Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

Channel 9 Under Investigation MAX Promo

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Channel 9 Under Investigation MAX Promo

Old 5th Apr 2021, 09:09
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 727
Originally Posted by SRM View Post
For the uneducated, MCAS is an add on to Speed Trim.
The "Super 3 Crew" were educated!

And the fact still remains - there was not a NON NORMAL procedure available - for Speed Trim running in reverse, or any other error that they had they should have followed. A Band Aid modification of the procedure (Runaway Stab) was put together afterwards to fake a solution. Still a nearly 2 year grounding resulted.

The "Super 3 Crew" did not follow ANY documented NON NORMAL procedure - they winged it!
Bend alot is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 09:14
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 727
Originally Posted by SRM View Post
It seems that we still have people out there who are not MAX rated in any shape or form willing to express an opinion on an aircraft that has been modified, test flown and certified by every Aviation Safety Authority in the world.

My case rests and I will continue to release the 737 Max safely back into Airline operation.
CAAC? The first to ground it?
Bend alot is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 10:48
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 859
CAAC grounding has nothing to do with Boeing and it’s safety problems. Have a think about what’s happening in that region at the moment and draw your own conclusions.

They will ground it for 100 years if they want to.
PoppaJo is online now  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 11:05
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 343
Originally Posted by SRM View Post
For the uneducated, MCAS is an add on to Speed Trim.
Is it? It serves an entirely different purpose to STS, uses different inputs, uses different logic, bypassed the control column STS override, has different FCC architecture and, happy to be corrected on this last point if I'm wrong, would still operate even with an STS FAIL.
MickG0105 is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 11:16
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Fliegensville, Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 15
https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...aair199202582/

I remember this, but was a number 2 failure?
Fliegenmong is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 11:32
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 578
People talk about this as if it were a technical issue, which it isn’t. The MAX debacle is an ethical issue with the way big business works, pure and simple.

Boeing, with the aid of the FAA, tried to avoid recertification and retraining costs by making an inherently unstable airframe “stable” using a piece of software fed by a single point of failure input.

Had Boeing and the FAA had an ethical fibre in them, this would not have happened.
gordonfvckingramsay is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 12:00
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sydney
Age: 68
Posts: 67
What is the advantage of the Max

Having only flown the 737-800 sim I would like to know what the advantages are of operating the 737Max.
Am also well aware of the cosy arrangement that Boeing have had with the FAA for years. In my opinion the FAA trusted the manufacturer for its expertise for a long time.
Have also experienced runaway trim in a few types and recognition of what was going on and the remedial action was hair raising.
boaccomet4 is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 12:13
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,269
The program was a waste of time. As most predicted it just re-hashed the already known info about the MAX that has told many times without spending anytime talking about how those problems were rectified. The previous MAX which suffered these problems has been re-designed to the point that concentrating on the aircraft as it once existed is pointless.

Teary stories with the parents of victims, sim rides showing a system that won't react that way anymore, a travel journo on the panel, trying to whip up fear about how the previous crashes occurred, Liz Hayes' emotive language. To be expected from a 60 Minutes spin off.

TJ said he would have no problems flying on the aircraft now, BB said it's probably the safest aircraft in existence today. But they only spent about 20 seconds out of a 60 minute program talking about the rectifications done to the aircraft. In the end they spent more time asking the opinion of two emotional American parents of crash victims, who have no aviation qualifications, on whether or not the aircraft is now safe than two qualified pilots and an engineer on the panel.

All it did was to make the public ignorant and fearful about an aircraft that essentially doesn't exist anymore. Phrases like "the DISASTER Aircraft is coming to Australia". But that's modern commercial media these days I guess.......
dr dre is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 12:18
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 869
Boeing should be held accountable for a long time yet, Doesn’t matter a rats if they have fixed it. If they were your kids you’d feel the same I suspect.
ozbiggles is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 12:22
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,170
They are dealing with advertisers during prime time. All this fear and emotion will bring in the viewers. They have targets to meet.

By all means if the problems continue then dish out as much fear as you want, otherwise let’s take a backseat for the next year and see if they have got the house in order.
wheels_down is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 12:31
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,269
Originally Posted by ozbiggles View Post
Boeing should be held accountable for a long time yet, Doesn’t matter a rats if they have fixed it. If they were your kids you’d feel the same I suspect.
Of course there should be accountability for what happened in the past. But my beef with that program was they continually kept fearmongering about an aircraft that essentially doesn't exist anymore. An unsuspecting viewer would come away with the impression that those problems haven't been addressed as the program barely spent any time discussing it. They were more interested in pushing the views of two unqualified emotional parents, sad as it is, than qualified engineers and pilots on the program. With all due respect how could an unqualified parent give their analysis of the modification done to the MAX? Of course they will be against it. It would have been good to ask that engineer to at least spend a minute or two going through the redesigned system to allay any fears.

Whoops, that would mean bringing educated rational discussion to a format that exists only to attract emotional and fearful viewers.

And it's already started. Comments on social media after that episode slamming Virgin for buying "that deadly aeroplane", "I'll never fly with them again..."

Last edited by dr dre; 5th Apr 2021 at 12:46.
dr dre is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 12:42
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: .
Posts: 27
Under Investigation - Boeing 737 Max - Liz Hayes

Please permit me to blow my horn, just a bit. I mean the likes of Byron Bailey spruiks himself as an Aviation Expert, but what is the largest aircraft has he flown as a Captain? I believe his career began in New Zealand as a non-flying crewman.

Though retired, I held ATPL from seven countries. I have flown about 130 different aircraft including single and multi-engine aeroplanes, single and multi-engine seaplanes, single and multi-engine helicopters, a tandem rotor helicopter, two and four engine turboprops and two and four engine jets. I served as a Captain of Boeing 747-400, 747-300, 747-200, 737-800, and 737-700 aircraft. The Boeing 737NG alone, I had flown more than 3,500 hours as a Captain and would rank them as one of my favorite aircraft to fly. I have an Aircraft Mechanic License. Consider I got my start as a lowly Army helicopter pilot. I was trained as a Maintenance Officer and Maintenance Test Pilot. I held Flying Instructor Ratings for aeroplanes and helicopters from two countries. ATPL from two countries for helicopters. Commercial single and multi-engine seaplane.

I know there are Space Shuttle Pilots and A380 Pilots and guys and gals who may have accomplished more, but I would bet I am more of an Aviation Expert than Byron Bailey. Nobody would believe he was a pilot or a Captain, had he not shown up on the program in uniform.

All that said, I cannot understand the beat up of Boeing or the 737 Max.

During the video portion of the 60 Minutes broadcast, with Captain Chris Brady, in the Flight Simulator, you will notice the Stabiliser Trim Wheel is scrolling forward, as a result of the failed MCAS.

The Boeing Quick Reference Handbook (QRH), Chapter 9, page 9.1 "Runaway Stabilizer". That is/was all the Pilots needed to know to deal with the Abnormal situation. Disconnect the Autopilot. It may require both Pilots to hold the Control Column/Yoke. The Stab Trim Cutout Switches should both be immediately moved to CUTOUT (Off) and leave them in CUTOUT, but the Pilot(s) in the accident aircraft switched them back to NORMAL (On).

With the STAB TRIM to CUTOFF, don't experiment by turning it back to NORMAL. If the Trim Wheel still scrolls, with the switches in CUTOFF put your shoe leather against it. That is why it is rubber coated.

Is anyone aware that the Airbus 330 had 338 fatalities and the Airbus 320 had suffered 1,393 fatalities in 17 accidents?

Why isn't anyone going out of their way to shutdown Airbus?

This 60 Minutes broadcast by Liz Hayes was nothing short of sensational tabloid journalism, on the order of trying to analyze the s_ _ t out of the Oprah interview with Harry and Megan.

I am not saying there weren't things that went astray, but every aircraft has suffered problems when they were first released for service. It often takes years for all the wrinkles to be ironed-out in the form of Service Bulletins and Airworthiness Directives, etc. Just think of how many times a QRH has been revised for a particular aircraft.

Boeing builds great aircraft and they haven't paid me to say so. I know it, based on my experience flying them.

Last edited by FWRWATPLX2; 5th Apr 2021 at 12:47. Reason: spelling
FWRWATPLX2 is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 18:58
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kichin
Posts: 578
but every aircraft has suffered problems when they were first released for service. It often takes years for all the wrinkles to be ironed-out
This is the first time that an aircraft manufacturer knew about a potentially deadly issue and still said “fvck it, release as is”

Negligent homicide
gordonfvckingramsay is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 19:48
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 423
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
Ethiopian isn't some dodgy third world carrier. They've had a fatal crash caused by pilot error this century, but then so have American Airlines, Southwest, Singapore Airlines, Air France, Emirates. Before that you have to go a long way back to find a significant case of pilot error resulting in fatalities. As far as I can see their record isn't littered with regular incidents which you would get from a Lion Air type carrier. From what I gather the Ethiopian Aviation Academy is highly regarded and the airline is staffed by a fairly experienced mix of local and expat Training pilots.
.
Name the fatal crash Southwest has had. Caused by pilot error, or any other cause. In any century. I’ll wait.

Muppet.
JPJP is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 22:54
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Mycenae
Posts: 422
Originally Posted by JPJP View Post
Name the fatal crash Southwest has had. Caused by pilot error, or any other cause. In any century. I’ll wait.

Muppet.
http://www.airsafe.com/events/report...2005-final.pdf
Not a spectacular “crash” but some errors on the part of the pilots caused an overrun. The aircraft hit a car and the impact caused the death of a car passenger.

Last edited by StudentInDebt; 5th Apr 2021 at 23:08.
StudentInDebt is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 23:06
  #56 (permalink)  
SRM
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by MickG0105 View Post
Is it? It serves an entirely different purpose to STS, uses different inputs, uses different logic, bypassed the control column STS override, has different FCC architecture and, happy to be corrected on this last point if I'm wrong, would still operate even with an STS FAIL.
Wrong on both points Boeing are little smarter than that.
SRM is offline  
Old 5th Apr 2021, 23:48
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 343
Originally Posted by FWRWATPLX2 View Post
Please permit me to blow my horn, just a bit. I mean the likes of Byron Bailey spruiks himself as an Aviation Expert, but what is the largest aircraft has he flown as a Captain? I believe his career began in New Zealand as a non-flying crewman.
...
Nobody would believe he was a pilot or a Captain, had he not shown up on the program in uniform.
...
I'm most assuredly no fan of Byron's but I wouldn't be slagging off on his experience. Yes, he did start out as a Navigator with the RNZAF (on Sunderlands if you're looking to do some carbon dating) but then went on to join the RAAF as a pilot. With the RAAF he flew fighters; Sabres (he walked away from an EFATO at Williamtown that wrote the aircraft off) and Mirages. In civvy street he flew B727s, A300s and B777s as well as a handful of smaller corporate jets for over 26,000 hours flying.

Byron is what the media love, someone who will speak with an air of authority and happily say things that are sensational - MH370, the Captain did it; MS804, it was a bomb; JT610, poorly trained crew (that was within 24 hours of the crash no less), etc. His big problem is that he never checks anything and consequently he is routinely wrong (his work for The Australian newspaper has been the subject of at least two formal retractions which is probably why he no longer writes for them). He has no 73 experience which meant his commentary on JT610 was somewhat misguided; for instance, when the CVR revealed that the FO was referencing the QRH Byron slagged off on that before someone pointed out to him that there's no EICAS on the 737.

He's the embodiment of the media's preference for simple, unequivocal but occasionally wrong over complex, nuanced and correct.
MickG0105 is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2021, 00:12
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 343




Happy to accept that Boeing designate MCAS as part of the STS but interesting how that graphic seems to have evolved, isn't it?


Originally Posted by SRM View Post
Boeing are little smarter than that.
A two year grounding and numerous technical and investigative reports probably suggests otherwise.

Last edited by MickG0105; 6th Apr 2021 at 01:00. Reason: Correction after reviewing FAA's Summary of the FAA’s Review of the Boeing 737 MAX
MickG0105 is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2021, 01:10
  #59 (permalink)  
SRM
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by MickG0105 View Post




Happy to accept that Boeing designate MCAS as part of the STS but interesting how that graphic seems to have evolved, isn't it?



A two year grounding and numerous technical and investigative reports probably suggests otherwise.
I have the WDM for MCAS however its probably too technical for you to understand so lets just stick to the graphics.
SRM is offline  
Old 6th Apr 2021, 01:14
  #60 (permalink)  
SRM
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by dr dre View Post
Ethiopian isn't some dodgy third world carrier. They've had a fatal crash caused by pilot error this century, but then so have American Airlines, Southwest, Singapore Airlines, Air France, Emirates. Before that you have to go a long way back to find a significant case of pilot error resulting in fatalities. As far as I can see their record isn't littered with regular incidents which you would get from a Lion Air type carrier. From what I gather the Ethiopian Aviation Academy is highly regarded and the airline is staffed by a fairly experienced mix of local and expat Training pilots.

Hard to fly the aircraft in accordance with non normal procedures that would allow you to control the aircraft if those procedures are not in your training manuals. I think the grounding of the type for two years until the necessary rectifications were made is a sign this is primarily a design fault and lack of correct information passed to pilots rather than pilot incompetence.
So what have got to say about the ET incidents in the last couple of days?
SRM is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.