Get ready the 2019 Airshow season is upon us. Watch this to get in the mood and mark your
calendar for one near you:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More weigh in on the B737 Max
accidents:
From: mmcarti@gmail.com
To: dwskjerven@aol.com
Sent: 4/5/2019 10:46:45 AM Central Standard Time
Subject: Re: Boeing: AOPA safety expert weighs in
To: dwskjerven@aol.com
Sent: 4/5/2019 10:46:45 AM Central Standard Time
Subject: Re: Boeing: AOPA safety expert weighs in
A good
article with the most current info:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 8:53 PM Mark McCarthy <mmcarti@gmail.com>
wrote:
Dave,
Here'’ another opinion.....
McSpadden'’ condescending attitude toward the pilots
of these carriers, and his subsequent blaming of them, rather than a flaw
aircraft design, for these crashes was premature, speculative, and mostly
wrong. I have flown with pilots who worked for Ethiopian Airlines,
and can unequivocally say they were as talented and as qualified as you and
me. With that said let me state that a 200 hours pilot has no business
being in any aircraft flying paying passengers. But it wasn'’ the
co-pilot which caused a poorly design aircraft to dive toward the earth at an
altitude of less than 2,000'’ I have cranked the manual trim wheel on
both the c-135 and the 727. It'’ not easy, and with an accelerating
aircraft , probably futile. I suspect they didn'’ train for that at any
airline, but they will be now.
The fundamental problem with the 737 Max is its inherent
instability in high AOA situations. Boeing attempted to compensate for
this tendency and minimize the impact of this difference through an
undocumented computer controlled input to the flight control system.
Boeing failed to properly assess the potential risk scenarios which could
result from hardware, software, indicator, or instrumentation failures,
compounded by the crewmembers'’unawareness of the system (whose only indication
would be uncommanded controlwheel forces and a rotating trim wheel... occurring
at low altitude and in a high work load environment). The need for Boeing
to maintain enough commonality between these various aircraft to ensure a
common type-rating was critically important to its sales prospects. Add
to that the macro-economic factors affecting the the U.S. balance of trade
added significant impetus to the rapid, unhindered approval of this aircraft.
His article was an obvious effort to protect Boeing and was
a gross disservice to commercial aviation.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 3:37 PM <dwskjerven@aol.com>
wrote:
Thanks Bill, DWS
+++++
From: dbina@comcast.net
To: dwskjerven@aol.com
Sent: 4/11/2019 2:22:02 PM Central Standard Time
Subject: 737 MAX
To: dwskjerven@aol.com
Sent: 4/11/2019 2:22:02 PM Central Standard Time
Subject: 737 MAX
--Interesting
Boeing has called 737 Max 8 “not suitable” for certain high-elevation airports like DIA
Denver International Airport could fall into that category, expert for aircraft maker says
Andy Cross, The Denver Post
Denver International
Airport on October 20, 2016.
By ANITA SHARPE | The Washington Post
April
11, 2019 at 12:10 pm
Before
last month’s crash of a flight that began in Ethiopia, Boeing said in a legal document
that large, upgraded 737s “cannot be used at what are referred to as ‘high/hot’
airports.”
At an
elevation of 7,657 feet — or more than a mile high — Addis Ababa’s Bole
International Airport falls into that category. Denver International Airport could
also fall into that category. High elevations require longer runways and faster
speeds for takeoff.
The
Ethiopian airport’s altitude hasn’t been cited as a factor in the downing of
Flight 302 and likely didn’t cause the crash. But it could have exacerbated the
situation because an airplane’s performance degrades at higher altitudes, said
a 737 pilot who flies into high-elevation airports such as Denver and agreed to
speak on background since he’s not authorized to talk with the media.
Data
released last week from the Ethiopian Airlines flight indicated the pilots
didn’t cut the 737 Max 8 airplane’s speed after takeoff when they should have.
The preliminary report on the disaster said the plane’s anti-stall system
pushed the nose of the plane down less than two minutes into the flight because
of a malfunctioning sensor. The pilots struggled to control the plane as it
hurtled toward the ground at 575 miles per hour.
“The
faster the airplane is going, the more force of air there is on its wings and
control surfaces which requires more force on the pilots’ part to pull the
control” column, said Robert Mark, a commercial pilot and senior editor with
Flying Magazine.
Boeing
cited the performance of the 737 Max 8 in a case brought before the U.S.
International Trade Commission in 2017. Boeing charged that unfair competition
from Bombardier — which beat out Boeing for a large order from Delta Air Lines
— threatened its 737-700 and Max 7, the smallest of its upgraded single-aisle
jets. By pointing out the limitations of the Max 8, the plane maker sought to
preserve market share for the 700 and Max 7.
A
Boeing spokesman said that Addis Ababa can handle large airplanes because it
has long runways.
Boeing
stated in a brief filed in the trade case that the “737 Max 7 has greater
performance capabilities at challenging airports. In particular, the 737 Max 7
can serve certain ‘high/hot’ airports and has a greater range operating out of
constrained airfields.” The brief then cites a number of such airports — the
names of which are redacted — that the Max 7 can fly that “the 8, 9 and 10
cannot.”
“Larger
737 variants cannot be used at what are referred to has ‘high/hot’ airports,”
the brief stated. Certain U.S. airports are unsuitable for the Max 8 “due to a
combination of short runway lengths, elevation, temperature, humidity and other
environmental conditions.”
Aviation
consultant Bob Mann said airlines typically use a smaller, earlier version of
Boeing’s jet, the 737-700, at higher elevations because that plane usually gets
a “better rate of climb” than the Max 8.
Documents
in the trade case referred to at least 16 U.S. airports considered “high and
hot” and therefore unsuitable for the Max 8, though the names of those facilities
weren’t made public. Asked during a trade commission hearing to specify which
airports, an expert witness for Boeing replied that “sometimes Denver would
qualify as that.” The expert, Jerry Nickelsburg, an adjunct economics professor
at UCLA, added that “Mexico City certainly qualifies as that.”
Both
the Denver and Mexico City airports sit at lower elevations than Addis Ababa
and have runways as long or longer than the Ethiopian airfield, where they
extend more than 12,000 feet, or 3,700 meters.
Denver’s
airport is more than 2,000 feet lower than Addis and has five runways that
measure 12,000 feet and one that is 16,000 feet. The airport in Mexico City is
300 feet lower than Addis and has four runways that are 13,000 feet and two
that are 15,000 feet. Aeromexico flies the Max 8 as part of its fleet.
Hot
airfields such as the Jakarta airport, from where the doomed Lion Air plane
took off last October, produce similar air densities as high elevations,
requiring faster takeoff speeds. Heat, air density and fast speed haven’t been
cited as factors in that accident.
The
performance of all airplanes deteriorates in high heat or elevation, and all
pilots account for that before taking off, said Steve Wallace, former director
of the Federation Aviation Administration’s accident investigation branch. Even
airlines operating from Orange County, California, which is nearly at sea
level, occasionally have to reduce weight on their planes because of high
temperatures, Wallace said.
Altitude
and heat may well have played no role in either 737 Max 8 crash, but the
wording from Boeing’s 2017 trade case could still be seized upon by plaintiffs
lawyers.
“Even
if it is B.S., plaintiffs’ lawyers will focus on the quote and put that back to
the company to explain it,” said long-time aviation attorney Roger Clark, who
teaches aviation law as a visiting professor at Rutgers University in New
Jersey.
Chicago
attorney Thomas Demetrio, who is leading a lawsuit against Boeing for the Lion
Air crash, said he wouldn’t include altitude or heat in a complaint unless
investigators or one of his experts said those factors were a proximate cause.
All
the factors that contributed to the Ethiopian Airlines crash won’t be known
until sometime next year when the full investigative report is completed.
“It’s
like a detective story right now,” said Mark, the commercial pilot. “And we
don’t have all the data.”
Bloomberg’s Michael Sasso and
Margaret Newkirk contributed to this story.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Full post disclaimer in left column. PCN Home Page is located at: http://pcn.homestead.com/home01.html
No comments:
Post a Comment