer NNC...

Yes, I know, 3rd pilot, blah blah blah. It doesn't change the fact that they had no idea MCAS existed and were able to recover from an MCAS failure.



And further evidenced by the fact that after Lionair all airlines were told what MCAS was - what to look for and to run the Runaway Trim NNC if you experienced the same symptoms. ET302 failed to do that - which I find unfathomable that they could fail in that simple task - unless of course they were never told by their airline about it.

Which makes a lot more sense than Pilots who had the intelligence in the first place to become pilots failing to do such a simple task. What to do if you experience a MCAS failure should have been pinned to the front page of the QRH or glued to the yoke.

Nothing in the ET prelim report mentioned they had the procedure in the cockpit or talked about it and I'll be shocked if the final report has anything either.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 15207
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:14 pm

One concern I have with the continuing groundings and delays in the 'fix' is the domino affect some have noted on outside suppliers and sub contractors. Some companies have a lot of their 'eggs in one basket', relying on a lot on contracts and sub-contracts with Boeing or their suppliers. For some it might mean bankruptcy, higher borrowing costs, losing key employees, layoffs and dropped stock prices. For some like GE for engines, a company already in poor financial condition, it could get much worse. Those companies might go to their state or Federal politicians and say to fix this or the job losses will include you so pressure put on the President and FAA.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 3584
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:31 pm

morrisond wrote:
planecane wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:

And the first crew had no idea MCAS existed. But please continue .. :roll:


Which lends credence to Boeing's position during certification that they didn't need to know and would recover with the runaway stabilizer NNC...

Yes, I know, 3rd pilot, blah blah blah. It doesn't change the fact that they had no idea MCAS existed and were able to recover from an MCAS failure.



And further evidenced by the fact that after Lionair all airlines were told what MCAS was - what to look for and to run the Runaway Trim NNC if you experienced the same symptoms. ET302 failed to do that - which I find unfathomable that they could fail in that simple task - unless of course they were never told by their airline about it.

Which makes a lot more sense than Pilots who had the intelligence in the first place to become pilots failing to do such a simple task. What to do if you experience a MCAS failure should have been pinned to the front page of the QRH or glued to the yoke.

Nothing in the ET prelim report mentioned they had the procedure in the cockpit or talked about it and I'll be shocked if the final report has anything either.

In the same way that a loan company gives you all the information about what happens if you fail to repay on time... in tiny tiny writing where you can’t really see it and so as not to make the selves look bad.

Morrisond, I totally agree with you that better trained pilots could have saved the MAX crashes and that additional MAX specific training could bring it in line with the safety record of the rest of the aviation transport system. We should not ignore the training required to safely fly the max and be as safe as the other aircraft.

Personally I think it would be better to spend the limited resources in making the system as safe as possible with those resources, don’t you?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8357
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:45 pm

flyingphil wrote:
Just watched an “aviation expert” explaining why the 737MAX may never fly again.
Once you halt the supply chain it is nearly impossible to re-start it with the same economies of scale.

I saw that Spirit have started producing 767/KC-46 forward fuselages.. maybe they can find other work.. also they are buying Bombardier in Belfast that supply A220 wings.. but will still be a major disruption for their workforce.

Link to the video is here https://p.dw.com/p/3UzRB
Not sure if I agree with him, but at the moment there are no guarantees that the 737MAX will return to service.


That seems to be very biased opinion. There are thousands of 737s in service, there is enough need for parts.

The core of aviation sector is suppliers not system integrators like Boeing, Airbus, Embraer or Bombardier. Yes system integrators get all the news coverage.

Everyone thought Toyota would celebrate General Motors demise, in fact Toyota lobbied to save GM, the supply chain disruption would have hurt all automakers. Similarly this will hurt all integrators.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 7:45 pm

pune wrote:
Probably a naive POV, but aren't shareholders/stockholders supposed to be the owners of a company and the management is someone to whom you have given the authority to run the airlines or whatever product that the company sells. So from a stock-holder perspective couldn't they (the shareholders) ask for any internal documentation, whether under NDA or otherwise ? I am sure if not all but at least some would be genuinely interested to know what is wrong in the company and what else is being kept under wraps. The way things are going, it is possible that we (the paying customers and aviation followers) may never know what actually happened, unless of course a 3rd crash happens where they may be forced to share much more than what they have shared atm.

It would not be prudent to let such "owners" have internal documents, since anyone can buy stock then have access to documents worth many times the value of their stake in the company.

Shareholders interests are represented by the Board members who are elected by the shareholders. Board members are the ones expected to conduct such investigations on behalf of the shareholders.

Boeing's board did just this, results were reported at https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... x-crashes/ ...
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
 
smartplane
Posts: 1508
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:28 pm

lightsaber wrote:
SAFRAN is a risk sharing parner. Or more precisely, CFM is and SAFRAN is paid by CFM. Of course some contracts have progress payments. But usually the bulk is paid on delivery. As a risk sharing partner, CFM isn't paid on engine delivery to Boeing, they are paid the bulk when the aircraft is delivered to the airline.

SAFRAN doesn't want a new deal with GE. The current deal forces GE to 50/50 joint venture with SAFRAN for all engines, going from memory here, 25,000lbf to 40,000 lbf. This forces more risk on SAFRAN, but in the long run they make twice to triple the profit.

GE doesn't invoice, it is CFM. GE/SAFRAN each own half. Both want 51%. If GE gets paid, so does SAFRAN.

The only advantage for GE is they hold the high turbine. That ensures a bulk of maintenance profit.

In a 50/50 joint venture, both hurt equally in a line shutdown.

As I noted earlier, it takes a year to stop engine production and 2 years to restart.

On all the vendors this will be brutal. Worst on Spirit as 50% of their business is the MAX. SAFRAN has military, rockets, sub assemblies on other engines, world's #1 helicopter engine business (was GE, these two are frienimies), aircraft (interiors, including Zodiac, and avionics), plus the huge CFM-56 spares market, including overhaul services.

I worry about smaller businesses more. I'm trying to figure out how many people the MAX directly employs. At $30 billion/year, that should be 200,000 to 300,000 people. Quite the stop button.

All WB and most NB aircraft engines are subject to milestone payments, paid by the purchaser.

On a turnkey purchase, engines are purchased by the the air frame OEM, and milestone payments are consolidated with the whole aircraft milestone payments. Where the customer purchases engines direct, milestone payments are also invoiced and paid direct to the engine OEM.

CFM billing for Boeing-related sales uses the GE accounting system.

From deposit to ready for CAF, some 50-60% of the purchase price, including engine milestone payments, will have been paid by the purchaser, which is why there are financiers in the market place specialising in pre-shipment finance. The delivery payment is the single largest, but is eclipsed by the cumulative pre-shipment payments

The delivery payment is not the final payment due, as a portion of the sale price is withheld for warranty. Plus there are retrospective discounts, which depending on the negotiating skills of the purchaser, may be less retrospective and more current.

CFM creates an account for each new engine built, against which Safran and GE invoices are lodged. As milestone payments are received, invoices are paid on a FIFO basis. An interim distribution is made to the JV partners on delivery, deducting retrospective discounts. A further distribution occurs when the withholding payment is received, again less the retrospective discount. If the retrospective discount is not triggered, a final distribution is made.

Boeing have seemingly harsh vendor terms, which don't encourage loyalty, why some took the opportunity to exit when Boeing adjusted 748 and 787 volumes, resulting in Boeing have to move work in-house, or find new vendors, or use the same again but on improved terms.

Most MAX contracts are of the same era, so unless updated in the light of experience, there will be vendor exit provisions, which could delay the re-start of production (and may even have been one reason, of many, why production has been temporarily halted).

Initially when the 737 was grounded, milestone payments continued to be invoiced and paid, and pre-shipment drawdowns permitted, with the exception of delivery and withholding payments.

But as the grounding continued, milestone payments ceased, partly because financiers triggered suspension / termination events.

So for the last 3-4 months, Boeing and CFM have been assembling and storing with zero inward cashflow (other than borrowing and other programs).

The billion dollar question, is what good faith payments has Boeing been making with their deep pockets, to support vendors? Have they been consistent across the board, or playing favourites? It's at times like this we discover the views of our good friends in the financial world, may be coloured by our accounting, dividend and capital reduction policies, which could have created a war chest for new models and unforeseen events.

Small vendors are exposed, but don't underestimate the impact on the large. Earlier this year, a GE aero engines / Boeing marriage was on the cards. What now for GE? Where vendors are supplying to both B & A, will Airbus need to 'rescue' some for their own self-interest?
Last edited by smartplane on Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
birdbrainz
Posts: 511
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:36 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
Refitting engines on an existing frame is a completely different matter. If you're going to correct "fleabyte" for mixing turbofan and turbojet, you should also not mix refitted planes with new built planes.

Airbus "executives" are just happy Boeing decided to MAX the 737 and not build a new NSA.


Very well. Airbus did the same trick between the A340-200/300 and the A340-500/600. Was that another Idiotic move by bean counters?

Or how about a Malibu Mirage vs Malibu Meridian, Shrike Commander versus Aero Commander 680T, or the beloved A320 NEO? The list of new built planes with different engines fitted must be a mile long. There's nothing wrong with fitting new engines to an existing airframe. Had Boeing not botched the MCAS implementation, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2731
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 8:56 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
morrisond wrote:
planecane wrote:

Which lends credence to Boeing's position during certification that they didn't need to know and would recover with the runaway stabilizer NNC...

Yes, I know, 3rd pilot, blah blah blah. It doesn't change the fact that they had no idea MCAS existed and were able to recover from an MCAS failure.



And further evidenced by the fact that after Lionair all airlines were told what MCAS was - what to look for and to run the Runaway Trim NNC if you experienced the same symptoms. ET302 failed to do that - which I find unfathomable that they could fail in that simple task - unless of course they were never told by their airline about it.

Which makes a lot more sense than Pilots who had the intelligence in the first place to become pilots failing to do such a simple task. What to do if you experience a MCAS failure should have been pinned to the front page of the QRH or glued to the yoke.

Nothing in the ET prelim report mentioned they had the procedure in the cockpit or talked about it and I'll be shocked if the final report has anything either.

In the same way that a loan company gives you all the information about what happens if you fail to repay on time... in tiny tiny writing where you can’t really see it and so as not to make the selves look bad.

Morrisond, I totally agree with you that better trained pilots could have saved the MAX crashes and that additional MAX specific training could bring it in line with the safety record of the rest of the aviation transport system. We should not ignore the training required to safely fly the max and be as safe as the other aircraft.

Personally I think it would be better to spend the limited resources in making the system as safe as possible with those resources, don’t you?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


But that's the point - it doesn't really need to be MAX specific training - other than training to identify MCAS failure as trim runaway (at least with MCAS V1.0 - who knows what MCAS V2.0 will be yet) and treat it as such and run the Trim runaway NNC. That is not MAX specific - Trim runaway should be a required Memory NNC procedure for all aircraft.

Identifying MCAS specific failure should be able to be accomplished on an iPad - it is not that difficult. MCAS failure and the alarms going off on ET302 happened just as described in the AD and FCOM bulletin.

Not being able to run a Trim Runaway NNC is a worldwide training issue - it's not MAX specific and should not be considered optional for any airplane.

However given the issues surrounding the MAX - seeing how a MCAS failure looks in a SIM and practicing the Runaway Trim NNC as part of RTS training would be a good idea.

However I would also add Runaway trim NNC (or maybe just how to run a NNC and where to find them in the QRH) training to the US style EET(Stall) training, and mandate that all pilots worldwide go through that combined training on all aircraft and do it recurringly. That would have taken care of most of the fatals of the past 10-15 years.

The resources are what the regulators, manufacturers and airlines decide they are going to be either voluntarily or more likely by legislation.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 3584
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:07 pm

morrisond wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
morrisond wrote:


And further evidenced by the fact that after Lionair all airlines were told what MCAS was - what to look for and to run the Runaway Trim NNC if you experienced the same symptoms. ET302 failed to do that - which I find unfathomable that they could fail in that simple task - unless of course they were never told by their airline about it.

Which makes a lot more sense than Pilots who had the intelligence in the first place to become pilots failing to do such a simple task. What to do if you experience a MCAS failure should have been pinned to the front page of the QRH or glued to the yoke.

Nothing in the ET prelim report mentioned they had the procedure in the cockpit or talked about it and I'll be shocked if the final report has anything either.

In the same way that a loan company gives you all the information about what happens if you fail to repay on time... in tiny tiny writing where you can’t really see it and so as not to make the selves look bad.

Morrisond, I totally agree with you that better trained pilots could have saved the MAX crashes and that additional MAX specific training could bring it in line with the safety record of the rest of the aviation transport system. We should not ignore the training required to safely fly the max and be as safe as the other aircraft.

Personally I think it would be better to spend the limited resources in making the system as safe as possible with those resources, don’t you?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


But that's the point - it doesn't really need to be MAX specific training - other than training to identify MCAS failure as trim runaway (at least with MCAS V1.0 - who knows what MCAS V2.0 will be yet) and treat it as such and run the Trim runaway NNC. That is not MAX specific - Trim runaway should be a required Memory NNC procedure for all aircraft.

Identifying MCAS specific failure should be able to be accomplished on an iPad - it is not that difficult. MCAS failure and the alarms going off on ET302 happened just as described in the AD and FCOM bulletin.

Not being able to run a Trim Runaway NNC is a worldwide training issue - it's not MAX specific and should not be considered optional for any airplane.

However given the issues surrounding the MAX - seeing how a MCAS failure looks in a SIM and practicing the Runaway Trim NNC as part of RTS training would be a good idea.

However I would also add Runaway trim NNC (or maybe just how to run a NNC and where to find them in the QRH) training to the US style EET(Stall) training, and mandate that all pilots worldwide go through that combined training on all aircraft and do it recurringly. That would have taken care of most of the fatals of the past 10-15 years.

The resources are what the regulators, manufacturers and airlines decide they are going to be either voluntarily or more likely by legislation.

But the other aircraft don’t seem to need that level of training to get to the level of safety they are at, why waste resources that could be better placed making them safer in other ways. Imagine you are in charge of easyJet’s safety department and you are told you need to spend your last million on training brought about by a failure in the max and have to forgo adding an additional safety feature which would otherwise add a higher level of safety, I’m sure you wouldn’t be happy....resources are limited.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8357
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:18 pm

morrisond wrote:
Trim runaway should be a required Memory NNC procedure for all aircraft.

Not being able to run a Trim Runaway NNC is a worldwide training issue - it's not MAX specific and should not be considered optional for any airplane.


If you look at Runaway stabilizer checklist, the condition explained as "Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs continuously"

MCAS Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs 10 seconds on and 5 seconds off, i believe the right word is continually.

MCAS behavior doesn't match Runaway stabilizer condition.
Last edited by dtw2hyd on Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All posts are just opinions.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2731
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:23 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Trim runaway should be a required Memory NNC procedure for all aircraft.

Not being able to run a Trim Runaway NNC is a worldwide training issue - it's not MAX specific and should not be considered optional for any airplane.


If you look at Runaway stabilizer checklist, the condition explained as "Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs continuously"

MCAS Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs 10 seconds on and 5 seconds off, i believe the right word is continually.

MCAS behavior doesn't match Runaway stabilizer condition.


No - but if you read the ET additions to it's flight manuals in the back of the preliminary report it talks about what to look for (10 seconds on 5 seconds off) and what to do if that happens - run the Runaway Trim NNC - which specifically mentions to disengage Autothrottle.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 1019
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:45 pm

Revelation wrote:
NDAs establish and enforce a confidential relationship, and other forms of employment contract have confidentiality clauses as well.

It's normal for employees to have information that can hurt the company’s reputation.

I can think of stuff I have in my head that would damage the reputation of pretty much every employer I've worked for over four decade's time.

What is different is many of these employees are feeling upset about losing work and/or being relocated to keep their jobs.

Given this, it's not surprising that these feelings will cause some to want to say bad things about their employers.

You are free to have the opinion that reminding employees of their obligations is some form of cover up, but that's not the only way to look at it.

NDA are usually about very a specific subject with clauses that define the obligations and the liabilities. I never have see a NDA about reputation (I probably have read and signed near a hundred of NDA).
Employees are the working force of a company, there need to feel going forward, no to be view as enemy of the company reputation.
Confidentiality is normal, I agree, but the Boeing remainder is coming at the most worst time from a communication point of view. Just look at what we have in hands from Boeing: 2 crashes, a grounding, lot of missing targets since a year, production halt, and now a warning to the employees about the company reputation. The logical conclusion is that Boeing simply have nothing reliably positive to communicate. This is a total communication disaster while I am certain that Boeing have experts in communication that perfectly know that this is all wrong. This let me thinking that the structural problem is maybe far more larger than just the design of the 737 MAX...
Last edited by PixelFlight on Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
: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:
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2217
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 9:49 pm

Well if there are further problems, both Boeing and the FAA will get them reviewed and addressed so certification can happen. If it is as bad as some claim above the RTS will be many months from now. If what Boeing submitted after the 100+ test flights is acceptable as it, RTS will be sooner rather than later or Never as some proclaim.

With the MAX on the sidelines Airbus should be racking up the orders, but there seems to be an orders drought at the moment. IF Boeing does a total #FAIL, it would mean an exit from the NB market, putting Airbus in the command seat to charge their customers whatever they want. That should be really great for all of the airlines. I personally hope this shutdown is relatively quick, there are a lot of communities that will be hit hard.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10337
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 10:36 pm

PepeTheFrog wrote:
Here are the milestones Boeing needs to complete:

Image

Tweet source: https://twitter.com/LeehamNews/status/1 ... 3657516033

Still a lot of work to do. The grounding could easily continue through Q1!

Is this up to date, the link below has the FAA taking about additional under Boeings control already being completed
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safe ... ax-return/
 
lowbank
Posts: 511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:10 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 10:47 pm

Great simplistic plan, with no dates.

If I presented that at work, I would be sacked.
Every days a school day.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24357
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 10:47 pm

par13del wrote:
Is this up to date, the link below has the FAA taking about additional under Boeings control already being completed
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safe ... ax-return/

It doesn't seem to be, since the same article says:

FAA Administrator Steve Dickson told CNBC Wednesday that the approvals would slip into 2020 with the [b]10 or 11 still-outstanding milestones.

And the chart doesn't show 10 or 11 unfinished milestones.
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
 
planecane
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:06 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Trim runaway should be a required Memory NNC procedure for all aircraft.

Not being able to run a Trim Runaway NNC is a worldwide training issue - it's not MAX specific and should not be considered optional for any airplane.


If you look at Runaway stabilizer checklist, the condition explained as "Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs continuously"

MCAS Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs 10 seconds on and 5 seconds off, i believe the right word is continually.

MCAS behavior doesn't match Runaway stabilizer condition.


Please, not this again. When it runs for almost 10 seconds, that is "continuous" movement. The regulators seem to think that runaway stabilizer should be recognized within 3 seconds. The trim wheels, when doing something intended, do not sit there and just zip away for that long.

You could argue that because the pilots weren't told of MCAS, that ANY intended, properly functioning, MCAS activation could be recognized as a runaway stabilizer. Especially, if it is a condition that requires the full authority of MCAS.
Last edited by planecane on Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
planecane
Posts: 1572
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:18 pm

pune wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
par13del wrote:
So what would you suggest Boeing do? As a public traded company they have to provide guidance to their investors on the state of affairs, the FAA wants them to cease and desist their PR on RTS, so what do you suggest?

A public traded company not only can communicate about the risks, but is required to do so to there investors. The problem is that Boeing have recently presented the risk as the FAA, witch is wrong, so the FAA have rightfully reacted by asking then to stop doing so. Boeing have to communicate about the real internal problems instead of presenting itself as a victim of the FAA.


Probably a naive POV, but aren't shareholders/stockholders supposed to be the owners of a company and the management is someone to whom you have given the authority to run the airlines or whatever product that the company sells. So from a stock-holder perspective couldn't they (the shareholders) ask for any internal documentation, whether under NDA or otherwise ? I am sure if not all but at least some would be genuinely interested to know what is wrong in the company and what else is being kept under wraps. The way things are going, it is possible that we (the paying customers and aviation followers) may never know what actually happened, unless of course a 3rd crash happens where they may be forced to share much more than what they have shared atm.


Stockholders have a financial stake in a company. At the core, when a company sells stock, the buyer is basically loaning money to the company with the hope that the company will earn profit with that investment and pay dividends that give a return better than a safer investment. Financial stakeholders do not have management rights. If you wanted that kind of control or rights, you'd have to amass enough shares to be able to select board members that you have control over. Possibly, they would install you as CEO.

There are 3 people in the world that, if they essentially used their entire net worth, could personally buy a controlling interest in Boeing. They are Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Bernard Arnault. There are others like Warren Buffet that control investment funds that could use the fund to do it and get the power indirectly.
 
asdf
Posts: 696
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:41 pm

birdbrainz wrote:
JetBuddy wrote:
Refitting engines on an existing frame is a completely different matter. If you're going to correct "fleabyte" for mixing turbofan and turbojet, you should also not mix refitted planes with new built planes.

Airbus "executives" are just happy Boeing decided to MAX the 737 and not build a new NSA.


Very well. Airbus did the same trick between the A340-200/300 and the A340-500/600. Was that another Idiotic move by bean counters?

Or how about a Malibu Mirage vs Malibu Meridian, Shrike Commander versus Aero Commander 680T, or the beloved A320 NEO? The list of new built planes with different engines fitted must be a mile long. There's nothing wrong with fitting new engines to an existing airframe. Had Boeing not botched the MCAS implementation, we wouldn't be having this discussion.


you are completely wrong

the 737 is to low
the gear had already been rised for the NG

and the 737 is full manual
only partial automation of single elements
not connected

you can not fix engines outside of the aerodynamical norm tomsuch an old plane

on the airbusses it was and is no problem
they are full fly by wire
full „all inclusive“ automation can compensate aerodynamical flows

a patchwork add on like MCAS cant
 
pune
Posts: 392
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:18 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:47 pm

Revelation wrote:
pune wrote:
Probably a naive POV, but aren't shareholders/stockholders supposed to be the owners of a company and the management is someone to whom you have given the authority to run the airlines or whatever product that the company sells. So from a stock-holder perspective couldn't they (the shareholders) ask for any internal documentation, whether under NDA or otherwise ? I am sure if not all but at least some would be genuinely interested to know what is wrong in the company and what else is being kept under wraps. The way things are going, it is possible that we (the paying customers and aviation followers) may never know what actually happened, unless of course a 3rd crash happens where they may be forced to share much more than what they have shared atm.

It would not be prudent to let such "owners" have internal documents, since anyone can buy stock then have access to documents worth many times the value of their stake in the company.

Shareholders interests are represented by the Board members who are elected by the shareholders. Board members are the ones expected to conduct such investigations on behalf of the shareholders.

Boeing's board did just this, results were reported at https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... x-crashes/ ...


I doubt they will be any different than what has been uncovered so far. The Board would not willingly open itself to any liability on their part if their processes are shown up in failure. In fact, this is the reason why Boeing has been unwilling to steer the conversation on other roads away from issues in Boeing itself.
 
User avatar
767333ER
Posts: 1170
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 5:14 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Thu Dec 19, 2019 11:58 pm

morrisond wrote:
767333ER wrote:
morrisond wrote:

More automation is not necessarily the right answer. Ask yourself why the 737 NG which has less automation than the A320 has a lower crash rate.

From this great article in the Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2017/09/the-tragic-cras ... automation

"AF447 precipitated the aviation industry’s growing concern about such “loss of control” incidents, and whether they’re linked to greater automation in the cockpit. As technology has become more sophisticated, it has taken over more and more functions previously performed by pilots, bringing huge improvements in aviation safety. In 2016 the accident rate for major jets was just one major accident for every 2.56 million flights. But while overall air safety is improving, loss of control incidents are not. In fact, they are the most prevalent cause of fatalities in commercial aviation today, accounting for 43% of fatalities in 37 separate incidents between 2010 and 2014.

Loss of control typically occurs when pilots fail to recognize and correct a potentially dangerous situation, causing an aircraft to enter an unstable condition. Such incidents are typically triggered by unexpected, unusual events – often comprising multiple conditions that rarely occur together – that fall outside of the normal repertoire of pilot experience. For example, this might be a combination of unusual meteorological conditions, ambiguous readings or behavior from the technology, and pilot inexperience – any one or two of which might be okay, but altogether they can overwhelm a crew. Safety scientists describe this as the “Swiss cheese” model of failure, when the holes in organizational defenses line up in ways that had not been foreseen. These incidents require rapid interpretation and responses, and it is here that things can go wrong.

Our research, recently published in Organization Science, examines how automation can limit pilots’ abilities to respond to such incidents, as becoming more dependent on technology can erode basic cognitive skills. By reviewing expert analyses of the disaster and analyzing data from AF447’s cockpit and flight data recorders, we found that AF447, and commercial aviation more generally, reveal how automation may have unanticipated, catastrophic consequences that, while unlikely, can emerge in extreme conditions.

Imagine having to do some moderately complex arithmetic. Most of us could do this in our heads if we had to, but because we typically rely on technology like calculators and spreadsheets to do this, it might take us a while to call up the relevant mental processes and do it on our own. What if you were asked, without warning, to do this under stressful and time-critical conditions? The risk of error would be considerable.

This was the challenge that the crew of AF447 faced. But they also had to deal with certain “automation surprises,” such as technology behaving in ways that they did not understand or expect."

That kind of sounds like what happened with MCAS 2.0 in the simulator - they made it more complex and there was just too much stuff happening at once.

Which brings me back to my default - if anything remotely weird happens - Just hit a Big red button (which I think should be in all planes) that turns off all the nannies and fly the plane manually (straight and level) to give you the time to diagnose what is going on.

Sometimes simpler is better - KISS - Keep it Simple Smartguy - Assuming 737 Stall behaviour is controllable remove MCAS and just give all pilots EET(Stall) training.

Have a great day.

Did I not grill you just a few days ago for claiming that aviation crash rates mainly have come down because of increase in automation? This does not follow.

A button to shut off the control “nannies” you say? Well that’s exactly what the AF447 A330 did automatically. It did exactly as it should, there was not supposed to be any element of surprise there nor was there any inherent risk as the aircraft was not actively doing anything other than being fully at the mercy of the cockpit controls.

AF447 still fails to be relevant here. This is a case where the crash actually was chiefly caused by flight crew incompetence unlike the MAX crashes. The reliance on automation has not necessary made skills worse, it has just changed the skills needed to fly. The first rule they always say about flying an A320 for example is to fly it like any other plane. So whether it be in normal law or direct law, the flight law should not matter if that is the philosophy meaning the automation hasn’t changed much of that operation. Where automation has changed things is the management of the systems, stuff pilots don’t need to be doing anyway if a computer can handle it. Where on the 737 you have to set the pressurization, on newer Boeing’s and Airbuses you don’t have to do it. It’s the pain in the butt stuff like that that has been automated as well as the removal for the need to apply actual force to flight controls. Other than flight envelope protection, nothing else has been added that makes a pilot worse. That’s all up to individual choice of how much they choose to handfly.

Automation keeps things simpler, that’s why it was invented. If the stall characteristics are good, it’s still noncompliant with regulation; can they waive that regulation?


I didn't write any of that - that's a direct quote from Aviation researchers in the article from the Harvard Business Review. That is there opinion that Automation is not everything and that aviation crash rates have come down from automation.

They are saying the downfall of Automation is a loss of connection with the machine have you have so little time actually flying it.

When you get a second read the article - it's a good one.

You are however agreeing with it though. It presents an argument that to some degree contradicts itself. It points out an issue that automation is supposedly making pilot skills worse (all while not being specific about what automation or how) while somewhat erroneously referencing AF447 as an example (it is only partly an example of this as it is also an example of other huge issues stemming from other areas). They didn’t know how to recover from a stall. Hand flying a 737 for your whole flying career won’t teach you that either because you should never approach a stall anyway. There could very well be a decline in specific skills but I don’t buy that this one is due to automation stalls is one of them considering the fact that stalls in large aircraft almost never end well regardless of who is flying it meaning that no one should have actual experience in one on such aircraft.

Automation has made things some amount safer. CRM has gotten better and training had gotten better as well. Flying skills will have only declined due to auto-flight automation which just about everything flying in the category has. The difference in connection to the machine as it is put between an A320 and 737NG is basically nothing aside from the fact that on one you are controlling cables instead of computer signals. You use both the same way. You, however, cite the lower crash rate of the 737NG as proof of this being the case. That to me implies that you believe that the A320 is degrading skills more than the 737 even though there is no reason why it should. A comparison of crash rate of A320 bs specifically 737NG is not a good set of samples to compare. The fairest would be 737 from the -300 and newer compared to the A320; that comparison would be more revealing.

As for the article, they do make a compelling case; however, as I said AF447 was caused by something more than lack of skill due to automation. The crew totally forgot basic scientific knowledge such as how gravity works and how speed increases when going down, something they should have understood from when they were in diapers still. It wasn’t just about how comfortable or connected they felt with the controls. There were psychological issues, issues with the dual input thing, and also CRM issues. Hand flying may improve that or may not. I just don’t see them as a very valid authority on the subject. Having said that, it’s better than the junk on conventional media.
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?!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8357
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:39 am

planecane wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
morrisond wrote:
Trim runaway should be a required Memory NNC procedure for all aircraft.

Not being able to run a Trim Runaway NNC is a worldwide training issue - it's not MAX specific and should not be considered optional for any airplane.


If you look at Runaway stabilizer checklist, the condition explained as "Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs continuously"

MCAS Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs 10 seconds on and 5 seconds off, i believe the right word is continually.

MCAS behavior doesn't match Runaway stabilizer condition.


Please, not this again. When it runs for almost 10 seconds, that is "continuous" movement. The regulators seem to think that runaway stabilizer should be recognized within 3 seconds. The trim wheels, when doing something intended, do not sit there and just zip away for that long.

You could argue that because the pilots weren't told of MCAS, that ANY intended, properly functioning, MCAS activation could be recognized as a runaway stabilizer. Especially, if it is a condition that requires the full authority of MCAS.


You are using conjuncture vs what is written in the manual. It doesn't say anything over 3 seconds is runaway stabilizer condition.

The AD should have revealed MCAS's presence and how to deal with it promptly. Rather a cryptic message to treat it as Runaway trim stabilizer caused second accident.

Had crew saved both are either flights, all praises go to a well designed system.
All posts are just opinions.
 
AABusDrvr
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:35 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
planecane wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

If you look at Runaway stabilizer checklist, the condition explained as "Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs continuously"

MCAS Uncommanded stabilizer trim movement occurs 10 seconds on and 5 seconds off, i believe the right word is continually.

MCAS behavior doesn't match Runaway stabilizer condition.


Please, not this again. When it runs for almost 10 seconds, that is "continuous" movement. The regulators seem to think that runaway stabilizer should be recognized within 3 seconds. The trim wheels, when doing something intended, do not sit there and just zip away for that long.

You could argue that because the pilots weren't told of MCAS, that ANY intended, properly functioning, MCAS activation could be recognized as a runaway stabilizer. Especially, if it is a condition that requires the full authority of MCAS.


You are using conjuncture vs what is written in the manual. It doesn't say anything over 3 seconds is runaway stabilizer condition.

The AD should have revealed MCAS's presence and how to deal with it promptly. Rather a cryptic message to treat it as Runaway trim stabilizer caused second accident.

Had crew saved both are either flights, all praises go to a well designed system.



It also says this in the 737 QRH:

"While every attempt is made to supply needed non–normal checklists, it is not possible to develop checklists for all conceivable situations. In some smoke, fire or fumes situations, the flight crew may need to move between the Smoke, Fire or Fumes checklist and the Smoke or Fumes Removal checklist. In some multiple failure situations, the flight crew may need to combine the elements of more than one checklist. In all situations, the captain must assess the situation and use good judgment to determine the safest course of action."

No one with any common sense would just sit there and watch the stab trim run for 10 seconds, especially if it happened ,multiple times, without doing something about it. Basic airmanship and all that.

With a little systems knowledge, you would know that the runaway stabilizer checklist would be the place to start. Remove all power to the offending system, stop the problem.

It'a the same for any automatic system, if it's not doing what you expect, or want it to do, you tun it off, AP/AT trim, whatever.

FWIW, I have never seen the STS or autopilot trim for more than 3 or 4 seconds, 10 seconds is a very long time for the trim to run. It's not normal, ever, unless you are the one doing it.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2731
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:37 am

767333ER wrote:
morrisond wrote:
767333ER wrote:
Did I not grill you just a few days ago for claiming that aviation crash rates mainly have come down because of increase in automation? This does not follow.

A button to shut off the control “nannies” you say? Well that’s exactly what the AF447 A330 did automatically. It did exactly as it should, there was not supposed to be any element of surprise there nor was there any inherent risk as the aircraft was not actively doing anything other than being fully at the mercy of the cockpit controls.

AF447 still fails to be relevant here. This is a case where the crash actually was chiefly caused by flight crew incompetence unlike the MAX crashes. The reliance on automation has not necessary made skills worse, it has just changed the skills needed to fly. The first rule they always say about flying an A320 for example is to fly it like any other plane. So whether it be in normal law or direct law, the flight law should not matter if that is the philosophy meaning the automation hasn’t changed much of that operation. Where automation has changed things is the management of the systems, stuff pilots don’t need to be doing anyway if a computer can handle it. Where on the 737 you have to set the pressurization, on newer Boeing’s and Airbuses you don’t have to do it. It’s the pain in the butt stuff like that that has been automated as well as the removal for the need to apply actual force to flight controls. Other than flight envelope protection, nothing else has been added that makes a pilot worse. That’s all up to individual choice of how much they choose to handfly.

Automation keeps things simpler, that’s why it was invented. If the stall characteristics are good, it’s still noncompliant with regulation; can they waive that regulation?


I didn't write any of that - that's a direct quote from Aviation researchers in the article from the Harvard Business Review. That is there opinion that Automation is not everything and that aviation crash rates have come down from automation.

They are saying the downfall of Automation is a loss of connection with the machine have you have so little time actually flying it.

When you get a second read the article - it's a good one.

You are however agreeing with it though. It presents an argument that to some degree contradicts itself. It points out an issue that automation is supposedly making pilot skills worse (all while not being specific about what automation or how) while somewhat erroneously referencing AF447 as an example (it is only partly an example of this as it is also an example of other huge issues stemming from other areas). They didn’t know how to recover from a stall. Hand flying a 737 for your whole flying career won’t teach you that either because you should never approach a stall anyway. There could very well be a decline in specific skills but I don’t buy that this one is due to automation stalls is one of them considering the fact that stalls in large aircraft almost never end well regardless of who is flying it meaning that no one should have actual experience in one on such aircraft.

Automation has made things some amount safer. CRM has gotten better and training had gotten better as well. Flying skills will have only declined due to auto-flight automation which just about everything flying in the category has. The difference in connection to the machine as it is put between an A320 and 737NG is basically nothing aside from the fact that on one you are controlling cables instead of computer signals. You use both the same way. You, however, cite the lower crash rate of the 737NG as proof of this being the case. That to me implies that you believe that the A320 is degrading skills more than the 737 even though there is no reason why it should. A comparison of crash rate of A320 bs specifically 737NG is not a good set of samples to compare. The fairest would be 737 from the -300 and newer compared to the A320; that comparison would be more revealing.

As for the article, they do make a compelling case; however, as I said AF447 was caused by something more than lack of skill due to automation. The crew totally forgot basic scientific knowledge such as how gravity works and how speed increases when going down, something they should have understood from when they were in diapers still. It wasn’t just about how comfortable or connected they felt with the controls. There were psychological issues, issues with the dual input thing, and also CRM issues. Hand flying may improve that or may not. I just don’t see them as a very valid authority on the subject. Having said that, it’s better than the junk on conventional media.


Yes the article does make one think.

I think the US stall (EET) training is a good idea on a recurring basis though as you are right they don't normally and shouldn't experience those situations in practise.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7146
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:03 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
Well if there are further problems, both Boeing and the FAA will get them reviewed and addressed so certification can happen. If it is as bad as some claim above the RTS will be many months from now. If what Boeing submitted after the 100+ test flights is acceptable as it, RTS will be sooner rather than later or Never as some proclaim.

With the MAX on the sidelines Airbus should be racking up the orders, but there seems to be an orders drought at the moment. IF Boeing does a total #FAIL, it would mean an exit from the NB market, putting Airbus in the command seat to charge their customers whatever they want. That should be really great for all of the airlines. I personally hope this shutdown is relatively quick, there are a lot of communities that will be hit hard.


Just as a point of order, Airbus have recorded some 600 or so net NEO orders so far this year and it is not over yet.

MAX orders are down by around 70 plus 186 x ASC 606 listed orders which will also come off the books at some point (mostly Jet I suspect)

Rgds
 
NightStar
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu May 09, 2019 11:17 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:32 am

planecane wrote:
pune wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
A public traded company not only can communicate about the risks, but is required to do so to there investors. The problem is that Boeing have recently presented the risk as the FAA, witch is wrong, so the FAA have rightfully reacted by asking then to stop doing so. Boeing have to communicate about the real internal problems instead of presenting itself as a victim of the FAA.


Probably a naive POV, but aren't shareholders/stockholders supposed to be the owners of a company and the management is someone to whom you have given the authority to run the airlines or whatever product that the company sells. So from a stock-holder perspective couldn't they (the shareholders) ask for any internal documentation, whether under NDA or otherwise ? I am sure if not all but at least some would be genuinely interested to know what is wrong in the company and what else is being kept under wraps. The way things are going, it is possible that we (the paying customers and aviation followers) may never know what actually happened, unless of course a 3rd crash happens where they may be forced to share much more than what they have shared atm.


Stockholders have a financial stake in a company. At the core, when a company sells stock, the buyer is basically loaning money to the company with the hope that the company will earn profit with that investment and pay dividends that give a return better than a safer investment. Financial stakeholders do not have management rights. If you wanted that kind of control or rights, you'd have to amass enough shares to be able to select board members that you have control over. Possibly, they would install you as CEO.

There are 3 people in the world that, if they essentially used their entire net worth, could personally buy a controlling interest in Boeing. They are Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Bernard Arnault. There are others like Warren Buffet that control investment funds that could use the fund to do it and get the power indirectly.


That's an excellent summary. Most shareholders aren't super-wealthy either. The average person in the U.S. has stock investments. These companies must please everybody to sustain themselves and the best way to do that is to make products people want or need and sell them successfully in an open market. When any failure to do so happens, the company is punished because people get scared of losing money so they unload the stock and the possibility exists of company failure and collapse. Airplanes are a very serious business because so many lives are at stake. Nothing can hide the failures of an airplane company because they are such high-profile disasters. I feel Boeing should be firing left and right but maybe this is the wrong attitude. Aerospace is such a high-tech industry that perhaps there are only a certain pool of people able to do those jobs. I do feel Boeing's government should change-those not involved with the actual engineering are more "expendable" than the technology workers. Boeing should be on their knees begging to make it right and also make the hard decisions to prevent it in the future. To restore faith, new management may be necessary.
 
pune
Posts: 392
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:18 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019, Production suspended

Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:31 am

NightStar wrote:
planecane wrote:
pune wrote:

Probably a naive POV, but aren't shareholders/stockholders supposed to be the owners of a company and the management is someone to whom you have given the authority to run the airlines or whatever product that the company sells. So from a stock-holder perspective couldn't they (the shareholders) ask for any internal documentation, whether under NDA or otherwise ? I am sure if not all but at least some would be genuinely interested to know what is wrong in the company and what else is being kept under wraps. The way things are going, it is possible that we (the paying customers and aviation followers) may never know what actually happened, unless of course a 3rd crash happens where they may be forced to share much more than what they have shared atm.


Stockholders have a financial stake in a company. At the core, when a company sells stock, the buyer is basically loaning money to the company with the hope that the company will earn profit with that investment and pay dividends that give a return better than a safer investment. Financial stakeholders do not have management rights. If you wanted that kind of control or rights, you'd have to amass enough shares to be able to select board members that you have control over. Possibly, they would install you as CEO.

There are 3 people in the world that, if they essentially used their entire net worth, could personally buy a controlling interest in Boeing. They are Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates and Bernard Arnault. There are others like Warren Buffet that control investment funds that could use the fund to do it and get the power indirectly.


That's an excellent summary. Most shareholders aren't super-wealthy either. The average person in the U.S. has stock investments. These companies must please everybody to sustain themselves and the best way to do that is to make products people want or need and sell them successfully in an open market. When any failure to do so happens, the company is punished because people get scared of losing money so they unload the stock and the possibility exists of company failure and collapse. Airplanes are a very serious business because so many lives are at stake. Nothing can hide the failures of an airplane company because they are such high-profile disasters. I feel Boeing should be firing left and right but maybe this is the wrong attitude. Aerospace is such a high-tech industry that perhaps there are only a certain pool of people able to do those jobs. I do feel Boeing's government should change-those not involved with the actual engineering are more "expendable" than the technology workers. Boeing should be on their knees begging to make it right and also make the hard decisions to prevent it in the future. To restore faith, new management may be necessary.


usually carrot and stick approach works best. I don't see either for boeing executives so don't see them changing their behavior. If there is jail time for any of them (for which there hasn't been any evidence directly so far ) or any incentive to make their behavior better, they will continue to behave as they have behaved so far. It's everybody else's problem, not theirs.

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