Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10
 
User avatar
qf789
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 11134
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 1:14 pm

Welcome to 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020. Please continue to add your comments below

Link to last thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1440181

Link to 737MAX Grounding News and Reference Thread

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1437865

Just a reminder to keep your posts on topic, personal attacks and flamebait are left out of the discussion, if you are quoting from news sources to add links and your own comments
Forum Moderator
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:20 pm

'...Boeing said. “Ultimately, it will be the regulators who determine the training requirements.”...'
https://www.thenational.ae/business/avi ... x-1.986016

Does this mean that Boeing have forsworn:
'The covering up they did last year'
'Jedi mind tricks'
Treating regulators like 'Dogs watching TV'
Calling customers 'Dumb' for being manipulated.

Hope so. Perhaps the commitment to recommending SIM training as part of the package and paying for it will give encouragement to that hope.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8413
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:39 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
'...Boeing said. “Ultimately, it will be the regulators who determine the training requirements.”...'.


Boeing would have been in much better shape if they followed this simple rule.

There may have been couple of customers adamant about avoiding SIM training, but there was no reason for Boeing to carry that torch throughout the world by shaming the regulators.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 4123
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 2:54 pm

From previous thread:

PW100 wrote:
I think if you do the math, despite the numerous engine shut downs, the rate per flight (hour) is still very very very very low.
You'd be exceptionally unlucky to have two in one flight.
However MSPNWA turns that 180° around around and now calls it very lucky they did not have two A350 gliding down into the ocean.
One can't argue against flawed logic.


NSPNWA wrote:
One spill and the A350 could lose both engines. You're not addressing that model. Regarding the A220. If you do the math on the chances that the cascade of events that led to an MCAS 1.0 crash, it's also very, very, very low. MCAS 2.0 adds many more "very"s. Winning the lottery doesn't mean the chances to win again are better than they were the first time. It may feel like it, but it's not reality. It's interesting but not surprising that you're finding excuses to treat the A220's known risk differently. You cannot deny the overall point being made.

So your conclusion of "flawed logic" is from yourself. It is by luck that the A350 didn't glide into the ocean. There was nothing psychically preventing a dual engine shutdown. That's a fact according to the EASA..


Again, you are (purposely) playing your words. In this case "could". Yes. The A350 could lose both engines. Yes, the A350 could be hit by a meteorite. Doesn’t matter. What matters is risk, i.e. chance vs. outcome.

The risk difference between A350 losing both engines (never mind outcome) and Max having MCAS runaway and self-diving into the ground is many orders of magnitude. The regulators have addressed that model for the A350 quite well, unlike MCAS.

So yes, the FAA is finally starting to seriously addressing the MCAS risk (and at the same time other MAX risks) as well, rather than leave it to BSC (Boeing Self-Certificating).



NSPNWA wrote:
Regarding the A220. If you do the math on the chances that the cascade of events that led to an MCAS 1.0 crash, it's also very, very, very low. MCAS 2.0 adds many more "very"s. Winning the lottery doesn't mean the chances to win again are better than they were the first time. It may feel like it, but it's not reality. It's interesting but not surprising that you're finding excuses to treat the A220's known risk differently. You cannot deny the overall point being made.


Again, there are several orders of magnitude in risk difference between the two (invalid) comparisons as chosen by you. And they are flawed for that very reason.

Modern engine IFSD (In-Flight Shut Down) rate typically is 0.005 per 1000 flight hours. The GTF at worst has something around 0.015 per 1000 hrs (am not allowed to share more detailed info). Which compared to for instance CFM56-7 would be quite bad. But compared to CF6-80 it is actually quite good. So all of this is very relative.

I'd challenge you to some cascade calculations and demonstrate that the odds off having A220 dual engine IFSD approaches the category of "hazardous" (let alone catastrophic). I'll give you a hint: Don't bother the effort, because it is not possible. Because the odds are nowhere near as bad as you think, or want us to make believe. That’s why I wrote that I can’t argue with flawed logic.
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 3:37 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
'...Boeing said. “Ultimately, it will be the regulators who determine the training requirements.”...'.


Boeing would have been in much better shape if they followed this simple rule.

There may have been couple of customers adamant about avoiding SIM training, but there was no reason for Boeing to carry that torch throughout the world by shaming the regulators.


Do you have any links which further explain the shaming? I am not doubting what you say, just wanting more information. Someone I communicate with on a.net says that the FAA is punishing Boeing and will continue to punish Boeing. Is this the reason why almost a year from the MAX grounding, they are not yet flying? For me that's an inconceivable length of time for mere software changes? Federal bureaucracy? What?????
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 3:57 pm

spinotter wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
'...Boeing said. “Ultimately, it will be the regulators who determine the training requirements.”...'.


Boeing would have been in much better shape if they followed this simple rule.

There may have been couple of customers adamant about avoiding SIM training, but there was no reason for Boeing to carry that torch throughout the world by shaming the regulators.


Do you have any links which further explain the shaming? I am not doubting what you say, just wanting more information. Someone I communicate with on a.net says that the FAA is punishing Boeing and will continue to punish Boeing. Is this the reason why almost a year from the MAX grounding, they are not yet flying? For me that's an inconceivable length of time for mere software changes? Federal bureaucracy? What?????

Boeing have yet to come up with a solution that works. When they do, they can submit it for certification. All in their own hands, always has been. Suggest you read back the last few pages of last months thread.

Ray
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19174
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 3:59 pm

spinotter wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
'...Boeing said. “Ultimately, it will be the regulators who determine the training requirements.”...'.


Boeing would have been in much better shape if they followed this simple rule.

There may have been couple of customers adamant about avoiding SIM training, but there was no reason for Boeing to carry that torch throughout the world by shaming the regulators.


Do you have any links which further explain the shaming? I am not doubting what you say, just wanting more information. Someone I communicate with on a.net says that the FAA is punishing Boeing and will continue to punish Boeing. Is this the reason why almost a year from the MAX grounding, they are not yet flying? For me that's an inconceivable length of time for mere software changes? Federal bureaucracy? What?????


He's referring to the email communications where Boeing employees talked about shaming customers who suggested they needed training.
https://onemileatatime.com/boeing-737-m ... simulator/

The FAA "punishing" Boeing is a recurring theme. Yet, according to XRAYretired (post #677 in the Feb thread - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1440181) -
"Boeing did not submit a solution in June, it failed testing before hand and are yet to submit a working solution to date.

When Boeing has a solution that is functional and submits it, certification proper can begin.
"

I don't recall seeing any definitive reporting that Boeing had submitted its final solutions to the FAA.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8413
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 5:16 pm

spinotter wrote:
Do you have any links which further explain the shaming?


Go through the message dump, read about how Indonesian DGCA and Indian DCGA were shamed into accepting no SIM training.

https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/9/21059 ... ator-crash
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 6:27 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
'...Boeing said. “Ultimately, it will be the regulators who determine the training requirements.”...'
https://www.thenational.ae/business/avi ... x-1.986016

Does this mean that Boeing have forsworn:
'The covering up they did last year'
'Jedi mind tricks'
Treating regulators like 'Dogs watching TV'
Calling customers 'Dumb' for being manipulated.

Hope so. Perhaps the commitment to recommending SIM training as part of the package and paying for it will give encouragement to that hope.

I read a recent WSJ post on this topic ( ref: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22444727 ).

It spend a lot of time stating the incredibly obvious, that FAA employees were likely unhappy with the contents of the Boeing message dumps, but did not name any one specific FAA employee nor even reported any concrete outcome of such unhappiness.

The only operative stuff I found amongst the innuendo was:

Boeing and the FAA, however, first need to resolve differing approaches on the content of training. The company initially proposed that pilots practice, one by one, a handful of selected maneuvers. The FAA, by contrast, favors more expansive training that highlights longer scenarios featuring the interplay of different emergencies, according to the officials.

This all reminds me of what became apparent right around the time DM was made to walk the plank: Boeing has pretty much lost all ability to steer events, and now faces the daunting challenge of trying to please multiple regulatory entities all of whom are pretty unhappy with Boeing's recent behavior, and with no real motivation beyond professionalism to be cooperative, and with the rare opportunity to make industry do whatever they want.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 6:51 pm

Interesting to see how a different part of the same company is handling a crisis:

Boeing acknowledged Friday that its procedures for testing the Starliner spacecraft’s systems ahead of its marred maiden flight in December were seriously flawed and that it now plans to revamp them as it scrambles to reassure NASA that one of its longest and most trusted contractors is up to the task of flying astronauts into space.

In the most comprehensive comments to date on what went wrong during Boeing’s test mission — an autonomous flight without astronauts — to the International Space Station, John Mulholland, the manager of Boeing’s Starliner program, said the company had cut short a key test of the craft’s software, failed to test a critical system against crucial hardware, and instead used a flawed computer system to conduct the test.

Nice to admit the testing was flawed, but then give yourself many benefits of many dubious situations.

“From a hindsight standpoint, it’s very easy to see what we should have done because we uncovered an error,” he said. “But I really don’t want anyone to have the impression that this team tried to take shortcuts. They didn’t. They did an abundance of testing. And in certain areas obviously we have some gaps to fill.”

So we didn't try to take shortcuts, but...

On the timing issue, he said the clock on the spacecraft was pulling its time from the rocket. During tests of the software in the laboratory, the crews were primarily concerned with making sure the two vehicles were communicating correctly. The testing team proved there were no communication issues, but it cut the test short so it never uncovered that the spacecraft was reading the wrong time.

“Unfortunately, the run was stopped after we separated from the launch vehicle,” he said. If the test had continued, “we would have caught it.”

... but we did take a short cut, we stopped the test too early, and...

Boeing also had a breakdown in the testing of another key milestone in the flight — the moment when the service module was to separate from the crew module just prior to re-entry into the atmosphere. At the same time the test of the software was supposed to happen, Boeing had simultaneously scheduled a “hot fire” test of the module’s thrusters. As a result, the actual service module hardware was at another location for that test. To test the software, then, Boeing officials used an “emulator,” a computer system used to mimic the service module. The problem was the emulator had the wrong thruster configuration programmed in.

... we didn't wait till we could test against real hardware, we tested against simulated hardware.

Mulholland said the problems with the tests were “definitely not a matter of cost. Cost has never been in any way a key factor in any of our decisions on how we need to test our systems. The team thought it was more logical to break these mission phases into chunks and to do a lot of testing in those smaller chunks.”

We didn't do this to save costs, it's just logic that drove us to do shorter tests, and do piece-wise testing rather than full-up testing, and to avoid dependencies on costly hardware....

All of this leaves me non-plussed.

Ref: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technolo ... ing-flaws/
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
 
oschkosch
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 7:14 pm

I would like to copy my post in the February thread of today into this one, as I deem this to be rather newsworthy and important.

Actually we all know it is official that iPad training is not sufficient, but now details have been released as to why Boeing changed their opinion. And even well trained first world pilots have issues flying the max. At least that is my take on this article, which is on Bloomberg but I found a non paywall version:


https://beta.canada.com/pmn/business-pm ... 70cbd81b2/

FAA Tells Boeing More Training For 737 Max Pilots May Be Needed

U.S. regulators have told Boeing Co. that pilots may require additional training to properly respond to emergencies on the 737 Max after airline crews failed to perform proper procedures in simulator tests. In a Feb. 19 letter to Boeing reviewed by Bloomberg News, the Federal Aviation Administration detailed multiple missteps that airline crews had made in the December simulator sessions and said additional tests are needed. The simulations replicated failures similar to those in two fatal crashes.

Pilots from the three U.S. carriers that fly the Max, American Airlines Group Inc., United Airlines Holdings Inc. and Southwest Airlines Co., along with a crew from Grupo Aeromexico SAB were tested in December simulations of multiple emergency scenarios. The tests were conducted in a simulator running Boeing’s updated flight-control system that was developed in the wake of the crashes. While none of the crews committed such egregious mistakes that they lost their planes, the errors were extensive, according to the FAA letter.

The pilots, who had received additional training proposed by the company, failed to finish emergency checklists related to the automated system involved in both 737 Max crashes, known as Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System. In addition, they had difficulty with emergency procedures related to sensor failures, erroneous altitude and airspeed readings and the autopilot, among others, according to the letter. The tests also showed that some pilots were confused about how the autopilot behaved in some circumstances and their interactions with the plane’s automated warning systems were distracting.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 7:47 pm

Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.
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
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 7:51 pm

XRAYretired wrote:
spinotter wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

Boeing would have been in much better shape if they followed this simple rule.

There may have been couple of customers adamant about avoiding SIM training, but there was no reason for Boeing to carry that torch throughout the world by shaming the regulators.


Do you have any links which further explain the shaming? I am not doubting what you say, just wanting more information. Someone I communicate with on a.net says that the FAA is punishing Boeing and will continue to punish Boeing. Is this the reason why almost a year from the MAX grounding, they are not yet flying? For me that's an inconceivable length of time for mere software changes? Federal bureaucracy? What?????

Boeing have yet to come up with a solution that works. When they do, they can submit it for certification. All in their own hands, always has been. Suggest you read back the last few pages of last months thread.

Ray


Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.
 
XRAYretired
Posts: 870
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:21 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:09 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
spinotter wrote:

Do you have any links which further explain the shaming? I am not doubting what you say, just wanting more information. Someone I communicate with on a.net says that the FAA is punishing Boeing and will continue to punish Boeing. Is this the reason why almost a year from the MAX grounding, they are not yet flying? For me that's an inconceivable length of time for mere software changes? Federal bureaucracy? What?????

Boeing have yet to come up with a solution that works. When they do, they can submit it for certification. All in their own hands, always has been. Suggest you read back the last few pages of last months thread.

Ray


Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.

Cite the submission of a working solution and stop the inept gaming.
 
User avatar
flyingphil
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:17 pm

Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


Interesting .. but the key word is that they EXPECT to restart production..

Considering that they have a hundred or so completed 737MAX fuselages that have not been delivered to Boeing I dont see the need for them to start producing more. Also they have let a lot of their employees go over the last few months.

Soon it will be a whole year since the grounding . . still no clear timeline until return to service.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:23 pm

flyingphil wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


Interesting .. but the key word is that they EXPECT to restart production..

Considering that they have a hundred or so completed 737MAX fuselages that have not been delivered to Boeing I dont see the need for them to start producing more. Also they have let a lot of their employees go over the last few months.

Soon it will be a whole year since the grounding . . still no clear timeline until return to service.
Correct! 100 fuselages means 10 months worth of stock, when considering that Boeing will hope to produce 10 max per month. Maybe soon means early 4th quarter 2020?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:03 pm

oschkosch wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
Interesting .. but the key word is that they EXPECT to restart production..

Considering that they have a hundred or so completed 737MAX fuselages that have not been delivered to Boeing I dont see the need for them to start producing more. Also they have let a lot of their employees go over the last few months.

Soon it will be a whole year since the grounding . . still no clear timeline until return to service.
Correct! 100 fuselages means 10 months worth of stock, when considering that Boeing will hope to produce 10 max per month. Maybe soon means early 4th quarter 2020?

I suspect what this means is they felt they could idle the plants for a while without losing too many workers (most of whom would collect unemployment benefits) but now need to get them moving at a low rate to retain enough of a work force (whose benefits will be running out so they'll get serious about finding another job) to ramp up later.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:26 pm

flyingphil wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


Interesting .. but the key word is that they EXPECT to restart production..

Considering that they have a hundred or so completed 737MAX fuselages that have not been delivered to Boeing I dont see the need for them to start producing more. Also they have let a lot of their employees go over the last few months.

Soon it will be a whole year since the grounding . . still no clear timeline until return to service.

So the reason is political...try to pressure the politicians? Or do they have some internal source...
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:30 pm

Revelation wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
flyingphil wrote:
Interesting .. but the key word is that they EXPECT to restart production..

Considering that they have a hundred or so completed 737MAX fuselages that have not been delivered to Boeing I dont see the need for them to start producing more. Also they have let a lot of their employees go over the last few months.

Soon it will be a whole year since the grounding . . still no clear timeline until return to service.
Correct! 100 fuselages means 10 months worth of stock, when considering that Boeing will hope to produce 10 max per month. Maybe soon means early 4th quarter 2020?

I suspect what this means is they felt they could idle the plants for a while without losing too many workers (most of whom would collect unemployment benefits) but now need to get them moving at a low rate to retain enough of a work force (whose benefits will be running out so they'll get serious about finding another job) to ramp up later.

So if Boeing does not take the produced work how will they the workers, in the article they have already given some guidance of their losses.
I wonder if they will be able to raise prices when production restarts to cover their losses, that is usually the way it is done, production cost of the MAX parts not done by Boeing increases.
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 9:59 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
XRAYretired wrote:
spinotter wrote:

Do you have any links which further explain the shaming? I am not doubting what you say, just wanting more information. Someone I communicate with on a.net says that the FAA is punishing Boeing and will continue to punish Boeing. Is this the reason why almost a year from the MAX grounding, they are not yet flying? For me that's an inconceivable length of time for mere software changes? Federal bureaucracy? What?????

Boeing have yet to come up with a solution that works. When they do, they can submit it for certification. All in their own hands, always has been. Suggest you read back the last few pages of last months thread.

Ray


Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.


Looks suspicious, I'm sure you ill agreem
 
oschkosch
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 10:05 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:

Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.


Do we have a source that says it is working as it should? Do we even know it has been tested, verified, certified?



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
744SPX
Posts: 254
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:20 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 10:06 pm

IMO This announcement is an unwise gamble by Spirit. The restart is predicated solely on the Max RTS this summer.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 10:23 pm

744SPX wrote:
IMO This announcement is an unwise gamble by Spirit. The restart is predicated solely on the Max RTS this summer.

Right, and given we can assume they are run by sensible business people, it suggests either they are confident MAX will RTS this summer, or have some other reasons that compel them to take the risk that MAX will not RTS this summer.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
smartplane
Posts: 1523
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 10:38 pm

flyingphil wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


Interesting .. but the key word is that they EXPECT to restart production..

Considering that they have a hundred or so completed 737MAX fuselages that have not been delivered to Boeing I dont see the need for them to start producing more. Also they have let a lot of their employees go over the last few months.

Soon it will be a whole year since the grounding . . still no clear timeline until return to service.

Could there be some re-work required on those already completed fuselages, so the production start is to build new, fully compliant fuselages, while working through modifications to those already built?
 
User avatar
flyingphil
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 2:56 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sat Feb 29, 2020 10:56 pm

So when, or if, Spirit start producing new 737MAX fuselages this would incorporate the new routing of the wire bundles? and maybe updated flight computers? although that has yet to be agreed.

Cant see it somehow.. plus all those stored fuselages will need rework.. and is Boeing going to pay for the undelivered fuselages?
 
hivue
Posts: 2078
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 12:28 am

Revelation wrote:
Nice to admit the testing was flawed, but then give yourself many benefits of many dubious situations.


The Starliner flight was itself a test. Testing is done to find problems. They found problems. They will fix those. They should be required to repeat the test until no significant new problems are discovered.

In the case of the MAX no testing was done capable of finding the problem that was a primary cause for two of them crashing. The reasons this testing was not done have been beaten to death in these threads.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 12:39 am

oschkosch wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.


Do we have a source that says it is working as it should? Do we even know it has been tested, verified, certified?



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

So far we have nothing, nothing that the dual use of the computers have been tested and certified, nothing that the warning indicators that were not working or disabled have been corrected, tested and certified, bit flip corrections tested and certified, what we can speculate on is that the entire MAX is being re-certified.
We do know that AFTER the initial MCAS fix was submitted for testing in June-2019 a lot of other things came up as a result of that test.

So to be accurate I guess we can all go along with the notion that until the FAA states that the MAX has passed certification nothing related to the MAX has been tested, verified or certified, after all, the a/c is still grounded.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 12:43 am

Revelation wrote:
744SPX wrote:
IMO This announcement is an unwise gamble by Spirit. The restart is predicated solely on the Max RTS this summer.

Right, and given we can assume they are run by sensible business people, it suggests either they are confident MAX will RTS this summer, or have some other reasons that compel them to take the risk that MAX will not RTS this summer.

Think they are looking for a government bail out and this actually has nothing to do with the MAX RTS?
The number of stored fuses they have along with all the already produced frames probably means that Boeing may not need anything from them, until the end of 2020 or even 2021, they more than anyone else know the specifics of the delivery / production capabilities of the MAX lines.
 
TTailedTiger
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:19 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 12:47 am

par13del wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:

Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.


Do we have a source that says it is working as it should? Do we even know it has been tested, verified, certified?



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

So far we have nothing, nothing that the dual use of the computers have been tested and certified, nothing that the warning indicators that were not working or disabled have been corrected, tested and certified, bit flip corrections tested and certified, what we can speculate on is that the entire MAX is being re-certified.
We do know that AFTER the initial MCAS fix was submitted for testing in June-2019 a lot of other things came up as a result of that test.

So to be accurate I guess we can all go along with the notion that until the FAA states that the MAX has passed certification nothing related to the MAX has been tested, verified or certified, after all, the a/c is still grounded.


So then why did the FAA say Boeing's estimate of June/July was conservative? Is the FAA misleading the public?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:56 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
par13del wrote:
oschkosch wrote:

Do we have a source that says it is working as it should? Do we even know it has been tested, verified, certified?



Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk

So far we have nothing, nothing that the dual use of the computers have been tested and certified, nothing that the warning indicators that were not working or disabled have been corrected, tested and certified, bit flip corrections tested and certified, what we can speculate on is that the entire MAX is being re-certified.
We do know that AFTER the initial MCAS fix was submitted for testing in June-2019 a lot of other things came up as a result of that test.

So to be accurate I guess we can all go along with the notion that until the FAA states that the MAX has passed certification nothing related to the MAX has been tested, verified or certified, after all, the a/c is still grounded.


So then why did the FAA say Boeing's estimate of June/July was conservative? Is the FAA misleading the public?

As I posted in the last thread, when Boeing advised its investors of the summer RTS the stock price fell.
The head of the FAA to my shock and horror after months of telling the last head of Boeing to shut up and letting all know that he had no timeline for RTS suddenly came out and said that Boeing's timeline was too conservative, guess what happened to Boeing's stock price after he said that?
Note that he also made that statement multiple times in different countries and each time despite all the other negative news about Boeing the stock price held. That is my theory, what's yours?
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:33 am

It may be in the sticky, but based on what is in the article, he made no mention of MCAS software update, also we have additional articles talking about US3 pilots having issues in testing, is that the JOEB being done out of sequence or Boeing trying to circumvent / speed up the process?
Is the FAA and other regulators involved in these training sessions or are they waiting for the official test flight to be completed first? We know that EASA has already stated that they will wait for the FAA to complete their function then they will review both Boeing and the FAA.

https://www.reuters.com/article/singapo ... SL8N2AB4U8
 
morrisond
Posts: 2773
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:55 am

par13del wrote:
It may be in the sticky, but based on what is in the article, he made no mention of MCAS software update, also we have additional articles talking about US3 pilots having issues in testing, is that the JOEB being done out of sequence or Boeing trying to circumvent / speed up the process?
Is the FAA and other regulators involved in these training sessions or are they waiting for the official test flight to be completed first? We know that EASA has already stated that they will wait for the FAA to complete their function then they will review both Boeing and the FAA.

https://www.reuters.com/article/singapo ... SL8N2AB4U8


I strongly suspect that if they tested US3 pilots with the same level of scrutiny on other types the results would not be that good either - hence the rumours that the FAA is pressing for more stringent certification standards for new types with new assumptions of pilot response time.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1905
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 6:14 am

Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


As for the speculation on why they are going to restart this early, it could be that they have some news that the shutdown end sometime soon, but it could also be that to not risk losing all of the 3200 employees they had to layoff in December permanently. If they restart now at a low rate, at least they would have some staff and some frames ready for when Boeing eventually gets the green light to start production again. They could then more gradually rate up the production when they have somewhat of a buffer with the stored frames and it gives them time to rehire the staff they let go or find new staff.

This previously linked article talks about rate 52 in 2022 and 57 in 2023 again. I would guess if that is the guidance from Boeing then suppliers are already planning ahead to ensure they have the staffing available to meet the requirements.

The 737 Max is the company’s lifeblood, bringing in some 40% of Boeing’s profit before the aircraft was grounded and deliveries frozen last March. When the 737 Max is approved to fly, potentially later this year, the plane maker aims to progress cautiously, reaching a pre-grounding production rate of 52 jets monthly in 2022, and bumping it up to 57 jets a month in 2023, which would equal its record rate, supplier sources said.


It seems that the optimism regarding a return to service may be well founded though, if the FAA is happy that simulator testing is happening with the new features Boeing made. I don't think it would be a good way to spend time of either Boeing or the FAA if they test on a system that isn't fit for purpose or for procedures that they know may not be needed. So I suspect that the FAA and Boeing have reached an agreement on the physical fixes that was required, but now they need to sort out the other element and this is the training and procedures that will be needed by pilots.

morrisond wrote:
I strongly suspect that if they tested US3 pilots with the same level of scrutiny on other types the results would not be that good either - hence the rumours that the FAA is pressing for more stringent certification standards for new types with new assumptions of pilot response time.


Wait, are you now saying that the training procedures provided by the OEM's aren't good enough even for US pilots? Or are you saying that if you put US A320 pilots through the same training they will also struggle?

It seems that there were some concerns raised about the way US pilots reacted in the sim with the new updated flight control system and the procedures Boeing proposes for much the same problems faced by the crews of the crashed airlines.

In addition, they had difficulty with emergency procedures related to sensor failures, erroneous altitude and airspeed readings and the autopilot, among others, according to the letter.

The tests also showed that some pilots were confused about how the autopilot behaved in some circumstances and their interactions with the plane’s automated warning systems were distracting.


So these pilots would have known they were going for testing, as it would have been an updated simulator and they would have received training on the new procedures. They would have had some preparation that things would go wrong in the tests, and yet there seems to be concerns on their reactions. Interesting information.

However, the pilots in the simulator sessions in December had been given a revised training course and still made multiple missteps, showing that more was needed.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19174
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 9:11 am

TTailedTiger wrote:
Cite? I've seen nothing that says MCAS 2.0 isn't working as it should.


Are you able to provide any source that says MCAS 2.0 is working as it should? Or that it has indeed been submitted to the FAA?

enzo011 wrote:
It seems that there were some concerns raised about the way US pilots reacted in the sim with the new updated flight control system and the procedures Boeing proposes for much the same problems faced by the crews of the crashed airlines.


Yes, these vastly experienced and highly trained pilots struggled to complete the correct procedures in a prompt manner. They were in a sim, knew what they were going to be facing and had received additional training. They didn't manage to crash the 'plane', but even with the additional training, they still struggled.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2773
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:39 pm

enzo011 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


As for the speculation on why they are going to restart this early, it could be that they have some news that the shutdown end sometime soon, but it could also be that to not risk losing all of the 3200 employees they had to layoff in December permanently. If they restart now at a low rate, at least they would have some staff and some frames ready for when Boeing eventually gets the green light to start production again. They could then more gradually rate up the production when they have somewhat of a buffer with the stored frames and it gives them time to rehire the staff they let go or find new staff.

This previously linked article talks about rate 52 in 2022 and 57 in 2023 again. I would guess if that is the guidance from Boeing then suppliers are already planning ahead to ensure they have the staffing available to meet the requirements.

The 737 Max is the company’s lifeblood, bringing in some 40% of Boeing’s profit before the aircraft was grounded and deliveries frozen last March. When the 737 Max is approved to fly, potentially later this year, the plane maker aims to progress cautiously, reaching a pre-grounding production rate of 52 jets monthly in 2022, and bumping it up to 57 jets a month in 2023, which would equal its record rate, supplier sources said.


It seems that the optimism regarding a return to service may be well founded though, if the FAA is happy that simulator testing is happening with the new features Boeing made. I don't think it would be a good way to spend time of either Boeing or the FAA if they test on a system that isn't fit for purpose or for procedures that they know may not be needed. So I suspect that the FAA and Boeing have reached an agreement on the physical fixes that was required, but now they need to sort out the other element and this is the training and procedures that will be needed by pilots.

morrisond wrote:
I strongly suspect that if they tested US3 pilots with the same level of scrutiny on other types the results would not be that good either - hence the rumours that the FAA is pressing for more stringent certification standards for new types with new assumptions of pilot response time.


Wait, are you now saying that the training procedures provided by the OEM's aren't good enough even for US pilots? Or are you saying that if you put US A320 pilots through the same training they will also struggle?

It seems that there were some concerns raised about the way US pilots reacted in the sim with the new updated flight control system and the procedures Boeing proposes for much the same problems faced by the crews of the crashed airlines.

In addition, they had difficulty with emergency procedures related to sensor failures, erroneous altitude and airspeed readings and the autopilot, among others, according to the letter.

The tests also showed that some pilots were confused about how the autopilot behaved in some circumstances and their interactions with the plane’s automated warning systems were distracting.


So these pilots would have known they were going for testing, as it would have been an updated simulator and they would have received training on the new procedures. They would have had some preparation that things would go wrong in the tests, and yet there seems to be concerns on their reactions. Interesting information.

However, the pilots in the simulator sessions in December had been given a revised training course and still made multiple missteps, showing that more was needed.


I'm making a guess that if you put the average crew in any airliner they would struggle with emergency procedures. This would apply to all types. I strongly suspect that it has been an awful long time since real pilots were tested in the sims by either EASA or the FAA vs Company test pilots who are intimately familiar with the aircraft demonstrating the emergency procedures during certification flights.

Hence why it seems like new rules on crew response time assumptions are about to change and will affect all new airplane certifications going forward which is not a bad thing.

It's either that or the training regime has to change by regulation so emergency procedures are practised on a more frequent and comprehensive basis and proficiency is demonstrated by all crews.
 
smokeybandit
Posts: 1386
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 3:24 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:42 pm

So is it then common for pilots to breeze through a new training scenario for a niche situation? Why is it a big deal they struggled the first time? Isn't that why they're doing the training?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 3:42 pm

hivue wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Nice to admit the testing was flawed, but then give yourself many benefits of many dubious situations.

The Starliner flight was itself a test. Testing is done to find problems. They found problems. They will fix those. They should be required to repeat the test until no significant new problems are discovered.

True, but my point was about how management described the problems. He kept saying we didn't take short cuts but then proceeded to describe things that many of us would consider to be short cuts. It's akin to Calhoun saying there's nothing wrong with our culture, this is just one engineer relying too much on the three second rule. He never addresses all the other things that a good culture would have done to prevent MCAS from making its way into the product.

In the case of the MAX no testing was done capable of finding the problem that was a primary cause for two of them crashing. The reasons this testing was not done have been beaten to death in these threads.

IMO they haven't been beaten to death, they are the root cause of the MCAS tragedy. We've spent far more time on "human factors" that wouldn't matter if Boeing hadn't given itself so many benefits of the doubt and tested MCAS end to end at least once.

par13del wrote:
It may be in the sticky, but based on what is in the article, he made no mention of MCAS software update, also we have additional articles talking about US3 pilots having issues in testing, is that the JOEB being done out of sequence or Boeing trying to circumvent / speed up the process?
Is the FAA and other regulators involved in these training sessions or are they waiting for the official test flight to be completed first? We know that EASA has already stated that they will wait for the FAA to complete their function then they will review both Boeing and the FAA.

https://www.reuters.com/article/singapo ... SL8N2AB4U8

The recent Bloomberg article says:

In a Feb. 19 letter to Boeing reviewed by Bloomberg News, the Federal Aviation Administration detailed multiple missteps that airline crews had made in the December simulator sessions and said additional tests are needed.

Ref: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... -be-needed

So we aren't talking about out of sequence activities, the mid-Feb letter leaked in late-Feb really described tests done in December, and it was these "training issues" that led Boeing to start thinking of mid summer 2020 RTS.

You may want to go through the article again, since it gives a good review of the time line.

scbriml wrote:
Yes, these vastly experienced and highly trained pilots struggled to complete the correct procedures in a prompt manner. They were in a sim, knew what they were going to be facing and had received additional training. They didn't manage to crash the 'plane', but even with the additional training, they still struggled.

I'm not seeing anything that describes the pilots as being vastly experienced and highly trained, it just describes them as airline crews from the three US MAX operators and Aeromexico that were given the training Boeing proposed in response to the MCAS tragedy. It is disappointing that there were extensive issues during the testing.

morrisond wrote:
I'm making a guess that if you put the average crew in any airliner they would struggle with emergency procedures. This would apply to all types. I strongly suspect that it has been an awful long time since real pilots were tested in the sims by either EASA or the FAA vs Company test pilots who are intimately familiar with the aircraft demonstrating the emergency procedures during certification flights.

Hence why it seems like new rules on crew response time assumptions are about to change and will affect all new airplane certifications going forward which is not a bad thing.

It's either that or the training regime has to change by regulation so emergency procedures are practised on a more frequent and comprehensive basis and proficiency is demonstrated by all crews.

Indeed, if this set of tests are indicative, we probably need a global recalibration with regards to proficiency testing on emergency procedures, ideally with easy to judge pass/fail criteria.
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
 
Planetalk
Posts: 470
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:12 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 3:44 pm

smokeybandit wrote:
So is it then common for pilots to breeze through a new training scenario for a niche situation? Why is it a big deal they struggled the first time? Isn't that why they're doing the training?


It depends how badly they struggled no? It is probably q big deal if pilots who fly the 737Nag without problem are having significant difficulty with the MAX even with extra training. Perhaps leave it to the people who were actually there to assess whether the training was sufficient or not, I don't really want to fly on a plane pilots are struggling with in the sim in a known failure scenario.

And these were American pilots who've had over a year knowing about MCAS. Many on this forum think they would never have had an accident like the MAX crashes. Perhaps time to be a little less complacent.
 
User avatar
bgm
Posts: 2471
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 9:37 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 3:51 pm

morrisond wrote:
enzo011 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Meanwhile, Spirit AeroSystems to restart 737 Max production in March tells us pretty much what the title suggests, they will be restarting MAX production in March slowly and gradually ramping up during the year.


As for the speculation on why they are going to restart this early, it could be that they have some news that the shutdown end sometime soon, but it could also be that to not risk losing all of the 3200 employees they had to layoff in December permanently. If they restart now at a low rate, at least they would have some staff and some frames ready for when Boeing eventually gets the green light to start production again. They could then more gradually rate up the production when they have somewhat of a buffer with the stored frames and it gives them time to rehire the staff they let go or find new staff.

This previously linked article talks about rate 52 in 2022 and 57 in 2023 again. I would guess if that is the guidance from Boeing then suppliers are already planning ahead to ensure they have the staffing available to meet the requirements.

The 737 Max is the company’s lifeblood, bringing in some 40% of Boeing’s profit before the aircraft was grounded and deliveries frozen last March. When the 737 Max is approved to fly, potentially later this year, the plane maker aims to progress cautiously, reaching a pre-grounding production rate of 52 jets monthly in 2022, and bumping it up to 57 jets a month in 2023, which would equal its record rate, supplier sources said.


It seems that the optimism regarding a return to service may be well founded though, if the FAA is happy that simulator testing is happening with the new features Boeing made. I don't think it would be a good way to spend time of either Boeing or the FAA if they test on a system that isn't fit for purpose or for procedures that they know may not be needed. So I suspect that the FAA and Boeing have reached an agreement on the physical fixes that was required, but now they need to sort out the other element and this is the training and procedures that will be needed by pilots.

morrisond wrote:
I strongly suspect that if they tested US3 pilots with the same level of scrutiny on other types the results would not be that good either - hence the rumours that the FAA is pressing for more stringent certification standards for new types with new assumptions of pilot response time.


Wait, are you now saying that the training procedures provided by the OEM's aren't good enough even for US pilots? Or are you saying that if you put US A320 pilots through the same training they will also struggle?

It seems that there were some concerns raised about the way US pilots reacted in the sim with the new updated flight control system and the procedures Boeing proposes for much the same problems faced by the crews of the crashed airlines.

In addition, they had difficulty with emergency procedures related to sensor failures, erroneous altitude and airspeed readings and the autopilot, among others, according to the letter.

The tests also showed that some pilots were confused about how the autopilot behaved in some circumstances and their interactions with the plane’s automated warning systems were distracting.


So these pilots would have known they were going for testing, as it would have been an updated simulator and they would have received training on the new procedures. They would have had some preparation that things would go wrong in the tests, and yet there seems to be concerns on their reactions. Interesting information.

However, the pilots in the simulator sessions in December had been given a revised training course and still made multiple missteps, showing that more was needed.


I'm making a guess that if you put the average crew in any airliner they would struggle with emergency procedures. This would apply to all types. I strongly suspect that it has been an awful long time since real pilots were tested in the sims by either EASA or the FAA vs Company test pilots who are intimately familiar with the aircraft demonstrating the emergency procedures during certification flights.

Hence why it seems like new rules on crew response time assumptions are about to change and will affect all new airplane certifications going forward which is not a bad thing.

It's either that or the training regime has to change by regulation so emergency procedures are practised on a more frequent and comprehensive basis and proficiency is demonstrated by all crews.


Aren't pilots put through full sim proficiency checks every 6 months? Pretty sure emergency procedures skills would be tested during that.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:35 pm

bgm wrote:
Aren't pilots put through full sim proficiency checks every 6 months? Pretty sure emergency procedures skills would be tested during that.

Yes, which is why the "extensive" issues (Bloomberg's quote of the FAA letter) is pretty troubling.

Either the FAA is exaggerating, or they are documenting the need for a revamp of training and of proficiency evaluation.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19174
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:41 pm

Revelation wrote:
I'm not seeing anything that describes the pilots as being vastly experienced and highly trained, it just describes them as airline crews from the three US MAX operators and Aeromexico that were given the training Boeing proposed in response to the MCAS tragedy.


We were repeatedly told here that the MAX crashes happened because the crews were poorly trained and lacked experience, and that pilots with 200 hours had no right to be in the cockpit and that US pilots with their min 1,500 hours experience wouldn't have crashed.

Now we learn, those comparatively highly trained and vastly experienced pilots also struggled, despite additional training and pretty much knowing exactly what to expect in the sim.

So are all pilots actually a lot less capable than we thought (or hoped), or is it the MAX that's so bad?
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24589
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 4:52 pm

scbriml wrote:
We were repeatedly told here that the MAX crashes happened because the crews were poorly trained and lacked experience, and that pilots with 200 hours had no right to be in the cockpit and that US pilots with their min 1,500 hours experience wouldn't have crashed.

I'm not sure that's what you were told, but I am sure that is what you heard.

scbriml wrote:
So are all pilots actually a lot less capable than we thought (or hoped), or is it the MAX that's so bad?

How would you characterize pilots that do not follow procedures they were trained for or do not complete check lists?

Personally I doubt that trait has anything to do with MAX.

Personally I wonder if pilots with less training or used to a more automated cockpit would do even worse.

As I wrote earlier, either the FAA letter is exaggerating, or they are documenting the need for a revamp of training and of proficiency evaluation.
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
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:05 pm

I typically don’t comment on this thread because most of the info is uninformed enthusiast banter.

With that said Unreliable Airspeed is the most difficult procedure for pilots. Aircraft fly in 3 dimensions and when you are in the clouds or at night with no horizon it is impossible to get your mind to overcome spatial disorientation. When you lose an AOA and or other sensor and you AP kicks off you have to figure out which data being given to you is correct.

I don’t care how experienced you are it is a struggle. Add in top of that an 8 page Boeing checklist filled with what is no longer working or may be working plus additional procedures that must be accomplished and it gets ugly. The main goal is to not crash. And if you can successfully recover the aircraft it doesn’t matter how ugly everything in between was.

If the FAA demands perfection they will never get it. It is too complicated. The fact that these pilots survived in the sim is a major plus and good for them.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 596
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:08 pm

Revelation wrote:
scbriml wrote:
We were repeatedly told here that the MAX crashes happened because the crews were poorly trained and lacked experience, and that pilots with 200 hours had no right to be in the cockpit and that US pilots with their min 1,500 hours experience wouldn't have crashed.

I'm not sure that's what you were told, but I am sure that is what you heard.



I am quite sure that nearly all readers of the grounding threads are fully aware of the way it was "beaten to death" that the accidents were to blame on third world/non USA pilots and that the accidents would never happen in the USA due to the extremely well trained pilots. You may want to throw a blanket over that, but the majority of us will not forget it. I for one am very glad that this new info has come to the public.
:stirthepot: :airplane: "This airplane is designed by clowns, who in turn are supervised by monkeys" :airplane: :stirthepot:
 
User avatar
DL747400
Posts: 963
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:08 pm

In light of the Coronavirus-related capacity reductions which have already been announced as well as the upcoming reductions, I'd say that the world's airlines are not quite as anxious to take delivery of their grounded 737 MAX aircraft or return their already delivered but still grounded MAXs back in the skies.

If the MAX does receive approval to fly again, it seems that the timeline for reintroducing them into the schedules has now been lengthened considerably. That should remove some of the urgency from the previous delivery and return to service plans.

Maybe in light of the current crisis, it's time for the U.S. to drop the Airbus tariffs as well?
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:11 pm

oschkosch wrote:
Revelation wrote:
scbriml wrote:
We were repeatedly told here that the MAX crashes happened because the crews were poorly trained and lacked experience, and that pilots with 200 hours had no right to be in the cockpit and that US pilots with their min 1,500 hours experience wouldn't have crashed.

I'm not sure that's what you were told, but I am sure that is what you heard.



I am quite sure that nearly all readers of the grounding threads are fully aware of the way it was "beaten to death" that the accidents were to blame on third world/non USA pilots and that the accidents would never happen in the USA due to the extremely well trained pilots. You may want to throw a blanket over that, but the majority of us will not forget it. I for one am very glad that this new info has come to the public.


The foreign trained pilots did not hit the two switches that are memory items and would have saved their lives......and so they died.

These US trained pilots lived.....seems like prof of training there.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2773
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:21 pm

CriticalPoint wrote:
oschkosch wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I'm not sure that's what you were told, but I am sure that is what you heard.



I am quite sure that nearly all readers of the grounding threads are fully aware of the way it was "beaten to death" that the accidents were to blame on third world/non USA pilots and that the accidents would never happen in the USA due to the extremely well trained pilots. You may want to throw a blanket over that, but the majority of us will not forget it. I for one am very glad that this new info has come to the public.


The foreign trained pilots did not hit the two switches that are memory items and would have saved their lives......and so they died.

These US trained pilots lived.....seems like prof of training there.


I've been pretty consistent through all this - "It's a Worldwide training issue" and gave examples of western pilots who didn't know the trim wheel existed.

The runaway stabilizer procedure is the same for the MAX as the NG. If they couldn't run it for the MAX they wouldn't be able to run it on the NG.

Emergency procedures are taught but as detailed in these pages not all procedures are taught and practiced every Sim session. Time pressures dictate that only one or a few are gone over at a time - it may be years between practising one procedure.
 
CriticalPoint
Posts: 1062
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2017 5:01 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:22 pm

morrisond wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
oschkosch wrote:


I am quite sure that nearly all readers of the grounding threads are fully aware of the way it was "beaten to death" that the accidents were to blame on third world/non USA pilots and that the accidents would never happen in the USA due to the extremely well trained pilots. You may want to throw a blanket over that, but the majority of us will not forget it. I for one am very glad that this new info has come to the public.


The foreign trained pilots did not hit the two switches that are memory items and would have saved their lives......and so they died.

These US trained pilots lived.....seems like prof of training there.


I've been pretty consistent through all this - "It's a Worldwide training issue" and gave examples of western pilots who didn't know the trim wheel existed.

The runaway stabilizer procedure is the same for the MAX as the NG. If they couldn't run it for the MAX they wouldn't be able to run it on the NG.

Emergency procedures are taught but as detailed in these pages not all procedures are taught and practiced every Sim session. Time pressures dictate that only one or a few are gone over at a time - it may be years between practising one procedure.


It’s practices every 18 months at united
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10350
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 7:17 pm

morrisond wrote:

The runaway stabilizer procedure is the same for the MAX as the NG. If they couldn't run it for the MAX they wouldn't be able to run it on the NG.
.

Will the procedures be the same with all the changes required for the MAX, a new addition has to be to verify if one of the computers is faulty since both now operate simultaneously versus alternate flights.
 
Agrajag
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 8:23 am

Re: Boeing 737MAX Grounding, General Discussion Thread, March 2020

Sun Mar 01, 2020 8:26 pm

morrisond wrote:
CriticalPoint wrote:
oschkosch wrote:


I am quite sure that nearly all readers of the grounding threads are fully aware of the way it was "beaten to death" that the accidents were to blame on third world/non USA pilots and that the accidents would never happen in the USA due to the extremely well trained pilots. You may want to throw a blanket over that, but the majority of us will not forget it. I for one am very glad that this new info has come to the public.


The foreign trained pilots did not hit the two switches that are memory items and would have saved their lives......and so they died.

These US trained pilots lived.....seems like prof of training there.


I've been pretty consistent through all this - "It's a Worldwide training issue" and gave examples of western pilots who didn't know the trim wheel existed.

The runaway stabilizer procedure is the same for the MAX as the NG. If they couldn't run it for the MAX they wouldn't be able to run it on the NG.

Emergency procedures are taught but as detailed in these pages not all procedures are taught and practiced every Sim session. Time pressures dictate that only one or a few are gone over at a time - it may be years between practising one procedure.



"consistent"?? If by consistent you mean made strategic retreats in your position at pretty much every step then, yeah, sure.
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.
Slartibartfast had a point
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 10

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