Boeing 737 Max

#3
I don't know.

I take it that two of these have crashed, about half a year apart. Quite a lot of people in such a flight.

How many flights have been made in total with this plane model, though? And what would be the approximate likelihood of dying on such a flight compared to in just regular car traffic? I have no idea, but it'd be interesting to know. Normally, traveling by plane is a lot safer than by car of course. From what I've been told, your mortality risk is even supposedly higher at home than in on a commercial flight, though this was relayed to me by a pilot, so take it for what it's worth. But flying feels very unsafe from an emotional standpoint, so we tend to take any known increase in risk more seriously than in other scenarios.
 
#4
I don't know.

I take it that two of these have crashed, about half a year apart. Quite a lot of people in such a flight.

How many flights have been made in total with this plane model, though? And what would be the approximate likelihood of dying on such a flight compared to in just regular car traffic? I have no idea, but it'd be interesting to know. Normally, traveling by plane is a lot safer than by car of course. From what I've been told, your mortality risk is even supposedly higher at home than in on a commercial flight, though this was relayed to me by a pilot, so take it for what it's worth. But flying feels very unsafe from an emotional standpoint, so we tend to take any known increase in risk more seriously than in other scenarios.
I think dying in a plan crash has to be one of the most terrifying ways to go. Also the complete lack of control adds to the neurosis.
 
#8
I would.

Yet there are few mishaps, it doesn’t make the aircraft totally unsafe...

I might bet, the pilots wouldn’t have known all of the features in the autopilot system, as it was, when one of them Airbusses crqshed in an airshow at Moscow years back.

Sometimes the odds are just not with you, but in general flying is safer than a ride to thursday hockey match on the parkway.

I might be a touch biased being a former mil pilot.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
#10
I think dying in a plan crash has to be one of the most terrifying ways to go. Also the complete lack of control adds to the neurosis.
Think of an old mil pilot in the cabin... Some serious flight hrs without an autopilot and....


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
#11
I don't know.

I take it that two of these have crashed, about half a year apart. Quite a lot of people in such a flight.

How many flights have been made in total with this plane model, though? And what would be the approximate likelihood of dying on such a flight compared to in just regular car traffic? I have no idea, but it'd be interesting to know. Normally, traveling by plane is a lot safer than by car of course. From what I've been told, your mortality risk is even supposedly higher at home than in on a commercial flight, though this was relayed to me by a pilot, so take it for what it's worth. But flying feels very unsafe from an emotional standpoint, so we tend to take any known increase in risk more seriously than in other scenarios.
Good points for the most part. However, it appears that the 737 Max 8 line had been in service less than 2 years (starting late May 2107). Both craft that crashed were only a few months old. That is cause for concern. From wiki:

On October 29, 2018, Lion Air Flight 610, a 737 MAX 8 registration PK-LQP, crashed into the Java Sea 13 minutes after take off from Soekarno–Hatta International Airport, Jakarta, Indonesia. The flight was a scheduled domestic flight to Depati Amir Airport, Pangkal Pinang, Indonesia. All 189 onboard died. This was the first fatal aviation accident and first hull loss of a 737 MAX. The aircraft had been delivered to Lion Air just two months before. Following the Lion Air crash, Boeing issued an operational manual guidance, advising airlines how to address erroneous cockpit readings. The accident is under investigation, with the final report expected to be released between August and September 2019.
.
 
#12
Good points for the most part. However, it appears that the 737 Max 8 line had been in service less than 2 years. Both craft that crashed were only a few months old. That is cause for concern. From wiki:

On October 29, 2018, Lion Air Flight 610, a 737 MAX 8 registration PK-LQP, crashed into the Java Sea 13 minutes after take off from Soekarno–Hatta International Airport, Jakarta, Indonesia. The flight was a scheduled domestic flight to Depati Amir Airport, Pangkal Pinang, Indonesia. All 189 onboard died. This was the first fatal aviation accident and first hull loss of a 737 MAX. The aircraft had been delivered to Lion Air just two months before. Following the Lion Air crash, Boeing issued an operational manual guidance, advising airlines how to address erroneous cockpit readings. The accident is under investigation, with the final report expected to be released between August and September 2019.
.
Yes, fair point, I noticed that both were fairly mint (and crashed quite shortly after takeoff, which is also worrying).

Quite a few flights could have been made globally in the span of two years, though. I wouldn't know. To be clear, I'm not trying to say there isn't a problematically high risk with these planes (am happy that they've been grounded in Europe), I'd just be curious to know how the risk would compare to other modes of transportation. Again, I wouldn't know.
 
#13
Good points for the most part. However, it appears that the 737 Max 8 line had been in service less than 2 years (starting late May 2107). Both craft that crashed were only a few months old. That is cause for concern. From wiki:

On October 29, 2018, Lion Air Flight 610, a 737 MAX 8 registration PK-LQP, crashed into the Java Sea 13 minutes after take off from Soekarno–Hatta International Airport, Jakarta, Indonesia. The flight was a scheduled domestic flight to Depati Amir Airport, Pangkal Pinang, Indonesia. All 189 onboard died. This was the first fatal aviation accident and first hull loss of a 737 MAX. The aircraft had been delivered to Lion Air just two months before. Following the Lion Air crash, Boeing issued an operational manual guidance, advising airlines how to address erroneous cockpit readings. The accident is under investigation, with the final report expected to be released between August and September 2019.
.
Usually there are few crashes in develping a new aircraft. However that is not the case here. 737 is an old model, but the max-8 has new featues, which the FAA did not recognize to need education for... Americans go where there’s a hole in the fence.

I think, they’ll reconsider.

——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
Last edited:

sureshs

Bionic Poster
#16


Got me rollin’ on my back laughing!


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
Mission-critical software like avionics must be outsourced to India by Boeing and Airbus. There are so many people there available for testing that all bugs will be caught and fixed.
 
#19
I don’t think pretty much every major country on Earth (with the exception of the USA and Canada) would ban it without there being convincing reasons to do so. There’s obviously a problem with it, as two identical planes, seemingly having identical problems, and crashing in identical ways at identical parts of their journey cannot be a coincidence.

The USA will be loathed to ban it flying over US airspace. The only way they would ban it would be if one fell out of the sky and landed on The Donald’s head.
 
#20
One other thing got popping into my mind...

There were these ISIS guys at the airport. And they got into the same plane chatting domestics and other everyday stuff.

As they buckled up, one of them asked the others, if they were on holiday.

- No, business trip...


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
#26
I thought the issue is the autopilot gets a little confused and the pilots don't know how to turn it off (the first crash anyways). Sensed a stall and nosed down.. and wouldn't let pilots correct without them turning off the safety feature.

It is like trying to drift with the traction control on. If you aren't smart enough to turn it off, you can't make it go
 
#27
was the autopilot a male or female:?))).............the black boxes have been dug out n showing the autopilot was doing some 'miles high' in the cockpit way:?)))............
 
#29
They've been grounded in Europe, Oceania and parts of Asia. Europe won't even allow it in her airspace, meaning that airlines which are still running it, must send different aircraft to/over Europe. Speaking of which, they're not grounded in North America, such is the power of the corporate lobbyist. Scary.
Southwest, American and United are the airlines with the most 737 Max 8 planes still in operation. Air Canada also uses them. Time to look for alternative carriers.
 
#30
Seems to be a software bug. This is what happens when software is not outsourced to India.
Mission-critical software like avionics must be outsourced to India by Boeing and Airbus. There are so many people there available for testing that all bugs will be caught and fixed.
There are many reasons not to give any critical software development to India.
People's perception of Indian IT people are very wrong. I've worked with many Indians.
The only reason companies hire Indians or outsource is that they are much cheaper.
IT departments give 200K graduates every year in India. Most of them are useless. Top 3-5% migrate to the West.
 
#39
Why is the Black box still sitting in Africa ????? if I was boeing , I would go there and Take the black box myself and take it to NTSB myself. If anyone wants to stop them, take 3 F-15 fighter jet made by Boeing escort there and nobody can stop them.

Do it Do it now
Minor trouble with the range. Need a tanker for the flight from any airbase hosting F-15s.

And it might not be under their jurisdiction.

——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
#40
Minor trouble with the range. Need a tanker for the flight from any airbase hosting F-15s.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
No problem, there are pletnty of these midair refueling tankers made by Boeing flying over atlantic ocean all the time.

 
#41
This is mostly hearsay, but on the matter.

As a former pilot, the new MAX version charasteristics on the nose up autopilot working, yet the regular autopilot is not engaged is very much against the nature of flying a plane.

All the pilots are educated and know some aerodynamics, and they would defenately not stall an airliner no matter what.

If the system is not possible to switch off by simple manner, when going gets rough, that is a major offence by the builder.

I remember, a crash many years ago, where the autopilot was making a go-around and pulled up. The pilots found the angle of attack was getting way high and started steering against the autopilot, which was not disabled.

While the pilot pushed the nose down, the system thought, it was not pulling hard enough and added some nose up to the mix. And the more the pilot pushed... Stalled into the bushes.

Do not recall the make nor the model of that aircraft, but being a pilot and an engineer myself, I find it childish, business man’s fool error to say, no education needed, if a new powerplant setup changes the aerodynamics so much, that you need to install a new piece of fly-by-wire stabilazer on the aircraft on certain conditions.

Boeng has gone money first, safety second on this one, if the above is the case. That’s how it seems now, cause they’ve to release new manuals and the aeronautical authorities require the pilots to be educated properly.

The outmost offence is, that this feature had not been added to the pilot manuals. Lot of aviation documents are revised daily. But if you don’t update pilot’s manuals...

Really disappointed to read this in the papers of today.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
Last edited:
#42
This is mostly hearsay, but on the matter.

As a former pilot, the new MAX version charasteristics on the nose up autopilot working, yet the regular autopilot is not engaged is very much against the nature of flying a plane.

All the pilots are educated and know some aerodynamics, and they would defenately not stall an airliner no matter what.

If the system is not possible to switch off by simple manner, when going gets rough, that is a major offence by the builder.

I remember, a crash many years ago, where the autopilot was making a go-around and pulled up. The pilots found the angle of attack was getting way high and started steering against the autopilot, which was not disabled.

While the pilot pushed the nose down, the system thought, it was not pulling hard enough and added some nose up to the mix. And the more the pilot pushed... Stalled into the bushes.

Do not recall the make nor the model of that aircraft, but being a pilot and an engineer myself, I find it childish, business man’s fool error to say, no education needed, if a new powerplant setup changes the aerodynamics so much, that you need to install a new piece of fly-by-wire stabilazer on the aircraft on certain conditions.

Boeng has gone money first, safety second on this one, if the above is the case. That’s how it seems now, cause they’ve to release new manuals and the aeronautical authorities require the pilots to be educated properly.

The outmost offence is, that this feature had not been added to the pilot manuals. Lot of aviation do documents are revised daily. But if you don’t update pilot’s manuals...

Really disappointed to read this in the papers of today.


——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
if the plane start to stall or in danger or stalling,, why don't they immediately switch off the Autopiolet and engage the manuel flight. This is so easy to do and pretty quick. you are thousands of feet above the air, you have time to do that
 
#43
if the plane start to stall or in danger or stalling,, why don't they immediately switch off the Autopiolet and engage the manuel flight. This is so easy to do and pretty quick. you are thousands of feet above the air, you have time to do that
The trouble in this case, from what I’ve read and heard over the news would be, that this is an autonomous and automatic feature like the electronic stability control in your car that is not possible to switch off.

Old automatic transmission Mercs used to have this kind of traction control. In certain snowy conditions You could not drive a low percentage hill up, cause the system controlled the revs and torque, had you your wheels spinning. And there was no manner to switch it off.



——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
 
#44
The trouble in this case, from what I’ve read and heard over the news would be, that this is an autonomous and automatic feature like the electronic stability control in your car that is not possible to switch off.

Old automatic transmission Mercs used to have this kind of traction control. In certain snowy conditions You could not drive a low percentage hill up, cause the system controlled the revs and torque, had you your wheels spinning. And there was no manner to switch it off.



——————————
No more on pain meds - all contributed matter and anti-matter are still subject to disclaimer
if that was the case, we would have more than 2 planes crashed and burned by now. If it is auto feature that doesn't turn off, and your plane stall and crash and Piolet has no control, then we would have a lot more than 2 planes crashed by now.
 
#45
if that was the case, we would have more than 2 planes crashed and burned by now. If it is auto feature that doesn't turn off, and your plane stall and crash and Piolet has no control, then we would have a lot more than 2 planes crashed by now.
Not necessarily. There may have been conditions on both these, no else flight has encountered.

Will be intresting to see the safety investigation reports.

There was a case in Gibraltar just few days ago, where an airliner was tilting side to side, and looked to be out of control due sidewind. That ended in a lucky manner and they diverted to alternate.

Most accidents happen by the John Reason Swiss cheese model.

Many layers of safety features fail at the same instant in conditions nobody could have figured. Many times the airframe has been OK, but there been a systematic error, nobody could have figured before the mishap.
 

Big_Dangerous

Talk Tennis Guru
#46
There are many reasons not to give any critical software development to India.
People's perception of Indian IT people are very wrong. I've worked with many Indians.
The only reason companies hire Indians or outsource is that they are much cheaper.
IT departments give 200K graduates every year in India. Most of them are useless. Top 3-5% migrate to the West.
I wouldn't waste your time on Sureshs. He'll only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
 
#49
I thought the new system can be disabled, but the crash last year was because the pilots did not know how to disable it. Boeing "made it easier and "re-educated" the pilots" after that episode.

Which makes this crash more confusing. Either the pilots or boeing are definitely in the wrong
 
Top