Posted on 12/23/2019 7:17:55 AM PST by BenLurkin
How many times can you be wrong in one sentence?
The 737 Max uses CFM LEAP-1B engines, not Pratt&Whitney.
FADEC is what gives the LEAP-1B engines the fuel efficiency that makes the Max better than the NG.
The FADEC on the LEAP-1B was designed by CFM, so the engine and FADEC were designed to work together. Without FADEC, the engine won’t run without FADEC, just as a modern car won’t run without an ECU.
Yep, it is the MCAS which erroneously overrode the pilots’ controls and flew the plane into the ground even because it believed the aircraft was at or near stalling.
In the many previous threads on the Max crashes & grounding someone bet on the Max flying again before the new year, I think someone named Megan wins that one.
We've suffered countless arguments about poorly trained foreign pilots, and poorly paid foreign engineers. Firing the CEO after all this time might indicate they finally realize top management is responsible for the work environment they create.
“The Starliner mishap was a very minor error and the bulk of the mission’s objectives succeeded, but in that field, minor errors have major implications. This will get fixed by the next launch.”
It will. IIRC, there’s a lot of competition with Lockheed-Martin (Orion) and SpaceX (Dragon) for this. They can’t have too many more screw-ups.
Simple statement: “The Boeing Company has stepped down from its eminance as the premier multi-engine aircraft manufacturer, to the status of ‘cuck’!
“This has nothing to do with the engine controls.”
I’m not in aviation but am truly curious about the actual 737 MAX problem(s).
What is your opinion of 737 MAX.
Agreed, Boeing is lucky SpaceX doesn't make jet liners.
Do not ever get on board one.
I'm far from an expert but when Boeing designed the Max they stretched it out some. That added weight so the plane needed bigger engines. However they could not mount the new engines where they had mounted the old engines (to big) so the mounted them higher. This gave the plane and angle of attack problem so they added a sensor to sense the angle of attack and adjust it if the software thought the plane was going to stall. But they only added one sensor so there was no backup if that one sensor was giving a faulty reading (very bad, Boeing) and they did not tell anyone about it (very, very, bad Boeing) now well trained experienced crews could deal with the problem but one not so well trained or not experienced crews couldn't and two Maxs crashed due to the faulty sensor (very very very bad Boeing)
Simpler solution. Pull off all the engines and replace them with ones that will fit the plane. Ditch the LEAPs for CFM-56 units.
“But they only added one sensor so there was no backup ...”
That is my minimally informed conclusion: Their only excuse must be that even with the single sensor failure, it’s not that hard for a pilot to control the plane.
I recall that Boeing would put in a 2nd sensor at an extra charge and that now they’re putting the 2nd sensor on all of the planes at no extra charge.
The mission was to take supplies to the Space Station. It failed.
More importantly, it failed for the same reason that the MAX failed. An autonomous control system malfunctioned in flight. The craft should be grounded until a line-by-line review of the software is performed.
Long, long overdue.
See Post #29. jpsb gets it right enough.
“See Post #29. jpsb gets it right enough.”
A pilot I know says pilots don’t have the prestige they used to have. They’re now just ordinary grunts. He says not as many young people want to be pilots as in the old days.
Maybe the fact is, planes are being flown by less inspired, less competent pilots. The planes must be dumbed down accordingly. As an occasional passenger I agree.
Flying isn’t dumbed down. Same skills, same knowledge, same job as always.
/sarcasm
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.