Boeing - Again (Page 3): :sm16: :sm16: :sm16: :sm19:...

AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

jerryc41 wrote:

You might think that I'm anti-Boeing, but I'm not. Boeing has been getting lots of negative press for years, and for good reason. One of the YouTube channels I watch regularly is Maximus Aviation. Last night, I watched one of his videos that gave a very good summary of Boeing from its heyday as "King of the World" to a company that can't be trusted. Below is a link to a very good summary of Boeing from then to now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOBxT2q4_-Y

Dikdik Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

"Boeing has been getting lots of negative press for years"

and for reason... they have caused hundreds of deaths with impunity.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Dikdik wrote:

"Boeing has been getting lots of negative press for years"

and for reason... they have caused hundreds of deaths with impunity.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

Dean37 wrote:

We have another quality assurance,/control issue w... (show quote)

There was another problem on the MAX 8 as well, it only had one pitot tube feeding data to their MCAS, so no redundancy for that area. I'm not 100% sure but something in the back of my minds is telling me that they found that there was a blockage in the pitot tube on one of the crashes. Other problems were that flight crew could opt for self-training or revision of their new procedures for MCAS by just watching a video on an iPad, rather than coming in for one-on-one additional training on a flight simulator.

We flew to Munich in 2018 via Iceland on a 3.5-month-old Max 8 which was before the two later crashes. The new engines made it about 30% quieter plus the Max 8 had larger windows. All that was nice, I must say, however, in hindsight, I consider our family very lucky and I would not fly on an 8 or 9 again. It's always a bit of a concern when we fly home to Wales and an aircraft only has 2 engines like a 777. It's just nice having a third one there, just in case.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

Lucian wrote:

There was another problem on the MAX 8 as well, it... (show quote)

Because GPS positioning is far more accurate than pitot tube derived information, aircraft manufacturers regarded it as backup technology. That is why they decided that only one was required.

What confounds me is that any aircraft control system uses the pitot tube information to interact with automated controls. The other concern is if there is a way to jam the GPS system, a lot of airplane flights could be in danger.

BebuLamar

dbrugger25 wrote:

Because GPS positioning is far more accurate than pitot tube derived information, aircraft manufacturers regarded it as backup technology. That is why they decided that only one was required.

What confounds me is that any aircraft control system uses the pitot tube information to interact with automated controls. The other concern is if there is a way to jam the GPS system, a lot of airplane flights could be in danger.

Pitot tube to measure air speed and the problem with the 737Max and MCAS has nothing to do with it. It has to do with the angle of attack sensor. You can't measure airspeed with GPS.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

Yes, you absolutely can measure airspeed with GPS. I was a licensed private pilot until I got too old. I used GPS for coordinates, altitude, speed and direction. I also had a Pitot tube and autopilot. The autopilot relied on GPS and the display would calculate my time of arrival based on destination input, air speed and direction of travel and current location. For that matter, the GPS in my cars and my smart phones can do all that as well.

BebuLamar

dbrugger25 wrote:

Yes, you absolutely can measure airspeed with GPS. I was a licensed private pilot until I got too old. I used GPS for coordinates, altitude, speed and direction. I also had a Pitot tube and autopilot. The autopilot relied on GPS and the display would calculate my time of arrival based on destination input, air speed and direction of travel and current location. For that matter, the GPS in my cars and my smart phones can do all that as well.

Sure can measure speed with GPS but not airspeed.

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

dbrugger25 wrote:

Yes, you absolutely can measure airspeed with GPS. I was a licensed private pilot until I got too old. I used GPS for coordinates, altitude, speed and direction. I also had a Pitot tube and autopilot. The autopilot relied on GPS and the display would calculate my time of arrival based on destination input, air speed and direction of travel and current location. For that matter, the GPS in my cars and my smart phones can do all that as well.

Well maybe it's a good thing you are no longer a pilot then, if you think GPS can give you airspeed! I was a flight instructor for years and I never saw a GPS that could give me airspeed. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I can guarantee you that your car's GPS and your phone can absolutely NOT give you airspeed. And why would anyone in a car, need airspeed anyway, even if there was a car GPS that could give you airspeed?

Lucian Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio

dbrugger25 wrote:

Because GPS positioning is far more accurate than pitot tube derived information, aircraft manufacturers regarded it as backup technology. That is why they decided that only one was required.

What confounds me is that any aircraft control system uses the pitot tube information to interact with automated controls. The other concern is if there is a way to jam the GPS system, a lot of airplane flights could be in danger.

Hmmm, I kinda doubt that plus it was an angle of attack sensor, I believe, that was a contributing factor in at least one of the MAX 8 crashes. No good pilot ever relies on electronic instruments alone, to fly. That would be stupid, because electrical systems fail, GPS signals get shut down by governments, sometimes plus I'm sure there are ways to jam it. In fact, you are required by law to carry charts when you fly cross country, despite the fact that you might have an extremely accurate GPS on board.

dbrugger25 Loc: Raleigh, NC

I was referring to MPH in my car.

BebuLamar

The car wheel connected to the speedometer measures ground speed that is the speed of the car in related to the ground. GPS measures the speed of the car in relation to the position of the sattelite. Airspeed is the speed of the plane in relation to the air and without knowing the speed, direction and air density of the wind you can't know the airspeed of course unless you use the pitot tube. And of course airspeed is not important for a car.

Dikdik Loc: Winnipeg, Canada

I could calculate ground speed from air speed and wind speed back in grade school. I loved math as a kid. I came across my dad's RCAF notebooks (during WW2, he was a navigator for part of it) and he explained these to me. I could even use Pythagorean theorem and calculate (manually) the square root. Calculators were not common 65 years back. Later I learned to use the Cosine law... The vector summation of the air speed and the wind velocity (as a vector) gives the ground speed(as a vector). GPS can determine ground speed.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

dbrugger25 wrote:

Because GPS positioning is far more accurate than pitot tube derived information, aircraft manufacturers regarded it as backup technology. That is why they decided that only one was required.

What confounds me is that any aircraft control system uses the pitot tube information to interact with automated controls. The other concern is if there is a way to jam the GPS system, a lot of airplane flights could be in danger.

Pitot tube problems have crashed more than one plane.

Jamming and spoofing GPS is a growing problem - scary!

BebuLamar

jerryc41 wrote:

Pitot tube problems have crashed more than one plane.

Jamming and spoofing GPS is a growing problem - scary!

Started out with the pitot tube frozen it brought the Air France 447 (an Airbus 330) down into the ocean. But the probem with the 737Max has nothing to do with the pitot tube. And yes GPS can not replace the pitot tube.