• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 60
 
Phoenix757767
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:07 pm

Boeing doesn’t have enough mechanics to get them airworthy and ready for flight. There is other work needed besides software update for MCAS to get them back in the air.

Boeing has stated they needed 400 mechanics. That is why they asked AA to send letters to retired mechanics for TDY at Moses Lake. I’ve seen the actual letter AA has sent out on behalf of Boeing.
 
jollo
Posts: 383
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:40 pm

mjoelnir wrote:
    klm617 wrote:
    I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


    especially if you hide the manual from him, because he has to believe it is not different from your pickup


    and especially if the driver's responsibilities include switching off power steering within a few seconds of a single sensor failure, because otherwise the car will steer autonomously onto the other lane and repeatedly try to crash itself into oncoming traffic...
     
    2175301
    Posts: 1556
    Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

    Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

    Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:59 pm

    jollo wrote:
    mjoelnir wrote:
      klm617 wrote:
      I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


      especially if you hide the manual from him, because he has to believe it is not different from your pickup


      and especially if the driver's responsibilities include switching off power steering within a few seconds of a single sensor failure, because otherwise the car will steer autonomously onto the other lane and repeatedly try to crash itself into oncoming traffic...


      Have you been following the "issues" that automated cars have been having during the testing and early production phase. A number of accidents where the driver did not respond fast enough to either a malfunctioning automatic system, or to a condition that the automatic system could not handle that a normal person driving a car would have avoided...

      Automation is not always all it's cracked up to be...

      Have a great day,
       
      Sooner787
      Posts: 2596
      Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

      Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

      Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:10 pm

      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.
       
      User avatar
      AirlineCritic
      Posts: 1667
      Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

      Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

      Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:23 pm

      I have not had time to follow news, is it so that no final solution was delivered in September? Or we don't know yet?
       
      hivue
      Posts: 1954
      Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

      Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

      Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:40 pm

      From an AP story --
      "He [WN pilot union chairman for training] said the FAA is considering revising a half-dozen pilot checklists related to MCAS and flight-control computers, which he said would take at least 30 days."

      https://www.yahoo.com/sports/southwest- ... 48459.html
      "You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
       
      AirBoat
      Posts: 45
      Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 11:58 am

      Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

      Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:29 pm

      I believe the 120 hours per aircraft is mostly for purging all fluids, cleaning the systems and tanks and refilling.
      The potable water system needs to be clean and free of bugs..
      Then something non-aircraft: the heating elements in the stoves could have absorbed moisture, which is going to make them trip the earth leakage(if aircraft have something like that)
      Another thing is flat spots on tyres, but I believe some aircraft are moved once a week. or the aircraft were jacked off the tyres.
      The software load and check will take a few hours.
      And when all above is done complete ground testing of all systems.
      So looking at all the above I can easily see it taking 3 weeks per plane.( and winter is coming, which might slow things down)
       
      SFOtoORD
      Posts: 1130
      Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:26 am

      Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

      Tue Oct 01, 2019 8:18 pm

      klm617 wrote:
      I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


      The analogy only works if the 14 year old was required to have passed a drivers written and practical test and to have had 1000s of hours driving and years behind the wheel first. If not it’s an insult to the capabilities of your average professional airline pilot.
       
      jollo
      Posts: 383
      Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 7:24 pm

      Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

      Tue Oct 01, 2019 9:10 pm

      2175301 wrote:
      jollo wrote:
      mjoelnir wrote:

        especially if you hide the manual from him, because he has to believe it is not different from your pickup


        and especially if the driver's responsibilities include switching off power steering within a few seconds of a single sensor failure, because otherwise the car will steer autonomously onto the other lane and repeatedly try to crash itself into oncoming traffic...


        Have you been following the "issues" that automated cars have been having during the testing and early production phase. A number of accidents where the driver did not respond fast enough to either a malfunctioning automatic system, or to a condition that the automatic system could not handle that a normal person driving a car would have avoided...

        Automation is not always all it's cracked up to be...

        Have a great day,



        There's a fundamental difference between 1) a semi-autonomous (whatever that's meant to mean) car not living up to commercial hype and 2) a subsystem on a commercial airliner that will keep on trying to crash the plane on a single malfunctioning sensor unless it's manually, time-critically cut off by pilots.

        In case further clarification is needed: neither are acceptable practices. In the first case, a manufacturer is playing a fast and loose marketing game with the word "autopilot": something everyone knows does not exist yet (and the bold print is there for anyone bothering to read). In the second case, a manufacturer has designed, certified and then actively hidden from operators an automation vulnerable to catastrophic control runaway in a single sensor failure scenario: something everyone expects any halfway competent automation engineer knows to avoid.

        Not even in the same league, IMO.
         
        User avatar
        par13del
        Posts: 9198
        Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

        Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

        Tue Oct 01, 2019 9:59 pm

        So everything we read is about MCAS testing, no mention of the other items on the list, does this mean ungrounding based on MCAS repairs and the other items introduced / modified during production runs?
        https://atwonline.com/training/us-pilot ... ly+News%29
         
        User avatar
        Revelation
        Posts: 21752
        Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

        Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

        Tue Oct 01, 2019 10:51 pm

        2175301 wrote:
        Have you been following the "issues" that automated cars have been having during the testing and early production phase. A number of accidents where the driver did not respond fast enough to either a malfunctioning automatic system, or to a condition that the automatic system could not handle that a normal person driving a car would have avoided...

        Automation is not always all it's cracked up to be...

        Yes, I have followed, you can look for some posts I made to non-av about the topic.

        IMO commercial aviation is a lot more amenable to automation than amateur automobiling is. FBW shows that aircraft already have all the sensors and algorithms needed for automated flight, you cannot say the same about automobiles. The aviation issues really are about resolving air space conflicts and adding in sufficient failure mode handling. That's why we read articles such as https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -o-461135/ suggesting the first step will be single pilot freighter operation:

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

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

        The link back to the MAX: Is the MAX tragedy going to be looked back as the tipping point where the mind space of the industry shifted from dallying with more automation to resolving to get to fully autonomous pilotless aircraft?

        As was written by others above, this has been on the trend line, but will we look back and see the trend accelerate right about now, partially or wholly due to MAX?
        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
         
        sgrow787
        Posts: 312
        Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:12 pm

        Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

        Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:35 am

        mjoelnir wrote:
          klm617 wrote:
          I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


          especially if you hide the manual from him, because he has to believe it is not different from your pickup


          Couldn't've said it better myself! :banghead:
          Just one sensor,
          Oh just one se-en-sor,
          Just one sensor,
          Ooh ooh oo-ooh
          Oo-oo-ooh.
           
          sgrow787
          Posts: 312
          Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 8:12 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:56 am

          Revelation wrote:
          2175301 wrote:
          Have you been following the "issues" that automated cars have been having during the testing and early production phase. A number of accidents where the driver did not respond fast enough to either a malfunctioning automatic system, or to a condition that the automatic system could not handle that a normal person driving a car would have avoided...

          Automation is not always all it's cracked up to be...

          Yes, I have followed, you can look for some posts I made to non-av about the topic.

          IMO commercial aviation is a lot more amenable to automation than amateur automobiling is. FBW shows that aircraft already have all the sensors and algorithms needed for automated flight, you cannot say the same about automobiles. The aviation issues really are about resolving air space conflicts and adding in sufficient failure mode handling. That's why we read articles such as https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -o-461135/ suggesting the first step will be single pilot freighter operation:

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

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

          The link back to the MAX: Is the MAX tragedy going to be looked back as the tipping point where the mind space of the industry shifted from dallying with more automation to resolving to get to fully autonomous pilotless aircraft?

          As was written by others above, this has been on the trend line, but will we look back and see the trend accelerate right about now, partially or wholly due to MAX?


          So what you're saying is if Boeing had assumed dumb Pilots to begin with, they would have designed a better system - a system with two sensors instead of one. Regardless, the two crashes were because a design failed, the company that designed the system failed, the certification process overlooking that company failed, and without pilots in the planes, the two crashes would have just been less painful, as the MCAS system would have just plowed them into the ground sooner and faster.

          Automation is supposed to help the pilots. Some how we jumped from that to pilots are too dumb to be trusted with essential information on flying the plane, and then jumped from that somehow to they're too dumb to fly at all when they cant save the same undocumented automation. Amazing logic there!
          Just one sensor,
          Oh just one se-en-sor,
          Just one sensor,
          Ooh ooh oo-ooh
          Oo-oo-ooh.
           
          oschkosch
          Posts: 335
          Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:03 am

          hivue wrote:
          From an AP story --
          "He [WN pilot union chairman for training] said the FAA is considering revising a half-dozen pilot checklists related to MCAS and flight-control computers, which he said would take at least 30 days."

          https://www.yahoo.com/sports/southwest- ... 48459.html
          So the fix has not been finished nor submitted, faa needs minimum 30 days after submittal, plus now another 30 days on top. And the EASA list is not even part of that equation. How does early 4th quarter rts work???

          Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
           
          User avatar
          qf789
          Moderator
          Topic Author
          Posts: 9125
          Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 7:29 am

          SilkAir has started positioning its 737MAX fleet from SIN to ASP for storage

          https://australianaviation.com.au/2019/ ... m-storage/
          Forum Moderator
           
          dkjoe
          Posts: 2
          Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:27 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 7:50 am

          klm617 wrote:
          I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


          I am sorry, but this is not even close to being true. Average in this context means "average typed rated pilot" - not "average random random person found in the nearest mall and thrown into a plane"!

          Take 100 random pilots, and in this group of 100 there will be some with skills above average, some average and some below average. Take the 100 most skilled pilots in the world, and in this group there will still be some above the average (of the group), some at average and some below average.

          So the analogy with a 14 year old in a Ferrari are way wrong: The 14 year old does not have a driver license and as such is not in the class of "persons with a drivers license". And the analogy is even more false, because some (older) Ferraris did actually require the driver to above average driving skills. In comparision, the aeroplane shoulds be regarded as a Ford and not a Ferrari: It should not require special skills to drive (fly) it, just a drivers license (pilot certificate and type rating).

          The average pilot is just that, a pilot in the class of "type rated and qualified pilots" - average in this case could both (by chance) be the best pilot in the world or the worst pilot in the world. It just validates, that it takes no above average skills to fly the MAX, just as it should be and as it is required.
           
          rheinwaldner
          Posts: 1791
          Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:03 am

          As this site does not allow me to post all in one, I split this post in three parts.
          Part I:
          morrisond wrote:
          This is a design issue and a training issue that needs to be addressed probably for at least another 30-35 years (as MAX's will probably be produced for about 10 years until NSA is ready and then flown for another 25).

          Wrong, fix the MAX and aviation safety will be excellent. As it was before the MAX appeared.

          morrisond wrote:
          It is not time (yet) to relax Pilot training standards - in fact recent history has shown they need to be strengthened.

          The MAX is the outlier. It fails to comply with design standards, which have been established over the last decades.

          morrisond wrote:
          A 737 replacement will happen that will be full FBW and probably be the most idiot proof plane ever designed (or attempt to be designed).

          The 737NG is idiot proof too. A splendid and perfectly safe workhorse in the hands of all flavour of pilots. Only the MAX missed that standard.

          morrisond wrote:
          It seems like the amount of time to modify the MAX (isn't it being quoted as 120 hours?) seems a lot more than is needed to just load software and prepare the planes for flight.

          I can imagine that the new electronic architecture requires hardware changes. I only wonder why they dont need a full regression test if the changes go so deep.
          Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
           
          rheinwaldner
          Posts: 1791
          Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:03 am

          Part II:
          morrisond wrote:
          It is not time (yet) to relax Pilot training standards - in fact recent history has shown they need to be strengthened.

          They can always be improved. But it is a distraction from the real issue if it is asked in the MAX grounding thread. I have wrote some quotes from a well know US 777 pilot (Juan Browne) from his video (this site does not allow me to paste the link):

          "he (William Langewiesche) is throwing the pilots under the bus .. oversimplifying the problem with this aircraft: (that) the MCAS problem (would) presenting itself as simple runaway trim. The MCAS problem does not present itself as a simple, traditional runaway trim, that we've been used to train for years, where you see the trim literally running away from you and all you got to do was disconnecting the stab trim cutout switches."

          "No, the MCAS anomaly present itself in an overwhelming display of warning lights, bells and horns and sirens so to speak, stick shaker completely confusing the pilots and causing tunnel vision."

          "He (William Langewiesche) is really throwing the pilots under the bus unfairly, blaming the pilots (), completely disregarding the complicated nature of the presentation of this particular emergency."

          He goes on to acknowledge, ..
          "that there are fundamentally two different standards of training around the world, () we have younger, less experienced pilots getting into the cockpits"

          and then surprisingly he is putting the focus on the design of the aircraft:
          "and we (therefore) got to design the aircraft for folks with very little flying time, very little experience and very little airmanship".
          E.g. like the NG, which performs fine with all sorts of pilots..

          Putting these pieces together, we can see that the NG has an excellent safety record and the MAX the worst since many decades. The pilots are/were/will be the same. So we can remove them from the equation and focus on the MAX.
          Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
           
          rheinwaldner
          Posts: 1791
          Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:04 am

          Part III:
          I can even put it mathematically with the failure rate addition formula:
          Λ crash = Λ pilot + Λ aircraft (in the context where failure is defined as a crash causing mishap).

          In aviation prior the MAX, this figure was ever improving. The average between 2012 and 2017 was 0.00000024 crashes per flight. "Λ pilot" being the majority (just guessing: maybe 0.00000021) and "Λ aircraft" being the rest (0.00000003). The statistics are from this link: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airl ... SKCN1OW007

          The same formula with the MAX however looks like this:

          flights: 250k (educated guess, derived from my educated guess, that the MAX totally flew 516khrs)
          crashes: 2
          These values give:
          Λ crash = 0.000008 (33 times worse than aviation prior the MAX!!!)

          Modify the formula to get the failure rate contributed by the MAX:
          Λ MAX = Λ crash - Λ pilot

          Now lets put in the same Λ pilot as above (because, as I said a hundreds of time: MAX pilots were not trained less than NG pilots):
          Λ MAX = 0.000008 - 0.00000021 = 0.00000779

          And now, this is the bummer and the real scandal: "Λ MAX" is 260 times worse than "Λ aircraft" in a world sans MAX!!!!!

          In plain words this means, that the MAX has a (crash causing) system failure rate 260 times higher than the (crash causing) technical system failure rate in aviation prior the MAX.

          How anybody can entertain the pilot discussion in the light of these numbers is beyond me.
          Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
           
          WIederling
          Posts: 8888
          Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:11 am

          rheinwaldner wrote:
          How anybody can entertain the pilot discussion in the light of these numbers is beyond me.


          "Money" is quite wordy.
          Murphy is an optimist
           
          timh4000
          Posts: 209
          Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2018 1:14 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:51 am

          Especially the lion air pilots. Low altitude, low speed, BUT you know you're within normal parameters yet the cockpit is lighting up like a Christmas tree, audibles, stick shaker but what can you do other than try to pull out of the dive the plane is in even though it thinks it's pointing straight up into a stall. Nothing in the manual of a system to correct for what the plane is telling you it's doing even though your driving toward the ocean. The eithiopean crash, now they know of this system at least but it's still vague as to what you're supposed to do but, you've shut it off, gained altitude and in an over speed condition, couldn't manually trim because of excessive speed. I would guess the thought would be to keep high speed up and turn the automation back on to get trim control back only the plane is intent on driving you into the ground. It must have appeared to be a no win situation other than to wrestle with but eventually all control is lost and you're just falling like a ballistic missile
           
          asdf
          Posts: 496
          Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 8:59 am

          timh4000 wrote:
          .....The eithiopean crash, now they know of this system at least but it's still vague as to what you're supposed to do but, you've shut it off, gained altitude and in an over speed condition, couldn't manually trim because of excessive speed. I would guess the thought would be to keep high speed up and turn the automation back on to get trim control back only the plane is intent on driving you into the ground. It must have appeared to be a no win situation other than to wrestle with but eventually all control is lost and you're just falling like a ballistic missile


          somewhere back in one of that monster 737 grounding threads a user posted the two checklists for - i guess - "unreliable airspeed" and "{dont know, but was present at that time}"

          they contradicted each other.
          one demandes full thrust and rise, the other thrust left unchanged and hold high

          how can you expect from a crew barly a few hundred meters above ground, not only to cope with multiple fault indications of a undocumented system, when otherwise the checklists contradict each other ... not even to mention that there was an AD issued for that situation what was - at least - missleading (if not simply wrong)

          but well .... bad airmanship ... i know .....
           
          planecane
          Posts: 1234
          Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 4:58 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:59 am

          rheinwaldner wrote:

          morrisond wrote:
          It seems like the amount of time to modify the MAX (isn't it being quoted as 120 hours?) seems a lot more than is needed to just load software and prepare the planes for flight.

          I can imagine that the new electronic architecture requires hardware changes. I only wonder why they dont need a full regression test if the changes go so deep.


          It has been stated multiple times (including reports with quotes) that the 120 hours is due to all the work to prepare the aircraft to return to service after being in storage so long that would be required even if there were no changes. There has been no indication of any hardware changes.
           
          klm617
          Posts: 4625
          Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:01 pm

          SFOtoORD wrote:
          klm617 wrote:
          I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


          The analogy only works if the 14 year old was required to have passed a drivers written and practical test and to have had 1000s of hours driving and years behind the wheel first. If not it’s an insult to the capabilities of your average professional airline pilot.


          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.
          the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
           
          morrisond
          Posts: 1659
          Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:25 pm

          rheinwaldner wrote:
          As this site does not allow me to post all in one, I split this post in three parts.
          Part I:
          morrisond wrote:
          This is a design issue and a training issue that needs to be addressed probably for at least another 30-35 years (as MAX's will probably be produced for about 10 years until NSA is ready and then flown for another 25).

          Wrong, fix the MAX and aviation safety will be excellent. As it was before the MAX appeared.

          morrisond wrote:
          It is not time (yet) to relax Pilot training standards - in fact recent history has shown they need to be strengthened.

          The MAX is the outlier. It fails to comply with design standards, which have been established over the last decades.

          morrisond wrote:
          A 737 replacement will happen that will be full FBW and probably be the most idiot proof plane ever designed (or attempt to be designed).

          The 737NG is idiot proof too. A splendid and perfectly safe workhorse in the hands of all flavour of pilots. Only the MAX missed that standard.

          morrisond wrote:
          It seems like the amount of time to modify the MAX (isn't it being quoted as 120 hours?) seems a lot more than is needed to just load software and prepare the planes for flight.

          I can imagine that the new electronic architecture requires hardware changes. I only wonder why they dont need a full regression test if the changes go so deep.


          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 - I was simply pointing out that that might be nice 30 years down the road but we still have a worldwide fleet that requires Pilot's ability to take manual control and actually fly the plane. This is not just specific to the 737 NG/MAX.

          The ability to do this proficiently would have saved a lot more lives than those lost on just the MAX in the last 10-15 years (AF447, ET409 too name two).

          I take it you missed the news articles where the FAA and NTSB are likely to call for improved Pilot training as part of the ungrounding.

          Yes safety is quite good presently - especially when you blend the two MAX crashes into the total number of flights worldwide that take place over all Aircraft types - which if you are talking about Overall air safety is the number you should be looking at. From time to time there will be aircraft that have issues and effect the stats.

          The 737 NG is not quite as Idiot proof as you think it is. Please explain all the landing incidents and how improved Pilot training could not have changed the outcome of a lot of those flights.
           
          morrisond
          Posts: 1659
          Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:28 pm

          rheinwaldner wrote:
          Part III:
          I can even put it mathematically with the failure rate addition formula:
          Λ crash = Λ pilot + Λ aircraft (in the context where failure is defined as a crash causing mishap).

          In aviation prior the MAX, this figure was ever improving. The average between 2012 and 2017 was 0.00000024 crashes per flight. "Λ pilot" being the majority (just guessing: maybe 0.00000021) and "Λ aircraft" being the rest (0.00000003). The statistics are from this link: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airl ... SKCN1OW007

          The same formula with the MAX however looks like this:

          flights: 250k (educated guess, derived from my educated guess, that the MAX totally flew 516khrs)
          crashes: 2
          These values give:
          Λ crash = 0.000008 (33 times worse than aviation prior the MAX!!!)

          Modify the formula to get the failure rate contributed by the MAX:
          Λ MAX = Λ crash - Λ pilot

          Now lets put in the same Λ pilot as above (because, as I said a hundreds of time: MAX pilots were not trained less than NG pilots):
          Λ MAX = 0.000008 - 0.00000021 = 0.00000779

          And now, this is the bummer and the real scandal: "Λ MAX" is 260 times worse than "Λ aircraft" in a world sans MAX!!!!!

          In plain words this means, that the MAX has a (crash causing) system failure rate 260 times higher than the (crash causing) technical system failure rate in aviation prior the MAX.

          How anybody can entertain the pilot discussion in the light of these numbers is beyond me.


          Because if the Pilot's had actually followed the procedure and flown the airplane correctly the rate would have been half of this and getting lower all the time as the MAX would probably still be flying. If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.
           
          StTim
          Posts: 3471
          Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:34 pm

          klm617 wrote:
          SFOtoORD wrote:
          klm617 wrote:
          I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


          The analogy only works if the 14 year old was required to have passed a drivers written and practical test and to have had 1000s of hours driving and years behind the wheel first. If not it’s an insult to the capabilities of your average professional airline pilot.


          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.



          But you must actually put your trust in a poor pilot who has passed the relevant courses, check flights etc etc. It is a fact that you will have traveled on flights operated by below average pilots. These must exist and be flying planes.

          The bar isn't that an average pilot can cope but that a suitably qualified pilot or a reasonably bad day can cope.
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 2110
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:39 pm

          klm617 wrote:
          SFOtoORD wrote:
          klm617 wrote:
          I think it's very telling that the FAA wants the new system to be trained on by 'Average pilots" meaning to me that the lack of understanding and awareness in the cockpit was a very large contributing factors in the 2 MAX 8 crashes. I see this as similar to letting your 14 year old child drive your new Ferrari and some point you are just asking for trouble.


          The analogy only works if the 14 year old was required to have passed a drivers written and practical test and to have had 1000s of hours driving and years behind the wheel first. If not it’s an insult to the capabilities of your average professional airline pilot.


          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.

          Stay at home. Or trust that drive to an average driver (and if you rate your driving skills above average - think twice). And doctor who sees you in a hospital is likely average. Police officers around you, firefighters, teachers.. On average, they are average.
           
          asdf
          Posts: 496
          Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 12:46 pm

          morrisond wrote:
          rheinwaldner wrote:
          ...."In plain words this means, that the MAX has a (crash causing) system failure rate 260 times higher than the (crash causing) technical system failure rate in aviation prior the MAX. How anybody can entertain the pilot discussion in the light of these numbers is beyond me.


          Because if the Pilot's had actually followed the procedure and flown the airplane correctly the rate would have been half of this and getting lower all the time as the MAX would probably still be flying. If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          holy cow
          ist really hard to read that so often

          but it does not make it more true

          true is:
          CHANGED POSITION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG)
          CHANGED OPERATION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG)
          UNDOCUMENTED new procedure for failure of sensor
          UNDOCUMENTED way of recognition of failure of augmentation system (3 seconds? you are kidding, arent you?)
          NO checklist for new flight augmentaion system failure
          WRONG (or at least wrong sequence) AD (this was a main cause of the ET crash, too)
          CONTRADICTORY procedures in existing checklists
          NO sim time
          DOUBTFUL function of manual trim wheel because of overload (maybe even within envelope)
          DOUBTFUL function of electric trim switches (maybe because of malfunction of the flight computer - i hope we will know after the reports)

          contributing:
          average or under-average flight deck crew?
          maybe, i dont know
          i myself am used to rather shut up if i know something not very flattering about perished persons, they can not hold against ...

          and you are writing since months about "better training" ?
          honestly?
           
          morrisond
          Posts: 1659
          Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:16 pm

          asdf wrote:
          morrisond wrote:
          rheinwaldner wrote:
          ...."In plain words this means, that the MAX has a (crash causing) system failure rate 260 times higher than the (crash causing) technical system failure rate in aviation prior the MAX. How anybody can entertain the pilot discussion in the light of these numbers is beyond me.


          Because if the Pilot's had actually followed the procedure and flown the airplane correctly the rate would have been half of this and getting lower all the time as the MAX would probably still be flying. If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          holy cow
          ist really hard to read that so often

          but it does not make it more true

          true is:
          CHANGED POSITION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG)
          CHANGED OPERATION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG)
          UNDOCUMENTED new procedure for failure of sensor
          UNDOCUMENTED way of recognition of failure of augmentation system (3 seconds? you are kidding, arent you?)
          NO checklist for new flight augmentaion system failure
          WRONG (or at least wrong sequence) AD (this was a main cause of the ET crash, too)
          CONTRADICTORY procedures in existing checklists
          NO sim time
          DOUBTFUL function of manual trim wheel because of overload (maybe even within envelope)
          DOUBTFUL function of electric trim switches (maybe because of malfunction of the flight computer - i hope we will know after the reports)

          contributing:
          average or under-average flight deck crew?
          maybe, i dont know
          i myself am used to rather shut up if i know something not very flattering about perished persons, they can not hold against ...

          and you are writing since months about "better training" ?
          honestly?


          You have your opinion and I have mine.

          There is no one with no egg on their face in these crashes - Boeing/FAA/The Airlines for lack of training
           
          User avatar
          DL747400
          Posts: 774
          Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:35 pm

          So much talk about the 737MAX crashes, the impact of the MAX grounding on Boeing, the testing and efforts to get various "fixes" approved so the grounded can be lifted and the MAX can get back in the air. Let's shift gears for a moment.

          What about the airlines that ordered the 737MAX and have seen their flying frames grounded and been progressively watching their undelivered frames piling up at storage locations? This capacity is a ticking time bomb for the entire industry if not handled correctly and responsibly, one which will ultimately affect even those airlines which were never MAX operators and never ordered the MAX. There is a huge amount of grounded capacity sitting idle. Some of the stored MAX jets are replacements for frames being retired, while the rest is growth capacity.

          Once the grounding is lifted, will MAX operators show some restraint and act rationally and conservatively when adding MAX capacity back into their schedules and networks? Or will MAX operators use the MAX capacity as a weapon and deploy it quickly and strategically in specific markets with the intent of damaging a competitor? Unsettling questions for sure, but ones which I'm not hearing anyone asking.

          It is asking a lot to expect airlines to act rationally and show conservative restraint, as they have not demonstrated a long history of being able to do so. Yet the return of this capacity, if not done in a phased and measured approach, has the potential to negatively impact the economic health of countries in several key regions around the globe.
          From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

          All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
           
          User avatar
          Revelation
          Posts: 21752
          Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:37 pm

          StTim wrote:
          The bar isn't that an average pilot can cope but that a suitably qualified pilot or a reasonably bad day can cope.

          The bar being set at Lion Air is based on its running of the Lion City operation that has a 95% pass rate, which may be influenced by the fact each student is paying $60,000 for the privilege of such training and then a right hand seat in an airliner, in a country with a 2017 GDP per capita of $3,846.86 per Google.
          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
           
          AABusDrvr
          Posts: 107
          Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:48 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:42 pm

          Even on the 737NG, a similar failure of AOA data will present in exactly the same way, minus the MCAS stabilizer commands. There will still be the possibly conflicting aural warnings. In either case, the flight deck will not be "lit up like a Christmas tree". You will get some comparator flags on the PFD's, but most likely, thats it.

          The crew will still have to decide what the most appropriate check lists are, and what order to run them. While still flying the airplane.
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 2110
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:46 pm

          morrisond wrote:
          asdf wrote:
          morrisond wrote:

          Because if the Pilot's had actually followed the procedure and flown the airplane correctly the rate would have been half of this and getting lower all the time as the MAX would probably still be flying. If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          holy cow
          ist really hard to read that so often

          but it does not make it more true

          true is:
          CHANGED POSITION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG)
          CHANGED OPERATION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG)
          UNDOCUMENTED new procedure for failure of sensor
          UNDOCUMENTED way of recognition of failure of augmentation system (3 seconds? you are kidding, arent you?)
          NO checklist for new flight augmentaion system failure
          WRONG (or at least wrong sequence) AD (this was a main cause of the ET crash, too)
          CONTRADICTORY procedures in existing checklists
          NO sim time
          DOUBTFUL function of manual trim wheel because of overload (maybe even within envelope)
          DOUBTFUL function of electric trim switches (maybe because of malfunction of the flight computer - i hope we will know after the reports)

          contributing:
          average or under-average flight deck crew?
          maybe, i dont know
          i myself am used to rather shut up if i know something not very flattering about perished persons, they can not hold against ...

          and you are writing since months about "better training" ?
          honestly?


          You have your opinion and I have mine.

          There is no one with no egg on their face in these crashes - Boeing/FAA/The Airlines for lack of training

          I am following this thread for a while, and I keep wondering - why do you hate Boeing so much and want them to fail?
          There is just one way up for them: accept the failure, learn, do better next time. If that doesn't happen, next design will have problems - and that is where "too big to fail" may end.
          Why do you wish they to fail? Especially in such a convoluted way? Something what is beyond me...
           
          asdf
          Posts: 496
          Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:47 pm

          a little bit childish, isnt it
          but let me respond please:

          CHANGED OPERATION of switches (in relation to the type rated NG) - Disclosed in MAX Differences training
          well, actually only the new POSITION of the switches was mentioned bevor the ET crahs, they didnt tell that the switches under the floor of the console didnt stop the electric trim any more ...

          UNDOCUMENTED new procedure for failure of sensor - Disclosed after Lionair before ET302
          näääääh! the AD didnt say anything about the priority of the different checklists (unreliable airspeed, ....). and what it desires was listed in a deathly wrong sequence

          UNDOCUMENTED way of recognition of failure of augmentation system (3 seconds? you are kidding, arent you?) - They had way more than 3 seconds
          i guess you learned that a failure or undefinite state of the AoA sensor brings down the plane if it is not recongnised and countered by the flight deck crew within 3 seconds. boeing expected that friom the politos in the MCAS 1.0 certification documents.
          even in the SIM a few months later there was a perfect educated and trained US captain, with full knowenledge of the background and what to expect a few moments later and he could not safe the plane ... ähh ... the SIM
          the trim wheel often spins two or three seconds during climb .. how would one recognice a MCAS malfunktion within 3 seconds ... simply weird


          NO checklist for new flight augmentaion system failure - Yes there was after Lionair
          yup, but procedure listed in a deathly wrong sequence. well done ....

          CONTRADICTORY procedures in existing checklists - Overridden by what should be common pilot knowledge and wisdom - if HAL(the computer) tries to kill you, turn it off and fly manually - you will never be able to make a checklist for everything or have the time to go searching for one
          repeated a zillion times now in this threads ... yes, of course ..... but if you dont know about a new HAL function within your cockpit you have no idea what to switch of. there is NO "switch" to switch of the flight computer. you have to diagnose the problem, find out that there is something new, that dont add up with your previous experience .. find out that following an emergency AD only brings you in far more trouble than before ... and everything only a few hundred feet above ground near Vmax ... yes, definitly bad airmanship *sarcasm off*

          NO sim time - That ones on ET - up to them and Ethiopian Regulators and how much time in SIM
          sorry, but big BS! there was simply no MAX SIM at that time. the SIM they got did NOT reflect the attiutude of a MAX plane. it simply was a NG SIM with regrouped switches like on the MAX. no MCAS at all in the SIM logic. and you know it

          DOUBTFUL function of electric trim switches (maybe because of malfunction of the flight computer - i hope we will know after the reports) - On ET they seemed to work when the Trim System was energized and worked perfectly well on Lionair 22 times.[/quote]
          a input from the switches repeadedly always only exactly in the same lengh of 4.3 (?) seconds and than to a stop? at a time as the bird lowered its nose down to the ground during full speed? can you really imagine that a pilote on this world would take the finger off that switch if the earth is going to be bigger and bigger through the front window? no way. my bet is on a kind of electronic (not aerodynamic) overload in the flight computer ... but there is no final report out by now so we do not know for shure
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 2110
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:49 pm

          AABusDrvr wrote:
          Even on the 737NG, a similar failure of AOA data will present in exactly the same way, minus the MCAS stabilizer commands. There will still be the possibly conflicting aural warnings. In either case, the flight deck will not be "lit up like a Christmas tree". You will get some comparator flags on the PFD's, but most likely, thats it.

          The crew will still have to decide what the most appropriate check lists are, and what order to run them. While still flying the airplane.

          Difference is, crew has some time for taking a deep breath and looking at the panel again before contact with terrain.
           
          asdf
          Posts: 496
          Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:03 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 1:58 pm

          kalvado wrote:
          I am following this thread for a while, and I keep wondering - why do you hate Boeing so much and want them to fail?
          There is just one way up for them: accept the failure, learn, do better next time. If that doesn't happen, next design will have problems - and that is where "too big to fail" may end.
          Why do you wish they to fail? Especially in such a convoluted way? Something what is beyond me...


          sorry, but you get a complete wrong picture here
          i have no interest in harming the interests of shareholders, employees or any other persons

          i think BA did a very wrong desition in designing the MAX

          i think it is now - and will be in the future - unsafe
          not because of MCAS 1.0 or 2.0 but because of its questionable aerodynamical attitudes, not safely counteractable through electronic helpers because they can never safely implemented in a concept of a non-fly-by-wire plane

          the question is simply can BA lobby so strong that EASA (they will find out if they try the high speed turns in their test-week) is cringing back and put its head in the sand like a ostrich to avoid political confrontation with the US


          but that is simply my personal view, it can be wrong anyway

          i am not a internet lurk
          i do have a own life and family
          i drive a own business
          my time is pretty valuabel (for me)

          but every time i see how some users try to turn the complete story around and try to bend the facts and try to start a bush fire to unsettle the audience i think it is worth to invest a few minutes

          if those posters would declare themself as official BA PR-Staff (what will never happen, i know) i wont have any bad feeling in reading their statements, because thats their job and they need to do that in that way.

          btw:
          i would post no word other than now if it would be a A320MAX, read my lips ...
          Last edited by asdf on Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:06 pm, edited 3 times in total.
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 2110
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:02 pm

          asdf wrote:
          kalvado wrote:
          I am following this thread for a while, and I keep wondering - why do you hate Boeing so much and want them to fail?
          There is just one way up for them: accept the failure, learn, do better next time. If that doesn't happen, next design will have problems - and that is where "too big to fail" may end.
          Why do you wish they to fail? Especially in such a convoluted way? Something what is beyond me...


          sorry, but you get a complete wrong picture here
          i have no interest in harming the interests of shareholders, employees or any other persons

          i think BA did a very wrong desition in designing the MAX

          i think it is now - and will be in the future - unsafe
          not because of MCAS 1.0 or 2.0 but because of its questionable aerodynamical attitudes, not safely counteractable through electronic helpers because they can never safely implemented in a concept of a non-fly-by-wire plane

          the question is simply can BA lobby so strong that EASA is cringing back and put its head in the sand like a ostrich to avoid political confrontation with the US


          but that is simply my personal view, it can be wrong anyway

          This wasn't for you, but for @morrisond; you got notification due to multilevel quotes.
          He tries to unload responsibility from Boeing; and while this means avoiding legal and PR responsibility - this also means evading problem diagnosis and cure, even if the medicine is a bitter one.
           
          mjoelnir
          Posts: 8786
          Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:04 pm

          morrisond wrote:
          rheinwaldner wrote:
          As this site does not allow me to post all in one, I split this post in three parts.
          Part I:
          morrisond wrote:
          This is a design issue and a training issue that needs to be addressed probably for at least another 30-35 years (as MAX's will probably be produced for about 10 years until NSA is ready and then flown for another 25).

          Wrong, fix the MAX and aviation safety will be excellent. As it was before the MAX appeared.

          morrisond wrote:
          It is not time (yet) to relax Pilot training standards - in fact recent history has shown they need to be strengthened.

          The MAX is the outlier. It fails to comply with design standards, which have been established over the last decades.

          morrisond wrote:
          A 737 replacement will happen that will be full FBW and probably be the most idiot proof plane ever designed (or attempt to be designed).

          The 737NG is idiot proof too. A splendid and perfectly safe workhorse in the hands of all flavour of pilots. Only the MAX missed that standard.

          morrisond wrote:
          It seems like the amount of time to modify the MAX (isn't it being quoted as 120 hours?) seems a lot more than is needed to just load software and prepare the planes for flight.

          I can imagine that the new electronic architecture requires hardware changes. I only wonder why they dont need a full regression test if the changes go so deep.


          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 - I was simply pointing out that that might be nice 30 years down the road but we still have a worldwide fleet that requires Pilot's ability to take manual control and actually fly the plane. This is not just specific to the 737 NG/MAX.

          The ability to do this proficiently would have saved a lot more lives than those lost on just the MAX in the last 10-15 years (AF447, ET409 too name two).

          I take it you missed the news articles where the FAA and NTSB are likely to call for improved Pilot training as part of the ungrounding.

          Yes safety is quite good presently - especially when you blend the two MAX crashes into the total number of flights worldwide that take place over all Aircraft types - which if you are talking about Overall air safety is the number you should be looking at. From time to time there will be aircraft that have issues and effect the stats.

          The 737 NG is not quite as Idiot proof as you think it is. Please explain all the landing incidents and how improved Pilot training could not have changed the outcome of a lot of those flights.


          You yourself have been missing or purposefully avoiding the context.

          Yes, it is always good to go for better pilot training, but who does pay the cost.

          But Boeing purposefully sold the 737MAX with no special training necessary, hid the MCAS and made sure that pilots could not train for MCAS failure on the simulators sold as 737MAX simulators, by keeping those modes out of the simulators that were sold to airlines.

          No, the pilot training is not the issue when we look at the grounding of the 737MAX. The issue is an completely unnecessary attack by a badly designed automation trying to overwhelm the pilots and crashing the frame.
          Boeing does not have any excuses for this terrible design, because they encountered a similar problem on the KC46 or 767 tanker, developed a MCAS, with bells and whistles, several sensors and made sure it only activated once. Furthermore the pilots can override it there, by just pulling back on the stick.

          You hammer and hammer on pilot training in all the 737MAX grounding threads, to move the discussion from the deficiencies of the MAX, over to making the pilots the scapegoats.
           
          kayik
          Posts: 58
          Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:58 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:06 pm

          morrisond wrote:

          Because if the Pilot's had actually followed the procedure and flown the airplane correctly the rate would have been half of this and getting lower all the time as the MAX would probably still be flying. If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          So, you actually think MAX should fly. And you don't blame the pilots.
          You remind me chewing gums stuck under the boots.
           
          User avatar
          Francoflier
          Posts: 4917
          Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:21 pm

          morrisond wrote:
          If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          Please explain where ET's training is lacking and how it lead to the crash.
          I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
           
          mjoelnir
          Posts: 8786
          Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:23 pm

          morrisond wrote:
          rheinwaldner wrote:
          Part III:
          I can even put it mathematically with the failure rate addition formula:
          Λ crash = Λ pilot + Λ aircraft (in the context where failure is defined as a crash causing mishap).

          In aviation prior the MAX, this figure was ever improving. The average between 2012 and 2017 was 0.00000024 crashes per flight. "Λ pilot" being the majority (just guessing: maybe 0.00000021) and "Λ aircraft" being the rest (0.00000003). The statistics are from this link: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airl ... SKCN1OW007

          The same formula with the MAX however looks like this:

          flights: 250k (educated guess, derived from my educated guess, that the MAX totally flew 516khrs)
          crashes: 2
          These values give:
          Λ crash = 0.000008 (33 times worse than aviation prior the MAX!!!)

          Modify the formula to get the failure rate contributed by the MAX:
          Λ MAX = Λ crash - Λ pilot

          Now lets put in the same Λ pilot as above (because, as I said a hundreds of time: MAX pilots were not trained less than NG pilots):
          Λ MAX = 0.000008 - 0.00000021 = 0.00000779

          And now, this is the bummer and the real scandal: "Λ MAX" is 260 times worse than "Λ aircraft" in a world sans MAX!!!!!

          In plain words this means, that the MAX has a (crash causing) system failure rate 260 times higher than the (crash causing) technical system failure rate in aviation prior the MAX.

          How anybody can entertain the pilot discussion in the light of these numbers is beyond me.


          Because if the Pilot's had actually followed the procedure and flown the airplane correctly the rate would have been half of this and getting lower all the time as the MAX would probably still be flying. If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          You are at an undying quest to blame the pilots.

          The pilots did try to use the procedure and the procedure miserable failed the pilots.

          When Boeing assumed that pilots could be the safety for MCAS, they never checked on real world scenarios. The did not check on what would really happen if an AoA sensor would go bonkers and the cockpit would become a christmas tree. They did not even have their test pilots try out that situation, neither on the simulator nor in real flight. Boeing just assumed that it would look like a normal runaway trim, without testing it.

          The main point is, Boeing did it right before. They did it once for the 767 tanker and there with all the bells and whistles. Several sensors, guarantied only activating once and simple cutting out MCAS by pulling back the stick. The USA air force would never have accepted a crazy system like the MCAS on the 737MAX.
          I assume that is the main reason, why Boeing did hide MCAS from customers and pilots.
           
          morrisond
          Posts: 1659
          Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:36 pm

          Francoflier wrote:
          morrisond wrote:
          If training at ET had been better it's quite possible ET302 would never have happened.


          Please explain where ET's training is lacking and how it lead to the crash.


          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.

          Combine ET302 with the ET409 fatal flight where the PIC's both had issues with being able to control the plane (and passed through 737 Type rating at the same time) in manual flight leads me to believe that maybe they have to strengthen there training a touch in terms of how to control the airplane in Manual flight and make it a recurring theme in at least the SIM.

          It sounds like they have great training to operate the systems - assuming the systems don't do anything unexpected - however it is not an reasonable expectation in Aviation that systems will always work - systems will fail - either through piss poor design like the MAX or parts failure.
           
          User avatar
          Revelation
          Posts: 21752
          Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 2:39 pm

          rheinwaldner wrote:
          As this site does not allow me to post all in one, I split this post in three parts.
          Part I:
          morrisond wrote:
          This is a design issue and a training issue that needs to be addressed probably for at least another 30-35 years (as MAX's will probably be produced for about 10 years until NSA is ready and then flown for another 25).

          Wrong, fix the MAX and aviation safety will be excellent. As it was before the MAX appeared.

          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.

          You are comparing unlike populations thus doing correct arithmetic yet producing a statistical fallacy.

          Your words show that even you don't believe the implication of the 260x result, because you say MAX will converge to the norm once the fix is applied.
          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
           
          AABusDrvr
          Posts: 107
          Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:48 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 3:59 pm

          I'm curious, for everyone calling for MAX specific training. Have you ever attended a formal simulator type rating course? What exactly do you think should be trained, and how much training time should be spent on it?

          Since MCAS presents just like every other uncommanded stabilizer motion problem, except it's not continuous (as can happen with other trim faults), and the remedy is exactly the same, the runaway stabilizer checklist. If you are hand flying the airplane, you will know in a few seconds of stab trim movement, because of the increased back pressure on the yoke, that it's not doing what it's supposed to, or what you told it to do. The training would end up exactly like the runaway stabilizer scenario everyone has seen already.
           
          User avatar
          aerolimani
          Posts: 1249
          Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:46 pm

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:44 pm

          AABusDrvr wrote:
          I'm curious, for everyone calling for MAX specific training. Have you ever attended a formal simulator type rating course? What exactly do you think should be trained, and how much training time should be spent on it?

          Since MCAS presents just like every other uncommanded stabilizer motion problem, except it's not continuous (as can happen with other trim faults), and the remedy is exactly the same, the runaway stabilizer checklist. If you are hand flying the airplane, you will know in a few seconds of stab trim movement, because of the increased back pressure on the yoke, that it's not doing what it's supposed to, or what you told it to do. The training would end up exactly like the runaway stabilizer scenario everyone has seen already.

          Yeah… that sounds good. The sense I've gotten, after reading this thread since the beginning, is that runaway stabilizer has rather fallen off the regularly trained scenarios. Maybe it should be given a higher priority? So yeah, I'll suggest training on an MCAS style runaway (intermittent), and a classic runaway (continuous).
           
          User avatar
          flyingphil
          Posts: 251
          Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:58 pm

          Not seen this before..

          "According to an internal complaint submitted by a Boeing engineer after this year’s 737 Max crashes, the company declined to put a proposed safety system in the plane in an effort to keep costs low—a decision that may have contributed to the crashes in India and Ethiopia that collectively killed 346 people.."

          India? think they meant Indonesia!? Not sure how much credibility I would give this. Wise after the event maybe..

          https://gizmodo.com/boeing-engineer-fil ... 1838699968
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 2110
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:10 pm

          AABusDrvr wrote:
          I'm curious, for everyone calling for MAX specific training. Have you ever attended a formal simulator type rating course? What exactly do you think should be trained, and how much training time should be spent on it?

          Since MCAS presents just like every other uncommanded stabilizer motion problem, except it's not continuous (as can happen with other trim faults), and the remedy is exactly the same, the runaway stabilizer checklist. If you are hand flying the airplane, you will know in a few seconds of stab trim movement, because of the increased back pressure on the yoke, that it's not doing what it's supposed to, or what you told it to do. The training would end up exactly like the runaway stabilizer scenario everyone has seen already.

          Given that there is something else wrong with the plane.. how can you be sure this is not a structural failure, for example, that loads the yoke? Or - if you're in the cloud - that this is not inertial system failure, and you're trying to maintain level flight - but your true horizon is no longer what you see on display?
           
          AABusDrvr
          Posts: 107
          Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:48 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:19 pm

          aerolimani wrote:
          AABusDrvr wrote:
          I'm curious, for everyone calling for MAX specific training. Have you ever attended a formal simulator type rating course? What exactly do you think should be trained, and how much training time should be spent on it?

          Since MCAS presents just like every other uncommanded stabilizer motion problem, except it's not continuous (as can happen with other trim faults), and the remedy is exactly the same, the runaway stabilizer checklist. If you are hand flying the airplane, you will know in a few seconds of stab trim movement, because of the increased back pressure on the yoke, that it's not doing what it's supposed to, or what you told it to do. The training would end up exactly like the runaway stabilizer scenario everyone has seen already.

          Yeah… that sounds good. The sense I've gotten, after reading this thread since the beginning, is that runaway stabilizer has rather fallen off the regularly trained scenarios. Maybe it should be given a higher priority? So yeah, I'll suggest training on an MCAS style runaway (intermittent), and a classic runaway (continuous).


          I think it's a safe bet that stab trim malfunctions will bee an emphasis item during everyones next recurrent training cycle.


          kalvado wrote:
          AABusDrvr wrote:
          I'm curious, for everyone calling for MAX specific training. Have you ever attended a formal simulator type rating course? What exactly do you think should be trained, and how much training time should be spent on it?

          Since MCAS presents just like every other uncommanded stabilizer motion problem, except it's not continuous (as can happen with other trim faults), and the remedy is exactly the same, the runaway stabilizer checklist. If you are hand flying the airplane, you will know in a few seconds of stab trim movement, because of the increased back pressure on the yoke, that it's not doing what it's supposed to, or what you told it to do. The training would end up exactly like the runaway stabilizer scenario everyone has seen already.

          Given that there is something else wrong with the plane.. how can you be sure this is not a structural failure, for example, that loads the yoke? Or - if you're in the cloud - that this is not inertial system failure, and you're trying to maintain level flight - but your true horizon is no longer what you see on display?


          There are three separate, independent attitude/altitude/airspeed indications in the airplane, thats where a proper instrument scan/cross check, and crew coordination and communication becomes very important.
           
          kalvado
          Posts: 2110
          Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

          Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounded Worldwide Q4 2019

          Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:35 pm

          AABusDrvr wrote:


          kalvado wrote:
          AABusDrvr wrote:
          I'm curious, for everyone calling for MAX specific training. Have you ever attended a formal simulator type rating course? What exactly do you think should be trained, and how much training time should be spent on it?

          Since MCAS presents just like every other uncommanded stabilizer motion problem, except it's not continuous (as can happen with other trim faults), and the remedy is exactly the same, the runaway stabilizer checklist. If you are hand flying the airplane, you will know in a few seconds of stab trim movement, because of the increased back pressure on the yoke, that it's not doing what it's supposed to, or what you told it to do. The training would end up exactly like the runaway stabilizer scenario everyone has seen already.

          Given that there is something else wrong with the plane.. how can you be sure this is not a structural failure, for example, that loads the yoke? Or - if you're in the cloud - that this is not inertial system failure, and you're trying to maintain level flight - but your true horizon is no longer what you see on display?


          There are three separate, independent attitude/altitude/airspeed indications in the airplane, thats where a proper instrument scan/cross check, and crew coordination and communication becomes very important.

          Can you do all cross-checks in 3 seconds allocated for trim runaway recognition?
          • 1
          • 2
          • 3
          • 4
          • 5
          • 60

          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