[El Padrone]

^ Exactly! The Chinese and Russkies have been responsible for every plane incident in recent history to make Trump and American industry look bad. Poor Trump, poor Boeing. Thoughts and prayers for the victims and their devastated families.

[Jetset]

Meanwhile, in Indonesia:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...er-crashed

Quote:

As the Lion Air crew fought to control their diving Boeing Co. 737 Max 8, they got help from an unexpected source: an off-duty pilot who happened to be riding in the cockpit.

That extra pilot, who was seated in the cockpit jumpseat, correctly diagnosed the problem and told the crew how to disable a malfunctioning flight-control system and save the plane, according to two people familiar with Indonesia’s investigation.

The next day, under command of a different crew facing what investigators said was an identical malfunction, the jetliner crashed into the Java Sea killing all 189 aboard.

The so-called dead-head pilot on the flight from Bali to Jakarta told the crew to cut power to the motor in the trim system that was driving the nose down, according to the people familiar, part of a checklist that all pilots are required to memorize.

By contrast, the crew on the flight that crashed the next day didn’t know how to respond to the malfunction, said one of the people familiar with the plane’s cockpit voice recorder recovered as part of the investigation. They can be heard checking their quick reference handbook, a summary of how to handle unusual or emergency situations, in the minutes before they crashed, Reuters reported, citing people it didn’t name.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

But where did that first pilot learn about that malfunction and its solution?

[Atomic]

(03-20-2019 03:45 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

But where did that first pilot learn about that malfunction and its solution?

Each aircraft has a chapter in it's manual that discuss emergency procedures and the required steps if those emergencies are encountered. These chapters tend to be short for a new aircraft, and then grow in length throughout the lifetime of the aircraft. That is because new problems are found (normally due to accidents), a procedure for that emergency is written, and the manual is updated. Emergency procedures are written in blood they say.

I don't fly the 737 max so I can't comment on their emergency procedures. However I did read on a forum that they have an emergency procedure that covers this issue, most pilots just incorrectly diagnose it. I know there is a 737 guy that has posted somewhere on the forum, I wonder what his input would be.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

I see in the comments of various news articles that this report is being used by Americans to excuse Boeing - yeah sure, it's "pilot error" that somone didn't instantly diagnose and disarm the deathtrap that some asshole hid in your plane just so that they could buy themselves a new Ferrari.

[Atomic]

(03-20-2019 04:27 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

I see in the comments of various news articles that this report is being used by Americans to excuse Boeing - yeah sure, it's "pilot error" that somone didn't instantly diagnose and disarm the deathtrap that some asshole place in your plane just so that they could buy themselves a new Ferrari.

"Pilot Error" is almost always the conclusion of NTSB accident reports. It's a long lived joked in the aviation industry. "Oh the plane's wings fell off in flight, pilot error!".

Such is life. It's a dangerous and stressful job. Another saying I like is:

"One day you will walk out to your aircraft and it will be your last flight. You will either know it at the time (retirement), or you wont."

An aircraft can have tens or hundreds of published emergency procedures (EPs). Technically a pilot is supposed to have all of those memorized. Reality is there are very few which are immediate action EPs that don't allow you the time to pull out the checklist and figure out what's going on an how to fix it. Those are the important ones obviously. And again I don't have experience in the max, but it seems to me the "published EP" that fixes that isn't readily apparent or easy to diagnose.

And let's be real. Sitting at a table taking a written test or an oral examination and rattling off the corrective action for an EP is a much different environment than being in an aircraft in flight and seeing the master warning and caution advisories light up. Hearing the "bells and whistles" of the audio alarms going off. Stress level goes to 11 immediately, it's not an easy thing to deal with.

Heres a link to the NTSB aviation accident reports: https://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/month.aspx

[Duke Main]

(03-20-2019 04:03 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 03:45 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

But where did that first pilot learn about that malfunction and its solution?

Each aircraft has a chapter in it's manual that discuss emergency procedures and the required steps if those emergencies are encountered. These chapters tend to be short for a new aircraft, and then grow in length throughout the lifetime of the aircraft. That is because new problems are found (normally due to accidents), a procedure for that emergency is written, and the manual is updated. Emergency procedures are written in blood they say.

I don't fly the 737 max so I can't comment on their emergency procedures. However I did read on a forum that they have an emergency procedure that covers this issue, most pilots just incorrectly diagnose it. I know there is a 737 guy that has posted somewhere on the forum, I wonder what his input would be.

I'm a 737 pilot. The 737 (including the Max) has a stabilizer trim cutout switch in case the automatic trim system "runs away" (trims beyond what's required for the situation). The procedure is simply to flip that switch off and trim manually, which is what any experienced pilot would do. My speculation, which has already been mentioned here, is that these pilots may have been inexperienced and reverted to the reflexive response of wrestling with the aircraft and were unable to overpower the trim system.

[RIslander]

(03-20-2019 06:52 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

I'm a 737 pilot. The 737 (including the Max) has a stabilizer trim cutout switch in case the automatic trim system "runs away" (trims beyond what's required for the situation). The procedure is simply to flip that switch off and trim manually, which is what any experienced pilot would do. My speculation, which has already been mentioned here, is that these pilots may have been inexperienced and reverted to the reflexive response of wrestling with the aircraft and were unable to overpower the trim system.

Good to see another pilot on the forum. It's true that pilots are expected to memorize the Quick Action Item for the pitch trim runaway... but its extremely rare for it to happen. You only train for it in the simulator when you know its coming.

This is how it goes down in the sim: The instructor briefs the crew on pitch trim runaway procedures and tells them its in the day's lesson. Then, while in the sim he sets it as a clear day while you're flying parallel to the runway and tells you to accelerate to 250 knots, as pitch trim runaways are harder to fly when they happen at high speed and you need to decelerate. Its the same shit every year, the pilots know the drill, so both are staring at the trim indicator waiting for it to go crazy. When you know what's going on it isn't too hard. Add to the fact it isn't actually tested on the final checkride... its just checking a box during annual training.

When it happens in a real aircraft unexpectedly, at low altitude, I guarantee most flight crews aren't going to figure out WTF is going on in just a few seconds, while physically wrestling with the flight controls.

[Atomic]

(03-20-2019 08:07 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 06:52 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

I'm a 737 pilot. The 737 (including the Max) has a stabilizer trim cutout switch in case the automatic trim system "runs away" (trims beyond what's required for the situation). The procedure is simply to flip that switch off and trim manually, which is what any experienced pilot would do. My speculation, which has already been mentioned here, is that these pilots may have been inexperienced and reverted to the reflexive response of wrestling with the aircraft and were unable to overpower the trim system.

Good to see another pilot on the forum. It's true that pilots are expected to memorize the Quick Action Item for the pitch trim runaway... but its extremely rare for it to happen. You only train for it in the simulator when you know its coming.

This is how it goes down in the sim: The instructor briefs the crew on pitch trim runaway procedures and tells them its in the day's lesson. Then, while in the sim he sets it as a clear day while you're flying parallel to the runway and tells you to accelerate to 250 knots, as pitch trim runaways are harder to fly when they happen at high speed and you need to decelerate. Its the same shit every year, the pilots know the drill, so both are staring at the trim indicator waiting for it to go crazy. When you know what's going on it isn't too hard. Add to the fact it isn't actually tested on the final checkride... its just checking a box during annual training.

When it happens in a real aircraft unexpectedly, at low altitude, I guarantee most flight crews aren't going to figure out WTF is going on in just a few seconds, while physically wrestling with the flight controls.

Yep real life vs sim is completely different. As a sim operator it is great to give random EPs at critical phases of flight and just sit back and watch the crew interact. And the sim puts people in the "emergency" mode of thought, I've literally given crews nothing more than a false indication and watched them abort landings and debate the issues for 10+ minutes.

My favorite was when a crew was so into "emergency" mode that they failed an engine start on the ground. The busted out every reference they had, pulled and reset every circuit breaker they could think, an eventually gave up and "called maintenance", when the only problem was that they never put the fuel to the engine on. I just sit back back, twiddle my thumbs, and try not to laugh.

But real life, when the master caution pops on, and the warning audios start going off, thats a whole different scenario. The pilot on the controls can only attempt to fly the aircraft and hope the other crew members are sound enough to diagnose and fix the problem.

It's a shame that in essence it's such a simple problem, trim runaway, but yet it has killed so many people. Then again, simple stalls have killed many more people...all the pilot has to do is drop the nose and gain airspeed, but the intuition when losing altitude is the pull back and raise the nose.

[Werekoala]

Do you think things like this might be compensated for by a return to the 3-man cockpit with a "flight engineer" type position? The dead-head pilot helped save the plane the day before, maybe because he wasn't immediately responsible for keeping the plane in the air and could think more clearly?

Yeah I know it'd be more expensive for the airlines, but just a thought.

[Duke Main]

(03-20-2019 09:27 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 08:07 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 06:52 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

I'm a 737 pilot. The 737 (including the Max) has a stabilizer trim cutout switch in case the automatic trim system "runs away" (trims beyond what's required for the situation). The procedure is simply to flip that switch off and trim manually, which is what any experienced pilot would do. My speculation, which has already been mentioned here, is that these pilots may have been inexperienced and reverted to the reflexive response of wrestling with the aircraft and were unable to overpower the trim system.

Good to see another pilot on the forum. It's true that pilots are expected to memorize the Quick Action Item for the pitch trim runaway... but its extremely rare for it to happen. You only train for it in the simulator when you know its coming.

This is how it goes down in the sim: The instructor briefs the crew on pitch trim runaway procedures and tells them its in the day's lesson. Then, while in the sim he sets it as a clear day while you're flying parallel to the runway and tells you to accelerate to 250 knots, as pitch trim runaways are harder to fly when they happen at high speed and you need to decelerate. Its the same shit every year, the pilots know the drill, so both are staring at the trim indicator waiting for it to go crazy. When you know what's going on it isn't too hard. Add to the fact it isn't actually tested on the final checkride... its just checking a box during annual training.

When it happens in a real aircraft unexpectedly, at low altitude, I guarantee most flight crews aren't going to figure out WTF is going on in just a few seconds, while physically wrestling with the flight controls.

Yep real life vs sim is completely different. As a sim operator it is great to give random EPs at critical phases of flight and just sit back and watch the crew interact. And the sim puts people in the "emergency" mode of thought, I've literally given crews nothing more than a false indication and watched them abort landings and debate the issues for 10+ minutes.

My favorite was when a crew was so into "emergency" mode that they failed an engine start on the ground. The busted out every reference they had, pulled and reset every circuit breaker they could think, an eventually gave up and "called maintenance", when the only problem was that they never put the fuel to the engine on. I just sit back back, twiddle my thumbs, and try not to laugh.

But real life, when the master caution pops on, and the warning audios start going off, thats a whole different scenario. The pilot on the controls can only attempt to fly the aircraft and hope the other crew members are sound enough to diagnose and fix the problem.

It's a shame that in essence it's such a simple problem, trim runaway, but yet it has killed so many people. Then again, simple stalls have killed many more people...all the pilot has to do is drop the nose and gain airspeed, but the intuition when losing altitude is the pull back and raise the nose.

Atomic, you're obviously familiar with "simisms" but most here may not be. The sim is amazingly like the real thing, but it's not quite. And the pilots are acutely aware they're being evaluated, so they're not just thinking about the proper way to handle the scenario that they know is unfolding, they're also thinking about what the evaluator wants to see, adding another layer of stress and doubt. Training departments these days seem to do a pretty good job of recognizing and adjusting for that, but it has an impact.

In the real airplane pilots deal with small malfunctions all the time, and every once in a while the shit really hits the fan and it makes the news. There are countless times where the SHTF and it doesn't make the news because the pilots handle it and turn it into no big deal.

Everything said here is speculation until the NTSB, or whatever agency heading the investigation, releases their findings. But it could very well be that this accident was caused by inadequate training and experience.

If the Max were ungrounded today, I'd have no hesitation putting my loved ones on board, as long as it's with a N American or W European major airline. Other parts of the world have different standards due to culture and economics. I hope I don't sound too much like an arrogant American prick. That's just how I see it.

[Duke Main]

(03-20-2019 09:35 PM)Werekoala Wrote:  

Do you think things like this might be compensated for by a return to the 3-man cockpit with a "flight engineer" type position? The dead-head pilot helped save the plane the day before, maybe because he wasn't immediately responsible for keeping the plane in the air and could think more clearly?

Yeah I know it'd be more expensive for the airlines, but just a thought.

No, that's not going to happen. Modern flight decks are designed to be operated by 2 pilots and that's really all they need. I'm guessing the aforementioned deadhead pilot simply had more experience to properly diagnose the problem. I'd be interested to know the background of the deadheader.

[RIslander]

(03-20-2019 09:57 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 09:35 PM)Werekoala Wrote:  

Do you think things like this might be compensated for by a return to the 3-man cockpit with a "flight engineer" type position? The dead-head pilot helped save the plane the day before, maybe because he wasn't immediately responsible for keeping the plane in the air and could think more clearly?

Yeah I know it'd be more expensive for the airlines, but just a thought.

No, that's not going to happen. Modern flight decks are designed to be operated by 2 pilots and that's really all they need. I'm guessing the aforementioned deadhead pilot simply had more experience to properly diagnose the problem. I'd be interested to know the background of the deadheader.

I love having a jumpseater in my cockpit, even though he takes up space. The reason being he is unencumbered with flying the plane or talking on the radios. Its a third set of eyes. I have had a few minor issues with a jumpseater on board, perhaps from a different airline and aircraft, who I was able to put to work (usually communication with the cabin crew or monitoring the pilot flying while I was on the horn with maintenance).

[jeffreyjerpp]

(03-20-2019 09:50 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

If the Max were ungrounded today, I'd have no hesitation putting my loved ones on board, as long as it's with a N American or W European major airline. Other parts of the world have different standards due to culture and economics. I hope I don't sound too much like an arrogant American prick. That's just how I see it.

This is honestly reassuring, but I am interested to hear your opinion of Boeing in this whole thing.

Knowing that their highest obligation is safety, and that potentially less qualified pilots would be behind the controls of these planes, do you think they were negligent in how they rolled out the MAX aircraft? Should people resign/get sued/go to jail, or is it simply the reality that pilots in Ethiopia are prone to making really stupid mistakes?

[Jetset]

Apparently, you can order the 737 MAX with a "this plane should not be crashing" warning indicator light when the angle of attack sensor appears to be malfunctioning, but that was an optional feature that cost extra. They are now installing it free on all aircraft. Mighty nice of them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/busin...harge.html

[Duke Main]

(03-21-2019 08:53 AM)jeffreyjerpp Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 09:50 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

If the Max were ungrounded today, I'd have no hesitation putting my loved ones on board, as long as it's with a N American or W European major airline. Other parts of the world have different standards due to culture and economics. I hope I don't sound too much like an arrogant American prick. That's just how I see it.

This is honestly reassuring, but I am interested to hear your opinion of Boeing in this whole thing.

Knowing that their highest obligation is safety, and that potentially less qualified pilots would be behind the controls of these planes, do you think they were negligent in how they rolled out the MAX aircraft? Should people resign/get sued/go to jail, or is it simply the reality that pilots in Ethiopia are prone to making really stupid mistakes?

Yes, from what I've heard, Boeing is culpable here. The decision to obscure the existence of the MCAS from the end users is devastating, and it must have been made at a fairly high level. I'd expect nearly everyone in that chain will be spending more time with their families in the near future. Lawsuits? Definitely. This is going to cost billions. Criminal charges? I wouldn't be surprised.

I don't want to single out the Ethiopian Airlines pilots. They operated in a system that set them up for failure.

In the west most pilots spend a least a decade moving through the stages of flight instructing, flying bug smashers, small cargo planes and regional jets before moving to the copilot position of a major airline. By this time they already have several thousand hours of total time and they proceed to log a few thousand more in the right seat until they can become a captain.

Many developing countries are unable to attract enough experienced pilots, so they take a few bright pupils and give them a couple hundred hours of instruction and throw them in the cockpit of a commercial airliner. These guys can probably tell you all about the plane and systems etc, but they don't have the depth of experience to calmly and correctly handle the unexpected.

[PUA_Rachacha]

Below is the best explanation yet on what caused the two disasters. This is a YouTube video by a pilot with his opinion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ts_AjU89Qk

To summarize:

- Boeing needed to come up with a competitive product to steal back market share from the A321Neo.
- Instead of designing an entirely new plane, which would've cost between $15-30 billion, they retrofit the venerable 737, saving a ton of money.
- The more fuel-efficient engines were much bigger than the previous engines on the 737, and in order to prevent them from scraping against the ground during landing, the engineers had to move the engines more forward and up on the wing.
- This new engine position caused the 737 to fly markedly different, with a propensity to have the nose go up higher more easily
- To offset this different flying dynamic, engineers came up with the MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System).
- MCAS would step in automatically to trim down a 737 Max whose nose was going to high up on account of the new engine placement
- No pilot training was required for the MCAS, since Boeing didn't want people to know about it.
- The MCAS system communicates with the side angle-of-attack (AoA) vanes to gauge how far up the nose is pointed
- MCAS only needs to read data from one vane. If that vane is malfunctioning, good fucking luck. Amazing no redundancy for this
- When the MCAS kicks in, it spontaneously trims the plane (to angle the nose downwards) while adding more thrust to the engine. It's doing this because it thinks the nose is pointed too high up and the plane could stall
- This is scary for a pilot since the system kicks in instantly w/o warning. There also wasn't training on how to disengage MCAS. So, for both crashes, the pilots are in a full fight with MCAS, with MCAS trying to point the nose down and accelerate the plane, and the pilot trying to do the opposite
- The Ethiopian investigators found the jackscrew (screw responsible for trimming the plane) in the full downward position, indicating that the MCAS thought that there was a stall. It clearly caused the crash.
- Boeing is trying to come up with a software update for MCAS. Mandatory simulation training will be requisite for all 737 Max pilots and the MCAS. Ultimately, the plane is perhaps not property engineered and needs to be fixed mechanically. My guess would be that at least the European aviation authority will ground these planes indefinitely. I don't think a software update with assuage them. Japan will likely react the same.
- The FAA appears to have left oversight with Boeing. Obviously a big conflict of interest. Amazing there were no incidents in the U.S., but it would've happened eventually.

[saner]

FAA is a big part of this. Crony-corruption and outsourcing the safety testing of the 737max to....... Boeing.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/faa-boeing-...019-03-19/
-------
The two fatal crashes involving the Max, just five months apart, have raised questions about the relationship between the FAA and Boeing.

"We are bending over too much to the corporate interests and not enough to the public interest in the areas of safety," said Rep. Steve Cohen.

Cohen wants hearings on a process he worries has gotten too cozy. After 9/11, Congress approved a system that allows manufactures like Boeing to largely self-certify aircraft, including their safety systems.

-----

Just fucking facepalm.

[roberto]

Atomic- so not only are you a professor at a college but you also evaulate pilots in training in a simulator? And you're putting in 9-10 hours work in your own projects to become location independant? That's bloody impressive mate. Wish I had your energy.

(03-20-2019 09:27 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 08:07 PM)RIslander Wrote:  

(03-20-2019 06:52 PM)Duke Main Wrote:  

I'm a 737 pilot. The 737 (including the Max) has a stabilizer trim cutout switch in case the automatic trim system "runs away" (trims beyond what's required for the situation). The procedure is simply to flip that switch off and trim manually, which is what any experienced pilot would do. My speculation, which has already been mentioned here, is that these pilots may have been inexperienced and reverted to the reflexive response of wrestling with the aircraft and were unable to overpower the trim system.

Good to see another pilot on the forum. It's true that pilots are expected to memorize the Quick Action Item for the pitch trim runaway... but its extremely rare for it to happen. You only train for it in the simulator when you know its coming.

This is how it goes down in the sim: The instructor briefs the crew on pitch trim runaway procedures and tells them its in the day's lesson. Then, while in the sim he sets it as a clear day while you're flying parallel to the runway and tells you to accelerate to 250 knots, as pitch trim runaways are harder to fly when they happen at high speed and you need to decelerate. Its the same shit every year, the pilots know the drill, so both are staring at the trim indicator waiting for it to go crazy. When you know what's going on it isn't too hard. Add to the fact it isn't actually tested on the final checkride... its just checking a box during annual training.

When it happens in a real aircraft unexpectedly, at low altitude, I guarantee most flight crews aren't going to figure out WTF is going on in just a few seconds, while physically wrestling with the flight controls.

Yep real life vs sim is completely different. As a sim operator it is great to give random EPs at critical phases of flight and just sit back and watch the crew interact. And the sim puts people in the "emergency" mode of thought, I've literally given crews nothing more than a false indication and watched them abort landings and debate the issues for 10+ minutes.

My favorite was when a crew was so into "emergency" mode that they failed an engine start on the ground. The busted out every reference they had, pulled and reset every circuit breaker they could think, an eventually gave up and "called maintenance", when the only problem was that they never put the fuel to the engine on. I just sit back back, twiddle my thumbs, and try not to laugh.

But real life, when the master caution pops on, and the warning audios start going off, thats a whole different scenario. The pilot on the controls can only attempt to fly the aircraft and hope the other crew members are sound enough to diagnose and fix the problem.

It's a shame that in essence it's such a simple problem, trim runaway, but yet it has killed so many people. Then again, simple stalls have killed many more people...all the pilot has to do is drop the nose and gain airspeed, but the intuition when losing altitude is the pull back and raise the nose.

(07-14-2017 07:28 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

Finished up one contract, landed another small one (few thousand bucks), knocking out a small free job for a friend that talks me up to all his business contacts.

Been doing a solid 9-10 hours of work 6 days a week, with aroond 25% of those hours working on improving my skills.

I need to start hustling on advertising. It's one thing to get word of mouth contracts hear and there, but I need to treat this as a business not a side project hobby where I wait for the work to come to me.

Tomorrow my goal is to scout out the local competition. Some targeted google searches and walking around downtown areas looking for any related flyers in coffee shops, longues, etc.

(03-19-2019 10:34 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 10:22 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 09:57 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

I'm a professor at a major state university in the sciences field in the south west. I'm young enough to still get unsolicited attention from the female students. Academia is toxic for red pill men. College is a scam. $2k for a some knowledge you can learn for free off youtube with a little discpline. I let my students know this. I bang on average one student a semester.

Ask me anything.

How do you bust professor game? I guess...they approach you, but how do you make the move while CYA at the same time?

Obvious clues mostly.

The two most common are:

1. Undergrads including phone numbers in emails. Instead of replying via email just text back "Hey got your email, blah blah blah". They normally response with "thanks!" or something of that sort. Most girls skip at least a couple classes, so its an easy follow up with "start showing up to class more often". That's the screener text. If they respond favorably you continue the text message. If they don't you you are still covered because you are simply telling them to quit skipping.

2. Grad students asking for extra help. These are the ones that are seriously interested in their education. Thus you know your position as their professor is a serious DHV. Invite to office hours, then cancel and say you are going to be a local bar that night if they want to run a quick question past you. If they show, game like any normal girl.

The girls aren't the problem. None of them actually want people to know they are sleeping with a professor. It's the male friends in class you need to worry about.

Today a had a lunch break before an afternoon class. My student came to my place and we fucked before class. The whole class she was texting me as her orbiter friend was next to her. The guys are the problem, not the girls.

[Duke Main]

(03-21-2019 01:50 PM)PUA_Rachacha Wrote:  

Below is the best explanation yet on what caused the two disasters. This is a YouTube video by a pilot with his opinion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ts_AjU89Qk

To summarize:

- Boeing needed to come up with a competitive product to steal back market share from the A321Neo.
- Instead of designing an entirely new plane, which would've cost between $15-30 billion, they retrofit the venerable 737, saving a ton of money.
- The more fuel-efficient engines were much bigger than the previous engines on the 737, and in order to prevent them from scraping against the ground during landing, the engineers had to move the engines more forward and up on the wing.
- This new engine position caused the 737 to fly markedly different, with a propensity to have the nose go up higher more easily
- To offset this different flying dynamic, engineers came up with the MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System).
- MCAS would step in automatically to trim down a 737 Max whose nose was going to high up on account of the new engine placement
- No pilot training was required for the MCAS, since Boeing didn't want people to know about it.
- The MCAS system communicates with the side angle-of-attack (AoA) vanes to gauge how far up the nose is pointed
- MCAS only needs to read data from one vane. If that vane is malfunctioning, good fucking luck. Amazing no redundancy for this
- When the MCAS kicks in, it spontaneously trims the plane (to angle the nose downwards) while adding more thrust to the engine. It's doing this because it thinks the nose is pointed too high up and the plane could stall
- This is scary for a pilot since the system kicks in instantly w/o warning. There also wasn't training on how to disengage MCAS. So, for both crashes, the pilots are in a full fight with MCAS, with MCAS trying to point the nose down and accelerate the plane, and the pilot trying to do the opposite
- The Ethiopian investigators found the jackscrew (screw responsible for trimming the plane) in the full downward position, indicating that the MCAS thought that there was a stall. It clearly caused the crash.
- Boeing is trying to come up with a software update for MCAS. Mandatory simulation training will be requisite for all 737 Max pilots and the MCAS. Ultimately, the plane is perhaps not property engineered and needs to be fixed mechanically. My guess would be that at least the European aviation authority will ground these planes indefinitely. I don't think a software update with assuage them. Japan will likely react the same.
- The FAA appears to have left oversight with Boeing. Obviously a big conflict of interest. Amazing there were no incidents in the U.S., but it would've happened eventually.

The only quibble I have with this is that I doubt that the trimming is sudden and violent(due to the limitations of the motor), ergo not scary if you're prepared to handle it. Disengaging the MCAS is the same process as stopping any unwanted trim input; flipping the switch. I have very little time in the Max, so I'm willing to be corrected if I'm wrong.

[Duke Main]

(03-21-2019 02:58 PM)roberto Wrote:  

Atomic- so not only are you a professor at a college but you also evaulate pilots in training in a simulator? And you're putting in 9-10 hours work in your own projects to become location independant? That's bloody impressive mate.

(07-14-2017 07:28 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

Finished up one contract, landed another small one (few thousand bucks), knocking out a small free job for a friend that talks me up to all his business contacts.

Been doing a solid 9-10 hours of work 6 days a week, with aroond 25% of those hours working on improving my skills.

I need to start hustling on advertising. It's one thing to get word of mouth contracts hear and there, but I need to treat this as a business not a side project hobby where I wait for the work to come to me.

Tomorrow my goal is to scout out the local competition. Some targeted google searches and walking around downtown areas looking for any related flyers in coffee shops, longues, etc.

(03-19-2019 10:34 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 10:22 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(03-19-2019 09:57 PM)Atomic Wrote:  

I'm a professor at a major state university in the sciences field in the south west. I'm young enough to still get unsolicited attention from the female students. Academia is toxic for red pill men. College is a scam. $2k for a some knowledge you can learn for free off youtube with a little discpline. I let my students know this. I bang on average one student a semester.

Ask me anything.

How do you bust professor game? I guess...they approach you, but how do you make the move while CYA at the same time?

Obvious clues mostly.

The two most common are:

1. Undergrads including phone numbers in emails. Instead of replying via email just text back "Hey got your email, blah blah blah". They normally response with "thanks!" or something of that sort. Most girls skip at least a couple classes, so its an easy follow up with "start showing up to class more often". That's the screener text. If they respond favorably you continue the text message. If they don't you you are still covered because you are simply telling them to quit skipping.

2. Grad students asking for extra help. These are the ones that are seriously interested in their education. Thus you know your position as their professor is a serious DHV. Invite to office hours, then cancel and say you are going to be a local bar that night if they want to run a quick question past you. If they show, game like any normal girl.

The girls aren't the problem. None of them actually want people to know they are sleeping with a professor. It's the male friends in class you need to worry about.

Today a had a lunch break before an afternoon class. My student came to my place and we fucked before class. The whole class she was texting me as her orbiter friend was next to her. The guys are the problem, not the girls.

I don't know Atomic's particulars but some colleges and universities have aviation departments. And a lot of pilots have side gigs. I bet some professors do as well.

[Leonard D Neubache]

[Duke Main]

^ I don't get it.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Comments at Breitbart are in full denial, blaming crashes on "third world airlines" and "low IQ pilots". No way the precious Boeing could ever be at fault despite designing a flying deathtrap dependent on a single sensor to stay aloft.

IQ is for the right what racism is for the left - an infinite wellspring of excuses to avoid taking any personal responsibility.

[Stat]

What is wrong with boeing planes