Boeing recommends 737 Max Sim for all
01-07-2020, 04:55 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 414
Originally Posted by FXLAX
So much for the theory that well trained, experienced American pilots would’ve done any better.
"In the tests, which were part of the work involved in evaluating the software update, many of the pilots did not use the correct procedures to handle emergencies, instead relying on their flying skills. Those results raised questions about whether simply informing pilots of which procedures to use would be sufficient to prepare them to fly the plane."
They handled it just fine, they just relied more on their skill and not the checklist.
Thus indicating, pilots with less skill would not do as well.
01-07-2020, 05:28 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Posts: 1,273
Originally Posted by Texasbound
So much for being able to read...
"In the tests, which were part of the work involved in evaluating the software update, many of the pilots did not use the correct procedures to handle emergencies, instead relying on their flying skills. Those results raised questions about whether simply informing pilots of which procedures to use would be sufficient to prepare them to fly the plane."
They handled it just fine, they just relied more on their skill and not the checklist.
Thus indicating, pilots with less skill would not do as well.
"In the tests, which were part of the work involved in evaluating the software update, many of the pilots did not use the correct procedures to handle emergencies, instead relying on their flying skills. Those results raised questions about whether simply informing pilots of which procedures to use would be sufficient to prepare them to fly the plane."
They handled it just fine, they just relied more on their skill and not the checklist.
Thus indicating, pilots with less skill would not do as well.
01-07-2020, 06:02 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Apparently the sim excercises involve AOA disagreements on takeoff. Even without MCAS running. Guys are messing this up. What does this have to do with the MAX? This is just 737 stuff. This explains last month when EASA was saying they want Boeing to change already established procedures/checklist.
01-07-2020, 08:04 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: FIRE ALPA
Posts: 3,082
This is why the 737 should have been redesigned (either into a new type, or at least like the DC-9/B-717) so that modern technology could be used instead of being faked to replicate the 1960s.... 99.8% of pilots flying this thing weren't even born when it was first built at this point. That's a recipe for disaster here... that's guaranteed disaster in Asia/Africa
01-07-2020, 09:39 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,099
Boeing recommends 737 Max Sim for all
Originally Posted by Baradium
That doesn't really say anything on the theory one way or another. Boeing can't well recommend training requirements by country either.
I won't be surprised if the max is renamed though.
I won't be surprised if the max is renamed though.
Originally Posted by Texasbound
So much for being able to read...
"In the tests, which were part of the work involved in evaluating the software update, many of the pilots did not use the correct procedures to handle emergencies, instead relying on their flying skills. Those results raised questions about whether simply informing pilots of which procedures to use would be sufficient to prepare them to fly the plane."
They handled it just fine, they just relied more on their skill and not the checklist.
Thus indicating, pilots with less skill would not do as well.
"In the tests, which were part of the work involved in evaluating the software update, many of the pilots did not use the correct procedures to handle emergencies, instead relying on their flying skills. Those results raised questions about whether simply informing pilots of which procedures to use would be sufficient to prepare them to fly the plane."
They handled it just fine, they just relied more on their skill and not the checklist.
Thus indicating, pilots with less skill would not do as well.
I stand by what I said. The article says pilots from AA, UA, SW (presumably all experienced and well trained) had issues. And presumably all knew ahead of time what they were going to deal with. Something the accident pilots didn’t know ahead of time.
I’m not blaming pilots. This is obviously an issue with the design that needs specific simulator training. I’m positive all those pilots would handle it better if they had gone through specific sim training.
01-07-2020, 11:11 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by FXLAX
I stand by what I said. The article says pilots from AA, UA, SW (presumably all experienced and well trained) had issues. And presumably all knew ahead of time what they were going to deal with. Something the accident pilots didn’t know ahead of time.
I’m not blaming pilots. This is obviously an issue with the design that needs specific simulator training. I’m positive all those pilots would handle it better if they had gone through specific sim training.
I’m not blaming pilots. This is obviously an issue with the design that needs specific simulator training. I’m positive all those pilots would handle it better if they had gone through specific sim training.
I wonder what they mean by guys using flying skills versus going to checklists. Well newsflash, if the stick shaker is going off then this isn’t the time to throw the AP on. The ETH Capt asked for AP on 3 times with the shaker going off.
So here we are. I still think this whole fiasco being dragged out is because EASA is flexing their muscles over the FAA and Boeing. Let’s be honest, the world won’t look at the FAA to clear this airplane until EASA (Europe) certifies it too.
01-08-2020, 04:35 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,438
Originally Posted by docav8tor
Southwest Airlines wanted another 737 and did not want simulator training. Their contract allowed for $1M rebate if simulator training was required.
The Max was born because AA was making a massive airbus order. Boeing met with AA and offered an airplane that would improve fuel burn and keep the same type as their already sizable 800 fleet. They struck a deal. SWA then ordered a boatload of them with the simulator stipulation mostly because the NG line was being shut down.
And here we are....
The blame here lies squarely with Boeing management. They have been in MBA cost cutting mode since the MD merger. This is what happens when you stop building airplanes and start paying shareholders as your primary business.
01-08-2020, 05:25 AM
#18
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,273
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
I’m not buying it. MCAS has been fixed to run off both AOA sensors reading high, and then fire a limited amount only once. No more tug of war. “Those in the know” are being quoted in articles saying the issues guys are having is dealing with an AOA disagree after takeoff. That’s already an established procedure right? Why the problems?
I wonder what they mean by guys using flying skills versus going to checklists. Well newsflash, if the stick shaker is going off then this isn’t the time to throw the AP on. The ETH Capt asked for AP on 3 times with the shaker going off.
So here we are. I still think this whole fiasco being dragged out is because EASA is flexing their muscles over the FAA and Boeing. Let’s be honest, the world won’t look at the FAA to clear this airplane until EASA (Europe) certifies it too.
I wonder what they mean by guys using flying skills versus going to checklists. Well newsflash, if the stick shaker is going off then this isn’t the time to throw the AP on. The ETH Capt asked for AP on 3 times with the shaker going off.
So here we are. I still think this whole fiasco being dragged out is because EASA is flexing their muscles over the FAA and Boeing. Let’s be honest, the world won’t look at the FAA to clear this airplane until EASA (Europe) certifies it too.
Yes, it would be awkward for the FAA to go their own way without EASA on this. They dug that hole for themselves though.
I doubt they'll have universal consensus from all regulatory agencies but they probably need EASA and Canada onboard, and maybe Oz too.
01-08-2020, 05:29 AM
#19
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,273
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
Apparently the sim excercises involve AOA disagreements on takeoff. Even without MCAS running. Guys are messing this up. What does this have to do with the MAX? This is just 737 stuff. This explains last month when EASA was saying they want Boeing to change already established procedures/checklist.
Same with AS.
Personally I think US major airline pilots could handle a trim runaway fine. But if you don't know which way the airplane is pointing or what AS is doing it can go very wrong, very quickly. For anyone. My personal philosophy is cross-check all three AI's if anything suddenly goes wrong with no warning. Unlike pitot tubes, all three attitude systems cannot fail at once (the standby is a completely different and separate system).
Recent example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_A...den_Flight_294
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
