Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Moonman62

bull shit. 26 times the nose went down. You want to try it?


69 posted on 03/14/2019 4:35:27 PM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: yldstrk

The nose went down 26 times because the pilots were incompetent and didn’t disable the automatic trim.


89 posted on 03/14/2019 5:06:54 PM PDT by Moonman62 (Facts are racist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: yldstrk; Moonman62

Sorry, Moon man is right and you are full of.... So the plane’s nose dipped 26 times .. It would have dipped 27 times except the pilot ran out of altitude and ideas at the same time. The first time the nose dipped, ANY competent pilot would have flipped a couple of switches and thought nothing of it, just a glitch.


96 posted on 03/14/2019 5:25:22 PM PDT by SandwicheGuy (*The butter acts as a lubricant and speeds up the CPU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: yldstrk
First time (not the 26th) the horiz. stabilizer trim (MCAS) gives you trouble (due to faulty maintenance procedures at Lion Air), use the "cutout switch" right near your throttles...the Lion Air crew flying the same aircraft right before the crashed flight did exactly that and landed safely (then maintenance on the AOA sensor NOT performed):
----------

These are the “Stab trim cutout switches” that Media is referring to everywhere.
They form part of the “Runaway stabilizer” memory items that will stop most unwanted movements of the stabilizer, including the mentioned MCAS system.

All of us B737 pilots practice using them. pic.twitter.com/P1mc8KIWog— Mentour Pilot (@MenTourPilot) March 11, 2019


103 posted on 03/14/2019 5:45:14 PM PDT by Drago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: yldstrk

It’s Ok: He probably owns Boeing stock as well (he’s a Musk cheerleader).

He’s dumb as a rock on this one, too. MCAS was an add-on system which intervenes in normal flight in the critical moments immediately after takeoff. There is no excuse for Boeing to have utilized a single sensor for its input when a fault can cause a departure from flight with critically-short reaction time (40 seconds). Training is one thing, but anyone with half a brain who reads how the system operates can see that MCAS was added haphazardly.

The overarching question is “Why?”

What incident during flight testing could possibly have prodded them to butcher a well-designed flight control system with an add-on?

Better, how did it get certified without thorough testing?

There’s no other tangible explanation for this other than they found a defect in flight handling for which the risk was sufficient to patch the system but deemed too expensive to redesign the flight control system.

Other than the obvious critique of failing to design a safe fix, the root of this is lousy engineering. I can’t imagine how this might have occurred, but the fact is that the 737 MAX 8 was not an all-new aircraft: With all the design changes it should have prompted a very strict certification process rather than the fast-tracking it obviously received for being an existing/updated model.


157 posted on 03/26/2019 10:16:16 PM PDT by logi_cal869 (-cynicus the "concern troll" a/o 10/03/2018 /!i!! &@$%&*(@ -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson