- 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: Boeing 737 Max
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:25 pm to Lima Whiskey
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:25 pm to Lima Whiskey
quote:
How much did they save?
No clue what the cost of that option was for those particular airlines. The Lion was not required by regulatory agencies and was up to each airline to decide if it was worth the price.
Again, I have no problem with this as long as proper training and documentation would have been provided and required. A properly trained pilot would have no problem flying the plane even with a mcas or sensor failure.
1
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:26 pm to CharlesLSU
Just fly a real airline and you won't be on one.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:31 pm to Geekboy
quote:
Absolutely. It will be the safest plane on Earth. If another one goes down it will bankrupt Boeing.
Yes, but there is a reason the fix has been drug out for this long. The plane should have never been built in the first place.
Boeing is in deep doodoo.
I hope they have the next generation ready to be built or an updated 757.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:33 pm to CharlesLSU
If it's Boeing. It ain't going.
At least not anytime soon.
At least not anytime soon.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:34 pm to Cold Drink
quote:
But what’s not helpful at all is putting blinders on in response to this disaster by perpetuating this myth of the magic American Pilot. I’m not saying that American pilots (And airlines) aren’t - on average - more competent than those of poorer countries, but “shitty foreign pilots“ somehow can manage to keep every other new plane in the air except for the 737 Max.
I think there are two sides to that coin, i.e. I don't doubt that American pilots get a lot of seat time, but how many of them have faced a real, non-simulated emergency? I suspect more pilots from, say, Ethiopia or Indonesia have dealt with a significant in-flight malfunction before.
That said, I'd still prefer a recertified 737 Max to anything made by Airbus, once such a plane is flying. There's no question in my mind.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 8:37 pm to Pitt Road
YouTube has the 60 Minutes Australia episode from 5 months ago that discusses how and why the plane was built with whistleblower and employee interviews along with interviews of pilots. It was a good refresher of the entire debacle.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 9:09 pm to USMEagles
quote:
I think there are two sides to that coin, i.e. I don't doubt that American pilots get a lot of seat time, but how many of them have faced a real, non-simulated emergency? I suspect more pilots from, say, Ethiopia or Indonesia have dealt with a significant in-flight malfunction before.
Just because the pilots were flying in developing countries doesn’t mean they were flying POS planes. It’s about experience and training.
I think the first officer on The Ethiopian 737 crash had 500 or so hours. In the US a pilot needs 1500 hours before they start flying paying passengers. And you’d be hard pressed to find a 737 first officer in the US with less than 5000 hours.
The amount and quality of training US pilots go through is extremely top notch. Most pilots go every 6 months to full motion simulators and practice every emergency situation. If those sims were anymore real, they’d fly out of the building.
American pilots, and a lot of countries, train for emergency situations and that’s what what you want when the shite hits the fan. A pilot with high quality training and vetted experience.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 9:21 pm to USMEagles
quote:
I think there are two sides to that coin, i.e. I don't doubt that American pilots get a lot of seat time, but how many of them have faced a real, non-simulated emergency? I suspect more pilots from, say, Ethiopia or Indonesia have dealt with a significant in-flight malfunction before.
That said, I'd still prefer a recertified 737 Max to anything made by Airbus, once such a plane is flying. There's no question in my mind.
You make some good points and, at the risk of derailing this thread, I both agree and disagree with you.
I think Boeing (737 Max excluded bc quite frankly frick that plane) makes a far superior product. If the pilot is competent, give me Boeing every day. But Airbus is pushing out these idiot-proof planes where all you have to do as a pilot (yes I’m exaggerating a little) is push the right buttons and the plane flies - and most importantly lands - itself.
In other words, if you told me I have to get on a plane and that my pilot is a fricking dumbass, then I’m choosing Airbus every day.
All that said, what happened with the Max is unacceptable regardless of who was piloting it. Anyone claiming their magic American Pilots wouldn’t have crashed are wrong. Any engineer could tell you these crashes will happen. Would they happen less frequently with American pilots? Probably. But the inherent issue far exceeds any reasonable risk standard. And hate to break it to this forum, but not every pilot sitting in your cockpit is a superstar. I know it’s comforting to think so, but that’s just not the reality these days.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 9:30 pm to CharlesLSU
Posted on 10/30/19 at 9:32 pm to Cold Drink
Neither of the crashes were because of the problem mcas was a solution for as you say, so the chasis and design have performed fine thus far. I haven't heard any pilot unions come out against the aircraft design, it's all been improper notifications from Boeing. I'm not worried about the design at all; the fact that the software wasn't properly trained is the problem.
Perhaps American pilots would have crashed those planes in the same situation, but now that those events occurred, and knowledge has been gained, I'd feel 100% safe riding it. Tell me when a plane goes down because it actually stalled because the engines were too big.
Boeing should have to pay a cost for this initial failure though. Also, I'd think the insane scrutiny going forward, would make it hard for Boeing to frick up again like this any time soon. But just discontinuing this plane because of a software issue? Sounds dumb to me.
Perhaps American pilots would have crashed those planes in the same situation, but now that those events occurred, and knowledge has been gained, I'd feel 100% safe riding it. Tell me when a plane goes down because it actually stalled because the engines were too big.
Boeing should have to pay a cost for this initial failure though. Also, I'd think the insane scrutiny going forward, would make it hard for Boeing to frick up again like this any time soon. But just discontinuing this plane because of a software issue? Sounds dumb to me.
This post was edited on 10/30/19 at 9:34 pm
Posted on 10/30/19 at 9:46 pm to CharlesLSU
Not going the Airbus Vs Boeing route.
Both companies have produced great airframes.
In the Max case it seems that a System Safety Analysis was flawed.
Hence just one sensor feeding the MCAS.
If that sensor sent erroneous info to MCAS then you get unnecessary nose down commands.
That, combined with no real advertising of MCAS in training/ Flight Manuals unfortunately led to the current situation for Boeing.
Boeing has a tough road ahead to regain operator and traveling public confidence.
I hope both manufacturers learn from this.
Would I fly on a Max? Yes, but nervously aware of the past issues and I fly a lot.
Both companies have produced great airframes.
In the Max case it seems that a System Safety Analysis was flawed.
Hence just one sensor feeding the MCAS.
If that sensor sent erroneous info to MCAS then you get unnecessary nose down commands.
That, combined with no real advertising of MCAS in training/ Flight Manuals unfortunately led to the current situation for Boeing.
Boeing has a tough road ahead to regain operator and traveling public confidence.
I hope both manufacturers learn from this.
Would I fly on a Max? Yes, but nervously aware of the past issues and I fly a lot.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:05 pm to Pendulum
quote:
Neither of the crashes were because of the problem mcas was a solution for as you say, so the chasis and design have performed fine thus far. I haven't heard any pilot unions come out against the aircraft design, it's all been improper notifications from Boeing. I'm not worried about the design at all; the fact that the software wasn't properly trained is the problem.
Perhaps American pilots would have crashed those planes in the same situation, but now that those events occurred, and knowledge has been gained, I'd feel 100% safe riding it. Tell me when a plane goes down because it actually stalled because the engines were too big.
Boeing should have to pay a cost for this initial failure though. Also, I'd think the insane scrutiny going forward, would make it hard for Boeing to frick up again like this any time soon. But just discontinuing this plane because of a software issue? Sounds dumb to me.
I actually agree with most of what you said. Where Boeing’s actions arise to criminal degree IMO is trying to sneak in the MCAS without telling anyone specifically in order to get around additional training/certification.
Sure, the Max would be perfectly safe if pilots were trained for it, but the entire point of the Max was that 737 pilots wouldn’t have to be retrained. That’s the conundrum we have now. Boeing made a really high stakes bet and they lost. In fact, the worst-case scenario happened.
It’s the worst of both worlds. If they’d have known pilots had to be trained to fly this plane they’d have just built a new fricking plane and not try to pretend it’s a 737
This post was edited on 10/30/19 at 10:06 pm
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:06 pm to BHM
quote:
No clue what the cost of that option was for those particular airlines.
Genuine question, as a layman it seems like it would be a relatively trivial expense.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:07 pm to Cold Drink
quote:
All that said, what happened with the Max is unacceptable regardless of who was piloting it. Anyone claiming their magic American Pilots wouldn’t have crashed are wrong. Any engineer could tell you these crashes will happen.
Apparently the pilots were never notified of this system even being in place, so how would the magically awesome American pilots fix the problem in seconds without having knowledge of what is wrong?
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:24 pm to CharlesLSU
The problem is they designed a plane that needed a MCAS system at all, should have raised the gears
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:27 pm to Lima Whiskey
quote:
No clue what the cost of that option was for those particular airlines.
Genuine question, as a layman it seems like it would be a relatively trivial expense.
Seems I saw someone post a while back it was $80k but don't quote me on that.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:35 pm to BuckyCheese
quote:
Seems I saw someone post a while back it was $80k
Thank you
quote:
but don't quote me on that
Posted on 10/30/19 at 10:58 pm to CharlesLSU
American airline travel is incredibly safe. Like 99.999999999% safe. Literally.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 11:02 pm to Strannix
quote:
should have raised the gears
Max8 planes are already 'taller' than regular 800s. Im not sure how much higher they could have raised the gears with out doing even more redesigning of the plane.
Posted on 10/30/19 at 11:05 pm to dupergreenie
Yeah, raising the gears more wouldn’t have let it fit the normal airport gates. There’s no way around it: they pushed the design too far.
And know who deserves a huge portion of the blame but is getting off scot free? fricking Southwest Airlines (which I love).
And know who deserves a huge portion of the blame but is getting off scot free? fricking Southwest Airlines (which I love).
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News