Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Hawkmoon on March 12, 2019, 08:35:57 PM

Title: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 12, 2019, 08:35:57 PM
Is everyone rushing out to reserve their seats on 737 Max flights?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: RocketMan on March 12, 2019, 09:02:54 PM
I will be flying American late next month from CLT to PDX, and they operate 23 737 Max jets if I am not mistaken.  Not going to worry about which kind of aircraft takes me to PDX and back.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Andiron on March 12, 2019, 09:20:58 PM
The 2 incidents I'm aware of were Ethiopian and Lion (of Indonesia?). 

I'm willing to give Boeing the benefit of the doubt when the complainant carriers are 3rd world.  I'm told it takes more than just topping off the fuel tanks to keep the things flying.  It's not impossible that there's a catastrophic issue with that aircraft,  I just doubt it.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Scout26 on March 12, 2019, 09:24:51 PM
I will be flying American late next month from CLT to PDX, and they operate 23 737 Max jets if I am not mistaken.  Not going to worry about which kind of aircraft takes me to PDX and back.

I call dibs on all your stuff... =D =D
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Ben on March 12, 2019, 09:28:02 PM
If Boeing weren't so pricey per share, I'd buy a few hundred shares of it right now.

I only caught a snippet on the teevee news so may have misheard, but it sounds like there might be some pilot error in the Ethiopian crash.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Perd Hapley on March 12, 2019, 10:12:29 PM
Is anyone else watching Widow, on Prime?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: BobR on March 12, 2019, 10:43:25 PM
I flew a 737 Max from Phoenix to Spokane the other day, I don't think my wife or the people in the row in front of us really appreciated my knowledge of flying, the 737 platform and plane crashes in general as we were waiting for the pushback. :)


bob
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 12, 2019, 10:50:48 PM
Suffice it to say that there is a metric ton of attention being paid to this here in Boeing country.  Lots of stories in the print and electronic media.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 12, 2019, 11:59:00 PM
Suffice it to say that there is a metric ton of attention being paid to this here in Boeing country.  Lots of stories in the print and electronic media.

Anything substantive, or all speculation?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 13, 2019, 08:35:54 AM
If Boeing weren't so pricey per share, I'd buy a few hundred shares of it right now.

You'll get your chance.  I bet the price will drop another 10-15% just from fear and speculation.  If there is a fault in the plane, then Boeing won't be able to give away their shares.

https://articles.marketrealist.com/2019/03/boeing-plunged-again-as-countries-keep-grounding-its-737-max-jets/?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=feed&yptr=yahoo
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 13, 2019, 09:14:08 AM
Anything substantive, or all speculation?

Speculation right now about the flight control software as opposed to a mechanical fault.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 13, 2019, 09:23:38 AM
Speculation right now about the flight control software as opposed to a mechanical fault.

Based on some facts.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2018-11-13/boeing-guidance-737-max-stall-protection-system-under-fire

Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 13, 2019, 09:42:35 AM
https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=130402

Boeing now says the FAA will issue an Airworthiness Directive in April mandating a change to the flight control software.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Ben on March 13, 2019, 09:44:00 AM
Based on some facts.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2018-11-13/boeing-guidance-737-max-stall-protection-system-under-fire

I bet that's why yesterday I was hearing initial reports of pilot error. They had mentioned at least one of the Ethiopian pilots was a low hours guy, so maybe they were mixing up lack of training with lack of notification of stuff they need to be trained on.

Quote
Boeing failed to communicate with 737 Max operators new procedures for addressing cases in which the airplane’s automatic stall prevention system commands the nose of the airplane downward, potentially resulting the kind of steep dive that appears to have led to the fatal crash of Lion Air Flight 610, according to pilot union officials quoted by the Wall Street Journal.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 13, 2019, 10:16:32 AM
I bet that's why yesterday I was hearing initial reports of pilot error. They had mentioned at least one of the Ethiopian pilots was a low hours guy, so maybe they were mixing up lack of training with lack of notification of stuff they need to be trained on.


Boeing supposedly notified all operators of the 737 Max about the MCAS system following the Lion Air crash, and Ethiopian Airlines says their pilots received the notification. The question then becomes: If they received it, did they understand it?

If I remember correctly, the pilot had 8,000 hours experience, but I don't recall if the article I read indicated if that was 8,000 hours in a 737, or 8,000 hours total. The co-pilot had 200 hours, which seems VERY little for a commercial airline pilot. I don't think any American airline would hire a pilot with such low hours. For example, Delta requires a minimum of 1,500 hours experience, and most of their hires have more than that.

http://www.deltajobs.net/pilot_qualifications.htm
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 13, 2019, 10:28:40 AM
Boeing supposedly notified all operators of the 737 Max about the MCAS system following the Lion Air crash, and Ethiopian Airlines says their pilots received the notification. The question then becomes: If they received it, did they understand it?

If I remember correctly, the pilot had 8,000 hours experience, but I don't recall if the article I read indicated if that was 8,000 hours in a 737, or 8,000 hours total. The co-pilot had 200 hours, which seems VERY little for a commercial airline pilot. I don't think any American airline would hire a pilot with such low hours. For example, Delta requires a minimum of 1,500 hours experience, and most of their hires have more than that.

http://www.deltajobs.net/pilot_qualifications.htm

1,500 hours and an ATP is required now by the FAA to fly for part 121 airlines.  That is part of the reason for the pilot shortage.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 13, 2019, 11:10:16 AM
It's beginning to appear that the FAA may be taking a head-in-the-sand attitude on this:

https://www.philly.com/business/boeing-max-pilots-complained-suspected-safety-flaw-20190312.html

Quote
Records show a captain who flies the Max 8 complained in November that it was “unconscionable” that the company and federal authorities allowed pilots to fly the planes without adequate training or fully disclosing information about how its systems differed.

Quote
A federal audit in 2014 said the FAA does not collect and analyze its voluntary disclosure reporting in a way that would effectively identify national safety risks.

Quote
The fifth complaint from the captain who called into question the 737 Max 8’s flight manual ended: “The fact that this airplane requires such jury-rigging to fly is a red flag. Now we know the systems employed are error-prone — even if the pilots aren’t sure what those systems are, what redundancies are in place and failure modes. I am left to wonder: what else don’t I know?”
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: HankB on March 13, 2019, 12:00:33 PM
Saw part of some comments by a guy on TV claiming that there weren't properly trained pilots flying the aircraft, but trained systems operators. From the snippet I saw, the guy seemed to think a lack of piloting ability was to blame in aircraft that were excessively automated.

Not being a pilot myself and having only seen part of the interview it sounds plausible on the surface, but I can't judge whether or not the guy was credible.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 13, 2019, 12:32:25 PM
Saw part of some comments by a guy on TV claiming that there weren't properly trained pilots flying the aircraft, but trained systems operators. From the snippet I saw, the guy seemed to think a lack of piloting ability was to blame in aircraft that were excessively automated.

Not being a pilot myself and having only seen part of the interview it sounds plausible on the surface, but I can't judge whether or not the guy was credible.

I didn't see that video, but I tend to agree with that guy.  We rely more and more on the aircraft systems to protect us and less on actual flying skills.

During my last recurrent training in January, we spent about 90 minutes doing stalls, stall recovery without using power, high altitude stall recovery, and unusual attitude upset recovery training.  It used to be that the mindset was to use engine thrust to power out of the stall,  but the FAA has finally realized that doesn't always work.

This new attitude toward stall recovery and the new flight time requirments to get hired are both results of the Colgan Air 3407 crash 10 years ago.  And from the Air France crash into the Atlantic.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: HeroHog on March 13, 2019, 02:03:22 PM
Interesting take on the issue by AvE: Why are Boeing 737s CRASHING? | In layman's terms
https://youtu.be/1XCU__OEftU
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 13, 2019, 02:59:56 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/13/boeing-shares-fall-after-report-says-us-expected-to-ground-737-max-fleet.html

The President grounds all 737 Max aircraft in the US.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: BobR on March 13, 2019, 03:10:01 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/13/boeing-shares-fall-after-report-says-us-expected-to-ground-737-max-fleet.html

The President grounds all 737 Max aircraft in the US.

Glad I am not flying Southwest today....


bob
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 13, 2019, 05:58:04 PM
Based on new "physical evidence" recovered at the crash scene.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47562727

Considering that the plane basically nosedived and augered in perpendicular to the ground, pulverizing everything, the only physical evidence I can imagine that would have yielded any information at all would be the black boxes.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: BobR on March 13, 2019, 06:02:30 PM
Quote
"new information and physical evidence that we've received from the site and from other locations and through a couple of other complaints".

Maybe the information they had from US pilots that they also had issues but were able to overcome the issue and continue the flight as intended. Possibly US aircrews are trained a little better or are more able to rationalize on the fly? We were always taught that if you did something and it upset the apple cart undo what you just did to begin with. Just a thought.

bob

Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 13, 2019, 06:45:44 PM
Glad I am not flying Southwest today....


bob

Southwest has a large fleet.  The Max is a small number of that.  They will be fine.  Southwest is probably the most nimble airline around.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 13, 2019, 06:47:43 PM
Maybe the information they had from US pilots that they also had issues but were able to overcome the issue and continue the flight as intended. Possibly US aircrews are trained a little better or are more able to rationalize on the fly? We were always taught that if you did something and it upset the apple cart undo what you just did to begin with. Just a thought.

bob



In my experience teaching Saudis and Indonesians to fly, yes, Americans and other westerners are much better prepared to learn to fly.  The general knowledge and comfort with technology really helps.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MechAg94 on March 13, 2019, 06:50:21 PM
Based on new "physical evidence" recovered at the crash scene.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47562727

Considering that the plane basically nosedived and augered in perpendicular to the ground, pulverizing everything, the only physical evidence I can imagine that would have yielded any information at all would be the black boxes.
Reading what they are speculating about the cause kind of points back to other systems such as computer operated cars.  If you choose to do that, you are at the mercy of malfunctioning computers and/or instrumentation. 
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: BobR on March 13, 2019, 06:54:36 PM
In my experience teaching Saudis and Indonesians to fly, yes, Americans and other westerners are much better prepared to learn to fly.  The general knowledge and comfort with technology really helps.

I helped the US Navy train Iranians back in the day when we still sold them airplanes (F4s, F14s and P3s) to play with. To say they could not always grasp the finer parts of the instruction would be an understatement. Their common method of taking the exams was to have one guy translate the question into Farsi and all of them would discuss it for a while and then all answer the same. Many times the term "dumber than a box of rocks" was thrown about. ;)

bob
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: sumpnz on March 13, 2019, 07:09:38 PM
Boeing 737 Max fleet grounded in U.S. https://seekingalpha.com/news/3442445?source=ansh $BA, $LUV

Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Andiron on March 13, 2019, 07:44:32 PM
I helped the US Navy train Iranians back in the day when we still sold them airplanes (F4s, F14s and P3s) to play with. To say they could not always grasp the finer parts of the instruction would be an understatement. Their common method of taking the exams was to have one guy translate the question into Farsi and all of them would discuss it for a while and then all answer the same. Many times the term "dumber than a box of rocks" was thrown about. ;)

bob


I've worked with Jordanian and Afghans,  they're no better.  And that's at basic infantry *expletive deleted*it.  Can't imagine training them on something more complicated than machine guns.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 13, 2019, 08:06:21 PM
Different plane, but that "augering in" sounds like what happened in that Air Alaska crash.  The jackscrew operating the elevators got stripped out due to lack of proper maintenance / lubrication procedures and locked the elevators into an uncontrollable dive.

The thing there was the pilots tried their best guess at a correction procedure and the correction procedure itself was irreversible and caused it to fail totally.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261

Quote
The probable cause was stated to be "a loss of airplane pitch control resulting from the in-flight failure of the horizontal stabilizer trim system jackscrew assembly's acme nut threads. The thread failure was caused by excessive wear resulting from Alaska Airlines' insufficient lubrication of the jackscrew assembly".
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 14, 2019, 07:00:41 AM
Different plane, but that "augering in" sounds like what happened in that Air Alaska crash.  The jackscrew operating the elevators got stripped out due to lack of proper maintenance / lubrication procedures and locked the elevators into an uncontrollable dive.

The thing there was the pilots tried their best guess at a correction procedure and the correction procedure itself was irreversible and caused it to fail totally.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261


In this case it sounds like a software failure, not a hardware failure.  Either way, the result is the same.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 14, 2019, 09:56:14 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/business/automated-planes.html?action=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage&section=Business

Another interesting article on pilots as system operators.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 14, 2019, 07:56:24 PM

"You have reached your limit of free articles. "

Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: RocketMan on March 14, 2019, 08:51:53 PM
I call dibs on all your stuff... =D =D

You're welcome to all of it.  You may be sorry.   :P  >:D
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 14, 2019, 10:45:51 PM
"You have reached your limit of free articles. "


Delete cookies.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Scout26 on March 15, 2019, 12:33:36 AM
You're welcome to all of it.  You may be sorry.   :P  >:D

Dibs just means that I get to paw through it first to take what I want, not that I get all of it....
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 15, 2019, 01:21:34 PM
Update: https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/piece-found-at-ethiopian-airlines-crash-site-shows-jet-was-set-to-dive-2008100

I assume the "screw-like device" referred to is related to the stabilizer trim mechanism?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 15, 2019, 03:09:25 PM
From Hawkmoon's citation above:

Quote
Piece Found At Ethiopian Airlines Crash Site Shows Jet Was Set To Dive

....

A screw-like device found in the wreckage of the Boeing 737 Max that crashed last Sunday in Ethiopia indicates the plane was configured to dive, a piece of evidence that helped convince U.S. regulators to ground the model, a person familiar with the investigation said late Thursday night.

The piece of evidence was a so-called jackscrew, used to set the trim that raises and lowers the plane's nose, according to the person, who requested anonymity to discuss the inquiry.

Interesting in light of Reply #30 on this topic referring to the Alaska Airlines crash:

http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=59706.msg1201624#msg1201624

Bur we shall see.  I never really trusted data based on a request of anonymity.

It still might be software driving the screw to its "dive" limits, as opposed to its getting stuck there due to improper lubrication.

Terry, 230RN
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Scout26 on March 15, 2019, 03:23:22 PM
It could show that the compuetrized "stall preventer" had adjusted the the piece, not that the part was defective/broken as in the Alaska Airlines instance.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 15, 2019, 04:00:29 PM
It could show that the compuetrized "stall preventer" had adjusted the the piece, not that the part was defective/broken as in the Alaska Airlines instance.

That would be my take on it.

These 737Max planes are brand-new.  There shouldn't be any mechanical problems with them.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 15, 2019, 04:20:33 PM
From what little I understand about the complexities of modern aircraft, I gather that on the 737 the angle of attack of the entire horizontal stabilizers on the tail assembly is what gets adjusted to trim the airplane for neutral level flight. This is what that screw jack thingie adjusts. Then the elevators (the smaller flaps within the horizontal stabilizers) are used to command changes up or down from neutral flight by the flight controls.

Apparently the MCAS automated trim system in the 737 Max planes uses the horizontal stabilizer trim function to command the nose to go down if the little mice in the box under the cabin floor think they've detected an imminent stall configuration. This means that the BIG parts of the tail feathers are telling the plane to point down, and the little parts that the pilots can move with their yoke just aren't large enough to generate enough force to counteract what the auto-trim is calling for.

To Fly320s -- does that sort of explain what might have been going on?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 15, 2019, 04:21:35 PM
Yeah, well, I mentioned that:

Quote
It still might be software driving the screw to its "dive" limits, as opposed to its getting stuck there due to improper lubrication.

I'm not married to its being a purely mechanical problem. 
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 15, 2019, 04:24:27 PM
^ That was referring to post 40, but I didn't want to edit post 42.

Somewhere, there's possibly a Software Engineer (or a group of them) going over their code in great detail.

And thinking of where they put their passports.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 15, 2019, 04:34:45 PM

Somewhere, there's possibly a Software Engineer (or a group of them) going over their code in great detail.


Since Boeing has already announced that there will be a revision to the MCAS software deployed in April, I don't think we need to say "possibly."
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 15, 2019, 04:36:20 PM
OK, thanks.  I missed that.

Nap time.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 15, 2019, 05:37:59 PM
To Fly320s -- does that sort of explain what might have been going on?

Sounds right to me.  I have no experience on the 737, though.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 15, 2019, 06:08:47 PM
Here's video by a Swedish pilot (captain) who flies the 373-800 NG:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlinocVHpzk

He covers this pretty well. (I think.)
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Bob F. on March 16, 2019, 09:45:36 PM
Not sure if I saw it on TV or the Web, like MSN or Fox homepage, but " 'Sully' said 'absurd' lack of training." Or, based on previous posts, failure to learn from said training.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Unisaw on March 16, 2019, 10:29:24 PM
I believe Sully said that in reference to the first officer’s whopping 200 hours of total time.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 17, 2019, 07:23:53 AM
I believe Sully said that in reference to the first officer’s whopping 200 hours of total time.

Sully has a very high opinion of himself, and a low opinion of everyone else.

I thought I read that the FO had 200 hours in the 737, not total.  That is still fairly low, but enough to know how to fly it.   It is possible that the MCAS did not disengage as it should have.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: zahc on March 17, 2019, 11:19:41 AM
New article:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/?amp=1

Sounds like a Boeing/FAA boondoggle, plane and simple. Being an engineer myself, I know how things like this get shoved through due to bad management and in some cases, bad engineers, who usually end up teaming up on horrible ideas like this.

mgmt: Omg we will lose orders to Airbus! What shall we do??
eng: design a new plane to compete, like we've been saying for decades
mgmt: but it's too late for that now! Spending all that capital would have forced us to cut the dividend! We need something fast! Can't we hang 787 engines on it?
eng: well you could hang 787 engines on it, but it's already too low for the current engines, since we designed it in the 60s and all. We had to redesign the current engines as it is.
mgmt: Make it happen! We need doers not complainers!
*good engineers all distance themselves voluntarily or involuntarily to non-boondoggle projects*
bad eng: I known how we can do it. We will hack bandaid control system. I did something like this with python once on my raspberry pi home automation system.
mgmt: that's the spirit! you are in charge!
eng [from distance]: if you do that you will need a new type rating, and if customers need a new type rating anyway they are still going to buy Airbuses because they aren't 50 years old...as we've been saying....
mgmt: [pivot to compliance people] Is that true?
compliance: yes, definitely
mgmt: that's not going to work for us. make it happen!
[competent compliance people are distanced]
bad compliance person: I don't think this is necessarily going to require a new type rating. After all [contrived, plausible-sounding reasons]
mgmt: that's the spirit! You are in charge. Good thing we found the talent we need to be competitive within our exceptional talent pool!. I knew those new hiring initiatives would pay off! Let's do a early retirement plan to get some of these old guys out of here. Don't know what we are paying them so much for anyway.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 17, 2019, 12:31:11 PM
Wow.  That is a damning article.  Boeing and the FAA are going to pay big time for their lack of oversight.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 17, 2019, 02:58:33 PM

I thought I read that the FO had 200 hours in the 737, not total.  That is still fairly low, but enough to know how to fly it.   It is possible that the MCAS did not disengage as it should have.

I don't remember where I saw the 200 hours number, but it was my impression that it referred to total hours.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 17, 2019, 03:04:23 PM
New article:

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/?amp=1


Good grief!

Quote
The safety analysis:

  • Understated the power of the new flight control system, which was designed to swivel the horizontal tail to push the nose of the plane down to avert a stall. When the planes later entered service, MCAS was capable of moving the tail more than four times farther than was stated in the initial safety analysis document.
  • Failed to account for how the system could reset itself each time a pilot responded, thereby missing the potential impact of the system repeatedly pushing the airplane’s nose downward.
  • Assessed a failure of the system as one level below “catastrophic.” But even that “hazardous” danger level should have precluded activation of the system based on input from a single sensor — and yet that’s how it was designed.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 17, 2019, 03:32:06 PM
"Two is one, and one is none."
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 17, 2019, 03:46:43 PM
Once again, Trump in his bull-in-the-china-shop way was correct. Modern aircraft have become too complex. More importantly, the FAA abdicated its responsibilities and allowed the fox to guard the hen house. Heads should roll at the FAA over this.

In e-mails to a friend who is an aviation buff, I have argued that the 737 Max should have required separate certification as an aircraft type rather than being treated as in incremental update of the 737 NG type certification. I think this article makes that point abundantly clear. The fact that the FAA didn't require this illustrates all too plainly that the industry (meaning Boeing) has too much control over the agency that is charged with ensuring (:cough:  :cough:) aircraft safety.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 17, 2019, 05:29:18 PM
Gosh damn, Zahc.  You sure sound as if you have up close and personal experience with how things work.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 17, 2019, 05:42:35 PM
Gosh damn, Zahc.  You sure sound as if you have up close and personal experience with how things work.

All that's missing is the pointy-haired boss ...
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: RocketMan on March 18, 2019, 10:34:42 AM
The fact that the MCAS system was given major control authority and only utilizes a single AoA sensor is absolutely unbelievable to me.
Who the hell ever thought that was a good idea?  It should be a multi-sensor voting system at the very least.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 18, 2019, 10:43:39 AM
The fact that the MCAS system was given major control authority and only utilizes a single AoA sensor is absolutely unbelievable to me.
Who the hell ever thought that was a good idea?  It should be a multi-sensor voting system at the very least.

I completely agree.

There will/should be some heads rolling at Boeing and the FAA.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: zahc on March 18, 2019, 12:52:37 PM
I completely agree.

There will/should be some heads rolling at Boeing and the FAA.

We only know about this because there were not one but two crashes. How many other systems are just as bogus, but just haven't caused a problem yet? If there had not been the crashes, and/or the crashes had been pinned on pilot error or something, this would not be getting fixed, so I'm sure there are other bogosities lurking.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: MillCreek on March 18, 2019, 01:03:13 PM
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/

An article by the well-respected aeronautics reporter for the Seattle Times.  There are issues for both the FAA and Boeing.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 18, 2019, 01:35:56 PM
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/

An article by the well-respected aeronautics reporter for the Seattle Times.  There are issues for both the FAA and Boeing.

I can't get past the pay wall. Is this the same article linked in post #51?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Fly320s on March 18, 2019, 03:16:11 PM
I can't get past the pay wall. Is this the same article linked in post #51?

Yes it is.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Jamisjockey on March 19, 2019, 11:52:22 AM
Wow.  That is a damning article.  Boeing and the FAA are going to pay big time for their lack of oversight.

Nothing will happen, aside from a few firings and maybe a fine against Boeing.


And yes, the agency has become too cozy with the industry to effectively regulate it.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 19, 2019, 01:00:12 PM
Possibly worth reviewing, not to muddy the waters...

Older models of "737" crashing due to suspected loss of rudder or other tailplane control:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SilkAir_Flight_185

Quote
The Seattle Times devoted a series of 37 articles to Boeing 737 loss of control malfunctions.[21] The accident occurred in the middle of a controversy over the NTSB's role in accidents caused by the rudder control unit.[22]

In the subject Silk Air crash, it was thought that the pilot possibly committed suicide, but apparently this issue was never really resolved.

Quote
Date
19 December 1997

Summary
Cause disputed:
>Deliberate crash – Pilot suicide (NTSB)
>Inconclusive evidence to determine cause (NTSC)
>Loss of control due to rudder malfunction (L.A. Superior Court)

I'm thinkin' them things need better fletching.
 
Terry, 230RN
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: dogmush on March 20, 2019, 10:53:51 AM
It should be noted that, despite similar names, a 737-300 and a 737 MAX 8 are not the same aircraft.  I doubt they share many, if any, control parts.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 20, 2019, 02:15:44 PM
I think somewhere between the 737-300 and the 737-800 there was at least one new type certificate issued, if not two. The problem is (IMHO) that the Max series is sufficiently different from the preceding "New Generation" series that the Max should have gotten a new type certificate -- but that would have meant pilots would have to go through type rating for the new type, and Boeing wanted to market the Max series as a minor change within the same type in order to help persuade airlines to buy the 737 rather than an Airbus.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: French G. on March 24, 2019, 11:57:55 AM
200 is plenty! I once quizzed a USMC butterbar about his shiny V-22. So how many hours do you have? 50. Cool, so what platform were you flying before Ospreys? This is my first command.   ...  But I have about 50 simulator hours too! Very helpful Butters, very helpful.

On single sensor, I recall going through tech info on the Harrier over such. Can't remember if it was an AOA sensor or I think more possibly one relating to engine inlet air temp. The phrase that pays is "uncommanded throttle roll back." It liked to do it in a landing hover.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 24, 2019, 12:15:26 PM
It should be noted that, despite similar names, a 737-300 and a 737 MAX 8 are not the same aircraft.  I doubt they share many, if any, control parts.

That's why I put "737" in quotes.  While they may not share individual parts, one could start suspicioning there was something generically, conceptually goofy back there.  Note the "37 articles" written on some problems.

For all we know, one guy at Boeing could be using radians for pitch angle, and the other guy is using artillery degrees.  I'm only half-kidding here, but note the possible control surface excursion in one test was "four times" what was expected.

Remember the "kilometers versus miles" error in that space mission failure?  (Or yards versus meters or whatever the hell mixup there was.)

So crap like that can certainly occur, even at $150,000 per year.  Not saying that's the actual cause here, but offering a half-assed example of how major stupid snafus can happen.

And as zahc said,

We only know about this because there were not one but two crashes. How many other systems are just as bogus, but just haven't caused a problem yet? If there had not been the crashes, and/or the crashes had been pinned on pilot error or something, this would not be getting fixed, so I'm sure there are other bogosities lurking.


Like I said, it seems like them airplanes could use better fletching.

Terry, groundlubber, 230RN
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 24, 2019, 01:02:39 PM

Remember the "kilometers versus miles" error in that space mission failure?  (Or yards versus meters or whatever the hell mixup there was.)


How about pounds versus kilograms? Read up on the "Gimli Glider" to see why that might be important.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: WLJ on March 25, 2019, 10:55:22 AM
How to override the system

Runaway Stabilizer!! How to stop MCAS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xixM_cwSLcQ
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 25, 2019, 12:06:53 PM
(22:57)

Short version?
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 25, 2019, 05:28:38 PM
(22:57)

Short version?

Short version?

Co-pilot: Help! The horizontal stabilizer is out of control. What do I do?

Pilot: Turn the switch to "OFF."
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 25, 2019, 06:10:13 PM
Co-pilot: If I turn it to "OFF," how do we correct it to a neutral non-dive condition?"
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on March 25, 2019, 06:12:26 PM
Turn that little wheel next to your left knee.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 25, 2019, 06:18:16 PM
I'm not being a smartass, and I've liked that guy's vids before, but I don't feel like sitting through 22 minutes to hear the solution.  No offense, WLJ, but a precis would've been nice.

And if it were that simple, Hawkmoon, how come over 200(?) people are dead?  Including the would-be "little wheel" turners?

One of these days I may watch the video for 22 minutes and come to the conclusion that the crashes were due to stupid pilots.  Case(s) closed, and what a cute little doggie.

Terry
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: WLJ on March 25, 2019, 06:24:42 PM
I'm not being a smartass, and I've liked that guy's vids before, but I don't feel like sitting through 22 minutes to hear the solution.  No offense, WLJ, but a precis would've been nice.


Duly noted
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: 230RN on March 25, 2019, 06:53:15 PM
In some venues, it's called a drive-by posting, and I've been seeing a lot of them lately.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: WLJ on April 05, 2019, 11:44:21 AM
Article says they fought the anti-stall software but doesn't say if they did, or at least try, turn it off as shown in Mentour's video.
I should note the difference, in my mind at least, between saying our equipment played a role and saying our equipment caused

Quote

(CNN) - Boeing admitted its equipment played a role in two plane crashes that killed a combined 346 people.

CNN obtained a 33-page preliminary report from Ethiopian investigators. It details how pilots fought the plane's automated anti-stall software for nearly the entire 6-minute flight.
Boeing acknowledges its software’s role in plane crashes that killed hundreds
http://www.wave3.com/2019/04/05/boeing-acknowledges-flight-control-systems-role-plane-crashes-that-killed-hundreds/
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Brad Johnson on April 05, 2019, 11:51:30 AM
In some venues, it's called a drive-by posting, and I've been seeing a lot of them lately.

... and stay off his lawn!

Brad
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: zahc on April 05, 2019, 01:39:57 PM
Very interesting post from former Boeing employee, sorry if it's already been posted.

https://www.satcom.guru/2019/04/stabilizer-trim-loads-and-range.html?m=1

Nobody is talking about the change to the trim cutout switches. The old plane had a separate cutout switch for automatic trim systems, so automatic trim could be disabled but you could still manually move the trim via electric motor. The new plane did away with the separate ability to disable automatic trim. On the new plane, the only thing you can do is disable the electric trim motors completely, leaving only the manual, cable-driven trim wheels to adjust the trim. And according to the article, when trim is far out if whack it's very hard to turn the manual hand-wheels or even impossible even with two people trying to turn them at the same time.

It's like Boeing bent over backwards to make this as bad as possible.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on April 05, 2019, 04:57:01 PM
Very interesting post from former Boeing employee, sorry if it's already been posted.

https://www.satcom.guru/2019/04/stabilizer-trim-loads-and-range.html?m=1

Nobody is talking about the change to the trim cutout switches. The old plane had a separate cutout switch for automatic trim systems, so automatic trim could be disabled but you could still manually move the trim via electric motor. The new plane did away with the separate ability to disable automatic trim. On the new plane, the only thing you can do is disable the electric trim motors completely, leaving only the manual, cable-driven trim wheels to adjust the trim. And according to the article, when trim is far out if whack it's very hard to turn the manual hand-wheels or even impossible even with two people trying to turn them at the same time.

It's like Boeing bent over backwards to make this as bad as possible.

https://leehamnews.com/2019/04/03/et302-used-the-cut-out-switches-to-stop-mcas/

A 737 captain for a major European airline tried it in a simulator and crashed. He had a video up, but he has since taken it down. Apparently somewhere in the checklist it says to increase thrust, which is actually the WORST thing you could do in a 737 Max, because (a) the increased thrust tries to push the nose up, and that's what the MCAS is trying to counteract; and (b) when the airspeed increases, the forces acting on the stabilizer get so high that it's impossible for the pilots to manually crank those wheels to adjust the trim with no electrical power.

Boeing REALLY blew it on this design.
Title: Re: Air travel
Post by: Hawkmoon on April 06, 2019, 10:48:58 AM
The following is from a friend in Europe who has been following this rather closely:

Quote
In such a scenario pilots of older -200 planes were told they had to PUSH on the yoke momentarily, let the plane lower its nose, as the other pilot worked the manual trim, then regain some pitch (lift the nose) to restore attitude, then repeat. Over and over and over. Trimming would gradually get easier, as the horizontal stabilizer returns to a more neutral position.

According to Mentour, this information is still in the 'NG' plane's manual, but is no longer in the Quick Reference Handbook that pilots have on board, and isn't being taught much, if at all. So the pilots in the doomed plane wouldn't have heard of it.

It's one of those "yeah it's bad, but it can't happen so don't worry about it" kind of thing...

However, Mentour also said that for the Ethiopian pilots, lowering the nose deliberately to make trim possible, wasn't an option: they were already just 1000 feet above the ground.

That the manual trim didn't work was exactly what Mentour found in his simulator setup, in that deleted video. The finding was so powerful, he then decided to pull the video...

"Mentour" refers to the 737 NG pilot I referred to in the preceding post. He has a Youtube channel about aviation under the name Mentour Pilot, and he has done a number of videos on this situation.