|
Really good article on the 737 Max
This is a long and detailed article but well worth the read. It discusses the areas of automation and whether we have gone too far, or not enough. It also mentions that wonderful term “airmanship”.
What really brought down the Boeing 737 Max? Malfunctions caused two deadly crashes. But an industry that puts unprepared pilots in the cockpit is just as guilty. Read in The New York Times: https://apple.news/AHhKSVOlLS0GHBTAPJI9UXA |
That was well worth reading. Thanks.
|
It’s interesting, but I don’t know that I’d call it ‘really good’. It has been the subject of discussion in ‘Rumour and News’, and largely reads like a Boeing PR blurb.
|
Originally Posted by mrdeux
(Post 10576835)
largely reads like a Boeing PR blurb.
On the corporate level, the company is the worst sort of player — a corrosive agent that spreads money around Washington, pushes exotic weapons on Congress, toys with nuclear annihilation, sells all sorts of lesser instruments of death to oppressive regimes around the world and dangerously distorts American society in the ways that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned against in his prescient 1961 farewell address. |
There is a disturbing amount of lack of information from multiple companies in regards to new technology. Airbus NEO is another. Noticeable control differences on rotate or flare that result in different techniques being applied. There are pilots out there who were not told of this prior to EIS. The issue they raised was that there is potential to get messy if handled like a ceo, and some did. Jetstar Pilots will see what I’m talking about when it arrives next year. If your not briefed on this ask the question. If your company knows nothing about it then you shouldn’t be flying it. Pilots and companies finding out new type handling characteristics as it happens in the air only leads to distractions. The first 50 feet isn’t the time to be second guessing yourself on handling characteristics. You need to be two steps ahead of new technology it seems, not one. |
Originally Posted by PoppaJo
(Post 10576896)
There is a disturbing amount of lack of information from multiple companies in regards to new technology. Airbus NEO is another. Noticeable control differences on rotate or flare that result in different techniques being applied. There are pilots out there who were not told of this prior to EIS. The issue they raised was that there is potential to get messy if handled like a ceo, and some did. Jetstar Pilots will see what I’m talking about when it arrives next year. If your not briefed on this ask the question. If your company knows nothing about it then you shouldn’t be flying it. Pilots and companies finding out new type handling characteristics as it happens in the air only leads to distractions. The first 50 feet isn’t the time to be second guessing yourself on handling characteristics. You need to be two steps ahead of new technology it seems, not one. The twist is that Kirana could have built his airline on the Airbus 320, an airplane that is less challenging to fly, but instead chose the equivalent Boeing 737, which counts on pilots as the last resort if something mechanical or otherwise goes wrong. The heart of the problem is partially automation. We have stuff buried so deep in the lines of code, that a programmer makes an error, sometimes years in advance which given the right set of circumstances, could manifest itself into a catastrophic loss. The error then often only presents itself to the unsuspecting flight crew who now have only a limited amount of time, under trying circumstances to decipher the problem and take corrective action. You can't program for every possible outcome or circumstance in aviation, hence the art of the science of flying... And now they want to take out that last line of defence, the pilot, by going to single pilot and remotely operated aircraft. |
Closest I’ve read yet to an accurate analysis of what happened. |
It is indeed a good article. As an experienced 737 captain I would however pick up on a couple of things he presents as fact, which I would see a little differently. For example I have never used the trim cutout switches outside the simulator. In fact I cannot remember anyone else having to either. Also manual thrust is not standard operating procedure on takeoff. You get the occasional machine where autothrust is inoperative and it is no big deal. But generally deselecting it halfway through the initial climb needs a bit of thought and is far from an automatic highly trained response. Otherwise I agree with his general direction. |
Good article, shame it took a while. Fly the Aircraft first.🙂 |
Good read, thanks Dick. Quote also hits the nail on the head |
Excellent read, thanks for sharing. Just an absurd reality of gross negligence laid bare. I wonder who would want to fly on an Indonesian airline after reading this.
|
Dick,
As usual you are pursuing your own agenda. I wonder what you could do to help Glen Buckley? If you actually worked with the team, and supported causes that the GA industry is currently fighting against CASA, you might achieve something constructive. Instead here you are, still screaming into the wind alone like you did on Airspace reform in the Class E debate 15-20 years ago. Get with the team. |
Why isn't Tricky Dicky working with Glen?
|
Originally Posted by Horatio Leafblower
(Post 10579113)
Dick,
As usual you are pursuing your own agenda. I wonder what you could do to help Glen Buckley? If you actually worked with the team, and supported causes that the GA industry is currently fighting against CASA, you might achieve something constructive. Instead here you are, still screaming into the wind alone like you did on Airspace reform in the Class E debate 15-20 years ago. Get with the team.
Originally Posted by spektrum
(Post 10579116)
Why isn't Tricky Dicky working with Glen?
|
An article that largely shows the fault of children of the magenta line.... But accurately balmes the parents. A long but worthwhile read.
I often read articles about crashes hoping to learn something or to simply consider 'what would I have done if I were in their shoes'.... Well the same thing probably.... If your ill equiped by the system to fly the aircraft then a similar result is likely. No... Inevitable. Cant really balme the pilots despite the fact that they were at the control column. |
After watching another child of the magenta balls up a visual STAR while trying to fly the FMS, I’ve gone into the office to ask a C&T manager if they do any manual hand flown sectors during line training....”No, they might stuff up”. Well hey, they might also learn something and build skills and confidence. I frustratingly walked out thinking of managers as ostriches with their heads in the sand, and ass holes in the sunshine. |
Originally Posted by nefarious1
(Post 10579644)
After watching another child of the magenta balls up a visual STAR while trying to fly the FMS, I’ve gone into the office to ask a C&T manager if they do any manual hand flown sectors during line training....”No, they might stuff up”. Well hey, they might also learn something and build skills and confidence. I frustratingly walked out thinking of managers as ostriches with their heads in the sand, and ass holes in the sunshine. My point exactly. They know, but it costs money and by the time something happens they would have likely moved on. Digging deeper..... The regulators allow it to happen.... So who is to blame. |
After reading this it just confirms the auto throttle will kill you in these automated aircraft.Neither crew in these accidents thought to reduce or close the throttles.I would suggest all sim sessions should have manual flying with no auto throttle usage to check the coordination skills and build confidence to be able to operate without it. |
Originally Posted by nefarious1
(Post 10579644)
After watching another child of the magenta balls up a visual STAR while trying to fly the FMS, I’ve gone into the office to ask a C&T manager if they do any manual hand flown sectors during line training....”No, they might stuff up”. Well hey, they might also learn something and build skills and confidence. I frustratingly walked out thinking of managers as ostriches with their heads in the sand, and ass holes in the sunshine. And as far as physically handling emergencies?.. You can always teach a computer with enough sensors to do it better than a human. Incidents like these plaguing the 737 Max are just part of the learning curve for the manufacturer's (and their customers) on their route to making the pilot as superfluous as possible. Its just that Boeing never envisioned the corruption, and lip service to training and standards by some of the airlines out there coupled with the ineptitude of some of their crew. They can no longer ignore what they've always pretended didn't exist and its been an expensive lesson for Boeing. You can be sure Airbus's eyes are like soup bowls too. Net result is the ever increasing automation of airliners - and it will be sold to us because its safer, cheaper, more efficient.. blah.. blah..blah. |
Originally Posted by mrdeux
(Post 10576835)
...and largely reads like a Boeing PR blurb.
For a mere $60k, Lion’s pilot academy guarantees you a job as an airline pilot, with a 95% success rate. What could go wrong? A regulatory system and culture that allows complex and imperfect aircraft to be flown by inadequately trained pilots - THAT is the real culprit from my reading of the article. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:00. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.