Boeing 737 Max Software Fixes Due to Lion Air Crash Delayed
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Boston
Age: 72
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, yes, you can, and the 767 tanker does compare the AoA vane with the gyros. Most unmanned ac do not have AoA vanes, and rely on the inertial system.
Interesting paper showing the results of using different algorithms to estimate AoA
http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/tc16-52.pdf
Always amused by the CAT designations...from the draft FSB
Aircraft Category
B-737 C
B-737-CL C
B-737-600/700 C (even a 700 at CAT C is a struggle)
B-737-800/900/900ER C or D (CAT C?)
B-737-MAX C or D (CAT C?)
Interesting paper showing the results of using different algorithms to estimate AoA
http://www.tc.faa.gov/its/worldpac/techrpt/tc16-52.pdf
Always amused by the CAT designations...from the draft FSB
Aircraft Category
B-737 C
B-737-CL C
B-737-600/700 C (even a 700 at CAT C is a struggle)
B-737-800/900/900ER C or D (CAT C?)
B-737-MAX C or D (CAT C?)
AOA DERIVED FROM INERTIAL MEASUREMENTS A third method of estimating AoA was briefly investigated. This consisted of determining the angular separation between aircraft body X-axis pointing angle and flight-path angle, resolved into the aircraft’s plane of symmetry (in level flight, the difference between pitch attitude and vertical flight-path angle). This estimate is shown on some of the AoA comparison plots but compared poorly to the sensed, derived, and calibrated AoA, primarily due to not having a good estimate of vertical flight-path angle.
Keep thinking the best thing is to have as many different sensor technologies as possible with intelligent integration and cross checking of them all.
This would (at first at least) not require critical level software if it was done as a separate advisory/diagnostic function.
Psychophysiological entity
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 83
Posts: 3,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
slacktide: #740
Fair comment.
Not part of the 'argument', but thoughts going back to the STS seemingly working in reverse.
Utterly different? Disagree. On the 737 NG, there is also a piece of software also has control of the most powerful flying control surface. That piece of software is called STS. In fact based on statements in the most recent draft FAA FSB report on the MAX, MCAS is a sub-functionalty of STS.
Not part of the 'argument', but thoughts going back to the STS seemingly working in reverse.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Apple Maggot Quarantine Area
Age: 47
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although you can use the indicated airspeed, groundspeed, pitch angle, and rate of climb to try to estimate AoA, the results are subject to the cumulative errors associated with each individual measurement. Additionally, as described in the article, the computed AoA diverges from the actual AoA as you approach stall, which is exactly where you need accurate AoA the most. The linked article chalks this up to unmodeled forces and moments in their algorithm, meaning their method can only ever be an estimation.
One of the most critical problems with an AoA computation algorithm is that it can only tell you what your AoA WAS, based on previous airdata measurements. Additionally, an unchanging atmosphere is assumed. They cannot tell if the aircraft is encountering an updraft or a downdraft, or is descending through a shear between air masses with two different wind directions, both of which will change the actual AoA. The derived AoA systems are extremely laggy compared to direct measuring devices. I have flown behind the Aspen "derived AoA" described in the article, and I do not plan on spending the extra $2000 on that option when I do my own Aspen installation later this year. I am considering the Alpha Systems pressure-based direct measure AOA probe and heads-up display. I've flown behind that in a friend's plane, and found it to be responsive, and the HUD was actually useful compared the Aspen indicator that is way outside of your VMC scan. Lots of good videos of that Alpha Systems AoA in action if you search YouTube for "Backcountry 182"
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, it does not. If you believe that it does, please provide a published reference.
https://www.mro-network.com/airframe...d-pitch-system
The other algorithms include a number of other parameters in the mix, seems that inertial sensors (gyros and accelerometers) alone can't provide needed data.
Last edited by Smythe; 22nd Apr 2019 at 22:51.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Apple Maggot Quarantine Area
Age: 47
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing spokesmen declined to elaborate on which sensor inputs are used to provide the data in the tanker design. The options include using data from the angle of attack vanes on both sides of the cockpit, or an angle of attack vane and inertial gyroscope.
https://www.mro-network.com/airframe...d-pitch-system
https://www.mro-network.com/airframe...d-pitch-system
Also, you misquoted the author by editing his grammar. You might have fixed his typo correctly, but he also might have been intending to type something totally different. Let your source's words stand for themselves.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the NG, it is possible for the STS to fail in a way that causes undesired intermittent runaway trim, just like it is possible for MCAS to fail in a way that causes undesired intermittent runaway trim. Clearly, due to the reliance on a single unchecked AOA value, the demonstrated failure rate has been orders of magnitude greater on the MAX. But the scenario of intermittent runaway trim is still possible on NG.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: back of beyond
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been searching high and low for any actual cases of this happening on the 737NG, particularly as a result of a bad AOA or airspeed input in much the same way as occurred in the MAX accidents. If anyone has an actual case history of this malfunction, please post it here or send me a PM.
Sort of like mcas should have been, and shortly will be.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: USA
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you have a reference? Looking at our FCOM and Maintenance Manual, I see no reference to a speed comparison. The STS seems to work primarily through the active FCC which should only be using the airspeed on the selected side. As a side note, in one Boeing-produced document that I have seen, MCAS is described as a sub-function of the Speed Trim System which leads me to think that the Stall ID function (flaps down) could have the same issue, except of course that it is inhibited by the control column cutout switches.
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cape Town, ZA
Age: 61
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you have a reference? Looking at our FCOM and Maintenance Manual, I see no reference to a speed comparison. The STS seems to work primarily through the active FCC which should only be using the airspeed on the selected side. As a side note, in one Boeing-produced document that I have seen, MCAS is described as a sub-function of the Speed Trim System which leads me to think that the Stall ID function (flaps down) could have the same issue, except of course that it is inhibited by the control column cutout switches.
Edit: The jargon "error" is the difference between the measured value of a parameter, and the "desired" value (according to various rules). In this discussion it also has another meaning: Boeing's proposed fix allows a difference of 5.5 degrees between left/right AOA as acceptable for MCAS activation. AOA is a value that can easily be measured with the same degree of accuracy as something like airspeed (even if reliability is very high).
Edit: IMO such a disconnection tells you more than you need to know about the usefulness (or lack) of such a system.
Last edited by GordonR_Cape; 23rd Apr 2019 at 17:13.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: blue earch
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Authorities from different countries willing to review Boeing 737 MAX
FAA and EASA and few more authorities from different part of the world will be conducting a joint examination of the B 737 Max probably by 29th April.
So B737s (MAX) will grounded or what?
So B737s (MAX) will grounded or what?
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cape Town, ZA
Age: 61
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A source, and the name JATR should be a starting point: https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1RV1A1
China, the European Aviation Safety Agency, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Japan, Indonesia, Singapore and the United Arab Emirates will all take part, the FAA said, in the Joint Authorities Technical Review (JATR) that is set to last 90 days, the FAA said. Most of the countries previously confirmed they would take part.
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Boeing investor guidance..
Boeing Co has told some 737 MAX owners it is targeting U.S. Federal Aviation Administration approval of its software fix as early as the third week of May and the ungrounding of the aircraft around mid-July, two sources told Reuters.
The dates are part of a provisional timeline that Boeing has shared in meetings with airline customers as it explains an upgrade to software that played a role in two fatal crashes and led to the worldwide grounding of its MAX 737 jetliner in March.
However, Boeing has not yet submitted its completed software package to the FAA for approval, two other sources said.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/b...225009529.html
Boeing Co has told some 737 MAX owners it is targeting U.S. Federal Aviation Administration approval of its software fix as early as the third week of May and the ungrounding of the aircraft around mid-July, two sources told Reuters.
The dates are part of a provisional timeline that Boeing has shared in meetings with airline customers as it explains an upgrade to software that played a role in two fatal crashes and led to the worldwide grounding of its MAX 737 jetliner in March.
However, Boeing has not yet submitted its completed software package to the FAA for approval, two other sources said.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/b...225009529.html
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its got to come out of company profit, and the shareholders won't be happy.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Europe
Age: 44
Posts: 623
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's also worth noticing that Boeing hasn't logged a single order for any aircraft type since the 737 Max was grounded.
