51–60 of 125 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These common imperceptible failures... Do they involve the aircraft turning around and flying an hour back to the departure airport?
That would strain the definition of "imperceptible", wouldn't it? My point is that aircraft break all the time. Once in a while they break in such a way that they need to return to base. This wasn't an MCAS failure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I understand it the aircraft has a quite complex relationship with trim because of fundamental aerodynamic flaws (engines are too far forward). Am I right in saying other aircraft e.g. an A320 would handle this sort of failure without as much risk to the plane?
MCAS was only installed to cover up aerodynamic changes (not flaws) that would have required greater recertification and retraining of pilots. To save that expense, they covered it up with MCAS so they could say "See, it's just another 737!" which caused all the issues we know so much about.
"- A component of the main electric trim system became inoperative. Our pilots ran the appropriate checklist, which included manually trimming the aircraft. They returned to MIA and landed uneventfully. The issue was not related to MCAS." I don't get it. It is common for other airliners to rely systematically on trimming? Do other airliners have similar 'correcting' systems as MCAS?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I understand it the aircraft has a quite complex relationship with trim because of fundamental aerodynamic flaws (engines are too far forward). Am I right in saying other aircraft e.g. an A320 would handle this sort of failure without as much risk to the plane?
>As I understand it the aircraft has a quite complex relationship with trim because of fundamental aerodynamic flaws (engines are too far forward). That's not really correct. The engines being in a different position means the aircraft doesn't meet a very specific criterion of the FARs (positive stick force gradient). The 737 Max has the exact same relationship with trim as any other airliner. >Am I right in saying o…
I sympathize with the engineers there. It's like a bug that will not go away in some software. You think you've fixed it and all seems well and you get a good nights sleep with the gleam of satisfaction in your eyes. But the next day your manager says "That bug is still there". You incredulously do not believe that bug report and go to replicate it yourself. And surely, under some edge weird case scenario, it really…
Aerospace engineer here. From TFA: >A component of the main electric trim system became inoperative. Our pilots ran the appropriate checklist, which included manually trimming the aircraft. They returned to MIA and landed uneventfully. The issue was not related to MCAS. That statement is from the airline, not from Boeing, so I'm more inclined to trust it. Additionally, if the airline lies and it turns up on an airwor…
I sympathize with the engineers there. It's like a bug that will not go away in some software. You think you've fixed it and all seems well and you get a good nights sleep with the gleam of satisfaction in your eyes. But the next day your manager says "That bug is still there". You incredulously do not believe that bug report and go to replicate it yourself. And surely, under some edge weird case scenario, it really…
I'm refusing to fly the MAX, period! The plane is flawed by design...
I have taken a similar stance myself (not that I'm flying anywhere these days) but, out of curiosity: do you also refuse to be a passenger in automobiles? The 737MAX is quite a bit safer than those.
I sympathize with the engineers there. It's like a bug that will not go away in some software. You think you've fixed it and all seems well and you get a good nights sleep with the gleam of satisfaction in your eyes. But the next day your manager says "That bug is still there". You incredulously do not believe that bug report and go to replicate it yourself. And surely, under some edge weird case scenario, it really…
Aerospace engineer here. From TFA: >A component of the main electric trim system became inoperative. Our pilots ran the appropriate checklist, which included manually trimming the aircraft. They returned to MIA and landed uneventfully. The issue was not related to MCAS. That statement is from the airline, not from Boeing, so I'm more inclined to trust it. Additionally, if the airline lies and it turns up on an airwor…
Appealing to authority.
> That statement is from the airline, not from Boeing, so I'm more inclined to trust it ..
On an unstable aircraft such as the 737 Max, if the trim fails then the nose pitches-up, precipitating a stall, unless the pilot can execute a manual trim. Which is difficult without electrical-power-assist fed to the wheel. As the wheel was made smaller to allow for bigger displays.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aerospace engineer here. From TFA: >A component of the main electric trim system became inoperative. Our pilots ran the appropriate checklist, which included manually trimming the aircraft. They returned to MIA and landed uneventfully. The issue was not related to MCAS. That statement is from the airline, not from Boeing, so I'm more inclined to trust it. Additionally, if the airline lies and it turns up on an airwor…
@na85:"Aerospace engineer here." Appealing to authority. > That statement is from the airline, not from Boeing, so I'm more inclined to trust it .. On an unstable aircraft such as the 737 Max, if the trim fails then the nose pitches-up, precipitating a stall, unless the pilot can execute a manual trim. Which is difficult without electrical-power-assist fed to the wheel. As the wheel was made smaller to allow for bigg…
No. He is an authority. He is providing his bona fides. Not the same thing.
"- A component of the main electric trim system became inoperative. Our pilots ran the appropriate checklist, which included manually trimming the aircraft. They returned to MIA and landed uneventfully. The issue was not related to MCAS." I don't get it. It is common for other airliners to rely systematically on trimming? Do other airliners have similar 'correcting' systems as MCAS?
Trim is changed for each phase of flight. Electric trim is just a motor spinning the manual trim control.
Most airliners will be doing constant trim adjustment.
If you want a real change of pace check out Airbus’ control system. It does a lot more intervention than anything Boeing does. Depending on the state of the aircraft the control stick will respond to input in entirely different ways (3 ‘laws’ that contain no less than 5 submodes). Sometimes it will act as you would expect a stick to act, other times it will intentionally limit what the pilot is asking of the plane, sometimes it will average what the two pilots are asking. Confusion about how the system works has caused at least two crashes I can think of (AF447, QZ8501). It’s killed more people than the Max, but it was written off as pilot error since it was operating as designed in both cases. It just happens to be a design that will change the way the plane is controlled when things go wrong. A few of the modes do in fact include automatic trim adjustments.