• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Anyone else like Birds AND planes? (9 Viewers)

Mike, I suppose you could use flightradar24.com and search for today’s or yesterday’s flight with the airline concerned to get an idea of the aircraft type currently used on the route.
So, will Eddie’s boys resist the Irish steamroller on Saturday?
 
bit of a daft question but as I sit with my iPad booking a flight, how do I know what aircraft I will be loaded on to ?
(UK flights with Flybe, Skybus and Logair excepted ;) )

Often, you can go to the airline site directly and look at the flight number, it will often include aircraft type.

You can also look up the constituent of any airlines fleet to see if they actually own any of the offending type.
 
Mike, I suppose you could use flightradar24.com and search for today’s or yesterday’s flight with the airline concerned to get an idea of the aircraft type currently used on the route.
So, will Eddie’s boys resist the Irish steamroller on Saturday?

I love flightradar24... great app.
 
It's your life to do with as you please.

If you think you're getting the real story behind the MAX on the news, you're not... poor airmanship and training worldwide is the biggest part of this story, and has largely gone unreported. Boeing has problems and has made mistakes, but pilot competence world-wide is at an all time low.
 
If you think you're getting the real story behind the MAX on the news, you're not... poor airmanship and training worldwide is the biggest part of this story, and has largely gone unreported. Boeing has problems and has made mistakes, but pilot competence world-wide is at an all time low.

But how does this inspire confidence to potential buyers
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...BMAF6BAgDEAg&usg=AOvVaw1YAO5RVRqxzt7H0BRKyzCg

Nothing to do with pilot training. A few months ago I read a similar article and the response then was that Boeing were tightening up on this side of fabrication, it really beggars belief.
 
Last edited:
If you think you're getting the real story behind the MAX on the news, you're not... poor airmanship and training worldwide is the biggest part of this story, and has largely gone unreported. Boeing has problems and has made mistakes, but pilot competence world-wide is at an all time low.

Pilots don't build the planes or write the computer software though do they.

Are you a commercial pilot, perhaps you should pen an exposé?
 
Last edited:
Pilots don't build the planes or write the computer software though do they.

Are you a commercial pilot, perhaps you should pen an exposé?

It's already been written...

I'm not a commercial pilot, but my father was. He's an "airman" extraordinaire. He started out in an open cockpit tail dragger at age 15, on through fighter training after University. Flew acrobatics extensively. Was a bush/mountain pilot, then had a 33 year career with TWA where he ended in the left seat of the 747 with 25,000 flying hours.

Said that to say, he has lamented about the sad state of airmanship worldwide for the last 20 years, especially in the age of fly-by-wire/gps.

He sent me this article and thinks it is the most salient piece written on the Boeing 737 MAX... it's a long read, but if you'll take the time to read it, open your mind, and absorb what's written you may learn something:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html?searchResultPosition=12
 
It's already been written...

He sent me this article and thinks it is the most salient piece written on the Boeing 737 MAX... it's a long read, but if you'll take the time to read it, open your mind, and absorb what's written you may learn something:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html?searchResultPosition=12

I don't have or need a subscription to the New York Times, so I can't reads the article. It seems to have been written by a former pilot, though.

I did also read: -
The US aviation regulator then issued an "emergency" airworthiness directive to US carriers about this sensor - a so-called Angle of Attack (AOA) sensor.
The Federal Aviation Administration said the sensor "condition, if not addressed, could cause the flight crew to have difficulty controlling the airplane, and lead to excessive nose-down attitude, significant altitude loss, and possible impact with terrain".

Which doesn't sound a great deal like pilot error to me
 
I don't have or need a subscription to the New York Times, so I can't reads the article. It seems to have been written by a former pilot, though.

I did also read: -
The US aviation regulator then issued an "emergency" airworthiness directive to US carriers about this sensor - a so-called Angle of Attack (AOA) sensor.
The Federal Aviation Administration said the sensor "condition, if not addressed, could cause the flight crew to have difficulty controlling the airplane, and lead to excessive nose-down attitude, significant altitude loss, and possible impact with terrain".

Which doesn't sound a great deal like pilot error to me


The two fatal events, as I read it, were problems which were insurmountable by the crew who were fighting to keep the aircraft frim going in to a nosedive, as we know, they failed.

Bottom line, these aircraft have not been grounded due to poor piloting.
 
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.abc.net.au/article/10891736
https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019...ash-here-is-what-we-know/10888082?pfmredir=sm

I must admit that I do enjoy watching the series "Air Crash Investigations" for the detailed investigative and engineering work they do.

A lot of the incidents are quite old, but it is striking the number of:-
'Autopilot/ systems' ... fault/incident .... pilot interface, causes of accidents there are. Is there distinct 'haptic feedback' for Autopilot intervention? Many times the pilots seem stressfully unaware as they spin towards the ground in complete confusion.

This is closely followed by the manic 'woot woot woot' of alarms relating to unknown (such as engine fire/ or missing!) or contradictory information (air speed, altitude, flightpath).
I am stunned that almost never does someone get a visual on the engine etc - reverting to guessing ('logical' fault finding methodology), or RTFM (under extreme stress no less!). Surely it would be worthwhile to provide camera sourced visual information to the pilots for key items - engines, landing gear, flight control surfaces. Not to mention recording that at key points/interactions on the Flight Data Recorders.

The 737 forward order book is a ~$1Trillion dollar revenue. It seems we should have made more progress on safety by now.

I would agree with both lines of argument, though nobody seemed willing to discuss the writing on the wall last year ....... :smoke:

There are only 3 'minor' problems .....
1. Exceedingly poor business management
2. Extremely poor engineering - largely systems and software design and testing (including human interface - training)
3. Complete and utter lack of ability of pilots to actually 'fly' planes.



Chosun :gh:
 
3. Complete and utter lack of ability of pilots to actually 'fly' planes.
Chosun :gh:

I'm pretty sure that youngsters or learners do still actually "fly" the smaller private type planes when they study for their licence and eventual wings. Are you suggesting an RAF or front line fighter pilot couldn't step out of an F35 and not know how to use a Cessna or similar?

The systems are supposed to assist the pilots from fatigue, increase safety with warnings before it is irrecoverable. Of course they can fly planes and probably do so more than we think, just look at the footage of airliners landing or going round in the recent strong winds here in the UK - that ain't down to computers when the rudder is flapping about as it lands at quite an angle or when the power goes on and the stick is pulled back. That's a crew flying an airplane CJ.
 
I would have liked to read it as well but have read other articles. Several in fact.
I find you're closing words a wee bit condescending towards us that have a different point of view to your stance on this.

P

I'm pretty sure that youngsters or learners do still actually "fly" the smaller private type planes when they study for their licence and eventual wings. Are you suggesting an RAF or front line fighter pilot couldn't step out of an F35 and not know how to use a Cessna or similar?

The systems are supposed to assist the pilots from fatigue, increase safety with warnings before it is irrecoverable. Of course they can fly planes and probably do so more than we think, just look at the footage of airliners landing or going round in the recent strong winds here in the UK - that ain't down to computers when the rudder is flapping about as it lands at quite an angle or when the power goes on and the stick is pulled back. That's a crew flying an airplane CJ.

I managed to read the very long, but well researched and written NYT article. To any of the 3 essential tripod legs I mentioned add 'cowboy and fly-by-night night operators' , 'poor governance' and 'government corruption'.

It perhaps attributes too much em.phas.is on lack of airmanship skills. The almost complete abdication by the manufacturer to predict failure modes of their various systems (particularly compounded by a potential matrix of component failures) and the interface with all human elements is a major contributing factor in these incidents and fatalities. It is essential that this is done in the design/engineering process and pilots trained in how these systems will engage/disengage/fail in emergency situations. It's way too late when flummoxed pilots try to RTFM in the middle of an out of control situation. This risk will not be mitigated until this is addressed. This will of necessity require a cultural shift and complicated change management at Boeing, and Industry operators as a whole.

This is what I mean by actually being able to 'fly' these planes - being able to nail the basics, even when some systems/flight controls may be down/malfunctioning. I've lost track of the number of confused pilots I've seen that pull up in a stall on these Crash Investigation shows. If I was a pilot and couldn't rely upon the 'artificial horizon' instrument I'd carry a bl**dy plumbob on a string with me !

Years ago I went on an engineering exchange with QANTAS when they were performing all engineering and maintenance in Australia with well trained employees - there was a very good reason that Dustin Hoffman rated them ! Each of the key components had triple redundancies built in which was quite a feat even on their multi-layer circuit boards. When commercial pressures and de-regulation and outsourcing of maintenance reared it's ugly head, particularly that contracts were awarded to low cost regions in the world with 'cultural issues' around the truth, facts, and disappointment (those same regions prone to "rote" learning as in the article) - I knew it wasn't good. They were now aligning with a much lower bar evident in the rest of the world.

I could see these trends globally in maintenance, design, and assurance (quality, governance, and training) , and along with the often precarious or even shonky business models of some operators , knew that we would see a stream of planes falling from the sky.

This multi-billion dollar and hundreds of lives lost crisis might just serve as an essential wake up call ...... :cat:

I'd wager some of those landings or go rounds that you mentioned fall into the hail Mary class ! Along with other happy to be alive passengers, I once complimented a pilot on his "nice landing" in NZ (after he half bounced off the runway and nearly put us through the barriers) - he was all smiles until I added ..... "second time around".




Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
Hi Mac,

it's a long read, but if you'll take the time to read it, open your mind, and absorb what's written you may learn something:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/magazine/boeing-737-max-crashes.html?searchResultPosition=12

Well, there are several factors ar play there. First, pilots are best qualified to recognize pilot errors, and tend to stress these over engineering concerns. Second, aviation safety has undergone a shift away from putting the pilot in the spot (as Langewiesche does) to acknowledging the typically multi-causal nature of incidents. Third, there is a considerable natural bias towards Boeing and against Airbus in the USA, and the pilot interface is different enough to make it rather likely that someone "raised" on one system doesn't really appreciate the other.

With regard to Langewiesche's article, check how much emphasis he puts on the fact that the 737 could not have been certified even as a brand-new type because it didn't comply with important principles of safe aircraft design. (I would say he carefully tries to avoid drawing any attention to that, painting the MACS as somewhat of a backwards-compatibility device.)

That alone was enough for me to file his article as opinion piece. Your mileage may vary, of course.

Tangentially, I'd be quite interested to learn whether William Langewiesche is in any way related to Wolfgang Langewiesche of "Stick and Rudder" fame. Wolfgang was both an advocate of good piloting skills and of aircraft expressly designed for safety, so it's sort of ironic that someone bearing his famous surname focuses entirely on just one of these two aspects of flight safety.

Regards,

Henning
 
...... With regard to Langewiesche's article, check how much emphasis he puts on the fact that the 737 could not have been certified even as a brand-new type because it didn't comply with important principles of safe aircraft design. (I would say he carefully tries to avoid drawing any attention to that, painting the MACS as somewhat of a backwards-compatibility device.)

That alone was enough for me to file his article as opinion piece. Your mileage may vary, of course......

Regards,

Henning
Henning,

I'd agree. It almost comes off as an apologist piece for Boeing, and defense of a national industry. Having said that, the piece is well researched and the actual facts are present - just awaiting the right conclusions to be drawn - I think those are more in line with the multi-faceted points I have laid down.

Interesting observations about pilots vs engineers - such inherent worldviews pointing to the need to filter the 'fundamental attribution error' bias in any analysis. Accounting for this prior to potential disasters is the job of good management leadership and corporate governance. From a behavioural psychology point of view, both seem to be sadly lacking.

I think that I will take the time to check that my next flight is on an Airbus .... :cat:





Chosun :gh:
 
Quick trip to RAF Fairford a couple of days ago acting on information received. Three B-2A Spirits fresh in and after a further tip-off from the locals, a patient wait for dusk and a stonking rarity!

John
 

Attachments

  • 20200312 (3)_88-0332_82-1068_82-1070_Northrop_B-2A_Spirit.JPG
    20200312 (3)_88-0332_82-1068_82-1070_Northrop_B-2A_Spirit.JPG
    168.3 KB · Views: 191
  • 20200312 (16)_88-0332_82-1070_Northrop_B-2A_Spirit.JPG
    20200312 (16)_88-0332_82-1070_Northrop_B-2A_Spirit.JPG
    163.1 KB · Views: 28
  • 20200312 (18)_82-1070_Northrop_B-2A_Spirit.JPG
    20200312 (18)_82-1070_Northrop_B-2A_Spirit.JPG
    150.6 KB · Views: 33
  • 20200312 (30)_80-1071_Lockheed_U-2S.JPG
    20200312 (30)_80-1071_Lockheed_U-2S.JPG
    112.3 KB · Views: 32

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top