• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

NEWS 737MAX

HuggyU2

Well-Known Member
None
From my email:

ALPA supports the decision by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Transport Canada to ground the Boeing 737 MAX. The FAA reports that it made its decision "as a result of the data-gathering process and new evidence collected at the site and analyzed today." Out of an abundance of caution, North American regulators have acted in the best interests of aviation safety.
ALPA continues to monitor the situation and is working alongside aviation authorities in the United States and Canada to uphold the safety and integrity of our air transportation system. We strongly encourage the investigative authorities responsible to expedite the investigation of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 and identify any corrective action if necessary in order to return this aircraft to service.
ALPA stands ready, through the International Federation of Air Line Pilots' Associations, to assist the international aviation community in every way possible with the shared goal of advancing a safer air transportation system around the globe.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Actually I don't. My understanding is based on the President's comments and the broadcast timing. I may have gotten the timing wrong as I wasn't listening continuously. I know the American Airlines union seemed to be caught flat footed. I would think the FAA would have given the airline and subsequently, the pilots union, a heads up if a change was coming. This has the look of typical Trump management. Do we know something else, based on online releases with time stamps or other data?

I would prefer the FAA made up their own mind whether I agree or not.
Given the general dismantling of the interagency process, it could have gone either way, frankly. My presumption, based on past performance, is that nobody at the WH had the SA to take the initiative on something like this.

Edit: Sounds like Huggy shed some light on things.
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Ladies and gentlemen, stay tuned for a lesson in...

“The Dismantling of the Interagency Process”

This will count towards your JMPE/Command and Staff credit.
Way too complicated for this crowd, just like airplanes are too complex for pilots to fly now.
 

nittany03

FUBIJAR
pilot
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Ladies and gentlemen, stay tuned for a lesson in...

“The Dismantling of the Interagency Process”

This will count towards your JMPE/Command and Staff credit.
JMO was alright. S&W was fun. But TSDM? Meh . . . check in the box, I'll take my diploma, thankyouveddymuch.
 

ChuckMK23

Former H-46 Driver
pilot
This has been circulating within our flying club - I can't speak for the author but it rings true with what @HAL Pilot has shared...

For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving Boeing's newest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on behind the scenes is largely not being reported.

It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the problem in a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you probably missed the point. In essence, President Trump was saying that technology is a poor substitute for a qualified pilot in command.

One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is energy management of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it will literally drop from the sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe can come apart with disastrous consequences.

In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western countries, the first crop of pilots to enter commercial service were the post world war two pilots. Those guys were the real deal and not only hand flew almost all of their hours but also in some of the most demanding conditions. The second wave were the airport kids who just fell in love with the idea of being a pilot and scrimped and saved to take lessons. Both categories of pilots were skilled in the art of aviation.

With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were not even close to the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of new generation planes coming out of airbus and Boeing. Unlike Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong airline that was almost exclusively piloted by British pilots, the new asian airlines wanted asian pilots to man the cockpits...often with disastrous results. Asiana flight 214 crashed in SFO in 2014 because the pilots did not know how to hand fly the plane when the ground-based approach ILS was out of service.

Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only accidents, but also INCIDENTS…crap that was going sideways but didn't result in a crash. The number of unqualified pilots from Asia and Africa was plain to see in the number of errors being committed on a daily basis.

To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades ago and implemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of unqualified aircrews. Boeing resisted for a lot of very good reasons...but after the Asiana crash, the Chinese government basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof" the 737 as china would end up being the biggest purchaser of that model. Since Boeing had opted not to add automated control systems (which often override pilot’s inputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution which, unfortunately was not done well. Only one sensor was driving some very complicated algorithms which worked against the pilot’s decision-making inputs.

The fact that the asian and african pilots were essentially unqualified is highly embarrassing to the respective governments and Boeing kept it quiet. When ALPA, the pilot’s union reps found the system was added without informing the pilots, they went insane…

However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be enabled or disabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real time basis via uplink. The US airlines management, due to the superior training and piloting skills opted NOT to activate MCAR...but the Asian/African carriers DID. That is why most of the “ crappy" airlines self grounded while all the major US airlines are still flying without a problem.

It's a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the global pilot population are really not qualified to be pilots, but more just data input managers.










 

Fallonflyr

Well-Known Member
pilot
This has been circulating within our flying club - I can't speak for the author but it rings true with what @HAL Pilot has shared...

For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving Boeing's newest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on behind the scenes is largely not being reported.

It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the problem in a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you probably missed the point. In essence, President Trump was saying that technology is a poor substitute for a qualified pilot in command.

One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is energy management of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it will literally drop from the sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe can come apart with disastrous consequences.

In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western countries, the first crop of pilots to enter commercial service were the post world war two pilots. Those guys were the real deal and not only hand flew almost all of their hours but also in some of the most demanding conditions. The second wave were the airport kids who just fell in love with the idea of being a pilot and scrimped and saved to take lessons. Both categories of pilots were skilled in the art of aviation.

With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were not even close to the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of new generation planes coming out of airbus and Boeing. Unlike Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong airline that was almost exclusively piloted by British pilots, the new asian airlines wanted asian pilots to man the cockpits...often with disastrous results. Asiana flight 214 crashed in SFO in 2014 because the pilots did not know how to hand fly the plane when the ground-based approach ILS was out of service.

Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only accidents, but also INCIDENTS…crap that was going sideways but didn't result in a crash. The number of unqualified pilots from Asia and Africa was plain to see in the number of errors being committed on a daily basis.

To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades ago and implemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of unqualified aircrews. Boeing resisted for a lot of very good reasons...but after the Asiana crash, the Chinese government basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof" the 737 as china would end up being the biggest purchaser of that model. Since Boeing had opted not to add automated control systems (which often override pilot’s inputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution which, unfortunately was not done well. Only one sensor was driving some very complicated algorithms which worked against the pilot’s decision-making inputs.

The fact that the asian and african pilots were essentially unqualified is highly embarrassing to the respective governments and Boeing kept it quiet. When ALPA, the pilot’s union reps found the system was added without informing the pilots, they went insane…

However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be enabled or disabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real time basis via uplink. The US airlines management, due to the superior training and piloting skills opted NOT to activate MCAR...but the Asian/African carriers DID. That is why most of the “ crappy" airlines self grounded while all the major US airlines are still flying without a problem.

It's a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the global pilot population are really not qualified to be pilots, but more just data input managers.







I am pretty sure that the MCAS feature is active on all MAX aircraft. Nobody that I know that flys this jet is upset that the system is there, but that Boeing didn’t tell us that it was there and that a single failure of a sensor system could cause the runaway trim condition.
 

sevenhelmet

Uh oh...
pilot
This has been circulating within our flying club - I can't speak for the author but it rings true with what @HAL Pilot has shared...

For those interested in the recent spate of accidents involving Boeing's newest 737 variant, the real story of what is going on behind the scenes is largely not being reported.

It was interesting to note that President Trump alluded to the problem in a round about way, but unless you are a pilot you probably missed the point. In essence, President Trump was saying that technology is a poor substitute for a qualified pilot in command.

One of the most basic skills a pilot learns from day one is energy management of the airplane. If the plane is too slow, it will literally drop from the sky. Too fast and the wings/airframe can come apart with disastrous consequences.

In the history of commercial aviation in the US and western countries, the first crop of pilots to enter commercial service were the post world war two pilots. Those guys were the real deal and not only hand flew almost all of their hours but also in some of the most demanding conditions. The second wave were the airport kids who just fell in love with the idea of being a pilot and scrimped and saved to take lessons. Both categories of pilots were skilled in the art of aviation.

With the explosion of second and third world travel, there were not even close to the number of skilled pilots to fly the thousands of new generation planes coming out of airbus and Boeing. Unlike Cathay Pacific, a Hong Kong airline that was almost exclusively piloted by British pilots, the new asian airlines wanted asian pilots to man the cockpits...often with disastrous results. Asiana flight 214 crashed in SFO in 2014 because the pilots did not know how to hand fly the plane when the ground-based approach ILS was out of service.

Boeing, the FAA and worldwide aviation agencies track not only accidents, but also INCIDENTS…crap that was going sideways but didn't result in a crash. The number of unqualified pilots from Asia and Africa was plain to see in the number of errors being committed on a daily basis.

To make a long story short, airbus saw this eventuality decades ago and implemented automatic safety systems in anticipation of unqualified aircrews. Boeing resisted for a lot of very good reasons...but after the Asiana crash, the Chinese government basically told Boeing to "idiot-proof" the 737 as china would end up being the biggest purchaser of that model. Since Boeing had opted not to add automated control systems (which often override pilot’s inputs) they were forced to apply a band-aid solution which, unfortunately was not done well. Only one sensor was driving some very complicated algorithms which worked against the pilot’s decision-making inputs.

The fact that the asian and african pilots were essentially unqualified is highly embarrassing to the respective governments and Boeing kept it quiet. When ALPA, the pilot’s union reps found the system was added without informing the pilots, they went insane…

However, what they DON'T know, is that the MCAS system can be enabled or disabled per plane, and can be done remotely on a real time basis via uplink. The US airlines management, due to the superior training and piloting skills opted NOT to activate MCAR...but the Asian/African carriers DID. That is why most of the “ crappy" airlines self grounded while all the major US airlines are still flying without a problem.

It's a very PC issue, but basically comes down to 30-40% of the global pilot population are really not qualified to be pilots, but more just data input managers.







Interesting, if a little conspiracy theory-ish. The enable/disable decision on MCAS via uplink seems suspect to me- is it common for features like that to be remotely activated/deactivated while the aircraft is in flight? I sure hope not...
 

wink

VS NFO. Blue and Gold Officer
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
MCAS can not be disabled in flight via data link. In fact, it cant be disabled on a whim as it is certified with the system active. And it wasn't pushed on Boeing by China. Boeing itself found a tendency for a pitch up on take off in certain conditions due largely to the more powerful engines on the MAX. They designed the MCAS to aide in controlling for the unexpected pitch up if the pilots were caught asleep at the wheel.
 
Top