1. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Would you fly on this plane?

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Rack Kit, Mar 13, 2019.

  1. johnhunt

    johnhunt pfm Member

    Not know I wouldn’t, but me and my two kids flew to Greece in one last summer.
  2. avole

    avole The wise never post on Internet forums

    That may be true, but the adrenalin hit as you weave your way through the traffic in the city lasts an awful lot longer.
  3. TheDecameron

    TheDecameron Unicorns fart glitter.

    Agree and yet, I’d avoid flying in one until the facts are established.
  4. CHE

    CHE pfm Member

    They're heated so in 'normal' circumstances won't ice up.

  5. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr pfm Member

    And why might two sensors ice up, but the third not?
  6. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

    My 2 year recovery took a little while, as did the 4 years and 6 months until the insurance company agreed to pay up. I still ride a bike, and go climbing, and drive cars other than Volvo estates with airbags for every passenger, the shopping in the back and a few passing dogs.
  7. sq225917

    sq225917 situation engineer

    Until it's found out what caused the crash, either through systems analysis or investigation the plane's should be pulled. Any operator not pulling tone leaves themselves open to massive legal action should another go down.
  8. Paul R

    Paul R pfm Member

    By definition not normal circumstances.

    AF447 suffered pitot tubes blocked by ice, and they are heated.

    Two in the front, one in the back.
  9. CHE

    CHE pfm Member

    Indeed but neither the Lion Air nor the Ethiopian Airlines crash is not associated with pitot tube problems.

    Not the case apparently :-

    'There are five sets of pitot tubes on the 737, organized into two groups, the pitot tubes on the nose are used for airspeed measurements, independent for the pilot and copilot and one as a backup. There are two pitot tubes on the tail that are for the "elevator feel and centering unit" '

  10. sean99

    sean99 pfm Member

    AF447 was found to be iced pitot tubes (air speed indicators). I believe investigation / speculation on the 737 is focused on the angle of attack AoA sensor. Allegedly a single AoA provides input to new software (MCAS) that deals with stability issues inherent in the new variant (due to larger engines placed further forward). Failure of that AoA could cause a nose down condition that could be hard for pilots to counteract. Boeing was apparently planning a mandatory update to the system anyway.

    It all smells a bit fishy - I think grounding until the latest crash is investigated is a reasonable precaution.
  11. avole

    avole The wise never post on Internet forums

  12. Kraus

    Kraus Member

    Are you speaking of average airflight or the Boeing 737 Max 8 about which the question is asked?
  13. simon g

    simon g Grumpy Old Man

    No, I wouldn't. But then it's my avowed intent never to fly anywhere again. I spent a large part of my working lfe travelling the world on business. I really have no desire at all to travel far ever again. Car and train are fine for me.
  14. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

  15. cutting42

    cutting42 Heading to Fish Hacker Erg \o/

    It might be still safer statistically than driving or cycling but increased caution is definitely warranted I believe

    Ref quote from Forbes article:

    1. The MAX is a brand new aircraft type with limited operating history. Unlike previous-generation 737s, investigators cannot point to decades of safe flight by the model. To the contrary, 0.5% of the MAXs delivered to customers have now crashed in the first two years of service – giving it by far the worst safety record of any modern (or not-so-modern) jet
    linnfomaniac83 likes this.
  16. stevec67

    stevec67 pfm Member

    Absolutely and quite right too. However the question was "would you fly?" and the point I am making is that the worst commercial aircraft is still safer than a car in terms of time spent in it per fatality. If you are prepared to do 10000 miles pa in a car, which is about 300 hours, then your exposure to death and injury by this route vastly exceeds that in an aircraft. On that basis my reasoned answer is yes.

    This is not to say that the situation should not be investigated but to say that I won't get too concerned about my car's NCAP rating if I spend most weekends motorcycling, rock climbing or parachuting.
  17. sq225917

    sq225917 situation engineer

    If you look at person miles flown they're safe, if you look at safe take offs vs death they really arent.
    cutting42 and linnfomaniac83 like this.
  18. Sue Pertwee-Tyr

    Sue Pertwee-Tyr pfm Member

    Angle of attack sensors are different to pitot tubes though. And even so, being located in different positions doesn't explain why, being heated, two would ice up and a third not.
  19. linnfomaniac83

    linnfomaniac83 I bet you can’t wheelie a unicycle!

    Planes don’t just nosedive in the event of an engine failure, it might still land in the sea or fly into terrain if it doesn’t have sufficient height to glide to a runway, so I very much doubt it has anything to do with the engines. I very much agree that a sensor/control surface failure is more likely.
  20. Bob McC

    Bob McC Living the life of Riley

    Boeing refuse to ground them

    So Trump does it!

    Well done Pres.

    All 737 max grounded world wide.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice