Go Back  The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum > BOATING FORUMS > Dockside Chat
Reload this Page >

Boeing 737 MAX is stupidly designed

Notices
Like Tree186Likes

Boeing 737 MAX is stupidly designed

Old 03-15-2019, 11:48 AM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 185
Default

Originally Posted by TorFed View Post
I know who I'm not flying.

"We provide MPL training for an airline based on its own operating procedures. The graduates can perform as a co-pilot on any multi-engine multi-crew airliner without the need to go through extensive light aircraft experience, as the students are specially trained for the specific aircraft until they prove to be competent in all possible operational scenarios."
Hey they are just trying to be efficient LOL Why trouble the newbie with things like learning how to fly a trainer, when they can log him on to MS Simulator and go straight for the big jets. I guess it keeps their training costs down and who needs to have an experience pilot in the cockpit when the planes practically fly themselves.
niteatnicks is online now  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:00 PM
  #43  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Treasure Coast
Posts: 801
Default

From what I see, at least half the students in the local flight school in Vero Beach are foreign
China Rider is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:06 PM
  #44  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,198
Default

Name:  smiling_boeing_x_32_jsf_by_vinni_pooh-d7ut9v1.jpg
Views: 2126
Size:  837 Bytes

1 hour ago
Another cut and paste from Zerohedge site. Have not heard some of these thoughts form the Chinese.
Especially no. 3 on redundancy of the sensor.




Following the first crash (October 29, 2018)of Boeing 737-MAX, belonging to Indonesia's Garuda Airline, a Chinese Aeronautical Engineer, at the Chinese National Aeronautic Institute, has wrote a report, on the possible cause of this accident.The report was published on November 27, 2018, one month after the Indonesian crash. The Chinese FAA did not have the gut to ground the Boeing 737-MAX, after the first crash.The Chinese Investigators pinpointed 737-MAX's new stall-prevention MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) as the most likely culprit of the crash. This system was designed to monitor the Angle of Attack (AoA), so the plane will not stall, and crash due to lost of lift.And this system will automatically kick in, and will lower the nose of the plane, to prevent stalling of the wing, when certain AoA was exceeded.

Using various reports and Boeing Patent filings of the MCAS, Patent Number: CN106477055A, the Chinese investigators have discovered the following:

1. Boeing did not disclose the newly installed MCAS on the Boeing 737-MAX, to the airlines and pilots, consequently, the pilots don't know about the existence of this system, and therefore, they were not trained on how to handle this system.

2. The MCAS rely on a single AoA sensor, and so there is no logic, to check whether the input from the sensor is correct. This checking of input's correctness requires multiple sensors.

Faulty readings from this single AoA sensor, may be the fatal cause of 737-MAX's crash. 3. Airbus, in contrast, requires their planes, to have 3 separate AoA sensors, and if any one of the sensors do not agree with the others, their stall-prevention system will ignore all of them, and will inform the pilot. 4. The Chinese investigators further discovered that if the pilots intervene, after the MSAC kicked in, by pulling up the plane, the plane will still dive for 10 seconds, and then MSAC will order the plane to dive again, after 5 seconds. 5. The MSAC will only release the control of the plane, only if it thinks, the pilot is nose diving the plane, enough, to prevent the stall. If the Pilot pulls up, the MSAC will regain the control, and order the plane to dive again. 6. Since Boeing did not disclosed the existence of MSAC to the airlines and pilots, the pilots will simply don't know how to turn off the MSAC, even if it could be turned off. 7. Since the Boeing 737 is a 50 years old plane, FAA did not required Boeing to re-certify the plane after the upgrade.

This criminal negligent and collusion between Boeing and FAA has costed over 300 lives, so far.

forgot is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:08 PM
  #45  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,611
Default

Originally Posted by forgot View Post
Slack expressed curiosity about the potential for more layers of automation on the planes, underneath the MCAS. Being a certified pilot himself, he noted:“Experienced pilots are great at disengaging automation. MCAS seemed to be somewhat difficult to disable [the automated flight assistance]. There may be some sort of background stability augmentation system, which is causing additional issues.

”Above quote was copied from zerohedge article.

Hence, stupidly designed.
Rico2 likes this.
Kendall is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:12 PM
  #46  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,611
Default

Originally Posted by forgot View Post
Attachment 1096928

1 hour ago
Another cut and paste from Zerohedge site. Have not heard some of these thoughts form the Chinese.
Especially no. 3 on redundancy of the sensor.



Following the first crash (October 29, 2018)of Boeing 737-MAX, belonging to Indonesia's Garuda Airline, a Chinese Aeronautical Engineer, at the Chinese National Aeronautic Institute, has wrote a report, on the possible cause of this accident.The report was published on November 27, 2018, one month after the Indonesian crash. The Chinese FAA did not have the gut to ground the Boeing 737-MAX, after the first crash.The Chinese Investigators pinpointed 737-MAX's new stall-prevention MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) as the most likely culprit of the crash. This system was designed to monitor the Angle of Attack (AoA), so the plane will not stall, and crash due to lost of lift.And this system will automatically kick in, and will lower the nose of the plane, to prevent stalling of the wing, when certain AoA was exceeded.

Using various reports and Boeing Patent filings of the MCAS, Patent Number: CN106477055A, the Chinese investigators have discovered the following:

1. Boeing did not disclose the newly installed MCAS on the Boeing 737-MAX, to the airlines and pilots, consequently, the pilots don't know about the existence of this system, and therefore, they were not trained on how to handle this system.

2. The MCAS rely on a single AoA sensor, and so there is no logic, to check whether the input from the sensor is correct. This checking of input's correctness requires multiple sensors.

Faulty readings from this single AoA sensor, may be the fatal cause of 737-MAX's crash. 3. Airbus, in contrast, requires their planes, to have 3 separate AoA sensors, and if any one of the sensors do not agree with the others, their stall-prevention system will ignore all of them, and will inform the pilot. 4. The Chinese investigators further discovered that if the pilots intervene, after the MSAC kicked in, by pulling up the plane, the plane will still dive for 10 seconds, and then MSAC will order the plane to dive again, after 5 seconds. 5. The MSAC will only release the control of the plane, only if it thinks, the pilot is nose diving the plane, enough, to prevent the stall. If the Pilot pulls up, the MSAC will regain the control, and order the plane to dive again. 6. Since Boeing did not disclosed the existence of MSAC to the airlines and pilots, the pilots will simply don't know how to turn off the MSAC, even if it could be turned off. 7. Since the Boeing 737 is a 50 years old plane, FAA did not required Boeing to re-certify the plane after the upgrade.

This criminal negligent and collusion between Boeing and FAA has costed over 300 lives, so far.

Although I did not know about this Zerohedge site or the comments of this Chinese Aeronautical Engineer, it simply seems like the Boeing 737 MAX is stupidly designed.
Kendall is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:17 PM
  #47  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,611
Default

Captain C.B. Sully Sullenger, a seasoned, decorated veteran commercial airline pilot plainly stated today, "there are many similarities between this flight (Ethiopian Air) and Lion Air 610, in which the design of the Boeing 737 MAX 8 is a factor. It has been obvious since the Lion Air crash that a redesign of the 737 MAX 8 has been urgently needed, yet has still not been done, and the announced proposed fixes do not go far enough. "

Again the design of the Boeing 737 MAX 8 is a factor... AND a redesign of the 737 MAX 8 has been urgently needed according to Sully.

Hence, the Boeing 737 MAX is stupidly designed.
Kendall is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:29 PM
  #48  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,611
Default

Originally Posted by TorFed View Post
I'll take the word of my friends who ARE pilots, that this is not a plane or design issue. It is a lack of experience/training issue.

The word of your friend Pilots is different from Captain Sully Sullenger who is a decorated, and experienced pilot and said, "there are many similarities between this flight and Lion Air 610, in which the DESIGN of the BOEING 737 MAX IS A FACTOR. It has been obvious since the Lion Air crash that a REDESIGN OF THE 737 MAX 8 has been URGENTLY NEEDED, yet has still not been done, and the announced proposed fixes do not go far enough.
Kendall is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 02:03 PM
  #49  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 25
Default

99.9% of the population is in no way qualified to comment on the physics of flight. That includes almost every poster in this thread including myself.

The engineers, scientists, and experienced pilots will figure it out.
Seacat FL and Windwood like this.
Fractured but whole is online now  
Old 03-15-2019, 02:18 PM
  #50  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Kent Narrows, MD
Posts: 7,092
Default

Boeing did not disclose the newly installed MCAS on the Boeing 737-MAX, to the airlines and pilots, consequently, the pilots don't know about the existence of this system, and therefore, they were not trained on how to handle this system.

Not mentioned in the Flight Manual - unreal
Elusive is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 02:19 PM
  #51  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,097
Default

Originally Posted by Lorne Greene View Post
I am intrigued by this comment. Why would you be more concerned if it was American and United rather than Ethiopian?
TorFor answers it for me but yes Training.

Many of the non us pilots culture is to not question senior crew. Combine that with inadequate training and you get many crashes that are unavoidable.

bjm9818 is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 03:15 PM
  #52  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,198
Default

Question for pilots or those that may know.
The pilot requested a vector to return to airport. Would he have vectored manually [fly the plane manually] or plugged the vector into the auto pilot?
Or is it something one just really can't answer.
forgot is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 03:29 PM
  #53  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Default

Originally Posted by forgot View Post
Attachment 1096928

1 hour ago
Another cut and paste from Zerohedge site. Have not heard some of these thoughts form the Chinese.
Especially no. 3 on redundancy of the sensor.



Following the first crash (October 29, 2018)of Boeing 737-MAX, belonging to Indonesia's Garuda Airline, a Chinese Aeronautical Engineer, at the Chinese National Aeronautic Institute, has wrote a report, on the possible cause of this accident.The report was published on November 27, 2018, one month after the Indonesian crash. The Chinese FAA did not have the gut to ground the Boeing 737-MAX, after the first crash.The Chinese Investigators pinpointed 737-MAX's new stall-prevention MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) as the most likely culprit of the crash. This system was designed to monitor the Angle of Attack (AoA), so the plane will not stall, and crash due to lost of lift.And this system will automatically kick in, and will lower the nose of the plane, to prevent stalling of the wing, when certain AoA was exceeded.

Using various reports and Boeing Patent filings of the MCAS, Patent Number: CN106477055A, the Chinese investigators have discovered the following:

1. Boeing did not disclose the newly installed MCAS on the Boeing 737-MAX, to the airlines and pilots, consequently, the pilots don't know about the existence of this system, and therefore, they were not trained on how to handle this system.

2. The MCAS rely on a single AoA sensor, and so there is no logic, to check whether the input from the sensor is correct. This checking of input's correctness requires multiple sensors.

Faulty readings from this single AoA sensor, may be the fatal cause of 737-MAX's crash. 3. Airbus, in contrast, requires their planes, to have 3 separate AoA sensors, and if any one of the sensors do not agree with the others, their stall-prevention system will ignore all of them, and will inform the pilot. 4. The Chinese investigators further discovered that if the pilots intervene, after the MSAC kicked in, by pulling up the plane, the plane will still dive for 10 seconds, and then MSAC will order the plane to dive again, after 5 seconds. 5. The MSAC will only release the control of the plane, only if it thinks, the pilot is nose diving the plane, enough, to prevent the stall. If the Pilot pulls up, the MSAC will regain the control, and order the plane to dive again. 6. Since Boeing did not disclosed the existence of MSAC to the airlines and pilots, the pilots will simply don't know how to turn off the MSAC, even if it could be turned off. 7. Since the Boeing 737 is a 50 years old plane, FAA did not required Boeing to re-certify the plane after the upgrade.

This criminal negligent and collusion between Boeing and FAA has costed over 300 lives, so far.
Boeing has been in the flight and automated flight control business for a long, long time. It would surprise me if the system was so simple that it could be fooled easily and that it wouldn't be easy to override using the basic flight instructions, even if they weren't specific to MCAS. Unless this Chinese guy is a pro at the system and reverse-engineered it completely, it seem quite libelous to make such statements. I'm hoping Boeing has some info that proves this guy wrong and that he's jumping the gun on what really happened to that plane.
Seacat FL likes this.
km1125 is online now  
Old 03-15-2019, 03:37 PM
  #54  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
PLEDGERPLEDGERPLEDGERPLEDGER
 
Snapper Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Republic of West Florida - the ORIGINAL lone star state
Posts: 17,780
Default

I bailed at "Chinese Investigators".

Big Al
Snapper Head is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 03:47 PM
  #55  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 439
Default

I know exactly what happened, Gravity won.
alka2710 is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 04:22 PM
  #56  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,104
Default

I flew home from Dublin to Boston last May on one of the first Max's, and it was a really magnificent airplane. Really could use a better audio visual system for international service, however.

Boeing will get to the bottom of the airplane's problems, and the Max will go on to become one of the premier if not the premier airliner of the future. They'll keep'em grounded for 3 months, in order to test the modifications, etc. It's just too important a program not to get it right the second time around.
Bamaman is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 04:24 PM
  #57  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Venice, FL
Posts: 668
Default

Originally Posted by Lorne Greene View Post
I really doubt the bank would have lent them money on aircraft if their training was not up to standard and I really doubt Boeing would sell them aircraft without requiring training. They have 108 aircraft in their fleet with only two, now one of them being 737-MAX.
This is one of the dumbest comments on so many different levels that I have ever read. Ever.
First you try race baiting and then this.
Windwood is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 04:46 PM
  #58  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,066
Default

It's a software problem, don't worry, the fix will be transparent
FishnDive is online now  
Old 03-15-2019, 05:08 PM
  #59  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Central Florida (Longwood) & Marathon
Posts: 1,339
Default

I’m not a pilot or an aeronautical engineer. However I do know there have been no crashes of our domestic airlines. There have been two crashes that occurred in 3rd world countries. My conclusion is that I would get on one of these aircraft if Southwest, Delta or another domestic airline was flying it. I would not get on an Ethiopian or Malaysian aircraft.

I believe it is a reasonable conclusion that our pilots are better trained and have far more experience than those of 3rd world countries. Consequently we are safer when flying domestic airlines.

Just my opinion.
PXMAN is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 06:49 PM
  #60  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: ENC
Posts: 266
Default

I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night and fly a lot....but that does not make me a pilot, aeronautical engineer and no question an armchair quarterback....let me put my tin foil hat back on....
RaginRed is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread