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

Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

dallasnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 307 posts

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#151

Post by ansy »

privong wrote: post #145
dajohnson89 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So 20 MAX-related issues out of ~850. How is that significant?

> So 20 MAX-related issues out of ~850. How is that significant? To build on what @ggm and @siwatanejo noted. The 737 debuted in 1967, so it is 52 years old now. The 737 MAX is 2 years old. In terms of number of issues per year since the aircraft was introduced the 737 is at ~15 incidents per year and the 737 MAX is at ~10/year. But as @ggm notes, it's important to look at when in the life cycle many of the non-MAX 7…

I’d look at incidents per flight hour. Some of those 737s have been in the air for decades. I suspect the numbers for the 737 MAX will stand out more on this analysis.

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#152

Post by ams6110 »

siwatanejo wrote: post #130
dajohnson89 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So 20 MAX-related issues out of ~850. How is that significant?

we're talking about a plane model that is only 2 years old?

Yes and no. The basic 737 design dates to the 1950s. The first ones flew in the 1960s.

The 737 Max is an augmented version of the original.

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#153

Post by tarabanga »

dpwm wrote: post #45
tuna-piano wrote: post #30

Some context: 1. There have been 865 737 related ASRS reports since 1/1/2018 2. I don't know how to quickly separate out 737-MAX reports from the non 737-MAX reports, as the ASRS database doesn't include 737-MAX as an airplane type! From scanning, I can say that there are more than five MAX related reports, though. [1] All 865 737 reports since 1/1/2018 CSV - http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=5466867979406…

regex? I just grepped "B737 max" and found 11 entries. "737.{0,20}max" (case insensitive) yields 20. [0] [0] CSV output: https://pastebin.com/87N023cx

searching for mcas and its long form might do as well.

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#154

Post by manquer »

Zarel wrote: post #108
lutorm wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The relevance of the metric depends on what you're using it for. If you decide whether to drive or fly to a destination based on how safe it is, risk/distance is a perfectly reasonable metric. Since flying is a means of transportation, it seems reasonable to judge the risk relative to the amount of transportation you get out of it. That doesn't discount the fact that most of the risk is in take-off/landing, so if you…

I'm not sure how your comment addresses the core problem that risk/distance is not a reasonable metric if long-distance driving is less risky than short-distance driving, and you apply the short-distance driving risk to long-distance driving.

As a passenger on either it doesn't matter where the risk is concentrated . I am only interested in the outcome of how safe my journey is going to be.

As a technology such differentiated metrics helps to understand aspects of flying which is why broken metrics are used by the industry in more focused forums.

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#155

Post by ams6110 »

dtagames wrote: post #127
tuna-piano wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what that means though. As far as I am aware (totally a layperson), there have been potentially only 3 potential 737-MAX MCAS trim issue occurrences: 1. The Lion Air flight prior to the fatal lion air flight 2. The Lion air flight which crashed 3. The Ethiopian flight which crashed Of course I don't think any of those 3 are absolutely confirmed, but I do think it seems likely the three had MCAS trim related…

From the database, #1597286, "agressive" uncommanded nose down. Day 3 of 3 departing in a MAX 8 after a long overnight. I was well rested and had discussed the recent MAX 8 MCAS guidance with the Captain. On departure, we had strong crosswinds (gusts > 30 knots) directly off the right wing, however, no LLWS or Micro-burst activity was reported at the field. After verifying LNAV, selecting gear and flaps up, I set "UP…

MCAS is not active with autopilot engaged, according to Boeing.

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#156

Post by siwatanejo »

ams6110 wrote: post #152
siwatanejo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we're talking about a plane model that is only 2 years old?

Yes and no. The basic 737 design dates to the 1950s. The first ones flew in the 1960s. The 737 Max is an augmented version of the original.

Right, I'm (we're) obviously talking about 737MAX

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#157

Post by gok »

lsh123 wrote: post #136
siwatanejo wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you think of a better car analogy? I'm genuinely curious.

You know that you need to break when you get close to another veichle in front. Now you have a new shiny cruise control (without latest distance keeping feature). Well, you still need to break when you get close to a veichle in front of you.

*brake

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#158

Post by cjbprime »

varenc wrote: post #150
dpwm wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1555013 is pretty damning in telling how the airlines treated the MAX as the same type as the 737-800: "I had my first flight on the Max [to] ZZZ1. We found out we were scheduled to fly the aircraft on the way to the airport in the limo. We had a little time [to] review the essentials in the car. Otherwise we would have walked onto the plane cold.My post flight evaluation is that we lacked the knowledge to operate th…

Wow... I wonder how much of this could have been avoided if the 737-Max had just been given an entirely new model name like "738". I'd assume that when the 777's came out even pilots with experience on the 767 and other Boeing planes were still given ample training beforehand. The minor difference in the Max's model name disguises the seemingly large difference in their operation.

Boeing fought extremely hard to avoid having this happen, since then any pilot wanting to fly the Max would have to first achieve a type rating certificate for the new type of plane, and the FAA would have to test and certify it instead of Boeing "self-certifying" that it was a type of 737.

The determination to shoehorn what aerodynamically kind of is a new type of plane into the 737's type rating seems likely to be the root cause of these deaths.

Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw

#160

Post by userbinator »

jrockway wrote: post #49
tuna-piano wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some other MAX reports: 1583028: B737 MAX-8 Captain reported the engine fuel burn was higher than expected. Maintenance confirms that several 737-MAXs are burning fuel faster than expected. 1593699: ATIS sheet fell through the slot forward of the center pedestal and the blank off plate. We had Maintenance come out to remove it. We discovered 20 other ATIS sheets mixed into the wiring. The aircraft is only six months…

1593699 is amazing.

To me, it's rather scary that even the aviation industry is now seemingly changing the UI and confusing users; HN (and a lot of other people) love talking about how much they hate a redesign of some site or software because it broke their workflow and hid/removed critical functionality, and now it's happening to pilots in life-or-death situations.
Post reply on HN