Is it SAFE to Fly on New Boeing B737 MAX? Boeing Pilot opinion.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 май 2024
- #B737MAX #Pilot #Flight
The FAA cleared the Boeing B737MAX to fly again. It was grounded for long 18 month and back in March of 2019 no one knew that it will not be flying for such a long period. Boeing released the new updated version of B737MAX, they call it B737-8 now. And depends on modification it will be called B737-7, B737-8, and B737-9. So no more MAX in it's name, but I think everyone will continue to call it MAX. After the new update if everything will be as Boeing and FAA stated I can definitely say that New B737MAX is safe airplane to fly. I would like to fly that airplane. Unfortunately the fault design, poor pilot training and lack of information about the MCAS led to two deadly accidents of B737s. It is a hard lesson for Aviation industry to remember that aviation safety cannot be exchanged for extra profit or extra income. We should put the safety first. In other case you will loose the reputation, money and the most precious thing that we have, human lives.
I am sure about new version and I am sure that B737MAX will be as safe as B737NG that I fly right now or even more safer.
Link to Boeing737 MAX update page:
www.boeing.com/737-max-updates/
Link to FAA info:
www.faa.gov/news/updates/?new...
Lion Air B 737MAX Accident Full report:
www.flightradar24.com/blog/wp...
Ethiopian B737MAX Accident Full report:
reports.aviation-safety.net/2...
My name is Denys, and I am Boeing 737 Captain. Before I used to fly ATR 42/72.
I am making the videos on this Pilot Blog channel to encourage people all around the world to join our aviation community.
Here you'll see interesting aviation videos from pilot's perspective. Enjoy:)
By the way follow me on Instagram I have up to date uploads there.
/ denys_pilot
Support me on Patreon:
/ pilotblog
SUBSCRIBE!!!
/ @pilotblogdenys 
Авто/Мото
Not telling the pilots about MCAS is unforgiveable.
I agree. And to slander the names of pilots who were victims afterward is pure evil. The Lion Air pilot actually beat MCAS, even if it was too late.
I agree 100%. And then to blame the mess on the poor pilots. Boeing kept them in the dark. First the iPad training was a farce. Boeing should have insisted upon pilots being simulator-trained on the 737 Max. How were the pilots of those planes to know that Boeing had equipped the planes with a defective flight system.
Maybe the question should be asked: why didn’t the chief pilot/trainers of the airlines educate the pilots on the MCAS? Surely the chief pilots and experts in charge of aircraft purchases would ask about changes to the aircraft?
@@danielaramburo7648 Boeing hid MCAS from the airlines. They lied about changes to the plane when asked.
i realize it is pretty off topic but does anyone know of a good website to stream newly released series online ?
Can we all appreciate he read and liked almost every single comment on his video?
Like! Like! Like! Like! 😅✈️👍
ok ok
@@PilotBlogDenys lol!😅
Yes! Yes! Yes! @Pilot Blog 😄✈️👍
A very clear explanation of how corporate greed and regulatory incompetence are MANY times more important than consumer safety.
Once again the value of money exceeds the value of human life!
Thank you Boeing. Thank you FAA.
You have explained it better than Boeing themselves.
Thats their job to not explain anything
Boeing will not explain properly because it is a money thing. A marketing race. it's a ME ME situation.
@@georgereyes8445 what blame do the airline’s chief pilot have for not asking questions and not properly training the pilots he was in charge of?
If you were better educated you would realize that the video's explanation of why MCAS is needed is wrong. THINK! If you can… If it was needed to compensate for excessive pitch up due to high thrust, it should operate at take off. But the flaps are extended during takeoff. MCAS only operates when the flaps are fully retracted. That confirms that the explanation is wrong. Simple minds using common sense (instead of a proper education) to try to understand complex subjects and explain it to others usually come up with plausible nonsense that other simpletons find easy to understand. What is easy to understand is easily believed to be the truth. That's how nonsense-spread via the internet-becomes education… just look at all the snide comments from Smart Alecs who believe they understand aeronautics and Boeing because they read a news article. LOL.
I have over 8,000 hours in the B-737. 200, 300, 500, and 700 only. What Boeing did in not advising pilots of this MCAS system is criminal. Excellent explanation!
Would you be happy flying the max ?
Pilots before flight 610 switched it off and landed safety ... pilot you should know better
No the Brazilian knew....what a load of shit . Let's poke the big bear in this case it's boeing. Weather they knew or not they were doom . Before take off grow up ..
Would have made no difference Ethiopians crew knew about i, and yet they still crashed .. Mr. Pilot Man
@@michaelnacevski was the system , not the pilots. the research was doneeeee
One of the easiest to understand explanations I have seen on RUclips regarding the 737 Max issue. Thanks for sharing Captain.
Glad it was helpful!
I can't say it is also one of the most erroneous because I've seen worse, but yeah it is erroneous. Simple check: if MCAS is needed to compensate for excessive pitch up due to high thrust, it would have been enabled at takeoff, but it remains disabled until the flaps are fully retracted. Also, wouldn't it be triggered based on thrust setting if the explanation is correct?
I'm just upset no higher ups were jailed... For this obvious mishap by forcing through the process to green light it for flight for money purposes.
Countless lives lost, people who have lost family all because of corporate greed.
Just leaves a bad impression on me, it'll be impossible to look at this plane and think anything positive.
I also don't think positive about it. I like B737NG more. My airline cancelled the B737 Max order and I am absolutely ok with it. As for punishment I totally agree with you. Without the punishment it may happen again. Not with MAX but with other plane or maybe other aircraft manufacturer company.
People Lives should have top priority, not money saving...
They admitted that they were wrong only after the second crash knowing about the problem even before the first crash. Crazy. They thought pilots could handle it, but pilots are not ideal.
Unfortunately it is everywhere in our modern commercialised world.
Thanks for your comment 👍
Safe flights ✈️
It’s a process...one that takes a full investigation with good evidence. Give it some more time.
To get an idea about the monetary value Boeing places on human life, one only needs to look at what they set aside for the victims of the accidents. There were 346 lives lost in the two accidents and Boeing set aside $100 million to pay out to the crash victims. The list price of a 737 Max is around $125 million and there were two of them so the value of the planes lost is $250 million. That makes the value of the planes worth two and a half times the value of the human lives they took.
The guilty weasels got huge bonuses and golden parachutes.
@@charlesharper2357 you know this, or are you just repeating what the conspiracy theorists like to blabber on about?
Finally a clear and concise explanation of the situation and the fixes, thank you very much for making this video! But I just wonder, how is it even possible that Boeing would release an aircraft with a MCAS that 1) could automatically take the plane outside of its safe flight envelope, 2) depended on a single sensor without thinking of what would happen if that sensor ever malfunctions, and 3) was not even mentioned in flight manuals or pilot training? This was criminal negligence that caused the deaths of over 300 people.
Yes, it is also a strange thing for me how they could release the airplane with those issues. I think that responsible persons from Boeing should be charged with criminal justice.
@@PilotBlogDenys
Even though any competent pilot of a transport category aircraft since 1958 knows what runaway trim is, and how to deal with it?
@@alhanes5803 but it isn’t runaway trim,,, you are making thr same mistake as many others 😢
@@andyb.1026
So, the trim didn't runaway on it's own?
You don't have a clue.
@@andyb.1026 But you still treat it like a runaway trim thats why mcas is not in the pilots handbook.
To stop having big holes on the cheese, big rats might need to be removed.
That is interesting comment. With deep sense. 👍
😄
@@PilotBlogDenys As a metafor perhaps, but holes in cheeses are the result of its maturing - not some animal that takes away lumps of cheese
@@PilotBlogDenys Even with the big rats removed, you are correct--to be human is to be imperfect and prone to error. Remove as many hole as you can, but be aware that, with human endeavours, holes will always exist.
Big MBA management rats can sometimes eat entire slices of cheese!
Then you have NO protection & any bad event will pass to the next level unimpeded.
I've been working on jets for 32 years, I've changed a handful of angle of attack sensors...they are very reliable, what fails are the AOA heaters. With 2 this will never happen again, the chance of 2 failing at the same time is zero. Also the pilots are all hyper aware that will be flying this plane, the software only allows one pitch down and if the sensors disagree the system is disabled. 100 percent non issue now.
Thanks Michael 👍✈
Yeah except for the trust that Boeing has lost. They clearly put profit before safety.
This hasn't aged well at all.....We now have pilots AND Boeing execs who will NOT fly on a Max.....Another concern you should all have is they are doing some manufacturing in Charleston SC using the dumbest population on the planet.
Another company shrill. The plane has more problems every day. As does the manufacturer. What bolt is going to let go next? Should another 346 people die because Boeing wants more money. I don't trust the 737 and will not fly on it . A 60 year old design they still cant get right... I find that the most disgusting part of all.
Seeing as how jets have been equipped with stall warning sensors, stick shakers, stick pushers, etc for decades, is MCAS even needed still as a separate system..?
It’s design impetus as was revealed after the accidents was to try to keep the same handling characteristics when applying power as the previous generation of 737, to avoid recertification and retraining.
But now that the the Max did need after the accidents to be recertified and crews were retrained, is there any point in having the separate and redundant MCAS…?
Excellent explanation. You did a great job explaining the issues with the 737Max as well as the fixes. Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for watching me 😊
Brilliant presentation! I just subscribed to the channel, liked the video and activated the notifications. Looking forward to future posts!
Awesome, thank you! You are now officially awesome guy!
Excellent video, certainly the best I have seen regarding the function of the MCAS system.
I read all of your comments. Tell me what do you think... You are awesome!
You are awesome!!!
I'm too scared to fly the Max. After what Boeing done i dont think the deserve to have it ungrounded
@@pilotsam004 That is not about Boeing anymore it was checked by many of other authorities. Plus no one speaks about the wrong pilot actions that contribute to air crashes. I expect that many people will not fly on MAX, but after a while it will be usual thing. I also agree that the first design of MCAS was bad. Now if they realise what they promised with new upgrade I expect it to be as safe as B737NG or A320.
Anyway Pilot Sam I do respect your opinion 👍. Thanks for your comment, awesome guy 🤘✈️
@@PilotBlogDenys yes i understand 👍. Thanks for that :)
I have 20000+ hours in every kind of 737. No way I can relax in a MAX.. Not worth the risk to fly. Too many reasons to explain here. The new max training recovery is like fishing.. Pull, release, reel... Ridiculous
Mr Pilot, I admire you’re videos brother 🙏🏼 you have helped me with my flight anxiety. Thanks so much!
Very interesting. I was in Acquisition for the USAF for 35 years but I worked in Avionics, not flight controls. The Air Worthiness has become very controlled process. I'm surprised that the AOA system was not at least double redundant. With triple redundancy the flight control computer would be able to compare the different inputs and pick the two that agree the most. Computers require good input to provide good output.
Agree with you. I am also waiting foe 3rd AOA.
What do you think about adding parachutes for the passengers?
Great explanation best I’ve heard!
You've explained it very well, but I still can't get over the fact that they didn't see the crashes coming. I mean, fancy reasons aside, at the end of the day they programmed an aircraft to pitch automatically down toward the ground, against pilot input, based on information from a single sensor with no redundancy, and seemingly with not a single thought as to the consequences of a false positive reading from the alpha vane. What the hell did they expect was going to happen?? How can anyone have ever thought this was a good idea?
Yes, sadly it is probably the worst and the most stupid mistake or negligence....
They saw it coming. Their safety risk assessment flagged about 15 fatal crashes due to mcas over the lifetime of operation. Boeing just chose not to disclose these findings to the regulator.
@@winniethepoof44 15 😮 and there's only been two.😮. let's hope that's now been made totally redundant !
Poor maintenance installed incorrectly that's how..
It makes one wonder how many more similar issues are waiting to kill people
This really helped me to understand the issues. Captain Dennis you are so good at explaining things 👏
Awesome, thank you!
I have design autopilots, have an MS in aero form MIT. This situation troubles me. This situation raises fundamental design methodology issues. This is not the place for a major technical argument but let me raise one fundamental issue. The angle of attack is a much more complex flight parameter in this age of variable geometry AC than in was when flight control augmentation systems were first invented. Pitch, roll and Yaw are fundamentally inertial variables, and little has changed in regard to their utilization as feedback variables. Angle of attach is completely different. One could say it is an indicator of air speed direction at a particular sensor location. At a given time it's different all over the AC surface.This has impacted the 737, but really is an issue for all modern large AC. The Angle of attach sensed near the nose of an aircraft infers the angle of attack of the main wing through a complex relationship. This is a serious issue. I would agree with the Brits who are bucking for multiple aoc sensors.
The 737 MAX needs its own Pilot certification and certification process. The MCAS and its aerodynamic design makes it necessary, just because the MCAS allows the Pilot to fly it like a traditional 737 doesn't mean that it actually is one.
@@vincentletzner8638
True. See comments on angle of attack
Agreed and I think the MCAS must take the reference data from inertial pitch Gyroscopes to compare with the both AOA data for sure.
@@t_sixtyfivex_wing8787 agreed with you, rely on double AOA is not good, especially if the means of degree quite high on both AoA, even the MCAS not agresively to push stabilizer pitch down then not enough data will make another aircraft lost alt or power a bit
Cleared up a lot of the mystery regarding the MCAS on the Max; why the crashes happened. The next thing in line, is the PROPER pilot training for this aircraft. Like the idea that MCAS has a limit on how much pitching down it is allowed to do, and that it can be disconnected using the switch on the yoke.
Great explanation Captain... thank you very much!
Nice video Captain, as always! Very interesting! ✌🏼
Thanks, Nico🤘✈️
Happy to see this channel Literally BLOW UP!
Awsome explainations & visuals!
Very good video! Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge and personal opinion.
Even as an avgeek and heavy global traveller (multiple round-the-world trips per year), I'm still not comfortable with the MAX. It seems to me that this is still a compromise. If I understand the MCAS is really only there as a cost saving measure - to save cost of more extensive training. But training is a short-term problem. Once pilots have converted to the MAX, then it's not such a big problem. I think it would have been better to disable MCAS completely and require the more extensive training. After all, it's a plane from the 1960s that's undergone extensive changes, yet still is the same "type." At some point the plane is just too different. Maybe these changes will be enough, but I can't help but feel that the FAA has allowed minimal changed (e.g., limited hardware changes) to help Boeing commercially.
Adding to my fears that a deeper solution may be needed (plane and training), is the uncommanded pitch event of the 777x late last year. Even with all of the scrutiny and tragedy of the MAX, similar problems have made their way into the 777x. At least in the case of the 777x, the FAA seems to be taking a harder stance in telling Boeing that it will be years before it can be certified.
Hopefully continued concerns are unnecessary and the MAX will be just as safe as the NG. Meanwhile, I will be avoiding the MAX for the foreseeable future.
Hello, thank you for the clean explanation and for the very clean accent. I'm from Brazil and could understand your info very well.
Many thanks for your support! Glad that you can understand me...👍✈
I couldn't understand him perfectly but I'm gonna blame my shit speakers instead of his accent.
@@redtailarts101 his accent is pretty neutral. And yeah, bad speakers can be a pain... But try some headphones instead. Dennis is a great English speaker, believe me... I can understand even Indian accent, and his is good hahaha
@@djgustavvo I have earbuds but idk where they are rn
Thank you for this video, sir! much appreciated. after watching James Asquith's video after 737 Max, I got interested and looked for other related videos, then I landed in this page hehe Good luck on your next video :)
Glad it was helpful!
2 Things:
Thanks for bring up the fact that ALL airplanes that have under-wing mounted engines have "pitch-up" moments and not just the Boeing 737 Max (this is the only time in the last 20 months I have heard this fact stated) and pilots not following the "runaway trim" "stab trim" procedure.
Great video explanation !
Yes
"We make mistakes, we are not perfect like machines" Hahaha! I hope that "the machines" didn't mean 737Max.
No he meant Robocop and his brother Robopilot which now works for Tesla.
@@gunnarkaestle Ahhh Tesla that slammed in to the truck while auto pilot engaging right?
That was an excellent explanation of the 737 MAX's defects and subsequent fixes. I am due to fly the MAX soon. I was already confident to do it as I felt it was now safe (It is apparently the most scrutinised plane ever safety wise) but this video just made me me even more confident. Thanks for that.
Hey, Ian! Many thanks for supporting me with your view and comment!
How was the flight?
Excellent video. You put it in "for dummies" language so even non-aviation professionals can easily understand. You earned yourself a subscriber!
✈✈❤❤
Great vlog. I feel more confident about the max now thank you 😊👍✈️
Great to hear that, Jamie...
An excellent explanation was so clear that I don't might to use the 737 Max in the future now.
Yes, wonderful propaganda.
It is the first time I heard of "swiss cheese model" in years! Nice to see it again. But I would like to see this from the "Chain of events" point of view.
Great suggestion!
Very good video! I liked the Swiss cheese analogy, and the good distribution of the issues leading to those crashes. BTW, your English language skills are just fine, you have a better "accent" than many Slavic language speakers, and excellent vocabulary.
I'm glad more people are explaining the true problem and dispelling the myth about the plane being unstable. Very good explanation.
Many thanks, Dave!
Thanks for this! Will be flying on the MAX in a month or so and this video just made me feel a lot better and confident flying on it!
How did you find the flight?
After what happened with the 747 Max, I'm going to have a hard time ever trusting Boeing again. It's clear that as a company they are willing to put profit over safety and even though the 747 Max is now safe, the culture of profit over safety is still something that exists at Boeing and because of that I will always be weary of them.
*737
Boeing halted deliveries of new 787s because of production flaws including gaps where panels of the carbon-composite fuselage are joined. Boeing has been unable to come up with a fix that satisfies the Federal Aviation Administration.
@@david.m5768 yes, after the last ceo resigned they have gotten a lot better
@@david.m5768 😮
I’m flying for the first time in 3 years on a 737 max . This helped to calm my nerves . Thanks for this explanation
The Bob Ross of aviation, just always happy and 100%. Love all the videos
I feel like he’s looking into my soul😂
👤👀
Weird
Design problems, must redesign to be safe plane.
MCAS was causing the problem to counter bad design?
@B B we respect everyone on the two planes that went down in the Third World countries. They were not engineering oversights on old airframe redesign and marketing competition?
Their engineers at BOING messer dup relly bad. If they ran it in the STIMULAROT and di dnof find aproblem the BOING IS SUPER DANGOROUS.
That was the best explanation of the 737 Max situation. Really appreciated the video - and subscribed to your channel of course. Hope I'll be privileged to fly in a 737 under your command one day sir. Have always good & safe flights
Many thanks for your support and you warm comment 👍 You are now officially awesome guy 🤘✈️
Another great video! Thank you for sharing!
Thanks for watching!
I have been avoiding flights on the 737Max. After watching this video, I am more confident about flying on this plane. Not only has this video provided clarity on a complex situation, it is enabling me to fly again on a plane that is used by so many airlines. Thank you.
One of the best videos I've seen, well done sir. In my veiw these deaths were caused by corporate greed by Boeing, people should be in jail!
Indeed
Thank you. It was really informative.
I usually avoid commenting about controversial topics but i really want to speak about this.
I think creating the MCAS is a great thing and I always support innovation that's how we progress in technlogy.
However, Boeing created MCAS not for science advancement reasons but for economical reason.
They could have still sold the 737 Max even without the MCAS, even by forcing pilotes to do extra training , airlines would want to invest because the engines efficiency is very tempting. But Boeing wanted to create the deal of the century by making it not only fuel efficient but Also no training required, as i said MCAS is a good thing but created for the wrong reasons.
I'd be honestly happy to See some officials doing jail for this.
rip to all the victimes.
Thanks for your comment! Agree with you!
@@PilotBlogDenys thank you for the quality content , I think I heard you mentioning Ukraine , not sure if you are from there but I'm an expat in Ukraine. I really love this country. Thank you for the effort you put to this channel keep it up please .
@@samrossi2641 Yes, Sam I live in Boryspil. Have a pleasant stay in Ukraine, my friend 👍
Sam, Airbus has the same functionality built into their software for the airplanes that share type ratings. Same reasons.
MCAS wasn't developed simply for economical reasons. If it really was then there would have been no need to update its design. Boeing would have simply removed it since all aviation authorities were going to make retraining of MAX pilots compulsory anyway. MCAS was actually developed to tackle a real technical problem in the design of the MAX. The official documents prove that the MAX did not meet the FAA's requirement for static stability at high AOAs in certain airplane configurations and that was what MCAS aimed to correct (as the name "maneuvering characteristics augmentation" implies). However the fact that Boeing put undue emphases in economy led to them making some of the errors in its design that contributed to the crashes.
I flew the MAX (as a pilot) before it was grounded and I'm excited to fly it again. Actually today I just received my updated training materials and expect to be in the simulator within 90 days to retrain.
Wish you safe flights, Sean! I would like to fly it, but my airline had cancelled the order for Boeing 737 MAX. From what I heard it is great airplane, but the engines start takes time)
@@PilotBlogDenys
I hope you do too comrade, it's very quiet (compared to the NG). And yes the starts take forever, plus after rollback it's a minimum of 3 minutes wait before you can set takeoff power!
@@PilotBlogDenys
Safe flights to you too
How did you feel about not being briefed on the system before the two disasters and crash investigations.
I'm enjoying your Channel keep it coming.
Excellent! This a perfect primer for those of us that are neither pilots or engineers. Very well done!
Not at all worried about flying on the Max more people are trying to kill you on the drive to the airport. Great video
Haha) You are right 👍
1:27 HAHAHA HE IS A FUNNY MAN TOO😂😂
That made me laugh too
Excellent summary and analysis. Are there other systems that perform automatic flight dynamics adjustments like MCAS that exist we don't talk about because they were built right in the first place?
On Boeing 737 MAX?
P B great informative and interesting video with accurate situation descriptions and analysis of corrective actions taken not just unjustified scare click bait. Bottom line if a 737 Captain says He would fly it so would I. Keep up your great work. Stay safe and healthy, tail winds and clear skys.
Thanks for your comment 👍, Bill.
@@PilotBlogDenys I’m never going to fly on 737 MAXs, they’re the worst planes ever and they should be retired and scrapped and Boeing should discontinue the 737 max Production line
As an aircraft mechanic I really enjoyed this video. I’m looking forward to see the MAX fly again.
I personally would feel okay with flying on it. Not that I'd be first in line but if I do get that plane I don't have an issue
first time i see your videos and i found it exellent . very objective . congratulations .
What a refreshing video. You did a great job. Your explanations were stellar. Best out there. I wish you luck and hope you get to fly this aircraft. You explained it with logic not emotion.
Thank you so much!
Love the Cheese model
Yay I was waiting for it! Now I need to watch it :) I think the MAX will be safe now, Boeing would not want to mess with the MAX again and make their reputation will go down the hill. If the crashes happen again (I hope not) the orders of the 777X will also be start getting cancelled. At last, Airbus will prosper and be defined as the giant of the aviation industry!
The Europeans respect nuture and delight in their engineering talent. Enough said.
Great explanation! Very clear and easy enough to share with people with little knowledge in aviation! - I just can’t get over the fact that this airplane has a propensity to pitch-up and needs a software to correct it and to fly “normally”
Every airplane with underwing engines has a propensity to pitch up, some more than others, the problem with the Max was trying to make it perform like the older 737NGs. If they had just left it alone, and let the pilots fly it, it would have been safe. It didn't need the software to make it fly normally, it needed software to make it fly like an NG.
Thank you very much Sir for this video.
You even preached a convinced, because indeed I also think that the 737 max has certainly become one of the most secure planes on the market, taking into account the numerous tests that it has had to undergo by the various authorities.
Bean counters must never be involved in an aircraft`s design or redesign!
In this case, the bean counters were the customers who refused to pay for extra training or install extra sensor.
first i wil see one flight with it
Thank you for the explanation !
Before that I thought MCAS could never be turned off.
Now the stabilizer runaway is unlikely to happen at all.
Many thanks for your support 👍
Right below the engine start switches and to the right are the trim cut out switches.
Very good explanation - thanks for pointing it out! 👍
I think it would have been good to point out that the trim runaway procedure is common knowledge amount pilots and that they occur in many types and models of aircraft. Good video nonetheless.👍
Leonardo Di Caprio, is this you
This was a great video and explanation of the issues.
Thanks for your comment 👍
Great video one question is if u were unlucky enough to loose the both engines is it possible for plane to glide levely when it is designed this way ?
I'll let people fly it for a year or two and watch.... Luckily, my local airport (GVA) is mostly served by Airbus airlines.
Luckily? read (and preferably understand) the accident report of AF447.
@@birgerkagan6087 yesss.exactly. And pilots who where not properly trained
@@ambc8970 Indeed - not being able to recognize a stall should be unthinkable. The same with cruise parameters in terms of attitude, EGT, fuel flow N1/N2 to set in case of partial panel conditions. And another - who came up with the idea to cut off audible stall-warning below 60KIAS and who OK'ed it?
You can only polish a Turd so far
@@birgerkagan6087 This was more than 10 years and today there's not as many A330s flying than back then. And those which still do, a lot of them are pretty recent (5-6 years at max) and many of the early versions defaults have been corrected, just as much as pilot training was.
The problem will remain they want to keep it within the NG type rating and it's not an NG.
The MAX will be safe when and only when it get it's own type rating.
I may agree with you. Now it is flight simulator that pilots need to pass. Almost the type rating...
I don’t think it need it’s own type rating. A type rating consists of knowledge of how the components in the aircraft work and the maneuvering characteristics. The second part is where the simulator training and extra pilot training goes into. No doubt the 737 replacement will be the new type rating.
Such an awesome video captain! As an aviation enthusiast and maybe future pilot, i wold like to fly this aircraft too! I am getting sure day by day that this aircraft is safe. Have nice flights captain!
Best of luck! Thanks for your support!
Very very good analysis and explanations. Expert level. I started my subscription immidiately. Thanks!
Welcome on board! You are now officially the awesome guy 🤘✈️
I understand much better now. If a 737 captain feels it is safe, then I know it will be safe for me too.
As a 30k hour training captain, with over 10k hours in command on the 737, I would jump in and fly a Max literally in a heartbeat.
Yes, the MCAS was very poorly done, (yet still flyable when it misbehaves by properly trained pilots) and yes, it’s fine now with a software rewrite.
Well explained, couldn’t pick any significant problems with your description.
Many thanks, Captain. Safe flights to you!✈️🤘
Safe flights
A great design is one where the pilot does not have to manage a crisis caused by a flaw design deliberateley not corrected for profit.
I think the press/media had a “high angle of attack” on the Max. However, I’m confident that the new version will be good! Well explained Captain! Subscribed!
Thanks for your subscription! You are now officially the awesome guy!
Thanks for the explanation. At any time while piloting the NG or previous version of the 737, did you have to manually adjust the stabilizer with the mechanical wheel?
No, only on flight simulators (stabilizer runaway exercise).
Thanks for your comment!
@@PilotBlogDenys I am not a pilot. When the two accidents happened, I followed the on going investigation. There was a lot of rhetoric about the stabilizer cut-out switches (stabilizer runaway exercise) and there function. On further research, it looks like Boeing changed the function of these switches from previous versions. The Max version and NG version were different. Was there instructions about this for the pilots. The final report is not out yet, however, it looks like in both accidents, there was a runaway stabilizer condition caused by an erroneous signal from the AOA sensor. With the NG version cut-out switches, a pilot could switch the autopilot off with one switch (thus disabling auto stabilizer) and leave the "main elect" switch in it's normal position to still have electric trim on the yoke. The Max eliminated this function with its cut-out switches. What am I missing here? If this is correct, then that seems like an extremely important change. What is the pilot suppose to do. It seems like your timeline to manually trim a pitch down 737 at advanced throttles would be very short.
@@scruffy4647 I am not a pilot from Boeing, but I think the trim wheel remained he same on NG and MAX. Boeing did reprogram the trimming force. The auto pilot switch should be the same also.
I have to disagreed that the 737 MAX was a bad design. Although Boeing should have installed 2 angle attach sensors and did more test on the stabilizer trim force.
Watch it on 1.25 speed
Thanks for the tip!
The tarnished MAX!!!!!!!
If we’re going to really receive all the silver lining benefit from this tragedy, we should focus as much on its revelation of third world pilot limited experience and competency, as these crews’ failures to follow long standing runaway trim procedures turned a Boeing/FAA hazardous situation into a deadly one.
There's no respect for engineering in the USA
@@davidthompson4540 Years ago, a civil engineer friend of mine told the story of when he was in engineering college in Tennessee, he arrived at class one day to see a pop quiz on each desk. The test consisted of making a number of calculations to come up with a single numeric correct answer, with the result of the first calculation to be used in the second - the second in the third, and so on. Seeing that if only one mistake was made anywhere in the process he would score a zero on the test, my friend raised his hand and asked the Chinese professor: "If we show our work in the margins, will we get partial credit?" To which the wise old professor replied in his heavy accent: "Partial credit? You want partial credit? You design bridge, bridge fall down, you get partial credit? No no, you get whole blame. No partial credit!" Wise indeed.
Months ago I talked to a Southwest Airlines pilot, and he basically said the same thing you did. He said everyone shares the blame, but better trained pilots would have known to flip the 2 switches reduce the throttle and manually trim out the aircraft. Great video!
It's amazing over the years how great American trained pilots have tried to take off without flaps and crashed
Your videos are so awesome!!! You explain so detailed.
Glad you like them!
For the amount of scrutiny this plane has been through, it will probably be the safest aircraft around.
You won't find me flying on one, they LIED once, they might well be lying again
I trust it, because we both saw what happened last time: lives ended, money lost, public opinion of Boeing and their plane permanently damaged- the only reason I have any trust in the MAX myself is that Boeing doesn't want the bad publicity again. The reason they lied in the first place was to get money, but clearly that backfired, so this time, they likely learned from their mistake. Cutting corners that could cost lives does not earn you money.
@@redtailarts101 only ‘likely learned their lesson’?! I’ll still pass, not that we’re going to be flying anytime soon - thanks Corona grrrr
@@Tony-rw4qv I'm not gonna try and force my decision onto you. I just wanted to say why I personally trust the MAX, and I completely respect that you don't feel comfortable on that plane and you don't have to fly it ever again if you don't want to :)
ECOLOGY HAS ITS GIMMICK __ GREENWASHING
BOEING HAS TOO __CHEESING AND SLOPPY PILOTS
@@edekmiodek3712 wtf does this mean?
Fantastic video! I’m flying on one of these in a couple months!
Great explanation! Thank you )
👍✈️
I always buy reconditioned electronic devices because I know a human has actually run it through its paces. I've never had a problem with a reconditioned device and they are less expensive for some reason. Sounds the MAX might be the safest new plane ever since they have gone over everything with a fine toothed comb because if it fails again Boeing is done.
That makes sense
Refurbs are great, man. Costs less, have long warranties, and cheaper because people are stuck on buying "new."
If the 737 max doesn't have any issues i would feel pretty safe the 737 is my favorite plane
Theb737 has a long history of killing people due to lousy engineering.
Very Very good explained CAPTAIN i want aske you this defect mainly du to a mismatch of the engine size to the fuselage as a whole.????
Liked the video, subscribed and activated the bell, Greetings from Mexico, Cool channel. also Captain Denys, in which airline do you fly?
Welcome! You are now officially the awesome guy! Greetings to wonderful Mexico! I work (fly) for UIA.
I'm sticking to aircraft with more stable flight envelopes
How do YOU know which ones are more "stable"
@@sekabkilo22rangedog8 They're the ones that weren't designed to be aerodynamically unstable and need computer flight software to fix. And the original MCAS system was flawed and only compounded the problem. I put much more faith in aeronautical engineers than I do computer software programmers. At Boeing, the accountants and marketing geniuses won out over the engineers.
@@DrJohn493 The 737 Max is in fact an aerodynamically stable aircraft. Just the MCAS was not so „stable“. I agree with your last sentence.
@@drummingjack7055 MCAS had to be designed/installed to counter the pitch instability caused by moving the engines forward which was contrary to the recommendations of the aero engineers. And on top of this, the designated authority process put the Boeing foxes in charge of the FAA hen houses. A prescription for deadly failure. This has to be fixed by Congress too!
@@DrJohn493 Well, every aircraft with underwing installed engines has this pitch instability. In the case of the 737 Max, it‘s just a bit more pronounced than in the 737 NG. As explained in the video. But that aside, I‘m completely with you.
Answer: NO! It was not the pilots fault since no one told them about the MCAS and certainly no one trained them to handle the situation.
The MAX has oversized engines and this modification to the ancient fuselage design results in an aircraft that is inherently unstable. Now Boeing used software to rectify this mechanical problem.
This is criminal on Behalf of Boeing.
If its Boeing then I ain't going.
Wow, the guy here explains the problem and you miss it completely and cling to the myth that the plane is unstable because of the engines. Watch the video again. Especially the first minute or three. Pay attention.
@@davemiller6055 one pilots thoughts on the matter are not the ultimate truth. Go and watch the case agaisnt boeing on Netflix.
The plane had a single point of failure on the angle of attack sensor and sabotaged the untrained pilots. The pilot was trained in the USA.
@@aibel99 well that problem is fixed. Mcas has a failsafe one single sensor can’t cause a nosedive
Very good explanation, thank you!
Just remembered the WW2 'Westland Lysander' had a cable to worm operated moveable horizontal rear stabilizer that worked okay for trimming.
The Safety of a Plane is largely dependent on the training and skill of the Pilot Flying and the Pilot Monitoring, and their interactions!!!
Yes, we are the final border...
“Chain of bad design“ that explains all I need to know of my refusal to fly on the max. Don’t let the FAA to allow Boeing to set the standards and tests and then, surprise surprise, Boeing passes the test.
They changed that situation, you can be sure...
Then I take it you won’t be flying in an airbus either, because that is standard in aviation, europe included. It is physically impossible for EASA and the FAA to have inspectors for every piece of the airplane in every company, so they have an agreement in place with manufacturers: re airbus and Boeing. You clearly spent no time researching this before arriving at a smug conclusion.
Very good explanation so far on the 737 saga, however its still not possible to apply manual trim on full thrust take off due to aerodynamic forces acting on the stabilizers. Could this be the reason why pilots did not activate the two switches to disable MCAS?
I think pilots know that when they activate "the two switches" they will no longer have electric trim and the ONLY way to move/retrim the hor stab is with the manual trim wheels. They also know that this is difficult or impossible depending on airspeed. Think of it as losing your power steering in your car just as you need to turn to avoid something in the road.
Excellent, the best explanation of the MCAS issue I have ever seen! Just a supplementary information to get the whole picture (tell me if I am wrong):
1. The MAX was developped to challenge the A320 Neo. The main change refers to implementing bigger engines and there's where the problem starts: for the A320 Neo this was not a big deal since there is enough room under the wings, so they did it and at the end they get better performances while avoiding extra training because there is no real impact on the airplane behaviour.
2. Due to the short distance between the wings and the ground in the 737, they could not do the same thing, that's why they had to move the new engines forward. But this is not without consequences, hence the MCAS.
3. To stay competitive it was mandatory for them to avoid extra training and therefore they somehow hid this new feature to the pilots. That's malpractice, to say the least. You explained the rest perfectly.
Now, about the future of the MAX: I am sure the problem will be fixed in such a way that these mishaps will not happen again but the reputation of the aircraft might be terribly damaged. May be there will be no impact on the sales, I don't know, but remember the DC10 and its cargo doors issue: it had been fixed but commercialy the airplane was dead. Moreover it's not the first time the 737 has design issues: remember the crashes due to rudder lock (United 585 on March 3rd, 1991 - USAir 427 on Sept 8th, 1994). The problem was solved after 6 years of investigation when a third 737 encountered the same mishap but succeeded to land safely (Eastwind 517 on June 9th, 1996).
So from now on, even if I know that it's not rational, I will personally avoid flying with an airline using 737.
That doesn't prevent me to wish you the best for 2021 after having gone through a very bad year ...
Let's stay optimistic. Best regards
Hi! Thanks for your comment! Very interesting to read it...
I talked to an international contracted aviation mechanic. He said - "Stay away."