- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 737max crashes in Ethiopia. Killing 157
Posted on 3/15/19 at 12:56 pm to BHM
Posted on 3/15/19 at 12:56 pm to BHM
There’s a huge difference between software to help fly the plane/improve performance/provide redundancy/increase flying comfort and software necessary to counter a physical design flaw that exists solely because engineers want to put modern engines on a 50-year old plane design that can’t physically have them in the ideal location due to its notoriously low ground clearance. Boeing had a decision to make a few years ago: whether to develop a new plane design replace the 737 or to continue slapping together incongruent parts and modern “fixes” to the 737.
They were leaning toward the former, but when the 787 began having issues they decided to go with the latter. That was the wrong move and it’s why we are talking about this today.
So when I say this plane should never have been built, I’m saying that Boeing made the wrong decision years ago and is reaping the consequences.
Here’s an interesting article that goes into some of what I’m talking about: LINK
They were leaning toward the former, but when the 787 began having issues they decided to go with the latter. That was the wrong move and it’s why we are talking about this today.
So when I say this plane should never have been built, I’m saying that Boeing made the wrong decision years ago and is reaping the consequences.
Here’s an interesting article that goes into some of what I’m talking about: LINK
3
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:03 pm to Cold Drink
Also Boeing was concerned about getting eaten alive by Airbus flooding the market with their shitty Neo’s and that increased the urgency on Boeing’s part, but I’m afraid it was simply the wrong call.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:10 pm to RedRifle
Can we get a title edit? It throws me off when I'm drunk/sleepy browsing and see that "another" max crashed.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:38 pm to Cold Drink
quote:
There’s a huge difference between software ...
We can argue all day and probably never agree. The whole beauty of software systems is that it can be used to widen the use of hardware.
The problem here is not software countering of the "design flaw". The problem is a faulty something(bad sensor or computer) is telling MCAS that the plane is about to stall when it is not. MCAS is then tries to prevent that from happening.
Fix the faulty something and MCAS would work just fine. But like in any system, if the pilot does not react properly, the plane will crash. The only fault I see in Boeing is in not having a better warning to inform the pilots of what is happening.
With that said, after Lion air crash, the second crash should have never happened. Every pilot should be aware of MCAS and how to deal with it. In the second crash, it was daylight and clear weather. NO excuse for not recognizing what was happening and disabling MCAS.
Now, it is also possible that this crash has nothing to do with MCAS which would make you claim that this plane should not have been built even more silly. Time will tell.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:49 pm to BHM
If something other than the MCAS caused this crash then that’s even worse.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:53 pm to Cold Drink
Maybe worse but might also have nothing to do with the Max "design flaw". 
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:53 pm to Cold Drink
Also the max8 is a huge headache for ground crews/operation agents and such.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:55 pm to dupergreenie
quote:
Also the max8 is a huge headache for ground crews/operation agents and such.
where are you getting that from?
Posted on 3/15/19 at 1:59 pm to 777Tiger
Myself and co-workers.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 2:00 pm to dupergreenie
quote:
Myself and co-workers.
my company operates a large fleet of 737s, adding Max's every month, never heard a anything along those lines, just another 737 to everyone
ETA: what issues?
This post was edited on 3/15/19 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 3/15/19 at 2:05 pm to 777Tiger
So does mine. The 800s are a pain to work. We constantly have to move bags and or passengers to get the plane in trim.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 2:08 pm to dupergreenie
quote:
The 800s are a pain to work. We constantly have to move bags and or passengers to get the plane in trim.
little airplane issues
jk, I recall the A-300 having similar w&b issues when we used to have them
Posted on 3/15/19 at 2:13 pm to 777Tiger
We take so many delays on them. Can't start doing W&B until EVERYTHING is loaded from people to gate checks. Also the fact that they can tip if not loaded/unloaded properly is also something that should have been addressed before put into service.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 2:59 pm to dupergreenie
quote:
Also the fact that they can tip if not loaded/unloaded properly is also something that should have been addressed before put into service.
How can that be when the new engines add extra weight the front of the plane compared to older models?
This post was edited on 3/15/19 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 3/15/19 at 3:03 pm to BHM
Maybe because they had to raise the nose gear like 8 inches so the engines wouldn’t scrape the ground it’s already leaning back on its arse so much even empty.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 3:14 pm to BHM
True while the Max is less likely to tip compared to the regular 800 it is still a concern. Just overall the 800 series max included is a headache.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 3:52 pm to Cold Drink
quote:
ut this is a situation where the computer is making the plane crash while not in autopilot
If the computer is helping fly the plane, it maybe semantics but that’s basically autopilot is it not? Computer aided flying? Whatever you want to call it. The pilots are not using the instruments and flying the plane on their own.
Would you not agree then that this plane is more complicated to fly then a plane from 20+ years ago?
We have more complicated planes to fly and reduced pilot training and experience?
Posted on 3/15/19 at 4:03 pm to dupergreenie
quote:
Also the fact that they can tip if not loaded/unloaded properly is also something that should have been addressed before put into service.
quote:
True while the Max is less likely to tip compared to the regular 800 it is still a concern.
So perhaps they did address it? I am confused by your statement. Is the W&B more sensitive on the Max compared to the older -8 but tipping was actually improved?
This post was edited on 3/15/19 at 4:05 pm
Posted on 3/15/19 at 4:05 pm to baldona
quote:
We have more complicated planes to fly and reduced pilot training and experience?
No.
Experience minimums for US airline pilots went up in 2010. Also US airline pilots are constantly learning and go through intense recurrent training every 6 to 12months.
Posted on 3/15/19 at 4:08 pm to RedFoxx
quote:
Experience minimums for US airline pilots went up in 2010. Also US airline pilots are constantly learning and go through intense recurrent training every 6 to 12months.
Certainly in the USA, but I’m talking internationally?
Page 24 of 30
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News