모두
← Back to Squawk list
CNBC News Segment Video (NYT Mag reporter on Boeing Max: Accidents caused by crews in both cases): September 20, 2019
William Langewiesche, The New York Times Magazine reporter, joins CNBC's "Closing Bell" to discuss his story in the magazine, "What really brought down the Boeing 737 Max?" (www.cnbc.com) 기타...
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
So, listen to some random "journalist," or wait for the NTSB final recommendations? I'll wait for the NTSB. Plus, CNBC is pro-corporate and pro-profit, so naturally, they're going to push this viewpoint.
You may be waiting for some time since both Max accidents occurred on foreign soil (water) with foreign carriers. No full NTSB report in those circumstances unless invited by the ICAO member aviation authority to conduct the investigation, and unless invited in on the investigation by the governing body ICAO member, no participation is granted. NTSB is well regarded worldwide and the politics of today are are eroding the safety gains in the world air travel industry, not to mention ab initio pilots.
I do not agree with this authors opinion that the flight-crews are the primary cause of the two 737-MAX crashes. The trim runaway from the faulty MCAS software trims the aircraft in such a severe way that even once the auto trim is cut out that for a pilot to correct is very hard especially on initial climb-out . He omitted the fact that it's not just a couple of turns of the trim wheel to fix this, and that turning the trim wheel even with modern equipment manually with the forces at play in a severe nose down attitude is not easy to correct.
Boeing failed to produce a safe aircraft with good software. Aircraft software is zero fail not something you do a patch on after crashes. You have to get it right the first time. Boeing connecting MCAS to only one AOA sensor without redundancy and selling the aircraft that way is not acceptable.
The author also didn't bother to mention the weight and balance issues created by the bigger heavier engines and how that factor interacts with the overall performance of the aircraft.
The one thing I do agree with the author on is flight training and the quality of new airline pilots in other parts of the world is certainly not as good as it should be. New pilots I also feel can be too dependent on technology versus hand flying and feeling what the aircraft is doing by the seat of your pants. This problem is not unique to aviation.
However, I must add in the case of the 737 MAX Boeing also did not give pilots flight manuals that were complete. I think US airline pilots are some of the best in the world, but even they can have problems if they don't have the simulator training and the correct manuals to overcome a problem with their aircraft.
I am a big Boeing fan and this is not be written by an Airbus person.
Boeing failed to produce a safe aircraft with good software. Aircraft software is zero fail not something you do a patch on after crashes. You have to get it right the first time. Boeing connecting MCAS to only one AOA sensor without redundancy and selling the aircraft that way is not acceptable.
The author also didn't bother to mention the weight and balance issues created by the bigger heavier engines and how that factor interacts with the overall performance of the aircraft.
The one thing I do agree with the author on is flight training and the quality of new airline pilots in other parts of the world is certainly not as good as it should be. New pilots I also feel can be too dependent on technology versus hand flying and feeling what the aircraft is doing by the seat of your pants. This problem is not unique to aviation.
However, I must add in the case of the 737 MAX Boeing also did not give pilots flight manuals that were complete. I think US airline pilots are some of the best in the world, but even they can have problems if they don't have the simulator training and the correct manuals to overcome a problem with their aircraft.
I am a big Boeing fan and this is not be written by an Airbus person.
And what are your qualifications for such judgements? For someone whose only apparent background is being 'a big Boeing fan', you make some awfully grand statements regarding "zero fail" software that must be absolutely correct from Day 1 (which would be news to Airbus since they've written many software patches for their fly-by-wire aircraft, including one that they are currently writing for their A350 aircraft), knowledge about how Boeing sold its aircraft, and how manuals should be written. Do you have experience in writing and debugging computer code? Have you sold commercial aircraft in the past, especially for Boeing? Have you written technical documents? Do you even have a Private Pilot's License, or any pilot training at all? This author clearly did his homework, consulted with many experts, and wrote a very objective description of the problems encountered in the 2 crashes.
My own opinion is that 737 MAXs would have been falling from the sky from the day it was introduced if the aircraft is really so dangerous. Instead it took two inexperienced and VERY poorly-trained crews backed up by exceptionally terrible maintenance and ground support to crash it. Boeing hasn't covered itself in glory, but neither are they the murderers that some have claimed they are.
My own opinion is that 737 MAXs would have been falling from the sky from the day it was introduced if the aircraft is really so dangerous. Instead it took two inexperienced and VERY poorly-trained crews backed up by exceptionally terrible maintenance and ground support to crash it. Boeing hasn't covered itself in glory, but neither are they the murderers that some have claimed they are.
I’m confused. I never heard the author mention ANYTHING about a trim wheel. What I did hear was him referring to trim cutout switches which overrides runaway electric trim.
Never mind.........I now see what you mean by the omission
where are the pilots unions, where are thete tesy flights,?