Originally Posted by raven11 (Post 11594345)

Meursault
Now give us the stats on the chances of loosing an engine during a heavy weight take off precisely at V1…..

It’s the limited thinking like yours that led to the disastrous development of the 737 Max. How’s that working out for Boeing?

Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.

Originally Posted by Meursault (Post 11594328)

In the last 50 years, on western civil aircraft, how many sudden cases of loss of cabin pressure and subsequent application of 10-20 sec of TUC? Now consider the number of flights where it did not happen. Then consider the total flight time of all flights globally and put it in relation to the total time of a long haul flight with an inexperienced SO alone in the seat.

I think Magenta is not far off, less than one in a billion would be my guess.

Originally Posted by raven11 (Post 11594354)

You argued that the chances of an explosive decompression are less than a billion to one.

The chance of losing an engine at precisely V1 on a heavy weight take off is infinitely small. Yet, it is the worst case scenario…so regardless of the small chance…we constantly train for the worst case scenario. We don’t not train for it because the chance of it occurring on the line is small.

Do you think it was weak men or strong men that oversaw the development of the 737 Max?

Originally Posted by raven11 (Post 11594347)

V for Vendetta

Totally agree.

Just before I retired I had a line SO on a check ride that was completely unaware of the requirement for pressure breathing above 35,000’; he was also adamant that the concept of “Time of Useful Consciousness” regarding the onset of hypoxia in a high altitude decompression was a myth because he could hold his breath for over a minute…..

He was a fully rated P2X line pilot.

As I posted earlier…what could go wrong?

Originally Posted by raven11 (Post 11594347)

V for Vendetta

Totally agree.

Just before I retired I had a line SO on a check ride that was completely unaware of the requirement for pressure breathing above 35,000’; he was also adamant that the concept of “Time of Useful Consciousness” regarding the onset of hypoxia in a high altitude decompression was a myth because he could hold his breath for over a minute…..

He was a fully rated P2X line pilot.

As I posted earlier…what could go wrong?

Originally Posted by Meursault (Post 11594328)

In the last 50 years, on western civil aircraft, how many sudden cases of loss of cabin pressure and subsequent application of 10-20 sec of TUC? Now consider the number of flights where it did not happen. Then consider the total flight time of all flights globally and put it in relation to the total time of a long haul flight with an inexperienced SO alone in the seat.

I think Magenta is not far off, less than one in a billion would be my guess.

Originally Posted by magenta magnet (Post 11594170)

The odds of an explosive decompression in the cockpit are about 1/billion or even more. If that did happen then you'd have 10 seconds consciousness, BUT you'd probably die from frostbite, as well as your top lips being ripped off and your lungs exploding as 900kph wind hits them, plus you wouldn't be able to see anything anyway.. but a "normal" explosive decompression somewhere on the plane would still take a long time to suck out all the air, so the 10 seconds isn't really accurate and you would have plenty time to don your mask and get the old Captain and Co-Pilot to hurry back into the cockpit for any help you may need...

I'm pretty sure a SO can work out how to descend the plane without ripping the wings off her

Originally Posted by Meursault (Post 11594352)

So you are saying probability doesn't matter? Or that the estimate is wrong? And where is the association to the 737 Max? Or to an engine fail at V1? I am discussing a specific threat in cruise with an SO as sole occupant. If you disagree with the proposed ratio you are welcome to offer an alternative number. Maybe I am wrong. But simply stating my thinking is limited is, well, quite limited indeed. And what is the meaning of "weak" and "hard times" in this context? Is trading insults without substance "strong"?

Originally Posted by Meursault (Post 11594355)

Your argument doesn't make sense to me. We do train rapid depress as well, all the time. I also never proposed to stop preparing or training crew for highly improbable events.

And again, what makes me "weak" by arguing with a probality? And what has the 737 to do with it? I have no clue ( and neither have you) what exactly went wrong at Boeing, plus it is completely out of context.

Originally Posted by Meursault (Post 11594008)

Will an overweight 60ish year old immersed in his Golf magazine be quicker than a 22 year old SO? I would call it a toss-up :-))

Originally Posted by Stockportcounty (Post 11594489)

Not much thread drift here.

Last 20 odd posts are so relevant as to the op’s question. 🙄🙄