5 ms·

The 737 Max is probably the safest plane to fly right now. Pilots are not complacent people.

chimpburger 8y ago
No. The 737 Max introduced a fundamental design weakness that was implemented for cost efficiency reasons only. The center of gravity is towards the rear, which makes the plane tend to tilt backwards, and requires an automatic system to compensate for that https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-evaluates-a-potential-design-flaw-on-boeings-737-max-after-lion-air-crash/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-e...
- richjdsmith 8y ago
  This is the first time I have seen this. Really scary if that is what ended up being the cause. Won't bode well for Boeing.
  - rootusrootus 8y ago
    It's the first time you've heard it because there is a lot of BS floating around in the last few days, and it seems to be getting worse, not better.
    - CamperBob2 8y ago
      So it's not true?
      - FabHK 8y ago
        My understanding is that the issue is more one of the centre of thrust (of the engines), which is now further away from the centre of gravity, giving rise to a larger momentum.
        inferiorhuman 8y ago
        Also the nacelles generating lift.
  - mcv 8y ago
    It confirms what I've read about this issue so far. But this article is from the previous crash. If this was already known, why hasn't it been fixed? Why haven't pilots received additional training to deal with this?
- zyngaro 8y ago
  Wow ! Mind blowing. This is borderline criminal.
- outworlder 8y ago
  Engines were moved forward. Center of gravity should shift forward. Lift from the nacelles is the issue.
Voloskaya 8y ago
How can you seriously say that? There are a ton of planes with a better flight/crash ratio. 380 A340 where build since 1991 almost exactly as much as the number of 737 Max built (376). Not one fatal accident in almost 20 years for the A340 versus 2 fatal accident in 2 years for the 737.
- idlewords 8y ago
  My point is that all 737 Max pilots flying today are briefing on the issue and hyper-vigilant, while the Airbus pilots doze in their cockpits in peace.
  - isostatic 8y ago
    They were briefed after lionair
  - FabHK 8y ago
    (Incidentally, that's how I calm myself during turbulence: I think "well, at least the pilots are awake now"...)
  - aeternus 8y ago
    The problem is that the issue may cause the plane to be unflyable even by a pilot aware of the issue. The earliest reports said that pilots could avoid this runaway trim issue by knowing to disable the electric trim. Now it sounds like doing that may also eliminate all ability for pilots to trim the aircraft. Inability to trim make airplanes extremely difficult to fly, the control (yolk) pressures required can quickly become too high to maintain control. Pilots would have to hold something like 1 lb of continuous backpressure for every 6 knots out of trim for the entire flight.
    - TimTheTinker 8y ago
      > The problem is that the issue may cause the plane to be unflyable even by a pilot aware of the issue. That’s partly true, but it’s not the whole story. MCAS and its use to make the MAX 8-9 fly “more like the 737” is part of a longer trend of manufacturers coddling pilots instead of expecting them to behave as competent professionals and treating them as such. They’re effectively opting for a more familiar normal aviating experience, with the tradeoff being longer emergency/exigency checklists and so much more to manage/remember/process when the system malfunctions. With the end-result being that even more experience is required to safely and reliably pilot modern aircraft. Side note: Disabling trim should only be done as part of a problem remedy, not as part of normal flight. (Disclaimer: I’m not a pilot. I’ve read for many hours on these issues.)

No. The 737 Max introduced a fundamental design weakness that was implemented for cost efficiency reasons only. The center of gravity is towards the rear, which makes the plane tend to tilt backwards, and requires an automatic system to compensate for that https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-evaluates-a-potential-design-flaw-on-boeings-737-max-after-lion-air-crash/ https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/faa-e...

richjdsmith 8y ago
This is the first time I have seen this. Really scary if that is what ended up being the cause. Won't bode well for Boeing.
- rootusrootus 8y ago
  It's the first time you've heard it because there is a lot of BS floating around in the last few days, and it seems to be getting worse, not better.
  - CamperBob2 8y ago
    So it's not true?
    - FabHK 8y ago
      My understanding is that the issue is more one of the centre of thrust (of the engines), which is now further away from the centre of gravity, giving rise to a larger momentum.
      - inferiorhuman 8y ago
        Also the nacelles generating lift.
- mcv 8y ago
  It confirms what I've read about this issue so far. But this article is from the previous crash. If this was already known, why hasn't it been fixed? Why haven't pilots received additional training to deal with this?
zyngaro 8y ago
Wow ! Mind blowing. This is borderline criminal.
outworlder 8y ago
Engines were moved forward. Center of gravity should shift forward. Lift from the nacelles is the issue.

Voloskaya 8y ago

How can you seriously say that? There are a ton of planes with a better flight/crash ratio. 380 A340 where build since 1991 almost exactly as much as the number of 737 Max built (376). Not one fatal accident in almost 20 years for the A340 versus 2 fatal accident in 2 years for the 737.

idlewords 8y ago
My point is that all 737 Max pilots flying today are briefing on the issue and hyper-vigilant, while the Airbus pilots doze in their cockpits in peace.
- isostatic 8y ago
  They were briefed after lionair
- FabHK 8y ago
  (Incidentally, that's how I calm myself during turbulence: I think "well, at least the pilots are awake now"...)
- aeternus 8y ago
  The problem is that the issue may cause the plane to be unflyable even by a pilot aware of the issue. The earliest reports said that pilots could avoid this runaway trim issue by knowing to disable the electric trim. Now it sounds like doing that may also eliminate all ability for pilots to trim the aircraft. Inability to trim make airplanes extremely difficult to fly, the control (yolk) pressures required can quickly become too high to maintain control. Pilots would have to hold something like 1 lb of continuous backpressure for every 6 knots out of trim for the entire flight.
  - TimTheTinker 8y ago
    > The problem is that the issue may cause the plane to be unflyable even by a pilot aware of the issue. That’s partly true, but it’s not the whole story. MCAS and its use to make the MAX 8-9 fly “more like the 737” is part of a longer trend of manufacturers coddling pilots instead of expecting them to behave as competent professionals and treating them as such. They’re effectively opting for a more familiar normal aviating experience, with the tradeoff being longer emergency/exigency checklists and so much more to manage/remember/process when the system malfunctions. With the end-result being that even more experience is required to safely and reliably pilot modern aircraft. Side note: Disabling trim should only be done as part of a problem remedy, not as part of normal flight. (Disclaimer: I’m not a pilot. I’ve read for many hours on these issues.)