And there in lies the dilemma. Both hand flying skills and automation skills need to be used regularly to remain proficient. When I started flying HUD I didn’t particularly like it. Fast forward several years and had to fly a night time leg with an MEL’d HUD. Wow, were my panel scanning skills rusty to say the least. Same with autothrottles, etc.. Finally came up with a policy that encouraged crews to hand fly when conditions permitted, i.e. not at the end of a 10 hour leg to a night approach in a foreign country on the backside of the clock. Let the automation be your friend under those conditions.
737 Max
- Thread starter jrussl
- Start date
The dead money tree just fell on Boeing
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/southwest-pilots-sue-boeing-alleging-211858168.html
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/southwest-pilots-sue-boeing-alleging-211858168.html
mike mcs repair
Registered User
chugiak AK
Does no one remember all the Airbus's that shed their rudders. Airbus got away with claiming pilot error for a long time and way too many deaths until one Canadian pilot who lost the rudder at altitude in clear smooth air over the Atlantic brought the plane back down without crashing and with no rudder.
Airbus could no longer hide behind their Lawyers and lies.
Lets not forget flight 447 going down over the Atlantic. Yes the co-pilot made a major mistake but the software was what caused the problem. If an airplane can not fly with blocked pitot tubes we have a major design problem.
To me Airbus has been far more negligent for decades than Boeing is now. Airbus's software and flight control systems have killed way to many people unnecessarily. Remember Airbuses reply to the FAA when they refused to disclose their new software to fix the rudder related flight control problem?
It was for passenger comfort. Up passengers do get uncomfortable when their plane is braking apart in flight for no reason.
I remain in the camp, If it ain't a Boeing, I ain't going.
Airbus could no longer hide behind their Lawyers and lies.
Lets not forget flight 447 going down over the Atlantic. Yes the co-pilot made a major mistake but the software was what caused the problem. If an airplane can not fly with blocked pitot tubes we have a major design problem.
To me Airbus has been far more negligent for decades than Boeing is now. Airbus's software and flight control systems have killed way to many people unnecessarily. Remember Airbuses reply to the FAA when they refused to disclose their new software to fix the rudder related flight control problem?
It was for passenger comfort. Up passengers do get uncomfortable when their plane is braking apart in flight for no reason.
I remain in the camp, If it ain't a Boeing, I ain't going.
n40ff
Registered User
WV
As I recall Boeing 737's had a rudder issue too?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues
Not a airline pilot and haven't even flown airline since 911, I've always considered myself in the Boeing camp...... Now I don't care. Airlines, even Asian/third world airlines, are the safest way to get from point A to point B whatever the airplane. When it's your time, make sure your insurance premium is paid-up.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_737_rudder_issues
Not a airline pilot and haven't even flown airline since 911, I've always considered myself in the Boeing camp...... Now I don't care. Airlines, even Asian/third world airlines, are the safest way to get from point A to point B whatever the airplane. When it's your time, make sure your insurance premium is paid-up.....
Last edited:
Doncha love the Toyota commercial where everyone is yukkin' it up, lovin' life when something happens and the car saves the distracted drivers' bacon? Not just about the car, its a lesson for youth. This is how the world is going. No attention span required. Sad to say, Airbus is the future.
Farmer Ted
MEMBER
Then we might as well all ride in drones and hope the Chinese get the electronics right. I reject that reality! The reason the max has this problem to begin with is their emulation of Airbus with the MCAS system. I feel Boeing should be Boeing and let Airbus be Airbus. Boeing’s shortcut with the max (new engines on stretched old airframe with little pilot input and no training to new operators) caused this! They wanted to save money and roll out a new aircraft to fill a role the 757 should fly. I love me some Boeing, but the bean counters have taken over and people died because of it. I still feel if mcas wasn’t on the aircraft to begin with pilots would get used to different feel of the aircraft, and if you need pitch down help when stick shaker comes on god help you! You shouldn’t be flying to begin with. Unfortunately I see these aft cg small control surface aircraft more frequently it seems (ie dc10 becomes md11). When you rely on computers alone for safety you will be let down and people will die. Let’s also remember one of these crashes the aircraft went thru this oscillation with a different crew and made it back because the system was overridden. Mcas was supposed to save the idiot crew not kill them.
Farmer Ted
MEMBER
Charlie, you have to remember at the time even the USA based crews (I have a friend at American that was furious. When your check airman don’t know that’s bad) didn’t even know the system was on the aircraft running in the background nor were they trained on how to disable it.
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Are you saying that those two guarded switches just above the #2 fire handle will not disable the MCAS trim system? I thought that those were the two switches which were disabled by the jump seat rider on that first airplane on the day before it crashed?
Attachments
Farmer Ted
MEMBER
In all the 737 I flew if you pulled/pushed against runaway trim this engaged the stab brake. You then reached over and then placed the cutout switch to cutout and trimmed manually and problem over. I was told in mcas aircraft this pulling against runaway trim doesn’t work. Pulling the stab trim cutout should work, but does it kill the warnings? I don’t know. What I do know is grasping the trim wheel works and then trim manually. But these guys and others didn’t have a clue mcas was on the aircraft or where trained how to deal with it. I once had an uncontained engine failure/fire on takeoff. The start valve opened at 50’ 13stage bleed air blew a hole in side of engine ruptured fuel line and made a blow torch 150’ long. It burned thru fire warning system so fast the light flickered and we got a beep then quiet not the Brrrrrrrrrrrring! We were used to in training. Only after testing the fire warning did we know it was burnt thru and shut it down. The training in the system is what got me thru. The temps were normal and engine ran fine but it was burning itself off the pylon. They had none of this on mcas.
Attachments
Last edited:
skywagon8a
MEMBER
SE Mass MA6
Just like those three idiots, one of whom was a check airman, who undershot their VFR landing at SFO in the B-777.
Guys, my intent was not to re-litigate what has already been argued here. We can all point and counter point to Airbus and Boeing. Believe me, I've flown them both, been LCA on them and both manufacturer's have their problems. However, Boeing this time has managed to put pilots out of work. That creates two bad scenarios, one that follows the other. One the pilots are going to sue you and in the process of suing you they are going to have to say bad things about the airplane which will result in loss of confidence in the traveling public. You can pay off aggrieved crash victims and their families rather quickly. That kind of litigation is ordinary and expected. For Boeing, the worse possible outcome for the MAX is pilots suing it over its design work causing them lost wages because then you have the professional pointing an accusatory finger and the rhetoric will give the public pause. Boeing would do well to pay off SWAPA which at the moment it appears it will not.
Personally I don't see how the MAX survives as a product or much of the Boeing Board of Directors. This will get worse before it gets better if it remains on its present trajectory.
Personally I don't see how the MAX survives as a product or much of the Boeing Board of Directors. This will get worse before it gets better if it remains on its present trajectory.
BC12D-4-85
SPONSOR
Fairbanks, AK.
Follow the Boeing dialog on updates: https://www.boeing.com/commercial/737max/737-max-update.page and https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-releases-statements?item=130431
Last edited:
I would have to disagree. Boeing was not trying to emulate Airbus. They were trying to be a "little bit pregnant". If they had went full FBW, there would be no MCAS, no trimming down against the pilot etc. The control laws simply would not let you put the airplane in that position. The reason why the MAX has the problems it does is because they tried to stay with mechanical controls and Tango Foxtrot the system with electronics and poorly designed electronics at that. I'm not saying they should have gone FBW, but if you are going to design in that kind of instability in the airframe configuration, you either go FBW or you go to another configuration that is more stable.
n40ff
Registered User
WV
I agree with GeeBee, Boeing should pay the pilots NOW. But they may still be in deep s... ??
Maybe, make that, I must be missing something. It seems to me after all I have read that the Max could have been safely flown by well/correctly trained pilots w/o the MCAS at all?
As Ted said, "Mcas was supposed to save the idiot crew not kill them."
Seems rather harsh but maybe true?
I must be missing something?
Maybe, make that, I must be missing something. It seems to me after all I have read that the Max could have been safely flown by well/correctly trained pilots w/o the MCAS at all?
As Ted said, "Mcas was supposed to save the idiot crew not kill them."
Seems rather harsh but maybe true?
I must be missing something?
Last edited:
can’t resist thread drift...
But hands down - The 4020 was a far better tractor than the 4010..;-) Like calling shotgun, the slowest kid had to drive the 4010..
7000+ hours with fadecs, they broke once in a while, but fail safes kept things working. Now I’m flying an aircraft wo, and I miss them.
Random thought.
Having taken off in an aircraft with a malfunctioning AOA, stick shaker activated at weight off wheels into 200 and 1/2, a quick scan, and being familiar with airplane, made for an uneventful return while riding a stick shaker. Inexperience might have made for a different outcome.
Yeah, stick shakers save idiot crews, not the intention with MCAS. MCAS tried to cancel a slight nose up, but was given lawn dart authority. All to save the airlines a few bucks. And so easily avoidable with just one person with, shall we say, "engineering situational awareness". No one left at Boeing but compartmentalized typists.
Last edited:
mike mcs repair
Registered User
chugiak AK
BC12D-4-85
SPONSOR
Fairbanks, AK.
Changed Product Rules development: https://www.faa.gov/news/media/attachments/Final_JATR_Submittal_to_FAA_Oct_2019.pdf
Then there's the FAA vs Boeing staff on a professional level. It has to be a challenge dealing with big industry.
Gary
Then there's the FAA vs Boeing staff on a professional level. It has to be a challenge dealing with big industry.
Gary
BC12D-4-85
SPONSOR
Fairbanks, AK.
Which hires the best for a particular job skill...the Gov't or Industry? Job stability is one Gov't incentive versus an Industry prone to frequent layoffs during economic downturns. I'm not making a judgement just an observation.
Gary
Gary
