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

  1. 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
  2. Ranger_Chris61 — That’s not correct. There is nothing wrong with the way the MAX flies apart from the botched MCAS design.
    2
  3. It would add a lot of drag.
    2
  4. 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
  5. I blame the pilots, not the pitot tube.
    2
  6. 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
  7. superdupergrover — Johnston
    2
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. Perhaps, but there was very little time to assess the flyability of the aircraft.
    2
  11. The aircraft was not damaged, except superficially in the seating and interior trim. Of course it is being retuned to service.
    2
  12. Then why are you here?
    1
  13. SteveJohnFrank — They didn’t hit hard enough — just skipped.
    1
  14. The MAX-10 has different landing gear to accomodate the longer length.
    1
  15. 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
  16. This was a third party modification. It was not the fault of the airframe manufacturer.
    1
  17. 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
  18. I fly Alaska almost exclusively, and regularly, and prefer a no-Airbus fleet.
    1
  19. crusinscamp — They shouldn’t have been using a forklift. It’s too crude compared to a jack designed for mounting engines.
    1
  20. There were plenty of pieces. Don’t be a fool.
    1
  21. yamspaine — The AoA failures could only be emulated in the Boeing test aircraft. They haven’t said whether he will be flying that.
    1
  22. crapcbm — It’s easy to skip ahead.
    1
  23. 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
  24. MP was right — The flying public don’t care if they fly on a MAX.
    1
  25. But Muilenburg was an engineer, once.
    1
  26. It isn't a matter of technology, it is a matter of policy.
    1
  27. 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
  28. 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
  29. I think Russia has since changed to use standard flight levels. Id that correct?
    1
  30. It went down in the southern Indian Ocean. That has been established.
    1
  31. TOGO advances the throttle to go-around (maximum) thrust, and pitches up to about 15°.
    1
  32. 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
  33. HunterHans — Don’t belive everything you read. There are many reasons why a number could be wrong.
    1
  34. 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
  35. He explained that. Watch it again.
    1
  36. Tom ryan — Fatal crashes from aircraft defects are rarely, if ever, murder. I don’t think you understand criminal law at all.
    1
  37. 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
  38. That’s not liberalism.
    1
  39. shammus O’Malley — Especially people who make comments like yours.
    1
  40. Muilenburg was an engineer.
    1
  41. ulfpe — Military fighter aircraft are optimized for speed and manoeverability.
    1
  42. The seats had been sold but the passengers were no-shows.
    1
  43. I fly on Alaska Airlines. I don't blame them for this.
    1
  44. Norbert Fleck — That defect has been corrected. I expect they have learned their lesson on that point.
    1
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. The logic is that that the FAA want the quality assurance process fixed first. They should not be prroducing any defective aircraft.
    1
  48. AF447 was crazy bad flying. It fell in the ocean for no reason at all but incompetent airmanship and incompetent cockpit management.
    1
  49. 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
  50. I don’t think any airport checks runways after every departure. Had someone seen a piece fall off, they would have checked it.
    1