GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently April 23 19, 8:59 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 347 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35
Author Message
PostPosted: March 15 19, 4:23 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: October 12 06, 2:21 pm
Posts: 16193
Location: Baseball Ref Bullpen
Swirls wrote:
Arthur Dent wrote:
It doesn't sound like the MCAS is an optional nice to have system that can be switched off without consequences. It's apparently there because the MAX designs are inherently more prone to stall than prior 737s. Turning it off may replace MCAS malfunction crashes with stall crashes.


Yeah, from what I understand it isn't optional and sounds like the pilots were fighting it trying to keep the plane's nose pointed upward.

I think there is a related ssue here that might be just as big a deal here. Boeing's guidance that 737 pilots didn't need extra training before flying the MAX. This was a big selling point and cost saver. Turns out it was wrong. Did Boeing stretch the truth to make the cost benefit analysis look better?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 15 19, 5:01 pm 
Online
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22981
Location: Thinking of the Children
Is there an article that discusses that further. From everything I’ve seen, it’s optional and easy to switch off. There are multiple instances of mcas not working correctly with no repercussions. Including the previous flights of the lion air plane that crashed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 15 19, 5:57 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 25 06, 6:43 pm
Posts: 11346
Location: Austin
Switching it off because it has failed and switching it off because it could fail are two very different risks. And Joe’s point on the sales pitch that you don’t need new training for the MAX because these electronic systems compensate for the different dynamics seems clearly wrong. If that is a major selling point, I can see why Boeing would want to hide from that reality.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 15 19, 6:01 pm 
Offline
gone fission
User avatar

Joined: December 11 07, 4:15 pm
Posts: 7836
Location: Twin Cities, MN
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
Is there an article that discusses that further. From everything I’ve seen, it’s optional and easy to switch off. There are multiple instances of mcas not working correctly with no repercussions. Including the previous flights of the lion air plane that crashed.


This article kinda discusses it. It's entirely possible that they had attempted to turn it off and it didn't, or that they couldn't figure out how to, but if that was the case I'd expect to have heard about it since ATC communications are recorded. But it definitely sounds like it was still engaged at the time of the crash.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/lion-air- ... -findings/

Quote:
Since the Lion Air Boeing 737 MAX 8 plummeted into the Java Sea in October, killing all 189 people on board, little new information has come to light about the cause of the crash. The incident has remained under investigation by Indonesian and international authorities. But as of Tuesday, the latest discovery shows how hard the pilots fought in their futile struggle to save the doomed aircraft from almost the moment it took off.

According to information gathered from the aircraft’s flight data recorder, or so-called black box, the plane’s nose was pushed down by an automated system more than 24 times during the 13-minute flight. The two pilots managed to pull the nose of the aircraft back upward before finally losing control, sending the plane into the ocean at 450 mph.
The black box data has been prepared by Indonesian crash investigators for release in an official report on Wednesday, but it was reviewed early by the New York Times.

Prior to this latest information, we knew that in the moments preceding the crash, the 2-month-old Boeing jet underwent erratic changes in speed and altitude before plunging into the Java Sea at such a high speed that some parts of the plane disintegrated into powder upon impact.

The system, which is thought to have caused the crash from the beginning of the investigation, is meant to stop pilots from angling the aircraft nose too high (which can affect the plane’s speed and lift and cause a stall) by automatically pushing the nose of the plane downward if it senses a stall is possible. But, as Boeing said in a memo after the crash, the system can suddenly push the nose so far down that pilots cannot lift it back up. The system would kick in even if cockpit crews are flying a plane manually and wouldn’t be anticipating a computerized system to take over.

It’s known as the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system, or MCAS. The anti-stall system has been a controversial topic in the wake of the crash because airlines and pilots who operate the 737 MAX have expressed that they weren’t fully informed about the system, and it was not listed in the cockpit crew manual for the aircraft. Boeing has denied withholding relevant information about the system following the crash.


In a statement to TPG, the plane manufacturer said it couldn’t discuss the matter due to the ongoing crash investigation, but “the appropriate flight crew response to uncommanded trim, regardless of cause, is contained in existing procedures.”

“The pilots fought continuously until the end of the flight,” said Capt. Nurcahyo Utomo, the head of the air accident subcommittee of the Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee.

Nurcahyo said that in the case of Lion Air Flight 610, the stall-prevention system had been activated and is a central focus of the investigation, according to the Times.

While the findings detailed by the Indonesian Parliament is more than what was known before, there’s still plenty to be found out about Lion Air Flight 610’s final moments and why the aircraft, which had issues prior to the final flight, was permitted to fly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 15 19, 6:27 pm 
Online
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22981
Location: Thinking of the Children
interesting stuff guys. Here’s a link to a guy I follow on YouTube that talks about a lot of the stuff we’re talking about.

It sounds like as soon as the gas had proof the plane was being pushed nose down by the mcas system they grounded the plane.

https://youtu.be/AgkmJ1U2M_Q


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 15 19, 9:07 pm 
Offline
darjeeling sipping elite
User avatar

Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Posts: 36067
Location: Huis Clos
lukethedrifter wrote:
https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/the-world-pulls-the-andon-cord-on-the-737-max/

The 737 Max is a product of that environment where short-term decision-making can drive big and often painful pushes for product improvement. It’s one that I’ve written about extensively over the years, and born from the work of academics like Dr. Theodore Piepenbrock and his work on the Evolution of Business Ecosystems.

Every airplane development is a series of compromises, but to deliver the 737 Max with its promised fuel efficiency, Boeing had to fit 12 gallons into a 10 gallon jug. Its bigger engines made for creative solutions as it found a way to mount the larger CFM International turbines under the notoriously low-slung jetliner. It lengthened the nose landing gear by eight inches, cleaned up the aerodynamics of the tail cone, added new winglets, fly-by-wire spoilers and big displays for the next generation of pilots. It pushed technology, as it had done time and time again with ever-increasing costs, to deliver a product that made its jets more-efficient and less-costly to fly.

In the case of the 737 Max, with its nose pointed high in the air, the larger engines – generating their own lift – nudged it even higher. The risk Boeing found through analysis and later flight testing was that under certain high-speed conditions both in wind-up turns and wings-level flight, that upward nudge created a greater risk of stalling. Its solution was MCAS, the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System control law that would allow for both generations of 737 to behave the same way. MCAS would automatically trim the horizontal stabilizer to bring the nose down, activated with Angle of Attack data. It’s now at the center of the Lion Air investigation and stalking the periphery of the Ethiopian crash.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: March 16 19, 11:34 am 
Offline
Seeking a Zubaz seamstress

Joined: September 4 07, 1:48 pm
Posts: 23383
Location: St. Louis
made a new thread. Not in politics because everything touched by orange is inevitably political.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 347 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group