Posted on 05/21/2019 10:13:21 AM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Regular planes have been delayed at Phoenix due to heat reducing the lift during take-off. Now do it in thinner air at 5,000 feet.
-PJ
I always ask them:
How much?
It's free.
No, how much will you pay me to take one?
This news is over a month old. Thanks for the pointer.
https://www.denverpost.com/2019/04/11/boeing-737-max-8-denver-airport/
I keep asking the question, what is the true commercial airworthiness of this craft? Are pilots able to safely fly this passenger craft without auto pilot and other electronic bandaids from takeoff to landing without a bunch of patches or bandaids or are those days long gone for good even in commercial aviation? Remember a commercial craft should not be pressing the flight envelope like some inherently unstable jet fighter.
They could just try building planes that actually work.
"As an accident investigator since 1986, one truth remains with me today. It is never simple. Airplanes today are so safe, have so many redundant systems and operate in such complex airspace that the cause of an accident cannot be simple...."
Lion Air’s challenge
"If MCAS activated inappropriately, could the pilots stop it? Yes, they could disable the stabilizer trim motor with switches. This makes the assumption that they realize what is happening and follow the procedure for a “Runaway Stabilizer Trim.” But is not that simple.
"In the MAX, the stabilizer moves frequently without pilot input due to another system known as the Speed Trim System (STS). STS moves the stabilizer during acceleration or deceleration to maintain the proper feel in the control column.
"The pilots of Lion Air 610 faced a challenge: the stabilizer trim was moving as the control column was getting heaver due to the acceleration. Was this a “runaway trim” or STS? Did they realize the trim was moving with the noise of the stick shaker masking it...?
"...investigators have contributing factors of design, certification, crew action, maintenance trouble-shooting, failure to remove an airplane with recurring problems from service, failure to provide crews with critical information of problems encountered on a previous flight, and the addition of a system that could trim the stabilizer without pilot input without informing the operators.
"There is nothing simple about this accident.
"Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 faced similar challenges, but there were no maintenance problems and the crew knew about MCAS. It is a bit simpler, but still a very complex accident.
Just sent you a private message.
“The performance of all airplanes deteriorates in high heat or elevation, and all pilots account for that before taking off, said Steve Wallace, former director of the Federation Aviation Administration’s accident investigation branch. Even airlines operating from Orange County, California, which is nearly at sea level, occasionally have to reduce weight on their planes because of high temperatures, Wallace said.”
From the rocky Mountain liar. (err Denver Post)Reporting operational parameters at LA Times as though the parameters are a deficiency.
Read that again. You can't be serious.
That was actually the plan until the late 2000s! They scrubbed their plan to build a whole new & cool plane design...but got freaked out by Airbus' peak in sales.
So they just took the pre-existing 737, stuck a new engine on it, moved its placement on the plane, messed up its aerodynamics, added some semi-functioning anti-stall software as a band-aid, and then rushed it through the inspections/confirmation process while marketing it as the same ole 737 it's always been. But shinier and improved.
NOT.
Terrible. The leadership swamp needs to be drained there ASAP. Deep State Boeing won't be made 'Great Again' with current batch of people.
Good summary. I’ve said from the beginning of this that there’s something wrong with a plane that needs software to fly right.
Good plane at first, but then they stretched it, and then stretched it again. All that weight, all those extra passengers, and the wing size hasn't changed.
The new engines help some, but they don't quite fit under the wings, so they had to relocate, and now there's weight and balance trouble. MCAS to the rescue! Uh, maybe not.
The laws of Aerodynamics didn't change - you still need X amount of thrust pushing X amount of wing to lift X pounds off the ground at X air density. When you add Y pounds of weight for more passengers and luggage, maybe you don't achieve liftoff. Or you stall?
Sure, blame Boeing for trying to add those seats, but blame the airlines, too, for asking for them.
the autopilot “feature” that was supposed to correct for pilot errors
Reminder - the first 737 was flown in 1967, 52 years ago.
The engineers have been updating the design every since.
I recently read that the software (autopilot) was written to compensate for a engineering flaw introduced when they added larger engines to the aircraft then what the original aircraft was designed for.
The new engines changed the way the plane flew.
Perhaps the design for the 737 has finally reached a point it can no longer safely be tweaked.
Perhaps someone with better knowledge could explain it better.
You said it right. The MAX was not part of their original plan. They were going to design a whole new plane but got distracted by Airbus competition and decided to rush these ‘updates’ to the 737 instead to save time/money.
How many 737 Max 8 have crashed?
How many 737 Max 8 flights were completed successfully?
Based on what I read it seems like every other Max 8 crashed. What percentage of Max 8 flights were completed successfully. Is it 99.90%? Is it 59% Is it 19%.
Before we circle Boeing with pitchforks and torches can we get some FACTS?
Might was well write this one off.
I have tp assume this is a case where because of the thin air there is less lift when coming in and the engine can still bottom out against the runway under the right conditions. But just guessing. Maybe someday I'll read the article to see if I was right!
How the mighty have fallen.Boeing has gone from building some of the most robust planes in history to producing this tricked-out death trap.
I used to work for a company that made 'things' for Boeing aircraft. Boeing insisted that we outsourced 15 percent of our work to India and China and others because they wanted to sell planes there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.