Why Boeing 737 Max production has stopped, and its more than MCAS

[guncrasher]

Oh, there's an issue.   Too bad you can't fix stupid.   

Third world airlines are notorious for incompetence on multiple levels.

you are right too bad you cant fix stupid.

did the pilots messed up?  I believe you 100%.  what I dont believe is the idea that an airplane can have a problem with whatever and the thinking of "it's a non-issue, I can deal with it"  instead of I can deal with it but let's fix it so I dont have to.  this is what scares the crap out of me.


semp

[Busher]

you are right too bad you cant fix stupid.

did the pilots messed up?  I believe you 100%.  what I dont believe is the idea that an airplane can have a problem with whatever and the thinking of "it's a non-issue, I can deal with it"  instead of I can deal with it but let's fix it so I dont have to.  this is what scares the crap out of me.


semp

Semp, airplanes have become terribly complex and while the technology is very reliable, computers fail. Most failures are innocuous - this one should have been. Airplane manufacturers are not going back to "steam technology" because computerised airliners fly more economically than those that we had to hand-fly for a significant portion of every flight.

So until the techs that build them can make all systems fail-safe, it's going to take 2 calm experienced and well trained pilots to take control.

[FLS]

you are right too bad you cant fix stupid.

did the pilots messed up?  I believe you 100%.  what I dont believe is the idea that an airplane can have a problem with whatever and the thinking of "it's a non-issue, I can deal with it"  instead of I can deal with it but let's fix it so I dont have to.  this is what scares the crap out of me.


semp

What problem do you think exists that is being ignored?

The MCAS was added to prevent a potential problem and was deemed safe when used properly. It was a fix for a problem that hasn't happened. Sort of the opposite of your complaint.

[Puma44]

I would like to have Puma44's input because I never had the opportunity to try military training. But given the stakes involved, I had always assumed there was no place for "good enough". Who would give a 50 million dollar fighter jet to some clown that might prang it before the fight even starts?

Flying airplanes is fun but its equally unforgiving. I don't claim to have the answer to the world-wide pilot shortage but turning out bodies in the interest of staffing ahead of quality is certainly going to result in a lot more splashed airplanes.

Military flight training is nothing short of intense.  I’ve always compared it to going through four years of college in one year. A couple of years ago, a family friend got a pilot training slot to Vance AFB, my UPT base also.  Before he started, I told him they would put a fire hose in every orifice and turn them up to 125% the first day and it wouldn’t let up for a year.  Somewhere through the midst of it, we talked for a couple of hours about his experience.  He was very frustrated that there wasn’t enough time to learn everything as perfectly as he wanted.  He said just when something made sense and he wanted to improve on it, something totally new came down the trough. 

Everyone who is awarded USAF Pilot Wings meets the same basic standards.   Some met the standards better than the others.  Those are the ones selected for fighter/attack follow on assignments.  “Good enough” isn’t very survivable at 540 knots a couple hundred feet above the ground. 

[Vraciu]

What problem do you think exists that is being ignored?

The MCAS was added to prevent a potential problem and was deemed safe when used properly. It was a fix for a problem that hasn't happened. Sort of the opposite of your complaint.

It's actually a replacement for a system (STS) that has been on the 737 since at least the NG.   Same duck, different color feathers.

[Oldman731]

Busher, do you know what they call someone who graduates last from Medical School?


"Doctor."

Heh.  I remember a West Point cadet, after lamenting his class standing, asking me virtually the same question, but the answer was "Lieutenant."

- oldman

[guncrasher]

What problem do you think exists that is being ignored?

The MCAS was added to prevent a potential problem and was deemed safe when used properly. It was a fix for a problem that hasn't happened. Sort of the opposite of your complaint.

not saying ignored by the manufacturer, or perhaps it is.  but ignored by you guys.  redundant systems, a single sensor used that can fail because somebody was chewing bubble gum and left it there and forgot about it.  I dont hear from you guys saying that.  I want to hear from you guys say, well yeah, the sensor thingy should be redundant just in case.  because put yourselves as passengers and you will understand what I am trying to say.  yes things can fail and a good pilot will try to fly till the airplane crashes or lands.  yes the 2 planes that crashed did have bad pilots.  and I am not saying it should replace training.  but if it had had a redundant system or a light that said "hey stupid, I am giving you wrong information, instead of being sold as an option.  well that is scary.

and again put yourselves in a situation whre you know nothing about airplanes like me.  and I am overly exaggerating here, and you hear a pilot say, after the fact, yes the gas truck took off the wingtip but no need to fix it.  I am a trained professional and I can fly it.  and I gave you this example just to prove a point to us passengers, that's what you guys sound like. I do agree pilot training had a big thing to do with it, but what I worry about is pilots saying well it it's a non-issue, instead of saying we train for it, but it should be fixed.

I am not trolling any of you guys, just giving you my thoughts as a passenger. 


semp

[Vraciu]

not saying ignored by the manufacturer, or perhaps it is.  but ignored by you guys.  redundant systems, a single sensor used that can fail because somebody was chewing bubble gum and left it there and forgot about it.  I dont hear from you guys saying that.  I want to hear from you guys say, well yeah, the sensor thingy should be redundant just in case.  because put yourselves as passengers and you will understand what I am trying to say.  yes things can fail and a good pilot will try to fly till the airplane crashes or lands.  yes the 2 planes that crashed did have bad pilots.  and I am not saying it should replace training.  but if it had had a redundant system or a light that said "hey stupid, I am giving you wrong information, instead of being sold as an option.  well that is scary.

and again put yourselves in a situation whre you know nothing about airplanes like me.  and I am overly exaggerating here, and you hear a pilot say, after the fact, yes the gas truck took off the wingtip but no need to fix it.  I am a trained professional and I can fly it.  and I gave you this example just to prove a point to us passengers, that's what you guys sound like. I do agree pilot training had a big thing to do with it, but what I worry about is pilots saying well it it's a non-issue, instead of saying we train for it, but it should be fixed.

I am not trolling any of you guys, just giving you my thoughts as a passenger. 


semp

Look, the issue is pilot standards.  They can put in all the "fixes" in the world to MCAS and still not think of everything.  One day the cheese holes will line up and bang.   You better have someone up front who knows what the hell he is doing.

I've said it a million times and I'll say it again: HUMAN FACTORS CAN ONLY BE MITIGATED--NEVER ELIMINATED (from pilots to software engineers).   This also counts with automation.   The human is the only infinitely flexible part of the system.   When HAL9000 decides to leave the pod bay doors closed the only solution is a human--and with the idiots we have programming things now, they are actually taking us out of the loop more and more.

If you want the problem solved then demand that the airlines you fly on train and maintain to the highest level.  Don't complain when the ticket prices go up.

ALSO, DO NOT FLY THIRD WORLD CARRIERS.  EVER.    This is a problem that WILL NEVER GO AWAY in places like Africa, Cuba, India, etc.   It's the nature of the game there.

[guncrasher]

Look, the issue is pilot standards.  They can put in all the "fixes" in the world to MCAS and still not think of everything.  One day the cheese holes will line up and bang.   You better have someone up front who knows what the hell he is doing.

I've said it a million times and I'll say it again: HUMAN FACTORS CAN ONLY BE MITIGATED--NEVER ELIMINATED (from pilots to software engineers).   This also counts with automation.   The human is the only infinitely flexible part of the system.   When HAL9000 decides to leave the pod bay doors closed the only solution is a human--and with the idiots we have programming things now, they are actually taking us out of the loop more and more.

If you want the problem solved then demand that the airlines you fly on train and maintain to the highest level.  Don't complain when the ticket prices go up.

ALSO, DO NOT FLY THIRD WORLD CARRIERS.  EVER.    This is a problem that WILL NEVER GO AWAY in places like Africa, Cuba, India, etc.   It's the nature of the game there.

it's your job to point this things out, instead of saying we can train more because the programmers are idiots.

you still dont get that part.


semp

[Vraciu]

it's your job to point this things out, instead of saying we can train more because the programmers are idiots.

you still dont get that part.


semp

Uh, what??

[guncrasher]

Uh, what??

yeah, the programmers are idiots and they keep us out of the loop, but it's a non-issue, I'll just train more.  I'll just keep saying nothing is wrong.


semp

[Vraciu]

yeah, the programmers are idiots and they keep us out of the loop, but it's a non-issue, I'll just train more.  I'll just keep saying nothing is wrong.


semp

What do you recommend they do then!  No training?  Duplicate AF447?   Let the software engineers over-think the design parameters and cause negative feedback?

How about full computer autonomy?  Will that work for you?

I think we should stop selling airplanes to third world countries until they prove their training and maintenance are worthy of the product.

It's always about training.    Training rates the day when the chips are down.  That's why we do it.

[FLS]

not saying ignored by the manufacturer, or perhaps it is.  but ignored by you guys.  redundant systems, a single sensor used that can fail because somebody was chewing bubble gum and left it there and forgot about it.  I dont hear from you guys saying that.  I want to hear from you guys say, well yeah, the sensor thingy should be redundant just in case.  because put yourselves as passengers and you will understand what I am trying to say.  yes things can fail and a good pilot will try to fly till the airplane crashes or lands.  yes the 2 planes that crashed did have bad pilots.  and I am not saying it should replace training.  but if it had had a redundant system or a light that said "hey stupid, I am giving you wrong information, instead of being sold as an option.  well that is scary.

and again put yourselves in a situation whre you know nothing about airplanes like me.  and I am overly exaggerating here, and you hear a pilot say, after the fact, yes the gas truck took off the wingtip but no need to fix it.  I am a trained professional and I can fly it.  and I gave you this example just to prove a point to us passengers, that's what you guys sound like. I do agree pilot training had a big thing to do with it, but what I worry about is pilots saying well it it's a non-issue, instead of saying we train for it, but it should be fixed.

I am not trolling any of you guys, just giving you my thoughts as a passenger. 


semp

Two sensors disagree. Now what?

What should be fixed is letting unqualified pilots fly poorly maintained aircraft.

[Vraciu]

Two sensors disagree. Now what?

What should be fixed is letting unqualified pilots fly poorly maintained aircraft.

“But...but....Misseur, zet ees impossible.   Zee airplen ees not designed to break thees way.” 

- Popular Dassault Falcon Tech Rep Joke

[davidpt40]

You have the answer right there.  It is a complex computerized plane.  It appears that only a percentage of airlines have pilots who are skilled and trained enough to fly it.  It should not be sold to those airlines that do not meet the training requirements.  However, Boeing isn't the saintly company that you all believe it is.  Their job is to make money.  This is why these big goofy engines were added to the 737 in the first place, to compete with Airbus.  All the current trouble stems from them being far forward of previous enginge placement.  Poor aerodynamic design.

I wonder if Boeing knew about the rudder trouble on early 737s before the first crash happened?

Two sensors disagree. Now what?

What should be fixed is letting unqualified pilots fly poorly maintained aircraft.