Would you fly on this plane?
- Thread starter Rack Kit
- Start date
That may be true, but the adrenalin hit as you weave your way through the traffic in the city lasts an awful lot longer.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
Agree and yet, I’d avoid flying in one until the facts are established.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
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.
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" '
CHE
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.
It all smells a bit fishy - I think grounding until the latest crash is investigated is a reasonable precaution.
Kraus
pfm Member
Are you speaking of average airflight or the Boeing 737 Max 8 about which the question is asked?
Both.
cutting42
Arrived at B4 Hacker Ergo
It might be still safer statistically than driving or cycling but increased caution is definitely warranted I believe
Ref quote from Forbes article:
- 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
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.
Sue Pertwee-Tyr
Accuphase all the way down
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.
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.
