Pilot forum 737 max
All rights reserved.
Mark Forums Read. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots. Thread Tools. Is the increasing elevator feel with increased angle of attack a useless hangover from the first world war? If so the archaic regulators and their disciples responsible for the worse ever peace time aviation scandal.
My revised B. C instructor's manual has 4 stall symptoms; falling airspeed, decreasing effectiveness of controls, buffeting and aircraft sinks. My B. A manual has eight including probable changed effectiveness of elevator. But none mentioned increased stick force. I now fly paragliders whose pitch control force increase towards the stall by design but it hasn't stopped me accidentally spinning a wing — twice.
Over the new forest I did a clean, power off stall which ended up inverted having completed a half flick roll before I centralised the controls. Again without any noticeable change in stick force. In my best mate mistakenly retracted the slats and despite the stick shaker and stick push going he died.
One of the accident investigators stated that the simulator pitch control wasn't the same as the aircraft. We hadn't flown approach to the stall in real life as it was deemed too dangerous after a Trident was nearly lost. A couple of years later a new boy, whilst sir was in the loo, selected slats out whilst in the Clacton hold around 25,ft.
The aircraft stalled above mach limitation and only recovered after careering through several other aircrafts flight paths into lower air. A couple of times I heard brief stick shakes during approach in turbulence. Stick force not mentioned. I was in the classroom when our DC10s were grounded after Chicago when the engine fell off taking out two of the hydraulic systems allowing the slats on that side to retract. No cockpit indication nor slat locking device and the wing stalled.
We were only allowed to fly it with CWS plugged in so control forces were irrelevant. I was one of the first lot of pilots on the Fokker with full time thrust stall protection according to our books.
Two crews both doing a split arse visual approaches into Nice at low level had the stall warning go.Graver, it was news to the Pilots flying the MAX since 18 months as well. The Lion Air accident can prove otherwise. Figure 1. Source: Boeing MAX brochure. By placing the nacelle further forward of the wing, it could be placed higher. Combined with a higher nose landing gear, which raises the nacelle further, the same ground clearance could be achieved for the nacelle as for the NG.
The drawback of a larger nacelle, placed further forward, is it destabilizes the aircraft in pitch. All objects on an aircraft placed ahead of the Center of Gravity the line in Figure 2, around which the aircraft moves in pitch will contribute to destabilize the aircraft in pitch. Figure 2. Source: Leeham Co. The is a classical flight control aircraft. It relies on a naturally stable base aircraft for its flight control design, augmented in selected areas. Until the MAX, there was no need for artificial aids in pitch.
Once the aircraft entered a stall, there were several actions described last week which assisted the pilot to exit the stall. But not in normal flight. The nacelles are designed to not generate lift in normal flight. It would generate unnecessary drag as the aspect ratio of an engine nacelle is lousy.
The aircraft designer focuses the lift to the high aspect ratio wings. A lift which is felt by the aircraft as a pitch up moment as its ahead of the CG linenow stronger than on the NG. The most difficult situation is when the manoeuvre has a high pitch ratio. This would negate why MCAS was implemented, the Pilot pulling so hard on the Yoke that the aircraft is flying close to stall.
They learned that holding against the trim stopped the nose down, and then they could take action, like counter-trimming or outright CUTOUT the trim servo. After a 10 second trim to a 2. The faulty high AOA signal was still present. This has created strong reactions from airlines with the MAX on the flight line and their Pilots. They fly them interchangeably during the week. They do fly the same as long as no fault appears.
Then there are differences, and the Pilots should have been informed about the differences.
Category: Uncategorized. In figure 2 it shows the same center of gravity for the NG as the Max. Based on what is coming out about the automatic trim, Boeing must be counting its lucky stars that this incident happened to Lion Air and not to an American aircraft. Depending on the answers pilot training requirements are likely to change materially. The reused fuselage design has also been repeated extended without extending the wheel base.
This means the tail of the plane is alot longer than originally intended and forces pilots to land at higher than intended speeds since the plane has to land with a flatter pitch angle so the tail doesnt strike the ground. The higher speeds mean potentially harder landings and alot harder braking, over heating of the brakes.
Also a non-trivial number of tail strikes on s. No idea of stats, but my impression is very much that the stretched airliners smack tails a lot more than shorter planes.
At least one accident report on this I read cited the PICs familiarity with a shorter config; one day he flew a long plane and immediately smack the tail on landing. Same controls and behavior encourage these sorts of things. The aircraft is slowed by reversing engines thrusters to a very low speed.All rights reserved.
Thread Tools. By Ian Austen and Selam Gebrekidan. The Federal Aviation Administration had for days resisted calls to ground the plane even as safety regulators in some 42 countries hadbanned flights by the jets. View Public Profile. Find More Posts by canyonblue Find More Posts by kghjfg. Is it unusual for such announcements to originate from the White House?
Find More Posts by mickjoebill. The issue, in my mind, is the silence of Boeing and the FAA, in the face of serious public concerns. I'm not a huge Trump supporter, but something needed to be said and done. Find More Posts by Gilmorrie. That's good to hear, glad to see erring on the side of caution.
Find More Posts by SirLoosli. Dee Vee. Find More Posts by Dee Vee. All crew-only recovery flights. ACA used 7xxx numbers as ferry flights to maintenance bases. Last edited by kenish; 14th Mar at MCAS took over when it thought the planes were stalling. Except they weren't stalling. Investigators suspect damaged sensors gave a false stall reading and MCAS took control and put the aircraft into a dive. However, flight testing revealed the MAX was not handling well in low-speed stall conditions due to its larger and more powerful engines.
Boeing engineers volunteered a software fix and MCAS was revised to handle low-speed stall. MCAS now had to be more powerful and act more severely to handle low-speed stall. Safeguards that prevented MCAS from taking control at low-speed were removed. Also removed was input from multiple sensors to detect stall.
Wind vane AOA sensors are often damaged. Both Lion Air and the Ethiopian Air flights were getting bad data, indicative of damaged sensors. It is not known when or why MCAS came to rely on a single sensor. He neglected to mention MCAS would be taking over in more flight situations, including more often encountered low-speed, stall situations.
Boeing, playing by FAA rules, did not resubmit the revised MCAS because the changes of the control system applied during low-speed conditions, not extreme interpreted as high-speed conditions. The FAA role — and especially how it may have been led by the very company it was supposed to be watching — is under investigation by the US Senate. When the MAX took flight with passengers, the FAA assumed it to be with the wimpy, benign flight control system, content to stay in the shadows, probably never used.
But on-board was a pumped up and muscular MCAS, poised to take control of the aircraft. It was no longer chained by constraints.
The pilots had no idea of a stowaway on board. The MCAS was programmed to act on signal: trim the stabilizers to pitch the aircraft down.
U.S grounds ALL 737 Max
In addition, there were the aforementioned tragedies of Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines flights. Such a scenario was considered, but was judged to be so unlikely, predicted to occur once every 10 million flight hours. A fleet of one hundred Maxes would have to fly 10 hours a day every day of the year for 27 years to reach 10 million flight hours. Inveteran test pilot Ray Craig testing high-speed situations in a simulator in the early days of MAX development, detected problems with the MAX in certain high-speed cases.
Craig, an old-school pilot and probably distrustful of a software fix, relented to MCAS. After all, it would only kick in when speeds were high and there were great g-forces — a combination rarely encountered.
The original version of MCAS allowed for a maximum of 0. These problems were thought to be due to the bigger, more powerful engines and their placement more forward than in the previous model. Rather than apply an aerodynamic fix or have pilots try to handle these situations, MCAS was offered as a solution.
Since stall occurs at lower speeds and altitude but in greater air density, MCAS had to be far more aggressive, be more powerful and be able to rotate the stabilizers four times as fast: a rotation of up 2. Boeing engineers solved this problem by mounting the engines up and forward from where the previous engines were mounted.
The Best Analysis Of What Really Happened To The Boeing 737 Max From A Pilot & Software Engineer
While this solved the ground clearance problem, the forward mounted, more powerful engines were thought to have caused problems in flight.Several pilots complained about Boeing Max 8 planes ahead of Sunday's deadly Ethiopian Airlines crashthe second crash of a Boeing Max 8 in five months.
US records show that at least five complaints were lodged with federal authorities in recent months, with one captain even calling the flight manual "inadequate and almost criminally insufficient," according to The Dallas Morning News. The complaints were made in the Federal Aviation Administration's incident databasewhich allows pilots to report issues about aviation incidents anonymously.
The complaints highlighted issues with the Max 8's autopilot system, which has been called into question after Sunday's crash and the crash of Lion Air Flight in October. That incident also involved a Boeing Max 8 plane. The black box recovered from the Lion Air crash has indicated Flight was repeatedly pushed into a dive position shortly after taking off from Jakarta, Indonesia. Investigators have suggested the automated system's sensors may have malfunctioned.
All people on board were killed in that crash. In one complaint, a commercial pilot described issues occurring during takeoff. As the autopilot was engaged, the aircraft's nose suddenly pitched down, setting off the plane's alarm system, which sounded "Don't sink, don't sink!
The situation was remedied only after autopilot was turned off, it added. Another pilot who flies the Max 8 complained in November that it was "unconscionable" that pilots were allowed to continue to fly the planes without more training or disclosure on how the Max 8's system differed from previous models, Politico said.
Read more: Germany, the UK, China, and other countries have grounded the Boeing Max 8 after its 2 deadly crashes — here's who's taken action so far. In an October reporta pilot complained the Max autothrottle system did not work properly.
The problem was rectified after the pilot adjusted the thrust manually and continued to climb. Boeing has faced backlash over its Max planes as investigators look into what happened to both doomed flights. Countries and airlines around the world have begun grounding Boeing Max planes for inspection.
Read more: 'If it's Boeing, I'm not going': People are freaking out about flying on the plane model that has now crashed twice in 5 months. Boeing has announced that all Max planes will receive updated flight-control software in the coming weeks, though the company has not indicated whether it will make physical changes to the aircraft, which has been in service since last spring.
This change disrupted the plane's center of gravity and caused the Max to have a tendency to tip its nose upward during flight, increasing the likelihood of a stall," Zhang said. Get the latest Boeing stock price here. Account icon An icon in the shape of a person's head and shoulders. It often indicates a user profile. Login Subscribe. My Account.
World globe An icon of the world globe, indicating different international options.Log in Register. Search titles only. Search Advanced search…. Forums New posts Trending Search forums. What's new New posts All posts Latest activity New profile posts. Members Current visitors New profile posts Search profile posts. Active Topics. Everywhere Threads This forum This thread.
Then when the solution turns to crap they cover it up and circle the wagons. The "optional" AoA vane and light below need to be mandatory. As well as the proposed software changes confirming the stall. Boeing sells an option package that includes an extra AoA vane, and an AoA disagree light, which lets pilots know that this problem was happening. Both MAXes that crashed were delivered without this option. No MAX with this option has ever crashed. Norman Gold Member. Joined Sep 24, Messages 22, Reaction score 3, Points Trump was the fault?
Norman said:. Slyhunter Gold Member. Grampa Murked U Diamond Member. McRocket said:. Tipsycatlover Platinum Member. Joined Sep 23, Messages 37, Reaction score 7, Points 1, The crashes were caused by a malfunctioning part.
Tipsycatlover said:. You must log in or register to reply here. Latest Discussions. The worst leader in the world is!!! Issa Friday at PM Politics 3 4 5. Replies 86 Views Chat with us in Facebook Messenger. Find out what's happening in the world as it unfolds. More Videos Pilots confronted Boeing over Max concerns In recent weeks, Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg and others have said that the actions of the pilots played a role in the chain of events that caused the crashes, which Dennis Tajer, spokesman for the Allied Pilots Association, said unfairly points the finger at foreign pilots.
Audio reveals pilots angrily confronting Boeing about Max feature before second deadly crash. When asked if the Ethiopian crash might have been prevented if Boeing had taken action on the pilots' suggestions, Tajer said, "I think that's a fair conclusion.
Boeing did not respond to CNN's request for comment. Tajer, who has flown the MAX, argues the Ethiopian Airlines pilots did what they were instructed to do but that Boeing's MCAS forced the plane into such an aggressive downward angle that the pilots could not recover.
It just blew us away," Tajer said.
U.S. pilots flying 737 MAX weren’t told about new automatic systems change linked to Lion Air crash
Horrific details in timeline of Ethiopian crash The MCAS software on the Boeing MAX, which is designed to push the nose of aircraft down if it senses an imminent stall, is believed to have played a role in both the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes that left a total of people dead. Muilenburg said in April that the safety systems on its MAX jets were properly designed and the pilots did not "completely" follow the procedures that Boeing had outlined to prevent that kind of malfunction.
Ethiopian officials said the Ethiopian Airlines pilots repeatedly performed all of Boeing's procedures but could not recover the plane. Delegates from 33 international aviation authorities will meet with the FAA Thursday to discuss processes for reviewing the software fix Boeing has completed for the aircraft, which remains grounded worldwide. Boeing says it has completed Max software fix. He said the FAA remains in "constant, close communication" with other regulators, and that although he expects the US to lift flight restrictions first, he expressed optimism foreign regulators would agree on processes to recertify the plane.
Report: Pilots raced for manuals as plane went down The process has not been as fast as Boeing had initially projected. Elwell said the process was delayed by a review conducted by the manufacturer and questions from the FAA. Elwell would not predict a timeline for certifying Boeing's software fix. When asked whether airline's plans to return the MAX to service in August were realistic, he replied the he wouldn't even say October at this point because of the unknowns associated with the fix.
He said before recertification, the FAA must receive Boeing's final application and then conduct test flights, a system safety analysis and determine training requirements. International regulators, including those in Canada and Europe, will conduct their own validations or independent design reviews of the aircraft's updated system before lifting flight restrictions.
A Boeing spokesperson said in a statement Wednesday the company has been working closely with the FAA and global regulators on processes to certify the updated MAX software and enhance pilot training.