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

E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 365 posts

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#51

Post by AWildC182 »

_verandaguy wrote: post #41
dclowd9901 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given this only seems to be afflicting MAX8 craft in terms of material evidence, my guess is they won’t ground the whole series unless/until another MAX craft goes down.

AFAIK the avionics on both variants are the same. A pilot who is (properly!) trained and type-rated on one should be able to effortlessly use the other. The only difference, again AFAIK, is the passenger and cargo capacity, length, and the range.

The 737 type rating (training/licence addon required) covers pretty much the entire family of 737s from the 200 to the max.

The avionics are the same but because the planes have substantially different air-frames, the software parameters and possibly some functionality will differ. It's not unreasonable for differences in these flight parameters to be a factor.

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#52

Post by organsnyder »

sushibowl wrote: post #33
bwang29 wrote: post #20

What would financially happen to an airplane company with a fleet of dozens of Max 8s?

Depends on how big the airline is, what percentage of its fleet consists of max 8s, etc. Generally, planes like this have high operating costs, and usually are kept in the air pretty much constantly to be able to make a profit. Having one grounded potentially means losses of hundreds of thousands of dollars a day.

Surely airlines purchase insurance to hedge against this sort of thing?

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#53

Post by ConceitedCode »

linuxftw wrote: post #25
nck4222 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more I read about flight systems and protocols (and I am absolutely a layman when it comes to this), the more it seems like it's very rarely solely isolated to one component. The hardware, software, and human systems are so intertwined that it likely involves all 3, even if the route cause can be isolated to one. That being said, there hasn't been much specific information about the cause released yet, that I've…

Problem is, if they've added so much automation that trained pilots cannot determination the proper course of action 100% of the time, the system is at fault. "You don't have to do anything, the plane will fly itself. Unless there's a catastrophic emergency. Then you better remember everything you haven't practiced from 18 months ago" seems like a failed implementation.

That's definitely a mischaracterization of what the airlines do. Anyone that has been in a cockpit of a plane knows that you fly by checklists.

There's a checklist procedure for almost any scenario they will run into (of course not every). This exact issue was seen by other airlines and the pilots followed the checklist procedures to safely regain control of the plane as expected.

In theory, these checklists are optimized to resolve these issues and regain control as quickly as possible while ruling out other causes. It is very rare the correct course of action for the pilot differs from the checklist procedure.

There is 0 expectation that the pilot should remember everything. Pilots are trained specifically to communicate with each other to go through these checklists as quickly as possible.

That being said, there is a major concern that this issue will popup while taking off and being too low to the ground to properly follow procedure in time to recover control of the aircraft.

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#54

Post by w0utert »

notfromhere wrote: post #19
foepys wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't Boeing also market the plane as an evolution of the 737 that doesn't require retraining? So pilots with experience on the 737 can automatically fly the 737 Max?

Yep, that was the big selling point since airlines hate retraining pilots. Totally backfired in that regard though.

It sounds really stupid for Boeing if you put it that way.

I can imagine it looks good on the marketing material, 'no pilot retraining required!', but as far as I understand from all the analysis so far, it's actually not that hard to disable the new MCAS system and prevent a crash. As a pilot you only need to know it is there, and what happens if it somehow fails.

I would be surprised if they had sold even a single plane less if they advertised it as 'very minimal pilot retraining necessary'.

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#55

Post by bluthru »

anaphor wrote: post #5
Areading314 wrote: post #3

Does anyone actually know or suspect what's wrong with these planes? Hardware issue? Software issue?

The engines are larger than previous models and had to be moved forward, which causes it to (potentially) stall, so they implemented an anti-stalling mechanism called MCAS which relies on a particular sensor, which can malfunction potentially. They also didn't inform pilots that this system even existed which means they have trouble diagnosing the problem and will potentially only make it worse by trying other things…

>and had to be moved back

Small typo: He says "forward and up" in the video.

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#56

Post by cm2187 »

ak217 wrote: post #32
paganel wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like Norwegian is already asking its 737 Max flights to return to their departing airports, at least according to this recent screenshot I found on reddit [1] [1] https://i.redd.it/6gtecemacpl21.png

Wow. This is pretty ridiculous considering all three of these planes seem to have been closer to their destination than the origin, making it safer to just finish the planned flight.

Do these groundings also apply to ferrying the plane?

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#58

Post by ReptileMan »

linuxftw wrote: post #25
nck4222 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more I read about flight systems and protocols (and I am absolutely a layman when it comes to this), the more it seems like it's very rarely solely isolated to one component. The hardware, software, and human systems are so intertwined that it likely involves all 3, even if the route cause can be isolated to one. That being said, there hasn't been much specific information about the cause released yet, that I've…

Problem is, if they've added so much automation that trained pilots cannot determination the proper course of action 100% of the time, the system is at fault. "You don't have to do anything, the plane will fly itself. Unless there's a catastrophic emergency. Then you better remember everything you haven't practiced from 18 months ago" seems like a failed implementation.

That is literally how Tesla and some otber players started car automation. With the same predictable results. A human just cannot stand on standby in perpetum. Either the human must be in control or out of the loop.

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#59

Post by Reason077 »

imsofuture wrote: post #47
sheri wrote: post #17

Does anyone know if there is a material difference between the MAX-8 and the MAX-9? All the banning seems to be specifically for the MAX-8, but should they consider banning all MAX series aircraft? I realize the crashes themselves were MAX-8, but the difference between them seems not significant?

I believe only the MAX-8s are in service. MAX-7s exist, but not sure if they're in use, or just on order. The 9 and 10 haven't been produced yet.

MAX 9 deliveries started in 2018. About 30 have been delivered, many for United Airlines.

https://www.planespotters.net/production-list/Boeing/737/737...

Re: E.U.’s Biggest Economies Ban Boeing Max 8 Jets

#60

Post by newman314 »

imsofuture wrote: post #47
sheri wrote: post #17

Does anyone know if there is a material difference between the MAX-8 and the MAX-9? All the banning seems to be specifically for the MAX-8, but should they consider banning all MAX series aircraft? I realize the crashes themselves were MAX-8, but the difference between them seems not significant?

I believe only the MAX-8s are in service. MAX-7s exist, but not sure if they're in use, or just on order. The 9 and 10 haven't been produced yet.

From Wikipedia

The 737-700, -800 and -900ER, the most widespread versions of the previous 737NG,[10] are replaced by the 737 MAX 7, MAX 8 and MAX 9, respectively[61] (FAA type certificate: 737-7, -8, and -9[8]). The 737 MAX 8 entered service in May 2017,[2] and the MAX 9 entered service in March 2018.[62] The MAX 7 is expected to enter service in January 2019, followed by the MAX 200 later in 2019, and the MAX 10 in 2020.

Post reply on HN