Boeing 737 Max design error

On Friday, May 10, 2019 at 11:21:51 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:12818a23-e6bf-4023-97e1-a515f20cd061@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 6:00:15 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:b3bc6fc9-a8a3-4cbd-a981-ec5b4561c87b@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 11:48:51 AM UTC-4, DLUNU wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:9ac95d86-7697-4fd5-b32d-37d3644c99a2@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:954c1f11-ccbb-4c27-b8e9-80daec1fa3a1@googlegroups.com:

Woooah there Pilgrim! Neither I nor any of the other
adults here discussing this said that it required "tons
of force" to turn the trim wheels. Only that:


Learn to read, idiot. I said the screws EXERT tons of
force, but that such force is not required to TURN the
screw which applies that force.

You need to learn how to fucking read, BOY! That and you
are one
thick skulled dimwit as it relates to mechanical aptitude.

Have you found those B1 crashes that you claim were the
result of fly-by-wire failures yet?


"found"? I am not looking, you retarded piece of criminal
street slut shit.

Of course you're not looking, because as usual, the B1 crashes
due to fly-by-wire failure that you claimed don't exist.




Figured out yet that the flaps on the 737 and most other
commercial aircraft are not driven by pistons?

Chalk one up for Sylvia, not you, you pathetic, So fucking
Trumplike CHUMP.

Not me? I'm the first one to tell you that the flaps are not
piston activated.


Nice try, punk. You do not even know how to follow a thread.

Sure I do, as I will show you.




And even after both of us told you that, you
still claimed that all planes use piston flap actuators.

You came far later, idiot. Sylvia even told you that. You are
days off the mark, dumbfuck.

Now you're lying and trying to use Sylvia to boot! AFAIK, she
never said what you are claiming. Here is your post, May 7,
claiming that the flaps on large passenger aircraft use piston
actuators:


There is your problem, dumbfuck. That is the first thread YOU
jumped into.

It's all in the same thread, right here.




I actually mentioned it earlier than that, and not by
> Sylvia, but another person posted a link.

That's a lie. The cite I gave you is the first time you claimed that
large aircraft FLAPS use pistons. And if as you now claim there was
an earlier post and Syvia told you that you were wrong, why did you
keep making the false claim? Fact is, what you claimed earlier was
not about FLAPS, but a suggestion to use pistons in the trim:

May 7:
" Same equipment, except that instead of a screw jack, it would be a
hydraulic cylinder, and THAT cylinder can be made to be 'freed' either
in the cylinder valving and design itself or by attachment point or
both. "

To which I responded on the same day:


"Yes, great idea. McDonald Douglas used that idea in the DC-10.
Instead of a jackscrew to drive the flaps, they used a hydraulic PISTON.
Which of course is what we actually call it. In 1979 a DC-10 full
of passengers taking off from O'Hare had an engine fall off, which in
turn damaged the hydraulic lines in the wing. The flaps retracted.
Guess what happened next. "


Anything else I can help you out with, let me know.

BTW, have you found any cites to all those B1 bomber accidents that were
caused by fly-by-wire that you claimed happened?

Wrong, always wrong.

 

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 4:38:14 AM UTC-10, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:8c9ce028-3472-42f2-b643-
16e126a81ad2@googlegroups.com:

I actually mentioned it earlier than that, and not by
Sylvia, but another person posted a link.

That's a lie. The cite I gave you is the first time you claimed that
large aircraft FLAPS use pistons.

Absolutely untrue. You need to get off your lazy, fat ass, and read
the thread over again. I mentioned it days before your lame ass chimed
in.

Gentlepersons, gentlepersons... please remain polite as passengers'
attitudes are boing boing bonn.

 

[Banders]

On 05/11/2019 06:48 AM, trader4@optonline.net wrote:

Fact is, what you claimed earlier was not about FLAPS, but a
suggestion to use pistons in the trim:

May 7: " Same equipment, except that instead of a screw jack, it
would be a hydraulic cylinder, and THAT cylinder can be made to be
'freed' either in the cylinder valving and design itself or by
attachment point or both. "

A screw won't operate in reverse. Just as you can't hammer a screw into
a 2x4, air loads won't turn the screw. The jack screw is ideal for trimming.

As Sylvia said, the tailplane can't be left flapping in the wind. It
has to be fixed at some position, even if not the ideal one. If you
freed the screw, or cylinder, some other type of anchor would have to
take over.

To which I responded on the same day:

"Yes, great idea. McDonald Douglas used that idea in the DC-10.
Instead of a jackscrew to drive the flaps, they used a hydraulic
PISTON. Which of course is what we actually call it.

Is it? I don't know, but cylinder sounds right to me. If you're sure
they're bad though, why not demand screws to drive ailerons?

In 1979 a DC-10 full of passengers taking off from O'Hare had an
engine fall off, which in turn damaged the hydraulic lines in the
wing. The flaps retracted. Guess what happened next. "

It was leading edge slats, on one side, not flaps. The airplane had "no
agree" lights for the slats, but the lights didn't work because the
electrical system was also torn out along with the hydraulics. The
pilots would have had a fair chance of saving the plane if the lights
had been able to tell them something. You want to replace electrical
circuits with something better too?

 

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 1:37:04 PM UTC-4, Banders wrote:

On 05/11/2019 06:48 AM, trader4@optonline.net wrote:
Fact is, what you claimed earlier was not about FLAPS, but a
suggestion to use pistons in the trim:

May 7: " Same equipment, except that instead of a screw jack, it
would be a hydraulic cylinder, and THAT cylinder can be made to be
'freed' either in the cylinder valving and design itself or by
attachment point or both. "

A screw won't operate in reverse. Just as you can't hammer a screw into
a 2x4, air loads won't turn the screw. The jack screw is ideal for trimming.

As Sylvia said, the tailplane can't be left flapping in the wind. It
has to be fixed at some position, even if not the ideal one. If you
freed the screw, or cylinder, some other type of anchor would have to
take over.

To which I responded on the same day:

"Yes, great idea. McDonald Douglas used that idea in the DC-10.
Instead of a jackscrew to drive the flaps, they used a hydraulic
PISTON. Which of course is what we actually call it.

Is it? I don't know, but cylinder sounds right to me.

Sure, as long as you want a hydraulic failure to result in a crash?
Hello? DC-10, O'Hare, 1979?



If you're sure
> they're bad though, why not demand screws to drive ailerons?

It's not up to me to demand anything and it would be irrelevant.
The fact that most control surfaces in modern aircraft are not
driven by pistons is relevant.

In 1979 a DC-10 full of passengers taking off from O'Hare had an
engine fall off, which in turn damaged the hydraulic lines in the
wing. The flaps retracted. Guess what happened next. "

It was leading edge slats, on one side, not flaps.

Correct, but still the same point, a piston with hydraulic failure,
retracted the control surface, resulting in a disaster.


The airplane had "no

agree" lights for the slats, but the lights didn't work because the
electrical system was also torn out along with the hydraulics. The
pilots would have had a fair chance of saving the plane if the lights
had been able to tell them something. You want to replace electrical
circuits with something better too?

BS. That aircraft was at a low speed, without the leading edge, they
were doomed, it stalled. And regardless, it shows the extreme disadvantage
to using pistons. You think maybe that's why jackscrews are prefered?
The part about agree lights and electrica things not working is pure BS.

 

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 10:36:31 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:6c372853-11a3-41ae-8d94-32dadf2a0ceb@googlegroups.com:

Why did you leave out an identifiable violation of safe, sound
aircraft design practices? And if what MCAS is constitutes safe
and sound practice at Boeing, what other irresponsible, stupid
designs are in other Boeing planes right now? The CEO should go,
those shareholders were right. He hasn't accepted that this is a
Boeing failure, that they got this very wrong, that their crap
design killed people. It's only one attempt at PR spin after
another.


You make the most retarded, convoluted observations I have ever seen.

Well... you come in a close second to Donald J. Trump.

Obviously suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, when you bring
Trump into a thread about Boeing and the 737 Max.

Nuff said.

 

omnilobe@gmail.com wrote in news:dcedbb29-526a-43fe-af1d-
afbc4af9044d@googlegroups.com:

Gentlepersons, gentlepersons... please remain polite as passengers'
attitudes are boing boing bonn.

Ooopa Dupa! Putin' on the Ritz...

Or is that "ooompa looompa..."?

H. R. Fukensuk, who's yer friend when Usenet gets rough?

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:db5c3393-9005-486e-807e-
ecb907ad4247@googlegroups.com:

> Sure, as long as you want a hydraulic failure to result in a crash?

You can never get it right, chump.

Hydraulic motor... Currently turns screw knuckle

Hydraulic cylinder... Could apply selfsame pressure at same or
better rate.

What results in a crash?

We have RELIED on hydraulics in airframes for decades, you stupid
fuck.

YOU are an authority on NOTHING.

The only thing you are adept at is shoving calories into your fat
face.

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:5fb4e107-bb61-4cbb-a76b-
efdf8c062623@googlegroups.com:

Obviously suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome, when you
bring
Trump into a thread about Boeing and the 737 Max.

Nuff said.

Nice job, dumbfuck. You are unqualified, unsolicited,
unprofessional, and so full of shit.

Oh, that's right... YOU ARE SHIT.

You cannot make up 'sydromes' you fucking loon.

I mentioned Trump as a measure reference. I mean I know it is
hard for a failed trader wammabe jackass to garner, but anyone with
even half a brain could see that I did not bring Trump into the
thread. I merely mentioned his low bar setting as a measure to
which you run a close second.

I know it is hard for you to get, chump. Come back in twenty
years when your adolescent brain has had time to mature at least
another ten years. Right now, it is only keeping up with your
physical age at a quarter speed.

You are such a pathetic wuss.

 

On Sat, 11 May 2019 04:49:12 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

krw@notreal.com wrote in
news:mqgcde5f5ptiv1av7eagpb62jrr6mlq86n@4ax.com:

On Fri, 10 May 2019 12:47:36 +1000, Sylvia Else
sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:

On 10/05/2019 8:00 am, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org
wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:b3bc6fc9-a8a3-4cbd-a981-ec5b4561c87b@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 11:48:51 AM UTC-4, DLUNU wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:9ac95d86-7697-4fd5-b32d-37d3644c99a2@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, May 9, 2019 at 7:06:57 AM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:954c1f11-ccbb-4c27-b8e9-80daec1fa3a1@googlegroups.com:

Woooah there Pilgrim! Neither I nor any of the other
adults here discussing this said that it required "tons of
force" to turn the trim wheels. Only that:


Learn to read, idiot. I said the screws EXERT tons of
force, but that such force is not required to TURN the screw
which applies that force.

You need to learn how to fucking read, BOY! That and you
are one
thick skulled dimwit as it relates to mechanical aptitude.

Have you found those B1 crashes that you claim were the
result of fly-by-wire failures yet?


"found"? I am not looking, you retarded piece of criminal
street slut shit.

Of course you're not looking, because as usual, the B1 crashes
due to fly-by-wire failure that you claimed don't exist.




Figured out yet that the flaps on the 737 and most other
commercial aircraft are not driven by pistons?

Chalk one up for Sylvia, not you, you pathetic, So fucking
Trumplike CHUMP.

Not me? I'm the first one to tell you that the flaps are not
piston activated.


Nice try, punk. You do not even know how to follow a thread.

And even after both of us told you that, you
still claimed that all planes use piston flap actuators.

You came far later, idiot. Sylvia even told you that. You
are
days off the mark, dumbfuck.

At least
for once you admit you were wrong.


And not at least for once, but yet again, you prove how much
of an
abject idiot you are, obsessed with your lame, elementary school
tally.

I have done more in the last ten years to make the world a
better,
safer place than you ever have or ever will in your entire,
pathetic life, you stupid piece of shit. And you can't trade
that, childish fuck.

Is this how you deal with work colleagues, or if you're not yet
working, how you intend to deal with work colleagues?


AlwaysWrong gets a "does not play well with others" on his annual
evaluations. Always.


Remember the beginning of "Contact"? Your chest gripper is gonna
be even more painful for you. You are one day closer, chump.

You're _always_ wrong, AlwaysWrong.

I smile just thinking about it.

They're coming to take you away...

 

krw@notreal.com wrote in news:9n2fde95in3u4ebraoqme90pmuamdo0dsu@
4ax.com:

They're coming to take you away...

And yet I am still miles above a lame fucktard like you.

 

[Cursitor Doom]

On Sun, 12 May 2019 08:07:26 -0700, trader4 wrote:

See, another example of why you have no credibility. You just make
things up out of thin air.

You'll never get anywhere attempting to debate with these bottom-feeders,
mate.




--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in
news:f9aa4713-4aa5-4758-99f5-ed098825ffa0@googlegroups.com:

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 10:50:57 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:db5c3393-9005-486e-807e-
ecb907ad4247@googlegroups.com:

Sure, as long as you want a hydraulic failure to result in a
crash?

You can never get it right, chump.

Hydraulic motor... Currently turns screw knuckle

Yes, I'm the one that explained that to you. You foolishly
thought that hydraulics = pistons.

No, you DUMB FUCKTARD. YOU have foolishly thought that you have
the first clue about anything I know. And you are wrong, you stupid
fuck.

Hydraulic cylinder... Could apply selfsame pressure at same or
better rate.

What results in a crash?

If the hydraulic system loses pressure and the control surface is
driven by your simple piston that you described,

You obviously think that a hydraulic cylinder runs free. The
valving alone would hold it stiff right where it was last
positioned. IF said valving is released, THEN the cylinder is
released for movement by other means. NOT the outside forces,
idiot.

then the plane
could crash.

You are an abject idiot. You keep proving that.

> would be left flapping in the wind

snip

Your brain has been out flapping in the wind. Every time you make
another stupid post.

We have RELIED on hydraulics in airframes for decades, you
stupid
fuck.

YOU are an authority on NOTHING.

Me? You're the one that claimed the flaps on large aircraft are
done with pistons.

Some are.

The only thing you are adept at is shoving calories into your
fat
face.

See, another example of why you have no credibility. You just
make things up out of thin air. You keep hurling childish
insults, calling me fat, when everyone here knows you don't know
anything about my weight or what I look like.

I have seen no denials. You got huge, didn't ya, boy?

 

On Saturday, May 11, 2019 at 10:50:57 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:db5c3393-9005-486e-807e-
ecb907ad4247@googlegroups.com:

Sure, as long as you want a hydraulic failure to result in a crash?

You can never get it right, chump.

Hydraulic motor... Currently turns screw knuckle

Yes, I'm the one that explained that to you. You foolishly thought that
hydraulics = pistons.

Hydraulic cylinder... Could apply selfsame pressure at same or
better rate.

What results in a crash?

If the hydraulic system loses pressure and the control surface is driven
by your simple piston that you described, then the plane could crash.
I keep citing you the example of the DC-10 crash at O'Hare, 1979.
If it's driven by a jackscrew, that can't happen. Jackscrews have that
advantage. Probably why Boeing chose it and they've worked for 50+ years.
Can you use hydraulic pistons? Sure, but it's not just a simple one piston
design, for the above reasons. You need two pistons, separate hydraulic
systems for redundancy. All that adds complexity and more potential
failure points, as Sylvia pointed out to you. She also pointed out that
your idea of just cutting off the piston drive makes no sense, because
then the control surface, in this case the horizontal stabilizer, would
be left flapping in the wind and the crew still needs to be able to move
it by HAND. And Boeing, who you above all else here
seems to have a lot of faith in, designed it and they aren't going to
change what has worked for 50+ years. They will fix MCAS and the planes
will be flying again. Assuming the public is willing to get on them.
Me? I'm not just worried about the 737 Max, I'm worried that if this could
come out of Boeing, God only knows what else is in other planes that we
don't know about. There have been plenty of whistle blowers claiming that
the aircraft being delivered have all kinds of crap, scraps, parts left
laying around in hidden spots. And so far, that CEO hasn't owned up to
anything, hasn't admitted that this was a bad design that is not what
Boeing should have put into an aircraft. He's pretending it's just
a little glitch along the way. Let's just say my faith in Boeing isn't
what it was a year ago.

We have RELIED on hydraulics in airframes for decades, you stupid
fuck.

YOU are an authority on NOTHING.

Me? You're the one that claimed the flaps on large aircraft are done
with pistons. I showed you links showing the jackscrews on the 737
flaps, videos too.

The only thing you are adept at is shoving calories into your fat
face.

See, another example of why you have no credibility. You just make things
up out of thin air. You keep hurling childish insults, calling me fat,
when everyone here knows you don't know anything about my weight or
what I look like.

 

Cursitor Doom <curd@notformail.com> wrote in
news:qb9dlq$gun$1@dont-email.me:

You'll never get anywhere attempting to debate with these
bottom-feeders, mate.

And this doomitor curse dipshit thinks calling folks 'bottom
feeder' is civil.

Pretty much all of you motherfuckers are low life holier than thou
jackasses.

Some are smart, some are intelligent, but few are of good
character and are honorable.

Debate? "get anywhere"? Looks like you do not even know what the
word debate means. If the person disagrees with you they are
'bottom feeders' and folks you are 'unable to get anywhere with'.
Wow... what a joke you are. With Fatfuckfacetradertard4 anyone
disgreeing with that absolute fucking putz is 'a lib'. Yeah, you
two dumbfucks are a real piece of work. Pathetic even by Usenet
standards, actually.

What you stupid characterless bastards are... fucking hypocrites.
Fucking uncivil retards, some of which whom think that insulting
folks, as long as "a name" or "cussing" is not invloved it is OK.
You stupid, uncivil fucktards are so far off the mark, you only
serve to prove you never ever even got close to the mark.

 

krw@notreal.com wrote in
news:br9hde9t2fmg7qug274v8njtl4ng8godip@4ax.com:

On Sun, 12 May 2019 05:14:41 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

krw@notreal.com wrote in news:9n2fde95in3u4ebraoqme90pmuamdo0dsu@
4ax.com:


They're coming to take you away...


And yet I am still miles above a lame fucktard like you.

It's a good thing for me that you're AlwaysWrong. You just can't
shut your mouth to avoid creating even more examples.

Nice try, heartless punk. It is broken. It is brittle. It will
fracture... and you will feel that pain... that pain you still
fear.

Good job, always heartless. You get it right back in your face,
putz. Just like you deserve. Instant karma done got you, you just
don't know it yet. Gonna whopp you right upside the chest!
I am already glad. So I took a hit on my karma due to wanting you
to get yours.

 

On Sun, 12 May 2019 05:14:41 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

krw@notreal.com wrote in news:9n2fde95in3u4ebraoqme90pmuamdo0dsu@
4ax.com:


They're coming to take you away...


And yet I am still miles above a lame fucktard like you.

It's a good thing for me that you're AlwaysWrong. You just can't shut
your mouth to avoid creating even more examples.

 

On Sun, 12 May 2019 23:15:50 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

krw@notreal.com wrote in
news:br9hde9t2fmg7qug274v8njtl4ng8godip@4ax.com:

On Sun, 12 May 2019 05:14:41 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

krw@notreal.com wrote in news:9n2fde95in3u4ebraoqme90pmuamdo0dsu@
4ax.com:


They're coming to take you away...


And yet I am still miles above a lame fucktard like you.

It's a good thing for me that you're AlwaysWrong. You just can't
shut your mouth to avoid creating even more examples.


Nice try, heartless punk. It is broken. It is brittle. It will
fracture... and you will feel that pain... that pain you still
fear.

There you go again...

Good job, always heartless. You get it right back in your face,
putz. Just like you deserve. Instant karma done got you, you just
don't know it yet. Gonna whopp you right upside the chest!
I am already glad. So I took a hit on my karma due to wanting you
to get yours.

....ALWAYS AlwaysWrong. Keep the examples coming, AlwaysWrong.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 11/05/2019 00:33, whit3rd wrote:

On Friday, May 10, 2019 at 12:03:53 PM UTC-7, Mike Perkins wrote:

I don't understand your point. The issue is whether Boeing is criminally
negligent. If this was a non-US company there would be calls for their
extradition.

Well, no; there's an approval process for planes, and they went through that
process and got certified. The investigations are still under way, with
no claim of wrongdoing coming from the investigators.

They self certified and the FAA were in bed with them. Not a proper
independent certification that the thing was truly airworthy. I hope
that the truth will eventually be told. I doubt if any international
aviation authority will take FAA certification at face value after this.

'They' to be extradited: who, exactly, would those persons be?

Civil responsibility remains, but only violation of certification would
cause a legal (criminal) offense for the manufacturer. The current situation
is unfortunate, and the (rather spectacular) loss of two aircraft is tragic, but
not criminal, unless some information comes to light about a party to an
identifiable violation of an operational, maintenance, or materials-and-craftsmanship
norm is found. There will be recertification with a new specification,
hopefully soon.

I think a case for negligence in the design and implementation of the
MCAS system and its lack of documentation in the as released plane and
flight manuals would be compelling. I also expect Boeing will be able to
employ expensive fat slimy lawyers to get them off the hook though.

It also appears on the face of it that their remedial procedure did not
work either since by the time the crew have reacted the plane is already
descending too fast & too steep for them to move the manual trim wheels.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, May 6, 2019 at 6:57:15 PM UTC+10, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Mon, 06 May 2019 08:30:50 +0000, Jan Panteltje wrote:

Like Trump University, normally somebody would get jailed for running a
fake university and handing out fake certificates?

Dunno about that, but I *do* know Obama posted a crudely-forged birth
certificate on the WH website, so maybe Trump is simply following a
recently-established precedent. :-D

What Cursitor Doom "knows" is rather like what krw "knows" - some bizarre delusion that some right-wing propaganda site has managed to lodge in his head.

Evidence-based facts don't get a look in. Where's the fun in agreeing with the saner members of the population?

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:1b9cc817-2b24-4f20-b534-
ee2c3f3fe6e5@googlegroups.com:

If so, then what will they do? Demand that all Boeing planes be
certified by each foreign authority? Seems unlikely. Having some
foreign observers with the FAA might be a good idea though.

Self certification through a regulating authority is nothing new.

Underwriters Laboratories have had it for decades. Most major makers
of nearly any product you can name self certify their UL compliance and
place the mark of said certification.

Until and unless they have a major failure that would indictate being
due to an element the UL labs would scrutinize heavily, that company
loses its self cert capacity.

You guys are so far behind the process. It is really amazing the
gossip spew these accidents have caused.