Ethiopian airliner down in Africa
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Clichy
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone clear up something for me please.
I know from reading the whole thread the MCAS has a single AoA input, but some post refer to xchecking against the 2nd AoA ( which is not connected to MCAS)
However post 188 says this
post 188
At least Southwest took it's own initiative by adding an extra AOA indicator into 737 MAX for crew to cross-check erroneous data, but, shouldn't that be a Boeing responsibility and hence fitted to the worldwide fleet? I doubt Ethiopian purchased or insisted on these upgrades.
Is this extra a 3rd AoA or is there only 1 AoA and this IS the 2nd "comparison only" one.
ta
Oldoberon
I know from reading the whole thread the MCAS has a single AoA input, but some post refer to xchecking against the 2nd AoA ( which is not connected to MCAS)
However post 188 says this
post 188
At least Southwest took it's own initiative by adding an extra AOA indicator into 737 MAX for crew to cross-check erroneous data, but, shouldn't that be a Boeing responsibility and hence fitted to the worldwide fleet? I doubt Ethiopian purchased or insisted on these upgrades.
Is this extra a 3rd AoA or is there only 1 AoA and this IS the 2nd "comparison only" one.
ta
Oldoberon
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if it's behind a paywall but NYT has a chart showing which 737 MAX operators have grounded them as of today.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-airlines.html
Grounded - # of 737 MAX in operator's fleet
=================================
China Southern Airlines - 22
Air China - 15
SpiceJet - 13
Hainan Airlines - 11
Shanghai Airlines - 11
Xiamen Airlines - 10
Lion Air - 10
Jet Airways - 9
Shandong Airlines - 7
Shenzhen Airlines - 6
SilkAir - 6
Ethiopian Airlines - 4
China Eastern Airlines - 4
Lucky Air - 3
Cayman Airways - 2
Eastar Jet - 2
Fiji Airways - 2
Fuzhou Airlines - 2
Kunming Airlines - 2
Okay Airways - 2
9 Air - 1
Garuda Indonesia - 1
Comair - 1
Not Grounded (partial list)
====================
Southwestern Airlines - 34
Air Canada - 24
American Airlines - 24
Norwegian Air - 18
TUI fly - 15
WestJet - 13
FlyDubai - 11
Turkish Airlines - 11
Smartwings - 7
GOL Airlines - 7
Aeromexico - 6
Aerolineas Argentinas - 5
Oman air - 5
(remainder omitted for brevity)
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-airlines.html
Grounded - # of 737 MAX in operator's fleet
=================================
China Southern Airlines - 22
Air China - 15
SpiceJet - 13
Hainan Airlines - 11
Shanghai Airlines - 11
Xiamen Airlines - 10
Lion Air - 10
Jet Airways - 9
Shandong Airlines - 7
Shenzhen Airlines - 6
SilkAir - 6
Ethiopian Airlines - 4
China Eastern Airlines - 4
Lucky Air - 3
Cayman Airways - 2
Eastar Jet - 2
Fiji Airways - 2
Fuzhou Airlines - 2
Kunming Airlines - 2
Okay Airways - 2
9 Air - 1
Garuda Indonesia - 1
Comair - 1
Not Grounded (partial list)
====================
Southwestern Airlines - 34
Air Canada - 24
American Airlines - 24
Norwegian Air - 18
TUI fly - 15
WestJet - 13
FlyDubai - 11
Turkish Airlines - 11
Smartwings - 7
GOL Airlines - 7
Aeromexico - 6
Aerolineas Argentinas - 5
Oman air - 5
(remainder omitted for brevity)
I have difficulty in believing that this is a similar failure to the Lion Air one.
After the LionAir accident, any 737 Max pilot worth his salt would have read up on it, understood the new system and would be clear in his mind on how to deal with it. This is what all of us would do without exception.
After the LionAir accident, any 737 Max pilot worth his salt would have read up on it, understood the new system and would be clear in his mind on how to deal with it. This is what all of us would do without exception.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lower Skunk Cabbageland, WA
Age: 74
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what, if any, compensation to the operators Boeing will be offering.
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under the sea
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone mentioned that the MCAS provides 10 secs of trim input when activated. Can that be correct/verified? 10 secs of trim input is massive on the 737. The stabiliser is a powerful secondary flight control and has known limitations - for example Boeing are explicit about overuse of stabiliser trim
during the approach to stall recovery. Positioning the stabiliser in such a sense can severely reduce elevator authority - was this not the contributing factor in the FlyDubai 738 crash in Rostov? Two separate variants, one without MCAS, but with the same concerns relating to pitch authority?
during the approach to stall recovery. Positioning the stabiliser in such a sense can severely reduce elevator authority - was this not the contributing factor in the FlyDubai 738 crash in Rostov? Two separate variants, one without MCAS, but with the same concerns relating to pitch authority?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Savall
yes I k now that but is this additional one 2nd or 3rd AoA, some posts ask why they didn't look at the other AoA read out ie there are 2 others appear to say there is only 1.
If only 1 adding another very wise , if there are already 2 why add a 3rd
oldoberon
yes I k now that but is this additional one 2nd or 3rd AoA, some posts ask why they didn't look at the other AoA read out ie there are 2 others appear to say there is only 1.
If only 1 adding another very wise , if there are already 2 why add a 3rd
oldoberon
Can someone clear up something for me please.
I know from reading the whole thread the MCAS has a single AoA input, but some post refer to xchecking against the 2nd AoA ( which is not connected to MCAS)
However post 188 says this
post 188
At least Southwest took it's own initiative by adding an extra AOA indicator into 737 MAX for crew to cross-check erroneous data, but, shouldn't that be a Boeing responsibility and hence fitted to the worldwide fleet? I doubt Ethiopian purchased or insisted on these upgrades.
Is this extra a 3rd AoA or is there only 1 AoA and this IS the 2nd "comparison only" one.
Just to add I was horrified to read the certification is basically a grandfather one, when major changes to airframe, engine or flying controls are made it should be a new certification, loved the analogy " like putting a new dash and a 300bhp engine in a model T and saying it is safe to use!
ta
Oldoberon
I know from reading the whole thread the MCAS has a single AoA input, but some post refer to xchecking against the 2nd AoA ( which is not connected to MCAS)
However post 188 says this
post 188
At least Southwest took it's own initiative by adding an extra AOA indicator into 737 MAX for crew to cross-check erroneous data, but, shouldn't that be a Boeing responsibility and hence fitted to the worldwide fleet? I doubt Ethiopian purchased or insisted on these upgrades.
Is this extra a 3rd AoA or is there only 1 AoA and this IS the 2nd "comparison only" one.
Just to add I was horrified to read the certification is basically a grandfather one, when major changes to airframe, engine or flying controls are made it should be a new certification, loved the analogy " like putting a new dash and a 300bhp engine in a model T and saying it is safe to use!
ta
Oldoberon
AFAIK there are 2 AOA-s on the 737, the MCAS uses only AOA-1, Southwest elected the option of having AOA-1 on the PIC EFIS & AOA-2 on FO EFIS. please correct me if I am wrong.
Also if you want to see "grandfathered", compare the DC-9 cockpit with the B717. Same type rating, one day differences class is all that is required to go from one to the other.....
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Clichy
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the correction. I am not familiar with the type, I misinterpreted an earlier post. I still believe having two readouts would have been a sound decision from the beginning.
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: PA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clear notification that MCAS activated?
I'm a (non-aero) engineer who has done User Interface work in the past. All of the discussions of MCAS seem to suggest you'll only know it's active when the nose pitches down (et al.) without being commanded.
Is there no definitive visual or auditory signal that MCAS is active?
Is there no definitive visual or auditory signal that MCAS is active?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: wales
Age: 81
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hans
"AFAIK there are 2 AOA-s on the 737, the MCAS uses only AOA-1, Southwest elected the option of having AOA-1 on the PIC EFIS & AOA-2 on FO EFIS."
I am ex ground crew don't know all your abbreviations but you seem to be saying there were always 2 they just reconfigured their functionality.NOT added another as post 188 stated, what is the resulting effect of their change
oldoberon
"AFAIK there are 2 AOA-s on the 737, the MCAS uses only AOA-1, Southwest elected the option of having AOA-1 on the PIC EFIS & AOA-2 on FO EFIS."
I am ex ground crew don't know all your abbreviations but you seem to be saying there were always 2 they just reconfigured their functionality.NOT added another as post 188 stated, what is the resulting effect of their change
oldoberon
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA says Boeing 737 Max 8 is airworthy http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-47533052
This may well come back to bite them!
Have you looked at least to the most crude bits of information on this crash before climbing up the sope box?
Fuel contamination, engine problems => 383kts, Ultra high energy impact. Scrap it.
instrument problems: 383kts (read: no stall) and sunny, nice weather => WTF instrument should cause this??? I don't see a reasonable scenario for this.
bird strike: => why spearing along at 1000ft at ridiculous speeds after being hit by a bird??? That would be exactly opposite of what you would want to do: Higher altitude and low speed. IMHO not really supported from what we know so far.
I would accept flight control problems ( would be extremely worrying though on a just 5 month old aircraft of a new type!), suicide (but why would someone fly for so long at low altitude and high and increasing speed when he wants to commit suicide?), runaway trim (here we go -that is what has been mostly discussed and wehre there is a precedence).
So if I draw a line below your objection I still end up mostly with what is being discussed here (although I agree it is much to early to be sure it was MCAS).
Would I happily board a MAX tomorrow? Not if I could avoid it.
Fuel contamination, engine problems => 383kts, Ultra high energy impact. Scrap it.
instrument problems: 383kts (read: no stall) and sunny, nice weather => WTF instrument should cause this??? I don't see a reasonable scenario for this.
bird strike: => why spearing along at 1000ft at ridiculous speeds after being hit by a bird??? That would be exactly opposite of what you would want to do: Higher altitude and low speed. IMHO not really supported from what we know so far.
I would accept flight control problems ( would be extremely worrying though on a just 5 month old aircraft of a new type!), suicide (but why would someone fly for so long at low altitude and high and increasing speed when he wants to commit suicide?), runaway trim (here we go -that is what has been mostly discussed and wehre there is a precedence).
So if I draw a line below your objection I still end up mostly with what is being discussed here (although I agree it is much to early to be sure it was MCAS).
Would I happily board a MAX tomorrow? Not if I could avoid it.
Hans
"AFAIK there are 2 AOA-s on the 737, the MCAS uses only AOA-1, Southwest elected the option of having AOA-1 on the PIC EFIS & AOA-2 on FO EFIS."
I am ex ground crew don't know all your abbreviations but you seem to be saying there were always 2 they just reconfigured their functionality.NOT added another as post 188 stated, what is the resulting effect of their change
oldoberon
"AFAIK there are 2 AOA-s on the 737, the MCAS uses only AOA-1, Southwest elected the option of having AOA-1 on the PIC EFIS & AOA-2 on FO EFIS."
I am ex ground crew don't know all your abbreviations but you seem to be saying there were always 2 they just reconfigured their functionality.NOT added another as post 188 stated, what is the resulting effect of their change
oldoberon
Every 737 has 2 Angle Of Attack indicators, and an OPTIONAL warning light for a difference in value between the two. SW have paid extra to display the actual AOA value displayed on the respective pilots instruments. The left pilot seas AOA one, the right pilot sees AOA 2 values. These should be the same, and if they are not seeing the value could help in deciding who is right.
Last edited by hans brinker; 12th Mar 2019 at 02:52.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: 8th floor
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, after 30 years it is hard not to speak in allcaps three letter words, here is the English version:
Every 737 has 2 Angle Of Attack indicators, and a warning light for a difference in value between the two. SW have paid extra to display the actual AOA value displayed on the respective pilots instruments. The left pilot seas AOA one, the right pilot sees AOA 2 values. These should be the same, and if they are not seeing the value could help in deciding who is right.
Every 737 has 2 Angle Of Attack indicators, and a warning light for a difference in value between the two. SW have paid extra to display the actual AOA value displayed on the respective pilots instruments. The left pilot seas AOA one, the right pilot sees AOA 2 values. These should be the same, and if they are not seeing the value could help in deciding who is right.
For example the Lion Air 737 MAX didn't have either of those options installed, so it would have been difficult for the crew to determine they had an AOA disagree situation or not.