• Robert G. Oler

    there have been no issues in first world aviation cultures

  • Robert G. Oler

    Hypergolic attitude control systems like the Draco thrusters have been in use for over 60 years.

    which means SpaceX should have had access to experts which could have stopped their latest catastrophe πŸ™‚

  • Robert G. Oler

    why would they do that? Boeing has no obligation to help SpaceX particularly when the latter is not very safety oriented

  • Robert G. Oler

    you are not a pilot and are not competent to discuss technical matters of aviation. none of those are related to the question at hand

    face it man. SpaceX nearly killed three astronauts..

  • Robert G. Oler

    MCAS induced runaway different than classic because it is episodic on
    time interval while speed trim behaves normally between intervals. That
    with onset during flaps up configuration change is a dead ringer for
    this issue and not classic runaway. Stop covering it’s a bad look.

    LOL you do not know what you are talking about

    SPEED TRIM which has existed in the B737 since the 300 (it was required for certification) works exactly the same way (it is the same “part of the digital autopilot) …ie it trims in burst and can be negated by pilot input as well as being disarmed with flaps “not up”

    I could go to any B737 hub (Dallas, Houston etc) and pull 100 B737 Captains aside and they would be unable to tell me what the defining feature that differentiates Speed Trim and MCAS and do in a time period that is useful…and why should they?

    the action is the same. STAB TRIM CUTOFF switches OFF, Trim manually…establish flaps up or Flaps down stabilized speed

    the failure in all B737 simulators (as well as the B757/767 where MCAS and Speed Trim come from) is simply “autopilot trim runaway”

    there is no need to tell the difference between the two…because the actions are the same

    you know nothing about most of what you are commenting on

  • Robert G. Oler

    it is like when Virgin lost their vehicle.

  • Robert G. Oler

    well…it aint going to fly any time soon

  • Jacob Samorodin

    No one got killed…That is the most important thing.

  • Jacob Samorodin

    Somebody is playing at engineering forensics in the peanut gallery.

  • Jacob Samorodin

    Hey! Cars explode too! …Low-tech as they are in comparison to spacecraft, they go BOOM on occasion too when they are not supposed to…What was the name of that car? Saturn?

  • Jacob Samorodin

    You must be getting grey-hairs and wrinkles waiting for the fulfillment of all these ambitious space projects that get postponed year after year, decade after decade.

  • Robert G. Oler

    yes./..but it wont matter in what happens. I suspect no astronaut will ride in a Dragon2 now…I wouldnt…I would ride on a Falcon…but not the capsule…

  • ThomasLMatula

    Why do you keep insisting that the fault was in the RCS and not the LES? Do you hate the success of the Cargo Dragon that much?

  • ThomasLMatula

    No, TWA Flight 800 was the last time that happened to Boeing. Something about a faulty fuel tank if I recall…

  • ThomasLMatula

    If you have evidence that SpaceX has sloppy safety why haven’t you reported it to your contacts at NASA? Or wise such statements border on libel.

  • Robert G. Oler

    I am not saying where the fault was…I dont know…you cannot find a post that says I think the fault was “X” or “Y”

    what I am saying and have been clear about is clearly there was something that SpaceX did not know about, it was a single channel failure and it destroyed the vehicle. we need to find out what that was…and why they missed it.

    until then its unclear to me that any safety analysis they have done period is valid

    You are the one who is making shit up and not thinking rationally based on your SpaceX love

  • ThomasLMatula

    You do such terminology is considered racist?

    BTW I checked and Ethiopia Airlines has the highest rating the FAA provides, the same FAA rating that Turkish Airlines has. The Captain of the Ethiopia jet had over 8,000 hours of flight time.

  • ThomasLMatula

    So just what is your rational for grounding the Cargo Dragon? Again, the two are very different spacecraft.

  • Robert G. Oler

    two different questions or maybe three

    1. Why ground the Dragon cargo? soley based on the reality that SpaceX safety as well as NASA oversight missed whatever caused the Crew dragon problem…and you dont know what they missed with Cargo Dragon…in addition SpaceX in four years I believe has had three “booms”

    2. BTW I checked and Ethiopia Airlines has the highest rating the FAA provides, the same FAA rating that Turkish Airlines has..

    we have a part 121 certificate now (one reason they hired me)…but that has nothing to do with it

    the problem at Lion Air and Ethopia is that the vast majority of the people there speak and read and comprehend English as a second language…to varying degrees of capability…and this is true particularly at Lion Air…

    At THY the flight crews are required to have level 5 English and the vast majority of them learn it as a second language through the school system here where English is mandatory from grade 9.

    Other then English I speak Russian (USN school), Arabic (more or less self learned), now Turkish (more or less self learned), …but Spanish and German are near native languages to me. I can (as my two younger ones can in Turkish) think in them if I have to.

    I’ve instructed at Lion Air for Boeing (Ive instructed or have held for Boeing Chief Instructor title and mangement…at Lion Air, Air Baltic, Aeroflot, China Southwest, Erik Air, Bimen and Spice Jet) so I am pretty familiar with what it takes to instruct in countries where the language bridge is pretty high. IN addition I have liasoned with the Russians on space matters (ie been in Star City)

    without a doubt Boeing has challenges in instructing complex systems in countries where English is a weak second language. (I’ve done this) that is why the checklist dont go into a lot of detail expecting line pilots (either in strong English countries or lessor) to trouble shoot systems such as Speed Trim and MCAS rather to take aggressive utlimate action to “stop” the problem.

    “The Captain of the Ethiopia jet had over 8,000 hours of flight time.” but his transition time to the Max was limited to the Boeing min recommendation. here at THY we give three days of ground school and two full sim sessions with a third as a transition check.

    “Incidentally a quick check also shows Turkish Airlines had 4 fatal
    accidents since 2000, the most recent in 2017, while Ethiopia Airlines
    had only 2, including the B737 Max”

    the one in Jan 2017 for “us” was THY in name only it was a Cargo airplane operated by a I think US air carrier under a THY call sign…

    for what it is worth we operate in 6 months what Ethiopian does in 2 years in terms of flight hours …by the time the Max was grounded we had 81,000 hours of Max flight with zero events. none

    we operate at a tempo that exceeds SWA and comes close to UAL…

    the comments I am offering are mine and do not reflect any viewpoint of my current or former employer.

  • Robert G. Oler

    I would add one more thing. I am fluent (thank the creator) in high level math, CW(morse code), and aviation sign language like it is a native tongue… I speak and understand them as I do English…I am not quite as good as my kids…they can hold a conversation in English or Turkish and also comprehend what is being said in “the other language”…but if there is CW playing in the background. I’ll catch it πŸ™‚ WB5MZO

  • windbourne

    Why are you in the peanut gallery?

  • Robert G. Oler

    the shape and activity of the |Boeing capsule design is well understood

  • Mr Snarky Answer

    Those associated with a recent configuration change (flaps up) and stick shaker?

  • Robert G. Oler

    no grounded by Trump not the FAA sorry

  • Robert G. Oler

    there is no evidence that MCAS worked when the flaps are not up…none

    had the pilots 1) put the trim switches off 2) estatlished either flaps up or flaps down stabilized speed and 3) landed…the would be alive today…what do you not grasp about that.

    you are an idiot a Trumper

  • redneck

    So Trump is responsible for most other nations grounding it as well? Including Turkey that you speak so highly of?

  • Mr Snarky Answer

    Right, that’s the point, MCAS engages at the moment flaps-up configuration change occurs and associated with stick shaker due to faulty AoA input and false stall indication. That is a high workload environment at low altitude.

    I grasp all of it, I am not saying the pilots did the right thing, they didn’t even remotely. That is irrelevant to protections from bad input handling in the software to mitigate needless problems.

    “you are an idiot a Trumper”

    You’ve called me that before…must be your nervous tick because I’ve never voted for DJT.

  • Robert G. Oler

    it would be impossible for the average pilot to tell a Speed Trim from a MCAS activation. even if both were working perfectly

    neither of the flight crews was able to diagnose which AOA was giving good information…non even tried

    both flight crews killed themselves through incompetence

  • envy

    The problem is they now likely need the DM-2 vehicle for IFA, and the PCM-1 vehicle for the crewed demo. Even if they fix the issue tomorrow, the PCM-1 vehicle probably still isn’t going to be ready to fly this year.

  • envy

    Nobody is asking them to ride in a Dragon now. First the failure(s) will be identified and fixed, then tested and requalified, then rated for crew per NASA standards.Then astronauts will have no problem riding on Dragon.

  • Robert G. Oler

    its going to take more than this…someone is going to have to explain “how” this catastrophe slipped by SpaceX safety systems… Musk needs to get a handle on this…Tesla just posted hugh losses

  • Robert G. Oler

    it will be 2021 before Crewed Dragon flies to the station

  • envy

    Crew Dragon, particularly it’s abort system, is not certified for crew flight. In fact, it’s in the final stages of development, and the in-flight abort test is part of the testing required for it’s certification.

    So the failure did not “slip though” the safety systems. The certification process found a flaw before putting crew on the vehicle. That is exactly what the certification process is designed to do (though typically they would prefer it do so in a less spectacular fashion…).

  • envy

    ASAP said, and I quote, “Firing of eight SuperDracos resulted in an anomaly.” I’d trust the specificity of that official statement above the questionably-synced audio in a leaked video.

  • Robert G. Oler

    LOL Really LOL

    “Crew Dragon, particularly it’s abort system, is not certified for crew

    flight. In fact, it’s in the final stages of development, and the

    in-flight abort test is part of the testing required for it’s

    certification.”

    only in the world of fan boys

    1. they have fueled the Super D’s before using the exact same “way” they were doing it here…the only thing different was that it was on an actual vehicle

    2. they MISSED JUST MISSED a single point failure (most likely) that blew their vehicle up.

    they missed it…a typical software company mistake

    “That is exactly what the certification process is designed to do (though
    typically they would prefer it do so in a less spectacular fashion…).”

    NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

    you dont understand certification

    Certification actions are designed to demonstrate that tested systems meet performance specs.

    the analogy here is that imagine my old employeer designed a plane and depended on the certification flights to figure out if the gear would hold the plane

    you 1) dont have a clue what you are talking about and 2) have drank to much Elon kool aide

    TESTING is not a substitute for good designing. well at a software company it is πŸ™‚

  • envy

    Your “old employer” did enough “designing” to figure out that their valves would leak hydrazine only during an integrated test and not during component testing.

    The abort system has passed integrated testing before. Something changed since then to cause a failure. I’ll wait to find out exactly what that was before saying it got though any “safety systems”.

  • Robert G. Oler

    omething changed since then to cause a failure.”

    bingo you broke the code…something changed and as that “change” occurred safety missed the ramifications of it and the vehicle went into small pieces

    this is a failure of the safety dept. my guess is that the near silence from Elon either means he is standing on the brink of losing money because of this and tesla poor performance…or somewhere this is someone who is now fired who said “this could be a problem” and somewhere else there is a memo from someone who said “lets test anyway”

    software

    “Your “old employer” did enough “designing” to figure out that their
    valves would leak hydrazine only during an integrated test and not
    during component testing.”

    this is why you test and its not uncommon. during the test, not certification flights, but test the B777 suffered a dual compressor stall on take off (first flight) . the powerplants did exactly as they were designed to do…recycled and all was well

    BUT Boeing quickly found out what in integration had been missed.

    this is btw why they stopped the CST…ie unlike a software company they know that when the data line gets outside the predicted trend…you stop and figure out why

    wonder who Elon is ranting about now πŸ™‚

  • envy

    You don’t know what failed, ergo you don’t know that it’s a failure of the safety department.

    For example, the failure could have been caused by a faulty test setup that didn’t accurately reproduce the conditions of an abort, and instead produced condition far outside the expected flight environment.

    Or it could have been due to the ocean recovery and refurbishment, and not be an issue at all on a new capsule. Recovered capsules are not even being human rated.

    You’re just jumping to conclusions. Don’t do that. It doesn’t make you look smart.

  • Mr Snarky Answer

    This is so rich coming on the heels of the “non-software-company” designing a software system to take actions on input data that would suggest a B737 is doing the cobra maneuver shortly after takeoff

  • Robert G. Oler

    You don’t know what failed,”

    LOL true statement

    “ergo you don’t know that it’s a failure of the safety department.”

    not a true statement in fact you prove that its not true

    “For example, the failure could have been caused by a faulty test setup

    that didn’t accurately reproduce the conditions of an abort, and instead

    produced condition far outside the expected flight environment.”

    YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED A FAILURE OF THE SAFETY OFFICE.

    all test, all test should be reviewed and are reviewed in aerospace companies for 1) what they are trying to prove and 2) if they are safe to do…now they should be checked for that by the people doing the test…but the “last stand” should be safety

    other wise you risk losing a high cost asset for well error…

    “Or it could have been due to the ocean recovery and refurbishment, and not be an issue at all on a new capsule.”

    this is why test are sent to safety…safety is suppose to ask “have you considered that this vehicle has been in salt water…or (insert question here)

    sorry man you can twist and turn all you want but this is sloppy…and arrogant…and I suspect a bit careless.

    some adults need to come in and help the children, paraticularly the maangement be safe.

  • Robert G. Oler

    the smarts in the Boeing are in the pilot seats…its not software.

  • envy

    Safety review is supposed to make sure nobody gets hurt. Not make sure that tests never fail.

    And you’re again jumping to conclusions about what was or wasn’t done.

  • Robert G. Oler

    no that is not what a safety review does.

    you have no clue what you are talking about. you are just outof your league fan boy

  • envy

    And you’re not interested in having a factual conversation, just in calling names and making claims that aren’t supported by any evidence.

  • Robert G. Oler

    knowledge is essential you dont have it…you simply dont know what you are talking about

  • envy

    Since you don’t work for the Commercial Crew program or for SpaceX, you don’t have any more relevant knowledge about this specific incident than I do.

    Commercial Crew are not airliners, nor is NASA the FAA, so your field of expertise is no more applicable than mine. If you want to appeal to your own authority, qualify your expertise in spacecraft.