Comments by "GH1618" (@GH-oi2jf) on "Mentour Pilot" channel.

  1. It keeps the rain off your head while inspecting the aircraft. It keeps the sun off your head while inspecting the aircraft.
    178
  2. They might be sold for cargo conversion.
    66
  3. There are also FAA reports of cracks in the A320 structure.
    14
  4. supertrix101 — Despite it’s reputation, the DC-10 remained in service for many years after its early troubles. People flew on it — even those like me who didn’t like it, because it took us where we needed to go. I feel much better about the 737 Max than I did about the DC-10. The Max is an excellent aircraft which had one horrible defect. It’s been fixed and it’s time to move on, in my opinion.
    14
  5. Tinotenda Mandizvidza — MD-11 has winglets and the tail end is squared off like a flat-bladed screwdriver. Those are the easiest differences to spot.
    10
  6. speculative
    7
  7. Tubmaster 5000 — I think that’s better than the other way around. You can’t control public opinion, put you can control the technical issues. When they start flying again, most people who have qualms will get over it.
    7
  8. William Swenson — I’m sure they have already done thorough testing of that behavior, but it would require using their test aircraft in which they could install special hardware to emulate failures. Dickson may want to fly an aircraft in customer-ready configuration. It’s just PR anyway.
    6
  9. Because, despite their current troubles, Boeing makes some great aicraft, notably the triple-7 and 747.
    5
  10. Paulo Gaeta — The reason you don’t understand the problem is that you are reading “all” the articles and apparantly giving credence to the ones that are pure baloney. There is a lot of baloney out there and the idea that there was something wrong with the choice of engine is baloney. You should stick to the articles with more and better meat.
    5
  11. Not just a mistake by the maintenance team, but also by the team who produced the procedures not requiring an indrpendent inspection when the plug door was only opened but not removed.
    5
  12. I have been ready to fly on a MAX for a long time. In my opinion, it has taken far too long to get it back in service.
    5
  13. Eric Lozen — No gentleman age 50 or over is complete without a hat.
    5
  14. Martin H. — That’s not true. The revised MCAS does very little.
    4
  15. The fence is partial? There’s the problem.
    4
  16. Andrew Miller — Most people don’t care.
    4
  17. DB Thats-Me — That’s a strange rule. When the pilots stand at the door of the flight deck to see passengers off, they should not be wearing their hats because they are indoors. A gentleman removes his hat indoors. I don’t expect they would wear their hat while operating the aircraft. When they walk off into the terminal, then hats and coats would be proper.
    4
  18. Another reason it that it helps keep your head warm when you are inspecting the aircraft in cold weather. You can lose a lot of heat through your head. You wouldn’t want to rush your inspection just because it was freezing cold.
    4
  19. zodszoo — MD-11 has a larger air inlet on #2 engne.
    4
  20. Paul Osborne — What Boeing builds is largely determined by what customers want to buy.
    4
  21. Mark S — Airbus also had a rudder problem, in 2001. American Airlines 587.
    3
  22. There is also a current FAA Airworthiness Directive pertaining to cracking in structural parts in Airbus 320 and related models of aircraft. Nobody is talking about it because that sort of problem is not unusual.
    3
  23. There is a jacking point near each gear.
    3
  24. Piotr Miszczak — People flew on the Comet after the first mysterious crash and grounding, which led to another tragedy. After the second crash, the problem was discovered and fixed. A variant of the aircraft (post-fix) was flown in government service for some time.
    3
  25. Leonardo Corrales — Boeing have always been conservative about changes to the controls. That’s a good thing, in my opinion.
    3
  26. Over Under Above — Most passengers do not even know what they are flying on.
    3
  27. It seems to me that Boeing should be doing the conversion. Maybe the third-party conversion is a poor design.
    3
  28. a4yster — This was not caused by Brexit. TC was in debt trouble years ago.
    3
  29. Phoenixspin — The MAX aircraft will not be scrapped merely to indulge your irrational fears. Other people are ready to fly on them.
    2
  30. If Boeing had done this, they would have been called out for it, but Boeing haters never criticize Airbus when they screw up.
    2
  31. Calhoun has to be given a chance, because he knows the company to some extent, at least. An outsider would find it more difficult to get control of the situation. I don’t know how much the board had to do with getting into this mess, but I do fault them for supporting Muilenburg much longer than they should have. He had no credibility from the beginning of the troubles. Ironically, Muilenburg came up through Boeing engineering to reach the highest level of the company.
    2
  32. There is nothing more expensive than cost saving gone bad.
    2
  33. Flying on a commercial airplane is safer than driving.
    2
  34. Weight, and the loss of a window.
    2
  35. The engineers should have stuck around until the plane departed.
    2
  36. The 737 has two, but the MCAS system did not use them properly. When they disagree, the pikots should be alerted and they should have no effect on the flight controls.
    2
  37. Excellent discussion! I had heard of this crash before, but did not know all these details. At the end, the captain’s explanation in his defense omits the fact that he was well below his minimum allowed altitude. He should have been trying to get his altitude up rather than trying to change the heading to the other runway. I have one comment where you discuss flight controls at 3:20 ff. You jump directly from mechanical linkage (cables) to computer controlled electrical linkage (fly-by-wire). But mechanical linkage is not used in the larger aircraft. Prior to computer controlled flight surfaces, they could have electrical and hydraulic linkage from flight deck controls to electric motors and hydraulic valves which would move the flight surfaces. It is the addition of computers, not electric wiring, that is the revolution in modern flight control systems. Without the computer, the pilot’s intent is transmitted directly to the flight surfaces, whether by cables, hydraulics, or electric wiring.
    2
  38. Is there an audible response when TOGA is activated? Should there be?
    2
  39. It has, and it has a perfect record since reintroduction.
    2
  40. C.T. Wellington — You don’t understand the problem at all. You are just repeating falsehoods promoted by fearmongers or people who may have an ulterior motive.
    2
  41. Richard Reynolds — That’s the popular interpretation, but Dennis Mullenburg started his career at Boeing in 1985. Kevin McAllister came from GE, not McDonnell-Douglas.
    2
  42. Reverend Rodinal — I would feel better about the FAA if they had fired Elwell. Dickson has been tough on Boeing, but he needs to show the FAA is being reformed.
    2
  43. It’s a cockamamie idea, and ironic coming on the heels of the single-sensor MCAS problem. No one who sincerely believes that safety is the first priority should be for this, because the motivation is purely economic. Even the economic argument is weak. Since all commercial airliners are subject to the two-pilot rules, there is no competitive advantage to be gained.
    2
  44. Jeff Bourke — The software changes will stop the plane from crashing, not the training.
    2
  45. The number is the heading and that is useful.
    2
  46. They were sold. The passengers missed theflight.
    2
  47. wrong
    2
  48. I like 737s, including MAX. This process is taking far too long, in my opinion.
    2
  49. Ontario, California was named after the province of Ontario, whence its founders came. Such duplication can work both ways. For example, the city of Vancouver, Washington was founded well before the city of Vancouver, B.C. (both named after George Vancouver). Canadians also take names from their ancestral homeland. London, Ontario is an example. London International Airport serves London, Ontario.
    2
  50. I don't think it was merely luck that the departing plug door did not hit the horizontal stabilizer. When it came free of the stop pads, the bottom edge was still held by the hinges. The air pressure forced the top of the door to rotate out and down. When it broke free from the hinge, it was below the horizontal stabilizer with downward momentum. It would have required unusual airflow to lift the door to the height of the stabilizer before it had been left behind.
    2
  51. Moosifer — Boeing are working on a new aircraft, but the 737 has been one of the most successful airliners of all. That isn’t just because Boeing wanted to build them, it is because airlines wanted to buy them and passengers were happy to fly in them. There are some control wires (not string) in the 737, but the flight surfaces are operated by hydraulic and electric motors.
    2
  52. Ranger_Chris61 — That’s not correct. There is nothing wrong with the way the MAX flies apart from the botched MCAS design.
    2
  53. It would add a lot of drag.
    2
  54. Mike Wade — Not only did the FAA not ground the A380, but the incident happened in 2010 with different people in charge of the FAA. When different administrations have different policies, that is not a double standard. It is also not a double standard if different circumstances lead to different policy decisions. Don’t be so quick to throw out terms like this. Look into the facts first.
    2
  55. I blame the pilots, not the pitot tube.
    2
  56. All aircraft with engines mounted under the wings have a pitch-up moment under acceleration. This is normal. In the MAX, the effect was greater than in the previous model because the engines are more powerful. It isn’t a defect, it is just a difference in handling characteristics which needed extra trim in order to have the feel.
    2
  57. superdupergrover — Johnston
    2
  58. Luca — Exactly. That’s the crux of the problem. Faulty sensors must not affect the flight controls. Boeing has stated that the revised software will look at both sensors, presumably to recognize disagreement.
    2
  59. The 737 has more crashes only because it has been produced in very large numbers. Also, it started flying much earlier than the A320, when flying was less safe for various reasons.The NG-series 737 has an excellent safety record.
    2
  60. Perhaps, but there was very little time to assess the flyability of the aircraft.
    2
  61. The aircraft was not damaged, except superficially in the seating and interior trim. Of course it is being retuned to service.
    2
  62. Then why are you here?
    1
  63. SteveJohnFrank — They didn’t hit hard enough — just skipped.
    1
  64. The MAX-10 has different landing gear to accomodate the longer length.
    1
  65. The market wasn’t big enough for both the DC-10 and the L-1011, then the ocean routes were opened to two-engine aircraft.
    1
  66. This was a third party modification. It was not the fault of the airframe manufacturer.
    1
  67. Greg Meyer — We live in a democracy where we have a protected right of free speech and press. Most of us prefer that, despite the downside.
    1
  68. I fly Alaska almost exclusively, and regularly, and prefer a no-Airbus fleet.
    1
  69. crusinscamp — They shouldn’t have been using a forklift. It’s too crude compared to a jack designed for mounting engines.
    1
  70. There were plenty of pieces. Don’t be a fool.
    1
  71. yamspaine — The AoA failures could only be emulated in the Boeing test aircraft. They haven’t said whether he will be flying that.
    1
  72. crapcbm — It’s easy to skip ahead.
    1
  73. Altitude for aircraft is units of feet worldwide, with few exceptions. There are good reasons for this, which you might understand if you tried to design an alternative system based on Metric units, including a comprehensive plan for changeover. Flight levels for cruising altitudes are in units of 100 feet, so 15 thousand feet is flight level 150. Flight levels are then counted by tens: 150, 160, etc. It is quite simple. I thought people who prefer Metric units liked multiples of ten, so I don't understand why they would object to flight levels.
    1
  74. MP was right — The flying public don’t care if they fly on a MAX.
    1
  75. But Muilenburg was an engineer, once.
    1
  76. It isn't a matter of technology, it is a matter of policy.
    1
  77. If it were just money, they would have more seats. This configuration has fewer seats than the maximum, which is why the exits are not required. Activating the exits would add weight.
    1
  78. Remember the British Midlands 737 crash in 1989? The pilots thought they knew which engine had a problem, but they shut down the wrong engine.
    1
  79. I think Russia has since changed to use standard flight levels. Id that correct?
    1
  80. It went down in the southern Indian Ocean. That has been established.
    1
  81. TOGO advances the throttle to go-around (maximum) thrust, and pitches up to about 15°.
    1
  82. Kari Kähäri — Even if the implementation were entirely electric, to servos at the control surfaces, yokes are the best way to fly the aircraft because they are familiar and intuitive. They have at least two advantages not usually present for other systems. One is that the position relative to the pilot is the same for either seat. The other is that both yokes move together, which means the pilot monitoring can see what the pilot flying is doing. The inability to see the other pilot’s control stick may have been a factor inthe Air France crash off Brasil, although there were other factors.
    1
  83. HunterHans — Don’t belive everything you read. There are many reasons why a number could be wrong.
    1
  84. Ron Con Coma — I don’t know if Boeing develops flight-control software overseas or not, but the important question is not where is it developed but how is it developed. I am a retired software engineer. I worked well over 40 years in various companies in the USA. Over the years, I encountered a lot of poor programmers, some completely incompetent, who nevertheless had programming jobs. The fact is, there is more programming that needs to be done than there are good programmers available. What matters is that mission-critical systems should be designed by competent engineers experienced in the type of system being developed, in a disciplined engineering environment, under the supervision of an expert and reviewed by other experts to ensure safety. It doesn’t matter where it comes from. Clearly the process for developing critical software was broken in the case of the initial MCAS design. I wonder if we’ll ever find out how it happened. I don’t think it has anythingto do with outsourcing.
    1
  85. He explained that. Watch it again.
    1
  86. Tom ryan — Fatal crashes from aircraft defects are rarely, if ever, murder. I don’t think you understand criminal law at all.
    1
  87. Magnetic heading seems an odd choice for runway numbering, but I suppose the reason is historical. When ATC gives the pilots a heading, is that magnetic?
    1
  88. That’s not liberalism.
    1
  89. shammus O’Malley — Especially people who make comments like yours.
    1
  90. Muilenburg was an engineer.
    1
  91. ulfpe — Military fighter aircraft are optimized for speed and manoeverability.
    1
  92. The seats had been sold but the passengers were no-shows.
    1
  93. I fly on Alaska Airlines. I don't blame them for this.
    1
  94. Norbert Fleck — That defect has been corrected. I expect they have learned their lesson on that point.
    1
  95. Two angle of attack sensors should not both fail at once in an identical way. What should the aircraft do if there are significantly different readings from the two sensors?
    1
  96. Jose Guti — There is nothing wrong with the engine placement. Engines can be placed just about anywhere on an aircraft, as anyone interested enough to look at many different aircraft knows.
    1
  97. The logic is that that the FAA want the quality assurance process fixed first. They should not be prroducing any defective aircraft.
    1
  98. AF447 was crazy bad flying. It fell in the ocean for no reason at all but incompetent airmanship and incompetent cockpit management.
    1
  99. Anderson Rodriguez — The Max is the fourth generation of the 737. The third generation (NG) is a modern aircraft. If it weren’t a solid design, airlines would not have asked for another generation rather than an entirely new aircraft.
    1
  100. I don’t think any airport checks runways after every departure. Had someone seen a piece fall off, they would have checked it.
    1
  101. Fredric c — No, that’s an obsolete aircraft. Boeing needs to build the New Midmarket Aircraft and get it right, as well as get the MAX flying again.
    1
  102. I fly now and then, and usually on 737s. As far as I can tell, nobody is concerned about whether it is a MAX.
    1
  103. Jack Perry — That’s completely wrong. A great deal of thought goes into flight deck layout. Boeing’s approach is conservative. Generally, they stick with what is familiar and what works well. When significant changes are made to the human interface, it is only after a long design process and for good reasons. Using screens for display is flexible whereas special-purpose indicators are not. The screens are probably also more reliable than the gauges.
    1
  104. asdsdjf asdjxajiosdqw — How does something “look” reliable?
    1
  105. I think the FAA are dragging their feet. They took so much heat (deservedly) from Congress on this that they are being extra cautious. My opinionis that they should get the Max flying soon, In June. I don’t agree that all the foreign regulators need to be on board first.
    1
  106. James Neilson Graham — It looks to me that your real worry is about Boeing and you feel everybody should feel the same way about them as you do. This video is neutral. The presenter is not discussing the MCAS problem, either one way or another, because that is not the subject here. If all you are interested in hearing is what is wrong with Boeing, there are other places to look.
    1
  107. The reason was that the two people who booked the seats were no-shows.
    1
  108. The bolts only prevent the door moving upward off the stops. One bolt would suffice. Four are plenty. There is no need for more of these bolts.
    1
  109. “Millions”? hardly. This is hyperbole.
    1
  110. It seems to me that the artificial horizon is in color so that it stands out from the other instruments. It is easy to read at a glance. Shouldn’t it be the first thing any pilot looks at when having trouble?
    1
  111. I see an MD-8x all the way through, except where he is referring to another aircraft.
    1
  112. I remember hearing about this when it happened. What I wondered then was, why should a plane line up on the runway before it is cleared to take off?
    1
  113.  @x--. Well, duh. Why was it the policy of ATC to put an aircraft on the runway without a clearance to take off? Especially on a runway which is also being used for landings.
    1
  114. larsyxa — The “general public” doesn’t care that much, only the commentariat.
    1
  115. I don’t understand how you determine the balance. Do you calculate it or is it measured? If the latter, is it built into the landing gear systems? Does it calculate the CG for you? If it is not where you want it, what can you do about it in an empty aircraft? Can you move fuel between tanks?
    1
  116. I see there is a system called OnBoard Aircraft Weighing System that will give you the weight on each axle, from which you can get the CG, but not all airliners have this.
    1
  117. It seems to me that transporting military vehicles should be solely done by the Air Force. I can see why they might use a contractor for containers, but not for trucks.
    1
  118. wrong
    1
  119. I’m not a pilot, but before I drive through wilderness, I fill my tank. It’s my understanding that, after this incident, a working fuel guage is required to fly.
    1
  120. It did. It hit the ground.
    1
  121. This happened at a time when Alaska Airlines was handing out Christian prayer cards to its passengers. Clearly not an effective safety program.
    1
  122. My layman’s opinion: When using a combined runway/taxiway, there should never be more than one aircraft using it. The tower should have slowed everything down to enforce that. Couldn’t departures have been expedited by taking off the other direction? Was the wind too strong for that? What it comes down to is: safety first or second?
    1
  123.  @johnstedman4075  — So what you are saying is that safety is second. All good safety protocols have redundancy. You cannot count on nothing going wrong.
    1
  124.  @peteconrad2077  — Good safety protocols have redundancy. When everything must be done correctly to avoid disaster, the probability of disaster is too high. Is the primary objective to fix blame or to avoud disaster?
    1
  125.  @peteconrad2077 Runways are not used simultaeously as runways and taxiways hundreds of times a day. They are used by planes taking off or landing in the same direction. The safest arrangement is to have two parallel runways, and to use one for takoff and one for landing.
    1
  126. I remember when this happened. It seemed to me that the alternative runway was inherently more hazardous than the prinary runway due to length and terrain.
    1
  127. How many people do think the FAA have in their employ? They have stepped up their scrutiny after this incident, but you aren't going to see what you contemplate here.
    1
  128. Part of the problem was the question of who was actually in command. Had the relief pilot taken control of the aircraft, the outcome might have been different. For that matter, had the captain stayed in his seat until they were clear of the storms, the outcome would have been different.
    1
  129. The newest 737 models are nice aircraft, but the concept has run its course. It is time to plan for its replacement, but Boeing is behind on replacing even the 757.
    1
  130. The name is “Boeing,” the name of the founder.
    1
  131. I don’t believe there is a technical reason to delay clearance to fly to the end of the year. The problem isn’t that hard to correct. I suspect somebody is just being difficult and it’s possible there is an ulterior motive. If that’s the case, everybody else should just move on without them. If you insist on 100% support around the world, then you enable people who just want to do maximum injury to Boeing to do so.
    1
  132. Leonardo Baez — Analog instruments also need power. Aircraft have backup power generators in case of total engine failure.
    1
  133. The capacity is set by regulation, not by technology. It was set long ago when technology of CVRs was considerably different. It should be updated.
    1
  134. pad39b — You need more power for a larger aircraft.
    1
  135. 4lly0ur8as3 — Because there is no alternative. The competition are no more trustworthy. Despite this though, flying on either one is far safer than driving.
    1
  136. They are used in this configuration. The plug door can be opened for inspection, in which case the springs help lift the door.
    1
  137. Levi Rothstein — If you insist on avoiding all Boeing aircraft, you may find traveling difficult. There have been crashes and near crashes of Airbus aircraft as well. The Qantas 72 incident is interesting because it was so similar to what happened to the B737 MAX.
    1
  138. Sport and Health — Software is engineering. The problem is a software problem. The software is what needed fixing. There has been plenty of time to fix it. I would like to know exactly why this is taking so long.
    1
  139. Richard Deasington — You may not understand ergonomics, but consistency is not the best way overall. In some cases, yes. A toggle switch should always be “on” in the up position, for example. But if everything looked the same, finding the switch you want would be harder. When the pilot has to be flying the plane and manipulating controls at the same time, the most important controls need to be close, in familiar positions. Less important controls should be implemented in a way that does not interfere with easy operation of the aircraft. The pilots are the best judge of how well a flight deck is implemented. If the pilots are happy with the controls and feel that the aircraft is easy to handle in all kinds of conditions, then I’m happy.
    1
  140. The runway number is the heading, so left and right parallel runways must have the same number. A runway "36" would be due north and the opposite end would be "18".
    1
  141. encinobalboa — The engines are fine where they are. If you look at a lot of aircraft, you will see that the engines can be located just about anywhere.
    1
  142. It's cost. If you activate those doors, you have to remove a row of seats to provide access room.
    1
  143. He may be deserving of some empathy for his condition, but I just hope he never flies for Alaska Airlines (or its regional subsidiaries) again. That’s the airline I use most often. I don’t want any drama when I’m flying.
    1
  144. Fire — This video isn’t about that. Do you think every video must be on your topic of the day? Why not just go look for another video on that subject?
    1
  145. Butch Bailey — Boeing will start a new design, when they get through the MAX mess. Don’t know what it will be yet, but I hope it will have 2-3-2 seating.
    1
  146. Shehul Suratwala — There is also a backup computer for the display system.
    1
  147. dave miller — Muilenburg was chairman of the board at the same time that he was president and CEO.
    1
  148. Master Wong — American carmakers went through a period when their products were junk, but they do much better today. I have two GM vehicles and they are both very good — the best vehicles I have owned.
    1
  149. Seems to me that “rejected takeoff” would have been the right decision.
    1
  150. Not even close.
    1
  151. They would probably lose a row of seats.
    1
  152. Their conduct will become a textbook case for how to mismanage a crisis, I expect.
    1
  153. Recorders have various technologies. The newest probably use digital memories. The data would only be deleted when wroverwriting with newer data. When you rewrite, the previous data are gone.
    1
  154. Johnny — There is nothing wrong with the center of gravity on the Max. That is a nutter myth.
    1
  155. Roark Doubt — Muilenburg is an engineer.
    1
  156. Bill Wilson — They shouldn’t wear a hat while at the controls. You wouldn’t wear your hat at a desk job.
    1
  157. More like a mouse. The vast majority of air travelers will fly on whatever aircraft is going where they are going. They flew on the DC-10 and they will fly on the MAX.
    1
  158. Parikshit Baugh — What new features? All they are doing is tinkering with MCAS to rid it of a defect. They have to do that to get it approved for flying again.
    1
  159. It does, if the stops are aligned. Emergency exits on the earliest B737s opened inward. That design was a serious impediment to evacuating the aircraft. The door had to be lifted out of the way while people were wanting to get to the exit. With the new design, you just raise the door with a lever and it falks out.
    1
  160. Did anyone get in serious trouble for this?
    1
  161. At takeoff, they have flaps e xtended for greater lift, and they have to reach takeoff speed before rotation. Once they are flying, the power will keep them flying. The problem with a stall is that the aircaft has dropped below flying speed. Adding more engine power won’t get the speed back fast enough. That’s why you need altitude, so you can nose down to pick up speed.
    1
  162. I think they use birds which have already been killed. Chickens.
    1
  163. Jeremie Alliaume — MP took awhile to get this out because he wants to get the story right. A lot of people who started reporting on this problem early don’t actually know much about aircraft and put out a lot of garbage. That garbage is still being passed around in the forums because a lot of people seem to prefer a sensational narrative to the facts. The facts are bad enough — there is no need to make stuff up to sensationalize it.
    1
  164. Computer people use the term "garbage in, garbage out" (GIGO).
    1
  165. MVE — But their profits have taken a big hit lately. That should provide motivation to clean up their act.
    1
  166. It is the name of the founder.
    1
  167. Do you mean the manufacture of the plug door? Boeing have globally sourced parts for a long time. All car companies globally source oarts. Practically everything complicated uses globally sourced parts.
    1
  168. DaBomJr — He has explained this in another video.
    1
  169. The irony is that the MCAS screwup cost them dearly.
    1
  170. Not luck, as I have explained elsewhere.
    1
  171.  @CaptainKevinandCarol  — Boeing planes do not have structural defects. Structural failures are rare. The DC-10 had a couple of failures with cargo doors and one with an engine pylon which led to loss of the aircraft. I don’t know of any similar Boeing failures. There was an incident with an old 737 losing part of its fuselage, but the plane held together, proving that the structure is strong. There was a crash of a 747 in Japan caused by repairs which were not done according to Boeing specifications. Had Boeing supervised the repair, the crash would have been avoided. When the structure of the aircraft is involved, The manufacturer is the most qualified to do the work, cerainly in the case of Boeing.
    1
  172. The structure of the fuselage was not damaged in the recent MAX 9 accident, so it was not at all similar to the Comet crashes. A doorway for an optional emergency exit contained a plug, and the whole plug assembly came out.
    1
  173. james stamps — I have never heard Boeing call it “new and refreshing.” I think you made that up, but if I’m wrong, please give me a link to a Boeing site which documents it.
    1
  174. Ivan Jay — Any aircraft an be stalled.
    1
  175. That was before the internet and World Wide Web.
    1
  176. S. Nawfal There is no problem with the wing/engine design. That is baloney.
    1
  177. On a DC-10? poorly
    1
  178. no
    1
  179. ressljs — The KC-46 acquisition turned out right, so that’s a bad example. Airbus won the first round only because their partner had friends in the Pentagon. People play politics on both sides.
    1
  180. No, Boeing have to build new aircraft and do a better job of it to restore their reputation. They are not going to just roll over for Airbus.
    1
  181. I think he is trying to be objective.
    1
  182. The original 737 had emergency exit doors which had to be removed into the cabin. That is an impediment when people are wanting to get out in a hurry. A door which just slides uo and goes straight out is much faster.
    1
  183. He didn’t make excuses. He explained what happened and how it happened. I found it informative. It is for others to lay blame. There is plenty to go around here.
    1
  184. That, and the vulnerability of the aircraft to damage from debris.
    1
  185. Omer Shomrat — This is not a promotional video. It is an informative video for people who are interested in aircraft.
    1
  186. No, the error was made at Boeing, where the bolts were removed but not replaced.
    1
  187. Johan M — I look at the card, also, but we are not typical. And by the time you look at the seat card, it’s too late. Look around you the next time you are at a boarding gate. How often do you see someone exclaim, as the aircraft pulls in, “OMG! It’s a (whatever)! I’m not getting on that!” Never.
    1
  188. scottrsfooty — Unless it’s an elk or moose. I knew someone who died in a car that hit an elk. A long time ago, though, before air bags and seat belts.
    1
  189. John Iii — You must mean “irrelevant.”
    1
  190. the saint — Boeing have finished the MCAS revisions. The continued delay must be for other reasons.
    1
  191. Consulting — What Boeing builds largely depends on what the airlines want. A lot of airlines like the 737 and wanted the upgrade, although not knowing how it would be botched, of course.
    1
  192. He exaggerated, but it is true that most passengers don’t pay much attention to the type of aircraft.
    1
  193. There is a video that illustrates what can happen from too much bank: 1994 Fairchild B-52
    1
  194. How would you measure airspeed?
    1
  195. Never confuse flying with barbecue.
    1
  196. Ontario is a town east of Los Angeles. Where is London?
    1
  197. I suppose an airline could order it that way.
    1
  198. You are. Boeing are responsible for the aircraft that they deliver to a customer. Every critical component received from a supplier must be inspected.
    1
  199. Remember that Muilenburg was a Boeing engineer before he became CEO. The president of Boeing Commercial Aircraft now is an engineer, but the Boeing CEO is not. I think we should be hearing from the head of the Commercial Aircraft division as well as the CEO on this issue.
    1
  200. Not really. An incompetent pilot together with poor cockpit management led to the disaster.
    1
  201. No, that is not a design flaw. It is a good design.
    1
  202. You have just a couple seconds to make that dcision. If the plane is flyable, lifting off and coming back to land is best.
    1
  203. Old regulation.
    1
  204. prabal sarkar — They just scraped them a little bit. Not a hard enough hit to tear them off.
    1
  205. sho bordy — They did raise the plane up a little bit by redesigning the nose gear. They also reduced the size of the engine fans a little bit. I think some models also now have a redesigned main gear which gives a little more height. None of those changes addresses the main problem, which is that the new engine has greater takeoff thrust, which requires more trim. MCAS was added to adjust the trim automatically, in order to avoid requiring a new type certification.
    1
  206. No. The MAX has had no incidents since being reintroduced. It is as safe as the NG series.
    1
  207. This was not an example of cutting corners in the design of the plane. Cutting corners on inspection in assembly was the problem.
    1
  208. Russell Horn — The DC-10 had other problems as well.
    1
  209. No, 80 plus 180 equals 260, so 26.
    1
  210. FLY LIKE A BIRD — But you can change the aerodynamic characteristics of an aircraft. One way to do that is by adjusting the horizontal stabilizer — trim. That can can be done manually or automatically. MCAS is a system for adjusting the trim automatically. There is nothing wrong with that in principle, but Boeing botched the implementation.
    1
  211. In my opinion, the FAA have been taking much too long to get this cleared up. Boeing, of course, hurt themselves — I don’t wory about them. But the extraordinary delay is hurting airlines and passengers, and now Boeing assembly workers and suppliers who had nothing to do with causing the problem. I understand that the new FAA director wants to restore confidence in the FAA above all, but he hasn’t done the one thing he needs to do to get my confidence — fire Elwell.
    1
  212. If he is retired, he cannot know how this plane was insoected.
    1
  213. The consideration is that they want the fuselage structure to be exactly the same for all planes of that model, regardless of seat configuration. The plug door uses the same retention system as for a normal emergency exit door.
    1
  214. I wonder why Boeing couldn’t have put a taller landing gear in the Max series.
    1
  215. Nick Clark — The aircraft can make a controlledlanding with both engines out, on backup power. It is a requirement of certification.
    1
  216. He covered that.
    1
  217. US Airways Flight 1549
    1
  218. Airbus aircraft have made several emergency landings in the USA in the past year. They don't get as much attention as Boeing emergencies. Any aircraft presents some risk of something going wrong.
    1
  219. ENDER⌚EINSTEIN⌚ — There are engine-over-wing designs, but that isn’t the reason.
    1
  220. The runway number is the heading, in units of 10°.
    1
  221. PAPIs? What is the time indication?
    1
  222. Kolby Claxton — Doppler effect.
    1