|
737 max returning to service ?
Time for a thread on "after the fix"
I wonder what other carriers are going to do and I see that the Southwest Pilots appear to be taking the highroad of waiting to see what is needed vs their corporation stance.
Southwest Airlines does not expect its pilots to undergo simulator training as part of a process to return the Boeing 737 Max to service, as the carrier stresses its aviators are well-equipped to handle a problem that has emerged as a common link between two fatal crashes of the aircraft type. "We are not hearing that will be a requirement," chief executive Gary Kelly told analysts on an earnings call on 25 April, in response to questions on whether pilots will have to undergo simulator training ahead of the aircraft's return to service. Kelly says these indications were drawn from discussions the airline has had with several parties, including its pilots union, the US Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing. He stresses that the pilots of Southwest, the largest 737 operator in the world, are "extensively trained". "Managing the aircraft in a runaway stabiliser scenario is something that we've already covered," says Kelly, saying the airline is "the most experienced 737 operator in the world". Investigations into two crashes of the 737 Max 8 have centered on an aircraft system that might have activated the aircraft stabiliser to push the nose down into a dive. Training for 737 pilots transitioning to the 737 Max has emerged as a point of discussion in the scrutiny cast upon Boeing's newest narrowbody following two fatal crashes. Southwest's pilot union had criticised Boeing for not informing operators about the system, the manoeuvring characteristics augmentation system (MCAS), which the union called "ill-designed". The Southwest Airlines Pilots Association (SWAPA) says it is awaiting the proposed training programme for the software update. "Once we see the final training product from Boeing, we will decide if more training should be given to SWAPA pilots in conjunction with the company. If we and the company disagree, we will do what we think is best for our passengers and the flying public," says SWAPA's president Jon Weaks. Southwest told FlightGlobal previously it will receive the first of three 737 Max simulators this year, while fellow 737 Max operator American Airlines will receive its first by the end of the year. Dallas-based Southwest ended the first quarter with a fleet of 753 737 aircraft, including the 34 737 Max 8s that were grounded in March. The airline holds the largest order for the 737 Max that has been publicly announced, with 260 additional aircraft on its orderbook. When and how the 737 Max will return to service remain unclear. The FAA has to certify the software upgrade from Boeing, which completed test flights earlier this month. If simulator training is required, airlines like Southwest will likely face an additional delay in getting the aircraft back into service. Southwest, which grounded its 737 Max fleet on 13 March, has pulled the 737 Max from its schedules until 5 August. The airline's chief operating officer Mike Van de Ven says in the event that the aircraft is cleared to return to service before that date, Southwest will utilise its 737 Max 8s as spares to support its operations before resuming normal operations after 5 August. The 737 Max grounding, along with other difficulties, reduced the airline's net profit by $150 million in the first quarter. While Kelly concedes the airline is "not happy" with the situation, he throws his support behind Boeing, calling the 737 Max 8 "the best narrowbody airplane in the world". "That will continue to be the case when it returns to service with this software modification," he says. Southwest has no intentions of reconsidering its status as an all-Boeing operator, says Kelly. The Air Current recently reported that a team of Southwest employees visited Europe to learn more about the operations of the Airbus A220, but executives say the trip was planned prior to the 737 Max grounding and was part of the airline's ordinary course of business to learn more about aircraft types. Calling the timing of the trip "unfortunate", Kelly says, "We were not trying to send any message whatsoever… there is no plan to do anything other than grow our fleet with the Max." |
Firstly I believe Boeing should refrain from any mention of what training might be required - my understanding is training requirements are the domain of the regulators, not Boeing. So just put forward your proposed fix and debate the outcome.
Secondly, I think every regulator should get hard evidence that the MAX meets every requirement "possible" that MCAS was developed for to meet certification - I simply can not understand how the new "handicapped" MCAS, can now keep the MAX within the certification requirements. Thirdly every change made to the MAX must be justified as to why it was made, and exactly why no extra training was or will need to be give - this is not limited to MCAS. Another step should be a list of all persons that were involved in discussions and decisions over the MCAS on the MAX and access to privately interview them - I doubt this will ever happen as I expect there is more to hide. |
The problem now lies with passenger confidence.
|
a third crash, Heaven forbid, would be the death knell for Boeing AND whichever airline was flying it and put profit before safety. They've had enough warnings now. The tort lawyers would jump for glee. The MAX issues go beyond an MCAS software fix. If I worked for any airline in a management capacity there's no way my signature would be appearing on any return-to-service MAX paperwork....
G |
I’m slightly disturbed from the comments from Southwest here, very much schedule over safety sort of vibe I am getting. His Aviators are well trained he quotes. Well so are those over at say Virgin Australia, if not better, but those guys have publicly said they are not putting it into service next quarter without additional training over the initial requirements. The pilots don’t want it. I highly doubt all WN pilots are happy with those comments. |
Saying no new training needed is not something that will provide confidence to flying public.
DO THE TRAINING, even if not needed as you need to give confidence to the flying public otherwise they will not fly. Andy S Grove of Intel had a minor chip problem in 1990's, they saw it as minor and it was. Consumers saw it differently and it cost Intel $475 million and almost the company. Bottom line it will require Boeing senior bods and airline bods to be on board a few Maxs to build confidence |
Originally Posted by groundbum
(Post 10456314)
a third crash, Heaven forbid, would be the death knell for Boeing AND whichever airline was flying it and put profit before safety. They've had enough warnings now. The tort lawyers would jump for glee. The MAX issues go beyond an MCAS software fix. If I worked for any airline in a management capacity there's no way my signature would be appearing on any return-to-service MAX paperwork....
Originally Posted by racedo
(Post 10456619)
Saying no new training needed is not something that will provide confidence to flying public.
DO THE TRAINING, even if not needed as you need to give confidence to the flying public otherwise they will not fly. The MAX needs to be seen as safer than before, since another crash (or even a B737 NG model) would attract intense media coverage. This would be true even if caused by something completely unrelated (such as the shooting down of MH17). Marketing and PR isn't just about shiny feel-good advertising and bland reassurances, gut-feel issues take longer to overcome. |
I don't think that any additional MAX-related pilot training will be required or that passengers should be scared of flying on MAXes... ever.
|
Originally Posted by Clandestino
(Post 10456661)
I don't think that any additional MAX-related pilot training will be required or that passengers should be scared of flying on MAXes... ever.
Happily my airlines of choice do not use them. |
sim time is the issue, tough enough to get as it is.
|
Originally Posted by Smythe
(Post 10456763)
sim time is the issue, tough enough to get as it is.
Had that not been a sales pitch (no pun intended) then there would have been simulators on hand. |
Originally Posted by Smythe
(Post 10456763)
sim time is the issue, tough enough to get as it is.
|
I don't think that Boeing or Southwest get how much has changed. Crashing two models of the newest plane within months for the same technical fault may have been a big deal in 1950 but it is an existential threat in the 2019s. Planes are not supposed to crash anymore, and generally they don't.
It seems like the least that Boeing could do for their loyal customers who they just %$@! over royally is to pay for more simulators to be built and simulator time for the pilots. Somewhere in the $1billion and counting budget they are talking about there should be room for a few millions (in actual cost) to train pilots. They should also pay for very nice hotels for the pilots who are being retrained. I would suggest that some paranoid instructor work on training all of the differences of the MAX from the other models, with and without whatever hackery Boeing did to meet certification. Now that MCAS is pretty much gone (Murphy says that an AOA disagree WILL happen when somebody actually has to pull into a high AOA for some reason) practice high AOA stalls and recovery, and whatever else follows from the different placement of the engines. Edit: Boeing's line is that the planes are perfectly safe, the crashes were the pilot's fault, but they are resisting calling for more pilot training on the MAX! It is fascinating to watch the results of a collision between a corporate sales pitch and reality. |
Originally Posted by groundbum
(Post 10456314)
a third crash, Heaven forbid, would be the death knell for Boeing AND whichever airline was flying it and put profit before safety. They've had enough warnings now. The tort lawyers would jump for glee. The MAX issues go beyond an MCAS software fix. If I worked for any airline in a management capacity there's no way my signature would be appearing on any return-to-service MAX paperwork....
G By the way, any tort lawyer who would jump for glee at a third fatal accident is not one I would want to retain. Call me old fashioned. |
Originally Posted by Bend alot
(Post 10456779)
Sim time should not have been an issue - it is an issue, because someone decided that to save costs and say it would require no extra training other than differences.
Had that not been a sales pitch (no pun intended) then there would have been simulators on hand. Beancounters rule the World. |
Facts please. Comments from currently qualified 737 Max 8 pilots, or people who are involved with design, certification or return to service of the type are welcome. People's opinion of being a passenger in this type, or the flying skills of other pilots, do not contribute to the thread.
|
Originally Posted by Pilot DAR
(Post 10457348)
Facts please. Comments from currently qualified 737 Max 8 pilots, or people who are involved with design, certification or return to service of the type are welcome. People's opinion of being a passenger in this type, or the flying skills of other pilots, do not contribute to the thread.
|
The message I get from Boeing, SW and the FAA is something along the lines of 'let's not dwell too much on the overall design or dig too deep into other potential issues, here's quick MCAS fix now let's get the birds back in the air (before the investigations have concluded)'.
And that's money talking. |
"Money" is nervous certainly . . . but they forget passengers and crew will get nervous too when it looks like the problem is swept under the table either entirely or by one or two airlines . .
|
Simplest thing would have been to remove MCAS. Since it's not done means MAX cannot fly without it. The software upgrade consist of reduced authority of MCAS so that stabilizer will never override the elevator authority and using redundancy toto disab it in case of a disagree. Now the question is will reduced authority MCAS do the job of preventing the stall for which it was installed? Two aircrafts were driven into ground and if the third one is stalled into ground how will it be treated? Secondly in case of disagree the disabled MCAS will it be land ASAP?
|
Originally Posted by Clandestino
(Post 10456661)
I don't think that any additional MAX-related pilot training will be required or that passengers should be scared of flying on MAXes... ever.
|
What ever happened to the pilot action of pushing the power up when up the aircraft is slowing toward its stall speed? Or even better, of increasing power when your are 5-10 knots below your target speed so you never get to its stall speed.
|
Originally Posted by warbirdfinder
(Post 10457595)
What ever happened to the pilot action of pushing the power up when up the aircraft is slowing toward its stall speed? Or even better, of increasing power when your are 5-10 knots below your target speed so you never get to its stall speed.
|
Originally Posted by warbirdfinder
(Post 10457595)
What ever happened to the pilot action of pushing the power up when up the aircraft is slowing toward its stall speed? Or even better, of increasing power when your are 5-10 knots below your target speed so you never get to its stall speed.
So, what is your stall speed? It might be hard to say if you have unreliable airspeed indications due to an AOA failure. |
Originally Posted by hans brinker
(Post 10457704)
So, what is your stall speed? It might be hard to say if you have unreliable airspeed indications due to an AOA failure.
I would first expect a pitot issue and then move from there. As a + 30 year LAME #1 - is the pitot cover on or melted parts of one evident. #2 - is there a pitot blockage or leakage. #3 - is there a static blockage. #4 is not a AoA failure. |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Smythe https://www.pprune.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif sim time is the issue, tough enough to get as it is. Does that not just equate to $$$$ ? You can do plenty without full motion on, maybe a scaled down, non-motion sim would help, and be a bit better than an iPad. |
Originally Posted by sixchannel
(Post 10456691)
I would appreciate knowing why you think that?
Originally Posted by sixchannel
(Post 10456691)
Happily my airlines of choice do not use them.
I have decisively proven it works on Huawei Android pad too. |
Evidently some US Pilot groups are not satisfied with the level of training proposed by Boeing.
U.S. pilots demand better training if Boeing wants to rebuild trust in 737 MAXAmerican Airlines pilots have warned that Boeing Co.'s draft training proposals for the troubled 737 MAX do not go far enough to address their concerns, according to written comments submitted to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and seen by Reuters.
Thomson Reuters · Posted: Apr 28, 2019 1:58 PM ET | Last Updated: an hour ago American Airlines pilots have warned that Boeing Co's draft training proposals for the troubled 737 MAX do not go far enough to address their concerns, according to written comments submitted to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and seen by Reuters. (Matt Mills/Reuters)The comments were made by the Allied Pilots Association (APA), which represents pilots at American Airlines Group Inc., the world's largest airline and one of the biggest 737 MAX operators in the United States. Their support is important because Boeing has said pilots' confidence in the 737 MAX will play a critical role in convincing the public that the aircraft is safe to fly again. Boeing's fast-selling 737 MAX was grounded worldwide in March following a fatal Ethiopian Airlines crash that killed all 157 on board, just five months after a similar crash on a Lion Air flight that killed all 189 passengers and crew. Now it is readying for regulatory approval a final software update and training package to address an anti-stall system known as MCAS that played a role in both nose-down crashes. A draft report by an FAA-appointed board of pilots, engineers and other experts concluded that pilots only need additional computer-based training to understand MCAS, rather than simulator time. The public has until April 30 to make comments. Protesters are expected outside Boeing's annual meeting in Chicago on Monday, where shareholders will also question the company over its safety record. APA is arguing that mere computer explanation "will not provide a level of confidence for pilots to feel not only comfortable flying the aircraft but also relaying that confidence to the travelling public." It said the MAX computer training, which originally involved a one-hour iPad course, should include videos of simulator sessions showing how MCAS works along with demonstrations of other cockpit emergencies such as runaway stabilizer, a loss of control that occurred on both doomed flights. Required simulator training could delay the MAX's return to service because it takes time to schedule hundreds or thousands of pilots on simulators. Hourly rates for simulators range between $500-$1,000 US, excluding travel expenses. American Airlines Chief Executive Doug Parker said on Friday that even if other countries delay the ungrounding of the MAX, once the FAA approves it, American will start flying its 24 aircraft. Union pilots for Southwest Airlines Co., the world's largest operator of the MAX with 34 jets and dozens more on order, have said they were satisfied with the FAA draft report, but would decide on additional training once they see Boeing's final proposals. |
Originally Posted by Bend alot
(Post 10457705)
AoA failure would not be my first guess on an unreliable airspeed - why is it yours?
I would first expect a pitot issue and then move from there. As a + 30 year LAME #1 - is the pitot cover on or melted parts of one evident. #2 - is there a pitot blockage or leakage. #3 - is there a static blockage. #4 is not a AoA failure. I think you misunderstood me. Somebody was saying:"just fly slightly faster than the stall speed and everything will be okay". I wanted him to answer where he would get a reliable source for airspeed from, with an AOA failure (and I think most of us agree the two crashed MAXes had AOA issues), at no point did I suggest AOA failure is more or less likely than a pitot issue. On the aircraft I fly I have seen min clean as low as 180 and as high as 245 depending on weight, pretty hard to guess the stall speed accurately enough. |
PR
Regardless of the fix/how/when/retraining pathways, there has been significant damage done to the brand of the aeroplane. When the aircraft is returned to service, I’m interested to see how public perceive the aircraft and what that does to the bottom line for its operators. I can imagine that one more such crash would leave the aircraft irrecoverable in terms of sales. Also would leave a major blow to Boeing’s brand for years to come. Time will tell. |
I heard that SWA is seriously considering the A-220, because of Boeing's failure with the 737.
Boeing Whistleblowers Report More 737 MAX 8 Problems to FAA |
I'd like to buy some shares in Boeing, but I'm not sure just how bad this is going to get for them. Then there's the problems with USAF tankers and Dreamliners.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/b...-problems.html https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...r-over-debris/ |
Well this has become the "New Coke" episode for Boeing. Remember New Coke from April of 1985. Had to be replaced with "Coke Classic". Disaster!
|
That was very interesting about the 'New Coke'.
Boeing's got a similar problem and it won't go away anytime soon. There'll be passenger resistance, but many passengers have no idea what aircraft they're flying on anyway. There's also only 2 major commercial aircraft manufacturers in the world so many airlines have no choice but to be going Boeing given the backlog of aircraft on order. They'll want to make sure they get this 100% right, so it could be a protracted grounding, very, very expensive, and Boeing have suspended guidance, so i might just wait a while longer before I make my purchase. |
Originally Posted by skol
(Post 10458471)
I'd like to buy some shares in Boeing, but I'm not sure just how bad this is going to get for them. Then there's the problems with USAF tankers and Dreamliners.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/20/b...-problems.html https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...r-over-debris/ Not just Aviation. Their space division also had recent early failure, not to kick em while they are down, but they really need to get it together, across the board. https://www.yahoo.com/news/intelsat-says-satellite-made-boeing-fails-210810314--finance.html |
Originally Posted by Smythe
(Post 10456763)
sim time is the issue, tough enough to get as it is.
How soon can the sims be upgraded and re-certified? Cheers |
Originally Posted by jack11111
(Post 10458548)
Well this has become the "New Coke" episode for Boeing. Remember New Coke from April of 1985. Had to be replaced with "Coke Classic". Disaster!
Affected probably 1 in 5 million as it was in complex calculations, didn't matter as everybody wanted it changed, Intel said "No" until consumer and manufacturers started walking away from them. Almost cost them the company. Cost $1/2 billion to put right. |
Almost 400 deliveries of the Max but less than 5 operating sims in the world. Is that the worst aircraft to simulator ratio ever?
|
Originally Posted by 6 DOF
(Post 10458674)
I agree, even if not needed from a pilot point of view. But from the public view it is essential.
How soon can the sims be upgraded and re-certified? Cheers Per |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:22. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.