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

Boeing 737 MAX is stupidly designed

Notices

Boeing 737 MAX is stupidly designed

Old 03-16-2019, 10:21 AM
  #81  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: North NJ
Posts: 909
Received 484 Likes on 290 Posts
Default

I havn't seen mentioned here one of the main reasons the 737 -max wasn't a clean sheet build, and why Boeing was determined to keep it the same type rating as the other 737's. The airlines! It costs a lot of money to have to type rate pilots. This is the reason southwest only flys 737's. So there was a tremendous amount of pressure on Boeing to keep the 737 under the same type rating. For the pilots out there, can you be type rated on two types for commercial flying? (besides 767/757).

One thing that is troubling me, is that after the lion air crash, you'd think every single MAX pilot would have known to drop out those trim circuit breakers. So, did the pilots not keep up (were not kept up) to the goings on in the very type they are flying, did they not put two and two together fast enough, or was this actually something else all together.
Old 03-16-2019, 10:53 AM
  #82  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Beaufort NC
Posts: 156
Received 74 Likes on 45 Posts
Default

MCAS is a computer and software! There may be a design flaw in the software or faulty input but Boeing is not going to build a faulty designed air frame. Saw a demonstration on CNN yesterday of the 737 8 cockpit and it showed someone just turning off the MCAS with a switch. Unless the CNN report was wrong, seemed pretty simple. If this is not as simple as it showed, then it sure needs to be.

As far as the Chinese report, they are copying the 737 8 right now as we speak. Do we really believe a thing the Chinese say!

This is like a boater hitting a bridge pylon and saying it was his auto pilot/GPS' fault. At some point you have to turn off your electronics and drive the thing! Or in the 737 8 case, turn off the MCAS, if it is as simple as a switch, and fly it!
Old 03-16-2019, 11:05 AM
  #83  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Galveston, Tx
Posts: 192
Received 222 Likes on 108 Posts
Default

Hence, Boeing 737 MAX was stupidly designed.
Seems in your thinking --anything that doesn't perform flawlessly and perfectly is a stupid design.
Even passengers should realize that a jet airplane is a VERY complex piece of machinery with a lot of moving parts.
You should also appreciate how safe it has become when 2 crashes in 6 months get so much attention while thousands of flights come & go each day with no (or minimal) problems.

Most difficult to design something absolutely perfectly right out of the box. All aircraft continually get upgrades over the years based on use & experience.
Old 03-16-2019, 11:31 AM
  #84  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,677
Received 2,730 Likes on 1,700 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TurboJoe View Post
I havn't seen mentioned here one of the main reasons the 737 -max wasn't a clean sheet build, and why Boeing was determined to keep it the same type rating as the other 737's. The airlines! It costs a lot of money to have to type rate pilots. This is the reason southwest only flys 737's. So there was a tremendous amount of pressure on Boeing to keep the 737 under the same type rating. For the pilots out there, can you be type rated on two types for commercial flying? (besides 767/757).

One thing that is troubling me, is that after the lion air crash, you'd think every single MAX pilot would have known to drop out those trim circuit breakers. So, did the pilots not keep up (were not kept up) to the goings on in the very type they are flying, did they not put two and two together fast enough, or was this actually something else all together.
That certainly is important, as is all the maintenance. Having to service only one type of airframe makes maintenance much simpler, as does substituting aircraft when there's an issue.
Old 03-16-2019, 11:40 AM
  #85  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,962
Received 702 Likes on 312 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by dell30rb View Post
MCAS is basically a band-aid over a design compromise. The airframe does not meet certification standards for handling characteristics in a certain flight envelope. So they ‘fixed’ it with a computer stability augmentation system. The stability augmentation operates in the background, so the pilots don’t even know it’s there. The airplane handles just like they expect it would.

In this case it sounds like the design compromises were made in the name of efficiency and avoiding the expense of a clean sheet design.

I’d prefer transport aircraft handle honestly and do not need artificial help from a computer. Save the stability augmentation for fighters and designs that really require it.

Agree !!
Old 03-16-2019, 11:42 AM
  #86  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,962
Received 702 Likes on 312 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RyanL11 View Post
Sully designs planes now?

You really have no clue what you are talking about...you're just regurgitating nonsense you don't understand.

Sounds like I am stating information about a topic that many on this thread understand but clearly YOU DON"T understand.
Old 03-16-2019, 11:42 AM
  #87  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ & MV
Posts: 4,131
Likes: 0
Received 2,076 Likes on 1,123 Posts
Default

Some of you are too funny. Boeing builds aircraft that their customers want and with customer input. Those customers have ordered 5000 of those "stupidly" design planes. Did Boeing make errors along the way with regards to the current events, maybe, maybe not.

I know little about the MCAS system but it isn't inconceivable it is a result of customer demands to help actually reduce the risk with less experienced pilots.

Old 03-16-2019, 11:46 AM
  #88  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,962
Received 702 Likes on 312 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TurboJoe View Post

One thing that is troubling me, is that after the lion air crash, you'd think every single MAX pilot would have known to drop out those trim circuit breakers. So, did the pilots not keep up (were not kept up) to the goings on in the very type they are flying, did they not put two and two together fast enough, or was this actually something else all together.

Agree, and at the same time, it seems greatly flawed system if MCAS is activated causing the plane to nose down AND YET the pilots are not even aware of it, no visual or audio warning!
Old 03-16-2019, 11:50 AM
  #89  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,962
Received 702 Likes on 312 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ktdtx View Post
Seems in your thinking --anything that doesn't perform flawlessly and perfectly is a stupid design.
Even passengers should realize that a jet airplane is a VERY complex piece of machinery with a lot of moving parts.
You should also appreciate how safe it has become when 2 crashes in 6 months get so much attention while thousands of flights come & go each day with no (or minimal) problems.

Most difficult to design something absolutely perfectly right out of the box. All aircraft continually get upgrades over the years based on use & experience.

You really appreciate how safe the Boeing 737 MAX is because it has only had 2 crashes in 6 months out of thousands of flights?? Surely you cannot mean that ONLY 2 crashes demonstrates that it is safe.
Old 03-16-2019, 12:10 PM
  #90  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,962
Received 702 Likes on 312 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by aubv View Post
Boeing builds aircraft that their customers want and with customer input. Those customers have ordered 5000 of those "stupidly" design planes. Did Boeing make errors along the way with regards to the current events, maybe, maybe not.

I know little about the MCAS system but it isn't inconceivable it is a result of customer demands to help actually reduce the risk with less experienced pilots.


Incorrect. Boeing did not institute the MCAS based on customer demands.

According to "The Air Current" (a digital publication providing exclusive news and insight on the business and technology of flying), Boeing wanted to retain the Boeing 737 but "relocated engines and their refined nacelle shape then caused an upward pitching moment- in essence, the Max's nose was getting nudged skyward. Boeing QUIETLY ADDED A NEW SYSTEM (the MCAS) to compensate for some unique aircraft handling characteristics during its Part 25 certification AND to help pilots bring the nose down in the event the jet's angle of attack drifted too high when flying manually, putting the air craft at risk of stalling."

Without the addition of the MCAS, the FAA would not have given Part 25 certification to this modified design with the relocated engines.
Old 03-16-2019, 12:15 PM
  #91  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ & MV
Posts: 4,131
Likes: 0
Received 2,076 Likes on 1,123 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kendall View Post
Incorrect. Boeing did not institute the MCAS based on customer demands.

According to "The Air Current" (a digital publication providing exclusive news and insight on the business and technology of flying), Boeing wanted to retain the Boeing 737 but "relocated engines and their refined nacelle shape then caused an upward pitching moment- in essence, the Max's nose was getting nudged skyward. Boeing QUIETLY ADDED A NEW SYSTEM (the MCAS) to compensate for some unique aircraft handling characteristics during its Part 25 certification AND to help pilots bring the nose down in the event the jet's angle of attack drifted too high when flying manually, putting the air craft at risk of stalling."

Without the addition of the MCAS, the FAA would not have given Part 25 certification to this modified design with the relocated engines.

You are clearly the resident expert....maybe you can elucidate us on other systems as it relates to stall warnings.(stick shaker, audible warnings, etc.) And the procedures to follow.......

Follow that up with a synopsis on how people react in panic situations.

Many accidents are not because of single thing but a cascade of events..... including human reactions.....

Last edited by aubv; 03-16-2019 at 05:03 PM.
Old 03-16-2019, 12:39 PM
  #92  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 3,376
Received 3,824 Likes on 1,707 Posts
Default

Farnborough Air Show - zero gravity at -1:00 - amazing it doesn't stall at that climb rate

Old 03-16-2019, 12:58 PM
  #93  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Palm City, FL
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 605 Likes on 282 Posts
Default


What really happened.......
Old 03-16-2019, 02:00 PM
  #94  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC / Indian Creek, VA
Posts: 3,166
Received 653 Likes on 436 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ProppedUp View Post
Just to drop another little tid bit on you guys. Every 737 flying today has had logic built into the trim system. This is just a little add on for the Max and it's got a glitch.

Every single aircraft in the air has logic and CPUs that run various things, systems, etc.

But at the end the day as far as I am aware the 737 is the largest airliner (flying today) that has a direct mechanical connection from the pilots hands to the flight controls out on the wings and tail. I know the 737 has it for a fact not because I saw somebody talk about it on Pravda (I mean CNN), Or read about it in the New York Times but because according to various government agencies around the world including the FAA I am certified to fly one. Not a video game, not a remote control one, not something in a happy meal but a real Boeing 737.

Many on here have already stated what the real problem is. It's sad deal.

But saddle up Nancy's your about to see more of it. There is a pilot shortage here and standards aren't exactly going up.
Correct me if I am wrong but the trim logic on the NG’s and earlier 737’s is there to make trim changes easier. It isn’t there to mask an undesirable handling characteristic. It won’t adjust the trim unless commanded by the pilot or the autopilot. The autopilot can be easily switched off with a button on the yoke.
Old 03-16-2019, 03:22 PM
  #95  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 701
Received 603 Likes on 276 Posts
Default

I have nothing to add, other than, I told you all planes weren't safer than cars. 200 hours behind the wheel of an F-150 pickup truck makes any teenage kid plenty proficient. Even a brand new model. Well then, carry on.

Last edited by JonisMist; 03-16-2019 at 03:42 PM.
Old 03-16-2019, 03:27 PM
  #96  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,677
Received 2,730 Likes on 1,700 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by coastboater View Post
Farnborough Air Show - zero gravity at -1:00 - amazing it doesn't stall at that climb rate
At just over 100,000 lbs with a light load and little fuel and nearly 70,000lbs of thrust available on the engines, the wings don't have to do a whole lot of lifting!!
Old 03-16-2019, 04:40 PM
  #97  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 861
Received 337 Likes on 169 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by JonisMist View Post
I have nothing to add, other than, I told you all planes weren't safer than cars. 200 hours behind the wheel of an F-150 pickup truck makes any teenage kid plenty proficient. Even a brand new model. Well then, carry on.
Roughly 37,000 people die per year in car accidents in the USA alone. That's 100 per day. Worldwide its about 1.3 million deaths per year. That's over 3,500 per day.
8000 of those killed were in vehicles driven by someone between the ages of 16 to 20

Worldwide its about 1.3 million deaths per year. That's over 3,500 per day.

Old 03-16-2019, 05:28 PM
  #98  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: TX and Louisiana
Posts: 326
Received 533 Likes on 281 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by coastboater View Post
Farnborough Air Show - zero gravity at -1:00 - amazing it doesn't stall at that climb rate

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RyeqeqSNSgQ
Not sure they still do it but American Airlines used to do a flyby over the water and all the boats during the Ft Lauderdale Air/Sea show. They would have every plane in their inventory ( an example of each one ) fly by low over the water, and then hit the up button over the crowd. First time I saw a 777 do some amazing stuff, I was more impressed by that than the Blue Angels shortly afterwards.

They started low enough you can see the rivets in the belly of the plane, gear down, lots of flaps, then up up and away.
Old 03-16-2019, 05:29 PM
  #99  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ocean Isle Beach, NC
Posts: 1,962
Received 702 Likes on 312 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by aubv View Post




Many accidents are not because of single thing but a cascade of events..... including human reactions.....

Agree.
Old 03-16-2019, 05:31 PM
  #100  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,492
Received 3,732 Likes on 1,957 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by GulfC View Post
Dude (and I hate the word dude but it's appropriate here), it ain't rocket science. Nor brain surgery. It's a friggin' airplane. There's ton's of people that can do it. There's no secret formula, just controls like any other. Ease up, you'll get used to it.
I tend to listen to folks that actually are allowed and trained to fly this aircraft.

Don't know for sure which one of these posters are this person. I'm fairly sure 99% are not.

The 1 % with seat time are probably not going to say a thing at this point for good reason.

Does a Pelican have anti stall devices along with anti dumb ass protection built in? Can he turn it off? And who the f trained him to fly to start with? I hear Indonesian pelicans are more likely to go into a dive than US pelicans.

I would leave this alone until we get the word from the Chinese Pelican. He has stolen and re engineered the diving practice software at pennies on the dollar.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.