User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 12:31:43 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You guys are as bad as the old Chero-rose. There’s nothing wrong with hanging bigger engines on an airplane. It’s a good thing that’s done all the time on all different airplanes. The problem was they gave the MCAS only one AOA vane input, and gave it the authority to order full nose down trim. It’s fixed now, because it compares AOA, and will disable itself if bad data is detected. Furthermore, flight crew are now aware of that failure mode, and can shut off the trim at the flip of a switch. Boeing screwed up initially, but it had nothing at all to do with the overall design. Just that one small system (mcas). The truth is actually simpler, yet harder to believe, than the convoluted bullshit you guys are spouting. Incidentally, you could fly a whole career, and never even activate MCAS. It wasn't actually needed to begin with. I believe they also added an annunciation to the display for MCAS miscompare and added a 3 strikes type counter (or something similar) that disengages the MCAS if the flight crew engage the electric trim multiple times in disagreement with what MCAS is trying to do. If I recall correctly, in both accidents, the pilots used the electric trim switch to level the plane only to have MCAS kick back in a few seconds later. The "strike" counter would fix that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 12:35:45 AM EDT
[#2]
Boeing could not make two versions of the plane, but should have.
One, for the US market. Called the 737 Max. The other for the rest of the world. Called the 737 SH. (shit hole) The first could have sophisticated flight controls that took 4 hours in class and 4 hours in the sim to train. The second could have stone age flight controls that a Cessna 172 pilot could understand and operate. But that is not politically correct. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 7:53:19 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This in bold... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Well, like I said, they weren't going to sell 800 narrow body units to Ryan and Southwest that weren't a standard 737NG. Period. Neither company were going to invest in a new fleet type. Honestly, had Boeing said "the MAX pilot needs a differences sim session on a NG sim with software load to replicate the handling of various components of the new aircraft" Boeing would likely be making a really compelling case that they did the due diligence requisite for a derivative 737NG and this was a human factors accident. Sometimes, the customer is wrong. The airlines might have made the requirements - but it was all on Boeing for the design and manufacture. They could have chosen Safety (and perhaps suffered the consequences) or $$$. They chose - poorly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 9:12:08 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the point I've been making since this whole mess started: I will just about guaran-fucking-tee you there was a high up Boeing Executive who literally pounded on the table demanding "No New Training Required!" I've seen it time and time again. Of course, this executive is probably now gone, enjoying his retirement somewhere. The airlines might have made the requirements - but it was all on Boeing for the design and manufacture. They could have chosen Safety (and perhaps suffered the consequences) or $$$. They chose - poorly. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well, like I said, they weren't going to sell 800 narrow body units to Ryan and Southwest that weren't a standard 737NG. Period. Neither company were going to invest in a new fleet type. Honestly, had Boeing said "the MAX pilot needs a differences sim session on a NG sim with software load to replicate the handling of various components of the new aircraft" Boeing would likely be making a really compelling case that they did the due diligence requisite for a derivative 737NG and this was a human factors accident. Sometimes, the customer is wrong. The airlines might have made the requirements - but it was all on Boeing for the design and manufacture. They could have chosen Safety (and perhaps suffered the consequences) or $$$. They chose - poorly. 4 hours class. 4 hours sim. 737 max The 737 sh had to be designed around 0 hours class. 0 hours sim. It wasn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 11:31:42 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the point I've been making since this whole mess started: I will just about guaran-fucking-tee you there was a high up Boeing Executive who literally pounded on the table demanding "No New Training Required!" I've seen it time and time again. Of course, this executive is probably now gone, enjoying his retirement somewhere. The airlines might have made the requirements - but it was all on Boeing for the design and manufacture. They could have chosen Safety (and perhaps suffered the consequences) or $$$. They chose - poorly. It wouldn’t shock me if it all happened at a much lower level. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 7:58:39 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wouldn't shock me if it all happened at a much lower level. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is the point I've been making since this whole mess started: I will just about guaran-fucking-tee you there was a high up Boeing Executive who literally pounded on the table demanding "No New Training Required!" I've seen it time and time again. Of course, this executive is probably now gone, enjoying his retirement somewhere. The airlines might have made the requirements - but it was all on Boeing for the design and manufacture. They could have chosen Safety (and perhaps suffered the consequences) or $$$. They chose - poorly. It wouldn't shock me if it all happened at a much lower level. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:09:00 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wouldn't shock me if it all happened at a much lower level. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This is the point I've been making since this whole mess started: I will just about guaran-fucking-tee you there was a high up Boeing Executive who literally pounded on the table demanding "No New Training Required!" I've seen it time and time again. Of course, this executive is probably now gone, enjoying his retirement somewhere. The airlines might have made the requirements - but it was all on Boeing for the design and manufacture. They could have chosen Safety (and perhaps suffered the consequences) or $$$. They chose - poorly. It wouldn't shock me if it all happened at a much lower level. My experience after +32 years at Boeing is that almost always this type "artificial" pressure comes from the exec level, not mid-level managers and certainly not from first line managers or engineers. None of these have the incentive to fork around with safety issues like the execs do. The lower levels are then pressured to be quiet and go along with whatever the edict of the day is. Boeing didn't spend millions if not billions of $$$ on "Ethics" training because mid- and first-level managers and engineers couldn't keep their pants zipped up. That was all on the CEOs and Presidents of the company (Condit and StonePOSpher). |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:15:16 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think the problem occured several times before the fatal crashes but the US pilots were able to overcome the problem due to training. Not to say there wasn't a problem that needed fixing but the US pilots received different training. they make no mention of the 3rd world airlines other abilities that seem to result in lost aircraft I noticed |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:23:43 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You can't make up for outsourcing code to idiots for $9/hr with "oversight" either, when the "oversight" allows it. Not to mention the other idiots that designed and approved how the controls were setup, how they interacted with the software, and designed the pilot training and procedures. Boeing could have saved a lot of time, money, and terror by just lining all those passengers up and shooting them.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:27:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I won't even get into the fiasco of Boeing trying to rivet composites to metal....and the resulting cracks over time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:30:42 PM EDT
[#11]
 Troubles at Once-Great Boeing: A Snapshot of What Happened to America |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:40:44 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My experience after +32 years at Boeing is that almost always this type "artificial" pressure comes from the exec level, not mid-level managers and certainly not from first line managers or engineers. None of these have the incentive to fork around with safety issues like the execs do. The lower levels are then pressured to be quiet and go along with whatever the edict of the day is. Boeing didn't spend millions if not billions of $$$ on "Ethics" training because mid- and first-level managers and engineers couldn't keep their pants zipped up. That was all on the CEOs and Presidents of the company (Condit and StonePOSpher). How many of those 32 years were in engineering? I’ve seen far worse than this Max fiasco or a guy dicking his secretary. In most cases the worst of it won’t ever make it out of the program. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 8:45:18 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And then told their bosses everything "is just fine" even knowing the scenarios possible. . Seems like I’ve spent a good chunk of my career dealing the fallout of that. I’ve pretty much given up hope for this industry. I have to be careful, I’ve still got a few kids to put through school. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 9:42:33 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How many of those 32 years were in engineering? I've seen far worse than this Max fiasco or a guy dicking his secretary. In most cases the worst of it won't ever make it out of the program. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: My experience after +32 years at Boeing is that almost always this type "artificial" pressure comes from the exec level, not mid-level managers and certainly not from first line managers or engineers. None of these have the incentive to fork around with safety issues like the execs do. The lower levels are then pressured to be quiet and go along with whatever the edict of the day is. Boeing didn't spend millions if not billions of $$$ on "Ethics" training because mid- and first-level managers and engineers couldn't keep their pants zipped up. That was all on the CEOs and Presidents of the company (Condit and StonePOSpher). How many of those 32 years were in engineering? I've seen far worse than this Max fiasco or a guy dicking his secretary. In most cases the worst of it won't ever make it out of the program. All of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 10:02:17 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Seems like I've spent a good chunk of my career dealing the fallout of that. I've pretty much given up hope for this industry. I have to be careful, I've still got a few kids to put through school. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: And then told their bosses everything "is just fine" even knowing the scenarios possible. . Seems like I've spent a good chunk of my career dealing the fallout of that. I've pretty much given up hope for this industry. I have to be careful, I've still got a few kids to put through school. Any current employee ought to be careful as there were threats from the company last year or in 2019 toward anyone that made unflattering remarks in social media, and it's a safe bet there is a vendor similar to Lone Buffalo raking up and analyzing posts across the internet. After all, that business is more important that the business of building high performance aircraft, weapons, and spacecraft. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 10:09:08 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All of it. The worst of it that I have seen you could probably argue was the result of pressure to make goals, not to fail. The root of it is almost always some low level puke who can’t get it done any other way than the wrong way. Or one who is simply afraid to admit the truth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 10:11:42 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Any current employee ought to be careful as there were threats from the company last year or in 2019 toward anyone that made unflattering remarks in social media, and it's a safe bet there is a vendor similar to Lone Buffalo raking up and analyzing posts across the internet. After all, that business is more important that the business of building high performance aircraft, weapons, and spacecraft. . I’m sure I have a stellar social credit score |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 10:35:52 PM EDT
[#18]
Boeing aircraft are uncomfortable…flat out. The seats are small, isles are tight, ceilings are low, loud, and everything feels inconvenient.
Airbus aircraft are quiet, spacious, have nice lighting and temp control, and you can stand up in them. You can walk down the isle without touching passengers in isle seats. safety aside…Airbus is a more comfortable plane. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2021 10:43:11 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The worst of it that I have seen you could probably argue was the result of pressure to make goals, not to fail. The root of it is almost always some low level puke who can't get it done any other way than the wrong way. Or one who is simply afraid to admit the truth. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: All of it. The worst of it that I have seen you could probably argue was the result of pressure to make goals, not to fail. The root of it is almost always some low level puke who can't get it done any other way than the wrong way. Or one who is simply afraid to admit the truth.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 12:13:54 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: All of it. The worst of it that I have seen you could probably argue was the result of pressure to make goals, not to fail. The root of it is almost always some low level puke who can't get it done any other way than the wrong way. Or one who is simply afraid to admit the truth. . |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 8:04:31 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know exactly what Base is describing, and he is right. This is largely responsible for production of what I described as "analysis looking analysis" that doesn't hold up to examination by a qualified analyst. Often the pages are filled with junk that is unusable for reuse. . Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All of it. The worst of it that I have seen you could probably argue was the result of pressure to make goals, not to fail. The root of it is almost always some low level puke who can't get it done any other way than the wrong way. Or one who is simply afraid to admit the truth. . A "low level puke" wasn't responsible for the Boeing 737 Max disaster. So yea:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 9:25:40 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A "low level puke" wasn't responsible for the Boeing 737 Max disaster. So yea: Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All of it. The worst of it that I have seen you could probably argue was the result of pressure to make goals, not to fail. The root of it is almost always some low level puke who can't get it done any other way than the wrong way. Or one who is simply afraid to admit the truth. . A "low level puke" wasn't responsible for the Boeing 737 Max disaster. So yea: There are times when upper management sets a goal, and somebody at the grunt level finds a way to meet that goal, but that 'solution' creates problems that the grunt either didn't notice or was not capable of solving (lack of experience, or lack of training, etc). The situation can be corrected, if someone between the grunt and upper management points out the problems that were created, and upper management listens and accepts that the 'solution' is not yet a workable solution. On the other hand, it's possible that upper management can focus on the singular point that a solution to their set goal has been found, and either ignore warnings, apply pressure that may silence warnings, or step in to bypass the levels in between upper management and the grunt level (micromanage, without the needed background to recognize potential problems). |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 10:38:32 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are times when upper management sets a goal, and somebody at the grunt level finds a way to meet that goal, but that 'solution' creates problems that the grunt either didn't notice or was not capable of solving (lack of experience, or lack of training, etc). The situation can be corrected, if someone between the grunt and upper management points out the problems that were created, and upper management listens and accepts that the 'solution' is not yet a workable solution. On the other hand, it's possible that upper management can focus on the singular point that a solution to their set goal has been found, and either ignore warnings, apply pressure that may silence warnings, or step in to bypass the levels in between upper management and the grunt level (micromanage, without the needed background to recognize potential problems). It’s almost always a group effort. Unrealistic expectations/goals combined with incompetent “yes men”. Stretch goals can be healthy as long as you have a strong engineering org with some integrity. That last part didn’t seem to be there, and that’s why I got the hell away from BCA as fast as I could. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 11:45:36 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Modern airliners fly on the edge of falling out of the sky. Literally. They are inherently unsafe. No passenger airplane should require 87 sensors to maintain a stable flight profile. LOL |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 11:48:23 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @Vne You said it much better than I was going to! This guy is a treasure! All we need now is melting canopies. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How about blaming idiotic EPA policies that make modern commercial airplanes inherently unstable in flight? They are forced to be designed for "low emission and gas mileage" instead of safety and stability in flight. What specific EPA policies are those? Emissions are an engine driven metric, and fuel efficiency is mostly a business driven one. Modern aircraft are far more safe and stable than first generation ones. That's a demonstrated fact. Safer than pine wood covered in glue impregnated fabric? You don't say... It doesn't have to be either/or though. We can have airplanes where you can deviate by 30 knots and not drop out of the sky like a brick. It is possible. But it might cost a bit more fuel, and maybe a few less passengers. Might even be cheaper in the long run, not replacing sensors....  I love when you post. Easily the greatest entertainment of the thread.  Everything you say is so over-the-top retarded, I couldn't invent such quality material for trolling purposes if I tried. Keep up the good work, sir, and never doubt yourself! You know what's up and it's your duty to educate everyone here! Sensors are bad!! Efficiency is dangerous!! You said it much better than I was going to! This guy is a treasure! All we need now is melting canopies. this guy is a chick |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/26/2021 11:51:04 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Boeing aircraft are uncomfortable…flat out. The seats are small, isles are tight, ceilings are low, loud, and everything feels inconvenient. Airbus aircraft are quiet, spacious, have nice lighting and temp control, and you can stand up in them. You can walk down the isle without touching passengers in isle seats. safety aside…Airbus is a more comfortable plane. the airline decides on the seat layout and the seats |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
