Beep
Well-Known Member
“ threats? “
“ Boeing executives “
Boeing Lounge Boeing 737 LRD
- Thread starter ZapBrannigan
- Start date
“ Boeing executives “
BEEF SUPREME
Well-Known Member
Yes. Yes.
Likely a lot of rubber jungle events and turn backs with resultant errors.
Real mans airplane! Hurr durr.
One more gallon to go!
The fix is done. 480 market days for the FAA to review the paperwork. That process started in June of 2024. So fixed 2026. Apparently, the MAX 7 could be approved then. Will they replace all the existing aircraft engine cowls? That would ground most of our fleet.
TBM 700, PC-12, KA200, CJ1, 2 and 3, CitationX, Falcon 900, EMB175, 737. They all kind of fly the same with the exception of the landing flare for the straight wings. Since the X every aircraft has had the mains behind the CG. All really similar IMO.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
lol, the PC12 doesn’t fly like the 73 but go off
BEEF SUPREME
Well-Known Member
The -45 flew exactly like the truck you described.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Ah, before they fixed the ailerons.
BEEF SUPREME
Well-Known Member
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Not really dude. Maybe big airplanes with hydraulic boosted controls all have similarities, I can’t speak to that, but the PC-12 and Lear variants I flew handled much better than the 73. I also assume FBW aircraft don’t have the obnoxiously large deadband that some of our planes have in roll.
ctab5060X
Well-Known Member
It is my understanding that Airbus has logic that closes the associated engine bleed valve in the event of LRD activation on the LEAP-1A.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Amazing what you can do if you’re not locked into a 70 year old bleed panel design.
ctab5060X
Well-Known Member
Now that I have a little more time.
We knew about the system back in February when our Fleet Bulletin was published. However, now that the incidents at SWA are really coming to into the light, it is getting more traction.
According to Boeing, their solution is not to do a bleeds off takeoff, but rather to initiate the Engine Severe Damage checklist as soon as possible. This was the guidance we were given 2 weeks ago at our Winter Standards Meeting.
I agree that doing bleeds off takeoffs is not the solution. It’s not the risk of errors, but rather performance data (at least ours) limits the engines to only TO power only when conducting a bleeds off takeoff. As a result, operators will lose the cost saving of doing reduced power takeoffs. As much as it pains me to say this, but I think the simplest solution is simply a recall/memory item that has us close the associated bleed valve. Apparently, Boeing as said that is not in the works either.
@ZapBrannigan We have discussed what we know of the incidents around the dinner table at our CKP commuter hotel and the overall consensus is, regardless of whether we knew of the system or not, massive kudos to the crews for getting those aircraft back on the ground.
Going to be interesting to see how Boeing handles this one.
We knew about the system back in February when our Fleet Bulletin was published. However, now that the incidents at SWA are really coming to into the light, it is getting more traction.
According to Boeing, their solution is not to do a bleeds off takeoff, but rather to initiate the Engine Severe Damage checklist as soon as possible. This was the guidance we were given 2 weeks ago at our Winter Standards Meeting.
I agree that doing bleeds off takeoffs is not the solution. It’s not the risk of errors, but rather performance data (at least ours) limits the engines to only TO power only when conducting a bleeds off takeoff. As a result, operators will lose the cost saving of doing reduced power takeoffs. As much as it pains me to say this, but I think the simplest solution is simply a recall/memory item that has us close the associated bleed valve. Apparently, Boeing as said that is not in the works either.
@ZapBrannigan We have discussed what we know of the incidents around the dinner table at our CKP commuter hotel and the overall consensus is, regardless of whether we knew of the system or not, massive kudos to the crews for getting those aircraft back on the ground.
Going to be interesting to see how Boeing handles this one.
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
Man, I don’t like that either. Even if you’re 100% on grabbing the correct bleed and only the correct bleed the first time, are you likely to be quick enough to prevent a smoke event? Also wouldn’t the first priority be to get the O2 mask and goggles on?
I admit I didn’t pay that much attention when this first popped up but the more I learn this seems like a pretty big damn deal and another nice FU from Boeing
ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
Is it a Boeing design issue, or CFM?
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
As per @ctab5060X post a few up, and the fact that we’re not hearing about this on NEOs, seems like a Boeing issue.
ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
That's fair. Sometimes I feel the aircraft builders get a lot of flack for something designed by somebody else. But this does seem like a Boeing issue.
ctab5060X
Well-Known Member
In theory, the smoke should start to dissipate after the engine bleed valve is closed if this happens during takeoff or initial climb.
We were discussing this during recurrent this week and we all agreed that getting your mask on is paramount. Beyond that, we discussed the visibility going to the 5 inches that @ZapBrannigan mentioned and how doing our Engine Fire, Engine Severe Damage or Separation trying to do multiple confirm steps by feel would be difficult at best.
Skåning
Well-Known Member
Time to open the window and clear the air
Roger Roger
Bottom of the list
ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
That was how we got mosquitoes out of the plane in the CASA. Minus the packs of course.