ACATROYAL
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:25 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 2:55 pm

Revelation wrote:
shmerik wrote:
For me these two points suggest that the lift is more extreme than Boeing is letting on:

1) The extreme increase in MCAS authority
2) Not disclosing the actual extent of the nacelle lift

It seems like Boeing could easily make everyone feel much more comfortable if they would simply release some info about what they found about the increased amount of lift. If it's really a "slight lightening of the controls" (one quote I remember reading was that you would barely notice if you weren't actually looking for it) then wouldn't it be a no brainer to release some actual test data and allay everyone's fears? That would immediately show that the airframe itself is pretty much as safe as others and that MCAS was really just needed in order to comply with regulations.

The facts that Boeing is telling as little as possible at every step of the way and that the authority of MCAS was increased ~4x it's original implementation makes it seem like what they discovered was much worse than the minor issue they make it out to be.

The counter to "Boeing is saying very little because they have something to hide" is "Boeing is saying very little because for MAX right now less news is better than more news".

I think Boeing has been saying little over the last few weeks because they realize anything they say starts a new news cycle and it's best for them to stay out of the news till they have good news to report.

If they did some elaborate presentation on nacelle lift and stick force not being significant some tech savvy people would feel better about the state of affairs, but some non tech savvy people will start to worry about nacelle lift and stick force and stalling and falling out of the sky pretty much every time they get on a Boeing product.

Given Boeing's reputation is much more damaged than FAA's reputation, Boeing is going to keep mostly quiet till FAA approves return to flight, then start putting out pressers about about how safe flying is versus driving, decades of improvements in safety, etc.


Yes I agree completely
 
Virtual737
Posts: 631
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 6:16 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 3:00 pm

maint123 wrote:
Just thinking out loud, regarding the max, at take off the auto pilot is off, so mcas is in play.
Now if the AOA sensor is damaged /malfunctions during take off, MCAS again pushes the nose down, but now the pilots get a warning of mismatched AOA inputs from the 2nd sensor, so ignore the AOA input and start trimming like in the lion air crash. And now the modified MCAS does not push the nose down repeatedly since AOA is manually/automatically confirmed to be faulty.
So in this case the plane is basically flying in manual mode with no MCAS, just like the NG, while climbing. The difference being the plane's different aerodynamics will force the pilot to keep making some inputs to counteract the pitch up tendency? And the late changes made to increase the MCAS authority from 0.6 to 2.5 deg, indicates that a lot of manual input will be required from the pilots.
Will be interesting.


MCAS is only active with a clean wing. Takeoff will always have some flap / leading edge slats, so no MCAS.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9244
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 3:16 pm

maint123 wrote:
Just thinking out loud, regarding the max, at take off the auto pilot is off, so mcas is in play.

Aircraft rarely take off without flaps or slats, so no, MCAS is not in play.
Not sure how this reality affects the rest of your thought process, I prefer not to speculate.
 
maint123
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 3:38 pm

par13del wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Just thinking out loud, regarding the max, at take off the auto pilot is off, so mcas is in play.

Aircraft rarely take off without flaps or slats, so no, MCAS is not in play.
Not sure how this reality affects the rest of your thought process, I prefer not to speculate.

Doesn't effect. Just remove the first line and continue. At some point during the climb, MCAS will come into play like it did in the case of the 2 crashes.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 714
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 4:43 pm

DoT Committee to report in the next few weeks - Dickson
https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... ion-issues

'....The US Department of Transportation appointed a committee to review the FAA’s process for certifying the Boeing 737 Max 8. The special committee is specifically tasked to review the 737 Max 8 certification process from 2012 to 2017. The findings from that review will provide the basis for recommendations for future improvements. The committee’s goal is to make proposals to improve “the FAA's aircraft certification process, including recommendations on delegations of authority and training, and improvements to other certification processes. Topics for investigation include the FAA’s certification process and timelines, and the process under which the FAA delegates some certification and oversight work to aircraft manufacturers and their employees....'

Ray
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21905
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:04 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
DoT Committee to report in the next few weeks - Dickson
https://aviationweek.com/commercial-avi ... ion-issues

'....The US Department of Transportation appointed a committee to review the FAA’s process for certifying the Boeing 737 Max 8. The special committee is specifically tasked to review the 737 Max 8 certification process from 2012 to 2017. The findings from that review will provide the basis for recommendations for future improvements. The committee’s goal is to make proposals to improve “the FAA's aircraft certification process, including recommendations on delegations of authority and training, and improvements to other certification processes. Topics for investigation include the FAA’s certification process and timelines, and the process under which the FAA delegates some certification and oversight work to aircraft manufacturers and their employees....'

Ray

Interesting, but I don't see that text included in the given link. I'm not doubting what you posted, it is consistent with other things I've read. Perhaps the article was edited.

Relevant to grounding, this is a discussion of future improvements so it will be more impactful for future certification efforts.

It will be interesting to see if FAA calls out Boeing for mis-categorizing MCAS in the same way that 'Satcom Guru' did.
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
 
Nick1209
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:24 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:47 pm

sharpley wrote:
Nick1209 wrote:
You put either accident crew in UA232 position, guess what? Everyone is dead. Gone. You put the pilots in JT610 position. Landed. You put the pilots of UA232 in ET302 position, landed. Fact.

Not fact at all. You can assume that, but its something we'll never know.



Oh really? The pilots of UA232 knew pitch and power. Neither accident crew knew a thing about it. So am I wrong? Probably not.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8930
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:49 pm

As Boeing’s 737 MAX nears a return to service, will flyers return to it?

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... urn-to-it/

for me the most interesting quote:

Public perception about the MAX and Boeing’s trustworthiness seemed to calcify within weeks after the MAX’s grounding. A market research survey of 2,000 passengers in May found 72 percent of leisure travelers correctly identified the MAX as the grounded jet.

“That was a big surprise to us,” Henry Harteveldt, president of San Francisco-based Atmosphere Research that conducted the survey, said last week. “Not every airline passenger is a frequent flyer who knows the type of plane he or she is flying on.”
 
Nick1209
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:24 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:53 pm

PixelFlight wrote:
Nick1209 wrote:
You put either accident crew in UA232 position, guess what? Everyone is dead. Gone. You put the [UA232] pilots in JT610 position. Landed. You put the pilots of UA232 in ET302 position, landed. Fact.
:crazy: This is only 3 consecutive speculations, not facts at all.

The fact is that no aircraft safety agencies want to asses the aircraft safety based on speculations. The facts there have in hands is a flawed safety assessment on the 737-7/8/9 MAX directly liked to the two last deadliest crashes records, and a worldwide historically low fatal crash rate per year, especially without the flawed 737-8 MAX. The 737-7/8/9 MAX need to be fixed. The worldwide training need to be improved. But don't try to mix the two subjects, there have different causes and have different fixes. As the EASA said: "Pilot training requirements are not meant to compensate for non-acceptable design on the compliance and safety standpoint."


The training the crew needed had already been given in the first few hours of their first flights in an airplane. Go down hill, speed up. Go uphill, slow down. Just like a bicycle. Reduce power going down hill. Add power going uphill. Trim. Trim applies at a given speed. Trim forces increase with a speed increase; if it's hard to hold the nose up at X speed, it's going to be harder to hold the nose up at a faster Y speed. Really basic stuff, you see. It was failure to FTDA that killed them. Had they kept the speed, they had a flyable airplane, on a VFR morning, and they had the altitude the handle it.

Airplanes break. Parts fail. Engines fail. Hydraulics fail. Controls fail. Avionics fail. Pneumatics fail. Fuel systems fail. Antiskid fails. There are a lot of potential abnormal and emergency situations that we can be faced with as flight crews: our job, as you all don't seem know it, is to fly the damn airplane. If you're worth your weight in wet salt, you'll fly it to a landing. Not just to the scene of the crash.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1816
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 5:55 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
As Boeing’s 737 MAX nears a return to service, will flyers return to it?

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... urn-to-it/

for me the most interesting quote:

Public perception about the MAX and Boeing’s trustworthiness seemed to calcify within weeks after the MAX’s grounding. A market research survey of 2,000 passengers in May found 72 percent of leisure travelers correctly identified the MAX as the grounded jet.

“That was a big surprise to us,” Henry Harteveldt, president of San Francisco-based Atmosphere Research that conducted the survey, said last week. “Not every airline passenger is a frequent flyer who knows the type of plane he or she is flying on.”


How is something from May relevant to now or early next year when it is likely to return to service?
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3258
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 6:29 pm

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... -controls/

Dominic Gates reports that his sources, named and unnamed, agree the MAX is ready to fly. In hindsight one wonders why Boeing did not do this before the first MAX was delivered, and it strains credulity that Boeing did not ground the plane after the first crash. While I do not think that criminal activity will be found, one has no grounds at any point to ever give Boeing the benefit of the doubt. They are not trustworthy.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8930
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:20 pm

morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
As Boeing’s 737 MAX nears a return to service, will flyers return to it?

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... urn-to-it/

for me the most interesting quote:

Public perception about the MAX and Boeing’s trustworthiness seemed to calcify within weeks after the MAX’s grounding. A market research survey of 2,000 passengers in May found 72 percent of leisure travelers correctly identified the MAX as the grounded jet.

“That was a big surprise to us,” Henry Harteveldt, president of San Francisco-based Atmosphere Research that conducted the survey, said last week. “Not every airline passenger is a frequent flyer who knows the type of plane he or she is flying on.”


How is something from May relevant to now or early next year when it is likely to return to service?


It is relevant to the question: do passengers know on what type of airplane they are flying.

The common a.net answer is no.
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3527
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:33 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
It is relevant to the question: do passengers know on what type of airplane they are flying.


Actually it doesn't tell us if it's relevant to that. The article tells us they generally knew months ago that the MAX was the grounded aircraft. It doesn't tell us if they would know the MAX is what they would be flying, or if that would actually sway their behavior.

Also we don't have to allow questionable sources to form our opinions. We can look ourselves at seat maps. People are booking the MAX with no obvious avoidance.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8930
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:41 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
It is relevant to the question: do passengers know on what type of airplane they are flying.


Actually it doesn't tell us if it's relevant to that. The article tells us they generally knew months ago that the MAX was the grounded aircraft. It doesn't tell us if they would know the MAX is what they would be flying, or if that would actually sway their behavior.

Also we don't have to allow questionable sources to form our opinions. We can look ourselves at seat maps. People are booking the MAX with no obvious avoidance.


Somehow I have difficulties to believe the validity of your last statement. What MAX flights are people booking with no obvious avoidance?
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3527
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 7:48 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
Somehow I have difficulties to believe the validity of your last statement. What MAX flights are people booking with no obvious avoidance?


Uh, those MAX flights in the schedules? It was easy to compare with UA before they moved back their schedule this past week. Was the same story at AA. The fare buckets and maps can be compared at any time. No need to let questionable sources tell you what your opinion should be.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1098
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:18 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/boeings-fix-tames-the-tiger-in-the-737-max-flight-controls/

Dominic Gates reports that his sources, named and unnamed, agree the MAX is ready to fly. In hindsight one wonders why Boeing did not do this before the first MAX was delivered, and it strains credulity that Boeing did not ground the plane after the first crash. While I do not think that criminal activity will be found, one has no grounds at any point to ever give Boeing the benefit of the doubt. They are not trustworthy.


I would say that Dominic Gates reports that MCAS 2.0 is done, but he also reports that little has been done to address some of the other points that reared their heads when the MAX got a closer look.

Most JATR representatives airworthiness authorities are seeking firm timetables for the implementation of their multiple recommendations, as a condition of ending the grounding. FAA position?
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8930
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 9:05 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
Somehow I have difficulties to believe the validity of your last statement. What MAX flights are people booking with no obvious avoidance?


Uh, those MAX flights in the schedules? It was easy to compare with UA before they moved back their schedule this past week. Was the same story at AA. The fare buckets and maps can be compared at any time. No need to let questionable sources tell you what your opinion should be.


It should be known that the MAX is grounded, so nobody needs to worry until the MAX is ungrounded. And that will be big news.
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 10:10 pm

Nick1209 wrote:
PixelFlight wrote:
Nick1209 wrote:
You put either accident crew in UA232 position, guess what? Everyone is dead. Gone. You put the [UA232] pilots in JT610 position. Landed. You put the pilots of UA232 in ET302 position, landed. Fact.
:crazy: This is only 3 consecutive speculations, not facts at all.

The fact is that no aircraft safety agencies want to asses the aircraft safety based on speculations. The facts there have in hands is a flawed safety assessment on the 737-7/8/9 MAX directly liked to the two last deadliest crashes records, and a worldwide historically low fatal crash rate per year, especially without the flawed 737-8 MAX. The 737-7/8/9 MAX need to be fixed. The worldwide training need to be improved. But don't try to mix the two subjects, there have different causes and have different fixes. As the EASA said: "Pilot training requirements are not meant to compensate for non-acceptable design on the compliance and safety standpoint."


The training the crew needed had already been given in the first few hours of their first flights in an airplane. Go down hill, speed up. Go uphill, slow down. Just like a bicycle. Reduce power going down hill. Add power going uphill. Trim. Trim applies at a given speed. Trim forces increase with a speed increase; if it's hard to hold the nose up at X speed, it's going to be harder to hold the nose up at a faster Y speed. Really basic stuff, you see. It was failure to FTDA that killed them. Had they kept the speed, they had a flyable airplane, on a VFR morning, and they had the altitude the handle it.

Airplanes break. Parts fail. Engines fail. Hydraulics fail. Controls fail. Avionics fail. Pneumatics fail. Fuel systems fail. Antiskid fails. There are a lot of potential abnormal and emergency situations that we can be faced with as flight crews: our job, as you all don't seem know it, is to fly the damn airplane. If you're worth your weight in wet salt, you'll fly it to a landing. Not just to the scene of the crash.

Officials documents from experts did not identify the speed as a contribution to the accident.
 
smokeybandit
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:13 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
morrisond wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
As Boeing’s 737 MAX nears a return to service, will flyers return to it?

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... urn-to-it/

for me the most interesting quote:

Public perception about the MAX and Boeing’s trustworthiness seemed to calcify within weeks after the MAX’s grounding. A market research survey of 2,000 passengers in May found 72 percent of leisure travelers correctly identified the MAX as the grounded jet.

“That was a big surprise to us,” Henry Harteveldt, president of San Francisco-based Atmosphere Research that conducted the survey, said last week. “Not every airline passenger is a frequent flyer who knows the type of plane he or she is flying on.”


How is something from May relevant to now or early next year when it is likely to return to service?


It is relevant to the question: do passengers know on what type of airplane they are flying.

The common a.net answer is no.


Though I'm sure once it returns to service you'll have a few people going nuts having to fly on a NG thinking it's a MAX just because of the 3 letters 7, 3, 7
 
airnorth
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 7:30 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Sun Nov 17, 2019 11:49 pm

Is there a return to service thread and or flight testing thread? I only ask because i see MAX flights are bookable on Air Canada in Feb.
 
jmry888
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 2:39 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 3:24 am

I have been watching / reading this thread for awhile. When I was stationed in the Aleutian Islands in alaska , we they station crew plus the crew chief of an Sikorsky- HH-3F “Pelican” had to change out the main rotor blades. We had an 1800 foot crushed volcanic ash runway no hangers , no building nothing. We got the blades changed the HH-3F flew to an airbase and was inspected. The pilots of that aircraft and c130s that flew in the replacement blades always told us that no matter what happens you always fly the aircraft first , get control then worry about the rest later.

Most of the posts i see here are cut and paste posts , we would bet ninety nine percent of you have never even been up close to the 737 max , other than boarding from the tunnel , am i wrong ? So if Southwest airlines which has about 5 times the hours of the these 2 airlines that crashed thier maxshave combined , have never crashed one , one should be looking in the ohter direction would not one think ? Please soneone set me straight on the Southwest no crashes with the max and differences ?

Every pilot we have talked to from C130 , HH-3F , and the Lockheed Electra always told us number for them was flying the aircraft , that to them meaning knowing how to fly it and where not to fly it.

This post will more than likly be deleted because it doesn't go with Boeing bashing theme of this thread.
 
ShamrockBoi330
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 3:24 am

airnorth wrote:
Is there a return to service thread and or flight testing thread? I only ask because i see MAX flights are bookable on Air Canada in Feb.


I would assume as the Max is still grounded, no certification flights have taken place, no return to service dates, that this is still the most appropriate thread, at least for the rest of this quarter!
 
art
Posts: 2993
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:07 am

par13del wrote:
Aircraft rarely take off without flaps or slats...


Just curtous. With slats/flaps increasing lift, why would you want to extend takeoff run by not using them? Would you save fuel through reduced drag?
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 702
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:26 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
mjoelnir wrote:
There is a fine line between safe and slow and obsolete.

Obsolete has no functional meaning as far as aviation is concerned. What matters is that the job is done reliably and predictably. What obsolete means in the rest of the world is that there are better/faster/more powerful/cheaper alternatives available, and hence any new designs will use them, and since certification is not needed many old products will be redesigned to use the new components. But in aviation, where every last item must be certified, which is time-consuming and expensive, obsolete has no meaning. If it does the job, is reliable and has been certified, you keep using it unless there is a compelling reason to change it. If a redesign is necessary for other reasons then you use new components.


As more and more automation is expected it would have been prudent to move on to more capable processor. 68000 is a dead-end architecture after its mainline customer Apple dropped it. BAE seems to have several high-end hardened processors.

Aircraft are not interstellar spacecraft, they show up at some air within hours.

Honest question about component certification. Couldn't a vendor like Rockwell Collins work on a new backward-compatible component, get it certified from FAA as an equivalent replacement?


The A320 still flies fine with the 68k, and that's with full protection etc...
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 7008
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 5:04 am

jmry888 wrote:
This post will more than likly be deleted because it doesn't go with Boeing bashing theme of this thread.
Nah, I don't think so. If your post #2924 is deleted, then it is because it is off topic.

This thread is about a plane type which has had its certification suspended because a single point failure may seriously harm pitch control with potentially catastrophic consequences, and therefore it does not conform to world wide agreed certification criteria. In addition this thread covers modifications being made to the plane including enabling of normal system redundancy making re-certification possible.

Your post is mainly related to "airmanship". Airmanship is certainly a relevant issue, relevant to all flight, including 737MAX. But no more, no less, to the MAX than any other plane type. And certification agencies have clearly told that airmanship shall always be an addition to - never a substitute for - proper aircraft design.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
maint123
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:31 am

jmry888 wrote:
I have been watching / reading this thread for awhile. When I was stationed in the Aleutian Islands in alaska , we they station crew plus the crew chief of an Sikorsky- HH-3F “Pelican” had to change out the main rotor blades. We had an 1800 foot crushed volcanic ash runway no hangers , no building nothing. We got the blades changed the HH-3F flew to an airbase and was inspected. The pilots of that aircraft and c130s that flew in the replacement blades always told us that no matter what happens you always fly the aircraft first , get control then worry about the rest later.

Most of the posts i see here are cut and paste posts , we would bet ninety nine percent of you have never even been up close to the 737 max , other than boarding from the tunnel , am i wrong ? So if Southwest airlines which has about 5 times the hours of the these 2 airlines that crashed thier maxshave combined , have never crashed one , one should be looking in the ohter direction would not one think ? Please soneone set me straight on the Southwest no crashes with the max and differences ?

Every pilot we have talked to from C130 , HH-3F , and the Lockheed Electra always told us number for them was flying the aircraft , that to them meaning knowing how to fly it and where not to fly it.

This post will more than likly be deleted because it doesn't go with Boeing bashing theme of this thread.

Apples to oranges comparison. Did any MAX in the southwest Fleet face a similar AOA issue?
If not then can't really compare reactions.
These airlines have not exactly been crashing the other planes with them, like the NG.
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 11:41 am

shmerik wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
We do know nacelle lift at high AoA makes the stick feel lighter as the aircraft gets closer to the stall, and we know decades of aviation regulations have made it so such a phenomena does not happen on certified aircraft. Changing that pattern feels like it could be pretty problematic, no? Best to follow the regs with exemptions as allowed and of course properly design, implement, test, train and document the feature as well.

Just thinking out loud, regarding the max, at take off the auto pilot is off, so mcas is in play.
Now if the AOA sensor is damaged /malfunctions during take off, MCAS again pushes the nose down, but now the pilots get a warning of mismatched AOA inputs from the 2nd sensor, so ignore the AOA input and start trimming like in the lion air crash. And now the modified MCAS does not push the nose down repeatedly since AOA is manually/automatically confirmed to be faulty.
So in this case the plane is basically flying in manual mode with no MCAS, just like the NG, while climbing. The difference being the plane's different aerodynamics will force the pilot to keep making some inputs to counteract the pitch up tendency? And the late changes made to increase the MCAS authority from 0.6 to 2.5 deg, indicates that a lot of manual input will be required from the pilots.
Will be interesting.


For me these two points suggest that the lift is more extreme than Boeing is letting on:

1) The extreme increase in MCAS authority
2) Not disclosing the actual extent of the nacelle lift

It seems like Boeing could easily make everyone feel much more comfortable if they would simply release some info about what they found about the increased amount of lift. If it's really a "slight lightening of the controls" (one quote I remember reading was that you would barely notice if you weren't actually looking for it) then wouldn't it be a no brainer to release some actual test data and allay everyone's fears? That would immediately show that the airframe itself is pretty much as safe as others and that MCAS was really just needed in order to comply with regulations.

The facts that Boeing is telling as little as possible at every step of the way and that the authority of MCAS was increased ~4x it's original implementation makes it seem like what they discovered was much worse than the minor issue they make it out to be.


It isn't the extent of the nacelle lift that is the issue, it is the change in nacelle lift relative to the change in spanwise lift on the wing at high AoAs that is what MCAS is designed to address. A lot of people confuse trim and stability. While they are linked they are not the same.
  • Trim: This is the balance of moments about the c.g. If the aircraft keeps pitching up or down with no control input or external perturbation it is out of trim. A trimmed aircraft requires an input to move it out of trim. The behaviour of force required to provide this input is covered by the certification standards – an issue for the 737MAX in some instances
  • Stability: The tendency of the aircraft to return or not if perturbed from a trimmed condition. The stability of the aircraft will effect the force required to move an aircraft out of trim because it is related to the elevator and stabiliser effectiveness
The absolute amount of lift in the nacelle, which won't be that different from the NGs lift as the planform area of the nacelle is not much different, plus the locaiton of the nacelles will effect trim. The delta lift and the location effects stability. By moving the nacelles forward and upward there will be significant potential changes in two areas
[list=]
[*]The position of the lift generated by the nacelle. This will provide more nose up pitching moment at all AoAs. Some of this is countered by more nose-down moment by the outboard wings. This will drop off as the wing-tips unload at higher AoA.
[*]Significantly different interference effects between the nacelle and the inboard wing. This may increase or decrease the lift on this section of the wing, but will also change the separation behaviour, potentially significantly.
[/list]

If it were just the increase lift we would need a bigger stabiliser or more range to trim the aircraft, period. In the first order the further forward the c.g. the bigger the stab would need to be. It wouldn't show up in near stall behaviour and would, if anything, make the stick heavier as the elevators would be "less effective". We didn't see a change in either the stabiliser size or trim range. So this isn't the problem. It is in the deltas with changing AoA.

What MCAS does is it actively takes the aircraft out-of-trim as AoA increases so as to force the pilots to put more yoke input in just to keep the aircraft in same state. This has the effect of requiring even more elevator input to keep pulling the nose up, hence more stick force.

The reason for the significant increase in MCAS authority was the need for it to apply at lower speeds, and hence lower load factors. This occurs as the control input is a function of CL not actual lift, but the CM generated by the stab is also a function of the lift on the stab. Since your speed is lower you have to generate more CL on your stab to get same trim input, hence the higher deflection change.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8930
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 12:17 pm

1989worstyear wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
SEPilot wrote:
Obsolete has no functional meaning as far as aviation is concerned. What matters is that the job is done reliably and predictably. What obsolete means in the rest of the world is that there are better/faster/more powerful/cheaper alternatives available, and hence any new designs will use them, and since certification is not needed many old products will be redesigned to use the new components. But in aviation, where every last item must be certified, which is time-consuming and expensive, obsolete has no meaning. If it does the job, is reliable and has been certified, you keep using it unless there is a compelling reason to change it. If a redesign is necessary for other reasons then you use new components.


As more and more automation is expected it would have been prudent to move on to more capable processor. 68000 is a dead-end architecture after its mainline customer Apple dropped it. BAE seems to have several high-end hardened processors.

Aircraft are not interstellar spacecraft, they show up at some air within hours.

Honest question about component certification. Couldn't a vendor like Rockwell Collins work on a new backward-compatible component, get it certified from FAA as an equivalent replacement?


The A320 still flies fine with the 68k, and that's with full protection etc...


I have my doubts about that the 737MAX uses the Motorola 68000. That was introduced in 1979.
The Motorola 6800 was introduced in 1974.

So I assume that the 737 uses actually an older technology.

The step from the 6800 to the 68000 is going from a 16 bit 1 to 2 MHZ to a 32 bit with 8 to 20 MHZ when the A320 came around.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 714
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 1:37 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

As more and more automation is expected it would have been prudent to move on to more capable processor. 68000 is a dead-end architecture after its mainline customer Apple dropped it. BAE seems to have several high-end hardened processors.

Aircraft are not interstellar spacecraft, they show up at some air within hours.

Honest question about component certification. Couldn't a vendor like Rockwell Collins work on a new backward-compatible component, get it certified from FAA as an equivalent replacement?


The A320 still flies fine with the 68k, and that's with full protection etc...


I have my doubts about that the 737MAX uses the Motorola 68000. That was introduced in 1979.
The Motorola 6800 was introduced in 1974.

So I assume that the 737 uses actually an older technology.

The step from the 6800 to the 68000 is going from a 16 bit 1 to 2 MHZ to a 32 bit with 8 to 20 MHZ when the A320 came around.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=735823&p=10614849&hilit=collins#p10614849

Found this topic. Indicates that the Honeywell FCC was replaced by Collins FCC (with option to upgrade existing NGs) c.2003. May well be when the 68000 processor comes in. Would explain previous confusing messages on these threads.

Ray
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 1:51 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
1989worstyear wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

As more and more automation is expected it would have been prudent to move on to more capable processor. 68000 is a dead-end architecture after its mainline customer Apple dropped it. BAE seems to have several high-end hardened processors.

Aircraft are not interstellar spacecraft, they show up at some air within hours.

Honest question about component certification. Couldn't a vendor like Rockwell Collins work on a new backward-compatible component, get it certified from FAA as an equivalent replacement?


The A320 still flies fine with the 68k, and that's with full protection etc...


I have my doubts about that the 737MAX uses the Motorola 68000. That was introduced in 1979.
The Motorola 6800 was introduced in 1974.

So I assume that the 737 uses actually an older technology.

The step from the 6800 to the 68000 is going from a 16 bit 1 to 2 MHZ to a 32 bit with 8 to 20 MHZ when the A320 came around.

But the 737-7/8/9 MAX use a newer FCC from Rockwell Collins that is different from the older FCC from Sperry / Honeywell used in the previous 737 generations. The Sperry / Honeywell 737 old FCC is know to have a very old bits sliced processor architecture, but to date I failed to read anything about the processor used into Rockwell Collins 737 MAX new FCC. This site http://www.b737.org.uk/glareshield.htm#fcc trace back the new FCC to "Collins provided a preliminary MCP design to Boeing in 2000". So it's plausible that his design use a processor qualified for civil aircraft at that time. Likely to be a 32 bits processor with a couple of ten of MHz. By the way, the Intel 80386SX-20 was used in space operation back in 1998. I will not be surprised that it would be something similar.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9244
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:05 pm

maint123 wrote:
Apples to oranges comparison. Did any MAX in the southwest Fleet face a similar AOA issue?
If not then can't really compare reactions.
These airlines have not exactly been crashing the other planes with them, like the NG.

Well the authorities made it an Apples to Oranges comparison because they stated that all airline pilots would crash the MAX if a similar AOA failure occurred, that is the reality of the worldwide grounding.
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:40 pm

par13del wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Apples to oranges comparison. Did any MAX in the southwest Fleet face a similar AOA issue?
If not then can't really compare reactions.
These airlines have not exactly been crashing the other planes with them, like the NG.

Well the authorities made it an Apples to Oranges comparison because they stated that all airline pilots would crash the MAX if a similar AOA failure occurred, that is the reality of the worldwide grounding.


Except it was never all. The likelihood of a catastrophic event precipitating from the failure of the Captain's AoA sensor is quite high. However, it isn't 1 as demonstrated by the prior LionAir flight. The behaviour is unacceptable. In all likelihood a large percentage of 737MAX's that had suffered from a failure similar to the one on the Ethiopian flight would have been lost.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 9244
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:47 pm

phollingsworth wrote:
par13del wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Apples to oranges comparison. Did any MAX in the southwest Fleet face a similar AOA issue?
If not then can't really compare reactions.
These airlines have not exactly been crashing the other planes with them, like the NG.

Well the authorities made it an Apples to Oranges comparison because they stated that all airline pilots would crash the MAX if a similar AOA failure occurred, that is the reality of the worldwide grounding.


Except it was never all. The likelihood of a catastrophic event precipitating from the failure of the Captain's AoA sensor is quite high. However, it isn't 1 as demonstrated by the prior LionAir flight. The behaviour is unacceptable. In all likelihood a large percentage of 737MAX's that had suffered from a failure similar to the one on the Ethiopian flight would have been lost.

The authorities grounded the a/c, they have / had the ability to lift the grounding after the initial findings, as long as they have not, they continue to make the comparison valid.
I am not debating whether they should or should not have grounded the a/c, the bull is already out of the gate.
 
planecane
Posts: 1246
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:54 pm

maint123 wrote:
par13del wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Just thinking out loud, regarding the max, at take off the auto pilot is off, so mcas is in play.

Aircraft rarely take off without flaps or slats, so no, MCAS is not in play.
Not sure how this reality affects the rest of your thought process, I prefer not to speculate.

Doesn't effect. Just remove the first line and continue. At some point during the climb, MCAS will come into play like it did in the case of the 2 crashes.

No it won't because MCAS 2.0 won't activate with an AoA disagree. From all available information the activation would not be necessary in normal operations in the typical flight envelope.
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 3:08 pm

planecane wrote:
maint123 wrote:
par13del wrote:
Aircraft rarely take off without flaps or slats, so no, MCAS is not in play.
Not sure how this reality affects the rest of your thought process, I prefer not to speculate.

Doesn't effect. Just remove the first line and continue. At some point during the climb, MCAS will come into play like it did in the case of the 2 crashes.

No it won't because MCAS 2.0 won't activate with an AoA disagree. From all available information the activation would not be necessary in normal operations in the typical flight envelope.


While it is still possible that MCAS 2.0 could activate in error, e.g. two AoA sensors giving very close but massively incorrect readings. There looks to be another safety check added, if the pilots cancel the trim command MCAS will not reactivate until the AoA goes back to normal. If both sensors are massively offset, e.g. the LionAir issue x2 then this won't happen. There are likely to be some corner cases where runaway might occur but these should be vanishingly unlikely.
 
phollingsworth
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:05 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 3:12 pm

par13del wrote:
phollingsworth wrote:
par13del wrote:
Well the authorities made it an Apples to Oranges comparison because they stated that all airline pilots would crash the MAX if a similar AOA failure occurred, that is the reality of the worldwide grounding.


Except it was never all. The likelihood of a catastrophic event precipitating from the failure of the Captain's AoA sensor is quite high. However, it isn't 1 as demonstrated by the prior LionAir flight. The behaviour is unacceptable. In all likelihood a large percentage of 737MAX's that had suffered from a failure similar to the one on the Ethiopian flight would have been lost.

The authorities grounded the a/c, they have / had the ability to lift the grounding after the initial findings, as long as they have not, they continue to make the comparison valid.
I am not debating whether they should or should not have grounded the a/c, the bull is already out of the gate.


I am not disputing the decision to ground the aircraft. Given the information that has come of light it made and makes sense. The failure chain is/was all wrong. One could argue that the hurdles to recertification might be unreasonably high. However, some of these came about because the FAA et al. lost trust in Boeing and EASA et al lost trust in the FAA. The one that will be interesting to see how it plays out was the additional tests on FCC degradation. I would be curious to see how many existing aircraft would meet that degradation test.
 
DenverTed
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 4:34 pm

phollingsworth wrote:
shmerik wrote:
maint123 wrote:
Just thinking out loud, regarding the max, at take off the auto pilot is off, so mcas is in play.
Now if the AOA sensor is damaged /malfunctions during take off, MCAS again pushes the nose down, but now the pilots get a warning of mismatched AOA inputs from the 2nd sensor, so ignore the AOA input and start trimming like in the lion air crash. And now the modified MCAS does not push the nose down repeatedly since AOA is manually/automatically confirmed to be faulty.
So in this case the plane is basically flying in manual mode with no MCAS, just like the NG, while climbing. The difference being the plane's different aerodynamics will force the pilot to keep making some inputs to counteract the pitch up tendency? And the late changes made to increase the MCAS authority from 0.6 to 2.5 deg, indicates that a lot of manual input will be required from the pilots.
Will be interesting.


For me these two points suggest that the lift is more extreme than Boeing is letting on:

1) The extreme increase in MCAS authority
2) Not disclosing the actual extent of the nacelle lift

It seems like Boeing could easily make everyone feel much more comfortable if they would simply release some info about what they found about the increased amount of lift. If it's really a "slight lightening of the controls" (one quote I remember reading was that you would barely notice if you weren't actually looking for it) then wouldn't it be a no brainer to release some actual test data and allay everyone's fears? That would immediately show that the airframe itself is pretty much as safe as others and that MCAS was really just needed in order to comply with regulations.

The facts that Boeing is telling as little as possible at every step of the way and that the authority of MCAS was increased ~4x it's original implementation makes it seem like what they discovered was much worse than the minor issue they make it out to be.


It isn't the extent of the nacelle lift that is the issue, it is the change in nacelle lift relative to the change in spanwise lift on the wing at high AoAs that is what MCAS is designed to address. A lot of people confuse trim and stability. While they are linked they are not the same.
  • Trim: This is the balance of moments about the c.g. If the aircraft keeps pitching up or down with no control input or external perturbation it is out of trim. A trimmed aircraft requires an input to move it out of trim. The behaviour of force required to provide this input is covered by the certification standards – an issue for the 737MAX in some instances
  • Stability: The tendency of the aircraft to return or not if perturbed from a trimmed condition. The stability of the aircraft will effect the force required to move an aircraft out of trim because it is related to the elevator and stabiliser effectiveness
The absolute amount of lift in the nacelle, which won't be that different from the NGs lift as the planform area of the nacelle is not much different, plus the locaiton of the nacelles will effect trim. The delta lift and the location effects stability. By moving the nacelles forward and upward there will be significant potential changes in two areas
[list=]
[*]The position of the lift generated by the nacelle. This will provide more nose up pitching moment at all AoAs. Some of this is countered by more nose-down moment by the outboard wings. This will drop off as the wing-tips unload at higher AoA.
[*]Significantly different interference effects between the nacelle and the inboard wing. This may increase or decrease the lift on this section of the wing, but will also change the separation behaviour, potentially significantly.
[/list]

If it were just the increase lift we would need a bigger stabiliser or more range to trim the aircraft, period. In the first order the further forward the c.g. the bigger the stab would need to be. It wouldn't show up in near stall behaviour and would, if anything, make the stick heavier as the elevators would be "less effective". We didn't see a change in either the stabiliser size or trim range. So this isn't the problem. It is in the deltas with changing AoA.

What MCAS does is it actively takes the aircraft out-of-trim as AoA increases so as to force the pilots to put more yoke input in just to keep the aircraft in same state. This has the effect of requiring even more elevator input to keep pulling the nose up, hence more stick force.

The reason for the significant increase in MCAS authority was the need for it to apply at lower speeds, and hence lower load factors. This occurs as the control input is a function of CL not actual lift, but the CM generated by the stab is also a function of the lift on the stab. Since your speed is lower you have to generate more CL on your stab to get same trim input, hence the higher deflection change.

That all makes sense. In normal flight, the stab has a force down, and when the elevator is deflected down, the elevator has a force up, so two opposing forces on the stab. Now in the two tests, the aircraft starts in trim with the force down on the stab. Then the elevator provides a down force, then the aircraft rotates up. At any point is the slipstream on just the stab starting to provide an upward force? Then MCAS changes the trim angle on the stab another several degrees up in the slipstream. At the final degree before stall, I suspect that the force on the stab airfoil is an upward force by that point, although the elevator is a down force.
The isloated contributions of force versus AOA of the elevator and stab, through these tests with and without MCAS would certainly explain a lot about the affect of MCAS.
 
ShamrockBoi330
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 3:28 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:35 pm

So are Boeing now going on a campaign of charm offensive with tv advertisements?

Never noticed a Boeing tv advert before, but just this minute there was one on the tv.

the usual cheesy pictures of various guises posing to sympathetic music, followed by "To all veterans, and the families who stand by their side, thank you. Boeing"

Is this aimed at getting people to forget about the plane crashes, and get their bums back in seats if/when the Max returns the service next year?
 
747megatop
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 7:49 pm

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:
So are Boeing now going on a campaign of charm offensive with tv advertisements?

Never noticed a Boeing tv advert before, but just this minute there was one on the tv.

the usual cheesy pictures of various guises posing to sympathetic music, followed by "To all veterans, and the families who stand by their side, thank you. Boeing"

Is this aimed at getting people to forget about the plane crashes, and get their bums back in seats if/when the Max returns the service next year?

Most people (the avg Joe) have already forgotten about the crashes. Some are actually unaware. A whole lot can't tell the difference between a 787, 777 or 737; or for that matter can't tell the difference between an A380 and an A330.

It is only we a.nutters who are going bananas over this + the TV anchors & analysts who keep discussing it because it is their job. The flying public at large will be just fine and plant their behind in whatever plan the airline flies...all they care is getting from point A to point B in the quickest way at the cheapest possible price! I am an aviation enthusiast...my wife who is a professional will yawn and say what crash? if someone asks her what her thoughts are on the 2 MAX crashes :eek: same response from few of my friends who are not aviation enthusiasts and who don't have time for TV!
 
NightStar
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 09, 2019 11:17 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 8:59 pm

747megatop wrote:

Most people (the avg Joe) have already forgotten about the crashes. Some are actually unaware. A whole lot can't tell the difference between a 787, 777 or 737; or for that matter can't tell the difference between an A380 and an A330.

It is only we a.nutters who are going bananas over this + the TV anchors & analysts who keep discussing it because it is their job. The flying public at large will be just fine and plant their behind in whatever plan the airline flies...all they care is getting from point A to point B in the quickest way at the cheapest possible price! I am an aviation enthusiast...my wife who is a professional will yawn and say what crash? if someone asks her what her thoughts are on the 2 MAX crashes :eek: same response from few of my friends who are not aviation enthusiasts and who don't have time for TV!


Excellent point. The public is amazingly forgiving of corporate errors. Few are going to bother going through the hassle and time of changing flights if it happens to be a 737. No one has time for that these days. Airlines will continue to buy it too. It is perfect for their needs. It is cheaper than the big fuel guzzling planes and still can fly hundreds thousands of miles. The economic advantages will erase misgivings in a hurry.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 714
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:15 pm

NightStar wrote:
747megatop wrote:

Most people (the avg Joe) have already forgotten about the crashes. Some are actually unaware. A whole lot can't tell the difference between a 787, 777 or 737; or for that matter can't tell the difference between an A380 and an A330.

It is only we a.nutters who are going bananas over this + the TV anchors & analysts who keep discussing it because it is their job. The flying public at large will be just fine and plant their behind in whatever plan the airline flies...all they care is getting from point A to point B in the quickest way at the cheapest possible price! I am an aviation enthusiast...my wife who is a professional will yawn and say what crash? if someone asks her what her thoughts are on the 2 MAX crashes :eek: same response from few of my friends who are not aviation enthusiasts and who don't have time for TV!


Excellent point. The public is amazingly forgiving of corporate errors. Few are going to bother going through the hassle and time of changing flights if it happens to be a 737. No one has time for that these days. Airlines will continue to buy it too. It is perfect for their needs. It is cheaper than the big fuel guzzling planes and still can fly hundreds thousands of miles. The economic advantages will erase misgivings in a hurry.

Precisely the people that need the protection of strong and effective regulation.

Ray
 
planecane
Posts: 1246
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:06 pm

ShamrockBoi330 wrote:
So are Boeing now going on a campaign of charm offensive with tv advertisements?

Never noticed a Boeing tv advert before, but just this minute there was one on the tv.

the usual cheesy pictures of various guises posing to sympathetic music, followed by "To all veterans, and the families who stand by their side, thank you. Boeing"

Is this aimed at getting people to forget about the plane crashes, and get their bums back in seats if/when the Max returns the service next year?


Boeing runs these types of ads all the time. Nothing to do with getting people to forget the MAX crashes.
 
747megatop
Posts: 1731
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 8:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 10:49 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
NightStar wrote:
747megatop wrote:

Most people (the avg Joe) have already forgotten about the crashes. Some are actually unaware. A whole lot can't tell the difference between a 787, 777 or 737; or for that matter can't tell the difference between an A380 and an A330.

It is only we a.nutters who are going bananas over this + the TV anchors & analysts who keep discussing it because it is their job. The flying public at large will be just fine and plant their behind in whatever plan the airline flies...all they care is getting from point A to point B in the quickest way at the cheapest possible price! I am an aviation enthusiast...my wife who is a professional will yawn and say what crash? if someone asks her what her thoughts are on the 2 MAX crashes :eek: same response from few of my friends who are not aviation enthusiasts and who don't have time for TV!


Excellent point. The public is amazingly forgiving of corporate errors. Few are going to bother going through the hassle and time of changing flights if it happens to be a 737. No one has time for that these days. Airlines will continue to buy it too. It is perfect for their needs. It is cheaper than the big fuel guzzling planes and still can fly hundreds thousands of miles. The economic advantages will erase misgivings in a hurry.

Precisely the people that need the protection of strong and effective regulation.

Ray

Precisely. And can you guess what needs to be regulated the most & in what order to protect the public?

1) POLITICIANS (Just see what a mess that circus is..the one they call Washington DC. I am probably offending professionals who perform in an actual circus by calling DC a circus).
2) Greedy corporate boards and CEOs. To make a fast buck (fat pay packets, bonuses, money in shares etc.) they can do anything; don't believe me? Enron, Boeing 737 Max fiasco, GM's Chevy Cobalt scandal (https://www.atlantamagazine.com/great-r ... h-scandal/), Wells Fargo fake account scandal etc. etc.
3) The regulators themselves need regulation - FAA being the prime example.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21905
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Mon Nov 18, 2019 11:56 pm

prebennorholm wrote:
This thread is about a plane type which has had its certification suspended...

Actually operation was prohibited temporarily, status of certification was not changed.
Ref: https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/ ... _Order.pdf

PixelFlight wrote:
But the 737-7/8/9 MAX use a newer FCC from Rockwell Collins that is different from the older FCC from Sperry / Honeywell used in the previous 737 generations.

Actually the a.net thread linked above by Ray says the switch from Sperry / Honeywell nee Bendix to Collins happened in the middle of the 737NG life cycle in the early 2000s, and MAX continues to have a Collins FCC from various media reports. None of the sources make it clear what CPU type(s) are in the Collins FCC.
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
 
MrBretz
Posts: 429
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:13 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Nov 19, 2019 12:16 am

Rev said:
“Actually the a.net thread linked above by Ray says the switch from Sperry / Honeywell nee Bendix to Collins happened in the middle of the 737NG life cycle in the early 2000s, and MAX continues to have a Collins FCC from various media reports. None of the sources make it clear what CPU type(s) are in the Collins FCC.”

Exactly, Rev. we don’t know the processor, if it has an OS, was written Ada, assembly language, what kind of I/O bus it has, or frankly, nichts, nada, zilch, etc. But it matter little if it works.
 
flilot
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:45 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Nov 19, 2019 12:44 am

smokeybandit wrote:
Though I'm sure once it returns to service you'll have a few people going nuts having to fly on a NG thinking it's a MAX just because of the 3 letters 7, 3, 7


Those are numbers, my friend.
 
maint123
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:18 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Nov 19, 2019 1:44 am

flilot wrote:
smokeybandit wrote:
Though I'm sure once it returns to service you'll have a few people going nuts having to fly on a NG thinking it's a MAX just because of the 3 letters 7, 3, 7


Those are numbers, my friend.

Haha.
But he is partially right.
As soon as the Max is about to reenter service, it will be the top news in every news outlet. Anchors will be vying to be on the first flight....or will they prefer to cover it from the ground ?
The trick for Boeing will be to do a very quiet normal reintroduction, with several flights. It won't like publicity.
350 ppl lost their lives, so no chance of a quiet restart.
But western media is very aligned with their country's interests when issues of national importance are involved, whether political or financial. So lets wait and see.
 
Nick1209
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 12:24 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:45 am

Officials documents from experts did not identify the speed as a contribution to the accident.[/quote]
 
User avatar
PixelFlight
Posts: 790
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:09 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Nov 19, 2019 2:59 am

Revelation wrote:
prebennorholm wrote:
This thread is about a plane type which has had its certification suspended...

Actually operation was prohibited temporarily, status of certification was not changed.
Ref: https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/ ... _Order.pdf

PixelFlight wrote:
But the 737-7/8/9 MAX use a newer FCC from Rockwell Collins that is different from the older FCC from Sperry / Honeywell used in the previous 737 generations.

Actually the a.net thread linked above by Ray says the switch from Sperry / Honeywell nee Bendix to Collins happened in the middle of the 737NG life cycle in the early 2000s, and MAX continues to have a Collins FCC from various media reports. None of the sources make it clear what CPU type(s) are in the Collins FCC.

I have searched on the web several possible solutions, and bingo with the FCC-730 ! :bouncy:
Searching back into the JT610 final report the "FCC-730" word returns:

Page 256:
"An NTSB review of the EDFCS SCD revealed that the MCAS safety requirement
3.1.1.5.3.1.1-A was added to the SCD per Boeing document “B-1740” at Revision
J, dated November 3, 2016.
An NTSB review of a December 09, 2016 Rockwell Collins document titled
“EDFCS FCC-730 P10.0 Requirement Verification Matrix” was conducted. This
document included a “traceability matrix” table that identified the incremental
requirements that were changed/added/deleted for the EDFCS FCC-730 P10.0
software development. The document indicated that the traceability matrix had
been reviewed by Rockwell and their review found that the requirements affected
by the EDFCS FCC-730 P10.0 software development have been correctly allocated,
implemented, and verified.

Page 268:
"The Software Accomplishment Summary for the Flight Control Computer (FCC-
730)
shows the compliance of the Flight Control Computer software development
and verification to the Plan for Software Aspects of Certification for the FCC-730."

Page 278:
"One of the failure conditions “FCC-730 produces undetected erroneous
MCAS or Flaps Up/Dn discrete”"

This exchange program price list [url]https://www.rockwellcollins.com/Search/~/media/F8431A0E26E54189BB957E614CA2A22A.ashx
[/url] give the following part numbers for the FCC-730:
822-1604-101
822-1604-102
822-1604-151
822-1604-152
2019 rental price is $30,621 and exchange price $51,032 :cold:

By luck, the patent US 7,852,235 B1 with Assignee: Rockwell Collins, Inc., Cedar Rapids have a schematic in page 1 and 2 of the FCC-730 with a FCP-2002 box into it:
https://rpx-patents.s3.amazonaws.com/US/b57a9-US7852235B1/US7852235B1.pdf

So, at this stage, I believe that the 737-7/8/9 MAX use the FCC-730 Flight Computer running FCP-2002 microprocessors, the same as in the 777.
I have yet to find the specifications of the FCP-2002 microprocessor...
 
AvFanNJ
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2019 9:47 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Nov 19, 2019 3:36 am

mjoelnir wrote:
As Boeing’s 737 MAX nears a return to service, will flyers return to it?

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... urn-to-it/

for me the most interesting quote:

Public perception about the MAX and Boeing’s trustworthiness seemed to calcify within weeks after the MAX’s grounding. A market research survey of 2,000 passengers in May found 72 percent of leisure travelers correctly identified the MAX as the grounded jet.

“That was a big surprise to us,” Henry Harteveldt, president of San Francisco-based Atmosphere Research that conducted the survey, said last week. “Not every airline passenger is a frequent flyer who knows the type of plane he or she is flying on.”

A really valid point and an area where Boeing probably will still have a big problem for a while. Public resistance to booking a MAX flight will likely be high for some time to come. Many flyers will surely shun this aircraft in droves for a year or more after the ungrounding despite probable universal recertification worldwide. I and surely many others in here will fly it because we've read so much info. in here and elsewhere about the problems and fixes but the public in general hasn't read as much and won't care to. They'll remember that Boeing was not thorough in designing the MAX and let a fatal flaw slip through the process. So the airlines flying the MAX will initially face booking shortfalls, impacting profitability and maybe flight frequencies. They may have to sharply discount ticket prices to overcome that, further hurting profits. It's a truly bad mess that may take Boeing years to recover from, along with airline customers flying it. Even BCA fans like myself see this as a PR disaster of epic proportions.

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