Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Boeing B737-8 and -9 grounding

Would Boeing not argue that the only time it would trim forward is when it is required?

The much more likely problem is that the AOA sensor can fail…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Found this on Facebook from a flight yesterday (12/03) …. looks like they didn’t know where to go anymore.

EGSX

There for sure is more to this than first met the eye.

This seems to me to be a problem caused by the logics of certification. Tweaking the plane to behave more like an earlier version, and this causes new problems.

If every plane is to behave the same to the pilot, then FBW surely is the way to go.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

LeSving wrote:

Tweaking the plane to behave more like an earlier version, and this causes new problems.

You can’t have that in all possible configurations/scenarios if physics behind the scenes (engine mainly) are different, the risk is you may end up training crew too much of diffs than learning from scratch

Also if something is acting behind the scenes against pilot inputs it should not go ON/OFF in one go and has to gradually fade in smooth fashion, is it the case for MCAS?

Last Edited by Ibra at 13 Mar 12:42
Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Airborne_Again wrote:

I wouldn’t put much credence in witnesses claiming to have seen fires.

Nor me. Seeing is NOT believing – the human visual system fills in any blanks with what it expects to see. See a plane crashing? You might ‘see’ smoke or an engine fire, but in reality it was just the sunlight glinting off the engine nacelle and sky conditions. You’re seeing a plane crashing, so your brain is automatically filling in the ‘why’ turning the glint into fire and a cloud formation in the background into ‘smoke’.

I think the strongest example of seeing not being believing I’ve come across was one time while walking to my Dad’s house, at night. At the bottom of the road, I could see halfway up the old man bending over putting the lead on his Scottie dog. As I came closer it turned out to be just shadows, a wall, and a wheely bin – but they conspired in the lighting conditions to look enough like a man bending over that my brain automatically added enough detail that it had been a Scottie dog and not any man, but an old one in a flat cap. Imagine there had been a serious crime on that street, and instead of walking up it, I had glanced up there while walking past, and responded to the Police asking for witnesses for what happened at that date and time. You can be sure when the Police asked for evidence, I’d mention I saw an old guy going to walk his dog, even though the old guy and dog didn’t actually exist.

Eyewitness accounts, unless very carefully observed, are generally pretty unreliable.

Andreas IOM

Canada also joins closing their airspace. Bjørn Kjos (Norwegian) has a video on their facebook site. He say he will send the bill to Boeing Norwegian has 18 MAX’s, all grounded now, and they expect to lose around €1M for each one per day.

FAA has no plans of grounding them.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

LeSving wrote:

FAA has no plans of grounding them.

We will see if the FAA will keep this up. To me, what the FAA is doing is destroying their credibility as a regulator. Trying to protect Boeing is a HUGE mistake apart from possibly illegal. Obviously the chance that they get proven wrong is diminishing by the day as everyone else grounds those things, but to me with what we do know now, it did not even take the 2nd accident to SERIOUSLY question the airworthiness of the 737 max. Yes, Lionair deservves a huge blame (and should in fact be stopped operating until these problems are solved) but still: What we know now how this plane works in terms of elevator trim and flight controls, it is a scandal it ever got certified.

If today pilots pop up on forums stating they would fly the 737 max anytime and would be able to deal with the problem, then it is howling up the wrong tree. Mainstream airplanes don’t need superpilots, they need to be operable by just about any airline who cares to fly them. And even if, I call some of those people big mouths to their face, as nobody has yet so far survived a serious trim malfunction on a Max. If you end up at 1000 ft AGL with an airplane which speed trims the elevator to maximum downward because of a faulty sensor, it will make a small problem a lot worse. If the whole thing is so intelligent, then why does a stall recovery system not double check it’s criteria? Pitch, Power, VSI, Altitude AGL and whatever parameters are there? Which plane unless it has a self destruct mechanism should ever have a protection which has even the potential of flying itself into the ground?

I’m sorry, there is something MASSIVELY wrong here.

This accident sequence will most probably change a lot about how the future of aviation looks like in terms of automatisation. Also possible that we are withnessing if not the end then a massive disruption of development of pilotless passenger airplanes. Whereby I would think that is a good thing.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

LeSving wrote:

FAA has no plans of grounding them.

Actually, FAA are waiting for the few that in the air to land…

Paris/Essex, France/UK, United Kingdom

Bang.

Just reading on several news sources that Pres. Trump has issued an Executive Order instruction the FAA to ground the 737 Max. That must be a first. And for the first time that guy is in office I say, good one Mr President. It may help that he is an aircraft owner himself and also has people available to ask about it who are not part of a lobby.

Huge disgrace for the FAA in my opinion.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top