6 ms·
1555013 is pretty damning in telling how the airlines treated the MAX as the same type as the 737-800: "I had my first flight on the Max [to] ZZZ1. We found ou
by dpwm 8y ago
1555013 is pretty damning in telling how the airlines treated the MAX as the same type as the 737-800:
"I had my first flight on the Max [to] ZZZ1. We found out we were scheduled to fly the aircraft on the way to the airport in the limo. We had a little time [to] review the essentials in the car. Otherwise we would have walked onto the plane cold.My post flight evaluation is that we lacked the knowledge to operate the aircraft in all weather and aircraft states safely.
The instrumentation is completely different - My scan was degraded, slow and labored having had no experience w/ the new ND (Navigation Display) and ADI (Attitude Director Indicator) presentations/format or functions (manipulation between the screens and systems pages were not provided in training materials. If they were, I had no recollection of that material).
We were unable to navigate to systems pages and lacked the knowledge of what systems information was available to us in the different phases of flight. Our weather radar competency was inadequate to safely navigate significant weather on that dark and stormy night. These are just a few issues that were not addressed in our training.
I recommend the following to help crews w/ their introductory flight on the Max:Email notification the day before the flight (the email should include: Links - Training Video, PSOB and QRG and all relevant updates/FAQ's)SME (Subject Matter Expert) Observer - the role of the SME is to introduce systems navigation, display management, answer general questions and provide standardized best practices to the next generation aircraft.Additionally, the SME will collect de-identified data to provide to the training department for analysis and dissemination to the line pilots regarding FAQs and know systems differences as well best practices in fly the new model aircraft."
[EDIT] Fixed ACN Number
- jonodubs 8y agowow i feel nervous enough having to drive someone else's car without having a quick look at the different setup.
- tuna-piano 8y agoWow. That's the same type of training material we would get when I worked at a coffee shop (large chain) and we came out with a new drink. Maybe even less - At the coffee shop we had to do a test with the manager for them to see that we could make the new drink successfully to standard.
- fl0wenol 8y agoIf you want an RCA of the last two crashes in 737 MAX's, please see the parent. Ridiculous gyrations to avoid new aircraft regulations creates dangerous scenarios for pilots and passengers.
- kernelPan1c 8y agoIs this the right #? 1517486 points to something about a tug crew error. https://titan-server.arc.nasa.gov/ASRSPublicQueryWizard/QueryWizard_Display.aspx?server=ASRSO https://titan-server.arc.nasa.gov/ASRSPublicQueryWizard/Quer...
- dpwm 8y agoNo – it should have been 1555013. Must have had the wrong number in the clipboard.
- sn41 8y agoThis is I think what is very very close to the truth. Some pilots are trained on the MAX, but later, untrained pilots are arbitrarily assigned to these planes. I am not sure that even emails help - with the amount of newsletters, and ad mails we receive, this email might be missed, or even when read, its importance might be missed.
- varenc 8y agoWow... I wonder how much of this could have been avoided if the 737-Max had just been given an entirely new model name like "738". I'd assume that when the 777's came out even pilots with experience on the 767 and other Boeing planes were still given ample training beforehand. The minor difference in the Max's model name disguises the seemingly large difference in their operation.
- cjbprime 8y agoBoeing fought extremely hard to avoid having this happen, since then any pilot wanting to fly the Max would have to first achieve a type rating certificate for the new type of plane, and the FAA would have to test and certify it instead of Boeing "self-certifying" that it was a type of 737. The determination to shoehorn what aerodynamically kind of is a new type of plane into the 737's type rating seems likely to be the root cause of these deaths.
- lixtra 8y ago> seems likely to be the root cause of these deaths. Given that investigation in both accidents is still ongoing and all we know is wild speculation your conclusion is premature even though it finally may turn out to be true.
- cjbprime 8y agoYou're quoting the phrase "seems likely". It's not a conclusion. It's my guess at what's most probable based on what we know today. (Also, I don't agree that we only know "wild speculation" about the Lion Air crash. The investigators have told us much about the proximate cause of the crash, even though their final investigation is not yet complete.)
- lixtra 8y agoMaybe it’s my English. What probability do you assign to “seems likely”? Above 50% (the way I read it)? Or does it mean it’s a possible outcome among many others, all with very low probability?
- mobilemidget 8y agoAs a passenger I would feel safer knowing that last information and instructions are not send a day before the flight but a pilot gets actual training? Maybe that’s just me
- azernik 8y agoIn theory, regulators agree. However, Boeing seems to have marketed this plane under the regulatory fiction that it was the same plane as the 737, and that therefore no retraining was needed.
- flukus 8y ago> The instrumentation is completely different - My scan was degraded, slow and labored having had no experience w/ the new ND (Navigation Display) and ADI (Attitude Director Indicator) presentations/format or functions (manipulation between the screens and systems pages were not provided in training materials. If they were, I had no recollection of that material). Are these changes not noticeable until you're in the air or should pilots have been refusing to take off in a plane they're not familiar with?
- dpwm 8y ago> Are these changes not noticeable until you're in the air or should pilots have been refusing to take off in a plane they're not familiar with? I'm not familiar with the plane and I'm not a pilot, but from reading the report it sounds like they were able to do the checks OK – but that took time. It also sounds like the instrumentation displays on the plane very helpfully have modes and some kind of menu system. The references to stages of flight make it sound like these modes become available dynamically. So it seems quite probable that it isn't possible to actually navigate the screens in the air in the same way as on the ground. Compare the 737 MAX8 cockpit [0] with the 737-800 cockpit [1] and the 737-300 cockpit [2]. Then consider that all of these planes are under the same type rating [3] – so a pilot trained on one of them is good for all of them. There's also a lot of commercial pressure on pilots to not refuse to take off in a plane – which could lead to bizarre consequences like the airline questioning their competence for their current type rating. [0] https://i.ytimg.com/vi/tCXPJkC7ZwI/maxresdefault.jpg https://i.ytimg.com/vi/tCXPJkC7ZwI/maxresdefault.jpg [1] https://drscdn.500px.org/photo/35641948/m%3D2048_k%3D1_a%3D1/v2?sig=fb93798c62ddfb1cec8b42faf86e5e4d7eaf559ab03984acecb2c58b6c790dae https://drscdn.500px.org/photo/35641948/m%3D2048_k%3D1_a%3D1... [2] https://magazin.lufthansa.com/content/uploads/2016/07/Boeing-737-300-Blick-ins-Cockpit-360-Panorama-Startbild-1164x776.jpg https://magazin.lufthansa.com/content/uploads/2016/07/Boeing... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_rating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_rating
- anticensor 8y agoI can conclude they are different enough just based on display layout. How could aerospace experts not?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- zbobet2012 8y agoI've got to say it's massively comforting to see that many pilots treat this stuff with such a level of professionalism and sense of duty.