Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at all.
Thank you
What if there is no target altitude in the SID.
Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
291–300 of 307 posts
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you
What if there is no target altitude in the SID.
I'm only an "interested layperson" in the subject so I don't know details.
But I know that for instance there are plenty of alarms warning the pilots about the proximity to terrain.
Besides, there were excellent visibility conditions at the time of the accident so, even if the autopilot were able to drive the plane into ground, the pilots would have realized that not only by seeing the other instruments but looking through the window as well.
The available radar data also shows there's been a struggle to keep the airplane flying. An autopilot-controlled flight into terrain wouldn't show such pattern.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you
What if there is no target altitude in the SID.
A key question is whether the plane's advanced flight management system -- the autopilot -- might have played a role in the most recent crash as it did in the fatal crash of an Indonesian Airlines 737 MAX 8 last October. In that crash, it appears the pilots failed to disengage the autopilot when the plane's nose began pitching up and down,
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#294Earlier quoted context omitted.
So then why did I get downvoted so hard?
You don't seem to know how to do math
Personal attacks will get you banned here. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and post civilly and substantively, or not at all.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if there is no target altitude in the SID.
A key question is whether the plane's advanced flight management system -- the autopilot -- might have played a role in the most recent crash as it did in the fatal crash of an Indonesian Airlines 737 MAX 8 last October. In that crash, it appears the pilots failed to disengage the autopilot when the plane's nose began pitching up and down,
No.. this is not about the autopilot. The suspicion (which is only a suspicion so far) is about another system called MCAS. Roughly speaking (specially because I have not enough knowledge to speak on this regard with confidence), this is meant to help pilots prevent a stall.
The MAX family has more powerful engines, and they are a bit projected ahead under the wings. This makes the plane susceptible to point its nose up during full throttle, which could lead to a stall.
This system shouldn't be confused with the regular autopilot. It plays a completely different role and, the way it's designed, it should engage only under very specific conditions.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#296This is off topic. But I've been skeptical of the commercial aviation accident risk compared to cars. I'm not saying cars are safer. But using accident count per mileage seems a bit odd, especially when the most risky parts of flying are taking off and landing. A plane travelling 400 more miles doesn't incur much more risk. But a car travelling 400 more miles incur a much bigger risk (e.g. fatigue, car malfunctioning…
Wikipedia has a pretty handy table of metrics here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety#Transport_comp... Ignoring the silly ones (Space Shuttle, Skidiving and Paragliding), we see that Motorcycles are by far the most dangerous mode of transport, across all metrics. Buses do very well, only losing out to Aircraft on distance. When you look at Aircraft by number of journeys, the risk is significantly higher…
Thanks for sharing it.
It seems, if the risk is based on the distance, then air is 60x safer. But, for per journeys, air travel is worse. For per hours, the air travel is only 3x safer.
The popularized concept of air travel's risk gave me the impression that air travel was sooo much safer than car. smh. If you asked me a month ago, I would say air travel should be, at least, 1000x safer than car.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You should, in the course of day to day operation, be able to expect a WiFi router will work. My experience with WiFi routers is the opposite. I will wire anything important.
I very much doubt they're using consumer grade Linksys boxes in there, though.
Enterprise WiFi networks work better but my experience has still been far from what I'd call reliable.
I'd like to say an airplane might work better as a controlled environment than an office building, but probably not if you have 300 passengers in the back, half of whom have forgotten their MiFi devices running in their carryon.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#298Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, I'm (we're) obviously talking about 737MAX
> Right, I'm (we're) obviously talking about 737MAX I think @ams6110 is saying that it may not be fair to identify the 737MAX as a completely new plane, since the 737MAX can be identified as more of an evolution of the 737 rather than a new, from-scratch plane design.
And that is bullshit. As long as you're not just changing the resolution of the seat's screens, it's a completely different model, for all intents and purposes.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a useful metric because, when comparing auto and plane safety, consumers are usually deciding between taking a plane and a car for the same distance. We could give them risk as a function of distance by taking the increased takeoff/landing risk into account, but generally people only compare the two for fairly long trips.
Do the car incident statistics only take into account long distance trips?
For cars they count all passenger-miles equally. Car accidents are much more strongly correlated with distance than aircraft accidents, but I don't know the actual risk factors - these are all heuristics for much more detailed models that I'm sure some academic is building.
Re: Boeing 737 Max pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
#300Earlier 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…
Another one: 1603376: B737 Captain reported the flight recorder light was inoperative, which led to the discovery that the flight data recorder was not installed. Can anyone anyone with more experience with this say whether this is normal for a new aircraft? I get that it's easy to forget parts of the assembly process, but how do you put an aircraft into service without verifying that all the parts (especially import…
IIRC, The flight recorders are tested by Boeing before delivery to the customer. Planes undergo several weeks to a month of tests by Boeing before delivery and sometimes undergo even more testing by the customer after delivery.
Most likely, the part is pulled for maintenance and its not properly recorded. If its not properly recorded, the plane can be put back into service without the part that was removed.
Air Canada Flight 143 is an example of maintenance records not being kept properly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider