The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Silkair Max to Alice Springs

Old 30th Sep 2019, 08:12
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: adelaide australia
Posts: 270
Silkair Max to Alice Springs

heard it on the radio today...

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...-sprin-461021/

Australia’s civil aviation safety authorities have given Singaporean carrier SilkAir the go-ahead to move its grounded Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft from Singapore to Alice Springs for storage.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) states in a notice put up on 23 September evening that it has repealed a temporary prohibition of 737 Max operations in Australian airspace.

This comes after CASA confirmed FlightGlobal’s queries that SilkAir applied to move its 737 Max aircraft to the outback town of Alice Springs for long-term storage.

The Singapore Airlines subsidiary has six 737 Max 8s, Cirium’s fleets data reveals.

In the notice, CASA states that the aircraft can only be operated on an “authorised flight” — for “non-commercial” purposes such as for flight testing, storage, maintenance or repairs.

The flight will also be operating without its manoeuvring characteristics augmentation system (MCAS), the software that has been implicated in two fatal 737 Max crashes.

SilkAir will have a six-month window to move the aircraft to Alice Springs for storage, as the CASA notice indicates that the repeal is now in force, and will expire after six months.

The carrier’s plan to store the Max was first reported by the Financial Times, which said SilkAir and Asia Pacific Aircraft Storage have struck a deal to have the 737s stored at the latter’s Alice Springs facility.

Asia Pacific Aircraft Storage managing director Tom Vincent declined to comment on the SilkAir move, but would only say that his company is "in discussion" with a number of airline customers with regard to storing the 737 Max aircraft.

From Flight Global


gileraguy is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2019, 13:20
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: closer to hell
Age: 48
Posts: 906
how much has Boeing got in public liability and products insurance? someone gonna take a big hit somewhere
troppo is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2019, 18:00
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cairns FNQ
Age: 68
Posts: 177
Originally Posted by troppo View Post
how much has Boeing got in public liability and products insurance? someone gonna take a big hit somewhere
Surely Boeing has to wear the whole lot,- down to the last cent.
The whole shemozzle is entirely their fault.
cowl flaps is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2019, 20:18
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,249
Originally Posted by cowl flaps View Post
Surely Boeing has to wear the whole lot,- down to the last cent.
The whole shemozzle is entirely their fault.
You need to do bit more reading on this issue. Take a look here to start with https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/62

Yes Boeing have some culpability but both airlines involved in those crashes have some serious problems that had a significant bearing on the outcome.
27/09 is offline  
Old 30th Sep 2019, 20:48
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 47
Posts: 672
More to the point... sounds like apart from ferry flights ole Maxy won’t be flying anytime soon!!!
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2019, 16:17
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cairns FNQ
Age: 68
Posts: 177
Originally Posted by 27/09
Take a look here to start with. [url
https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/62
"Page not found"
Seems the post has been taken down.
cowl flaps is offline  
Old 1st Oct 2019, 22:01
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,249
cowl flaps

Have a look here. https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world...max/ar-AAHun78

That post was discussing this article. While some parts of the article may be a bit simplistic it still captures pretty well most of what contributed to the two 737 Max accidents.
27/09 is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2019, 09:44
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 451
The title of the article is "What really brought down the 737 Max" Its trying to lay the blame at the feet of the pilots. I don't think that will wash with the jury when the litigation starts.
Lookleft is offline  
Old 2nd Oct 2019, 09:55
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by 27/09 View Post
cowl flaps

Have a look here. https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world...max/ar-AAHun78

That post was discussing this article. While some parts of the article may be a bit simplistic it still captures pretty well most of what contributed to the two 737 Max accidents.
But very interestingly not any NG over many years operated by turd world countries with an AoA failure.

Last edited by Bend alot; 2nd Oct 2019 at 09:56. Reason: spelling correction
Bend alot is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2019, 09:19
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,249
Originally Posted by Lookleft View Post
The title of the article is "What really brought down the 737 Max" Its trying to lay the blame at the feet of the pilots. I don't think that will wash with the jury when the litigation starts.
Not so much as just at the feet of the pilots but more importantly also the system under which their training had been done and preparation they had had for a runaway trim (which effectively was what the event was) and unreliable airspeed indications.
27/09 is offline  
Old 3rd Oct 2019, 10:31
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by 27/09 View Post
Not so much as just at the feet of the pilots but more importantly also the system under which their training had been done and preparation they had had for a runaway trim (which effectively was what the event was) and unreliable airspeed indications.
It was not a run away trim, it was far more than that.

If it were a simple runaway trim 500 aircraft would not be grounded - still waiting for the final fix to be submitted.

STILL WAITING TO BE SUBMITTED for rectification.

Ask Captain Sulenberger on his thoughts of the crashed aircraft and if he could have prevented the deaths - but many pilots have stated they are or would have been far superior than Sully.

* applying a run away trim procedure would have been good if implemented in time - but it was not a runaway trim.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 00:59
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Bendalot.
Are you really saying there has never been an A of A transmitter failure on the B737 until these 2?
I saw one in Kalgoorlie about 6 years ago after it had an argument with an eagle and I'm sure that kind of damage is not unheard of all the time?
Certainly as an instrument licensed ground engineer I was involved in many pitot head changes and cleaning out for the same reason.
Anyone who designs a system which relies on a sole A of A transmitter must know the history of equipment mounted in that position?
Wunwing
Wunwing is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 02:36
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 47
Posts: 672
It’s been documented well enough everywhere that it was basically an out of control scenario, even Boring test pilots took 8000’ to level off knowing exactly what was coming.

It is so easy to say they were third world countries etc. Remember the previous Lion flight had an issue however I don’t think it was exactly the same???

I know I would hate to be thrown into test pilot mode when a system activates that I didn’t even know about. Some situations are simply not flyable.

Have you ever crashed the sim because an over zealous instructor put a scenario in that just didn’t work? I have several times and each time I questioned my ability until the instructor said... whoops!!!

Enough of the Oztronaughtitiss........
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 07:27
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 8,031
Originally Posted by Global Aviator
Enough of the Oztronaughtitiss........
The only poster in this thread implicating the pilots has the Location "Enzed". In fact, the ones identifying as Australian are taking the opposite view...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 09:52
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Enzed
Posts: 2,249
Originally Posted by Global Aviator View Post
It’s been documented well enough everywhere that it was basically an out of control scenario, even Boring test pilots took 8000’ to level off knowing exactly what was coming.

It is so easy to say they were third world countries etc. Remember the previous Lion flight had an issue however I don’t think it was exactly the same???

Enough of the Oztronaughtitiss........
It became out of control but it didn't need to. It has been proven it is a scenario that is controllable.

Yes, previous Lion Air flight had the same issue, and it was able to be landed safely. That proves to me this problem could be controlled. In fact control of one of the accident aircraft was maintained by the Captain for quite some time. It wasnt until after control was transferred the FO to allow the Captain to read the QRH that the aircraft went out of control.

Don't you think airline training departments of airlines operating the MAX and the individual pilots would have been all over the information that came out after the Lion Air crash so as to ensure they all knew what to do in the even of another similar scenario? It would seem the Ethiopian guys weren't well briefed.

Boeing certainly don't come out of this smelling of roses, but to hang all the responsibility on them is being a tad simplistic.
27/09 is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 10:52
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
So you are saying that its a good design to have the whole system off one transmitter installed in a known area of impact, with no comparison with another set of data?

Then couple it with a system who existence appears to have not been released to engineers or pilots until after the 1st accident.From what I can see on PPRuNe, it still wasn't fully explained.

As someone whom learnt their trade ( fixing and flying) on the B707,even then, that would not have been acceptable would it?

Wunwing
Wunwing is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 10:59
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tent
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by 27/09 View Post
It became out of control but it didn't need to. It has been proven it is a scenario that is controllable.

Yes, previous Lion Air flight had the same issue, and it was able to be landed safely. That proves to me this problem could be controlled. In fact control of one of the accident aircraft was maintained by the Captain for quite some time. It wasnt until after control was transferred the FO to allow the Captain to read the QRH that the aircraft went out of control.

Don't you think airline training departments of airlines operating the MAX and the individual pilots would have been all over the information that came out after the Lion Air crash so as to ensure they all knew what to do in the even of another similar scenario? It would seem the Ethiopian guys weren't well briefed.

Boeing certainly don't come out of this smelling of roses, but to hang all the responsibility on them is being a tad simplistic.
Nor the FAA. From R&N on the matter.

Originally Posted by Bend alot
Did this guy really say this?

Still, former FAA Certification and Regulatory Enforcement Support specialist, Larry Williams, has said any experienced pilot should have been able to handle the Max emergencies.

“You grab the yoke and pull it back and if you can’t override it you just kick off trim and fly it manually. It’s autopilot disconnect, basically. Push a button on the yoke and disconnect — grab the wheel, keep it from turning.”

A lot of mistakes in there. If AP is on MCAS doesn’t operate anyway. Complete confusion as to the controls required to disable trim. Also the words “you just...” smack of some other machos posting on here.
Bend alot is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 12:14
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Equatorial
Age: 47
Posts: 672
Ahhh that’s why there is a worldwide grounding......

Me tinks it be a little more serious than what you’ve said.......

If it is a Boeing Max it ain’t going.....
Global Aviator is offline  
Old 4th Oct 2019, 21:33
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,422
27/09 you obviously don’t understand the difference between the concepts of continuous and intermittent.
Sunfish is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.