Gathering of the Clan

Page 1 of 3

Author:  4SeasonFisher [ Tue Mar 12, 2019 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Boeing

A criticism I've been hearing this week is that pilots have become computer operators rather than pilots.

Author:  Buxtehude [ Tue Mar 12, 2019 11:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

Even with all of the high-tech instrumentation installed in modern aircraft....skilled pilots are still the most important items in the management of aircraft. Regardless of all the electronic aides and fail-safe gadgets , the pilot still needs to be "in charge" and on top of everything.....and that comes down to experience.
Don't ever sell "seat of the pants" and calmness as things of the past.
Once you've logged enough hours to feel comfortable and have confidence in your skills....
Then, when the lights go off or the auto-pilot strays for no good's time to aviate.....that's what aviators do.
The rule we hammered into our students was simple....When something goes wrong...and it will...
Aviate....Navigate....and only then Communicate.

I do clearly recall a stressful moment when the controller started giving senseless instructions after I told him how I intended to deal with a minor glitch: Very calmly I said, "You fly what you are sitting in and I'll handle the plane."

Author:  Colston Newton [ Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

To see what Bux means, watch "Sully." I saw it two nights ago.

Author:  ColoradoNative [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

Buxtehude wrote:
Even with all of the high-tech instrumentation installed in modern aircraft....skilled pilots are still the most important items in the management of aircraft. Regardless of all the electronic aides and fail-safe gadgets , the pilot still needs to be "in charge" and on top of everything.....and that comes down to experience.

I'd like to agree with you, but all the moving parts that keep the plane in the air are now "drive by wire" and if there is an issue with any part of that system so that the commands don't make it to the moving parts, then all the "experience" in the world won't do any good.

From what I've read, this is part of the issue, so a monkey could do the same as an experienced pilot is these situations.

It will be interesting to see the final reports.

Author:  Rancid C. [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

All the electronic systems for flight controls have (or should have) an emergency disconnect. Pilots need to maintain proficiency in manual operations. I wouldn't get on an airplane that couldn't be flown manually. That's why pilots take periodic check rides.

John, former USAF check pilot

Author:  Doug G [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 1:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

Heard yesterday that the 737 Max has a unique feature. All the 737 models have an auto-override that controls the stick to prevent the pilot from putting the nose too far vertical, to prevent a stall. With the other models, you can disengage that feature by moving the stick. On the Max's, there's a button that has to be pushed. The problem is that Boeing did not put those instructions in its flight manual for the Max. American pilots have enough training to have learned these things. Foreign pilots often do not. I heard the Turkish co-pilot had 200 hours. You need more hours than that to get a drivers license for a car in many states.

I know nothing of flying planes. That's just what I heard on the radio. Might be wrong.

Author:  Buxtehude [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

Just looked in the log is 3,000 hours plus. And that is not unusual nor even a high number.
Thus, when your buddy has 65 hours including instructional time.....and he wants to show you "his stuff", beg off.... :roll: Bux.....added...3,000 hrs @ 140 mph = 420,000 miles....and I never frightened anyone....but there were those moments....ask John.
No airports above minimums and low on fuel...that still wakes me up at night once in a while....but, I followed the glide slope, busted minimums and landed safely in Portland, ME.
It took several days to shed "the puckers."
Old Bux

Author:  4SeasonFisher [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

Trump has grounded all of these planes. Wow what a logistical nightmare this is going to cause people in airports. How long will it take to bring in a replacement airplane? This has potential to become a terrible disaster for airports, airlines, Boeing, hotels, and all passengers. Ugh. I hope people who live near airports can find ways to make their homes available for people to stay overnight if they need to.

Author:  Buxtehude [ Wed Mar 13, 2019 4:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

Just as an aside from the above entries....I don't think I'd want to ride in a plane flown by " The Donald."

We used to say (and John's heard it I'm certain)....
"There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots....but there are very few "old-bold pilots."

Author:  Doug G [ Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:14 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Boeing

From an aviation guy:
In my opinion the defect in Boeing 737..max

The issue with the 737Max started when Boeing's biggest 737 customer, Southwest, wanted a newer more efficient airplane. Boeing killed the 757 and began the Max program. The customer wanted an airplane that wouldn't require any new training or a new type rating. Boeing claimed that the Max was just an updated, more efficient version of it's venerable, proven, workhorse; the classic 737. But the Max wasn't just an updated version of a previously certified airframe. The Max had a new wing and new engines; changing the airframes center of gravity and center of lift. Those characteristics changed the way the airplane flew. So, to make it fly like the current 737-800; Boeing installed a new, secret, 'safety' system called the MCAS. The MCAS was needed to make the airplane fly and feel like the current version 737-800. But it was so secret that Boeing chose not to tell anyone about it. They didn't included it in any maintenance manuals, they didn't include it in any training manuals, they didn't include it in any aircraft operating manuals. They especially didn't tell the pilots about it. The airplane was successful certified as a 737 and no new training was required. A win for Boeing and a win for its biggest 737 customer. With the new flight characteristics the Max might have a proclivity to pitch up under certain flight conditions. To counteract this pitch up moment, Boeing developed and installed the MCAS. The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System is designed to push the nose or nudge the nose over during a critical pitch up moment. It takes information from computers fed by information from the Angle of Attack vanes. Apparently, the Lion Air crash was caused by faulty information fed to the MCAS. The MCAS pushed the nose over. This caught the pilots by surprise. The airplane was not behaving like they expected or like they were trained to expect. In a effort to arrest this uncommanded, nose over moment, you should be able to disconnect the autopilot and hand fly, manually fly the airplane using your pilotage skills. But, this new secret system was designed to operate in both Auto-flight and manual-flight mode. So even when you are in manual flight mode, if the MCAS is getting false information, it will continue to push you nose over, push your nose down. Runaway trim is something pilots are trained for. That is what Boeing would like to hide behind. That is what Boeing would like to use when it points to pilot error. At least with the Lion Air flight, the passengers and crew were done in by an aircraft system that Boeing chose to keep secret. If @FAA there is nothing wrong with the Max, why has Boeing recently said there is a software update coming out soon. Air France 447, was scheduled to have it's defective pitot tubes replaced when its fatal last flight was scheduled to land in Paris. Just a little too late for 228 passengers and crew? Did the Boeing software update come too late for the 157 passengers and crew on Ethiopian 302

Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group