|
|
Post by Roadsterstu on Jan 31, 2020 8:26:44 GMT
The 737 being such an old design is at the root of the MAX issues..... it's apparently very low to the ground because it's from the days before proper luggage handling equipment was commonplace, and from a time when baggage was placed by hand in the hold by the baggage handlers. That's why larger engines could not easily be fitted in the "right" place and had to be moved so far forward of the wing, causing the CoG issues That's essentially it. The reason why you see engine casings with a flat bottom on 737s is because as engines got bigger, they got closer to the ground. The flat bottomed casings reduce the chance of the casing striking the ground if there is too much roll on landing. The newer, much bigger engines on the MAX required the engines to be moved forwards and up, to obtain the necessary ground clearance. This affects the pitch characteristics to the extent that the aircraft is inclined to pitch upwards. Ultimately, a step to far for an ageing design, maybe. |
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jan 31, 2020 14:03:54 GMT
Which somewhat begs the question as to why they didn't just design a new plan, it's not as if they're new to the business of designing aircraft. I know that money would have been the biggest reason but they've blown any savings they made by having a plane go to market that was poorly adapted to the new technology they were adding.
|
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jan 31, 2020 14:57:56 GMT
The big problem was that the centre of lift changed drastically because they moved much larger engines further forward and higher up than the airframe was designed for. The change induced a nose up effect. the software change was to move the nose downwards by a computer controlled pitch down. The sensors were both faulty but the Boeing management refused to certify it as it should have done and forced a situation where pilots were NOT required to be familiarised in a simulator to account for the change and disable the MCAS system when there was a false pitch down maneuver. The FAA allowed Boeing to self certify the aircraft with it's embedded staff. Basically Boeing were given a bye, the airlines refused the choice of a new aircraft preferring to keep the 737 and save money so everyone involved was at fault. If your pilot of the 747 you are flying in has only ever flown a Cessna you would be rightly PO'd and refuse to fly. Same situation different gravy. Of course, the Max will never crash and the Titanic safely served for decades. The 737 is an old design from the days when many airports didn't have luggage handling equipment and bags were loaded by hand - hence it was low to the ground. As the size of the engines were increased to accommodate more load they had to be moved forward to maintain the minimum 18" of ground clearance inducing, as Mike says, the nose up effect that had to be countered by software. It's much easier for a manufacturer and cheaper for the airlines if generations of aircraft are just updated as the pilots can just download the training file onto their iPads and review them as they fly during normal work hours, which is what happened with the various versions of the 737 through to the Max. If it's a completely new aircraft they have to go on the simulators for more formal training, which is time consuming and expensive. Bob's got your answer here....^^^ They needed a quick solution to avoid losing a major customer to their main (only) competitor. Developing a new plane from scratch would have taken way too long (see how long the Dreamliner took - it was plagued with development setbacks due to all the new and untested tech). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 15:29:14 GMT
I recalled going on a 777 once and looked it up on wikipedia. Fuck me, plane pages are properly geeked out! The 777 ain't exactly a lucky plane. Introduced in 1995 and 541 fatalities so far...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 16:39:11 GMT
Just wait for the long delayed 777X, their max version of the 737 hits customers, literally. The 737 max apparently flies OK if the pilot knows how.
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Feb 4, 2020 13:33:34 GMT
I know Boeing have said that they will get the 737-Max air certified again, but I can't help thinking that it is going to be a really hard sell to (a) get airlines to buy them without almost giving them away and (b) to get passengers to go on them. The Comet never recovered from its early crashes even though the later versions did not have the same issues.
I reckon the only real way out of this for Boeing is to redesign the 737-max to such an extent that it effectively becomes a new plane with a new name.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2020 16:44:43 GMT
Which is the concensus from those in the industry from what I have seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on Feb 4, 2020 16:45:58 GMT
I know Boeing have said that they will get the 737-Max air certified again, but I can't help thinking that it is going to be a really hard sell to (a) get airlines to buy them without almost giving them away and (b) to get passengers to go on them. The Comet never recovered from its early crashes even though the later versions did not have the same issues. I reckon the only real way out of this for Boeing is to redesign the 737-max to such an extent that it effectively becomes a new plane with a new name. I agree, look out for the Boeing 737 Max Plus coming to an airline near you soon. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2020 16:53:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by PG on Feb 4, 2020 20:49:49 GMT
I know Boeing have said that they will get the 737-Max air certified again, but I can't help thinking that it is going to be a really hard sell to (a) get airlines to buy them without almost giving them away and (b) to get passengers to go on them. The Comet never recovered from its early crashes even though the later versions did not have the same issues. I reckon the only real way out of this for Boeing is to redesign the 737-max to such an extent that it effectively becomes a new plane with a new name. I agree, look out for the Boeing 737 Max Plus coming to an airline near you soon. Or maybe "The airliner formerly known as the Boeing 737-Max", or "I can't believe it's not the 737-Max". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2020 17:04:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Feb 7, 2020 13:40:22 GMT
I read an article yesterday about Boeing's 707 - their first jetliner - and it served as the template for the 737 including donating the nose structure, cockpit and front part of the fuselage.
Thing is the 707 is now 70 years old!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2020 14:50:40 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2020 17:30:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Mar 12, 2020 10:28:32 GMT
I wonder what would be found if Airbus were so closely investigated.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2020 13:47:55 GMT
With this event I would bet on those being retroactively checked too.
|
|
