CAA bans Boeing 737 max 8

[oldsoak]

Hmm. I'm wondering how flyable the damn thing is in turbulence. I'l be honest, I'm very wary of putting my backside in a Max seat until it's got loads of flight hours.

 

[Toastie]

I expect the pressure from Boeing will mean that operations won't be long coming. The pilots aren't exactly busy, neither are the engineers, so training will proceed apace.

But hangar space and simulator time is limited.

Any idea what that would entail?

Not yet finalised and as has been mentioned, EASA are running up their own Return To Service protocol. Absolute minimum of a sim session (4 hours) covering differences. This was one of (the many) major criticisms by pilots’ groups and others in that the differences course* was a home study package on an iPad.

Any idea how they're being taught to deal with it if it goes off the reservation?

The software has been modified to essentially that on the 737NG. It still has MACS but it can now be over ridden by the pilots. There is a mandatory package in the U.K.for annual Recurrent Training, Classroom and Sim for UPRT (Upset Prevention and Recovery Training).

I‘d have no problem getting on one once all this is in place.

*Differences from 737NG

 

[RCT(V)]

But hangar space and simulator time is limited.



Not yet finalised and as has been mentioned, EASA are running up their own Return To Service protocol. Absolute minimum of a sim session (4 hours) covering differences. This was one of (the many) major criticisms by pilots’ groups and others in that the differences course* was a home study package on an iPad.



The software has been modified to essentially that on the 737NG. It still has MACS but it can now be over ridden by the pilots. There is a mandatory package in the U.K.for annual Recurrent Training, Classroom and Sim for UPRT (Upset Prevention and Recovery Training).

I‘d have no problem getting on one once all this is in place.

*Differences from 737NG

But, but, BUT . . the dubious inappropriate physical deficiencies, have STILL not been addressed .

Because of their increased size (compared to those on earlier 737), the new engines are moved forward on longer pylons, so that the engines can be lifted , so that the(ir) cowlings do not drag along the tarmac. Consequently, the centre of gravity is moved forward, and the resulting flight characteristics . . . dictate the adoption of "electrickery" to rectify the situation.

If the "electrickery" fails, I'm not certain I would want to be on such an aircraft, even WITH the redoubtable @Toastie in the left-hand seat .

Since my earlier posts, I have learnt that earlier Series of 737 (BEFORE the MAX), were ALREADY available with longer landing-legs . . . that if adopted for the MAX would have enabled the new bigger engines, to be mounted in a/the, more conventional, usual position, providing in, resulting in, a more conventional, usual CoG.

These existing longer landing-legs lift the older 737 some 8".

The MAX's longer pylons, were/are to enable the MAX to be lifted some 8", using normal, ordinary, standard length landing legs!!

When posting earlier, I had anticipated the supplier having to design/approve/manufacturer new 8" longer landing-legs! I did not then realise such things as already available from the components invantary, with their own parts number, etc..

I do not know why such a sensible, pragmatic solution, to retro-fit the longer landing-legs AND download the appropriate, conventional software, has not been adopted ?!

Possibly, just because Boeing is Boeing ?!

NOTE: there is one sub-series of MAX that is/has already been elevated the magical, mystical 8" . . . and which presumably could/not, be lifted a further 8".

However, their existence does prove the viability of the above suggestion, for the bulk of the MAX fleet .

 

[Lardbeast]

...It still has MACS but it can now be over ridden by the pilots. There is a mandatory package in the U.K.for annual Recurrent Training, Classroom and Sim for UPRT (Upset Prevention and Recovery Training)...

It makes no sense at all to have any form of automation whatsoever that cannot be overridden when things go pear shaped. As for UPRT, old farts like us call it flying the aircraft.

Never had a problem with flying on one as long as the bloke driving it in seat 0A was confident enough in his abilities and experienced enough to disable the ungodly electronic abortion the bean counters wish to have in command, and fly the thing himself.

 

[RCT(V)]

From my post #911, the link . . .

Proposed US fix for Boeing 737 Max software woes does not address Ethiopian crash scenario, UK pilot union warns

MCAS saga still hasn't ended as reps warn of trim wheel problem

www.theregister.com

Bootnote

The 737 Max will be known as the 737-7, 737-8 and 737-9. In Ryanair's case it will be known as the 737-8200, a reference to the base -8 Max model having been fettled to fit 200 seats rather than the stock -8's 180ish.

International Air Transport Association aeroplane type codes will be B37M, B38M and B39M should you want to avoid booking a flight on one.

Published by: Oliver Smith, The TELEGRAPH, on 24 November 2020.

Ryanair boss says nervous 737 MAX fliers will be allowed to disembark and change planes.

Telegraph Travel readers have expressed reticence to step on board the aircraft, with a poll suggesting 43% would avoid doing so.

The chief executive of Ryanair has promised to give passengers the chance to disembark the 737 MAX before takeoff, and find them another flight, if they feel nervous about the jet’s safety record . . .

[Damn PAYWALL].

[PHOTO: The 737 MAX, now rebranded the 737-8200 Credit: Getty]

Ryanair boss says nervous 737 MAX fliers will be allowed to disembark and change planes

Telegraph Travel readers have expressed reticence to step on board the aircraft, with a poll suggesting 43% would avoid doing so

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[exbluejob]

Published by: Oliver Smith, The TELEGRAPH, on 24 November 2020.

Ryanair boss says nervous 737 MAX fliers will be allowed to disembark and change planes.

Telegraph Travel readers have expressed reticence to step on board the aircraft, with a poll suggesting 43% would avoid doing so.

The chief executive of Ryanair has promised to give passengers the chance to disembark the 737 MAX before takeoff, and find them another flight, if they feel nervous about the jet’s safety record . . .

[Damn PAYWALL].

View attachment 523930[PHOTO: The 737 MAX, now rebranded the 737-8200 Credit: Getty]

Ryanair boss says nervous 737 MAX fliers will be allowed to disembark and change planes

Telegraph Travel readers have expressed reticence to step on board the aircraft, with a poll suggesting 43% would avoid doing so

www.telegraph.co.uk

That'll really screw things up and delay departures. How about letting people decide before they board?

 

[CrashTestDummy]

That'll really screw things up and delay departures. How about letting people decide before they board?

Clever renaming of the aircraft, though. Most people won't know that it's a re-branded 737 MAX.

 

[exbluejob]

Clever renaming of the aircraft, though. Most people won't know that it's a re-branded 737 MAX.

Rebranded because they're squeezing another 20 SLF on it. Normal configuration 180, greedy bastard have your knees in your chin configuration 200.

 

[CrashTestDummy]

Rebranded because they're squeezing another 20 SLF on it. Normal configuration 180, greedy bastard have your knees in your chin configuration 200.

Yep, I posted about that a few days ago.

 

[Electromagnetic]

Published by: Oliver Smith, The TELEGRAPH, on 24 November 2020.

Ryanair boss says nervous 737 MAX fliers will be allowed to disembark and change planes.

Telegraph Travel readers have expressed reticence to step on board the aircraft, with a poll suggesting 43% would avoid doing so.

The chief executive of Ryanair has promised to give passengers the chance to disembark the 737 MAX before takeoff, and find them another flight, if they feel nervous about the jet’s safety record . . .

[Damn PAYWALL].

View attachment 523930[PHOTO: The 737 MAX, now rebranded the 737-8200 Credit: Getty]

Ryanair boss says nervous 737 MAX fliers will be allowed to disembark and change planes

Telegraph Travel readers have expressed reticence to step on board the aircraft, with a poll suggesting 43% would avoid doing so

www.telegraph.co.uk

A bit sinister having entrance signs on the engine cowlings. What's wrong with kersoene?

 

[PhotEx]

Ryanairs just ordered another load of 737 MAX's

 

[incendiarycutlery]

Ryanairs just ordered another load of 737 MAX's

I should imagine that they are cheap.

 

[exbluejob]

I should imagine that they are cheap.

No overhead luggage racks should keep the price down.

 

[lastwalt]

No overhead luggage racks should keep the price down.

balanced out by all the extra seats they squeeze in.

 

[exbluejob]

balanced out by all the extra seats they squeeze in.

Job jobbed!

 

[PhotEx]

They've bought 75

 

[CrashTestDummy]

Boeing (again) and the FAA (again) not coming up smelling of roses (surprise!):

737 Max: Boeing 'inappropriately coached' pilots in test after crashes

US Senate investigators find problems with tests conducted in the wake of two deadly crashes.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[terminal]

Boeing (again) and the FAA (again) not coming up smelling of roses (surprise!):

737 Max: Boeing 'inappropriately coached' pilots in test after crashes

US Senate investigators find problems with tests conducted in the wake of two deadly crashes.

www.bbc.co.uk

Boeing more or less rigged the tests of how well pilots could react to an MCAS failure, and the FAA went along with it.

The more I hear about the whole affair, the worse it gets.

 

[Lindermyer]

It appears, in this instance, FAA and Boeing were attempting to cover up important information that may have contributed to the 737 Max tragedies."

If true (rather than some journalistic creative interpretation of what was actually said) that could have serious repurcussions moving forward, possibly impacting the intent to lift restrictions in January accross Europe.

Its one thing for a regulatory body to be seen to have absolutely screwed the pooch like this - its quite another to have fingers pointed that it was complicit in that proceess and then possibly so in trying to hide said failings

edited to add missing word

 

[Lindermyer]

From BBC

""Most of the initial safety certification work on the 737 Max was carried out by the FAA, and simply endorsed by EASA under the terms of a long-standing international agreement.

But with the FAA now facing intense criticism for allowing an apparently flawed aircraft into service, Mr Ky says in future, things will be done differently.""

"What is certain is that there were lessons learned from this, which will trigger new actions from our side", he explains.
In particular, where EASA is not the primary authority carrying out safety work, it will examine other people's decisions much more closely.
"We will perform our own safety assessment, which is going to be much more comprehensive than it used to be", he says.

In other words the reciprical nod through is somewhat dead (at least until confidence in the FAA is restored).