In the event of multiple MCAS activations with repeated electric trim inputs
by flight crew without sufficient response to return the aircraft to a trimmed
state, the control column force to maintain level flight could eventually
increase to a level where control forces alone may not be adequate to control
the aircraft. The cumulative mis-trim could not be countered by using
elevator alone which is contrary to the Boeing assumption during FHA.
That's absolutely abnormal and yet the crew never recalls the runaway stabilizer trim memory items nor calls for the runaway stabilizer checklist.
Xtra Aerospace was not qualified to do the repair of the AoA sensor in the first place, now the FAA revoked their repair certification license.
Wouldn’t incorrect activation of the stick shaker be serious enough to declare MAYDAY right away?
The crew of the previous flight who successfully recovered the same faulty aircraft decided to fly the whole flight with the sticker shaker activated! That seems crazy to me.
Xtra Aerospace was not qualified to do the repair of the AoA sensor in the first place, now the FAA revoked their repair certification license.
and perhaps activate one stick shaker.
Only when MCAS was introduced did Boeing give a faulty AoA sensor the power to cause trim changes. And they didn't tell anyone about it, at least not pilots or operators.
So it's understandable that people who didn't know about MCAS would be a bit unconcerned about an AoA sensor.
This isn't failed engineering, needing improving sensors and fault detection.
It's unbridled corporate greed and corruption, at the executive level.
MCAS had already been properly engineered. From Muilenburg's testimony before Congress this week:
"Michigan Republican Representative Paul Mitchell asked why the 737 Max’s version of MCAS had key differences from a midair refueling tanker Boeing supplies to the U.S. Air Force. He pointed out that the Pentagon required that the KC-46 tanker’s MCAS system activate only once, when the civilian application could -- and did -- fire repeatedly, he said.
“Why the difference? What motivated that?” the lawmaker said.
John Hamilton, chief engineer of Boeing Commercial Airplane division, cited specifications set by the Air Force. Muilenburg said the tanker’s MCAS system was designed for different flight scenarios than the 737 Max’s version. The Air Force has said the KC-46’s MCAS systems incorporated data from two angle-of-attack sensors, rather than one sensor as originally designed on the 737 Max."
--snip--
After this saga, all fall back to a very simple fundamental question, how is Boeing better than -> Comac ?
Example Comac C919, its intended to compete primarily with the Boeing 737 MAX, pretty confident its darn cheap compared to 737 MAX.
Quote : "In 2012 the C919 order book stood at 380 units worth US$26 billion, and averaging $68.4 million. FlightGlobal's Ascend market values in 2013 were $49.2 million for the Airbus A320neo, 51% less than its $100.2 million list price and $51.4 million for the Boeing 737 MAX-8, 49% less than its $100.5 million list price. In June 2015, the China National Radio predicted a $50 million price, cheaper than the B737 or A320 list prices."
Also if the China's FAA equivalent body is proven to accept bribe or made such mistakes, guilty parties for sure will be executed with death penalty, at least this bring more confident isn't it ?
This 737Max saga cannot get any more sad, even if it is allowed to flight it really doesn't comply FAA rules fully, like clearance between control cables,
One issue is how FAA managers agreed during certification of the 737 MAX to give Boeing a pass on complying with a safety rule that requires more separation between duplicate sets of cables that control the jet’s rudder.
This is to avoid the possibility that shrapnel from an uncontained engine blowout could sever all the cables and render the plane uncontrollable.
The requirement was introduced when such a blowout caused the deadly 1989 crash of a United Airlines DC-10 in Sioux City, Iowa. The 737 has never been brought into line with the requirement
.....The story listed a series of legacy design details that have been repeatedly grandfathered into the latest model each time Boeing has updated the 737, which was originally certified more than 50 years ago.
All the issues in the list were flagged by FAA safety engineers as requiring fixes before the MAX could be certified. But each was waved through after managers on the Boeing side of certification insisted that these were non-issues and managers on the FAA side agreed to let it move ahead with the requirement unaddressed.
So basically Boeing is designing non-compliant and unsafe airplanes like nothing but since it is already designed how the hell is it not going to get certified, the costs would be tremendous!!!
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/new-questions-raised-on-safety-of-both-737-max-and-787-dreamliner/
[...] they claim that the 737 does not comply a 30 year old rule, while obviously no accident was contributed to that non-compliance in that 30 years [...]
[...] they claim that the 737 does not comply a 30 year old rule, while obviously no accident was contributed to that non-compliance in that 30 years [...]If the rule is incorrect, it should be removed. Otherwise it should be adhered to.
There should be no rules that are arbitrarily ignored just because someone thinks not enough accidents are happening!
My 1965 Mustang doesn’t meet many current federal safety standards. Nevertheless, I can still drive it on the road.
Lucky you. The bureaucrats in Brussels want to end with that in Europe.
That does not mean I think the shoulder belt or dual circuit braking or reverse lights requirements are bad laws, just that they don’t apply retroactively to machines certified or built before they were introduced.
Lucky you. The bureaucrats in Brussels want to end with that in Europe.Rightly so. Why should the community bear the healthcare bills of individuals recklessly injuring themselves and others with unsafe cars?
Since when does "the community" pay the insurance bills?