ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 1 minute ago, Carlos Danger said: So from what I gather the new engines which are larger in diameter than the previous CFM56 which barely fit under the wing where the JT8 once was. To over come the height problem for the CFM56 they moved the engine higher on the wing and added a flat to the bottom of the engine inlet. The Max had to move the engine forward and up as well as make new landing gear that still fit in the same well but but extended when deployed to give clearance for the new engine. The engine moving forward on the wing changes the line of thrust in a bad way and has been compensated for through mostly trim. Latest reports from the FAA indicate that evidence on the ground and satellite intel made them pull the plug. They’ve been fucking around with software patches since the last crash. I think it’s a software glitch. The plane basically develops a mind of its own. How horrifying for a pilot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Rosenberg Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 1 minute ago, ActionfigureJoe said: Latest reports from the FAA indicate that evidence on the ground and satellite intel made them pull the plug. They’ve been fucking around with software patches since the last crash. I think it’s a software glitch. The plane basically develops a mind of its own. How horrifying for a pilot. Airbus experienced something similar early on with the 320 and it all got swept under the rug and blamed on pilots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, Sal Rosenberg said: Airbus experienced something similar early on with the 320 and it all got swept under the rug and blamed on pilots Given the sophistication of flight systems, it’s getting more difficult to pin it on pilot error. But they will try. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, ActionfigureJoe said: Latest reports from the FAA indicate that evidence on the ground and satellite intel made them pull the plug. They’ve been fucking around with software patches since the last crash. I think it’s a software glitch. The plane basically develops a mind of its own. How horrifying for a pilot. Well that is what happened to early Airbuses.....fly by wire has it's pros and cons. Right so like I said they corrected some of the new planes CG issues with trim which is controlled by the computer. I feel they will be able to fix the software but the underlying problem will remain just a matter if they get cleared. Boeing wanted to completely replace the 737 with a new plane but the carriers pushed back for an upgrade instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 6 minutes ago, Sal Rosenberg said: Airbus experienced something similar early on with the 320 and it all got swept under the rug and blamed on pilots Yea the Airbus crash was the best example of pilot vs computer. So the pilot came in for a slow pass and with his years of experience had planned to do a standard maneuver where you just pop up a little and level off to wait for the plane to gather speed so you could climb out but the computer saw this as a impending stall and of course the computer didn't know about the trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 1 minute ago, Carlos Danger said: Well that is what happened to early Airbuses.....fly by wire has it's pros and cons. Right so like I said they corrected some of the new planes CG issues with trim which is controlled by the computer. I feel they will be able to fix the software but the underlying problem will remain just a matter if they get cleared. Boeing wanted to completely replace the 737 with a new plane but the carriers pushed back for an upgrade instead. If the B2 and f117 can fly via fly by wire and software, so could a red brick. I’d think that they could compensate for what you describe. I thought they pinned the October’s crash on some frosty air speed indicators? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, ActionfigureJoe said: If the B2 and f117 can fly via fly by wire and software, so could a red brick. I’d think that they could compensate for what you describe. I thought they pinned the October’s crash on some frosty air speed indicators? The B2 is a really good flying plane in fact it is rather tough to land as it has so much lift and stability that you have to almost fly it into the runway. The F117 on the other hand is a perfect example of what fly by wire can do. The F117 is a crappy flying plane and there were crashes related to it's instabilities that went outside of the computers ability to correct. Some of the systems use speed sensors to indicate yaw so it could have been a factor but probably just one piece in a string of failures like always in plane crashes. Most modern fighters are designed to be unstable and completely depend on Fly by wire to keep them in the air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sal Rosenberg Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 5 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said: If the B2 and f117 can fly via fly by wire and software, so could a red brick. I’d think that they could compensate for what you describe. I thought they pinned the October’s crash on some frosty air speed indicators? It all goes back to my original opinion with Vince , these guy's are babysitters . When it starts going to shit at low altitude , you need to be able to react and mostly only get one shot to get it right . Seat of the pants stick and rudder guy's like Sully , Denny Fitch , ect ect are rare these day's 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 1 minute ago, Sal Rosenberg said: It all goes back to my original opinion with Vince , these guy's are babysitters . When it starts going to shit at low altitude , you need to be able to react and mostly only get one shot to get it right . Seat of the pants stick and rudder guy's like Sully , Denny Fitch , ect ect are rare these day's The airlines get mad at the pilots when they take the plane out of autopilot as the computer is calculating the most fuel efficient way to fly it's route in a way a pilot would be unable to. But yea when shit goes sideways i want a Sully in the cockpit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Sal Rosenberg said: It all goes back to my original opinion with Vince , these guy's are babysitters . When it starts going to shit at low altitude , you need to be able to react and mostly only get one shot to get it right . Seat of the pants stick and rudder guy's like Sully , Denny Fitch , ect ect are rare these day's I don’t know if I agree with that about pilots. They’ve all had a lot simulator and real world training. Planes have been crashing for decades while being flown by some very good pilots. A lot of pilots are ex USAF with oodles of flight experience. A lot of times when something goes to shit it’s about luck and skill. Edited March 13, 2019 by ActionfigureJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 2 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said: I don’t know if I agree with that about pilots. They’ve all had a lot simulator and real world training. Planes have been crashing for decades while being flown by some very good pilots. A lot of pilots are ex USAF with oodles of flight experience. A lot of times when something goes to shit it’s about luck and skill. When usaf flights go to shit....they hit the eject button. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 This one here is why you want pilots in the cockpits. So the tail engine had a disk failure that wiped out most of the control surfaces on the tail and elevator leaving the pilot co pilot only engine differential thrust for yaw movements and limited pitch control. As luck would have it an instructor pilot for the airline was in the jump seat getting a ride and between him the pilot, co pilot and engineer they were able crash land it and save 150 people onboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: The B2 is a really good flying plane in fact it is rather tough to land as it has so much lift and stability that you have to almost fly it into the runway. The F117 on the other hand is a perfect example of what fly by wire can do. The F117 is a crappy flying plane and there were crashes related to it's instabilities that went outside of the computers ability to correct. Some of the systems use speed sensors to indicate yaw so it could have been a factor but probably just one piece in a string of failures like always in plane crashes. Most modern fighters are designed to be unstable and completely depend on Fly by wire to keep them in the air. The presenter at the B2 area during EAA said that the B2/flying wing design has a very bad issue with instability during certain conditions. So much that the plane couldn’t exist without fly by wire and digital compensation. They tried the design several decades before, but it fell out of the sky during some maneuvering and certain conditions. It was tried back then and abandoned. It’s benefit was amazing lift. Edited March 13, 2019 by ActionfigureJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 3 minutes ago, DAVE said: When usaf flights go to shit....they hit the eject button. Right. Because every military jet has an ejection seat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 It’s amazing the people that fall in line with what trump says Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 1 minute ago, ActionfigureJoe said: Right. Because every military jet has an ejection seat. You know what i meant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, Snoslinger said: It’s amazing the people that fall in line with what trump says Holy fuck...youre one to talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just now, ActionfigureJoe said: The presenter at the B2 area during EAA said that the B2/flying wing design has a very bad issue with instability during certain conditions. So much that the plane couldn’t exist without fly by wire and digital compensation. They tried the design several decades before, but it fell out of the sky during some maneuvering and certain conditions. It was tried bad then and abandoned. It’s benefit was amazing lift. Well the YB47 was actually a pretty good plane and many feel that it was unfairly treated due to politics and the makers of the B36 which in my mind was a hunk of junk. Tailless planes have a yaw problem as they have no tail which in the 50s was a problem because they were still using an updated norden bomb sight which made it tougher to hit a target but since it was supposed to carry Nukes how close do you have to be. Jack Northrop was always pushing for flying wings I just think he was ahead of the curve to far for the public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayward Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 10 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: It’s amazing the people that fall in line with what trump says Well, Im not saying i'll fall in line with what he says, but I will say one thing, technology, in farming, can be a real frustrating son of bitch at times, and really fucking costly when you can't fix it yourself and have to pay someone else to. It's great when it works, but when it don't, oh man.... same with vehicles 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 2 minutes ago, hayward said: Well, Im not saying i'll fall in line with what he says, but I will say one thing, technology, in farming, can be a real frustrating son of bitch at times, and really fucking costly when you can't fix it yourself and have to pay someone else to. It's great when it works, but when it don't, oh man.... same with vehicles So using that same logic....... you need to be a rocket scientist to drive a new tractor? Not repair, drive pilots are supposed to fly planes, and they do. That doesn’t mean they have to know how to fix controls, sensors, software programs, etc. that makes flying safer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 8 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: So using that same logic....... you need to be a rocket scientist to drive a new tractor? Not repair, drive pilots are supposed to fly planes, and they do. That doesn’t mean they have to know how to fix controls, sensors, software programs, etc. that makes flying safer Most planes crash because of poor maintenance or poor engineering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez ryder Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 59 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said: Given the sophistication of flight systems, it’s getting more difficult to pin it on pilot error. But they will try. and now the reason you started thread This is the president. Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are.... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 12, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fireball 440 Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 19 hours ago, irv said: I agree with Trump a 100%! Many things, like he says, aren't better despite all the new technology thrown at them. Brings to mind, why fix things that weren't broken. Yes, like every new car on the road. I already don't like my new Explorer. Considering selling it an buying another older one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snatchslayer Posted March 13, 2019 Share Posted March 13, 2019 Just wait till all the accidents happen with driver assist bull shit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 13, 2019 Author Share Posted March 13, 2019 25 minutes ago, Ez ryder said: and now the reason you started thread This is the president. Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are.... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 12, 2019 You’re an idiot. Plain and simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.