Aviation Antipatterns Thread
-
@Watson Well... If instead he'd sit on the open toilet, make a perfect seal, and then flush, maybe he could be secured by the vaccuum caused by flushing?
(Inb4 Bad Ideas )
-
@Watson I'm pretty sure I've seen that in the past. But I haven't flown anywhere that was far enough for me to need to use the plane's toilet since (thinks) probably 2006 (LHR to JFK, Virgin Business), so I might be mis-remembering.
-
@Watson said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
I didn't know airliner toilets are equipped with seatbelts.
It doesn't matter too much; he's not going to hit anyone else if he bounces around a bit. It's only a concern if they need to evacuate the plane in a hurry, but that's fortunately rare.
-
@Watson said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
I didn't know airliner toilets are equipped with seatbelts.
Maybe he could improvise one out of toilet paper?
-
@dkf said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
It's only a concern if they need to evacuate the plane in a hurry
... which, since he was stuck inside the toilets, is going to be a problem for him, but not one where any sort of seat belt would matter.
-
-
Atlas 747-8 Spectacular GEnx Engine Failure Miami 18 Jan 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFCfSMgq3to
-
@HardwareGeek Summary: You don't hate journalists enough...
-
-
Incident: Delta B752 at Atlanta on Jan 20th 2024, you chose a fine time to leave me loose wheel
Not the first time I've read something like that, complete with the lame pun.
Also this time they were not even rolling yet.
-
@Bulb said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
you chose a fine time to leave me loose wheel
-
A bit late, but:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELRkAhbh3no
On 2024-01-20, A CI919 (Airbus A330-300) was scheduled flying from TaoYuan International Airport(RCTP), Taiwan to Hong Kong International Airport (VHHH) at 4:55pm. However the actual takeoff time is 6:28pm.
Not long after it started flying to Hong Kong, the plane squawks 7700 emergency code and initiates emergency descend from 37,000 ft. down to 10,000 ft. and return to RCTP.
The plane safely landed RCTP at 6:55pm.
On that news report, China Airline just said they received report that the flight has some warning and the pilot decided to return according to the procedure.
All the passengers are rearranged to continue their journey on the following flights.
-
@cheong said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
initiates emergency descend from 37,000 ft. down to 10,000 ft.
That very strongly suggests a loss of cabin pressure.
-
-
It's spreading. It's not just the 737-9MAX. Now the FAA is calling for inspection of the same door plugs on older 737-900ERs.
-
@HardwareGeek … which could have been expected given the design is the same. It also shows the design isn't that bad, as 737-900s have been flying for a while, if the quality control somewhere didn't lapse. And they are trying to find out quality control where.
-
-
Yay, more short-haul flight in Europe is what they need! And what could be a better choice than to buy 100 Boingboing 737 MAX?
392 nonconforming findings on 737 mid fuselage door installations [in 365 days]
*The Boeing QA writes another record in CMES (again, the correct venue) stating (with pictures) that Spirit has not actually reworked the discrepant rivets, they just painted over the defects.
-
@LaoC said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
Yay, more short-haul flight in Europe is what they need! And what could be a better choice than to buy 100 Boingboing 737 MAX?
A type they already operate would be a better choice.
-
@Bulb said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@LaoC said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
Yay, more short-haul flight in Europe is what they need! And what could be a better choice than to buy 100 Boingboing 737 MAX?
A type they already operate would be a better choice.
Ah but those types are no longer available for production! Brave new future and all!
-
@Bulb said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@LaoC said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
Yay, more short-haul flight in Europe is what they need! And what could be a better choice than to buy 100 Boingboing 737 MAX?
A type they already operate would be a better choice.
Unless that type happens to be called "737 MAX".
-
@HardwareGeek said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
It's spreading. It's not just the 737-9MAX. Now the FAA is calling for inspection of the same door plugs on older 737-900ERs.
However seems that SAFO has been taken offline:
https://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/safo
EDIT: Seems the URL is a bit different, won't they update the URL in the document?
-
Boeing's Quality Management Failure Explained 737-Max-9 Door 24 Jan 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhRYqvCAX_k
I haven't watched it, yet, so I can't give you a TL;DW.
PARTIAL TL;DW: There were previously problems with the rubber seal around the door plugs. Maintenance was done to fix the seals. Accessing the seals to fix them requires either opening or removing the doors. The door on the right side was removed, the seal was repared, the door was reinstalled, and the quality (including installation of the bolts) was inspected. Apparently, the door on the left side was only opened to make the same repair, not removed. This is significant, because in Boeing's quality tracking system, removing the door triggers the quality inspection, but opening it does not, despite the fact that the process for opening the door is exactly the same as removing it, including removing the 4 bolts, or at least it doesn't trigger the paperwork documenting the inspection, so we don't know for certain whether an inspection was performed. [Narrator: It obviously wasn't.]
-
Not really an update on the door problem, itself, but a look at the culture of Boeing and Spirit, how both are completely dependent on the other, but they don't really play nice together:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b0eyrE7tXU
-
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39159592 said:
What if you are on a plane and door blows out but the only other passenger on the plane happens to be a Boeing exec by sheer coincidence?
I know what you're thinking, but no, you still can't push him out.
-
@Zecc Also this:
There is a chance that the plane crashing would improve Boeing's management.
-
More fallout from Boeing trying to make-believe the 737MAX is backward compatible with older 737s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrKgZWMk1EA
This time it's the engine anti-ice system. It has a simple on-off switch, like older 737s, but because the engine inlet cowling uses polymers instead of metal, it really needs an auto position, because forgetting to turn it off when you don't actually need it can cause severe engine damage.
-
By now it would probably have been simpler to admit that it's a new plane and jumped through all the proofing and certification hoops that would have entailed. But hey, hindsight and all...
-
@Watson For Boeing, yeah. But for the airlines to which they want to sell the MAX, it would be inconvenient. Due to the rules for how pilots are certified to fly a particular type of aircraft, it is very attractive that their pilots can fly the new aircraft without recertification. Pilot scheduling is much easier when any pilot can fly any 737 in your fleet (which, for some airlines, like Southwest, means any plane in the fleet). It's a lot more complicated when a pilot can fly only some 737s but not others. That would make the purchase of a MAX less attractive to airlines and selling them more difficult for Boeing.
-
@HardwareGeek and flying them safer for passengers. But who cares about passengers.
-
@Gustav As someone who is neither a pilot, airline executive, nor Boeing executive, but who is sometimes (rather rarely) a passenger, I agree. (I'm pretty sure that most pilots would, too, since they don't want to die in a crash, either.) I was merely stating the motivation for Boeing doing things the way they did.
-
@HardwareGeek I imagine recertifying as a new type now will take a year or more and require modifying all existing planes, removing makebelieve equipment and changing cockpit controls. And they'd still be stuck with decisions they'd have broken with if this had been a new type from the outset.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
That would make the purchase of a MAX less attractive to airlines and selling them more difficult for Boeing.
By the time you have all the recertification, there was a real chance of losing lots of custom to Airbus. Boeing's business edge with the MAX was exactly being able to offer almost the same upgraded airframe performance while not requiring recertification of flight crew.
Pity it didn't work out, engineering-wise, at least for quite a few people now dead and also Boeing's shareholders...
-
@dkf said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@HardwareGeek said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
That would make the purchase of a MAX less attractive to airlines and selling them more difficult for Boeing.
By the time you have all the recertification, there was a real chance of losing lots of custom to Airbus. Boeing's business edge with the MAX was exactly being able to offer almost the same upgraded airframe performance while not requiring recertification of flight crew.
Pity it didn't work out, engineering-wise, at least for quite a few people now dead and also Boeing's shareholders...
Enshittification in the aircraft industry: discuss.
-
@Watson said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@dkf said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@HardwareGeek said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
That would make the purchase of a MAX less attractive to airlines and selling them more difficult for Boeing.
By the time you have all the recertification, there was a real chance of losing lots of custom to Airbus. Boeing's business edge with the MAX was exactly being able to offer almost the same upgraded airframe performance while not requiring recertification of flight crew.
Pity it didn't work out, engineering-wise, at least for quite a few people now dead and also Boeing's shareholders...
Enshittification in the aircraft industry: discuss.
Seems like a real airheaded thing to do.
-
GPS spoofing. Sometimes it's merely annoying, like when you get "Terrain! Pull up! Terrain! Pull up!" warnings when you know you're 10000 feet above the highest terrain on the planet. Other times, it's an active threat, like when it (almost) leads you off course over areas where not-nice people have surface-to-air missiles pointed at you.
-
@HardwareGeek The ADIRU should be able to tell with good confidence when the GPS signal is no good. The software probably isn't currently doing it, but it should be possible to add with software update.
The EGPWS is a slightly more complicated case, because it is a stand-alone system with its own GPS—and no IRS.
… actually in the included clip of the EGPWS ground proximity warning up at FL370 it seems to be exactly what's happening—the navigation display is, at the bottom, showing a message GPS PRIMARY LOST. Which suggests to me that the ADIRUs maybe did notice and discard the GPS signal, but the EGPWS is still using its own GPS to issue the warning.
-
Emirates doesn't trust Boeing to the point they're threatening to send their own engineers to monitor the manufacture of the 95 777s and 787s they ordered.
-
NTSB preliminary report
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnFzT6aUehg
-
Poor goose!
-
For lack of another obviously suitable thread, I'll stick this here, since most of the action takes place on and around a plane, although the plane stays on the ground.
Man Attempts to Hijack Plane After Crashing Through Airport Gate
or
How to go from misdemeanor theft of cigarettes to multiple felonies and bail set at half a million (and that's before the Feds charge him with whatever aviation-related Federal laws he may have broken).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inPB7_te0Kc
-
-
GWKBL is strong.
-
@TimeBandit Scary, perhaps, but aerodynamically pretty insignificant. The pilots were likely not even aware of it until notified by the cabin crew. Little or no effect on the aircraft handling; maybe a little more vibration than usual. The leading edge slats deployed normally during landing, and there was no additional damage even when the thrust reverser was deployed.
-
@Zecc said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
GWKBL is strong.
It was flying from SFO and diverted to Denver; it never made it to Boston.
-
@HardwareGeek :flapsbarrierjoker:
-
@Zecc
E_SLATS_NOT_FLAPS
-
@HardwareGeek said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@Zecc said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
GWKBL is strong.
It was flying from SFO and diverted to Denver; it never made it to Boston.
But maybe it was a Boston-based plane/crew doing the round trip :checkmate_atheists:
-
@izzion said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@HardwareGeek said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
@Zecc said in Aviation Antipatterns Thread:
GWKBL is strong.
It was flying from SFO and diverted to Denver; it never made it to Boston.
But maybe it was a Boston-based plane/crew doing the round trip :checkmate_atheists:
Or the plane knew it was headed to Boston and just noped out of that.
-