Boeing Max.

[L39Guy]

And what expertise resides in Tower C in Ottawa that the Yanks don’t have? What value would a TC review add - none.

[Daniel Cooper]

And what expertise resides in Tower C in Ottawa that the Yanks don’t have? What value would a TC review add - none.

I purely political one, after the C-Series shenanigans.

[goingnowherefast]

And what expertise resides in Tower C in Ottawa that the Yanks don’t have? What value would a TC review add - none.

Not so much expertise, but credibility. The FAA is a little short on credibility at the moment.

[corethatthermal]

And what expertise resides in Tower C in Ottawa that the Yanks don’t have? What value would a TC review add - none.

Political, After what happened between the FAA and Boeing, any great nation would be wise to score pathetic bonus political points AND remind Boeing AND the FAA not to play their little Russian Roulette games again !

[L39Guy]

So no real value, just political points. Great.

[boeingboy]

Last we heard a couple of weeks ago is the FAA still will not require sim training for the Max - it's all computer based. However - we believe that TC will require sim training for it. Which is just fine with me.

For such a hot button topic - It seems like this would be the easiest of the issues to solve - but I guess Boeing and the FAA are going to leave it at that and if anyone else wants to do sim training - so be it. I suspect that's what most of the world's airworthiness people will do. I don't really see any other sticking points with the proposed fix.

[leftoftrack]

if Canada requires all Max airplanes in their airspace to have aircrews who have demonstrated a MCAS recovery in the sim or be banned from the airspace you'll see all the majors in the US add it to their training

[Lecowboy]

So no real value, just political points. Great.

Credibility and impartiality are good values when you have to judge any common situation.

But when you put into the equation the lives of thousands of people and the sale of billions dollars of aircrafts, theses values are, ironically, unvaluable.

[pilotbzh]

https://www-seattletimes-com.cdn.amppro ... ies/?amp=1

[boeingboy]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/wh ... li=AAggNb9

One of the best articles I've ever read. About not only the airplane and what happen in each accident - but more importantly of the way stuff happens in other parts of the world.

[W5]

That article is spot on. Although it does not go into the corporate shenanigans of Boeing.

[Eric Janson]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/wh ... li=AAggNb9

One of the best articles I've ever read. About not only the airplane and what happen in each accident - but more importantly of the way stuff happens in other parts of the world.

Fantastic article indeed - especially the cultural aspects which will never make it into any final report. Glad to see the author ignores Political Correctness.

Having worked in Asia I've experienced the "Protect the National Carrier" mentality first hand. Numerous incidents were covered up with the co-operation of the local CAA. Virtually impossible to fire anyone no matter how incompetent.

The only thing that surprises me is that there aren't more accidents.

[Shibby]

It is not just the MCAS' erroneous commands,

It is not just the misinterpretation of information displayed to the pilots.

It is not just the lack of training specific to the MCAS.

It is not the just the pilot training records.

It is not just the maintenance practices.

It is not just Boeing's arrogance.

It is not just the variances in design.

It is not just the degradation of manual skill.

It is all these things together. We would be ignorant to think that this could not have happened on North American soil. We are not privy of the flaws of aviation's darkest corners solely because of where we are located in the world. I do not envy what these two crews were up against. It was a lot more than just a runaway.

The plane will fly again. There is much to be learned from this. From lessons in aerodynamics, skill and the ever fragile human factors at play in a high stress environment.

If there is a stand out quote from Langewiesche's article is the difference in philosophy between Airbus and Boeing... "The idea was that it would no longer be necessary to protect the public from airplanes if Airbus could get airplanes to protect themselves from pilots."

His writing has explored many accidents in which pure human frailty was the cause of accidents, he does so on both manufacturer's planes.

What isn't mentioned however is how a "runaway" of this magnitude is a once in a blue moon event, not 5 months apart on brand new airplanes.

[boeingboy]

"The idea was that it would no longer be necessary to protect the public from airplanes if Airbus could get airplanes to protect themselves from pilots."

That statement is a very dangerous one, and shows a very narrow minded vision. The debate of whether to include more automation or not is a contentious one and one that will be hotly debated probably forever. There are many instances the other way as well....where an Airbus aircraft has crashed or narrowly avoided a crash due to the software and the computers having a mind of their own. For that reason I've always liked the Boeing aircraft better. They leave the pilot in control to a larger degree than Airbus.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... le-457574/
https://simpleflying.com/excessive-pitc ... -aircraft/

I'm not turning this into an Airbus vs Boeing argument. Just that everyone has their problems and no-one is immune to issues.

[L39Guy]

Boeing, Airbus, Bombardier, Embraer, Beechcraft, etc., it doesn’t matter; regardless of the degree of automation a professional pilot still has not know how to fly an aircraft without automation. Automation is not perfect and there are cases where the automation has to be turned off, i.e. the Boeing UAS NNC.

[valleyboy]

professional pilot still has not know how to fly an aircraft without automation.

- - and there is the irony and the elephant in the room. Automation has become the biggest concern amongst professional pilot groups and has been identified as the biggest safety issue due to the loss of sick and rudder skills. It has surpassed C-FIT.

Automation will always be there, you might think you are flying with it turned off but it's still operating at a different level. Pilot skills are eroding (look at the number who think "tail dragger" time is difficult, it's called conventional gear - damn) and Boeing, Airbus and the rest will continue ramping up automation to offset poorly trained and equipped pilots of the future.

[BoeingGuy10]

Wow, if Vox says it’s true it must be. They’re obvious world leading aerodynamicist. No the engines were not put in the wrong place. They were placed exactly where Boeing wanted them. The aircraft is incredibly sound. The issues surrounding the design and building of the Max are moot. The two aircraft crashed because the pilots did not follow the drill, as perfectly payed out in the non-normals.

[C.W.E.]

The issues surrounding the design and building of the Max are moot

If it is such a great design why has it been grounded all around the world for so long and no real time line on when it will be back in service.

I don't know about the " moot " part of this issue but it sure is costing Boeing a pile of money and bad publicity.

[Capt. Underpants]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/wh ... li=AAggNb9

One of the best articles I've ever read. About not only the airplane and what happen in each accident - but more importantly of the way stuff happens in other parts of the world.

Really? To me it reads like a classic case of blaming it all on the pilots and "non-Americans". Meanwhile, he gives Boeing (that great American company) all but a free pass for their directly causal role in these accidents. They designed a flight control modification that included the potential for a single point of failure to cause a major disruption of the crew's ability to control the aircraft. Let's be honest, if this was an Airbus issue, the daggers would be flying.

Any attempt to explain away the MCAS debacle without criticizing Boeing's repeated insistence on keeping the 737 a common type, or questioning their decision not to run a full spectrum failure analysis on MCAS, will always be left wanting.

[GRK2]

Hahahahaha, spoken like a die hard Airbus pilot. (Who has never left the shoreline and worked in a "Non American" environment.) I have, and it's positively stunning what passes for competency in some parts of the world. If you believe it was a Boeing only decision to keep the common type, maybe give Southwest Airlines a call and ask them how much influence they have inside the Boeing Corp. (HINT: It's huge!)