CAA bans Boeing 737 max 8

The Boeing 737 Max is supposed to be one of the major financial underpinnings of the company for some years to come. The biggest selling point for it is that there are loads of older 737s already flying, and so there are loads of pilots already qualified to fly them.

Boeing has been selling the Max to those many, many, existing customers on the basis that they don't have to retrain their 737 pilots beyond handing them an iPad with a quicky one hour update course on it. That means that when an airline receives their next 737 Max they can just take whatever existing 737 qualified pilot they have handy and give him the iPad and an hour later he's considered qualified to fly a Max, MCAS and all. That is a big cost saving in terms of manpower for airlines.

If you require simulator training, now you have to start booking simulator time (not cheap) and sending pilots away on courses. If an airline has to do that, then they might start seriously looking at what else might be on the market, in which case an old plane from Boeing that has been warmed over with updates multiple times may not look so attractive as one of the newer designs from Airbus or Bombardier.

Remember the massive US tariffs that Boeing wanted to put on Bombardier's C-Series? They said they needed those to protect the 737 Max from competition.

For the US FAA, Boeing is one of the US national champions, and they want to do what they can to support US industry.

So the incentives for Boeing and to the US FAA haven't changed. They see the recent crashes as just being a little glitch which will soon be forgotten, and so have no wish to change from their original course.
Thanks for the info.
Stupid question time from me: what will the simulation replicate - a new recovery process, with the aid of new software? Or does the software just eliminate the fault, but change existing flight procedures?
 
Thanks for the info.
Stupid question time from me: what will the simulation replicate - a new recovery process, with the aid of new software? Or does the software just eliminate the fault, but change existing flight procedures?
I don't think any decisions have been made yet on what the simulator courses would cover, but if I recall correctly one example given in the press was pilots would be exposed to a simulation of an MCAS failure and would practice diagnosing it and the recovery procedures.

Flight simulators of course being these jobbies, not a game you play on your PC.
Full-Flight Simulators


I don't know how many companies are making flight simulators for the Boeing 737 Max, but one of the biggest in the industry is CAE, and their first customer operated simulator was only approved by Transport Canada after Boeing had already starting delivering planes to customers. The ones in this announcement went to Air Canada.
CAE
Montreal, October 5, 2017
CAE announced today that Transport Canada has awarded earlier this summer Interim Level C qualification for the world’s first airline operated Boeing 737MAX full-flight simulator.
I don't know if airlines were able to book time on simulators owned by Boeing or some third party (or CAE's own training operation). It would be fascinating to know though if these simulators covered MCAS failures, and who and how it was decided whether that was necessary. I would not be surprised if Boeing had a big say in what the potential failure modes were, and if so did they tell the simulator maker that this was necessary, or even if they told them about the MCAS at all.

This could be an interesting line of questioning for any journalist wanting to look into it.
 
I don't think any decisions have been made yet on what the simulator courses would cover, but if I recall correctly one example given in the press was pilots would be exposed to a simulation of an MCAS failure and would practice diagnosing it and the recovery procedures.

Flight simulators of course being these jobbies, not a game you play on your PC.
Full-Flight Simulators


I don't know how many companies are making flight simulators for the Boeing 737 Max, but one of the biggest in the industry is CAE, and their first customer operated simulator was only approved by Transport Canada after Boeing had already starting delivering planes to customers. The ones in this announcement went to Air Canada.
CAE


I don't know if airlines were able to book time on simulators owned by Boeing or some third party (or CAE's own training operation). It would be fascinating to know though if these simulators covered MCAS failures, and who and how it was decided whether that was necessary. I would not be surprised if Boeing had a big say in what the potential failure modes were, and if so did they tell the simulator maker that this was necessary, or even if they told them about the MCAS at all.

This could be an interesting line of questioning for any journalist wanting to look into it.
And also of course, these simulators will need the same software fix as the aircraft as if they don’t they will be deemed non-representive. We had to have our sim in Aberdeen approved by Transport Canada and they were very thorough. Very professional.
 
I don't think any decisions have been made yet on what the simulator courses would cover, but if I recall correctly one example given in the press was pilots would be exposed to a simulation of an MCAS failure and would practice diagnosing it and the recovery procedures.

Flight simulators of course being these jobbies, not a game you play on your PC.
Full-Flight Simulators


I don't know how many companies are making flight simulators for the Boeing 737 Max, but one of the biggest in the industry is CAE, and their first customer operated simulator was only approved by Transport Canada after Boeing had already starting delivering planes to customers. The ones in this announcement went to Air Canada.
CAE


I don't know if airlines were able to book time on simulators owned by Boeing or some third party (or CAE's own training operation). It would be fascinating to know though if these simulators covered MCAS failures, and who and how it was decided whether that was necessary. I would not be surprised if Boeing had a big say in what the potential failure modes were, and if so did they tell the simulator maker that this was necessary, or even if they told them about the MCAS at all.

This could be an interesting line of questioning for any journalist wanting to look into it.
Thank you for the information. Appreciated.
Following up on your reply (and it may already have been posted) I watched this video, which contains an interesting/bloody concerning simulator sequence at the start:
And this re. some current 737 simulators not bring able to replicate the cause of the accidents:

Boeing 737 Max Simulators Are in High Demand. They Are Flawed.
 
Yeh, saw that yesterday. Very well presented.


BTW I was passing through an airport in the US the other day and spotted the headline of a local newspaper which stated “Boeing crashes pilot error”. Which newspaper? The Seattle Times.
Blaming the pilot is easy, especially as dead ones can't defend themselves.
 
Boeing has admitted that training simulators for the Boeing 737 Max do not accurately simulate the behaviour of the plane in the event of an MCAS malfunction.
Boeing admits 737 Max sims didn't accurately reproduce what flying without MCAS was like
Boeing has admitted that pilot training simulators for the controversial 737 Max did not accurately reproduce what happened if the infamous MCAS system went gaga.
In short, the problem apparently is that when the MCAS software activates when it shouldn't, this causes the plane to accelerate as it dives. In order to recover, the pilot can't just turn off the MCAS itself, but rather must turn off what amounts to the power assist on the elevators and try to use the manual backups.

However, with the MCAS forcing the plane to go faster and faster, the plane accelerates to the point where countering the increased aerodynamic forces requires "immense force" to be applied by the pilot.

Although the Ethiopian Airways crash is still under investigation, there are theories that the pilots were simply unable to overcome the huge forces resulting from the MCAS system repeatedly cutting in and accelerating the plane.
Theories are circulating that the crew of the second fatal crash, Ethiopian Airways flight ET302, after successfully cutting out the electric stab trim per Boeing's instructions, were then unable to move the trim wheel against the huge aerodynamic forces caused by their airliner accelerating towards the ground. As speed increases, so does the force needed to move control surfaces, much as the wind pressure you feel when putting your hand out of a car window at speed.
Boeing approved flight simulators do not reproduce this effect.
If Boeing-approved 737 Max flight simulators were not correctly reproducing those forces on the mechanical trim wheel, pilots could have been being lulled into a false sense of security while practising emergency drills on the ground.
 
IATA (International Air Transport Association) are estimating that the Boeing 737 Max will remain grounded until at least mid-August.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-737-max-grounding-1.5154581?cmp=rss
The Boeing 737 Max jet that was grounded after two deadly crashes will not fly before mid-August at the earliest, the global airline trade group said Wednesday.

The spokesman for the International Air Transport Association, Anthony Concil, said the group estimates the planes will remain grounded for at least another 10-12 weeks, though regulators like the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration will have final say.
 
This is a none story in the eyes of POTUS who is going to use one himself as AirForce1.
 
It's not getting better. Lucky for me my next few flights are long-haul!

'Boeing on Sunday said some of its 737 planes, including many 737 Max aircraft, may have faulty parts on their wings. It's the latest problem Boeing faces as it tries to get its most important and popular airplane, the grounded 737 Max, back in the air. Working with the Federal Aviation Administration, Boeing said it has reached out to airlines that fly 737 planes, advising them to inspect their slat track assemblies on Max and NG aircraft. The 737 NG series includes the 737-600, -700, -800 and -900 planes.'

Boeing says some of its 737 Max planes may have defective parts - CNN
 
It's not getting better. Lucky for me my next few flights are long-haul!

'Boeing on Sunday said some of its 737 planes, including many 737 Max aircraft, may have faulty parts on their wings. It's the latest problem Boeing faces as it tries to get its most important and popular airplane, the grounded 737 Max, back in the air. Working with the Federal Aviation Administration, Boeing said it has reached out to airlines that fly 737 planes, advising them to inspect their slat track assemblies on Max and NG aircraft. The 737 NG series includes the 737-600, -700, -800 and -900 planes.'

Boeing says some of its 737 Max planes may have defective parts - CNN
Thankfully, Delta don't appear to have drunk the 737 Max Kool-aid & are currently buying more 737-900's.
 
American Airlines have announced that flight cancellations due to to Boeing 737 Max groundings will continue into at least early September.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/american-airlines-extends-737-max-cancellations-1.5168294?cmp=rss
American Airlines said Sunday it is extending those cancellations through Sept. 3. Boeing has yet to complete a certification test flight and formally submit its software upgrade and training changes to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for approval.
 
The US FAA say they have no timetable for when the Boeing 737 Max will return to service.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/faa-no-timetable-for-boeing-737-max-return-1.5172247?cmp=rss
FAA spokesman Greg Martin said the agency has "no timetable" for allowing the 737 Max to resume flying and will act "only when it is safe to return to service."
Other news sources were apparently saying the likely date will be December.
Bloomberg reported earlier that the troubled 737 Max aircraft will be back in the air by December, citing a top Federal Aviation Administration safety official.
 
Boeing shipments of new airliners are down by more than half from a year ago. They said that in May they delivered 30 airliners, which is down 56% from 68 the year previously.
www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-deliveries-may-1.5171971?cmp=rss
Boeing said Tuesday that it delivered 30 commercial airliners during May, down 56% from the 68 it made in May 2018.
Deliveries of 737s are down from 47 to 8 in the same time frame. The 8 are older model NGs.
Deliveries of 737s plummeted from 47 a year ago to just eight last month. All eight were an older model of 737, called the NG.
 
Before we all get too carried away with MCAS,

It was the fitting of a jury rigged MCAS in reverse system to the Nimrod MRA4 that was the root cause of it being scrapped - it was designed with a lethal fatal flaw.

Its tail was too short for the new wings, giving it little control authority, and it tended to pitch down - a lot, less than ideal in a plane that flies down low for a living.
To get round this 'feature', they fitted a stall recovery system and wired it in full time and in reverse to keep the nose trimmed up.
After Haddon-Cave, NFW was such a lunatic system ever going to be signed off.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top