Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

A place to relax and discuss flying topics.

Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher

User avatar
MoonlightVFR
Posts: 624
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:55 pm

Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by MoonlightVFR »

It is an innate aviation curiosity
Not qualified and beyond scope of our forum. Still, pilots want to know.
You too perhaps have contacts at at Boeing. Typically they will say in hushed tones; 737 is Our CASH Cow.
Airlines pays your up front money and gets in line. 5,000 Back orders! We are talking big complex airplanes.

So why, Why did they incorporate a brand new automated anti Stall system on the 737 and NOT mention it in the manual, and not do SIMUlATOR training with pilots. It all happens in the Cockpit, two men with Brains, created Free Will. Notice that Simulator Training does NOT expose passenger lives. Precious cargo.

There is a new term creeping in; I call it Paper Complacency. It is costing lives.

Robert Buck Author Weather Flying had a little personal in cockpit note card rubber banded L side cockpit. They were still learning a new airplane - 747.
Realize that Boeing could have given a paper 3x5 Notecard w With Overview of new anti stall system and simply stated Capt stick this in your Shirt pocket, reference it frequently. 500 persons could be alive today.

This morning Mar 10,2019 - Ethiopia 737 MAX faltered on take off- new airplane - Crashed, 200 deaths.

Admission - my livelihood is tied to aviation documentation. Paper is concrete.
gradyb, '54 B N2890C
User avatar
Ryan Smith
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 4:26 am

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by Ryan Smith »

MoonlightVFR wrote:It is an innate aviation curiosity
Not qualified and beyond scope of our forum. Still, pilots want to know.
You too perhaps have contacts at at Boeing. Typically they will say in hushed tones; 737 is Our CASH Cow.
Airlines pays your up front money and gets in line. 5,000 Back orders! We are talking big complex airplanes.

So why, Why did they incorporate a brand new automated anti Stall system on the 737 and NOT mention it in the manual, and not do SIMUlATOR training with pilots. It all happens in the Cockpit, two men with Brains, created Free Will. Notice that Simulator Training does NOT expose passenger lives. Precious cargo.

There is a new term creeping in; I call it Paper Complacency. It is costing lives.

Robert Buck Author Weather Flying had a little personal in cockpit note card rubber banded L side cockpit. They were still learning a new airplane - 747.
Realize that Boeing could have given a paper 3x5 Notecard w With Overview of new anti stall system and simply stated Capt stick this in your Shirt pocket, reference it frequently. 500 persons could be alive today.

This morning Mar 10,2019 - Ethiopia 737 MAX faltered on take off- new airplane - Crashed, 200 deaths.

Admission - my livelihood is tied to aviation documentation. Paper is concrete.
If it’s Boeing, I’m not going. :oops:

In all seriousness, we have two 737 drivers that I can think of off the top of my head that are Association members. Quite a few Airbus drivers as well.

My 737 experience is limited to a two-hour sim session, but I preferred the A320 to the 737 with the little experience I have with both. I don’t know what makes the oversized 73 a better option than a 757...the scope of both is virtually the same now.
User avatar
ghostflyer
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:06 am

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by ghostflyer »

The 737 has been around since Adam was a boy and it’s the most successful airliner ever produced. It’s been updated and refined over the years . The 757 was designed by a number of engineers that came from different engineering cultures. While there are some still flying ,they are classified as fuel hungry and lack the refinements of newer Boeing’s .
There are a number of electronic systems that are not available to the pilot in flight [for his own safety] and due to the human brains lack of being unable to compute large masses of information in a instant ,there many electronic aids to flying.
These systems are creaping into GA aircraft as prices come down and technology is tailored towards GA aircraft design.
What I love about Boeing they have still retain some manual reversion to there flight systems . What I do not like about airbus ,their aircraft are cheap to buy but watch out for their cost in spare parts . It would make you cry. Due to the airbus license agreement there are very few PMA parts allowed.
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by GAHorn »

It's early to be commenting on these recent accidents but it's not too early to comment on the relative experience and talents of the newer cockpit occupants in these airplanes.
My recent experience with trainees in this genre of airplanes horrified me with the lack of basic flying skills of the up-and-coming new-hires at many companies.
Yes, they are really talented at operating FMS/Computers but seriously lacking in flying skills and when the electrons fail to line-up the operators become paralyzed and lost, not only in the airspace but also in the cockpit while they completely forget to FLY THE AIRPLANE! Asian/Oriental/Middle-East/African airlines are the worst of the lot.
Their ab-initio candidates knew the SOPs/Ops-Manual by memory all the way down to punctuation... but had absolutely NO flying skills and LESS willingness to question seniority.

The perceived "pilot shortage" has over-ridden the historical ability of airlines and other operators of sophisticated equipment to pick-and-choose only the best. Now there's a strong tendency to hire any warm-body that can pass the current reduction-of-required-basic-skills that computerized cockpits allow. (My most common question I would ask crews, as they struggled to program another approach that was an exact copy of the previous approach was "What is that box going to tell you that you don't already know?...!!!"
I can still hear my primary instructor telling me back in 1970 "If you can't get there without the radios you'd better not launch at all because if it quits you will also!"

I frequently pointed out that Lindbergh found Paris within ten-minutes of when he said he would with nothing more than a compass and a clock!

But modern button-pushers mentally shut down if the magic box acts up... and that's the reason Airbus is not going to be the airplane I or my family ride in.

I am appalled that Boeing decided to skip training information on the newest trim system... but as I understand it...the pilot response to a runaway trim is exactly the same as it has always been..... override it and revert to backup. Since the method of dealing with the latest system design is no different ... I can see why Boeing thought it not necessary to raise the issue.... But I am truly disappointed in their apparent abandonment of the need for full and complete training. This is a policy they have been developing there for some time, in my view. At my last job, we could not get much of the documentation for the -800 from Boeing because they felt that as a training facility with the latest in simulators that pilots only need to know what to do...not why to do it. I disagree strongly.

But AirBus has issues with airframe integrity, human-engineering/presentation/automation, and a basic belief that LED THE WAY to the current philosophy that pilots are drivers and not airmen. Shame on them both. And shame on the industry that has endorsed that philosophy in the hopes of getting cheap cockpit seat-occupants.


(With the latest ability of self-driving cars and safety features of auto-braking for pedestrians, etc., … marketed as a counter to distracted-driving I suspect.... I expect a drastic loss of ordinary driving skills as drivers begin to rely on such systems. The same is true of airplanes I'm afraid. "You can teach MONKEYS to fly better than that!"- quote from Battle of Britain.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
ghostflyer
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:06 am

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by ghostflyer »

I totally agree with you on this one George , a copilot only having 200 hrs and sitting in the right hand seat of a Boeing max. That’s asking for trouble .
But a lot of airlines that have long haul routes now have “cruise” pilots while the other members sleep or chat to the other crew. I know of a case just recently where the captain bunked down for a sleep [outside the cockpit area] and only the “cruise pilot and a first officer was up front. First officer left the cockpit to go to the toilet and then was distracted by a female and left the “safe area”. He was helping himself in the galley and chatting away when the cockpit door closed and auto locked. He couldn’t remember the entry code and intercom to the cockpit wasn’t responding . Cruise pilot was asleep.
He didn’t want to wake the captain due to SOP.s being breached. The banging on the cockpit door woke the captain and door was opened by the captain after about 3 tries. Cruise pilot was still asleep. The big issue was door code was changed every flight and no body could remember the code . This came from a captain on a Boeing 777 over the pacific.
All 3 had broken SOP,s but it was a common thing amongst staff to,do this on long flights. [excluding leaving the cruise pilot to sleep though].
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by GAHorn »

'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by c170b53 »

As mentioned it’s a bit early to determine cause in the latest 737 max tragedy. My opinions only, the max is an example of a manufacturer trying to weave their way through design regulations in a cost effective way. And at the same time provide customers with a modern airplane that they want, one they can make money with, now. The max; its wheel wheel is the most busiest piece of aviation real estate I’ve ever seen. In there you see mechanisms designed and proven from the sixties right along with present day designed components.The 787 main wheel well, albeit much larger , it’s almosr barren in comparison.
New aircraft; Fly by wire, the flight control system refines all the pilot’s flight control inputs based on the flight mode. All modern planes have auto stall protection as mandated by design regulations.
The Max does have a direct control system, revert to manual reversion and your back to the cable system. The 777 also has a manual system but it’s really a backup to a back up and is still electronic in nature.
I think, planes like the 777 or the 330 provide pilots with a well designed cockpit and controls. I think the Max cockpit could have been improved, like its wheel well, it’s a busy place.
In my opinion, the 737 requires more from a pilot than possibly newer aircraft when there’s real issues. The 777 is very successful in that it’s automation, automatic back-up’s can give a pilot more time to assess a problem and time to maintain situational awareness when things go wrong.
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by c170b53 »

Aviation Herald has more info. Software has added an additional AOA display on PFD for pilots to compare displays. Seems the elevators can run out of authority / travel if the MCAS system is feed incorrect data.
George here's another opinion
https://airfactsjournal.com/2019/03/can ... st-pilots/
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by GAHorn »

Closing comment from the Article "…. I am sure the future belongs to FBW (fly by wire) and that saying pilots need more training and better skills is no longer enough. The flying public wants to get home safely no matter who is allowed to be at the controls."

Yep. And that's the problem, IMO. The flying public wants cheap seats and that means airlines want cheap pilots and that means individuals who barely qualify to sit in the pilots seat...and it works most of the time because of automation. Not flying skills. Automation.

That article does explain the automation/flight control issue very well. The Cheyenne II I once flew had a SAS system that addressed the reverse-pitch-control issues that airframe experienced which is virtually the same as the MAXX problem. Piper put larger and larger engines on the same old Navajo airframe and the airplane had two problems resulting from the increased horsepower and CG issues: A Vmc issue which required autofeather and an elevator down-force missing under certain airspeed/flight regimes. If you flew that airplane at 140 kts and then reduced speed to 120 kts the stick down-force would increase just as a pilot would expect (and he would trim nose-up to overcome that downforce.) But very few pilots ever noticed that it was entirely artificial! In actual fact, the yoke did not move aft with the speed reduction....it moved FORWARD... which was masked by the elevator downforce-spring controlled by an AOA sensor. There were several countries that allegedly refused to certify the airplane inside their borders as the result. The airplane had negative longitudinal stability which was masked by an artificial SAS system which...when it failed... required the pilot to pull a D-ring discharging a compressed-air bottle into a cylinder which FORCED the elevator into a pitch-down, and the resulting emergency required landing at the nearest airport and grounding the airplane for repairs.

Every experienced Cheyenne pilot knew to NEVER pull that D-ring (as the manual instructed) when the SAS computer signaled a failure.... to instead do what would solve the problem and allow one to avoid the emergency landing... Pull the SAS circuit-breakers instead which disabled the so-called stability system completely.... keep it to yourself... and re-boot the computer at the next landing. (BTW, this almost always happened right after the airplane had been washed and upon reaching altitude because the AOA vane was contaminated with water that froze.)

What this most recent issue really means is that pilots need to be educated and experienced... but that is something the industry is moving completely in the opposite direction as they rely more and more on computers and operators are experiencing large profits while cheaping-out on pilot recruitment. (The recent belief that pilots are being paid more and given hiring bonuses and paid-education is not the increase it seems on the surface. It's indicative of how pilot salaries have not kept up and how retirement has been stolen from careers... think United, Delta, etc.) Highly qualified aviators once could not get hired unless they had a 4-yr degree with high grades, perfect health, thousands of hours of jet time, and 3 moon landings.

Now they'll hire kids off the street whose most complex experience was learning how to operate the taxi-cab window controls on the way to their ab-initio training. That's NOT an exaggeration....It's an actual event we witnessed at our DFW-based training facility when the employer won the training contract for an Asian airline and their trainees showed up wearing black slacks, black ties, and white shirts with epaulettes. The taxi ride to their new job was their first automation-experience after leaving the rice paddy behind buffaloes. They had received memorization-training from their employers and their best talent was in making certain to share information with each other so that each and every one of them knew exactly what had transpired to previous classmates in the simulator because the slightest low-grading mark in their record was a trip back to the rice paddy. No one wanted to be graded below the highest in their class. (This gave the initial impression they were all diligent students ...but belied the truth. They were good at duplicating test results only. I personally witnessed clients who, during a demonstrated stall, and this is not an isolated event, engaged the autopilot as their primary stall-recovery method! Think about that.

That was 3 years ago and those guys are now in airliner cockpits around the world.



:(
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
Ryan Smith
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 4:26 am

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by Ryan Smith »

I guess I should find a different profession since I’m not skilled enough to fly people around.

You know...lacking stick and rudder skills and all. I guess I should keep hand flying all the time outside of RVSM to sharpen my chops. Anyone want to give some dual to an unskilled pilot with a thousand or so hours in a 170?
User avatar
ghostflyer
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:06 am

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by ghostflyer »

I had a interesting experience recently when on a trip that I often fly I noticed a line of aircraft in close formation one behind the other [Cessna 172,s] and a heap of radio chatter all in Chinese . ATC got involved and advised that English was to be used. The issue was tail end Charlie lost the group and was lost. The lost pilot was in a total panic .it was communicating with ATC in both broken English and Chinese. I advise ATC that I could see the lost aircraft over a small lake and advised the lost aircraft that airfield that she was looking for was 90deg to her left and about 8 mls away. I shadowed her to the airfield and landed . Spoke to her group and asked about LOST procedures. I recieved blank stares. It was 160 ml navx they were on and it was a group thing .
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by GAHorn »

The latest news is that FAA is grounding all 737-Maxx's effective immediately. This is due to "new evidence collected" at the accidents and satellite tracking data (as reported by AvWeb.)
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
flyguy
Posts: 1057
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 6:44 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by flyguy »

Ryan Smith wrote:I guess I should find a different profession since I’m not skilled enough to fly people around.
The discussion isn't about your level of skill but about the tendency to under estimate the "emergency activity" training that may produce less than competent cockpit crews. You may be the best "stick and rudder" pilot in a normal situation but when a "super complex airplane" has built-in potential for "un-commanded activity" (of which the 737 has some history) unexpectedly does so in flight, it puts "super complex training" at highest priority. It is reported that the pilot of the Ethiopian crash had 5000 hours but was that mundane hours of seat time? I've sat in on some "heavy aircraft" sym training and seen the intensity, felt the rocking, rolling and shuddering of the unit and at the end of that session saw the sweat drenched pilots seemingly kissing the ground! Is it too much to ask that any ATP rated pilot demonstrate, that during most dangerous time in the cockpit, he/she be able to respond in the best and only way but also demand that the manufacturer and airline executives have that type of training in place?

It seems that George and Jim have both pointed out that the remiss of certain procedures may have cause the deaths of innocent passengers. No bottom line is worth the death of ONE of it's passengers much less 400. News worthy stories about the mandatory software upgrades being held off because of the shutdown of the government is troubling but in it's rush to get these MAX 8s out the doors, Boeing has some culpability in the matter. Also as an aside, Ethiopian Air has been awarded some of the highest marks for airline ops but what about intense emergency pilot training?
OLE GAR SEZ - 4 Boats, 4 Planes, 4 houses. I've got to quit collecting!
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20967
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by GAHorn »

Gar, I saw the discussion in a different light than what you seem to think I did.
I don't mean to suggest that the crews of Ethiopian or Lion Air were to blame for the crashes. As I said earlier, it's too early for that.
I was only relaying what I observed was a trend in pilot recruitment, particularly in Asian/African/M.E. operations, and the surprisingly low experience levels of new recruits in many operators world-wide. I am very disappointed that Boeing chose to not include details of the system for operators, but can understand how they came to that decision if the reports are true that the appropriate pilot-response is the same as any other pitch-trim misbehavior.

If it turns out that the modified system is a contributor to the problem, then it's possible that we've forgotten old lessons previously-learned. I suspect certification authorities may have again fallen into the trap of relying completely upon builder/designers certifying their own product. The latest designs in aviation are sometimes so complex that the builder (Boeing, Airbus, etc.) are the ones deemed best-equipped to certify them and therefore certification authorities, lacking that expertise, rely upon them to self-certify. Remember the cargo-door latch in DC-10's ? Douglas designated inspectors approved their own company's design (rather than outside inspectors) which was later discovered to be the root cause of accidents.
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
c170b53
Posts: 2527
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 8:01 pm

Re: Augmentation System Boeing 737 MAX 8 WHY?

Post by c170b53 »

I’ve been working in this biz for awhile. As far as I can tell it’s always been a cat and mouse game between the rule makers and the players when it comes to an airplane.
Ryan I hope you’re not offended by my musings. I guess I should tread carefully here, I hope I’m not offending others.
I deal with professional pilots everyday and as you would expect, most are human, but sometimes there’s variables. I was called out to a 777 dx this week, seems the RP had done a walkabout and had relayed some concerns to the captain about fluid below the engines. I walked into the cockpit and explained that a puddle is something you have to walk around, a leak is something we all have to do, and a drip or two is something some of us have to deal with after a leak. And the good news, neither engine has a fluid discharge falling into one of those categories. The F/O then pointed out that the most important thing for the RP to inspect were the engine drain masts and if he found them missing, he should get in touch with the previous crew and commend them on their flying technique. Awkwardly the RP shows me a picture he took of the fluid which was just ice on the lower wing surface , melting. I left the cockpit, couldn’t help but think, yes that’s a new pilot looking ahead at a rising hill, the Captain maybe contiplating the road ending and a F/O possibly forgetting the road he’s taken.
I think every pilot I’ve ever met wants to do a good job.
This is simply a terrible event needing some sleuthing to prevent further loss and suffering.
Jim McIntosh..
1953 C170B S/N 25656
02 K1200RS
Post Reply