737 max... what now?

Messages
575
Location
Alberta
Originally Posted by CT8
Originally Posted by carviewsonic
My family and I flew a route we have done several times over the past 20 years, always on 737's and with the same airline. This time it was a Bombardier Q400 turboprop, I was told due to grounding of the 737 MAX's in their fleet.
I really like the Q400.
Noisy compared to a 737, but a smooth flight otherwise. I googled what the prop rpm was, and was surprised to find out only about 1050 rpm at cruise.
 
Messages
1,152
Location
USA
I think unless Boeing replace the over sized engines with perhaps those from the -800 and the old mounting points for the 737-800 I'd NEVER fly the MAX ever. This isn't about just software, it's about faulty engineering of mechanical elements. I wonder why they didn't chose to update the 757 instead of the ancient 737?
 
Last edited:
Messages
17,302
Location
OH
Originally Posted by Pelican
Originally Posted by E365
Either way, it would be great to see a truly modern, composite 737 replacement that blows-away the A320neo in efficiency. Also, pilots don't like spending time in the 737 nearly as much as the A320. The 737 cockpit is incredibly small with poor ergonomics and outdated technology. Not a great place to spend a workday.
Agree, the A320 looked like it came from another planet! Boeing was very slow in adopting the latest technology and did so in the end only because Airbus sales skyrocketed and Boeing's plummeted, they are still trying to catch up. It's a question of management and their corporate mentality. There is need for change at the top.
Boeing sales plummeted and Airbus sales skyrocketed? Suggest you look at deliveries and then try again at this analysis. Technology? The 777 blew away the competing Airbus A340 and the 787 is widely recognized as a technical leader among the world's airlines, who vote with their checkbooks. Airbus's own A380 has turned out to be an albatross around the company's neck and is already no longer offered. In the narrowbody space, there was never all that much to choose between the various 737 models and the A32X offerings. Orders and deliveries have been a pretty even split between the two and neither can supply the volume required in this segment on its own. The MAX will fly again and will have a long and fruitful career. Boeing has hundreds of these aircraft in inventory now and their delivery will be quick, swamping whatever Airbus delivers in the short term after RTS. Boeing needed to compete with the neo in the short term and their longer term development in this space is in progress.
 
Messages
4,697
Location
Lakeville, MN
The idea they could just go back to the previous engines on the -800 (or the NG as the series was known) doesn't hold water. The reason the engines are bigger is part of increasing the thrust for bigger planes and for efficiency reasons. Take away the more efficient engines and it becomes a no brainer to buy Airbuses... other than whether Airbus can deliver them fast enough. The 757 was killed off when the larger variants of the 737 and Airbus 320 platform started encroaching into the territory of seating capacity of the 757-200 (or at least close enough) and developed a range that covered a significant portion of the 757's missions. All that while burning way less fuel... and the decision was easy in the post 9/11 world... Airlines in the US in particular went for more frequency to offset downguaging in plane sizes too... At the end of the day, the 757 was extremely versatile. Unfortunately, the same things that made it so versatile (in terms of range and performance) also meant it burned a ton more fuel doing the same thing on the vast majority of its missions. There are still missions where these work well - high performance needed or long and thin routes. The thing is a rocketship when lightly loaded. Will never forget a flight to Vegas with me and 13 others on a 57... Boeing was stuck - the Max is about as far as they could go and try to be "common" with previous 737's before it. Their choice was to squeeze every last drop out of the airframe or develop a new plane... and here we are...
 
Messages
719
Location
Michigan
My oldest brother flies the Boeing 747-8f . He says its like driving a school bus , no thrill of flying at all . But he would rather fly that then having crazy people to deal with when he flew for Northwest Airlines .
 
Messages
24,425
Location
Central Florida
Originally Posted by AC1DD
I think unless Boeing replace the over sized engines with perhaps those from the -800 and the old mounting points for the 737-800 I'd NEVER fly the MAX ever. This isn't about just software, it's about faulty engineering of mechanical elements. I wonder why they didn't chose to update the 757 instead of the ancient 737?
Will the 797 be the 'updated' 757 ? I agree the short landing gear of 737 makes it hard to mount bigger engines. I've always thought the 737 on the ground looks like a Corgi dog with stubby legs.
 
Messages
1,058
Location
Ontario, Canada
Originally Posted by sparky123
Boeing/FAA very badly tarnished their reputations. An old design w/the same wing in all models just doesn't seem prudent considering the new engine's weight/performance and mounting location on the Max.. I don't know the future for this version, but I know I'll find an alternative plane to fly.
That's right, Boeing, in order to compete with Airbus, had to install bigger engines, but because it has a very low landing gear it could not be done and so they had to move the engines up & forward thereby changing the attitude of the AC. That's the reason why they had to install MCAS. The problem is/was that Boeing didn't tell the airline how to disable it in case of conflict and they did not set up a proper training sequence.
 
Messages
9,912
Location
Jupiter, Florida
It's good to consider the fact that the Max crashes happened with foreign crews. In a recent test, no American crews crashed when given the fault in the sim, while various foreign ones did. The difference between a non event and a fatal crash is often a very minor one. I'd guess that had the crashes not occurred, Boeing and the FAA would have, in time, revised the system to a normal level of functionality through normal product improvement channels. The Max is very likely to be a fine airplane once it emerges from this debacle. The level of scrutiny is massive and the resulting product will be well understood.
 
Last edited:
Messages
234
Location
Texas
Thread starter
Originally Posted by Cujet
It's good to consider the fact that the Max crashes happened with foreign crews. In a recent test, no American crews crashed when given the fault in the sim, while various foreign ones did. The difference between a non event and a fatal crash is often a very minor one. I'd guess that had the crashes not occurred, Boeing and the FAA would have, in time, revised the system to a normal level of functionality through normal product improvement channels. The Max is very likely to be a fine airplane once it emerges from this debacle. The level of scrutiny is massive and the resulting product will be well understood.
I understand and agree with your assessment. It must be incredibly frustrating to the engineers and test pilots when the foreign pilots don't have the training and hours necessary for normal operations. The fact that the American crews were able to overcome the challenge in the sim's speaks volumes.
 
Messages
17,302
Location
OH
Crew experience standards certainly play a role in their ability to respond to potential emergencies. Too many of the world's narrowbody aircraft are flown by crews with very limited flight experience who've been trained in no more than the use of their aircraft when operated in as automated a mode as possible at all times. Little is therefore learned over crew hours flying the line since hand flying is mostly prohibited and can even subject pilots to fines in the form of reduced paychecks. This is less a problem with the widebody fleet since developing world airlines can afford to pay enough for these crews to poach expat pilots from the developed world, although even those crews may be deficient in their flying skills, as with AF 447. This is a controversial topic since there simply aren't enough really skilled and experienced pilots available worldwide to operate the airliners currently in service. Hence, you end up with a left seater who'd barely qualify for the right seat with any domestic carrier and a right seater who'd probably not be able to get a job as even a flight instructor VFR SEL here.
 
Messages
24,508
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by CT8
Does any one else ponder the cost of having the Aircraft sit. and the loss of revenue ?
Sidenote: heard on the news that Boeing said this whole debacle will be costing them 5 Billion dollars when taking into account all aspects.
 

MolaKule

Staff member
Messages
21,378
Location
Iowegia - USA
Originally Posted by Tdog02
Question to all the aviation specialists who follow this forum. Is the 737 - Max gonna get back in the air or has their reputation been damaged beyond repair? They are still sitting all around the country, is the FAA any closer to certifying their return or will they go down in history as the albatross around Boeing's neck?
The 737-Max will return to the air with modified control law equations, dual sensing, better FCC communications, and improved training for the flight crews. As others have stated, experienced flight crews have been able to mitigate or deal with the MCAS so part of the problem is crew experience, training, and flight time. Uneducated journalists and others outside the aerospace realm have only provided conjecture as to what really happened. The NTSB will provide their assessment as to what Boeing and the FAA needs to change. And I suspect much of the disinformation we have seen was aided by Airbus. As far as internal changes to Boeing and the FAA, I have no doubt there will be some major changes in both sectors. Loss of life is tragic no matter which aircraft goes down. I was on a team that investigated both the TWA Flight 800 explosion and the Pittsburgh USAir flight 427. As you sift through the wreckage it really hits you hard and makes you want to make things better and safer for all because you or your family could be on the next flight that has problems. [Disclosure: I was a former Scientist/Engineer at Boeing for 20 years working in both the Commercial and Defense areas].
 
Last edited:
Messages
368
Location
Greenville SC
Extensively trimmed ...
Originally Posted by MolaKule
The 737-Max will return to the air with modified control law equations, dual sensing, ...
How reliable are the AOA sensors? In the 2 foreign carrier crashes, one incoming flight had experienced issues and had some service work reportedly done, so I might say at least 3 had failed? Is there something that would be better? I know some experimental avionics providers use a pair of pitot impact tubes at a separation angle; not moving, but as good?
 
Messages
3,204
Location
Nashville, TN via Memphis
Originally Posted by Cujet
It's good to consider the fact that the Max crashes happened with foreign crews. In a recent test, no American crews crashed when given the fault in the sim, while various foreign ones did. The difference between a non event and a fatal crash is often a very minor one. I'd guess that had the crashes not occurred, Boeing and the FAA would have, in time, revised the system to a normal level of functionality through normal product improvement channels. The Max is very likely to be a fine airplane once it emerges from this debacle. The level of scrutiny is massive and the resulting product will be well understood.
There's been so much Bravo Sierra in this thread up until this point. Good to see some common sense from you and a couple of others.
 

MolaKule

Staff member
Messages
21,378
Location
Iowegia - USA
Originally Posted by George Bynum
Extensively trimmed ...
Originally Posted by MolaKule
The 737-Max will return to the air with modified control law equations, dual sensing, ...
How reliable are the AOA sensors? In the 2 foreign carrier crashes, one incoming flight had experienced issues and had some service work reportedly done, so I might say at least 3 had failed? Is there something that would be better? I know some experimental avionics providers use a pair of pitot impact tubes at a separation angle; not moving, but as good?
I can assure you that sensor reliability will be closely examined, as will the interactions among all sensor inputs and Flight Control Computer calculations.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,265
Location
Elizabeth. Colorado
I'm a 3 million mile flyer... 2.2 of it with United. I certainly like some aircraft over others, and some airlines over others. I won't have a second thought getting on a 737 max, even if it was the first one released to fly again.
 
Messages
9,912
Location
Jupiter, Florida
Originally Posted by George Bynum
How reliable are the AOA sensors?
They are generally reliable. It would be interesting to review the MTBF (mean time between failure) of the various AOA part numbers and types. The ones we use on the Gulfstream G550 are P/N 0861FW2, the vane type, we've changed one in 15 years. (New cost is about $13.5K) The reason for the replacement was due to damage. The paint shop hit it with the DA sander during aircraft re-paint. I don't know for sure who makes it, but I'd guess Rosemount. Neat looking unit, with an electrically heated vane, and a heated base.
 
Messages
368
Location
Greenville SC
Using Google to search "Rosemount Aerospace" resulted in one interesting hit, https://www.thegazette.com/subject/...echnologies-rosemount-aerospace-20190318 Independent perhaps of brand, it looks like lots of REPORTED repairs/replacements of AOA sensors. My first idea was of a cantilever mounted sensor ... bearings would see lots of unusual loads; perhaps a simple frame and the vane between 2 bearings would be better? https://utcaerospacesystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Angle-of-Attack-AOA-Systems.pdf shows cantilever and says reliability is good. That's the 0861 series you have. Makes me wonder if it is perhaps not the sensor at fault ... just one thing to easily change chasing the REAL problem. I've used Rosemount industrially for some 50 years, very good stuff. It will be nice to learn the root cause.
 
Messages
14,391
Location
...
Originally Posted by c502cid
I'm a 3 million mile flyer... 2.2 of it with United. I certainly like some aircraft over others, and some airlines over others. I won't have a second thought getting on a 737 max, even if it was the first one released to fly again.
I agree. While I prefer some aircraft over others it has never prompted me to refuse to get on. I wonder how many of these people that say they will never fly a certain aircraft will actually follow through on that?
 
Last edited:
Top