|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Now I'm trying to imagine an "MD-2020" with twin LEAP-1A engines. If McDonnell Douglas had survived to the present day you know this is exactly what they'd be selling.
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Goon Project: design the 737 replacement. Done, 757-200 with modern engines. That or a 727 with two LEAP engines. Where do I collect my money?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 03:00
|
|
|
Abolish all short haul air travel and build out high speed rail to all communities over 50k people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 03:00
|
|
|
Elviscat posted:Two Boeing 737's have crashed before, after the first crash Boeing "lost" the critical parts that were causing rudder reversal, leading directly to the second crash, people have been flying on 737s in the intervening 20 years after the problem was fixed. It was the 90s where the current level of media coverage didn't exist and while I'm certain there was internal politics that caused that issue, there weren't emails from employees saying that they were "shocked if the FAA passes this turd." The 737 also wasn't grounded for over a year over it either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
I don't care what replaces the MAX as long as the company I work for gets contracts to make poo poo for it, we are going to be turbo hosed otherwise
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 03:09
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Goon Project: design the 737 replacement. Mine would involve treadmills
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 03:53
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:It was the 90s where the current level of media coverage didn't exist and while I'm certain there was internal politics that caused that issue, there weren't emails from employees saying that they were "shocked if the FAA passes this turd." True, no emails, just literal theft of evidence. If the FAA says "this plane is safe now" people will fly on it, and airlines won't give them a choice, the number of people connected/informed enough to give a poo poo will be insignificant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 03:56
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:The last time I flew on a 737, before the MAX had been grounded, at least a dozen people were The 737Max story blew up (sorry) while my wife & I were in Florida. Our roundtrip was with Southwest. I remember stopping during our vacation to find a computer to look up a) whether or not we still had a return flight; and b) if that flight was on a 737Max. Because no loving way. Turned out we were on 737s both ways (eastern seaboard corridor) FuturePastNow posted:but would you fly on a 737-8200? Nice try, assholes. Arson Daily posted:Donald trump is president. Do you think people are paying any attention to the airplane they fly on? This is a Darwin question. I wholeheartedly approve. PainterofCrap fucked around with this message at 04:42 on Jan 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 04:37
|
|
-ing about whether it was a MAX or not. It was a 737NG and they were visibly relieved when informed it wasn't a MAX.
.
|
Elviscat posted:Two Boeing 737's have crashed before, after the first crash Boeing "lost" the critical parts that were causing rudder reversal, leading directly to the second crash, people have been flying on 737s in the intervening 20 years after the problem was fixed. With the media attention on the MAX I'm pretty sure it's not going back in the air without being as safe as any other plane in commercial service, I wouldn't think twice about flying on one once the FAA and their European counterparts get done tearing it apart and certifying a fix. Thanks for the link, that's fuckin nuts
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 05:09
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:Our roundtrip was with Southwest. you don't say! southwest only flies 737s
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 05:27
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:you don't say! They flew both 737s & 737Maxes. Turns out the eastern seaboard was flying standard 737s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
"737" is too generic for this thread. Southwest has flown 737s from every generation of the aircraft, and indeed has also flown most of the sub-types within generations too The OG adorable baby twinjets, the 737-100 and -200 The 737 Classic, including the -300, -400, and -500 variants The 737NG, including -600, -700, -800 and -900 variants The 737 MAX, including the MAX 7, MAX 8, MAX 9 and forthcoming MAX 10 You probably meant they were flying the 737NG on the eastern seaboard  (as noted, going forwards they're probably going to dump the MAX name and just call them the 737-8200 etc) Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Jan 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 05:47
|
|
|
737 SLAYER
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 05:58
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:737 SLAYER Rancid Angel of Death flying free~
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 06:03
|
|
|
Arson Daily posted:Donald trump is president. Do you think people are paying any attention to the airplane they fly on? Yes, but only to seek out the 737 Max, that I might expedite my exit from this mortal plane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 06:56
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:The situation is sort of unprecedented. The airlines need these planes. People likely aren't going to want to fly on these planes. Airbus really doesn't have capacity to replace all of them anytime soon nor do I think the economics work out that the airlines can go that direction anyways. Worse: some subcontractors who work for both Airbus and Boeing are in financial difficulties due to the MAX program being halted, and if they go bankrupt it will disrupt Airbus' supply chain. The situation is so that each of the Big Two can afford their rival to stay relatively healthy. They certainly each want to see the other's market share fall, but not too fast or it bites them too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 14:29
|
|
|
Jesus christ, every day there is new info about Boeing that is worse than the last day's. It's starting to feel like WeWork at this point. Today it seems lovely sensors were responsible for a crash in 2009 and Boeing has been covering this up. This was also their first lovely design that relied on a single sensor, which got carried over to the MAX. The failure to really acknowledge responsibility for the 2009 crash led directly to the terrible design of the MAX with the same failing sensors. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/20/business/boeing-737-accidents.html I wouldn't trust these idiots to develop a web site for a mexican restaurant, the fact that they are trying to fix every awful design decision in software is just stupid. Pryor on Fire fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Jan 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 15:07
|
|
|
The only way Boeing executives could look worse at this point is if they were caught literally screwing pooches.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 15:12
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:I wouldn't trust these idiots to develop a web site for a mexican restaurant, the fact that they are trying to fix every awful design decision in software is just stupid. This is like babby’s first programming mistake here: quote:The 737 NG has two parallel sets of computers and sensors, one on the left side of the plane and one on the right. Most of the time, only one set is in control. Should I even call that a “mistake”? It’s an intentional decision. They knew it was the easy and inferior solution to “which input should the autothrottle use?”. They just didn’t think it would bite them. They were almost right. Even when their software killed, almost no one knew about it and they never would have had Boeing not killed scores more with MCAS. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 15:26 on Jan 20, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 15:21
|
|
|
unfortunately the LEAP-1B has a 6" bigger fan diameter than the V2500 that was used on the MD-90, but i guess they did put a 12" diameter propfan on the back of a MD-80 so it's possible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
So am I hearing this right that Boeing wants to software fix *everything*? Because tearing out MCAS would mean type certificate kerfluffle, and hardware is expensive? Because if so, they've learned nothing
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 17:08
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:This is like babby’s first programming mistake here: The world is not quite ready to hold people responsible for negligent software design but it’s getting close.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:This is like babby’s first programming mistake here: I'm really surprised there isn't a procedure for having a bad data source that would definitively answer that question? Even if the answer is "turn it all off" that means the pilots didn't follow procedure and are technically were in the wrong.... ok I used the google cache trick to get the article: quote:As the plane dipped to 1,000 feet, the pilots had not yet completed their landing checklist. Strict adherence to airline procedure would have meant circling around for another try, but violations were commonplace at the busy runway, investigators later determined. Normalization of deviance is a good thing to focus on, but they applied TOGA power at 450 ft AGL and still crashed? drat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 17:18
|
|
|
they applied TOGA power significantly below 450 feet AGL. 450 is where the stick shaker activated, and the captain applied power 9 seconds after that. so they were probably a lot lower when power was applied.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 17:49
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Normalization of deviance is a good thing to focus on, but they applied TOGA power at 450 ft AGL and still crashed? drat. It could just be bad writing but the article doesn't say he applied TOGA, just that he pushed the levers up. The fact that they came back to idle immediately after would imply he bumped in enough to try and get it back on speed without realizing the A/T was misbehaving. They didn't go to TOGA power until 9 sec. after the shaker went off. This crash reads very similar to Asiana in SFO. 3 crew members on the flight deck, not monitoring the automation and assuming A/T will keep it on speed, not recovering from an impending stall correctly. Anyone who flies an automated plane should know the answer to fixing a mistake in automation is to remove it from the equation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 17:58
|
|
|
Fallom posted:The world is not quite ready to hold people responsible for negligent software design but it’s getting close. Therac-25 yada yada
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 18:27
|
|
C-Bangin' it 
|
I’m likely wrong but isn’t TOGA in some airframes a command rather than physically moving the throttles to the power setting?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 19:58
|
|
|
bloops posted:I’m likely wrong but isn’t TOGA in some airframes a command rather than physically moving the throttles to the power setting? In most airliners with auto throttles one of the things TOGA does is command the throttles to go around thrust. If the auto throttles are inop, not engaged, or overridden by the pilot, they will have to be advanced manually. On the 737 there are two settings of go around thrust. Pushing TOGA once gives enough thrust to transition to a healthy, but not excessive, climb rate. Pushing TOGA again sets max thrust which feels a bit like being strapped to a rocket if you're not prepared for it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
bloops posted:I’m likely wrong but isn’t TOGA in some airframes a command rather than physically moving the throttles to the power setting? *theatrical bongrip* Depending on how you classify hydro-mechanical or digital electronic engine controls and how they interact with fuel pumps, the thrust levers on most extant commercial airplanes are also merely issuing a command to a control system that may or may not directly command more fuel to be delivered to the engine. If it's not a piston prop, it's probably not physically moving a throttle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 21:24
|
|
|
Are there any flight tracking website that don’t obscure the poo poo out of private planes, like FlightAware does? It annoys me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 22:05
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:*theatrical bongrip* Depending on how you classify hydro-mechanical or digital electronic engine controls and how they interact with fuel pumps, the thrust levers on most extant commercial airplanes are also merely issuing a command to a control system that may or may not directly command more fuel to be delivered to the engine. If it's not a piston prop, it's probably not physically moving a throttle. AKTCHUALLY in the CRJ-200 it’s directly connected to the engines, there is no FADEC in a -200 I always joke the -200 is just as miserable to fly as it is to ride in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 22:09
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:there is no FADEC in a -200 How the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:How the gently caress How the gently caress perfectly describes a CRJ-200, yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Are there any flight tracking website that don’t obscure the poo poo out of private planes, like FlightAware does? ADSB Exchange may be what you're looking for, although it's not nearly as user-friendly as FlightAware or FR24.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Are there any flight tracking website that don’t obscure the poo poo out of private planes, like FlightAware does? ADS-B Exchange, though it's more Flightradar24 than Flightaware. E:beaten like the need for an ADS-B Exchange app
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:AKTCHUALLY in the CRJ-200 it’s directly connected to the engines, there is no FADEC in a -200 Controllers hate them too. The perfect trifecta.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 23:17
|
|
|
You can always tell how bad and/or checked out a -200 crew is by how synced the engines are in cruise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 23:20
|
|
|
It’s so good to know that the professionals feel the same distaste for the CRJ-200 that I do. Most of my travel up through college was flying out of Albuquerque, and if it wasn’t somewhere Southwest flew, I had altogether too high a chance of spending some quality time in the back of a CRJ-200 en route to Denver, Phoenix, or Salt Lake (whose regional jet terminal remains my mental picture of Hell). The fact that the window belt never got moved when the floor did during the conversion from the biz jet still amazes me. How do you not figure that one out?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2020 23:53
|
|
|
they were trying to keep costs way down and probably didn't expect the drat thing to be so successful after avoiding them for quite some time, i'm now on a semi regular leg on CRJ2s for about ~300 miles. gently caress them so hard
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:15 |
|
|
e.pilot posted:You can always tell how bad and/or checked out a -200 crew is by how synced the engines are in cruise. Does this have the same symptoms as with a twin prop?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2020 03:45
|
|
