the problem is when computer engineers try take over what humans should be doing. having said that, i did find some really cheap flights on Lion Air to Asia if anyone is keen?
MCAS is NOT a revolutionary design. It is a patch to overcome the 737’s unsolved engine bypass ratio problem and the ill-fated patch was designed in a mad rush in order to beat the release of A320neo, hence the MCAS has a close circuit logical failure which is known to the Boeing engineers and Boeing did the bare minimum to warn pilots around the world. An improvement to MCAS is a patch to a patch - when you fix one bug, two more pops up. No, 7M8 is NOT safe, the problem is hereditary unless a complete redesign overhaul is carried out, which Boeing cannot afford at the moment. For the long term, 7M8 maybe a huge success. But for now, I choose not to trust Boeing again just yet.
Interesting that the Lion Air incident wasn’t enough to bring out the full story about why MCAS is there. Now we know that Boeing are correcting a shortcoming in the behaviour of the aircraft with automation. They will need to do a lot more to show that the aircraft is safe to operate. I hope that the FAA and others actually fully scrutinise the safety integrity of the design before the bans are released.
The two primary owners of Lion Air made their feelings and ideas widely and publicly known almost immediately after their unfortunate crash. However, due to Lion Air's previous record, Boeing adroitly chose to frame the issue around Lion Air's safety issues. I bet Boeing will be eating some humble pie for a while over that decision.
With all due respect, if the FAA had done their job correctly in the first place, they wouldn't have ceded so much program control to Boeing in the first place. This is precisely why the FAA is now under investigation by the FBI. I have my popcorn ready, while we await what will undoubtedly be an intriguing view of the interaction between the FAA and arguably the world's largest aviation group. I guess the view of "if it ain't Boeing, I'm not going" might recede from aviation prominence shortly.
I think that Boeing have some major problems to overcome. Have seen in the press a couple days ago that Garuda is cancelling the remaining 49 Max's on order.. and have read tonight that the Chinese leader Xi has ordered 300 jets from the Europeans 290 of the A320 family and 10 A350's.
If you know anything about the design of the 737; you’ll know that it was originally designed in the late 1960s for the current engine technology at the time.
It was originally developed from the 707 & 727, as a shorter, budget, twin (low-bypass) turbofan engine passenger aircraft.
With the introduction of the increased efficiency, high-bypass turbofan, with larger frontal diameter fan (intake), the clearance under the wing proved too short. To fit the engines in such a limited height, the designers mounted the new engines further forward. Also, the engines were modified so the the gearbox was to the side resulting in the flat bottom you see today.
This is why the 737 seems so short: it was designed for the 60’s low-bypass, turbofan.
The first flight of the 737 was 52 years ago (9 April 1967)
The max is even more deformed than the Next Gen series (-700, -800, -900). The designers essentially overcame this with a computer.
Usually I adhere to the advice of most computer technicians: garbage in: garbage out. If a pilot inputs incorrect information, the aircraft output is incorrect. However I have recently heard that the 737 Max is unflyable without the perfect correction of the computer. This is deeply concerning.
Would I fly a 737 Max?
Not unless I had a death wish.
Last editedby Concorde1990 at Mar 29, 2019, 08:47 AM.
Boeing 737 Max should not fly again! Under pressure from Airbus they decided to re-engine a 1960's airframe (Boeing have known for over a decade they need a new airframe). The problem was a 420 aircraft order from American Airlines to Airbus for A320neo - Boeing freaked out! And so the process of compromising began on the Max. Engines too big so let's mount them forward and higher on the wing. Raise the front landing gear as well. Tell airline no major pilot training needed - just 1 hour on an iPad as a key selling feature! And then when Boeing started test flights the aerodynamics (reported as the worst 737 ever produced) found that the Max was prone to nose up because of the bigger, heavier, more powerful engines that were mounted further forward cause a high chance of an aircraft stall. Then and only then came MCAS (yes it was not part of the original plan!) a software add-on that they didn't tell pilots about to "fix" the problem.
Go back to the drawing board Boeing produce an aircraft you are proud of (like the 787) and is fit for air travel for the next 30+ years. Yes there'll be some corporate pain but so much gain long-term for aviation.
There's so much more to come out about the poor Boeing decision making on the 737 Max - it will be a corporate case study in years to come.
The other thing Boeing and airlines (who are standing behind Boeing) are underestimating is the power of social media. Never before have people had so much communication power they will be hit hard very hard.
I am surprised that ABT has kept away from reporting on it - you guys need to inform us! Don't be silent and Qantas if you're reading this... even thinking of using the 737 Max as your domestic fleet replacement you will lose customers in the droves.
brettepi
brettepi
Member since 10 Jul 2017
Total posts 86
the problem is when computer engineers try take over what humans should be doing. having said that, i did find some really cheap flights on Lion Air to Asia if anyone is keen?
New York State
New York State
Member since 06 Oct 2018
Total posts 5
MCAS is NOT a revolutionary design. It is a patch to overcome the 737’s unsolved engine bypass ratio problem and the ill-fated patch was designed in a mad rush in order to beat the release of A320neo, hence the MCAS has a close circuit logical failure which is known to the Boeing engineers and Boeing did the bare minimum to warn pilots around the world. An improvement to MCAS is a patch to a patch - when you fix one bug, two more pops up. No, 7M8 is NOT safe, the problem is hereditary unless a complete redesign overhaul is carried out, which Boeing cannot afford at the moment. For the long term, 7M8 maybe a huge success. But for now, I choose not to trust Boeing again just yet.
paulkaz
paulkaz
Member since 01 Mar 2011
Total posts 32
kimshep
kimshep
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 11 Oct 2014
Total posts 412
The two primary owners of Lion Air made their feelings and ideas widely and publicly known almost immediately after their unfortunate crash. However, due to Lion Air's previous record, Boeing adroitly chose to frame the issue around Lion Air's safety issues. I bet Boeing will be eating some humble pie for a while over that decision.
With all due respect, if the FAA had done their job correctly in the first place, they wouldn't have ceded so much program control to Boeing in the first place. This is precisely why the FAA is now under investigation by the FBI. I have my popcorn ready, while we await what will undoubtedly be an intriguing view of the interaction between the FAA and arguably the world's largest aviation group. I guess the view of "if it ain't Boeing, I'm not going" might recede from aviation prominence shortly.
Racala
Racala
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 22 May 2018
Total posts 66
I think that Boeing have some major problems to overcome. Have seen in the press a couple days ago that Garuda is cancelling the remaining 49 Max's on order.. and have read tonight that the Chinese leader Xi has ordered 300 jets from the Europeans 290 of the A320 family and 10 A350's.
Concorde1990
Concorde1990
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 13 Nov 2018
Total posts 24
If you know anything about the design of the 737; you’ll know that it was originally designed in the late 1960s for the current engine technology at the time.
Aussie100
Aussie100
Qantas - Qantas Frequent Flyer
Member since 10 Mar 2014
Total posts 2
Boeing 737 Max should not fly again! Under pressure from Airbus they decided to re-engine a 1960's airframe (Boeing have known for over a decade they need a new airframe). The problem was a 420 aircraft order from American Airlines to Airbus for A320neo - Boeing freaked out! And so the process of compromising began on the Max. Engines too big so let's mount them forward and higher on the wing. Raise the front landing gear as well. Tell airline no major pilot training needed - just 1 hour on an iPad as a key selling feature! And then when Boeing started test flights the aerodynamics (reported as the worst 737 ever produced) found that the Max was prone to nose up because of the bigger, heavier, more powerful engines that were mounted further forward cause a high chance of an aircraft stall. Then and only then came MCAS (yes it was not part of the original plan!) a software add-on that they didn't tell pilots about to "fix" the problem.