The Problem with Boeing (and the Aviation Industry) ft. Mentour Pilot
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 พ.ค. 2024
- In this episode we speak to @MentourPilot about the aviation history, the problems with Boeing and the future.
INSTAGRAM: / throughtheweb.podcast
LISTEN TO THE EPISODE: throughtheweb.buzzsprout.com
Twitter: / throughtheweb
00:00 - Who is Mentour Pilot
02:03 - Why he decided to be a pilot
03:43 - His TH-cam Career
08:19 - Misconceptions about the aviation industry
11:42 - 2023 the lowest year of plane accidents?
12:42 - Airlines want to use a single pilot
16:43 - Do different planes feel different to fly?
17:36 - How accurate are flight simulators?
19:45 - The Boeing Situation
25:42 - MCAS System
35:34 - Reasons air travel is safe
38:07 - Innovation in the industry
40:47 - Electric planes
43:01 - Plane ticket prices will rise
44:19 - Outro
Hey WebHeads - here's an interview with Petter from Mentour Pilot where we dive deep into the aviation industry. The rest of the gang is sitting this one out so it's a bit different to our usual format. Also the ColdFusion video about Boeing will be dropping shortly in the main channel so keep an eye out for that!
Enjoy!
Will you be doing a follow up to the Hyperloop transport system documentary video? 👍
Thanks. I'm here because of Mentour Now and Mentour Pilot.
30:35 lack of proper regulation always leads to system failure. In anything. From exploitation not being countered, and various flaws not being resolved.
What a load of balix...they Want rid of boeing....and saboteurs were placed in it to run it into the ground....destroy western engineering and all it stands for....airbus is next under the guise of the climate change hoax....they don't want us travelling anymore....ffs when is everyone gonna wake the fuck up!!!!
I think Mentour Pilot is one of the best channels on TH-cam.
Yes, that's true.
He is totally wrong with Boeing. Although MCAS is indeed a design problem and the loose bolts are a production problem, it is still related because the culture and system produced the same problem. The public and media are not wrong in losing faith in Boeing. Maybe he is just biased for Boeing because he seemed to ignore the fact that Boeing values profit over safety.
He seems to make loisy excuses for Boeing. Saying that Boeing tells people that they found the cause AFTER a door is blown off the plane IS NOT PROGRESS. Wtf
Peoole clearly understand what Boeing does. It hides safety issues like MCAS if it can and admits problems AFTER problems occur publicly like the door being blown out. In fact they hid the MCAS after the first 737 max crash. Theybonly admitted it after the second 737 max crash showed similar patterns in it's black box record.
He sounds to be lawyering for Boeing.
@@henryposadas3309 he's a line check captain for the 737 type. Are you autistic or schizophrenic or both?
Been watching Mentour Pilot & Mentour Now for a while. Petter is extremely thorough and effective at providing both general and in-depth information that everyone can understand. I've learned a great deal from him about the aviation industry that I would not otherwise have known. This is a surprising and very welcome pair up. Great interview!
Mentour Pilot is totally biased in favor of Boeing. And the host does not once question his statements. No, sorry, this not a good interview.
I'm an engineer and I LOVE Mentour Pilot.....but I had to stop watching at 24:44 when he looks for ways to make Boeing sound diligent.
I would expect he believes in Too Big to Fail. I forgive him because I also used to. 😥
@@DrumAdrian16 He wasn't looking for anything. He simply stated a fact. It IS a good thing that Boeing publicly announced the problem. Does that make Boeing the good guy? Of course not and that's not what was implied.
Indeed, exactly.
@@dinbkk It's a real tough line to walk honestly. Boeing may have just had a whistleblower murdered to coverup their (potential) crimes, and that guy had governmental protection. Petter is just an airline pilot & TH-camr with zero real protections. He could easily get shitcanned or even blacklisted by the industry as a whole.
Mentour Pilot - brilliant dude! Which gives us two brilliant dudes in one upload. Thanks for this opportunity to listen and get to know Petter more.
He is totally wrong with Boeing. Although MCAS is indeed a design problem and the loose bolts are a production problem, it is still related because the culture and system produced the same problem. The public and media are not wrong in losing faith in Boeing. Maybe he is just biased for Boeing because he seemed to ignore the fact that Boeing values profit over safety.
He seems to make loisy excuses for Boeing. Saying that Boeing tells people that they found the cause AFTER a door is blown off the plane IS NOT PROGRESS. Wtf
People clearly understand what Boeing does. It hides safety issues like MCAS if it can and admits problems AFTER problems occur publicly like the door being blown out. In fact they hid the MCAS after the first 737 max crash. Theybonly admitted it after the second 737 max crash showed similar patterns in it's black box record.
He sounds to be lawyering for Boeing. He even left out MCAS was intentionally hidden so that pilots wont need to retrain. Why leave that part?
As an aviation enthusiast and a frequent traveller, I have discovered Mentour a few years back. Petter is an awesome communicator and provides clear information. I enjoyed immensely the interview. Carry on guys, both of you do excellent jobs!
He is totally wrong with Boeing. Although MCAS is indeed a design problem and the loose bolts are a production problem, it is still related because the culture and system produced the same problem. The public and media are not wrong in losing faith in Boeing. Maybe he is just biased for Boeing because he seemed to ignore the fact that Boeing values profit over safety.
He seems to make loisy excuses for Boeing. Saying that Boeing tells people that they found the cause AFTER a door is blown off the plane IS NOT PROGRESS. Wtf
People clearly understand what Boeing does. It hides safety issues like MCAS if it can and admits problems AFTER problems occur publicly like the door being blown out. In fact they hid the MCAS after the first 737 max crash. Theybonly admitted it after the second 737 max crash showed similar patterns in it's black box record.
He sounds to be lawyering for Boeing. He even left out MCAS was intentionally hidden so that pilots wont need to retrain. Why leave that part?
Regarding the question why MCAS problem was not a problem in B767 tanker version (KC-46). Military version used two sensors simultaneously and pilot action stops MCAS input.
Also worth mentioning is that in case of MAX, there are two separate MCAS systems each connected to FCC A and FCC B (Flight Control Computer). Every FCC takes data from separate AOA (Angle Of Attack). Problem was that during flight only A or only B side was active (it flip flops between flights), which meant that only one AOA sensor was providing data to single MCAS system. So for example if during a flight there was FCC A active but AOA on B side would be damaged, then that would only affect instrument readings on First Officer side. If during same flight with FCC A active, AOA on A side would be damaged, than that would impact MCAS. Currently after the changes there is a sync between A & B sides and it is possible to compare data from both AOA sensors.
Thank you very much for this additional information!👍
Thanks for pointing that out! I felt like they didn’t explain it as in depth enough for me to understand, but this puts a lot more light on it
Sort of right, FAA and EASA aircraft were required to take information from both sensors, and the system had its own fault indicator, but they only required the pilots be told about the system, not trained on it. Outside the FAA/EASA governed airspace, which is where both MCAS related crashes occurred, they left the dual sensor system as an option.
In both crashes there were serious questions about the airlines training and the pilots decisions, but those were largely swept aside due to the MCAS system seemingly being the issue
The 767 tanker went through the recertification process, was thoroughly tested by the air force and proper pilot manual and training was provided unlike the 737 MAX
Awesome to see an unexpected collaboration between two channels that I enjoy watching, looking forward to this one.
Two of my favourite TH-camrs / storytellers in one video... woow...
I find no matter what Dagogo is presenting his voice just makes it so easy to listen to, and Petter has a way of always keeping you engaged with what he is saying.
He is totally wrong with Boeing. Although MCAS is indeed a design problem and the loose bolts are a production problem, it is still related because the culture and system produced the same problem. The public and media are not wrong in losing faith in Boeing. Maybe he is just biased for Boeing because he seemed to ignore the fact that Boeing values profit over safety.
He seems to make loisy excuses for Boeing. Saying that Boeing tells people that they found the cause AFTER a door is blown off the plane IS NOT PROGRESS. Wtf
People clearly understand what Boeing does. It hides safety issues like MCAS if it can and admits problems AFTER problems occur publicly like the door being blown out. In fact they hid the MCAS after the first 737 max crash. Theybonly admitted it after the second 737 max crash showed similar patterns in it's black box record.
He sounds to be lawyering for Boeing. He even left out MCAS was intentionally hidden so that pilots wont need to retrain. Why leave that part?
Petter is very knowledgeable. extremely interesting, and very easy to listen to. So glad to have him! Thank You!
Listening to Petter is wonderful. He is super knowledgeable, articulate and well informed. He is a master at what he does.
Thanks! A very good interview and some helpful tips to nervous fliers like me. I especially like when Petter says "flying is so incredibly safe, that it is even safer than you can imagine."
I don't like the idea that flying probably has to go back to being expensive like the 1950s. Flying is freedom and connects people and cultures across continents. It brings friendship, trade and peace. Yes we have to be concerned about the environment but start with use cars a lot less and buy products which last longer. You can probably bike/walk/train/bus to your car destination but from Paris to LA the only viable option is the plane.
Indeed, exactly.
Peter is a great TH-camr. He gives a lot of facts and when he gives his opinion but tells he is giving an opinion. Peter is a wonderful storyteller.
Boeing problems are not misconceptions, but self created situation.
Indeed.
Big fan of Petter, my only quibble is him calling the MCAS incidents and the door plug blowout “completely different”. I mean, they are of course very, very different, and their remedies are very different - but both were caused by Boeing optimizing for shareholder value, as far as I can tell. The MAX was snuck past re-certification to save Boeing money and sell more planes; Boeing Wichita was spun off into Spirit Aerosystems to save Boeing money and sell more planes. Someone somewhere said “can we do X more cheaply?” and allowed that concern to override quality/safety considerations.
Yes, and the fact that Boeing has apparently not been transparent nor fully cooperative in getting details regarding the door incident.
They are completely different. The door plug was supposed to have been correctly repaired by Spirit Aerosystems, they elected to do a repair that was not supposed to require a reinspection of the door, however, the Spirit employees did not do the repair correctly, causing damage to the door.
The airline also decided not to bother with looking into the pilot reports of cabin pressure fluctuation, deciding instead to restrict the aircraft to overland flights only. The FAA has changed the rules for that, as well as now working on inspection requirements for the door plugs to prevent this issue in the future, from any aircraft manufacturer
@@dankinusmc1 I did say they’re very different. What they have _in common_ is an overdeveloped profit motive. I wouldn’t blame Boeing for a faulty engine (Boeing doesn’t make engines), pilot error, or poor maintenance by airlines. But Boeing spun off Boeing Wichita to make more money, and avoided recertification of the MAX to make more money. These decisions weren’t made with goal of improving the product but maximizing short-term profit.
@ferchrissakes , the airlines demanded the MAX not require a different certificate, not Boeing. The reason MCAS was implemented was because the new engine position generated lift, in certain flight regimes, MCAS meant it would handle the same, the FAA looked at the system and approved it, as it was already approved and working great on the KC-46A.
@@dankinusmc1 “Demanded” is a bit strong. Of course the airlines would _prefer_ it, sure. That in and of itself shouldn’t factor into whether or not recert was required or pilots needed better training. And yes, I’m fully aware of the purpose of MCAS, however on the KC-46, it relies on redundant AoA sensors, not just one, and it’s easily overridden by pilot input. So it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison. I’d like to think the USAF also ensured better training on the new systems for its pilots, but either way it’s different training than for commercial pilots, so also hard to compare. If the KC-46’s implementation is successful, that only makes it stranger that Boeing did it differently for the MAX.
Two of my favorite TH-camrs together… this is a dream come true. Awesome interview and great to hear more of Petter here.
Regarding MCAS, I did not know that the 767 tanker variant incorporated an MCAS system. That was news to me. Thank you for that interesting tidbit of information!
I am a retired German Airforce Helicopter pilot, i am a MME and i used to fly commercial with Piper, Cessna and Lear! Not even at gun point, i would fly a 737....no matter what!!! Just waiting for the next drama coming forward, with a company irresponsibly caring about there financial figures, than the safety for there passengers.....
That's very silly comment by a German, what about VW snd Diesel Scandal.
@@bernese1004The Diesel Scandal killed nobody, the two MCAs induced Crashes 346 Human Beings.
Mentour Pilot's channel IS media, and I like his channel. He's a savvy bloke that treads the fine line between purely factual and light entertainment.
He does however cross into click-bait thumbnails and I'm never sure how sincere he is....but I could be completely incorrect...or not.
🙂
You can't afford bean counters building or these days assembling aircraft with parts from 30 other places. Aviation can be
very unforgiving!
19:49 Boeing discussion 25:43 737 MCAS 28:57 idea borrowed from military 767 tanker version 35:36 checks and balances: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System ASRS 39:22 greener aviation: hydrogen, SAF, possibly higher energy density batteries 41:02 Pipistrel electric plane
Mentour-- I have been following you since video one. Have taught myself to fly the PMDG 737 and the A320 (Fenix) on MSFS. Your channel has always been fascinating--good graphics and professionalism is nice but you are the core! I know you can't have a real go at Boeing but I am concerned at the number of ex employees of Boeing and ex engineers have witnessed how Boeing is now ruled by accountants in Chicago and not engineers in Seattle as it was before, and safety standards in the manufacturing process has slipped.
I sub to Mentor, a great channel, as is this one, and Cold Fusion! Great interview!
He is totally wrong with Boeing. Although MCAS is indeed a design problem and the loose bolts are a production problem, it is still related because the culture and system produced the same problem. The public and media are not wrong in losing faith in Boeing. Maybe he is just biased for Boeing because he seemed to ignore the fact that Boeing values profit over safety.
He seems to make loisy excuses for Boeing. Saying that Boeing tells people that they found the cause AFTER a door is blown off the plane IS NOT PROGRESS. Wtf
People clearly understand what Boeing does. It hides safety issues like MCAS if it can and admits problems AFTER problems occur publicly like the door being blown out. In fact they hid the MCAS after the first 737 max crash. Theybonly admitted it after the second 737 max crash showed similar patterns in it's black box record.
He sounds to be lawyering for Boeing. He even left out MCAS was intentionally hidden so that pilots wont need to retrain. Why leave that part?
Awesome! I really enjoyed this interview! I've been watching Petter for several years, I subscribed to Mentour Now as soon as I heard about it.
Thanks for a great podcast. I've been watching Petter for a while now, and yes, what w difference from the only option we had of watching the aircraft accidents tv show
If PILOTS are in such demand and not nearly enough supply then AIRLINE COs should fork out the money to help those who qualify to become fully trained. WIN WIN!!
Imagine that!
Peter's the real deal....he knew at age 14 that he loved aviation and he did everything to succeed in that field!
Thank you very much for this very informative and interesting Podcast!🙂👍 It´s always great to listen to Mentour Pilot/ Petter.
I could listen to Petter all day!! His aviation knowledge is on another level.
Hell yeah, love this collab. You're all great :)
I've been watching these guys for more than 5 years now. Watching them together is priceless
Boeing's biggest issue.... Buying McDonald Douglas and letting their management take over.
It's been all downhill in terms of quality from there.
Great interview man! He’s a great source for aviation information. Thanks for doing this both of you!
Interesting discussion. Thanks for sharing it. ✌️
Loved this video, two of my favourite TH-camrs together in one place
What about the suspicious sudden death of that former manager who was about to give a court deposition highlighting Boeing's quality control negligernce?!
Such a great video! Thank you.
Super interesting episode, thank you!
Enjoyed all of that, thanks very much. The last point of industry methodology cross over, 100%. The obvious Industry there is of course the Nuclear Industry which has self destructed by hiding issues. Issues such as the three mile island meltdown hydrogen explosion that then became the major failure vector that took the Fukushima accident from an event to an uncontrollable disaster. At a time when the world needs for bulk shipping to be Nuclear powered with some 45,000 80 to 120 megawatt mini modular reactors, to make that possible the world needs aviation level safety management.
Still don’t understand why people didn’t go to jail for the MCAS coverup.
If Petter says, MCAS was only necessary to avoid a new type rating caused by the different behaviour of the plane, so how does the "fix" - disabling MCAS when it is faulty - doesn't force operators to do a type rating?
I think the real issue with MCAS is that it can’t be disabled in time. It engaged at too low an altitude for the pilot to recover.
Because then it's a system failure, lots of things can fail on a aircraft with the aircraft being able to continue the full flight.
When the plane lands the MCAS system would then be fixed for the next.
@@iamjames8200 There’s nothing to “fix” on it. The problem is a faulty angle of attack/pitch sensors.
I use the word "fix" for simplicity sake.@@Ira88881
Two cool guys speaking about a great subject - unmissable 👍
I wonder f the root cause problem, common to the MCAS issue and the door plug issue, could be financial greed. And if so, how could that be tackled… maybe on the next one 😊
So informative! Balanced commentary.😊
Thank you again Petter for your objectivity and knowledge on the B737 multi generation aircrafts. Truth and accuracy are vey important in making a video, too many are allowed to propagate misinformation in TH-cam or any other media Or news broadcast.
Always funny, when two different youtubers I'm following for different reasons and you generally make videos about very different topics suddenly end up together in one video.
I came here from mentour pilot and this was a great conversation. Also love hearing a little more about peters personal life. Awesome chat gentlemen.
I came here to do a bit of research on Boeing as an avid investor. Came away with so much more than I expected. Fascinating to get a better feel for the culture within the aviation world. Thanks for a great cast.
Yes, you are very fortunate to know at a young age that you were interested in aviation. I see you as a master.
I love it when two of my favourite bloggers get together....
I LOVE watching MP videos. He's factual, detailed, and has a gift for tying the various pieces of a story together. Great stuff
What makes it malicious is that the whole purpuse was to augment and that was required to cut cost. It was then designed with trim authority even outside pilots capability. The single sensor was not only because it was not critical, but also to prove to regulators that it was not a risk. All done to hurry a product to market over safety. This is a systemic and deep rooted management culture issue at Boing and it is not being cured.
Saw Petter's photo and was instant listener😂
Re: Boeing. It's not just their airplanes. It's their Starliner ship to bring astronauts to the ISS. Was supposed to launch years ago and be in service now. But quality control issues have delayed this first mission by years. Last delay was bc they found out all the wiring is flammable. And there was a problem with the parachute system. Makes me enraged bc their rolling the dice with our lives.
Good questions!
Great discussion. But let’s remember, supply-chain is not new, nor are business decisions based on cost benefit analysis. Boeing has simply gone mad. For example; fitting bigger engines on a plane that’s too low to the ground, and giving MCAS flight authority. MCAS should have simply initiated a stick-shaker and let the pilots fly the plane. In conclusion Boeing has lost its collective mind.
If MCAS can deactivate during flight (35:11 in video), does that not alter the flight characteristics of the aircraft such that the pilots would require specific training on type anyway?
Spirit was an internal Boring department before it was spun off for short term financial gain.
The MCAS problem is the continuation of another mistake that Boeing made years earlier in the crash of Turkish airlines 1951 in Amsterdam. Single sourcing critical systems is a dumb idea that Boeing fell again in that trap. In that case the auto throttle retarded by command from faulty left hand radio altimeter again in 737 Max ,the MCAS was sourced to a single AOA vane. That's stupid design for such a life threatening system.
Indeed.
I love Mentour Pilot🙌🏽😻👏🏽
A bit short sighted on the thoughts regarding costs in the aviation industry - sounds a bit like the talking points a corporate shareholder might present.
As new technologies are developed and introduced to the marketplace, they are always initially a bit expensive due to the RND costs being baked in and attempts to recoup it. However, it will drop over time, and there is also a big impetus for these costs being bore by the wider population because of the benefits to us all. You also can't just state it's going to be more expensive while inflation is a thing and everything just naturally has a "higher cost". We all should be benefiting from this in a society that doesn't just shift all wealth to the top, so it's kind of silly to make these sweeping statements and rather dour predictions without giving that context. Really should have left the economics/cost discussion out of it, there's a lot of factors to weigh and discuss on the matter and it's all speculation anyway.
Good discussions otherwise, I've enjoyed the Mentour channel's coverage of so many different Aviation topics over the years.
As I figured out about 737 Max, Boeing's idea was to put MCAS under the vertical stabilizer servo fail procedure.
I have a feeling Boeing is rewarding Mentour because he always seems to be kind of protecting Boeing
@44:29 the importance of understanding what you're saying. "Sign off on" means "indicate approval for". I think you meant to say "sign off with", which is like saying, "any last words?"
One major problem with Boeing particularly with the whole Max debacle is that they themselves were giving an impression that safety was becoming more and more of an afterthought. This was evident in their initial response and crisis management, posturing, then scarring internal notes and evidence of known yet continued poor engineering/quality practices that eventually came to light. Even amongst those who would consider themselves as "aviation-savvy", more so than the actual fixes and extra precautions that have since been implemented to address all these known issues and incidents, it is precisely this "profits over safety" perception Boeing created for themselves that really erodes trust and leaves a bad taste in the mouth, and certainly does not bring confidence for their future.
I have a problem with the claim of the high price of SAF. Currently SAF cost about twice that of Jet-A, maybe a bit more, but not much, defiantly under 2.5 times.
SAF is made of basically two products, Hydrogen and some carbon or hydrocarbon. Today mostly vegetable oil is used as hydrocarbon source
The reason why vegetable oil is used as a hydrocarbon source is that green hydrogen is currently very expensive. vegetable oil is the hydrocarbon source that needs the least hydrogen, about 3-5%. The reason why hydrogen is so expensive is because electricity is so expensive, and the reason electricity is so expensive is because CNG is so expensive.
As long as that is the case, there is no point in SAF what so ever.. Well apart from sort of a trail run.
In the future there is really two ways to go. Either electrical or thermal. Electrical will bring down the cost of hydrogen in a well functioning grid to about 2/3 of what it is today. While that may not sound like much of a improvement this will unlock cheaper hydrocarbon the vegetable oils. Like sewage, farm waste, alleges, and so on.
If we go the thermal route hydrogen will cost about 1/4 of what it does today. (there is also semi thermal and hybrid production system that will give cost between 1/3 and 1/2 current cost). The main argument against that is that its a bit more complicated to implement. This will unlock even heavier sources of hydrocarbons as grass, wood or even CO2 directly. This could potentially cut down the price of SAF under the current price of Jet-A1.
Take that on top of the next generation aircraft engines (i think RR is planing on having them on a wing by 2028) with 30% fuel use reduction. I really doubt that traveling will be any more expensive.
The shortage of pilots and ground staff i would say is mostly temporary. (this part writing as a passive observer, not a expert) While there is structural issues here the business took a huge hit after covid. We already see the hit started to wear of. There is structural issues here to, but now when they are in the headlines, i think they will be solved, that is pretty typical. There is no lack of kids wanting to become pilot or ground crew. There is really just a lack of opportunity. This will be solved.. and possibly already are in process. but this will probobly take a decade untill the business is fully staffed again.
On top of that. Even with current cost of SAF, with new modern engines, have to consider not only the fuel saving, but also the weight saving. Saving 10-15 tons of fuel, also implies 10-15 tons of more pay load. This is a rather considerable side income.
MCAS is a typical example of incredible deviation from aeronautics basic rule : redundancy. Had there been two AoA sensors connected, the accident couldn’t have happened.
But the door plugs are something much worse : there are things against which there cannot be any redundancy fix. Wings can’t fall off, doors can’t fly off.
If this happens due to carelessness, you shouldn’t be allowed to build planes anymore until such a time that you’ve demonstrated that you have learned again the basics of airplane manufacturing.
Agree with you in this. But the bigger problem with MCAS was it didn’t have flight awareness. What’s our ground proximity, what’s our airspeed? MCAS should have simply induced a stick-shaker if it thought a stall was eminent and let the pilots fly the plane.
@@SurviveTheDay but that’s not MCAS, that’s just a stall indicator as in every airplane. What you’re say I believe, is that essentially McAS wasn’t useful and the stall indicators- siren and stick shaker- were enough.
I will forever associate Dagogo's voice with Burnwater - Nostalgia Dreams, has been in my top 10 songs of all time from the moment i first heard it
This was really unexpected!!
If the pilots who were flying the the two 737 max that crashed had of hit the stab trim cut off switches would that have prevented them from going down?
Peteris is absolutely awesome.
Excellent interview. Third party such as PMDG and Fenix for MSFS for ailerons, flaps, rudders, and elevators response very well compared to just MSFS. alone. Also, many Americans pilots handle the 737 Max well. Pilots disengaged MCAS and flew the Max. Many pilots are not flying the plane, and depending on the computers! Future AI will do better. Autonomously learning is getting better, but pilots MUST be able to disengage the AP and FLY the plane. ED NYC
watched most of this video and while I think Mentour Pilot has a lot of background experience but I personally think that Boeing making slack decisions concerning safety is not routine problem we are blowing out of proportion. These decisions to push profit over everything see people as numbers and seats hence all the whistleblowing. Acknowledging a problem is the least I'd expect them to do.
you have a beautiful voice😍
Electrically powered aircraft for basic pilot training are limited in power DURATION, not so much in RANGE considerations.
Aviation gene exist, it takes hold early 3 was my time it took over, at 12 my dad would drop me off at MIA 8am and pick
me up at 7pm Sat. or Sun. MIA tower freq. was my radio music.
If the MCAS system on the max goes faulty and now just switches off. Doesn’t that mean the pilot is fly a plane he’s not type rated for? If the system does shut off due to a fault does that mean the plane has to be taken out of service until MCAS is fixed.
I'm watching this after Dagogo''s shorter video on the 737 MAX, and I wonder if Boeing's political lobbying got this over the line when it maybe shouldn't have.
It wasn't talked about in this, but perhaps there was additional pilot training required when that fix was implemented.
Yow degogo Daniel from Namibia...how can I get in contact with u .. concerning something very important
The maritime industry is going through the same growing pains of not having enough personnel
Can I have the name of the song at the beginning please?
It is one of his own songs:
th-cam.com/video/8nTMej5WIOw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=v9KTdtC-WNM5N20l
What next ? Putting jet engines on a Connie ?
Great video from two of my favorite TH-camrs. Thank you to both of you for an interesting and informative video. I love flying, and have never been afraid to step into a “flying tube.” My father was a pilot many, many years ago, so I grew up on fun, interesting stories about his time in the air. That’s why flight fascinates me.
Hydrogen might have the necessary energy density, but it is very inefficient for many use cases and really hard to make green.
Also, unburned hydrogen is a very potent greenhouse gas itself, and because of weight restrictions, it is nearly impossible to prevent releasing much unburned hydrogen in commercial aircraft.
Hydrogen can be made in small modular reactors (which are green, no matter what Greenpeace says). There are plans to build an SMR for hydrogen production in South Korea in 2028, for example (just a quick google search).
I don't know about releasing hydrogen in commercial aircraft. Both Boeing and Airbus have released concept designs for hydrogen-fueled aircraft, I'm sure they've thought about that.
@@frufruJ the only option to store hydrogen in aircraft is liquid hydrogen. Pressured storage is too heavy.
What do you do with hydrogen that isn’t liquid any more while you wait in the sun für start clearance?
You let that potent greenhouse gas go unburned into the atmosphere.
Love this channel, but there is so much context and facts lacking in the Boeing conversation. I know a lot of these details are not public but yeah :/
Cold Fusion TV is my favorite channel. If you are interested, it might be great to do a video on how outsourcing supply chain and production has affected quality/safety of manufacturing in the USA and/or other countries
Your watching coldfusion. Great content
The bottom line is that the 737 max line of planes were improvised in a way that took them away from optimal stability. That's called de evolution. Where is plains had evolved to be aerodynamically stable? The change made with the engines caused the plane to deviate from optimal stability. If the handling is different as a result, that's because the stability has been reduced, bottom line. The prostituted the 737 giving it a giant boob job enlargening the engines, squeezing them closer together and pushing them forward , just as a woman getting a boob job suffers pain in her lower back because of the imbalance. So too the net vector forces intersecting into the center of balance was no longer in the center of the base of support but deviated down the spine of the plane backwards from the front causing it to tilt upwards causing the nose to tillt up, putting it at risk of a stall. The bottom line is MCAS was implemented by stealth to hide that imbalance otherwise perceptible by pilots forcing them to have to push down harder... a deviation from optimal in order to avoid a stall. If a plane had not become less balanced and less stable, there would never have been a need for MCAS. That's the bottom line. The fact that they had to install MCAS itself indicates the deviation from optimal costing the plane's innate stability. It's not nice to fool mother nature and try to overcome and hide the laws of physics and the aerodynamics. And it's even worse to hide the fact you did it and not train the pilots to tell them about it. Well, I really think this pilot being interviewed is excellent, he is still young and I think he's a bit naive. I think he's losing the point ultimately, that Boeing cut a major corner and took airplane technology backwards. The only reason these planes are still flying is due to cost and money the fact that they were constructed. They're Frankenstein airplanes. I think it's a sin. Uses rationale justified by these planes have not been completely abolished to the families of those who lost loved ones when 350 were killed in 2018 and 2019 to
The comment to expect airfare to go way up is disappointing. I live on an island, on the opposite side of the continent from my family, in a country with no unified cross-nation rail option. Flying is the only reasonable way to visit within a reasonable vacation window and it's already too expensive to do it often.
if you did not see the al jazeera docu BROKEN DREAMS about boeing yet you should watch it
Honestly the real reason for the original application of mcas is even WORSE. Rather than a true design flaw or oversight, it was a non-essential cost-saving band-aid intended to skirt the very certifications that are in place to ensure a pilot is familiar with the actual freaking aircraft they're freaking piloting.
Wow
great collab guys - 2 of my all time youtube faves @MentourPilot and @ColdFusion
I love your voice😻
"Is there anything you'd like to sign off on?"
"I'm Scott Manley. Fly safe." 🙂
My two favorite youtubers in one video, marvelous 😊
Insane notion. I remember watching a video of yours where an aircraft was lost *_specifically because_* the captain was asleep in his bunk when a problem occurred. If I remember correctly, by the time the captain returned to the cockpit their fate was already sealed. They spent the next ten minutes trying in vain to recover the aircraft, but in reality they had very little hope of doing so.
I could tell from the voice that this is the coldfusion guy
For those who enjoy Mentour Pilots content Juan Browns Blancolirio channel is also excellent
Indeed, exactly.
Our family has decided just to drive or take the train for now
Pilots weren’t briefed, notified, anything about MCAS. Was it supposed to be a major change? No. Was it major? Hell yeah, to the point it overrode all pilot inputs. And only one AoA sensor,,come on, is safety a joke? A malfunction of the sensor sends wrong information to the computers, in this case thinking the plane had an extremely high AoA, sends the plane on a nose dive, you get this at a low altitude and canceling all pilot inputs to try to pitch up ..,This is suicidal, murder, a crime. The MCAS system didn’t behave as they intended, it was an engineering failure. It needed more testing and smarter ways of implementing it, there needs to be a direct correlation between AoA and indicated airspeed, when the plane passes green dot speed( speed on which plane is safe to operate on even one engine on a clear configuration) the aircraft should level off automatically and then give the pilots elevator control immediately, there was no correlation here, they over speed the whole way down. Bad system, with bad implementations and not safe, literally nothing to prevent tragedy, not even pilot command inputs. There is a lot to say about this system and Boeing in general as a company and safety but I’ll resume it on this: May all who perished RIP and their loved ones find peace. Boeing is held accountable for the lives that were lost because of one system that was only implemented to save money.
When the CEO of Boeing openly and arrogantly declared he transformed Boeing from an engineering firm to a viable corporation
Did he tell you that he was a fire fighter before he became a pilot?
I’d love to see Lockheed give Commercial Aviation another try.
Boeing got complacent when they purchased and killed off their largest competitor (McDonnell-Douglas) while simultaneously overlooking Airbus.
Mistake #1. The above. Complacency.
Mistake #2: Ending the 757 Production line and destroying the tooling for the 757. A 757-100 would be a perfect 737 replacement complimented by the 757-200.
Mistake #3: Not purchasing the Bombardier CSeries. A program and Aircraft that was turnkey. An immediate and modern 737 replacement. But Boeing leadership balked. Airbus bought the CSeries which is now the A220. It’s even outselling A319’s and A320’s. (Similar to how the McDonnell-Douglas MD-95 AKA Boeing 717 was doing against the 737-400/500. Boeing wouldn’t dare allow the MD engineered, Non Boeing looking but better airplane in the 717 outsell one of their historic flagship models. (Pride)
#4: Continued BAD leadership that isn’t innovative or has a love for the brand.
Important lesson to be learned here.. A great wife who good at navigating spouse can help a good pilot.