You Gonna Fly On a 737?

[Lesh]

I think that the FAA is looking at a solution, but to My way of thinking, a design that makes the aircraft want to stay in the air is a good one. Otherwise they tend to fall down and go boom.

Gee that sounds so simple right?

The reality is that the wing design is such that it generates TOO much lift making the plane climb more than it should. When a plane climbs at too steep an angle it LOSES lift...and then ....falls down. Kinda a bad thing.

So there are two choices.

Teach the pilots how to deal with an unsafe design or install software that compensates for it. Sane people realize that training pilots to try to compensate for a flawed design is kinda iffy. Not something we really want...ya think?

A software fix is a reasonable alternative...as long as it works. This one isn't working and people died

That is why a plane has a pilot. To control the planes lift. Pretty simple actually.

All planes are designed to maximum lift. That is why they have control surfaces built into them. These controls are often monitored and controlled by a computer. However, no one is permitted to be a pilot unless you can control and monitor them WITHOUT the computer.

Landings and takeoffs are done manually, and only occasionally will a computer land a plane.

So, the plane has had thousands of landings without incident and only became a problem when they installed this software patch.

Easy logic. No crashes before the upgrade, two crashes and multiple successful crashes since the upgrade.

The problem is with the upgrade and the training, not with the aircraft.

The Boeing 737 MAX is a narrow-body aircraft series designed and produced by Boeing Commercial Airplanes as the fourth generation of the Boeing 737, succeeding the Boeing 737 Next Generation (NG).

The new 737 series was launched on August 30, 2011.[7] It performed its first flight on January 29, 2016.[1] The new series gained FAA certification on March 8, 2017.[8] The first delivery was a MAX 8 on May 6, 2017 to Malindo Air,[9] which placed the aircraft into service on May 22, 2017.[2] The 737 MAX is based on earlier 737 designs. It is re-engined with more efficient CFM International LEAP-1B engines, aerodynamic improvements (including distinctive split-tip winglets), and airframe modifications.

These things have not even been in service for a year and we have had two crashes and numerous "incidents"

Clearly there is a problem

 

[Lesh]

I sure as shit ain't getting on one

 

[pismoe]

There have been two crashes in recent months and nearly the entire world has grounded these plane but we have not.

Apparently the planes have a software glitch that tries to drive the plane into the ground and there have been numerous events in the US that thankfully didn't result in crashes. Boeing is saying that a software fix was delayed by the government shutdown. Wonderful.

The Boeing CEO "spoke with Trump" and told him the planes were safe. Trump so far has done nothing. Do you feel safer?

---------------------------------- sure , i don't fly for the last almost 20 years Lesh .

 

[Darkwind]

I think that the FAA is looking at a solution, but to My way of thinking, a design that makes the aircraft want to stay in the air is a good one. Otherwise they tend to fall down and go boom.

Gee that sounds so simple right?

The reality is that the wing design is such that it generates TOO much lift making the plane climb more than it should. When a plane climbs at too steep an angle it LOSES lift...and then ....falls down. Kinda a bad thing.

So there are two choices.

Teach the pilots how to deal with an unsafe design or install software that compensates for it. Sane people realize that training pilots to try to compensate for a flawed design is kinda iffy. Not something we really want...ya think?

A software fix is a reasonable alternative...as long as it works. This one isn't working and people died

That is why a plane has a pilot. To control the planes lift. Pretty simple actually.

All planes are designed to maximum lift. That is why they have control surfaces built into them. These controls are often monitored and controlled by a computer. However, no one is permitted to be a pilot unless you can control and monitor them WITHOUT the computer.

Landings and takeoffs are done manually, and only occasionally will a computer land a plane.

So, the plane has had thousands of landings without incident and only became a problem when they installed this software patch.

Easy logic. No crashes before the upgrade, two crashes and multiple successful crashes since the upgrade.

The problem is with the upgrade and the training, not with the aircraft.

The Boeing 737 MAX is a narrow-body aircraft series designed and produced by Boeing Commercial Airplanes as the fourth generation of the Boeing 737, succeeding the Boeing 737 Next Generation (NG).

The new 737 series was launched on August 30, 2011.[7] It performed its first flight on January 29, 2016.[1] The new series gained FAA certification on March 8, 2017.[8] The first delivery was a MAX 8 on May 6, 2017 to Malindo Air,[9] which placed the aircraft into service on May 22, 2017.[2] The 737 MAX is based on earlier 737 designs. It is re-engined with more efficient CFM International LEAP-1B engines, aerodynamic improvements (including distinctive split-tip winglets), and airframe modifications.

These things have not even been in service for a year and we have had two crashes and numerous "incidents"

Clearly there is a problem

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

 

[Lesh]

But the Secretary of Transportation (McConnell's wife) Elaine Chao says it's fine so...yea...it must be...right?

 

[Lesh]

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

The upgrade is a fix for a poor design and IT is also a poor design...obviously

 

[martybegan]

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

The upgrade is a fix for a poor design and IT is also a poor design...obviously

Did Boeing steal your lunch money when you were a kid?

Do you have a background in Engineering to back up your accusations?

Or is this just your TDS breaking through?

 

[Darkwind]

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

The upgrade is a fix for a poor design and IT is also a poor design...obviously

Did Boeing steal your lunch money when you were a kid?

Do you have a background in Engineering to back up your accusations?

Or is this just your TDS breaking through?

He is just speaking out to compensate for his little cock.

If they ground the plane, it costs Boeing and the Airlines (large corporations) a lot of money, whereas a simple software rollback to a point when these problems didn't exist is a fast and elegant solution that is far cheaper than grounding the entire fleet.

 

[Darkwind]

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

The upgrade is a fix for a poor design and IT is also a poor design...obviously

Obviously, a manageable design as there were no crashes before the upgrade.

There is NO NEED to ground the planes at this time.

 

[martybegan]

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

The upgrade is a fix for a poor design and IT is also a poor design...obviously

Did Boeing steal your lunch money when you were a kid?

Do you have a background in Engineering to back up your accusations?

Or is this just your TDS breaking through?

He is just speaking out to compensate for his little cock.

If they ground the plane, it costs Boeing and the Airlines (large corporations) a lot of money, whereas a simple software rollback to a point when these problems didn't exist is a fast and elegant solution that is far cheaper than grounding the entire fleet.

The only remaining question is if they have to re-train the pilots to remind them the software upgrade was removed, and they no longer need to use the compensation procedure.

 

[Lesh]

Obviously, a manageable design as there were no crashes before the upgrade.

Are you claiming this "upgrade" came out after the planes went into use?

Do you have as link to that?

 

[pismoe]

'ethiopian' airplane pilots are the b3st in the world aren't they ??

 

[DGS49]

(1). EVERY PILOT flying one of those planes NOW is fully aware of the possibility of this catastrophic development, and KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT TO DO to correct the problem if it occurs.

(2) This plane hits the air thousands and thousands of times every day without incident.

(3). Don't discount the effect of foreigners being resentful of Boeing's huge international success and dominance, and want to take advantage of this opportunity to sling mud at Boeing, and hence, America.

There is NO REAL EXTRA DANGER flying this plane.

 

[Darkwind]

Again, clearly, the problem is with the upgrade, not the plane.

The upgrade is a fix for a poor design and IT is also a poor design...obviously

Did Boeing steal your lunch money when you were a ki

Do you have a background in Engineering to back up your accusations?

Or is this just your TDS breaking through?

He is just speaking out to compensate for his little cock.

If they ground the plane, it costs Boeing and the Airlines (large corporations) a lot of money, whereas a simple software rollback to a point when these problems didn't exist is a fast and elegant solution that is far cheaper than grounding the entire fleet.

The only remaining question is if they have to re-train the pilots to remind them the software upgrade was removed, and they no longer need to use the compensation procedure.

Yep. I'm thinking that is going to be tough to relearn as muscle memory will take over.

Best thing though is to get the sensor software corrected. Clearly, there is an error in logic on how the control surface is compensating. Clearly, the ground effect causes a ground rush lift on the wing as the air is compressed, which causes the elevator to want to nose the plane down, or more correctly, to cause the tail to rise to rotate the nose. This is in response to a stall warning, meaning that the speed has slowed to dangers levels.

When in fact, the plane is at the correct speed. I'm not an engineer, but to suddenly nose down upon landing approach is a bad thing and should be avoided.

It is perfectly okay to suddenly nose down when the landing gear is on the ground, but not before.

 

[Lesh]

He is just speaking out to compensate for his little cock.

If they ground the plane, it costs Boeing and the Airlines (large corporations) a lot of money, whereas a simple software rollback to a point when these problems didn't exist is a fast and elegant solution that is far cheaper than grounding the entire fleet.

I'm sorry if my cock size is a disappointment to you. Clearly you are used to some REALLY big ones.

And your concern for BOEING is duly noted. After all...corporate profits are so much more important than lives...right?

 

[Lesh]

(1). EVERY PILOT flying one of those planes NOW is fully aware of the possibility of this catastrophic development, and KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT TO DO to correct the problem if it occurs.

You better hope so. I sure as hell ain't gettin on one

 

[Darkwind]

He is just speaking out to compensate for his little cock.

If they ground the plane, it costs Boeing and the Airlines (large corporations) a lot of money, whereas a simple software rollback to a point when these problems didn't exist is a fast and elegant solution that is far cheaper than grounding the entire fleet.

I'm sorry if my cock size is a disappointment to you. Clearly you are used to some REALLY big ones.

And your concern for BOEING is duly noted. After all...corporate profits are so much more important than lives...right?

I could care less about either. Clearly, your attitude dictates the former being true, and as for profits, they can have any they want. I don't make choices based on the profit or losses of a company but on the logic of the situation.

You have no valid reason for grounding this fleet of planes other than to harm Boeing and the Airlines who own them.

you're such a huge government guy, why not let the government decide if they need grounding or not.

 

[Lesh]

The only remaining question is if they have to re-train the pilots to remind them the software upgrade was removed, and they no longer need to use the compensation procedure.

Dude. The plane wants to climb into a stall and crash. You're depending on a pilot being able to overcome that tendency EVERY TIME?

 

[martybegan]

The only remaining question is if they have to re-train the pilots to remind them the software upgrade was removed, and they no longer need to use the compensation procedure.

Dude. The plane wants to climb into a stall and crash. You're depending on a pilot being able to overcome that tendency EVERY TIME?

Where is your proof of this condition?

It happens every time?

 

[Lesh]

If they ground the plane, it costs Boeing and the Airlines (large corporations) a lot of money, whereas a simple software rollback to a point when these problems didn't exist is a fast and elegant solution that is far cheaper than grounding the entire fleet.

I could care less about either. Clearly, your attitude dictates the former being true, and as for profits, they can have any they want. I don't make choices based on the profit or losses of a company but on the logic of the situation.

You have no valid reason for grounding this fleet of planes other than to harm Boeing and the Airlines who own them.

you're such a huge government guy, why not let the government decide if they need grounding or not.

Dude...your own posts show what a dishonest shill you are..and

Best thing though is to get the sensor software corrected. Clearly, there is an error in logic on how the control surface is compensating. Clearly, the ground effect causes a ground rush lift on the wing as the air is compressed, which causes the elevator to want to nose the plane down, or more correctly, to cause the tail to sink rotating the nose upward. This is in response to a stall warning, meaning that the speed has slowed to dangers levels.

When in fact, the plane is at the correct speed. I'm not an engineer, but to suddenly nose down upon landing approach is a bad thing and should be avoided.

It is perfectly okay to suddenly nose down when the landing gear is on the ground, but not before.

That is one fo the more bizarre posts I have ever read.The nose is going up when it's going down?? HUH?

Planes can "nose down" when they're on the ground?

Just stop talking