Another 737 MAX-8 down

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Guyfriday

They usually engage it somewhere during climb. The Max pilots started waiting longer, because of the pitch down, but as soon as they had a comfortable altitude under them it's active.

That sure sounds like a defect to me.

a reply to: KansasGirl

And no one is saying there's NOT a problem with the plane.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: KansasGirl

Except that we aren't. There's a hell of a gap between what you're claiming here, and what we're saying. What is ACTUALLY being said is let's spread the blame everywhere it belongs. You don't fix a pilot training issue by burying your head in the sand and applying software patches. You have to know everything that went wrong, to know what needs fixing.

Ok. So you aren't taking issue with people taking issue with a defect; you're taking issue with people not spreading the blame amongst multiple agencies?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk


Does that mean that I think the Max is perfectly safe, if a well trained crew is flying? Of course not. It could happen to them too. .

Well you did respond to a poster some pages back, saying that you would have no problem getting on a MAX right now.

That isn't necessarily saying that you consoder the MAX safe, I realize, but just pointing it out because it does give the impression, along with other posts, that you are, as I said, taking issue with those of us who are taking issue with the plane. You have hit the "not enough training" angle pretty hard when responding to posts that express criticism of the plane and/or Boeing

a reply to: KansasGirl

Sort of. A lot of people, especially the media, went straight to "it's the automation's fault" and refuse to even consider that other factors played a role. Aircraft crashes are never one thing causing them. It's always a chain of events. The automation started both accidents it appears, but we don't know everything the crew did after the accidents started.

There's always a human factor, but is it something that can be fixed, and how do we fix it if it is. If we just say, "the automation is flawed" and stop there something may be overlooked that is important. We know the automation and the certification process need fixing, but what else does? You have to look into everything, and not get stuck on just one thing.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Gee...were there any pilots from LionAir or Ethiopian?

How about Thai, or any number of other Boeing customers?

a reply to: KansasGirl

Because we don't know if training did play a role. The aircraft has flown over 100,000 hours, and seen a number of incidents where the nose pitched down in areas that require more training, but was recovered by them. Obviously the pitch down proves there's an aircraft issue, but the fact that they recovered, and these two aircraft didn't, is also something that needs looking into to see if more training should be required. All I'm saying is don't get stuck on one thing.

a reply to: KansasGirl

BUT...he's never set foot on one.

Say's it's "irrelevant" **nod**

I suspect he might say different when his boarding pass reads..."Equipment - 737 MAX".



Easy to pass judgement when you don't have to do it!

Bottom line...the 737 MAX is unsafe, and it has been grounded and banned from the airspace of the World aviation community.

The pilots haven't been grounded...the 737 MAX airplane has been grounded. Period.

World vs. Zaphod.

/end

**SMH**

a reply to: Zaphod58

"Forget it"? Why?

Because you're wrong?

Boy that stings I bet!

You've spent pages and pages on this thread saying it's a "training" issue, and blaming these 3rd world pilots and their crappy training for these crashes. BUT, the reality is, it was the plane which was crashing...not the pilots!

How hard is that to understand???

a reply to: Zaphod58

AND, earlier you told me to "read", and you told me to get off my "high horse", when you've been on your 'high horse' all throughout this thread, shaming others, telling people it was a "training" issue, when a training response is ridiculous for solving a system "problem".

Yeah, I "read" just fine. I read all the posts on this thread, including yours where you used your FSME status to shove the training issue down everyone's throats, in defense of a faulty product. Yeah, I read it all.

Yes, I'm angry. You know why? Because it's wrong, that's why! That's why. And, I'm tired of it.

MCAS is flawed, the 737 MAX is flawed; it's a bad desgin, and Boeing knows it. The rest of the World knows it too! And the rest of the World is saying "NO!".

Sorry Boeing...sorry Zaphod.

No wonder trump said,' make flying simple for the pilots as I don't want Einstein to be my pilot.'
cramming pilots with all the modern tech is kind of defeatist strategy as pilots are not exactly engineers, tho flying itself is by no means simple
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Reminder....

Go after the ball not the player.
Let's not make it personal.......You are responsible for your own posts.

This is the topic:

Another 737 MAX-8 down

and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: KansasGirl

Oh, you're not a "rube", girl!

Words of wisdom...don't fly on a Boeing 737 MAX!

It might take control away from the pilots in command and suddenly "pitch down"...just cuz. (just hope they've been "trained" to deal with the aircraft taking control away from them before CRASHING...because...training). All planes take control away from the command pilots and plummet into the earth before they can be recovered. It's just the modern design "thing"...all the rage.

It's a broken platform...and Boeing won't admit it.

(Neither will Zaphod)

Note - Am I angry about this? Yes, as a matter of fact, I am! I am genuinely saddened by some of the defenses here. This is a travesty, and it's wrong. In a day when maintenance standards are at an all time low, when corners are being cut at every turn, suddenly a new aircraft comes on the market, a brand new plane...and it just dives out of the sky, on its own, into the ground, killing everyone. Great!

Damn those inexperienced pilots!!

Nothing to see here, folks...move along!

ETA - Man, Zaph is going to have to pull his truck over to the side of the road to reply to this one. Probably steam shooting out if his ears!!

A lot of people are screaming about systems that can "take control away" from a pilot. The fact is that almost all FAA Part 25 (Transport Category) aircraft has such systems, and to be certified the FAA requires it on some. For example, to be certified, if an aircraft gives insufficient aerodynamic warning of an approaching stall, it must have a "stick pusher" which, on its own, shoves the yoke forward, uncommanded by the crew. Likewise, commonly found is a "stick puller, which, uncommanded by the crew, pulls the nose up if it senses that the aircraft will exceed MmO (the certified aerodynamic speed limit in Mach number for the aircraft. That saves the aircraft from the usually fatal mach tuck. There are other system that will not let the aircraft bank ore than a certain amount.
Aircraft accidents usually occur because of a number of factors or, sometimes, cascading problems. I see a number of primary contributors, if not causes, of the Max accidents. You have a design that, if not negligent, was not well thought out. The MCAS system relies on a single AOA sensor, even though there or 2 such systems on the 737s. And the software allows either the yoke trim switch or the actual stab trim control wheel to temporarily override the MCAS, but it resets and activates again as soon as the override goes away. And for some as yet undisclosed reason, Boeing changed the amount of stab trim input from .6 degrees to 2.5 degrees per activation. And Boeing, to compete with the new Airbus Neo, decided to not go with a clean sheet design, which would require crews to train for and obtain a new type rating, decided to just modify the current 737 Type Certificate Data Sheet, which would only require the crews to undergo what is called "differences training." And then you have the airlines, which, to pinch pennies, refused to pay for the offered AoA disagree warning system, which would act to warn of a faulty aoa sensor. And they hired inexperienced crew members. One of the copilots had total flight experience of 200 hours. 200 hours! In the US you can't legally quality as a copilot with less than 1500 hours. And then you have the crew. They had a trim wheels spinning like crazy next to their knees making this loud clacking noise continuously signalling a runaway trim (which it actually wasn't) and an uncommanded pitch down, and they grab a book to read. They didn't try the memory items and simply use the available switches on the forward console that are used to cut power to the stab trim actuator, or use the primary trim controls on the yoke or the wheel next to their knees to override the MC AS. Checklists are there for a reason but some emergencies demand memory items. If an engine blows and the fire warning light comes on, you don't reach for the checklist been until after you cut fuel and hydraulics to that engine and hit the fire extinguisher button. Eliminate even 1 of the contributing factors and you most likely eliminate the crash.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I've only gotten my information on what may have gone wrong from here, and honestly I don't even follow that. So, what a regular person with zero knowledge of aviation has gotten from the thread is that there may have been a problem with the Angle of Attack sensor, one of two, not matching the other one, and that there wasn't a redundant sensor anywhere in case one of the sensors folded (musician-speak for "failed" 😂), and that the AoA sensor may have caused the the nose to pitch down? Or, there maybe was something wrong with the MCAS, which I THINK I understood is supposed to disengage when the autopilot is engaged (or maybe it's the opposite), and maybe that caused the nose to pitch down, or maybe there was a problem with the elevator or the elevator control(s), they froze or wouldn't accept input or just plain folded, and MCAS was overriding pilot input, and or a combination of any or all of those things . And then, the pilots for this latest crash, or at least the co-pilot, had an appallingly low number of flight hours, and maybe both pilots didn't have enough training on the MCAS, which may or may not have been given to pilots and which wasn't included in the manual.

I jotted down my impressions from the thread here just to give you an idea of the whole deal from an outsider's point of view. I didn't go back and re-read any of this thread before this reply, and as I have read the thread over its course, I've made a minimal effort to understand how the issues fit together(meaning I've made some effort, but didn't look any terms or xoncepts up, and didn't make myself think extra if I was extra confused). So for a non-aviation person who just gets their info from the MSM, they will have an even less accurate picture of the issues. As bad and as kindergarten level as my understanding is, the general public is probably even worse. So, I bet the MSM has just been focusing on the "automation is flawed" explanation because A) the MSM no longer reports ANYTHING accurately or fully, and B) people don't want accurate or full if it takes a few minutes to get it.

So thanks for the clarification. To an outsider, all those things sound terrifying, since I don't know anything about flying, so to me, it all sounds critical and defective. 😂. But you of course know about every part and how it fits in and how to fly an airplane, so to you all those things don't seem like a endless sea of things going wrong with no way to control them. To a rube like me, a defective part or defective software or sounds like a death-trap, since I don't know what can be controlled and dealt with and what can't; so to have all those things possibly in play and then read "pilots need more training" it seems like a major issue(s) is being glossed over, because again, I don't know what is a minor issue, a major issue, or a non-issue. To me, amything going wrong or not working correctly on a plane equals crash.

TLDR: I don't know what Ya'll are talking about so it all sounds horrendous; you're an expert. No wonder I've gotten the wrong idea about a few of your posts (even though you and the other experts here have been generously kind in explaining things to me).

All that being said though, I sure hope, that when the MAX's grounding is lifted, that neither I nor my son (we both fly to visit family quite a bit) ever get put on one of its routes. 😕. Or if we do, that both the pilot and co-pilot have been flying since before I was born.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Bottom line...the 737 MAX is unsafe, and it has been grounded and banned from the airspace of the World aviation community.

The pilots haven't been grounded...the 737 MAX airplane has been grounded. Period.

World vs. Zaphod.

/end

**SMH**

It does sound like Boeing and the FAA were shady with the certification and roll-out with it. That's what I'm getting. I get mad when I think about that. And hope that if it's true, every person involved in that series of decisions gets fired HARD and is never let around any kind of aviation policy ever again.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
On another note, pilots from Southwest, American, United, and two non-US customers were in Renton for a meeting with Boeing, that included testing the software upgrade. Pilots were put in the simulator, into a situation similar to JT610, with the updated software. According to a source, all of the pilots landed safely.

CNN

Do you think the source was truthful? Any possibility they were trying to do some behind-the-scenes PR damage control?

Hey, don't belittle yourself. Your attention is commendable
a reply to: KansasGirl

a reply to: F4guy

I'll listen to you. When did you fly Phantoms?