MAX’s Return Delayed by FAA Reevaluation of 737 Safety Procedures
This is Forkner’s “text” conversation.
https://graphics.reuters.com/BOEING-...20Document.pdf
extract:
Wow just Wow!!
These guys had in depth knowledge of MCAS and it seemed to scare them, in just a sim - I tend to think that the accident crews ability/training have even less to do in contributing to the accident. than I did 24 hours ago.
A sub-system of the STS running in the back ground seems a play with words.
I wonder what other "conversations" between these two guys are around, does not seem like the first time they have had this method of communication about work. Vince will be interesting to hear from.
“Mark Forkner 6:50 PM:
Oh shocker alerT!
MCAS is now active down to M .2
It's running rampant in the sim on me
at least that's what Vince thinks is happening
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
Oh great, that means we have to update the speed trim descritption in vol 2
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
I'm levelling off at like 4000 ft, 230 knots and the plane is trimming itself like craxy
I'm like, WHAT?
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:52 PM:
that's what i saw on sim one, but on approach”
https://graphics.reuters.com/BOEING-...20Document.pdf
extract:
Wow just Wow!!
These guys had in depth knowledge of MCAS and it seemed to scare them, in just a sim - I tend to think that the accident crews ability/training have even less to do in contributing to the accident. than I did 24 hours ago.
A sub-system of the STS running in the back ground seems a play with words.
I wonder what other "conversations" between these two guys are around, does not seem like the first time they have had this method of communication about work. Vince will be interesting to hear from.
“Mark Forkner 6:50 PM:
Oh shocker alerT!
MCAS is now active down to M .2
It's running rampant in the sim on me
at least that's what Vince thinks is happening
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
Oh great, that means we have to update the speed trim descritption in vol 2
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
I'm levelling off at like 4000 ft, 230 knots and the plane is trimming itself like craxy
I'm like, WHAT?
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:52 PM:
that's what i saw on sim one, but on approach”
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Washington state
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This incident makes me reconsider American style capitalism. The pressure to cut corners is always there, but I thought that in any large reputable corporation there would be enough people with integrity to ensure that the really bad stuff wouldn't make it to test, and most certainly would not make it out of test. In my early postings on this issue I refused to believe some of the reporting (which now appears to be accurate) because some of it was just too abhorrent. If you knowingly put an airplane in the air with a potentially fatal flaw you are no better than a terrorist, and it doesn't matter how many millions of dollars per plane you saved for the stockholders (who are in a large part the upper management anyway.)
Even after the crashes, Boeing's behavior has been abhorrent -- blaming everybody other than Boeing for the crash. They even (apparently) placed an article in the New York Times that trashed not only the poor pilots, but the owner of the airline, all Asians, the country that the airline operated in, the airport operations, and even the customers for wanting cheap flights. I decided to stop posting for awhile because that article got me too hot under the collar to be coherent, but it is just one example of the unlimited depths to which they are willing to go in order to save the stock price for a day. I probably should stop now...
Even after the crashes, Boeing's behavior has been abhorrent -- blaming everybody other than Boeing for the crash. They even (apparently) placed an article in the New York Times that trashed not only the poor pilots, but the owner of the airline, all Asians, the country that the airline operated in, the airport operations, and even the customers for wanting cheap flights. I decided to stop posting for awhile because that article got me too hot under the collar to be coherent, but it is just one example of the unlimited depths to which they are willing to go in order to save the stock price for a day. I probably should stop now...
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Vienna
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is Forkner’s “text” conversation.
https://graphics.reuters.com/BOEING-...20Document.pdf
extract:
Wow just Wow!!
These guys had in depth knowledge of MCAS and it seemed to scare them, in just a sim - I tend to think that the accident crews ability/training have even less to do in contributing to the accident. than I did 24 hours ago.
A sub-system of the STS running in the back ground seems a play with words.
I wonder what other "conversations" between these two guys are around, does not seem like the first time they have had this method of communication about work. Vince will be interesting to hear from.
“Mark Forkner 6:50 PM:
Oh shocker alerT!
MCAS is now active down to M .2
It's running rampant in the sim on me
at least that's what Vince thinks is happening
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
Oh great, that means we have to update the speed trim descritption in vol 2
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
I'm levelling off at like 4000 ft, 230 knots and the plane is trimming itself like craxy
I'm like, WHAT?
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:52 PM:
that's what i saw on sim one, but on approach”
https://graphics.reuters.com/BOEING-...20Document.pdf
extract:
Wow just Wow!!
These guys had in depth knowledge of MCAS and it seemed to scare them, in just a sim - I tend to think that the accident crews ability/training have even less to do in contributing to the accident. than I did 24 hours ago.
A sub-system of the STS running in the back ground seems a play with words.
I wonder what other "conversations" between these two guys are around, does not seem like the first time they have had this method of communication about work. Vince will be interesting to hear from.
“Mark Forkner 6:50 PM:
Oh shocker alerT!
MCAS is now active down to M .2
It's running rampant in the sim on me
at least that's what Vince thinks is happening
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
Oh great, that means we have to update the speed trim descritption in vol 2
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
I'm levelling off at like 4000 ft, 230 knots and the plane is trimming itself like craxy
I'm like, WHAT?
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:52 PM:
that's what i saw on sim one, but on approach”
If this doesn't end in some serious consequences, the golden era of flying is over, and flying will never be safe again.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I, for one, an never going to get into one.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About this mail exchange:
1. What was ist that the first pilot had observed presumably in climb and the other in decent? Wasn't MCAS not supposed to activate within the regular flight envelope unless there was a faulty AoA sensor? If they had simulated a faulty sensor, he would have been told right after the sim session the latest. So what was going on?
2. How did Boeing get hold of this? Probably by sifting through archives after a criminal investigation was started. This is appears to be far less damning than a formal complaint to superiors.
1. What was ist that the first pilot had observed presumably in climb and the other in decent? Wasn't MCAS not supposed to activate within the regular flight envelope unless there was a faulty AoA sensor? If they had simulated a faulty sensor, he would have been told right after the sim session the latest. So what was going on?
2. How did Boeing get hold of this? Probably by sifting through archives after a criminal investigation was started. This is appears to be far less damning than a formal complaint to superiors.
I am not sure this exchange is as damaging for Boeing as some are making out.
I say this because I suspect it may be explained away as a sim fault.
He said he was levelling at 4000 and 230 kts which is nowhere near the AOA that would activate MCAS.
So either A) the exercise didn’t involve MCAS and there was a simple sim fault ( no big deal for Boeing)
or
B) the exercise involved simulating an aircraft fault and MCAS came into play ( big deal for Boeing to have this exchange take place).
That’s how I read it.
I say this because I suspect it may be explained away as a sim fault.
He said he was levelling at 4000 and 230 kts which is nowhere near the AOA that would activate MCAS.
So either A) the exercise didn’t involve MCAS and there was a simple sim fault ( no big deal for Boeing)
or
B) the exercise involved simulating an aircraft fault and MCAS came into play ( big deal for Boeing to have this exchange take place).
That’s how I read it.
2. How did Boeing get hold of this? Probably by sifting through archives after a criminal investigation was started. This is appears to be far less damning than a formal complaint to superiors.
Reuters are reporting today that the FAA are super-unimpressed that Boeing knew about these texts etc some months ago but failed to disclose them. Makes a mockery of Boeing's intention to fully cooperate with the investigation.
Finally on an unrelated point, it's intriguing to see how certain sections of the aviation press continue to report this story - they're obviously keen not to upset one of their major advertisers. Thankfully no such issues in the mainstream press.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France
Age: 62
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The two test pilots seem to describe a scenario in aspects similar to the later accident flights. Sim failure or not, it is getting very difficult to argue: oops, we didn't anticipate the erroneous MCAS activation or oops, the pilots should have easily dealt with this using some memory items within 3 s.
Rather, it looks like management must have known about the disastrous potential of MCAS, and must have decided to criminally push it on the market anyway and illegally hide it from FAA and pilots.
Rather, it looks like management must have known about the disastrous potential of MCAS, and must have decided to criminally push it on the market anyway and illegally hide it from FAA and pilots.
I am not sure this exchange is as damaging for Boeing as some are making out.
I say this because I suspect it may be explained away as a sim fault.
He said he was levelling at 4000 and 230 kts which is nowhere near the AOA that would activate MCAS.
So either A) the exercise didn’t involve MCAS and there was a simple sim fault ( no big deal for Boeing)
or
B) the exercise involved simulating an aircraft fault and MCAS came into play ( big deal for Boeing to have this exchange take place).
That’s how I read it.
I say this because I suspect it may be explained away as a sim fault.
He said he was levelling at 4000 and 230 kts which is nowhere near the AOA that would activate MCAS.
So either A) the exercise didn’t involve MCAS and there was a simple sim fault ( no big deal for Boeing)
or
B) the exercise involved simulating an aircraft fault and MCAS came into play ( big deal for Boeing to have this exchange take place).
That’s how I read it.
Not a big deal?
That alone should have rang massive alarm bells - they were not having an arvo out in a toy, they were testing and evaluating a aircraft (to be sure it was safe).
We know the simulators were faulty (now) as they do not correctly simulate the manual trim wheel forces required.
Testing seems to be the "Tick n Flick" option and if you do not get the result in the sim, the sim is to blame or get an exclusion.
Why was the "Shocker Alert" - MCAS now active down to M.2 said.
I read that as is it - is not a good thing, regardless of if there were a simulator fault or not.
The comments about the regulator indicate we are missing some important details in that text exchange -
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Was a strange reply to -
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: back of beyond
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not sure this exchange is as damaging for Boeing as some are making out.
I say this because I suspect it may be explained away as a sim fault.
He said he was levelling at 4000 and 230 kts which is nowhere near the AOA that would activate MCAS.
So either A) the exercise didn’t involve MCAS and there was a simple sim fault ( no big deal for Boeing)
or
B) the exercise involved simulating an aircraft fault and MCAS came into play ( big deal for Boeing to have this exchange take place).
That’s how I read it.
I say this because I suspect it may be explained away as a sim fault.
He said he was levelling at 4000 and 230 kts which is nowhere near the AOA that would activate MCAS.
So either A) the exercise didn’t involve MCAS and there was a simple sim fault ( no big deal for Boeing)
or
B) the exercise involved simulating an aircraft fault and MCAS came into play ( big deal for Boeing to have this exchange take place).
That’s how I read it.
I hope Boeing have a fall back plan of designing a 737 replacement.
Good luck with that
if it quacks like a duck...
if it quacks like a duck...
Just saying that I think there may be more to this than we naturally infer from the snippets we have seen.
Two guys have rampant MCAS operations - when it should not operate!
Not a big deal?
Not a big deal?
There is a lot unsaid in this exchange and it may have been an ongoing problem with sim programming that they didn’t have to explain to each other because they have both been dealing with it for a while.
Anyway, I’ll try not to look at things from different angles in the future.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France
Age: 62
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this was about a mere sim software issue, why worry about "having lied to the regulators"?
Nov 2016 they were less than half a year away from certification in March 2017...
Nov 2016 they were less than half a year away from certification in March 2017...
Yip, fair point. I’m completely happy to be wrong on this message exchange issue. It just wouldn’t surprise me if,when we know more, it is not quite as it seems. Potentially he had told the regulator that MCAS only kicks in at the higher Mach numbers ( because he thought it did) and he was worried because he had told them something that wasn’t accurate. That doesn’t necessarily mean that the MCAS was firing up at 4000 feet level and 230 kts.......that would be truely concerning I agree.
It may be the case that I simply can’t imagine so many individuals staying silent as the plane goes through final certification so I’m scrambling for alternatives, or, that we have been presented with half a story and the full story will look different.
I’ll be interested to find out which it is.
It may be the case that I simply can’t imagine so many individuals staying silent as the plane goes through final certification so I’m scrambling for alternatives, or, that we have been presented with half a story and the full story will look different.
I’ll be interested to find out which it is.
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Vienna
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe this is a chat exchange. E.g. SMS/iChat, Whatsapp, Slack or the like. It was still stored on somebody's device or server, so it's a "record".
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Vienna
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T
Why was the "Shocker Alert" - MCAS now active down to M.2 said.
I read that as is it - is not a good thing, regardless of if there were a simulator fault or not.
The comments about the regulator indicate we are missing some important details in that text exchange -
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Was a strange reply to -
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
Why was the "Shocker Alert" - MCAS now active down to M.2 said.
I read that as is it - is not a good thing, regardless of if there were a simulator fault or not.
The comments about the regulator indicate we are missing some important details in that text exchange -
Gustavsson, Patrik H 6:51 PM:
it wasnt a lie, no one told us that was the case
Was a strange reply to -
Mark Forkner 6:51 PM:
so I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)
What's more, it seems to indicate that parameters were changed POST regulatory review. We don't know if the regulator was updated on the change later on or not.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All of this sounds bad enough, but....
Later on, these same technical pilots then ‘forget’ to mention anything about MCAS in the manuals they were writing. How did that happen? Where did the pressure come from, for two professional technical pilots to completely miss out a safety system from the FCOM - the pilot’s manual?
Silver
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: L.A.
Age: 56
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will be much more interesting to see messaging exchanges between the test pilots...
Silver
