borrowed this from another Post on Boeing Thread.
Posted on 06/17/2024 3:27:05 PM PDT by mabarker1
On May 25, Southwest Airlines Flight N8825Q, a Boeing 737 Max experienced what is known as a “Dutch roll” — where the aircraft tail wags back and forth as the wings rock in see-saw fashion, according to NBC.
The Phoenix to Oakland flight had 175 passengers and six members of the crew aboard. The plane was initially reported to be at 38,000 feet at the time of the incident, but a National Transportation Safety Board investigation showed it was at 34,000 feet.
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournal.com ...
I am thinking of suing. My last flight was B O R I N G and here these people get some entertainment I should have been able to vote on. The pilot should have asked everyone all in favor of a “Dutch Roll” say aye.
I find it very odd that this is happening. Boeing has made tens of thousands of aircraft with an outstanding safety record. What has changed?
I find it very odd that this is happening. Boeing has made tens of thousands of aircraft with an outstanding safety record. What has changed?
I think that in order to reduce the workload of the pilots, they have remanded too much to computers and the computers are failing.
Somehow Boeing made one of the safest planes in the 777, but also the 737 and 787.
What company is competing with Boeing in a manner that is benefitted by their sabotage? Is there a foreign manufacturing concern that benefits most?
I heard a report yesterday that was worded in a way which faulted the flight crew.
Historically, that’s possible, but the investigation should prove interesting, especially considering the aircraft type’s history.
It should also prove interesting how Boeing slithers out of this one...
And reduced wing sweep. Overly aggressive rudder application or rudder malfunction is usual culprit. Early days of jet flying in military jets could result in loss of airplane. Not normally a catastrophe in mildly swept civ aircraft.
No one needs to sabotage Boeing when you bring in hedge fund folks to take over a company they throw out safety every single time.
Safety first costs, and they are about trimming every penny they can and always arrogantly think they can cut corners and costs in safety and every single time it comes back to bite them, but by the time it shows up years of faulty and unsafe products are in use so they come in a cascade.
Problem being the failure of the rudder control hydraulics identified in the 1990s that caused unwanted deflection? If that's true, it's incredible that it hasn't been fixed long long ago. I'd credit that some new malfunction has cropped up that does the same thing, yes I would. Could be a maintenance issue, could be something that can be designed out, but if it's the latter it took an awfully long time to rear its' ugly head. Hundreds of thousands of flights.
It COULD even be pilot error. I've read that single-engine WW2 fighters would dutch roll when carrying a full load of fuel if the pilot wasn't careful to be light on the rudder pedals. Could this airline pilot have made a careless move and is now covering up? All speculation at this point.
Bingo. Boeing went from having quality and safety in engineering, production, and service as their highest priority to being driven by complex accounting and lowest immediate cost. Ten years, ago, I was shocked to hear airline pilots at a private gathering complain in detail of the decline in quality by Boeing’s airliners and praise for Airbus’s models. Several of them predicted that new Boeing models like the 787 and 737 Max would have serious defects and that they would retire rather than fly them.
If they'd asked me in the interview what would I be concerned with most.....my answer was going to be Muslims working in maintenance.
Never would have gotten hired.
I agree with you. I admit to being wary of Muslims.
Wing sweep, yes. Flying RC models years ago I found that I could roll an aerobatic plane having no dihedral at all, but about 5 degrees of sweep, using rudder alone. I once launched the thing with the aileron servos disconnected, but recovered it that way. Wasn’t pretty, but I got it on the ground in one piece.
Then you ain’t flying Southwest.
As a flight instructor on the B-727, I taught the “Dutch Roll” recovery procedure.
Dutch roll is caused by wing sweep and instability of the Yaw axis.
It is not comfortable because the nose of the airplane moves in a way to trace a figure 8, lying on the horizon. If the recovery procedure is not done properly the result could be loss of control of the airplane. The recovery is done with the pilot’s feet on the floor, (no rudder inputs, at all) and the forward movement of each wing dampened by small inputs of the spoilers on that wing.
I taught the recovery in simulators and also in the airplane.
The B-727 had two yaw dampers, on the rudder, powered by separate hydraulic systems. If one hydraulic system failed, the airplane had to descend to an altitude below 26,000 feet, to fly in more dense air where the Dutch Roll was unlikely.
Airbus...no yoke. Perhaps some FReeper commercial pilots will comment on the Airbus.
the crash of an 2 day old A320 in 1988 was flight computer related (and poor pilot planning and knowledge).
LOL, the flight deck of a 'liner being a mile out in front of the CG, it sure wouldn't be! All that engine mass in the tail of a 727 wouldn't help recovery, either.
I suspect the pilots would prefer a Dutch roll over a barrel roll.
borrowed this from another Post on Boeing Thread.
Agreed on the Autopilot/computer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.