As usual, sales screws over engineering by selling a plane that doesn't exist which requires you to retrofit an existing FAA approved airframe instead of designing a new one (b/c FAA approval for commercial takes years, IIRC). I'd also like to offer bonus chuckles that the 737MAX was built in Seattle, and the AA deal that made the 737MAX exist out of thin air was during a time when Boeing organized labor were complaining that building planes in SC non-union style would lead to lower quality.

Watched 1:30 of it and my lie detector is going off. Will watch the rest later.

(04-30-2019 01:34 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Watched 1:30 of it and my lie detector is going off. Will watch the rest later.

You got a faulty detector. Was it designed by the same people who make Boeing's angle of attack sensor?

Boeing was trying to appease Southwest so that their pilots would not have to get another type rating. So Boeing developed MCAS to try and make the 737MAX fly like a 737-800 although it really is a totally new design.

I think Boeing has some serious corporate governance issues. They've been involved in several questionable practices lately.

(05-01-2019 09:25 AM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  Boeing was trying to appease Southwest so that their pilots would not have to get another type rating. So Boeing developed MCAS to try and make the 737MAX fly like a 737-800 although it really is a totally new design.

It's not really a new design though. The airframe is 50 years old and did not require FAA re-certification. What's new is MCAS and the bigger engines. The rest is largely warmed up leftovers (again).

Fascinating. Short-sighted design stuff and peer-pressure causing lots of deaths.

Pprune Forums

here is a 4735 posts thread on MCAS and Boeing. This forum has a lot of pilots on it for those of you who enjoy this sort of stuff.

In a very brief nutshell.. Boeing want to use an approved airframe but pop some fuel efficient big ass engines on the airframe... the engines completely change the aerodynamics of the plane 737 (max) and it consistantly wants to wants to nose up... so they come up with MCAS (automation) without really training the pilots...

sadly the MCAS want to pull the nose down... and if the pitot tubes are incorrectly measuring airspeed...then it pulls the nose down over and over again...until the plane crashes into terra firma…

(05-01-2019 04:00 PM)No Bull Wrote:  Pprune Forums

here is a 4735 posts thread on MCAS and Boeing. This forum has a lot of pilots on it for those of you who enjoy this sort of stuff.

In a very brief nutshell.. Boeing want to use an approved airframe but pop some fuel efficient big ass engines on the airframe... the engines completely change the aerodynamics of the plane 737 (max) and it consistantly wants to wants to nose up... so they come up with MCAS (automation) without really training the pilots...

sadly the MCAS want to pull the nose down... and if the pitot tubes are incorrectly measuring airspeed...then it pulls the nose down over and over again...until the plane crashes into terra firma…

Bad air speed indicators were relevant on both of the crashes. Like with most every crash it is a combination of issues. I recall a 737 crash years ago. It had to do with a new 737, maybe a 400, and the pilots went through a procedure to transfer the fuel from one engine to the other...using their knowledge of the older 737. The actually transferred all of the fuel over to a non working engine, boom stall crash.

(05-01-2019 04:10 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(05-01-2019 04:00 PM)No Bull Wrote:  Pprune Forums

here is a 4735 posts thread on MCAS and Boeing. This forum has a lot of pilots on it for those of you who enjoy this sort of stuff.

In a very brief nutshell.. Boeing want to use an approved airframe but pop some fuel efficient big ass engines on the airframe... the engines completely change the aerodynamics of the plane 737 (max) and it consistantly wants to wants to nose up... so they come up with MCAS (automation) without really training the pilots...

sadly the MCAS want to pull the nose down... and if the pitot tubes are incorrectly measuring airspeed...then it pulls the nose down over and over again...until the plane crashes into terra firma…

Bad air speed indicators were relevant on both of the crashes. Like with most every crash it is a combination of issues. I recall a 737 crash years ago. It had to do with a new 737, maybe a 400, and the pilots went through a procedure to transfer the fuel from one engine to the other...using their knowledge of the older 737. The actually transferred all of the fuel over to a non working engine, boom stall crash.

multiple factors for sure. PPrune is a pretty cool forum. I can spend a good amount of time on it. If you ever get bored check it out.