Bad day for Boeing

For all the MAGA Trumpeteers and Lie-brul Commies to post their wearisome screeds.
Post Reply
User avatar
FSchmertz
Cant Stop Watching His Avatar
Posts: 2113
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:37 am

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#201

Post by FSchmertz » Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:32 pm

Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:26 pm
FSchmertz wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:19 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:14 pm
FSchmertz wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:12 pm
And the findings of crash investigations usually find multiple factors contributed to the accident.
Yep, but wouldnt a bird strike represent the biggest factor?
Um, a plane crashes pretty much because a bird struck a shitty little sensor that was pretty much critical for some reason?

Yeah, no, not agreeing that will turn out to be "the biggest factor".
You didnt read the article then. OK

Its literally the first bullet point
U.S. aviation officials believe a bird strike may have caused a Boeing 737 Max to crash in March.
U.S. aviation officials think a bird strike is the likely culprit in what led to erroneous sensor data fed to the anti-stall system in the Ethiopian crash, the person said.
Yeah, to me that sounds like "a factor" as per the title
a bird strike was factor
Why was a system that appears so critical dependent on only one of two sensors?

And the software fix apparently is now going to monitor both sensors, with disagreement shutting off MCAS and alerting the pilots.

As I mentioned, the investigation is going to cite multiple likely contributors to the crashes, but I doubt a bird strike will be considered "the main factor." Especially since there were two crashes.
Last edited by FSchmertz on Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:40 pm, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#202

Post by Biker » Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:33 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am

Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Faulty sensor, not damaged sensor caused by external factors. Youve blamed Boeing the entire time.

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#203

Post by AnalHamster » Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:03 pm

Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:33 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am

Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Faulty sensor, not damaged sensor caused by external factors. Youve blamed Boeing the entire time.
"Faulty sensor data", you pathetic welcher. The cause of the data being faulty is not specified, your evidence free bird strike speculation theory would not change your loss. All sensors fail from time to time, boeing installed a kamikaze system with a single fallible sensor as the only point of failure and compounded the problem by failing to recognise the need for training, or even notification, to escape from kamikaze mode. Even if they had told the customers they needed to do simulator training on faulty MCAS situations, the simulators could not simulate it.
MCAS caused the crashes, and my wording is welchproof. You welch if you're gonna welch, but when I draw up the articles of imwelchment for presentation to the forum, you are going to be universally reviled as a welcher. Sad.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#204

Post by Biker » Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:07 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:03 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:33 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am

Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Faulty sensor, not damaged sensor caused by external factors. Youve blamed Boeing the entire time.
"Faulty sensor data", you pathetic welcher. The cause of the data being faulty is not specified, your evidence free bird strike speculation theory would not change your loss. All sensors fail from time to time, boeing installed a kamikaze system with a single fallible sensor as the only point of failure and compounded the problem by failing to recognise the need for training, or even notification, to escape from kamikaze mode. Even if they had told the customers they needed to do simulator training on faulty MCAS situations, the simulators could not simulate it.
MCAS caused the crashes, and my wording is welchproof. You welch if you're gonna welch, but when I draw up the articles of imwelchment for presentation to the forum, you are going to be universally reviled as a welcher. Sad.
Now youre being a dishonest cunt. All along, youve blamed this on the incompetence of Boeing and their lack of action in addressing the sensor. If you had any integrity you would acknowledge there is a distinct difference

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#205

Post by AnalHamster » Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:16 pm

Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:07 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:03 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:33 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am

Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Faulty sensor, not damaged sensor caused by external factors. Youve blamed Boeing the entire time.
"Faulty sensor data", you pathetic welcher. The cause of the data being faulty is not specified, your evidence free bird strike speculation theory would not change your loss. All sensors fail from time to time, boeing installed a kamikaze system with a single fallible sensor as the only point of failure and compounded the problem by failing to recognise the need for training, or even notification, to escape from kamikaze mode. Even if they had told the customers they needed to do simulator training on faulty MCAS situations, the simulators could not simulate it.
MCAS caused the crashes, and my wording is welchproof. You welch if you're gonna welch, but when I draw up the articles of imwelchment for presentation to the forum, you are going to be universally reviled as a welcher. Sad.
Now youre being a dishonest cunt. All along, youve blamed this on the incompetence of Boeing and their lack of action in addressing the sensor. If you had any integrity you would acknowledge there is a distinct difference
Yes, I do blame this on the incompetence of Boeing. It's a single fallible sensor feeding a kamikaze system. What difference do you think it makes why the sensor broke? Manufacturing fault, wear and tear, damage from ground equipment, bird strike, what's the difference? These things break for a range of reasons, boeing incompetently designed their plane to kamikaze if one did. They failed to tell the pilots the system was there, told the airlines they didn't need simulators and in any case didn't tell the simulator company how to simulate it. They have to roll out a fix for the existing simulators as well as for their airplane.

If boeing put a little wing release button on the nose to save maintenance time, and a bird then causes the wings to fall off, do you blame a birdstrike? And you've just quoted what I've said all along- faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. Totally welchproof language. Wriggle away.

User avatar
DandyDon
Redneck Commie
Posts: 1506
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:05 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#206

Post by DandyDon » Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:51 am

Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:07 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:03 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:33 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am

Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Faulty sensor, not damaged sensor caused by external factors. Youve blamed Boeing the entire time.
"Faulty sensor data", you pathetic welcher. The cause of the data being faulty is not specified, your evidence free bird strike speculation theory would not change your loss. All sensors fail from time to time, boeing installed a kamikaze system with a single fallible sensor as the only point of failure and compounded the problem by failing to recognise the need for training, or even notification, to escape from kamikaze mode. Even if they had told the customers they needed to do simulator training on faulty MCAS situations, the simulators could not simulate it.
MCAS caused the crashes, and my wording is welchproof. You welch if you're gonna welch, but when I draw up the articles of imwelchment for presentation to the forum, you are going to be universally reviled as a welcher. Sad.
Now youre being a dishonest cunt. All along, youve blamed this on the incompetence of Boeing and their lack of action in addressing the sensor. If you had any integrity you would acknowledge there is a distinct difference
You lost this one. Just take it and go forward.

User avatar
Charliesheen
Snarky Fucker
Posts: 2958
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 10:49 am
Location: Almost as Nice as Bermuda

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#207

Post by Charliesheen » Sat Jun 08, 2019 11:33 am

DandyDon wrote:
Sat Jun 08, 2019 12:51 am
Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:07 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 11:03 pm
Biker wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 4:33 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am

Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Faulty sensor, not damaged sensor caused by external factors. Youve blamed Boeing the entire time.
"Faulty sensor data", you pathetic welcher. The cause of the data being faulty is not specified, your evidence free bird strike speculation theory would not change your loss. All sensors fail from time to time, boeing installed a kamikaze system with a single fallible sensor as the only point of failure and compounded the problem by failing to recognise the need for training, or even notification, to escape from kamikaze mode. Even if they had told the customers they needed to do simulator training on faulty MCAS situations, the simulators could not simulate it.
MCAS caused the crashes, and my wording is welchproof. You welch if you're gonna welch, but when I draw up the articles of imwelchment for presentation to the forum, you are going to be universally reviled as a welcher. Sad.
Now youre being a dishonest cunt. All along, youve blamed this on the incompetence of Boeing and their lack of action in addressing the sensor. If you had any integrity you would acknowledge there is a distinct difference
You lost this one. Just take it and go forward.
.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#208

Post by Biker » Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:36 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am
Biker wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:50 am
analhamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:49 am
Biker wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:36 am
FYI...It will come out soon that this accident has nothing to do with 737 Max supposed flaw.
Bet?

Will the 'supposed flaw' also be ruled out in the other crash that happened shortly after takeoff and showed the same rapid changes in altitude?
Sure. Outline the bet. From what I’m hearing it’s either wing flap failure or pilot error
Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#209

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:01 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:36 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am
Biker wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:50 am
analhamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:49 am
Biker wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:36 am
FYI...It will come out soon that this accident has nothing to do with 737 Max supposed flaw.
Bet?

Will the 'supposed flaw' also be ruled out in the other crash that happened shortly after takeoff and showed the same rapid changes in altitude?
Sure. Outline the bet. From what I’m hearing it’s either wing flap failure or pilot error
Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Do you think the reason for the single point of failure sensor failing is the key issue mr welcher?

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#210

Post by Biker » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:04 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:01 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:36 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:58 am
Biker wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:50 am
analhamster wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:49 am
Biker wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 1:36 am
FYI...It will come out soon that this accident has nothing to do with 737 Max supposed flaw.
Bet?

Will the 'supposed flaw' also be ruled out in the other crash that happened shortly after takeoff and showed the same rapid changes in altitude?
Sure. Outline the bet. From what I’m hearing it’s either wing flap failure or pilot error
Pretty simple, faulty sensor data causing MCAS to repeatedly activate sending the plane into repeated dives to correct non existent stalls was a major factor in both crashes. One month avatar with the crash investigation report being decisive, null and void if no cause determined.
Do you think the reason for the single point of failure sensor failing is the key issue mr welcher?
Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 4:28 pm
Lets see the final report. Thats all

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#211

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:06 pm

Are you dropping your welching claim that the sensor being faulty for any particular reason means you don't lose then mr welcher?

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#212

Post by Biker » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:07 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:06 pm
Are you dropping your welching claim that the sensor being faulty for any particular reason means you don't lose then mr welcher?
I havent welched and never will. The winner will be determined by the final report's release. Whats so hard to understand?

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#213

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:16 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:07 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:06 pm
Are you dropping your welching claim that the sensor being faulty for any particular reason means you don't lose then mr welcher?
I havent welched and never will. The winner will be determined by the final report's release. Whats so hard to understand?
Your claim that if the sensor had been hit by a bird you're in the clear mr welcher. Could you explain it?

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#214

Post by Biker » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:21 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:16 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:07 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:06 pm
Are you dropping your welching claim that the sensor being faulty for any particular reason means you don't lose then mr welcher?
I havent welched and never will. The winner will be determined by the final report's release. Whats so hard to understand?
Your claim that if the sensor had been hit by a bird you're in the clear mr welcher. Could you explain it?
That was simply one theory. I personally think that it was due to pilot error or lack of pilot training. There were redundancies that were not purchased by EA that placed more emphasis on pilot training.

Now quickly run along and Google to see what Im talking about

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#215

Post by AnalHamster » Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:30 pm

Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:21 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:16 pm
Biker wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:07 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Tue Jun 18, 2019 5:06 pm
Are you dropping your welching claim that the sensor being faulty for any particular reason means you don't lose then mr welcher?
I havent welched and never will. The winner will be determined by the final report's release. Whats so hard to understand?
Your claim that if the sensor had been hit by a bird you're in the clear mr welcher. Could you explain it?
That was simply one theory. I personally think that it was due to pilot error or lack of pilot training. There were redundancies that were not purchased by EA that placed more emphasis on pilot training.

Now quickly run along and Google to see what Im talking about
I know far more about this one than you do bicker. You appear to be claiming that the optional warning light was a choice between buying the optional warning light or doing more pilot training instead? Despite the fact that boeing told its customers more pilot training was unnecessary, told the FAA the system required no pilot training at all under any circumstances, that the engineers who designed the thing were actually unaware the warning light wasn't a basic standard feature but had been made an optional extra, and that if anyone had thought to train pilots in how to deal with the kamikaze system, the simulators simply could not simulate the problem? In a simulator, the solution in the manual - not the solution to the specific problem, which was not in the manual, but the solution to the general problem of runaway trim - actually worked, turning the trim wheel. In the real world situation in both crashes, the wheel could not physically be turned because the forces on the stabiliser were too great. There are precisely 2 options to get round that, neither in the procedures. 1 is to reduce thrust, which pushes the nose down - the basic problem MCAS is there for with the faulty 737 airframe new engine configuration, 2 is to 'rollercoaster', which is to briefly deliberately dive in order to reduce the forces so you can spin the wheel. The pilots in both crashes experienced this problem shortly after takeoff, they simply did not have the altitude for either approach because both involve diving in an aircraft that is already trying to put you into a fatal dive.

The pilots followed the procedures given to them, they did not work. They could not turn the wheel to manually trim because the forces on the stabiliser from the airspeed were beyond human muscle capacity. Dropping airspeed would have had the same affect as turning the electrical trim system back on - pushing the nose down further.

User avatar
CaptQuint
UJR Military Attaché
Posts: 14627
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:18 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#216

Post by CaptQuint » Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:21 am

Pilots heard on audio pleading with Boeing to give them information about the mcas system 5 months before the second 737 Max 8 crash.

“I don't take responsibility at all” President Donald John Trump 03/13/2020

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#217

Post by Biker » Wed Jun 19, 2019 1:44 pm

CaptQuint wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 11:21 am
Pilots heard on audio pleading with Boeing to give them information about the mcas system 5 months before the second 737 Max 8 crash.

Union grandstanding

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#218

Post by AnalHamster » Wed Jun 19, 2019 2:55 pm

Silly pilots getting upset about a secret single point of failure kamikaze system.

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#219

Post by Biker » Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:10 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 2:55 pm
Silly pilots getting upset about a secret single point of failure kamikaze system.
Although AA had purchased both sets of redundancies to ensure it didnt happen.

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#220

Post by AnalHamster » Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:23 pm

Biker wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:10 pm
AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 2:55 pm
Silly pilots getting upset about a secret single point of failure kamikaze system.
Although AA had purchased both sets of redundancies to ensure it didnt happen.
United hadn't, and neither was told the system existed so had no reason to suspect it could happen.

It wasn't a "redundancy" it was a warning light that didn't work unless an optional extra had been purchased, due to a mistake by boeing. The warning was intended to be standard, they just done goofed. And all it did was warn of a disagree between the 2 sensors, which would not actually have prevented MCAS crashing either plane or alerted the pilots to the fact that MCAS actually existed. The other 'redundancy' displays the output of the two sensors. Neither would have affected MCAS operation. The changes boeing is making include making the warning light work on all the planes, and having it disable MCAS if there is disagreement. The pilots in the first crash had no clue the system existed, and the pilots in the second crash figured out what the problem was but had no options to deal with it. It's possible the malfunctioning warning light or optional display would have clued them in sooner, though their options were still slim to none.

And of course, if the optional extra display or the warning light that should have worked for free were essential safeguards, that would make boeing squarely to blame for failing to make one work and the other standard equipment.

User avatar
VinceBordenIII
Is Actually VinceBordenJr
Posts: 2689
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2019 11:03 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#221

Post by VinceBordenIII » Wed Jun 19, 2019 3:28 pm

All this over a fire in the cargo hold.

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#222

Post by AnalHamster » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:49 pm

Image

User avatar
AnalHamster
Gives Head Moderator
Posts: 4358
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 7:46 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#223

Post by AnalHamster » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:50 pm

I've really mastered this photochop thing

User avatar
Biker
Not really a democrat
Posts: 7620
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 7:22 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#224

Post by Biker » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:51 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:49 pm
Image
:lol:

The hat is a nice touch

User avatar
PimpDaddy
Flat and Bony Ass Lover
Posts: 1195
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 3:39 pm

Re: Bad day for Boeing

#225

Post by PimpDaddy » Wed Jun 19, 2019 6:39 pm

AnalHamster wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:49 pm
Image
And yet, we can't keep a Shop a Hawk thread going for more than a handful of posts :evil:

Post Reply