Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 270

Thread: 737 MAX

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    The C of G varies with how the aircraft is loaded. But that isn't the issue, it's the extra lift from the tops of the new pylons and nacelles.

    The airframe itself didn't really change. Put the old engines on it, and it would fly like the old one.
    Seems like the best plan for a safe and tested resolution to the problem eh??

    Quote Originally Posted by jono View Post
    No. It's the FAA certification shortcut that's fucked. Read TS's post carefully: in order to certify the new model under the old they had to make it no easier to stall--compared to the existing airplane. That's where most clusterfucks start. Not to suggest throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but that cert method needs attention at the regulatory level.
    See above..
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,343
    Quote Originally Posted by jono View Post
    It's the FAA certification shortcut that's fucked.
    For sure. There's a big economic factor too. Boeing doesn't want to design a new narrow body from scratch. Airlines that only have 737s in their fleets don't want to incur the huge cost to retrain every pilot and mechanic, and purchase all of the spare parts required.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,810
    so you are saying you drive 737's ?

    between the anti stall software, some of the cockpit controls its actualy a different fucking airplane

    but to cut corners its a 737 so initialy at least nobody needed any extra training ?
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    27,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    The airframe itself didn't really change. Put the old engines on it, and it would fly like the old one.
    Yes, the 737 Max 8 is the same length as the airplane it's replacing-- the 737-800--to within a couple inches.

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er
    but to cut corners its a 737 so initialy at least nobody needed any extra training ?
    It's not really about cutting corners. It's about designing an airplane that will effectively compete with the Airbus A320 Neo, which is itself just a variant of the basic A320 airframe that's been flying since the '80s. Making variants of existing aircraft is the bread and butter of commercial aviation.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,810
    if you change enough shit but call it a 737 just to get around more training at what point is it a really new airplane?

    there were accounts of pilots who were assigned to fly their first MAX who admitted to not knowing what every thing in the new cockpit did ... sounds like a shortcut to me ?
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    27,291
    I don't disagree that the airlines and/or Boeing undersold the need for pilot (re)training for the Max, but it's definitely still a 737.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Near Perimetr.
    Posts
    3,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick View Post
    Jeez

    I thought that I read somewhere that there are two sensors - for the Ethiopian crash one registered 15 deg and the other (erroneously) 70 deg. So the MCAS system just used the one when two were on board?
    Afaik, this is why airbus uses 3 AOA sensors in most (all?) planes because of their fbw design, so if one fails and start to feed erroneous data, it is isolated.
    I would be my 0.2$ that Boeing is forced to go that route as well... Atm failure of one sensor causes total system failure as there is no way for the computers to know which one has failed.

    The floggings will continue until morale improves.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,343
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    so you are saying you drive 737's ?
    Yeah, I used to fly it for a living. Now I'm flying an Airbus.

    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    between the anti stall software, some of the cockpit controls its actualy a different fucking airplane

    but to cut corners its a 737 so initialy at least nobody needed any extra training ?
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    if you change enough shit but call it a 737 just to get around more training at what point is it a really new airplane?

    there were accounts of pilots who were assigned to fly their first MAX who admitted to not knowing what every thing in the new cockpit did ... sounds like a shortcut to me ?
    If you've flown the NG for long enough (or enough cycles really) to be totally comfortable in it (maybe six months to a year for most pilots) you could jump right in a max and have no problem. Aside from the displays, the cockpit is the same. Procedurally, there are minor differences.

    RE: those pilots in the article, the thing with SRS/SMS reporting is that it only happens when something happens. As in, "awww shit, we fucked that approach up and had to do a go around." "Well... I was late with the flap selection because my scan was a little off because of these newfangled displays." "Yeah! And these new engines just don't spool like the old ones did." "Perfect. That should cover our asses."

    "We flew the new variant today and the trip was uneventful" said no report ever.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    33,538
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    so you are saying you drive 737's
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    Yeah, I used to fly it for a living. Now I'm flying an Airbus..
    We're not all dentists.
    Quote Originally Posted by Downbound Train View Post
    And there will come a day when our ancestors look back...........

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    27,291
    Quote Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
    Yeah, I used to fly it for a living. Now I'm flying an Airbus.
    Except for when Otto takes over. What's your vector, Victor?

  11. #111
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    9,262
    Quote Originally Posted by The AD View Post
    Except for when Otto takes over. What's your vector, Victor?
    He doesn't work hard enough on defense either

  12. #112
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,343
    Quote Originally Posted by mcski View Post
    He doesn't work hard enough on defense either
    ...except during the playoffs.

  13. #113
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Quote Originally Posted by PNWbrit View Post
    We're not all dentists.


    Not yet anyway
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  14. #114
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    STL
    Posts
    13,293
    I don’t understand all this sensor software BS. I understand aircraft development in engines and airframes equals fuel efficiency but why replace cables and pulleys with wires and software?

    Profit?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  15. #115
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    33,538
    Quote Originally Posted by Cono Este View Post
    airframes equals fuel efficiency but why replace cables and pulleys with wires and software?
    fly by wire is part of that airframe and fuel efficiency circle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Downbound Train View Post
    And there will come a day when our ancestors look back...........

  16. #116
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    8,303
    Quote Originally Posted by XXX-er View Post
    if you change enough shit but call it a 737 just to get around more training at what point is it a really new airplane?

    there were accounts of pilots who were assigned to fly their first MAX who admitted to not knowing what every thing in the new cockpit did ... sounds like a shortcut to me ?
    Shortcuts are safer than redesigns because existing designs have less unknowns. They're cheaper because they have less (mainly) regulatory costs. The safest thing of all would probably be to just keep selling the old 737's, which happens to be the biggest shortcut possible. The costs they're trying to avoid end with training, but start with design, verification, validation, qualification, manufacturing (tooling, programming, training, inspection...), inventory, spares, and even maintenance procedures before they get to retraining. And in the long run new pilots have to be trained anyway, but new parts cost money from beginning to end, so the less new stuff can be designed for a "new" plane the better, both for cost and safety.

    But since a lot of those costs are regulatory (proving a new design is airworthy is a lot more expensive for both the FAA and the airframer) there is a huge monetary incentive to simplify that. Right and wrong, arguing similarity with existing designs is where logic goes to be tortured.

  17. #117
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    SF & the Ho
    Posts
    9,262

  18. #118
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,491
    MAGA!

  19. #119
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    22,448
    Shit is downright criminal.
    The system points the nose of the plane down, but it's a dealer option to be able to turn it off? And no warning about conflicting sensor readings? Is that a normal occurrence? How often to sensors give conflicting information and why?
    People need to be in jail for this.
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  20. #120
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Cone of Uncertainty
    Posts
    49,306
    Also, the Boeing Board opened themselves up to some serious repercussions I think: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...=.bc3b58f012da

  21. #121
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    30,810
    whats the number, you know whats the lawsuit worth, how many billions, how is it tliable to play out ?

    either way this is gona keep some lawyers in Perrier & water for yars to come eh
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  22. #122
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,343
    Quote Originally Posted by mcski View Post
    The Trump administration grounded all 737 Max jets worldwide
    After most of Asia, Europe, and Canada.

    That article isn't the bombshell they think it is. One stick shaker going off immediately after liftoff while the other one isn't is a pretty good indication of AoA disagreement.

  23. #123
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,385
    Quote Originally Posted by iceman View Post
    Also, the Boeing Board opened themselves up to some serious repercussions I think: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...=.bc3b58f012da
    Wow there's a lot of people on that board. They all make $343k per year? crazy. Wonder if they actually do anything.

  24. #124
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    3,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Bromontane View Post
    One thing that was interesting is BA stating that having the indicator light inactive "didn't adversely impact safety." Yet, if that were the case the light wouldn't exist at all, right? The only purpose to have an indicator like that is to bolster the feedback from the plane to pilots on the topic of AOA functioning (read, improve safety). And given MCAS' potential to intervene AOA data is a critical safety component.

    Just seems like the answer is patently false.
    Exactly. And it seems like such a bullshit move that they would make it an extra cost option to have the light work. Incredible.

  25. #125
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    8,303
    There are legitimate arguments for why you don't want more warning lights. Information overload, particularly in an emergency, is a known safety concern. So giving the customer the option to decide that themselves is reasonable (in theory--assuming things work as they're supposed to).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •