Boeing 737 Max8 Aircraft Crashes and Investigations [Part 8] 24

[Sparweb]

This post is the continuation from this series of previous threads:

thread815-445840
thread815-450258
thread815-452000
thread815-454283
thread815-457125
thread815-461989
thread815-466401

This topic is broken into multiple threads due to the length to be scrolled, and images to load, creating long load times for some users and devices.
If you are NEW to this discussion, please read the above threads prior to posting, to avoid rehashing old discussions.

Thank you everyone for your interest! I have learned a lot from the discussion, too.

Some key references:
Ethiopian CAA preliminary report (Link from Ethiopia is now broken. See link from NTSB Investigations below)

Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee preliminary report

NTSB Investigations

NTSB Safety Recommendation Report: Assumptions Used in the Safety Assessment Process and the
Effects of Multiple Alerts and Indications on Pilot Performance

A Boeing 737 Technical Site

Washington Post: When Will Boeing 737 Max Fly Again and More Questions

BBC: Boeing to temporarily halt 737 Max production in January

Pulitzer Prize, For groundbreaking stories that exposed design flaws in the Boeing 737 MAX that led to two deadly crashes and revealed failures in government oversight.

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Well the guys that have flown all three fbw A320, A220 and emb195

Reckon the A220 is the clear winner from a pilot flying it pov.

Yes it is a shame leaving only two OEM both of which seem intent on keeping all the old gear on life support until they really have to modernize it.

 

[IRstuff]

Yes it is a shame leaving only two OEM both of which seem intent on keeping all the old gear on life support until they really have to modernize it.

But, the reason it's that way is that it costs a LOT of MONEY to develop a plane; the A320 purportedly cost $3 billion develop, while the 787, developed twenty years later, supposedly cost $32B to develop. Those are non-trivial entry costs. And, it's a huge incentive to milk a design cert for as long as possible. If you assume each plane generates $50M to amortize the development cost, that means that Boeing needed to sell at least 600 787s just to break even on development. Then, they need to turn a profit, and generate enough cash flow to fund the next development or modification.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[1503-44]

I dont think they are using a linear amortisation schedule.

 

[IRstuff]

For sure, I was trying to be optimistic. This seems to suggest the amortization is more like $13B per plane, although my $50B per plane is what Boeing was projecting for the last few hundred of the 787 build.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

this cockup with the max has cost 18 billion so far last number i saw and that's not including the development costs prior to that.

The ST article reads pretty much like the A380 timeline.

Although alto of the FBW and composite development costs will be used on future programs so as such they are not lost just paid for by the 787 program.

I suspect the biggest hit was the FBW much like the A320. But the same system on the A320 has been ported onto all types developed since then.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Some good news EASA is going to join the Canadians for the flight tests.

They will do the sim assessment in Gatwick the week before.

And there is also the joint board meeting scheduled.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

speaking of the 787.

https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-finds-manufacturing-flaw-in-some-787-dreamliners/

Quite how they found out which ones would be below standard would be interesting to know.

 

[Sparweb]

AH,
Since you mentioned autoland in the A220... drifting the thread topic unfortunately... are you using a HUD for that?
If you say you're a tall bloke, how is that on the head space?
I've been in a CRJ with the similar HUD and the projector takes up so much headroom I don't know how anyone 6-feet tall could tolerate it for a 4-hour CRJ flight, let alone whatever range you can do with an A220.

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[Sparweb]

There seem to be some 787's with a structural joint problem. They haven't said what - could be a lot of things that go into the joining process. Fasteners, adhesives, fixtures, assembly tools, etc. I assume it's a specific incident or error because of the small number of jets affected (eight I think) and the one factory they came from (South Carolina).

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

They aren't in the aircraft but are in the SIM.

It isn't bad on the a220. On the q400 ists horrible and has drawn blood out of my head on the gear collapse exercise after landing.

I have used them in the SIM but not in real flights. The a220 cockpit is quiet roomy and plenty of head room.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

A220 can take just over 17 tons of fuel at 1800 kg an hour that's 9 hours. They deliver them one hop to Europe.

With a full cabin the max sector is about 6 hours.

Longest I have done so far is 4 there and back and it's comfy enough. Q400 4 hours and you would be punch drunk with the noise and dehydration.

The a220 cabin pressure is 6k at fl410 which makes a huge difference and is much less cockpit noise. Also has foot heaters which makes things more comfortable.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Some more on the 787 and the shims. Also there is issues with composite roughness.

https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-...ight-787s-from-service-over-structural-issue/

The rumour I am hearing is that 737 is nearly compliant but not quiet and the FAA is willing to give a temp allowance to allow it to fly again while a 3rd AoA sensor is fitted. EASA is not so keen on letting it fly again on a promise that the 3rd will be fitted and integrated in a time frame. And Canadians also want the stick shaker killer which for some reason Boeing and some in the FAA is dead against. But as I have said before that requirement has history and has been an ongoing argument for some 40-50 years. I have never flown a commercial aircraft without the ability to kill it. So we may yet have it flying in only FAA airspace.

And there is some issues about if a statement of conformity has been issued, which could be because it doesn't conform to the required design standards.

They don't need to touch the current air data analogue system to ADC. They could just stick in a smart probe and only use the AoA feed off it i would have thought. They are self-contained units with digital output. Would make the nose a bit prickly with probes sticking out all over the place I grant you.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

just a comparison of the various huds.

Q400 Hud set up which is right over your head.

A220 with out hud

And with hud, you can see the projector is behind the back of the seat so your head can't get near it. Even when its stowed away. The Q400 and CJR i presume the projector and screen are one unit forward of your sitting position. We have head alignment balls which we have to line up for CAT II and CAT III approaches to get the eye line in the right place. And for me if my head is in the right place its close enough that my bald head clips the corner of it when there is a sudden G produced in the sim however tight I have my belt. If you remember SAS had multiple gear collapses due poor maint and they added a gear collapse exercise to the sim program which was always enough to batter my head against it unless I took precautions. After one argument about dropping my seat on approach and the examiner freezing the sim and making me put it back. End result was blood pouring down my face from a gash in my forehead. After that they even started telling tall people to drop the seat in the sim only and CAE put a big bit of foam on the bottom of the housing unless it was booked for hud work.

 

[1503-44]

Ouch. Yeah great work around with the foam. Not!
Lost time injury?

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

Nah, a trickle of blood down the face after scratching your baldy head is hardly a novelty.

Most aircraft don't have them thankfully. They are a bit of a fiddle to save money on dual flight director cat II maintenance. Autoland CAT III requirements are different and they don't give any benefit. Quite what the different requirements are equipment wise I have no clue. We as crew look after our own qualifications and there is a aircraft qualification on the briefing sheet in the tech log. Which you check when you take over the aircraft. It does change day to day depending on tech status and sometimes we have to requalify it by doing a test autoland in good weather.

 

[1503-44]

OK, Fit the "Any one you can walk away from category".
You are obviously too tall.
Over the design 5'-9 1/2 inches.

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

I think the baldy head was the reason for the blood. The guys with a full head just got a lump.

But they seemed to have learned and the a220 has more head room.

 

[Lou Scannon]

How about a scrum cap?

"Schiefgehen wird, was schiefgehen kann" - das Murphygesetz

 

[Alistair_Heaton]

I did think about that.... BUt actually the big lump of foam did the trick and if you put the seat down two notches you missed it as well.

If you look at that first picture there is a silver bit of metal comes down off the bottom, It stays on the bottom when the HUD is swung up away. And there was also a plastic fairing round it. It was that you connected with not the main lump of axle for the reflector.

Anyway don't have to fly it any more and in the real aircraft they didn't have them so its now someone else's problem.

 

[MacGyverS2000]

Someone please explain... why rear-projection HUDs instead of up-projection onto the windscreen? Seems like it would get rid of all headway obstructions, as well as being more easily positionable (up/down) for vertically-challenged pilots.

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com