Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > >
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-10-2019, 09:18 PM   #751  
Da Hudge
 
80ktsClamp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 16,819
Default

Boeing built an inherently unstable aircraft in multiple regimes in a rush to compete with airbus. They started out thinking there was one regime, and discovered (like we always joked about the Beech 1900 guy that came back in saying we need more fins) that it was way worse than anticipated.

It was not fly by wire to make it stable, but instead a hacked analog patch with a single point of failure for an aggressive correction for said instabilities.

What did you think would happen???
80ktsClamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2019, 03:32 AM   #752  
Gets three weeks off.
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Window Seat
Posts: 1,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp View Post
It was not fly by wire to make it stable, but instead a hacked analog patch with a single point of failure for an aggressive correction for said instabilities.

This is the problem with the design, but again, this does not excuse the crew for failing to control the aircraft. I agree the design was poorly executed, but the "stability" issue is no different than other aircraft which have unique handling characteristics with patches to make them less unique.

If this was a runaway trim due to faulty circuitry instead of faulty code nobody would be trying to give this excuse.
aviatorhi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2019, 12:37 PM   #753  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp View Post
Boeing built an inherently unstable aircraft in multiple regimes in a rush to compete with airbus.
The 737-800 Max is not an unstable platform.

The MCAS was a certification compliance measure.

Stability has never been the issue.
JohnBurke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2019, 08:35 PM   #754  
Da Hudge
 
80ktsClamp's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 16,819
Default

Well, crap. Someone should have told Boeing.
80ktsClamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2019, 10:14 PM   #755  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 3,602
Default

MCAS was designed and installed as an means of compliance for 14 CFR 25.203(a), for the purposes of certification.
JohnBurke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 06:28 AM   #756  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2016
Posts: 130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShyGuy View Post
So pilot error only, since you wrote off that “MCAS was such a minor part, it’s irrelevant. The ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the plane.” Those are literally your own words. If the ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the plane, that is by definition pilot error. But keep circling around your words. You’re entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. You constantly attack others for “comprehension problems” yet you play on your own words all day long. Most people have acknowledged that the MAX crashes go beyond just pilot error and a “failure of the crew to control their airplane.”

We’ll see what the world decides once the MAX is cleared to fly. You said that the “grounding had more to do with politics reasons than safety reasons.” That again would be your opinion. I’d say the FAA kept it going as long as they did because of political pressure as opposed to the other way around. It was only after pretty much every other regulator authority grounded the plane that the FAA did so. But they did so to save face, and not be the only country still flying these planes. Of course they claim they were the first to do so after studying data, whereas other countries didn’t and just grounded it on the basis that 2 MAX jets plummeted into the ground shortly after takeoff.

Grounding the plane was the right decision. The FAA has lost credibility to the rest of the world as a pillar and leader of aviation safety.
You are so far out of your league in this back and forth that it's almost painful. You can't even quote him correctly.

Your reading skills need to seriously improve if you want to tangle with this kind of animal. He deserves an immense amount of credit for not insulting you more.

He keeps hitting the nail on the head with a hammer, while you keep hitting the nail on the side with your screwdriver.

You see, hammers were made to hammer nails. Pilots were made to fly airplanes.

You aren't hammering the nail with a hammer, much like these pilots didn't fly the airplane.

Good luck with your screwdriver.
Truthanator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 06:33 AM   #757  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: French Bus Capn'
Posts: 6,601
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truthanator View Post
You are so far out of your league in this back and forth that it's almost painful. You can't even quote him correctly.

Your reading skills need to seriously improve if you want to tangle with this kind of animal. He deserves an immense amount of credit for not insulting you more.

He keeps hitting the nail on the head with a hammer, while you keep hitting the nail on the side with your screwdriver.

You see, hammers were made to hammer nails. Pilots were made to fly airplanes.

You aren't hammering the nail with a hammer, much like these pilots didn't fly the airplane.

Good luck with your screwdriver.
To the man with the hammer, everything is a nail. If your side of the story was accepted by the rest of the world, the plane wouldn’t have been grounded. Thankfully cooler heads prevailed to do the right thing.
ShyGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 07:58 AM   #758  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 22,667
Default

Inside baseball now says December for re-certification. FAA says officially "no timetable".

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...-idUSKCN1TD1VW
rickair7777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 09:13 AM   #759  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2016
Posts: 130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShyGuy View Post
To the man with the hammer, everything is a nail. If your side of the story was accepted by the rest of the world, the plane wouldn’t have been grounded. Thankfully cooler heads prevailed to do the right thing.
I don't have a "side to the story". I have a clear understanding of the actual story. See the difference?

Funny you feel able to speak for the "rest of the world" when you have trouble simply speaking for yourself.

"Cooler heads" would not have flown this airplane into the ground at T/O power past VMO/MMO while trying to repeatedly activate the autopilot and ignoring the trained procedure by reactivating the trim system.

So clearly your last sentence doesn't apply here either.
Truthanator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 09:17 AM   #760  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 42
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnBurke View Post
MCAS was designed and installed as an means of compliance for 14 CFR 25.203(a), for the purposes of certification.
The problem with the Titanic was the crew scraped the ice burg. It was in compliance with all safety regulations at the time and actually had 2 more lifeboats then what was required.
The shipbuilders had no reason to build passenger ships safer after learning about the subpar rivets, the metal that got weaker in colder waters etc etc....
They could have just said “Don’t hit anything” to the crews.
The point is is, yes the crew was at fault, but that was no justification not to make future ships safer.
Oh and the Captain of that ship was not a “low time” guy.
He was a little full of himself though in my opinion.
G4er is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ethiopian Airlines: 787 Boosted Profits vagabond Foreign 10 10-10-2013 04:49 AM
Russian Jet crash kills 88 ToiletDuck Safety 5 08-08-2012 09:04 PM
Kenya Airways 737 airliner crashes vagabond Hangar Talk 2 05-05-2007 06:23 PM
737 crash near Athens LAfrequentflyer Hangar Talk 1 09-07-2005 11:34 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:35 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1