User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4913
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:09 am

barney captain wrote:
Airplanes break - period. All of our training is focused on managing those problems when they arise. This crew was handed a situation that they failed to manage.


Airplanes are designed to break in ways that are manageable.

There are exceedingly few failures that demand immediate pilot actions, and the ones that do exist because they can not be designed out (i.e. engine failure on takeoff, depress, cockpit smoke/fire, etc.) are all regularly trained for as you know too well.

This is an instance of a system that was designed with no redundancy and that was not made fail-safe or even fail-passive. As its failure mode acted directly, and aggressively, on the primary flight controls, it necessitated an immediate action from the crew, the kind which, by industry standard, should be taught in the sim during initial training and then practiced regularly.

Not only was there no training for this failure mode, there was, initially, no information on that failure mode or even the underlying system available to pilots,and deliberately so as to avoid differences training and make the airplane more desirable to customers...

Imagine sending a pilot who has never flown anything other than single-engine aircraft in his life on a powerful twin and letting him deal with a V1 cut without ever doing it in the sim. Would you blame that pilot for 'system mismanagement'? I mean, he knows how to use a rudder, right?
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
asdf
Posts: 496
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:26 am

mjoelnir wrote:
What happened? Do engineers at Boeing not look at was has been done before? Was it to expensive? Needed an upgrade to the avionics? Would have taken to long a time? The engineers that made MCAS for the 767 made redundant right after finishing that design?
How is Boeing able to make a working design once and fuck it completely up the next time something similar is needed?


they needed the bigger LEAPs for economy
they didnt fit
they moved the engines a lot in front and up, compared to the ideal and natural place for CG, CT ....
it didnt fly well, it showed aerodynamical missbeheavor within the flight envelope
it was not certifiable at this stage

there was no way to augment the problem with safe and reliable electronic aids
- within grandfathering rules, and
- without new SIM ratings for the MAX over the NG

so they smugeled a dirty, unsafe and kinda childish MCAS augmentation into the MAX and hided it from the flightdeck crews

we know what happened
it didnt work
there have been more than 350 deaths
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:28 am

seahawk wrote:
morrisond wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
EASA opinion (certainly more relevant than your):

"Pilot training requirements are not meant to compensate for non-acceptable design on the compliance and safety standpoint."


Please ignore then the calls from the FAA, NTSB and Airbus that Pilot training needs to be improved.

I am not disputing that the MCAS isn't flawed it is - however what the crashes have shown is that training is lacking as well.

Under the existing standards Pilots were assumed to be able to handle an emergency of this type. Obviously they were not. Neither were they in AF447 which the NTSB singled out as Airbus not having learned lessons from that either. So you either have to change the standards (lower them) or improve the training.

It's very simple.


Nice to see someone pointing out the root cause of the crashes - substandard pilots that flew a perfectly fine airplane into the ground because they failed to identify a simple fault and failed to work through a very simple memory item.


If the root cause of the crashes is substandard pilots then why has the issue been nowhere near as prevalent for 737NGs and A320s that have far larger in-service fleets but have far, far fewer crashes per flight time/distance travelled?
 
sharpley
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2019 10:28 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:44 am

seahawk wrote:
Nice to see someone pointing out the root cause of the crashes - substandard pilots that flew a perfectly fine airplane into the ground because they failed to identify a simple fault and failed to work through a very simple memory item.

There are many ways to describe the 737 Max, 'perfectly fine' certainly isn't one of them.
 
planecane
Posts: 1230
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:55 am

Just a quick comment on the "average pilot." In certain occupations like Medical Doctor or Airline Pilot, there is a minimum skill level required. Therefore, the "average" skill level of a professional should still be highly skilled.

While an above average pilot can recover from situations like dual engine failure after takeoff like Sully, the worst licensed commercial pilot should be able to recover from any failure scenario that has a NNC that is proven by simulation to be effective.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 11:39 am

zeke wrote:
2175301 wrote:
The KC 767 Tanker uses a much more modern control computer and systems with much more capability. Actually, I understand a version of what is in the 787. Previous post on this site indicates that it is based off of the Intel 80286 chip. I have not been able to find an easy reference for that.

However, the 737 computer is based of of a Motorola 68040; running 60 Mhz, with 4 MB static Ram, and 32 MB for program and database.

http://www.b737.org.uk/fmc.htm

I note that I have found other references that state the same for the 737 computer.

I am fully aware of the concept of best practice... It is not generally a good practice (and certainly not the best practice) to take a program written for a larger faster computer, and then expect it to operate on a smaller slower computer. I think my engineering understandings are intact.

Also, retrofitting in a 787 style cockpit and computer into the 737 would be a very major mod with many more risks than just the MCAS system.

Have a great day


Your talking about the FMC which has nothing to do with with MCAS. The FMC is like the GPS on your car, MCAS is more like the computer that controls ABS.

This MCAS issue is more like a bug in the ABS computer that would lock up the front brakes on a wet corner at high speed. And then blame the driver for not being skilled enough to stop the car from going off the side of the road and crashing.

The driver should have known while travelling out of control at high speed with their front brakes locked up that they could pull a fuse out from under the dash and apply the emergency brake. It’s the drivers fault, not the car.

There is a real lack of reality with the expectations some people have with pilot responses.


Zeke - to use your car analogy with Lionair.

22 Times the Pilots got to the corner and the brakes locked up but the Pilot was still able to save it when ABS failed by pumping the brakes - not once did he think of turning the ABS controller off and maybe not trying to use the main brakes for the rest of the Drive and rely on the emergency brake. He then turned it over to the Co-pilot and forgot to tell him to pump the brakes sufficiently at the next corner or they will never make it.

On ET302 the first time they got to a corner the ABS failed and the brakes locked up - but they saved it - then they did the same thing at the next corner - after that they said - OOPS maybe something is wrong with the ABS - we better turn it off all while leaving a brick on the accelerator pedal.

Then they neglected to remove the brick on the accelerator pedal and expected to make the next corner without ABS. It didn't work.

Both flights had more than sufficient time to take manual control of the flight.

Their basic (not MAX or NG specific) training should have made both flights survivable.

These were not big problems to solve - half a wing didn't fall off or they didn't have to deal with an in-flight fire. Albeit degraded without Electric trim both flights should have been able to land safely if basic airmanship was better.

No-one is not debating that the primary reason the planes crashed is because of Boeing's screwed up design. That has been established beyond doubt.

However the reason Pilot training should be part of the discussion is that no matter how people try to dramatize what happened these should have been relatively easy emergencies to deal with and they exposed problems in the training system. It was a simple solution - Turn off one system and fly the plane manually - the previous Lionair flight showed it could be done.

Basic Pilot skills should have been able to handle these and as it's obvious they did not - something needs to change in the training system - most likely worldwide as evidenced by the NTSB, the FAA, Airbus and I assume Boeing once they are past this are calling for.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 11:45 am

zeke wrote:
seahawk wrote:

Nice to see someone pointing out the root cause of the crashes - substandard pilots that flew a perfectly fine airplane into the ground because they failed to identify a simple fault and failed to work through a very simple memory item.


Their point is not very valid. ET has a very good training system, their pilot and corporate standards are very high. Higher than many western airlines. That crew tried everything, and when the memory procedure did not work as they did not have enough strength to move the controls, they tried to think out of the box and turned the electric motors back on for assistance.

That aircraft was in an undesirable state because of a problem that the airframe caused. That is very different to AF447 where if the pilots had done nothing everything would have been ok. It was the pilots that flew the aircraft into an upset.


So did ET by not disengaging Autothrottle and leaving it at TOGA.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 11:49 am

PixelFlight wrote:
barney captain wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Please provides the training requirement that was "lacking" relevant to "handle an emergency of this type".
Please provides the detailed procedures into the "standards Pilots" that "handle an emergency of this type".
Without any details, you simply blame without any verifiable facts.


It's quite basic - disregard the instruments giving bad information, and use the ones that are working. I was trained to recognize a failed instrument early on in my instrument training (as should every pilot) - and we still practice this today.

True, there was a single faulty airspeed indication and a stick shaker - but only on the Captains side. The FO had a set of fully functioning instruments right in front him (plus the standby) - yet he lacked the experience and professional confidence to simply say "my aircraft". Instead he let the Captain struggle for over six minutes. SIX minutes. Never pulling the thrust levers out of TOGA that entire time? My God, in a 737 you don't need an airspeed indicator to know you're over the barber pole - the sound alone will be deafening. All of this on a clear, VFR day. Blame MCAS all you want, but these guys let the aircraft get into an undesirable state long before MCAS even activated.

Airplanes break - period. All of our training is focused on managing those problems when they arise. This crew was handed a situation that they failed to manage.

I asked for a training procedure, a document that I can read, not a general story.

There was no known information to the pilots at that time that the speed would render the manual trim impossible to move after the MCAS put it in extreme trim and there cutoff the stab trim motor. There have to prioritize there workload on the immediate death thread, and for them it was the nose down attitude with no working procedure to fix it. It's only _AFTER_ the two accidents that the speed has been identified as why the procedure there implemented did not work.


So you don't expect Pilot's to know that operating over Vmo is bad and should be avoided at all costs?
 
StTim
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:00 pm

Whilst I have not seen proof so this must be hearsay it has been mentioned on here several times than experience US pilots when faced with the scenario in a simulator that ET had only 50% managed not to crash the frame.

This to me points out that those who are saying it should have been easy to recover are not fully correct.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:11 pm

morrisond wrote:
....................
Basic Pilot skills should have been able to handle these and as it's obvious they did not - something needs to change in the training system - most likely worldwide as evidenced by the NTSB, the FAA, Airbus and I assume Boeing once they are past this are calling for.


a rather long winded misdirection.
comparable would be :


You notice the steering wheel lock is damaged and you have to hold the key "just so"
to not have it block to keep you able to navigate down the winding road ..
.. while the break just gave up its ghost.

Your friends had already notice that steering lock problem and
found a fix on a long strait road but had only left a chit of paper
saying the ingnition key had issues.
Murphy is an optimist
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:14 pm

StTim wrote:
Whilst I have not seen proof so this must be hearsay it has been mentioned on here several times than experience US pilots when faced with the scenario in a simulator that ET had only 50% managed not to crash the frame.

This to me points out that those who are saying it should have been easy to recover are not fully correct.


You'd also have reports around from those pilots having seen the issue and done the "right thing" from 1st world instinct.
( it still would have been a reportable issue, right?)
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8842
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:16 pm

zeke wrote:
seahawk wrote:

Nice to see someone pointing out the root cause of the crashes - substandard pilots that flew a perfectly fine airplane into the ground because they failed to identify a simple fault and failed to work through a very simple memory item.


Their point is not very valid. ET has a very good training system, their pilot and corporate standards are very high. Higher than many western airlines. That crew tried everything, and when the memory procedure did not work as they did not have enough strength to move the controls, they tried to think out of the box and turned the electric motors back on for assistance.

That aircraft was in an undesirable state because of a problem that the airframe caused. That is very different to AF447 where if the pilots had done nothing everything would have been ok. It was the pilots that flew the aircraft into an upset.


The training of the airline can only be as good as the information provided by the OEM and when it comes to the workings of MCAS little information was provided even at the time of the ET crash. Sure the implementation of the system was not following best practice but I am still much more concerned about the fact that Boeing hid the system completely from the pilots until the Lion air crash. In that case we had a training deficiency caused by Boeing.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:22 pm

flyingphil wrote:
A simple question..

If both sets of pilots had been flying the 737NG would 346 people be alive today?


So.. according to the Seattle Times the 737MAX Cockpit did not meet current Federal Regulations.. I think that is a big deal..

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ew-alerts/

It is a big deal. in the context of the MAX disaster.

Peter Lemme has re-tweeted a conversation that confirms that the P-8 is fitted with EICAS system (by Boeing Defense, post Renton as B737-800) that probably correctly concludes the issue with fitting EICAS system to MAX is only related to it being no longer certifiable as a 737 derivative and would require significant training. the quoted $10billion cost is likely mostly projected loss of profits on sales since certification of an available military EICAS for a 737 airframe would surely not cost a massive amount as part of an existing design and certification project.

Similarly, the KC46 tanker MCAS version, from which the concept was derived for MAX, uses both AoA sensors. Single sensor for MAX can only be attributed to concerns for derivative type certification and training since, contrary to popular myth it has been proven 'easy' to do for MAX, as expected. It is also worthy of note that Auto Thrust uses both radar altimeter sensors, following the THY MAS event, busting the popular myth that there is a total design dogma for single sensor/single side design or that it was not possible with the current FCC architecture. It should also be noted that MCAS was available in both FCCs and can alternate if one or other is non-capable, according to reports, for system availability reasons.

It would be of no surprise if the 787 airspeed system was ruled out for much similar reasons.

A pattern here maybe?

Ray
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:57 pm

StTim wrote:
Whilst I have not seen proof so this must be hearsay it has been mentioned on here several times than experience US pilots when faced with the scenario in a simulator that ET had only 50% managed not to crash the frame.

This to me points out that those who are saying it should have been easy to recover are not fully correct.


The Pilots were placed in the SIM where it was not recoverable - already in a dive over Vmo with Thrust in TOGA - well past the point when the electric was disengaged and thrust should have been pulled back in the ET302 flight.
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2246
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:59 pm

flyingphil wrote:
Another Seattle Times scoop:
Boeing pushed FAA to relax 737 MAX certification requirements for crew alerts.
It argued full compliance with the latest federal requirements would be “impractical” for the MAX and would cost too much.

https://t.co/KF0NsGCHLT

Boeing pushed FAA to relax 737 MAX certification requirements for crew alerts

Damning evidence that Boeing put a price on safety.


Wow. That is a scathing report.

Very important read.

My take on it:

The MCAS in the 767 tankers is working with the early 80s EICAS system introduced in the 757/767. However, EICAS was not installed in the 737 MAX 35 years later, because the system architecture itself is far too archaic, and would require massive redesign - and the type would no longer be grandfathered. Which leads to the MAX MCAS which was poorly designed and badly integrated into the MAX because there's no EICAS to work with. And the reason MCAS was needed in the first place is because the 737 MAX doesn't fly right with those oversized engines mounted forward and up on the leading edge of the wing. Which is a problem that could be solved by redesigning the wing box to lengthen the main landing gear. And then there's the issue of trying to hide the MCAS in the manual and not installing it in the simulators, and not telling anyone about it. Boeing has cut corners and cut corners and cut corners at every single turn - despite multiple warnings by engineers - all for that sweet $.

And now 346 people are dead, billions of $ are out the window, and the airlines can't fly the plane they paid for.

The people responsible for this needs to face a trial at some point. And that includes both Boeing and FAA.
 
asdf
Posts: 496
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:06 pm

morrisond wrote:
StTim wrote:
Whilst I have not seen proof so this must be hearsay it has been mentioned on here several times than experience US pilots when faced with the scenario in a simulator that ET had only 50% managed not to crash the frame.

This to me points out that those who are saying it should have been easy to recover are not fully correct.


The Pilots were placed in the SIM where it was not recoverable - already in a dive over Vmo with Thrust in TOGA - well past the point when the electric was disengaged and thrust should have been pulled back in the ET302 flight.


source?
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:28 pm

seahawk wrote:
zeke wrote:
seahawk wrote:

Nice to see someone pointing out the root cause of the crashes - substandard pilots that flew a perfectly fine airplane into the ground because they failed to identify a simple fault and failed to work through a very simple memory item.


Their point is not very valid. ET has a very good training system, their pilot and corporate standards are very high. Higher than many western airlines. That crew tried everything, and when the memory procedure did not work as they did not have enough strength to move the controls, they tried to think out of the box and turned the electric motors back on for assistance.

That aircraft was in an undesirable state because of a problem that the airframe caused. That is very different to AF447 where if the pilots had done nothing everything would have been ok. It was the pilots that flew the aircraft into an upset.


The training of the airline can only be as good as the information provided by the OEM and when it comes to the workings of MCAS little information was provided even at the time of the ET crash. Sure the implementation of the system was not following best practice but I am still much more concerned about the fact that Boeing hid the system completely from the pilots until the Lion air crash. In that case we had a training deficiency caused by Boeing.


Yes Boeing caused a training deficiency on MCAS.

However it's the point on ET302 where basic training should have taken over is the issue.

When ET302 properly cut off electric trim they were in the same state as they would have been if they were dealing with a normal trim runaway. Nose trimmed down, Autothrottle engaged and having to deal with significant back pressure on the controls. The procedure to save the plane would have been the same - disengage Autothrottle and get control of the aircraft. They failed to do this. There training failed them.

A normal trim runaway is something that all pilots are expected to be able to deal with. Although it presented itself differently initially and all the alarms were going off - which needs to be addressed on all Aircraft designs as per the NTSB.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:30 pm

rheinwaldner wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Thus you show the fallacy of your 260x statistic: it compares the unfixed MAX to planes that had problems that got fixed and flew for decades.

In statistics you can compare things like they are.

This confirms you do not understand how statistics work.

You can compare statistics from dissimilar populations all you want, but you can't reach any valid conclusions by doing so.

This type of comparison is garbage in, garbage out.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8842
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 1:44 pm

morrisond wrote:
seahawk wrote:
zeke wrote:

Their point is not very valid. ET has a very good training system, their pilot and corporate standards are very high. Higher than many western airlines. That crew tried everything, and when the memory procedure did not work as they did not have enough strength to move the controls, they tried to think out of the box and turned the electric motors back on for assistance.

That aircraft was in an undesirable state because of a problem that the airframe caused. That is very different to AF447 where if the pilots had done nothing everything would have been ok. It was the pilots that flew the aircraft into an upset.


The training of the airline can only be as good as the information provided by the OEM and when it comes to the workings of MCAS little information was provided even at the time of the ET crash. Sure the implementation of the system was not following best practice but I am still much more concerned about the fact that Boeing hid the system completely from the pilots until the Lion air crash. In that case we had a training deficiency caused by Boeing.


Yes Boeing caused a training deficiency on MCAS.

However it's the point on ET302 where basic training should have taken over is the issue.

When ET302 properly cut off electric trim they were in the same state as they would have been if they were dealing with a normal trim runaway. Nose trimmed down, Autothrottle engaged and having to deal with significant back pressure on the controls. The procedure to save the plane would have been the same - disengage Autothrottle and get control of the aircraft. They failed to do this. There training failed them.

A normal trim runaway is something that all pilots are expected to be able to deal with. Although it presented itself differently initially and all the alarms were going off - which needs to be addressed on all Aircraft designs as per the NTSB.


Yes, the training failed them, because a runaway trim on the NG and on the MAX sims of the time presented itself as one continuous trim motion that also saw electric trim having no effect. Here it was not continuous and electric trim worked. In that case having trained for a runaway trim on a NG, actually might have made things worse, as the problem they encountered did not match the training for the problem they were facing.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:18 pm

prebennorholm wrote:
The 737MAX is not grounded due to training issues. I am, however, afraid that the reason for grounding is purely due to the crashes. In a better world its faults would have been discovered independent of the crashes, or at least after the first crash, and then have initiated the grounding.

Well as far as we know, bit flip and small size of the trim wheel were not the flaws in the design, it was MCAS which was fixed in June and submitted for testing, so if that had passed the MAX should have been cleared for flight by now...BUT...bit flip was introduced, EASA had their additional items some of which have their roots in the NG so the MAX is still grounded. So if we technically want to say that this thread should only be about what caused the crashes, it should be MCAS only.

Unfortunately, the atmosphere in this thread is single focus.
 
jmry888
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:25 pm

On Zero Hedge there was an article about the engineer who designed the cockpit system that the pilots use to control the 737 max. It was his opinion that Being did not do enough with the safety systems . Now this engineer has requested whistle blower status. But it was HIS design and implementation that got used. He stated that he was afraid of company higher ups getting back at him so he said nothing about any imperfections of his system during design and//or production.

This engineer submitted a system that in his opinion was not suited for the function it is being used for. Should not this engineer be brought up on murder charges ? He never said a word during development or standardization of system, only after the crashes is he speaking up. Curtis Ewbank designed the 737 Max cockpit systems that pilots use to monitor and control the airplane.

This man is now blaming Boeing for his failed cockpit system. He at the time he repeatedly collected a weekly/monthly paycheck,collected the bonus's handed out, collected and used his vacation time, collected and used his sick time/leave. He has admitted he never said a word about the short comings of his system to Boeing , until after the aircraft was in production.

This aerospace engineer Curtis Ewbank should be investigated for charges of murder for the 2 crashes. His cockpit system did not do what it was supposed to do. Everyone can blame Boeing all they want but you have to start looking at head engineer who approved the design they are just as responsible as their employers.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 672
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:06 pm

jmry888 wrote:
On Zero Hedge there was an article about the engineer who designed the cockpit system that the pilots use to control the 737 max. It was his opinion that Being did not do enough with the safety systems . Now this engineer has requested whistle blower status. But it was HIS design and implementation that got used. He stated that he was afraid of company higher ups getting back at him so he said nothing about any imperfections of his system during design and//or production.

This engineer submitted a system that in his opinion was not suited for the function it is being used for. Should not this engineer be brought up on murder charges ? He never said a word during development or standardization of system, only after the crashes is he speaking up. Curtis Ewbank designed the 737 Max cockpit systems that pilots use to monitor and control the airplane.

This man is now blaming Boeing for his failed cockpit system. He at the time he repeatedly collected a weekly/monthly paycheck,collected the bonus's handed out, collected and used his vacation time, collected and used his sick time/leave. He has admitted he never said a word about the short comings of his system to Boeing , until after the aircraft was in production.

This aerospace engineer Curtis Ewbank should be investigated for charges of murder for the 2 crashes. His cockpit system did not do what it was supposed to do. Everyone can blame Boeing all they want but you have to start looking at head engineer who approved the design they are just as responsible as their employers.

Complete miss-representation of both the content of the named blog and the named individuals reported responsibilities and his reported complaint.
 
AvroLanc
Posts: 59
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:40 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:14 pm

There seems to be a lot of chatter here about poor pilot skills. If this was the root cause of the accidents then length of the grounding would have been considerable shorter. If pilots had sim time and training on this I doubt these incidents would have happened. I look forward to seeing the Max back in the air soon, but it must be safe for the public and pilots.
707, 717, 727, 732, 734, 737 ,738, 7M8, 742, 744, 767, 773, 789.
DC8, 9,10, MD80 ,L1011 ,HSTrident, BAC111, DHComet.
DH8-100, 400, CRJ100,200,700, EM75,90, A310,319,320,321,333
 
BEG2IAH
Posts: 929
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:42 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:14 pm

jmry888 wrote:
This aerospace engineer Curtis Ewbank should be investigated for charges of murder for the 2 crashes. His cockpit system did not do what it was supposed to do. Everyone can blame Boeing all they want but you have to start looking at head engineer who approved the design they are just as responsible as their employers.


I just read about this in NYT, CNN, and the Seattle Times and my understanding of what he was trying to do was completely different from yours. He left Boeing in 2015 and returned in 2018. He's been working on the development of 777X and filed the complaint during his second "mandate" at the company. He was pushing for EICAS for 737 MAX and mentioned some other things...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/busi ... ashes.html
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/02/politics ... index.html
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... over-cost/
Flying at the cruising altitude is (mostly) boring. I wish all flights were nothing but endless take offs and landings every 10 minutes or so.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:22 pm

seahawk wrote:
morrisond wrote:
seahawk wrote:

The training of the airline can only be as good as the information provided by the OEM and when it comes to the workings of MCAS little information was provided even at the time of the ET crash. Sure the implementation of the system was not following best practice but I am still much more concerned about the fact that Boeing hid the system completely from the pilots until the Lion air crash. In that case we had a training deficiency caused by Boeing.


Yes Boeing caused a training deficiency on MCAS.

However it's the point on ET302 where basic training should have taken over is the issue.

When ET302 properly cut off electric trim they were in the same state as they would have been if they were dealing with a normal trim runaway. Nose trimmed down, Autothrottle engaged and having to deal with significant back pressure on the controls. The procedure to save the plane would have been the same - disengage Autothrottle and get control of the aircraft. They failed to do this. There training failed them.

A normal trim runaway is something that all pilots are expected to be able to deal with. Although it presented itself differently initially and all the alarms were going off - which needs to be addressed on all Aircraft designs as per the NTSB.


Yes, the training failed them, because a runaway trim on the NG and on the MAX sims of the time presented itself as one continuous trim motion that also saw electric trim having no effect. Here it was not continuous and electric trim worked. In that case having trained for a runaway trim on a NG, actually might have made things worse, as the problem they encountered did not match the training for the problem they were facing.


I totally understand that but at the point where the Electric Trim was turned off, the out-of proper adjustment tailplane was forcing the nose down and the Auto Throttle was engaged in TOGO the recovery would have been the same in both scenario's.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:24 pm

AvroLanc wrote:
There seems to be a lot of chatter here about poor pilot skills. If this was the root cause of the accidents then length of the grounding would have been considerable shorter. If pilots had sim time and training on this I doubt these incidents would have happened. I look forward to seeing the Max back in the air soon, but it must be safe for the public and pilots.


No one is arguing it was the root cause - Bad MCAS design was the root cause - however the crashes uncovered deficiencies in training that need to be corrected as well to ensure we have the safest air system possible.
 
jmry888
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:25 pm

So how does that change , the cockpit design that controls the max is his design , and as we have experienced in the past it does not do what it is supposed to do. It was his design , he at the end had to sign off on it . If he complained about management not being supportive in his previous employment why go back to same thing ? And why did he wait all these years to say something ? Lives have been lost because of his cockpit design. He has stated he never said anything about short comings about the system. , he put wages,bonus's,vacation,sick leave in front of safety , in our opinion. And opinion's are like butts everyone has one.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8746
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:25 pm

Boeing pushed FAA to relax 737 MAX certification requirements for crew alerts

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ew-alerts/

It seems that when start digging more and more dirt is turned up regarding the certification of the 737MAX by the FAA.

This time the standards for crew alerts were relaxed. Boeing argued it was to expensive to comply.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:30 pm

morrisond wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
barney captain wrote:

It's quite basic - disregard the instruments giving bad information, and use the ones that are working. I was trained to recognize a failed instrument early on in my instrument training (as should every pilot) - and we still practice this today.

True, there was a single faulty airspeed indication and a stick shaker - but only on the Captains side. The FO had a set of fully functioning instruments right in front him (plus the standby) - yet he lacked the experience and professional confidence to simply say "my aircraft". Instead he let the Captain struggle for over six minutes. SIX minutes. Never pulling the thrust levers out of TOGA that entire time? My God, in a 737 you don't need an airspeed indicator to know you're over the barber pole - the sound alone will be deafening. All of this on a clear, VFR day. Blame MCAS all you want, but these guys let the aircraft get into an undesirable state long before MCAS even activated.

Airplanes break - period. All of our training is focused on managing those problems when they arise. This crew was handed a situation that they failed to manage.

I asked for a training procedure, a document that I can read, not a general story.

There was no known information to the pilots at that time that the speed would render the manual trim impossible to move after the MCAS put it in extreme trim and there cutoff the stab trim motor. There have to prioritize there workload on the immediate death thread, and for them it was the nose down attitude with no working procedure to fix it. It's only _AFTER_ the two accidents that the speed has been identified as why the procedure there implemented did not work.


So you don't expect Pilot's to know that operating over Vmo is bad and should be avoided at all costs?

There where toward the ground with no procedure to survive. The high speed was not a priority for them. As I said, this was only _AFTER_ the crash that the speed was found to be related to why the procedure failed. There where in high stress and workload in a untrained situation. You can't expect the pilots to focus on all the procedures at the same time.
 
jollo
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:34 pm

Revelation wrote:
rheinwaldner wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Thus you show the fallacy of your 260x statistic: it compares the unfixed MAX to planes that had problems that got fixed and flew for decades.

In statistics you can compare things like they are.

This confirms you do not understand how statistics work.

You can compare statistics from dissimilar populations all you want, but you can't reach any valid conclusions by doing so.

This type of comparison is garbage in, garbage out.


Why do you keep repeating “dissimilar populations” over and over? MAX is part of the population of civilian airliners certified to the same standard. Statistical analysis is meant to identify clusters and outliers within a population, and that’s exactly what MAX is now: an outlier (we all hope it will revert back towards median after RTS).

Maybe you don’t understand statistics (that would not be inexcusable: lots of good people have terrible trouble with stats), but I have a hunch that’s not the case here.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:37 pm

This is taking the proportions of a scandal, akin to VW's dieselgate.

If I were Muellenberg, I would order to stop producing MAXes and start producing B738NG's again. The B738NG may not be as competitive but at least it is a well proven design and many airlines will accept to switch back to it at the right price.
 
LDRA
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:01 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:41 pm

jmry888 wrote:
On Zero Hedge there was an article about the engineer who designed the cockpit system that the pilots use to control the 737 max. It was his opinion that Being did not do enough with the safety systems . Now this engineer has requested whistle blower status. But it was HIS design and implementation that got used. He stated that he was afraid of company higher ups getting back at him so he said nothing about any imperfections of his system during design and//or production.

This engineer submitted a system that in his opinion was not suited for the function it is being used for. Should not this engineer be brought up on murder charges ? He never said a word during development or standardization of system, only after the crashes is he speaking up. Curtis Ewbank designed the 737 Max cockpit systems that pilots use to monitor and control the airplane.

This man is now blaming Boeing for his failed cockpit system. He at the time he repeatedly collected a weekly/monthly paycheck,collected the bonus's handed out, collected and used his vacation time, collected and used his sick time/leave. He has admitted he never said a word about the short comings of his system to Boeing , until after the aircraft was in production.

This aerospace engineer Curtis Ewbank should be investigated for charges of murder for the 2 crashes. His cockpit system did not do what it was supposed to do. Everyone can blame Boeing all they want but you have to start looking at head engineer who approved the design they are just as responsible as their employers.


You do realize in large project that involves multiple levels of system, with complex interactions between systems, there is no way a single person can be responsible for design? It would be irresponsible for a single person to be liable for system design.
Working level technical staffs responsibility is to follow company process. If process has issue, it is company officers that needs to be responsible
The real sad reality is there are too many ways corporate higher ups can escape from this responsibility...
 
morrisond
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:45 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
morrisond wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
I asked for a training procedure, a document that I can read, not a general story.

There was no known information to the pilots at that time that the speed would render the manual trim impossible to move after the MCAS put it in extreme trim and there cutoff the stab trim motor. There have to prioritize there workload on the immediate death thread, and for them it was the nose down attitude with no working procedure to fix it. It's only _AFTER_ the two accidents that the speed has been identified as why the procedure there implemented did not work.


So you don't expect Pilot's to know that operating over Vmo is bad and should be avoided at all costs?

There where toward the ground with no procedure to survive. The high speed was not a priority for them. As I said, this was only _AFTER_ the crash that the speed was found to be related to why the procedure failed. There where in high stress and workload in a untrained situation. You can't expect the pilots to focus on all the procedures at the same time.


No they were still climbing when they should have pulled the thrust back and were 7,000 AGL with the Great Rift Valley (another 3-4,000 of Altitude beneath the plane) directly in front of them.

I'm sorry but control of thrust and speed is a basic pilot skill and should never be excused in any airplane operations.
 
jmry888
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:49 pm

Then how do you explain that this Curtis Ewbank said that he designed the cockpit systems that controlled the max ? He stated that . Why didn't he take a stand if what he presented was not up to the task ? You are still trying make the employer responsible for everything and the person who designed and signed off on it no responsibility at all. These engineers need to start being held accountable for what they design and sign off on .
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 8842
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 3:56 pm

morrisond wrote:
seahawk wrote:
morrisond wrote:

Yes Boeing caused a training deficiency on MCAS.

However it's the point on ET302 where basic training should have taken over is the issue.

When ET302 properly cut off electric trim they were in the same state as they would have been if they were dealing with a normal trim runaway. Nose trimmed down, Autothrottle engaged and having to deal with significant back pressure on the controls. The procedure to save the plane would have been the same - disengage Autothrottle and get control of the aircraft. They failed to do this. There training failed them.

A normal trim runaway is something that all pilots are expected to be able to deal with. Although it presented itself differently initially and all the alarms were going off - which needs to be addressed on all Aircraft designs as per the NTSB.


Yes, the training failed them, because a runaway trim on the NG and on the MAX sims of the time presented itself as one continuous trim motion that also saw electric trim having no effect. Here it was not continuous and electric trim worked. In that case having trained for a runaway trim on a NG, actually might have made things worse, as the problem they encountered did not match the training for the problem they were facing.


I totally understand that but at the point where the Electric Trim was turned off, the out-of proper adjustment tailplane was forcing the nose down and the Auto Throttle was engaged in TOGO the recovery would have been the same in both scenario's.


Just that the time to detect the problem would have been much reduced in a classic runaway trim scenario.

Imho the main cause of the crash is not how MCAS was implemented (which was not up to best practice of course) but that the function was hidden from the pilots and that the runaway trim checklist was not adjusted to include the new system and how a fault would look. MCAS should have been part of the ipad training and a MCAS fault should have been part of the MAX sim training.

All other problems (like on sensor only, the changed function of the switches, the missing AoA disagree warning, etc.) are just contributing factors, but the root cause is the fact that a new system with direct flight control inputs was hidden from the pilots.
 
User avatar
zkojq
Posts: 3939
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:01 pm

Sooner787 wrote:
There's an excellent article on the Aviation Week website ( need to register to access--free ) detailing
Southwest and AA's RTS plans for their Max's. Southwest will focus first on their 40 new build but
undelivered Max's. Once those are on property, Southwest's attention will turn to the 34 they have in
storage in VCV.


One would have thought that they'd do the opposite to preserve CAPEX.

klm617 wrote:

Sorry but I really don't want to trust my safety in getting from point A to point B in the hands of just an average commercial airline pilot.


Sorry but statistically you're going to have to on 50% of the flights you fly on, whether you like it or not. Because that's how averages work. :roll:

morrisond wrote:
You totally missed the context of the discussion. The discussion was centered around - add automation so Pilot's don't have to be as good


And who's going to trust Boeing on that after the MAX debacle?


morrisond wrote:

They sent an incredibly important AD by email and didn't even request a read receipt? That too me is not the symptom of a professional training system.

Source? And can you please provide evidence that US carriers ( the holy grail of safe operations) did request a read receipt?

PixelFlight wrote:
Avherald reference ?
Today's Internet give access to incidents before it was a thing: https://aviation-safety.net/database/


Most crew would probably prefer to preserve their anonymity, which is understandable. Linking to the avherald report allows their employer to link the a.net account to the crew member.
First to fly the 787-9
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:01 pm

morrisond wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
morrisond wrote:

So you don't expect Pilot's to know that operating over Vmo is bad and should be avoided at all costs?

There where toward the ground with no procedure to survive. The high speed was not a priority for them. As I said, this was only _AFTER_ the crash that the speed was found to be related to why the procedure failed. There where in high stress and workload in a untrained situation. You can't expect the pilots to focus on all the procedures at the same time.


No they were still climbing when they should have pulled the thrust back and were 7,000 AGL with the Great Rift Valley (another 3-4,000 of Altitude beneath the plane) directly in front of them.

I'm sorry but control of thrust and speed is a basic pilot skill and should never be excused in any airplane operations.

From the ET302 FDR, the speed was not too high when the autopilot disconnected and the MCAS immediately trimmed the stab to a nose down attitude. It's normal that there focused first into the trim runaway procedure. A the time there reach VMO, there where already with a nose toward the ground without procedure to survive. No one did know at that time that reducing the speed could have helped to solve the problem.
 
ShamrockBoi330
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:20 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Boeing pushed FAA to relax 737 MAX certification requirements for crew alerts

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ew-alerts/

It seems that when start digging more and more dirt is turned up regarding the certification of the 737MAX by the FAA.

This time the standards for crew alerts were relaxed. Boeing argued it was to expensive to comply.


This is shocking!

The regulator struck out four clauses that would be requirements for any new jet being designed today, the report said. That meant the planemaker avoided a complete upgrade of the 737's aging flight-crew-alerting system, the report added.

How were they allowed to get away with this? This points squarely at Boeing, and not the engineer as some earlier posters are indicating as being just as culpable as Boeing.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 334
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:27 pm

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Boeing pushed FAA to relax 737 MAX certification requirements for crew alerts

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ew-alerts/

It seems that when start digging more and more dirt is turned up regarding the certification of the 737MAX by the FAA.

This time the standards for crew alerts were relaxed. Boeing argued it was to expensive to comply.


This is shocking!

The regulator struck out four clauses that would be requirements for any new jet being designed today, the report said. That meant the planemaker avoided a complete upgrade of the 737's aging flight-crew-alerting system, the report added.

How were they allowed to get away with this? This points squarely at Boeing, and not the engineer as some earlier posters are indicating as being just as culpable as Boeing.
very interesting yet shocking to read!! How could the Faa allow this to happen?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:42 pm

jmry888 wrote:
Then how do you explain that this Curtis Ewbank said that he designed the cockpit systems that controlled the max ?

My reading of the ST article left me with the impression that he did not work on the MAX, he worked for the company wide safety team and was proposing the artificial speed enhancement for ALL Boeing Commercial Aircraft, including MAX. It is present on 787. MAX was the next opportunity to add it, but program managers and the Chief Engineer shot it down due to cost concerns.
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
aerolimani
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:43 pm

StTim wrote:
Why oh why are people arguing around this?
Firstly the plane as certified and delivered was flawed. That is Boeing and the FAA’s baby
Secondly the pilots might have been able to recover it if they had made different choices/had more experience/ had better training.
This thread is about the grounding to resolve the first issue. Why do we keep coming back to the second which will be covered in the specific accident reports.

Indeed. For a thread about grounding, it's astounding how few words are taken up with the discussion of the aircraft, and how many are spent on discussing the pilot's actions. It's a serious imbalance, IMO. Unfortunately, people want to shout from where they think their voice is likely to be heard by the most people. This, as opposed to exercising some self-control and posting in the correct threads. If I were a moderator, I might start sorting people's posts into the correct threads. I realize there is some blur between topics, but when we start discussing specific pilot actions of one crash or the other, then that really doesn't belong here.

Here are all the correct and still active threads:
• grounding, ungrounding, root cause of grounding: this thread: viewtopic.php?t=1432067
• pilot culpability in Lion Air crash: Lion AIr thread: viewtopic.php?t=1407217
• pilot culpability in Ethiopian AIrlines crash: Ethiopian AIrlines: viewtopic.php?t=1417519
• discussion of improved pilot training: viewtopic.php?t=1431655
 
hivue
Posts: 1954
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:51 pm

zkojq wrote:
Sorry but statistically you're going to have to on 50% of the flights you fly on, whether you like it or not. Because that's how averages work. :roll:


Sorry but that's how median works, not average. If the distribution can be biased -- by better selection processes, better training, a better pool of applicants, etc. -- toward the upper end of whatever scale is used to measure pilot proficiency then the number of below average pilots can be a very small number.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9189
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:52 pm

zkojq wrote:
Sooner787 wrote:
There's an excellent article on the Aviation Week website ( need to register to access--free ) detailing
Southwest and AA's RTS plans for their Max's. Southwest will focus first on their 40 new build but
undelivered Max's. Once those are on property, Southwest's attention will turn to the 34 they have in
storage in VCV.


One would have thought that they'd do the opposite to preserve CAPEX.

CAPEX is involved in new frames being delivered also, I think the issue is which one they can get into service faster.

zkojq wrote:
And who's going to trust Boeing on that after the MAX debacle?

Everyone who is not and have not cancelled or put their 787's, 777's and 767's up for sale, fortunately or unfortunately, the same Boeing who built the MAX is also building those aircraft.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:53 pm

oschkosch wrote:
very interesting yet shocking to read!! How could the Faa allow this to happen?

Well, if one reads the article, one finds:

The FAA said in a statement that the MAX complies with the “applicable” regulations, then listed some of the criteria under which exceptions from full compliance are granted.

And:

The submission from Boeing then cited an estimate of the cost of full compliance at more than $10 billion.

This staggering sum included not only the direct cost to Boeing of redesigning the airplane systems but also the expense of additional pilot training that new systems would require — costs that would have been borne by Boeing’s airline customers and would have made the MAX a much less attractive airplane to buy.

And:

In April 2014, the FAA accepted Boeing’s argument that for the MAX, the safety benefit of full compliance with the crew-alerting regulations was “not commensurate with the costs necessary to comply.”

Ironically, much of their argument is based on the great safety record of the NG, one Boeing themselves FUBAR'd via MCAS 1.0.
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: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 4:58 pm

aerolimani wrote:
StTim wrote:
Why oh why are people arguing around this?
Firstly the plane as certified and delivered was flawed. That is Boeing and the FAA’s baby
Secondly the pilots might have been able to recover it if they had made different choices/had more experience/ had better training.
This thread is about the grounding to resolve the first issue. Why do we keep coming back to the second which will be covered in the specific accident reports.

Indeed. For a thread about grounding, it's astounding how few words are taken up with the discussion of the aircraft, and how many are spent on discussing the pilot's actions. It's a serious imbalance, IMO. Unfortunately, people want to shout from where they think their voice is likely to be heard by the most people. This, as opposed to exercising some self-control and posting in the correct threads. If I were a moderator, I might start sorting people's posts into the correct threads. I realize there is some blur between topics, but when we start discussing specific pilot actions of one crash or the other, then that really doesn't belong here.

Here are all the correct and still active threads:
• grounding, ungrounding, root cause of grounding: this thread: viewtopic.php?t=1432067
• pilot culpability in Lion Air crash: Lion AIr thread: viewtopic.php?t=1407217
• pilot culpability in Ethiopian AIrlines crash: Ethiopian AIrlines: viewtopic.php?t=1417519
• discussion of improved pilot training: viewtopic.php?t=1431655


If people would stop shouting that there was nothing that pilot's could have done to save the flights and that the training system is perfect and does not need to be looked as part of the un-grounding then people like myself would have no reason to post in here.
 
User avatar
aerolimani
Posts: 1248
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:18 pm

morrisond wrote:
aerolimani wrote:
StTim wrote:
Why oh why are people arguing around this?
Firstly the plane as certified and delivered was flawed. That is Boeing and the FAA’s baby
Secondly the pilots might have been able to recover it if they had made different choices/had more experience/ had better training.
This thread is about the grounding to resolve the first issue. Why do we keep coming back to the second which will be covered in the specific accident reports.

Indeed. For a thread about grounding, it's astounding how few words are taken up with the discussion of the aircraft, and how many are spent on discussing the pilot's actions. It's a serious imbalance, IMO. Unfortunately, people want to shout from where they think their voice is likely to be heard by the most people. This, as opposed to exercising some self-control and posting in the correct threads. If I were a moderator, I might start sorting people's posts into the correct threads. I realize there is some blur between topics, but when we start discussing specific pilot actions of one crash or the other, then that really doesn't belong here.

Here are all the correct and still active threads:
• grounding, ungrounding, root cause of grounding: this thread: viewtopic.php?t=1432067
• pilot culpability in Lion Air crash: Lion AIr thread: viewtopic.php?t=1407217
• pilot culpability in Ethiopian AIrlines crash: Ethiopian AIrlines: viewtopic.php?t=1417519
• discussion of improved pilot training: viewtopic.php?t=1431655


If people would stop shouting that there was nothing that pilot's could have done to save the flights and that the training system is perfect and does not need to be looked as part of the un-grounding then people like myself would have no reason to post in here.

Training recommendations may be made as a result of the grounding, but such recommendations related to the grounding will be made in relation to any differences which the regulating agencies see between and NG and revised MAX.

Training recommendations, as regards the actions of the specific accident crews, will be made separately from the ungrounding, Will follow the reports, and therefore do not belong in this thread.

Overall world pilot training standards is yet again another topic, and is not part this thread.

Stop acting as the arbiter of all things truthful. There are three other appropriate threads. Go use them.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8746
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:30 pm

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... ew-alerts/

quote:

Boeing’s state-of-the-art system
Early in the development of the 737 MAX, Boeing considered equipping the flight deck with its state-of-the-art flight-crew alerting system, called EICAS, the Engine-Indicating and Crew-Alerting System.

It provides pilots visual, aural and tactile warnings as well as written messages on the main flight display when anything goes wrong with either the engines or with the airplane systems, and then also recommends the remedial action needed.

EICAS, designed to take account of the latest human factors studies, is a system that integrates all the interactions between the pilots and the machine they are flying.

Boeing introduced EICAS in the early 1980s when the 757 and 767 jets entered service. The improved alert system was one justification for removing the role of flight engineer to allow those airplanes to fly with two-person crews. It’s been upgraded incrementally since and installed on all subsequent Boeing jets.


So in regards to the cockpit alerting system, Boeing has not even moved the 737 to their own 1980s standard, introduced with the 757/767. Not with the advent of the NG nor with the coming of the 737MAX. Solidly stuck in the 1960s. To be able to do that, Boeing uses grandfathering and needs the FAA to relax its rules.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21726
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:44 pm

aerolimani wrote:
Training recommendations, as regards the actions of the specific accident crews, will be made separately from the ungrounding, Will follow the reports, and therefore do not belong in this thread.

Overall world pilot training standards is yet again another topic, and is not part this thread.

Review of pilot training material is squarely part of the 737 ungrounding endgame described by Boeing's CEO:

The final steps to lifting the ban are clearly defined, and timing will be determined by the FAA, Muilenburg said. Once a final version of the flight control computer update is ready, Boeing will invite airline pilots to test-fly it in the company’s engineering simulators known as e-cabs. A separate team of pilots will review the company’s updated training material. After that FAA pilots will test the changes in a Boeing 737 Max bristling with sensors and other flight-testing equipment.

Ref: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ax-crashes

This training material has to be created with regards to "the actions of the specific accident crews" and needs to be understood by pilots trained to "world pilot training standards" lest MCAS 2.0 have an unknown flaw.
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: 1642
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 5:50 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-pushed-faa-to-arelax-737-max-certification-requirements-for-crew-alerts/

quote:

Boeing’s state-of-the-art system
Early in the development of the 737 MAX, Boeing considered equipping the flight deck with its state-of-the-art flight-crew alerting system, called EICAS, the Engine-Indicating and Crew-Alerting System.

It provides pilots visual, aural and tactile warnings as well as written messages on the main flight display when anything goes wrong with either the engines or with the airplane systems, and then also recommends the remedial action needed.

EICAS, designed to take account of the latest human factors studies, is a system that integrates all the interactions between the pilots and the machine they are flying.

Boeing introduced EICAS in the early 1980s when the 757 and 767 jets entered service. The improved alert system was one justification for removing the role of flight engineer to allow those airplanes to fly with two-person crews. It’s been upgraded incrementally since and installed on all subsequent Boeing jets.


So in regards to the cockpit alerting system, Boeing has not even moved the 737 to their own 1980s standard, introduced with the 757/767. Not with the advent of the NG nor with the coming of the 737MAX. Solidly stuck in the 1960s. To be able to do that, Boeing uses grandfathering and needs the FAA to relax its rules.


Talk to Boeing's biggest Customer - Southwest - they were adamant through the NG and MAX generations that not much changed.
 
hivue
Posts: 1954
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Thu Oct 03, 2019 6:08 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeing-pushed-faa-to-arelax-737-max-certification-requirements-for-crew-alerts/

quote:

Boeing’s state-of-the-art system
Early in the development of the 737 MAX, Boeing considered equipping the flight deck with its state-of-the-art flight-crew alerting system, called EICAS, the Engine-Indicating and Crew-Alerting System.

It provides pilots visual, aural and tactile warnings as well as written messages on the main flight display when anything goes wrong with either the engines or with the airplane systems, and then also recommends the remedial action needed.

EICAS, designed to take account of the latest human factors studies, is a system that integrates all the interactions between the pilots and the machine they are flying.

Boeing introduced EICAS in the early 1980s when the 757 and 767 jets entered service. The improved alert system was one justification for removing the role of flight engineer to allow those airplanes to fly with two-person crews. It’s been upgraded incrementally since and installed on all subsequent Boeing jets.


So in regards to the cockpit alerting system, Boeing has not even moved the 737 to their own 1980s standard, introduced with the 757/767. Not with the advent of the NG nor with the coming of the 737MAX. Solidly stuck in the 1960s. To be able to do that, Boeing uses grandfathering and needs the FAA to relax its rules.


They did not need the FAA to relax its rules, they needed it to apply an existing, relaxed rule.

So a significant proportion of the worldwide Boeing fleet will be without EICAS or its functional equivalent until near the middle of this century?
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.

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