Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 270

Thread: 737 MAX

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,926
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Worst new product launch since New Coke..
    Maybe. The public will forget soon enough. Average person has no idea what they are flying on. Knowledge is power. I think the A380 debacle, where Airbus executives decided to swing dicks rather than play the long game, might end up being the bigger long term disaster. The MAX might still have a long and bright future, albeit probably rolling with a different handle.

    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757. Best takeoffs ever and long term demand seems almost certain. The A380 and Max debacles should at least have some pencil pushers rethinking business plans.

    Lastly, I have a flight (my first) on a 787 dash 9 coming up. Upgraded to bulkhead seats. Wife and kids on a 747 dash 8 on Lufthansa of course. Kind of jealous of them.
    Last edited by uglymoney; 09-01-2019 at 03:03 PM.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Let's take a perfectly good airliner... Put bigger engines on it to eek out a little more payload and a few more pennies per flight. Never mind the fact that the bigger engines tip the balance point so badly we have to run special software to keep it in the air.. Oh, and let's not tell the pilots how the new software the plane can't fly without works or how to use it! Yep, right there's some good shit..
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,926
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Let's take a perfectly good airliner... Put bigger engines on it to eek out a little more payload and a few more pennies per flight. Never mind the fact that the bigger engines tip the balance point so badly we have to run special software to keep it in the air.. Oh, and let's not tell the pilots how the new software the plane can't fly without works or how to use it! Yep, right there's some good shit..
    Didn't watch the video eh?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Didn't watch the video eh?

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Umm check out 15 minute mark of the video
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,926
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Umm check out 15 minute mark of the video
    ? The part where he talks about how the plane is actually inherently stable but the software was needed to provide proper stick feedback that falls within FAA requirements, which yes, is a result of the engine placement?

    Obviously a series of bad decisions were made which resulted in these crashes but it doesn't seem to be because the plane is inherently built to fall out of the sky. More that it has flight characteristics that differ slightly from other 737's and for regulatory (pilot training, stick feedback) reasons the software was added and then modified later as they went down the wormhole.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    ? The part where he talks about how the plane is actually inherently stable but the software was needed to provide proper stick feedback that falls within FAA requirements, which yes, is a result of the engine placement?

    Obviously a series of bad decisions were made which resulted in these crashes but it doesn't seem to be because the plane is inherently built to fall out of the sky. More that it has flight characteristics that differ slightly from other 737's and for regulatory (pilot training, stick feedback) reasons the software was added and then modified later as they went down the wormhole.
    It all started to go bad with the idea to add bigger engines which admittedly fucked up the balance because the air frame and wings were designed for different engines. How did that idea work out?
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    关你屁事
    Posts
    9,533
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    More that it has flight characteristics that differ slightly from other 737's and for regulatory (pilot training, stick feedback) reasons the software was added and then modified later as they went down the wormhole.
    Money reasons. The airlines wanted a plane that was operationally mostly interchangeable with their other 737s, but with better economics. That's what Boeing promised, that's why the airlines bought the plane. To deliver on that promise they went down a wormhole of engineering compromises.

    Anyways, this won't make any fucking difference. Because you are conflating the utter IT fuckup of the A380 - where they lost design control, and years -with executive swinging to wave the flag. USA! USA! USA!

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,926
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    It all started to go bad with the idea to add bigger engines which admittedly fucked up the balance because the air frame and wings were designed for different engines. How did that idea work out?


    So far, not great and only time will tell if it was a good long term business decision. As I said, some rethinking is almost certainly taking place with the benefit of hindsight. But, according to the man on the video at least, the software wasn't needed to "keep the plane in the air".

    Should they have gone with a new 757ish design (bigger wings/higher stance/short runway capable)? Why, why not.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    关你屁事
    Posts
    9,533
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Should they have gone with a new 757ish design (bigger wings/higher stance/short runway capable)? Why, why not.
    Because it'd cost too much to make them money. it's really fucking simple economics.

    and it's the same reason if they'd been honest about the 787 costs they'd never have approved it. and that's before the fuckups that cost $. Same with teh A380.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    5,122
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757..
    Only if they restrict them to no family travel and fly them on predominately business routes. Got stuck on the back of one for a cross country trip around xmas time and it took 45 minutes to get everyone off. The Boeing NMA is aimed at that market however, but some talk of it being a dual aisle and sitting in-between narrow and wide body fuselage.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    22,463
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Maybe. The public will forget soon enough. Average person has no idea what they are flying on. Knowledge is power. I think the A380 debacle, where Airbus executives decided to swing dicks rather than play the long game, might end up being the bigger long term disaster. The MAX might still have a long and bright future, albeit probably rolling with a different handle.

    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757. Best takeoffs ever and long term demand seems almost certain. The A380 and Max debacles should at least have some pencil pushers rethinking business plans.

    Lastly, I have a flight (my first) on a 787 dash 9 coming up. Upgraded to bulkhead seats. Wife and kids on a 747 dash 8 on Lufthansa of course. Kind of jealous of them.
    Don't the bigger 737's and A321 essentially replace the 757?
    No longer stuck.

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

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the ham
    Posts
    13,371
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    On that same note I can't believe neither major has decided to spend their money replacing the venerable 757. Best takeoffs ever and long term demand seems almost certain. The A380 and Max debacles should at least have some pencil pushers rethinking business plans.
    About one out of every six 757s still flying belongs to Delta. That's a big fleet to replace, plus the operational advantage of the 767 being considered the same type leaves little financial incentive to do so without a major increase in fuel price.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Don't the bigger 737's and A321 essentially replace the 757?
    pretty much.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    7,367

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    voting in seattle
    Posts
    5,122
    Many Delta 757 routes have 7373-900s in the rotation.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,926
    The 757 has bigger wings so it can take off at slower speeds with more payload. 737's need more speed and longer runways to get airborne.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    22,463
    I don't think there are many commercial airports not fit for a 737. Takeoff run from one plane to another also is a lot more complicated than just wingspan from 1 to the other.
    No longer stuck.

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

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    22,463
    Wow, Wikipedia says 757-200 takes off quite a bit shorter than a 737-800 at a higher max takeoff weight. How dey do dat?
    No longer stuck.

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

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    10,908
    Aerodynamics’n’shit probly


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On Vacation for the Duration
    Posts
    14,373
    Getting weirder.

    https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...KvX4Xesd_AbbVs

    A former Boeing official who played a key role in the development of the 737 MAX has refused to provide documents sought by federal prosecutors investigating two fatal crashes of the jetliner, citing his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, according to a person familiar with the matter.
    A few people feel the rain. Most people just get wet.

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    278
    I'm now retired from Boeing (35 yr. career) but my last years there were on the 737 Programs and the Max. I had a senior position but not in Management and was involved in the Engineering world. The Max program was rushed and issues raised by many were not on the Program Managers radar. Lower-level Managers would deflect things and with knowledge that you threatened your own career by being too vocal, the program bumped along. The real experienced folks often were not listened to and many retired in disgust, some got demoted. So how did a single AOA sensor (rather than two with dual redundancy) get on those airplanes? Everything I was ever told or read made an emphasis on any system / apparatus having dual redundant capability. One fails, a second is in place to back it up. Faster, cheaper, and don't let anything obstruct or mess with our "Master Schedule". I could go on but in the years of the Max program some serious inside problems were festering and as some of my colleagues said, only a matter of time and there will be consequences. The video is an accurate, technical explanation but misses some of the behavior issues. I do remember the (senior) FAA reps. leaving and the assurances given that self-certification was perfectly fine. Yeah, right.
    Last edited by L82thegate; 09-07-2019 at 12:36 PM.

  21. #171
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On Vacation for the Duration
    Posts
    14,373
    As Boeing goes, so goes the nation.

    In 1953, Charles Wilson, GM’s president, became President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s secretary of defense.
    A few people feel the rain. Most people just get wet.

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    278
    Just to add; a series of design reviews in packed conference rooms allow the entire design approach to be shared and critiqued by all other pertinent parties. Years ago, gruff and at times surly senior mangers would shoot arrows at anything they questioned or didn't understand. Different and more mechanical aircraft then but the practice is still in place. At the later event when 90% of the design is locked in, (Critical Design Review CDR) it would be appropriate to ask how a new system was "integrated" and were it's inputs fail-proof. Wouldn't someone in the room know you must have redundancy in the new MCAS system? Are there implications to the customers? Flight Manuals affected? and what about Simulators? Pilot / flight training considerations? There was a big hole in the experience / knowledge/ balls equation or it was a poorly attended event. The fly on the wall may know.

  23. #173
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    关你屁事
    Posts
    9,533
    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    I don't think there are many commercial airports not fit for a 737. Takeoff run from one plane to another also is a lot more complicated than just wingspan from 1 to the other.
    Define "commercial".

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On Vacation for the Duration
    Posts
    14,373
    Quote Originally Posted by L82thegate View Post
    ............ Years ago, gruff and at times surly senior mangers would shoot arrows at anything they questioned or didn't understand. Different and more mechanical aircraft then but the practice is still in place. .
    My educated guess is that years ago the surly managers were led by engineers. Educated guess is that today the MBA's and CFO's are the surly managers.

    Keep posting.
    A few people feel the rain. Most people just get wet.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    21,944
    Can we talk about the Boeing 2707 vs the Lockheed 2000 now?
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

Posting Permissions

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