Your Next Holiday......

[ToraToraTora]

You arrive at the airport and get checked in and are about to board when you look out of the window and see the plane is a 737 MAX. Would you get on it?
https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/boeing-737-max-software-mcas-ethiopian-airlines-crash-a8891686.html
I don't care what assurances the CEO gives I want the pilot to be able to turn the software off if he needs to. 300+ people are dead because of poor software and an increasing arrogant belief that software is fool proof. I've worked all my life in software and there is no way I'd get on one of these.

[ToraToraTora]

baz: "Just like driverless cars tora ?" - yes, obviously they'll be killing less people at a time but same principle.
"Are you talking about all software and can the software be turned off in other planes ? " - I believe in most planes autopilot can be turned off and cannot override the pilot, currently, though "developments" are worrying, I'd rather have Denzil Washington Plastered flying me than that software. Autopilot is useful for 99% of the time but there are times when human intuition is needed.

[Hopkirk]

If it was doing my flight it would be because it had beeo certified airworthy after alterations, so yes I would get on.

[spathiphyllum]

YMB so surely after this episode these plans are actually safer than most now?

[youngmafbog]

TTT, the worrying thing is that it is cars now but eventually it will be public transportation such as coaches.

Dependence on software to such a level is mad but the powers that be dont understand and are driven by the profit making large Global Corps who they dearly love.

[youngmafbog]

Not if there is no override. I'm not sure you understood what I wrote though.

[Calicogirl]

Pffft we use Southwest Airlines, American Airlines and Norweigen Air all the time, thank you for that YMB x

[Bazile]

The software on this airline was faulty and caused hundreds to loose their lives .

So , am i correct in saying that the pilots couldn't turn it off , when they realised they were in trouble ; or would it have been the case that they would not have known what was causing the problem / emmergency ?

[ToraToraTora]

baz: "So , am i correct in saying that the pilots couldn't turn it off , when they realised they were in trouble" - yes the plane believed it was stalling and kept dropping the nose, the pilots repeatedly tried to raise it but the software overrode them. Must have been a terror filled time, knowing that some software written some time ago was going to kill them. This really was death by software. .... I've worked in software my working life, fortunately nothing I programmed causes death. They'll know what went wrong by now they'll have the code in question and know why it did what it did and who wrote it. Some poor programmer on not much will be punishing himself somewhere.

[237SJ]

I think the pilots can turn it off but there wasn't sufficient training/knowledge about it. It's an auto levelling device thats fitted to make up for the fact that the engines are pretty much too heavy for the plane which has changed the aerodynamics.

[sanmac]

The way I understand it is that shortly after take-off the plane is in, obviously, a nose-high attitude in order to reach cruising altitude. Now the computer "thinks" that because of this, the plane is going to reach a stalling speed and forces the nose down, which is not a good thing to happen shortly after taking off, and the pilots cannot resume the airplane's nose-up position.

[ToraToraTora]

no 237, no pilot would get anywhere near any plane without knowing every possible combination of control and effect.

[retrocop]

Isn’t this question academic. The chairman admitted the override was an optional extra at extra cost but is now inclusive for new builds.
The rest of the fleet are currently grounded and to be retrospectively fitted with the manual override?

[spathiphyllum]

Sanmac to me that sounds like an issue that would have been surfaced with basic testing

[jno]

oh, they're going to train the pilots now? That's good news.

[naomi24]

Although I’m a frequent flier I wouldn’t know one plane from another but if the pilot was on board and ready to go I’d assume he wouldn’t want to risk his life so it must be safe.

[237SJ]

There are plenty of cases where pilots don't have the airmanship training to know what to do TTT (Air France off Brasil being an example)

[237SJ]

This is a good overview https://www.vox.com/business-and-finance/2019/3/29/18281270/737-max-faa-scandal-explained

[ToraToraTora]

they should not be flying the plane then, but that's academic here, even if they knew what to do they where overridden by software.

[Bazile]

For those who want to know if the airline they will be boarding is a 737 Max

https://onemileatatime.com/boeing-737-max-safe/

[Khandro]

The last plane I felt safe in was a friend's vintage Tiger Moth.
I go every where by car, which I'm told is statistically more dangerous, but it doesn't feel so.
A 'safe-landing' in a jumbo jet is to me nothing more than an organised crash.