New software update for 737 MAX

[LukeSavenije]

Source: Tweakers (Dutch)

 

According to Boeing, the software update for the anti-slip system of the 737 Max is ready. The aircraft manufacturer has conducted tests and is now awaiting final approval from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Quote

Boeing has told that it has conducted 207 test flights with the new software, with a total duration of 360 hours. At the moment, the aircraft manufacturer provides the FAA with additional information on how pilots handle the systems in different scenarios. If these requests are met, a definitive test flight will follow, after which the aviation authority can again certify the aircraft.

The update ensures that the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) compares data from two angle sensors instead of data from one sensor. If there is more than 5.5 degrees difference between the two sensors, the anti-slip system will not operate. The software update must also make it possible for pilots to manually cancel the anti-slip system.

Initially, the manufacturer said that the software update for the MCAS would be released in April, but that was postponed to ensure that all errors were detected. According to Boeing, the 737 Max with the new software is 'one of the safest aircraft ever'.

Errors in the MCAS probably led to the crashes of a Boeing 737 Max in October last year and in March this year. The system to prevent an overrun situation was activated while this was not necessary, so that the aircraft were sent down. A total of 346 people died in the crashes. Around 400 Boeing 737 Max aircraft are in use worldwide. They have all been grounded since March.

 

It's good to hear that Boeing does their job well... at least we hope. Thoughts?

[Jurrunio]

Someone go remind them how the DC-10 took down an entire company, even though its problems are fixed at the end and spend a long time as carriers.

[sof006]

Moral of the story. Don't cut corners when it comes to safety.

[ARikozuM]

Funny how a little regulation put 360 hours and 200 flights in just a month or two. 

 

Also, thank God, there’s an easy way to disable the MCAS now.

[vanished]

It's absolutely baffling to me how this was a problem in the first place.  It doesn't seem like this was a highly complex or nuanced issue with a difficult solution.  From what I can tell, some common sense in the design, and/or some actual testing, would have avoided the crashes.  How about a redundant sensor, and/or being able to detect when there's an issue?  More importantly though, and really this is all you would need I think, how about just having the system auto disable itself when "extreme" inputs are made (pulling up or down by more than 80%, lets say).  Am I crazy or is it just common sense to not have a software system put in place that would override and lessen the magnitude of a significant control input?  I've had a very good opinion of Boeing for a long time but this has really shattered that.  Given the circumstances around this whole thing I have no confidence that this issue is fixed, or that there aren't others waiting in the wings (no pun intended).

[Monkey Dust]

The real kicker is going to be passengers not trusting the 737 Max.

[D13H4RD]

You know what is funny to me?

9 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

 how about just having the system auto disable itself when "extreme" inputs are made (pulling up or down by more than 80%, lets say).

This was exactly the Boeing-ethos. Giving pilots absolute control when necessary. The flight-envelope protection system on the 777 would actually cancel itself out if the crew applied enough pressure on the yoke. 

 

From what I know of, MCAS is *supposed* to limit the side-effects of the placement of the larger engines and it *should* make it feel like a 737NG, and *was not* supposed to act as an anti-stall system. Guess Boeing slipped on the banana peel.....thrice.

[vanished]

Just now, D13H4RD said:

From what I know of, MCAS is *supposed* to limit the side-effects of the placement of the larger engines and it *should* make it feel like a 737NG. Guess Boeing slipped on the banana peel.....thrice.

Yes, that's my understanding as well.  It was basically "smart trim" - a filter to the inputs, sort of like how a B2 is supposedly impossible to fly by hand but by using the pilots' input as guidance and letting the computer work out the specifics rather than letting them have direct control, it becomes possible.  The trick with a system like that is a) it must not fail, and b) it should not prevent a corrective action that would otherwise have been possible and necessary.  For example, if the idle adjustment the system is making is to push the nose down a bit, and the pilot is pulling up as hard as possible, the system should get out of the way and allow the tail to go to the maximum lifting position, and cease applying a slight downward offset.  Idk, to me this seems obvious, but my understanding is that it did not work like this and that's what crashed the planes.  In theory, the pilots could have disabled the system manually by pulling a certain breaker or something but it's not reasonable to require that.  Auto-pilot automatically turns itself off at the first sign of trouble, this should have done the same rather than fighting them.

[Vode]

13 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

It's absolutely baffling to me how this was a problem in the first place.  It doesn't seem like this was a highly complex or nuanced issue with a difficult solution.  From what I can tell, some common sense in the design, and/or some actual testing, would have avoided the crashes.  How about a redundant sensor, and/or being able to detect when there's an issue?  More importantly though, and really this is all you would need I think, how about just having the system auto disable itself when "extreme" inputs are made (pulling up or down by more than 80%, lets say).  Am I crazy or is it just common sense to not have a software system put in place that would override and lessen the magnitude of a significant control input?  I've had a very good opinion of Boeing for a long time but this has really shattered that.  Given the circumstances around this whole thing I have no confidence that this issue is fixed, or that there aren't others waiting in the wings (no pun intended).

This was a completely concious and deliberate move by Boeing.

 

One factor is: Added flight control systems with more than one sensor require flight crew to be retrained in a simulator, which induces cost for airlines. They sold the 737 MAX upgrade as an airliner that specifically doesn't require flight crew to be retrained in a simulator. The pilots weren't briefed on the existance of the MCAS, it would have required simulator training if they were.

 

This is not incompetence by Boening. It was deliberate decision to cut cost and get to market faster.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Vode said:

This was a completely concious and deliberate move by Boeing.

 

One factor is: Added flight control systems with more than one sensor require flight crew to be retrained in a simulator, which induces cost for airlines. They sold the 737 MAX upgrade as an airliner that specifically doesn't require flight crew to be retrained in a simulator. The pilots weren't briefed on the existance of the MCAS, it would have required simulator training if they were.

 

This is not incompetence by Boening. It was deliberate decision to cut cost and get to market faster.

Yeah actually, that really seems like the situation.  Very much reminds me of when the tables were turned and the DC-9 and/or 10 were rushed out despite known issues to compete with Boeing.

[D13H4RD]

The thing is that the MCAS can be disabled by disabling automatic trim and trimming manually with the trim wheel. 

 

The Ethiopian 302 crew actually did so but potentially due to the aerodynamic forces or other unknown factors, it was really difficult to do so. 

[Vode]

6 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Yeah actually, that really seems like the situation.  Very much reminds me of when the tables were turned and the DC-9 and/or 10 were rushed out despite known issues to compete with Boeing.

Seems like the philosophy of McDonnell Douglas has spread to Boeing after the merger.

 

I hope the free market will punish Boeing heavily for this just like it has done so for Mc Donnell Douglas in the past.

[D13H4RD]

28 minutes ago, Vode said:

I hope the free market will punish Boeing heavily for this just like it has done so for Mc Donnell Douglas in the past.

It was a bit of a double whammy for McDonnell Douglas, to be honest. 

 

I'd say that the real killer of the DC-10 is the widebody twinjet like the Airbus A300 alongside the introduction of ETOPS. The early issues did deal a significant blow to the aircraft but what ultimately killed it was the changing dynamics of the aviation industry. 

 

ETOPS, the A300 and the introduction of the Boeing 767 ultimately meant that the DC-10's days as a passenger airliner were numbered simply because it was just too inefficient. 

 

Boeing's real issue isn't the 737 MAX itself. It's trying to convince airlines that the airframe is now airworthy (and airlines convincing passengers the same) and bracing themselves against the non-Airbus competition. 

[Trixanity]

Too big to fail. This'll likely just be business as usual when this all blows over and is forgotten.

[GoldenLag]

Does the update include Airplay?

[yian88]

Now it will fly upside down .........

[Soppro]

Wooooot lets get those aircraft finally doing something productive again instead of sitting on the ground!!

[Castdeath97]

5 hours ago, Trixanity said:

Too big to fail. This'll likely just be business as usual when this all blows over and is forgotten.

If another MAX crashes (even if it wasn't Boeing fault) it could screw the company very badly. The same happened with the DC-10 ... 

 

The A320 NEO really shocked Boeing.

[CarlBar]

16 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

The thing is that the MCAS can be disabled by disabling automatic trim and trimming manually with the trim wheel. 

 

The Ethiopian 302 crew actually did so but potentially due to the aerodynamic forces or other unknown factors, it was really difficult to do so. 

 

Also the stuff on the MACS was in the flight manuals for the first airline to suffer a crash so boeing clearly did tell the airlines. The issue seems to be that the airlines didn't see the problem either. Boeing may have dropped the ball here, but the airlines compounded the issue by deciding to copy boeing's low key stance, and that was a conscious decision on their part.

[PlayStation 2]

Boeing never learned from the fuck-ups that collapsed McDonnell Douglas, did they?

Next they’re gonna build an unremarkable upgraded 737 to replace the Max variants, just like the MD-90 and the MD-11.

 

just give us another 717 pls boeing

[Nowak]

15 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Boeing never learned from the fuck-ups that collapsed McDonnell Douglas, did they?

I guess they inherited more than just a few aircraft when they merged with McDD in 1997.

[PlayStation 2]

7 minutes ago, Nowak said:

I guess they inherited more than just a few aircraft when they merged with McDD in 1997.

Coming from someone who loves the DC-10, the MD-11 and the 717, many of the things MCD did were really stupid. Like that Laserfilm format they made... and never left the company internally.

[D13H4RD]

1 hour ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Boeing never learned from the fuck-ups that collapsed McDonnell Douglas, did they?

Next they’re gonna build an unremarkable upgraded 737 to replace the Max variants, just like the MD-90 and the MD-11.

 

just give us another 717 pls boeing

They will likely just go with the NMA or 797. 

 

No point in having yet another 737, especially when the original plan was to replace the 737NG with a new airframe before the A320neo orders came from AA. 

[xtroria]

On 5/18/2019 at 12:30 PM, D13H4RD said:

They will likely just go with the NMA or 797. 

 

No point in having yet another 737, especially when the original plan was to replace the 737NG with a new airframe before the A320neo orders came from AA. 

Well before that, we'll have the 777X coming out first. That folding wing tips might just spell another trouble to boeing all together.

[D13H4RD]

6 minutes ago, xtroria said:

Well before that, we'll have the 777X coming out first. That folding wing tips might just spell another trouble to boeing all together.

They'll likely have to do more testing on them. 

 

It's a neat idea and it looks cool but it's also potentially another failure point