Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 133 posts

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#11

Post by pinewurst »

bdonlan wrote: post #8
kbos87 wrote: post #4

The thing that baffles me - why the hell has there never been any innovation in the form of making it easier to diagnose a problem and move through the necessary steps in a checklist beyond fumbling through a paper manual? In a situation where seconds count, it seems illogical that this has never been improved upon. Didn’t at least one of these planes crash because the pilots are believed to have only gotten X number…

The newer airbuses actually do have electronic checklists including - for at least some steps - automatic detection that the step has been completed. You can see an example of the electronic checklist in this simulator video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzjyr0UZKRw Even on aircraft without fully integrated checklists, many operators have switched to using iPads instead of paper manuals as well.

So do the new platform (e.g. not 737) Boeings. The retention of paper on 737MAX is all about not changing anything to avoid having pilots require simulator training. It's also why it has a glass cockpit that mostly shows digitized versions of the 60s gauges.

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#12

Post by TylerE »

da_chicken wrote: post #9
whoisjuan wrote: post #7

Kind of unfair. Do they really think that an aircraft should be powered by the same software or hardware that powers a modern computer or smartphone? An aircraft needs incredible reliability. You don’t get that with modern software/hardware architectures.

Yeah, the B-52, adopted in 1952, is planned to be is service through the 2050s. An airframe design expected to last for over 100 years. Keep in mind that flight itself is barely 100 years old. And paper manuals? Are they expecting to use iPads for in flight documents or something? Shall we compare failure states of paper vs tablets?

There are still DC-3s from the early '30s in service.

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#13

Post by tedivm »

da_chicken wrote: post #9
whoisjuan wrote: post #7

Kind of unfair. Do they really think that an aircraft should be powered by the same software or hardware that powers a modern computer or smartphone? An aircraft needs incredible reliability. You don’t get that with modern software/hardware architectures.

Yeah, the B-52, adopted in 1952, is planned to be is service through the 2050s. An airframe design expected to last for over 100 years. Keep in mind that flight itself is barely 100 years old. And paper manuals? Are they expecting to use iPads for in flight documents or something? Shall we compare failure states of paper vs tablets?

That article says that other plans will display the error and the recommended checklist automatically, which certainly seems faster than flipping through a bunch of books trying to find a specific page based off of some lights.

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#14

Post by Aloha »

TylerE wrote: post #12
da_chicken wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the B-52, adopted in 1952, is planned to be is service through the 2050s. An airframe design expected to last for over 100 years. Keep in mind that flight itself is barely 100 years old. And paper manuals? Are they expecting to use iPads for in flight documents or something? Shall we compare failure states of paper vs tablets?

There are still DC-3s from the early '30s in service.

The old saying is "the only replacement for a DC-3 is another DC-3"

Though I think most of them that are flying are C-47's from the war era.

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#15

Post by EricE »

jonas21 wrote: post #10
kbos87 wrote: post #4

The thing that baffles me - why the hell has there never been any innovation in the form of making it easier to diagnose a problem and move through the necessary steps in a checklist beyond fumbling through a paper manual? In a situation where seconds count, it seems illogical that this has never been improved upon. Didn’t at least one of these planes crash because the pilots are believed to have only gotten X number…

As mentioned in the article, other Boeing jets do automatically present a checklist on the display when they detect a problem: > A second electronic system found on other Boeing jets also alerts pilots to unusual or hazardous situations during flight and lays out recommended steps to resolve them. The 737 is stuck in the past because given the choice, nobody wants to have to retrain their pilots on more modern system…

>The 737 is stuck in the past because given the choice, nobody wants to have to retrain their pilots on more modern systems.

Ding ding ding!

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#16

Post by the_fonz »

Regardless of how bad or good the 737 MAX was conceived, none of that matters because of regulatory capture of the FAA by way of millions of dollars of bribes paid to hundreds in Congress. Ever since the 737 NG, as the 2010 Al Jazeera report shows, Boeing has been installing substandard structural components and covering it up. No one should ever fly on an 737 NG or MAX aircraft because the regulatory environment was too weak, and so these aircraft are systematically-subpar. Defective structural parts and lax standards cannot be fixed with software upgrade. They're irreparably unsafe. Refusing to fly on them is the main logical act a passenger can undertake, and join Flyers' Rights http://flyersrights.org/

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#17

Post by ReptileMan »

tedivm wrote: post #13
da_chicken wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the B-52, adopted in 1952, is planned to be is service through the 2050s. An airframe design expected to last for over 100 years. Keep in mind that flight itself is barely 100 years old. And paper manuals? Are they expecting to use iPads for in flight documents or something? Shall we compare failure states of paper vs tablets?

That article says that other plans will display the error and the recommended checklist automatically, which certainly seems faster than flipping through a bunch of books trying to find a specific page based off of some lights.

A lecturer of mine once said - knowing what kind of people we teach here for programmers, I am scared of going to the doctor.

The less software is in something(and less cloudy/iot) the better. And the more I program the more I prefer stupid and mechanical things when reliability is on the line.

A paper manual is always there for you.

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#18

Post by londons_explore »

pinewurst wrote: post #2

The "1990s Computing Power" comment is ignorantly harsh. The MAX (to the best of my knowledge) uses a similar AMD29050-based architecture as the 777 (where it was pioneered) and the 737-800/900. It's amply fast and very very reliable, hardware and software (setting MCAS aside which is new to MAX). Any sane person would prefer the solid well-proven choice over the bleeding edge. People used to make similar comments ab…

I'm not sure I agree here.

There exist possibilities for far more safety with more compute.

For example, when a mechanical failure occurs (for example an engine explodes and partially falls off) the flight characteristics of the plane change dramatically. Current systems fall back to human control, and hope that human will be able to figure out how to control a now very "unique" machine.

Future systems could dynamically create new flight models based on collected data to be able to fly the machine in entirely new ways.

For an example of this, did you know it's possible to fully control a quadcopter even with 3 out of 4 rotors broken and no working fins/flaps? [1]. That sort of 'fly it how it has never been done before' is out of reach of human control, and might save lives.

[1]:. https://www.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2013/12...

Re: 737 Max: 1960s Design, 1990s Computing Power and Paper Manuals

#19

Post by exelius »

londons_explore wrote: post #18
pinewurst wrote: post #2

The "1990s Computing Power" comment is ignorantly harsh. The MAX (to the best of my knowledge) uses a similar AMD29050-based architecture as the 777 (where it was pioneered) and the 737-800/900. It's amply fast and very very reliable, hardware and software (setting MCAS aside which is new to MAX). Any sane person would prefer the solid well-proven choice over the bleeding edge. People used to make similar comments ab…

I'm not sure I agree here. There exist possibilities for far more safety with more compute. For example, when a mechanical failure occurs (for example an engine explodes and partially falls off) the flight characteristics of the plane change dramatically. Current systems fall back to human control, and hope that human will be able to figure out how to control a now very "unique" machine. Future systems could dynamica…

This tech is just now making it into military aircraft in the F-35 (it’s designed to compensate for failures or combat damage while keeping the plane’s handling relatively consistent), so I would guess it’ll be a while before we see a civilian version.
Post reply on HN