Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
1–10 of 84 posts
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#2This is a issue that may also affect Airbus aircraft, but so far, it has only caused problems on two Boeing planes. Like MCAS, it was not disclosed to pilots, prompting the FAA to recommend design changes and notify flight crews.
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-cfm-international-update-737...
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#3“Load reduction device.”
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#4“Load reduction device.” https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1497965
[deleted]
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#5I wonder what was the thought process there: hey we save an engine maybe, but everyone inside the plane gets cooked in 39 seconds. Ship it!
Comments on that youtube video are filled with industry insiders and it’s just wild. They even think someone has died from a similar fuming event back in December…
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#6I wonder what was the thought process there: hey we save an engine maybe, but everyone inside the plane gets cooked in 39 seconds. Ship it! Comments on that youtube video are filled with industry insiders and it’s just wild. They even think someone has died from a similar fuming event back in December…
Maybe they were thinking the Russian solution. If it crashes fast enough nobody finds out what happened
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#7This is a issue that may also affect Airbus aircraft, but so far, it has only caused problems on two Boeing planes. Like MCAS, it was not disclosed to pilots, prompting the FAA to recommend design changes and notify flight crews. https://simpleflying.com/boeing-cfm-international-update-737...
Unfortunately, it seems that the internal FAA recommendations were not allowed to make their way into any kind of airworthiness directive.
The recommendations include very basic procedure changes that mitigate the near term risks without any significant impact to operation, as well as recommendations for what probably amounts to a software change and upgrades to some of the pilot oxygen masks to effect a permanent fix.
The only reason that we even know about the internal recommendations is that they were leaked to the press.
Boeing released a pilot bulletin that basically says to go through the checklist quickly and to treat smoke in the cabin as a major failure, but stops short of recommending some very, very simple steps in aircraft configuration prior to takeoff that would completely mitigate the issue without negatively effecting flight performance.
The major recommendation in the internal FAA bulletin is to use the APU bleed instead of the main engine bleed air to power the air conditioning and cabin pressurisation during the takeoff phase of flight, below 3000 feet AGL. I can see no reason to drag feet on this recommendation, other than the uncomfortable suggestion that perhaps this issue should have been addressed during certification. (It is yet another difference from older 737 design , like the deadly MCAS system, that was not disclosed to pilots transitioning to the new aircraft)
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#8I wonder what was the thought process there: hey we save an engine maybe, but everyone inside the plane gets cooked in 39 seconds. Ship it! Comments on that youtube video are filled with industry insiders and it’s just wild. They even think someone has died from a similar fuming event back in December…
It doesn’t save the engine, it keeps it from ripping the wing off. It’s a good system.
The part about filling the cabin with smoke because they couldn’t be bothered to make the software that detects the extreme vibration tell the AC units from that engine to shut down (which they already do if the rpm drops, indicating an engine failure-just not soon enough or reliable enough to prevent the smoke issue) - not so much.
The system for the ECU to detect the engine mount failure condition already exists. The function to shut down the air handlers in response to a different indicator of engine failure already exists in the ECU. It’s just literally “also shut down if the engine mounts fail”, but the guys that sit around and think about the what ifs were given early retirement to make room for more MBAs.
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#9I wonder what was the thought process there: hey we save an engine maybe, but everyone inside the plane gets cooked in 39 seconds. Ship it! Comments on that youtube video are filled with industry insiders and it’s just wild. They even think someone has died from a similar fuming event back in December…
It doesn’t save the engine, it keeps it from ripping the wing off. It’s a good system. The part about filling the cabin with smoke because they couldn’t be bothered to make the software that detects the extreme vibration tell the AC units from that engine to shut down (which they already do if the rpm drops, indicating an engine failure-just not soon enough or reliable enough to prevent the smoke issue) - not so much…
> It doesn’t save the engine, it keeps it from ripping the wing off. It’s a good system.
Sure, I get that it was added to prevent plane from disintegrating, but like you said integration thinking is gone and now we have those individual components that sure look homicidal from outside.
The other issue is that regulators are missing in action or worse. It’s no way to run the industry by relying on concerned youtubers..
Re: Smoke in the cabin of two 737 MAX caused by Load Reduction Device system [video]
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn’t save the engine, it keeps it from ripping the wing off. It’s a good system. The part about filling the cabin with smoke because they couldn’t be bothered to make the software that detects the extreme vibration tell the AC units from that engine to shut down (which they already do if the rpm drops, indicating an engine failure-just not soon enough or reliable enough to prevent the smoke issue) - not so much…
> It doesn’t save the engine, it keeps it from ripping the wing off. It’s a good system. Sure, I get that it was added to prevent plane from disintegrating, but like you said integration thinking is gone and now we have those individual components that sure look homicidal from outside. The other issue is that regulators are missing in action or worse. It’s no way to run the industry by relying on concerned youtubers.…
I’m with you on all of this. It’s like all of the grownups left the building and the inmates are running the asylum.
Frikken clown world hijinks.