I have a 1991 Bantam Air & Space Series reprint of the (c)1963 "The Electra Story". I think you're right about the Max recovering, assuming that the multiple root causes of the two accidents are all fixed. Chapter 4 of "The Electra Story" is titled "If Another One Goes Down ...". It is an apt comment for the current situation, as Jamar Jackson noted below.

(Written on 10/05/2019)(Permalink)

Thanks, Ed. "The Electra Story" was one of my sources. I still have my old paperback. Just saw it is available as a Kindle book on Amazon.

(Written on 10/05/2019)(Permalink)

I was wrong about "grounding". The Electra was put under operational restrictions, including a speed restriction. It was not grounded.

(Written on 10/05/2019)(Permalink)

Another example of public opinion affecting an aircraft type is the Lockheed Electra. Pilots loved this aircraft, but shortly after its introduction in 1958, there were two horrific crashes. In the first crash in 1959, the initial investigation was hampered by the disintegrated state of the wreckage, but it was clear that the left wing had detached in otherwise nominal conditions at cruising altitude. Then on March 17, 1960, a second Electra lost BOTH wings at 18,000 feet, sending the fuselage into the ground like a missile, impacting at 600 plus mph. Unlike most aircraft accidents, there were no bodies and little debris on the ground, just a crater 40 by 30 feet. The crater made by the fuselage was so gruesome that local health, religious, and coroner officials tried to bar its excavation. It took 5 days to dig up the fuselage, compressed to a solid smoking mass 1/3 its length. Out of 63 souls on board, only the remains of 7 could be identified. And of course the press was reporting

(Written on 10/05/2019)(Permalink)

I design and validate safety-significant software systems for a living. I've seen some useful observations in this forum over the past few weeks, especially from the pilots and system designers. And of course some chaff to be ignored. As the investigation proceeds, there are a couple of rookie mistakes to watch out for, as even experts sometimes fall into these traps: 1) When analyzing actions and decisions of people over time leading up to an accident, it is unfair to apply your present "perfect" knowledge of what happened. You must "walk the timeline" shoulder to shoulder with those people and assess their actions and decisions with what they knew at that moment in time. Doing the latter can uncover root-cause defects that might otherwise remain undetected. 2) Be careful of firm, unyielding comments about how the systems worked leading up to the accident; e.g., "when you flip this switch, this IS what happened". Everything in the system behavior should now be suspect unt

(Written on 05/04/2019)(Permalink)

I have a vague memory that, early in 727's service, there were landing issues caused by an excessive nose-up attitude, which would cause the wings to block air to the 727's high-mounted horizontal stabilizers and stall them. The swaying you mentioned might have been caused by minor interference with the horizontal stabilizers. I think the fix included a faster landing speed and less nose-up. Any 727 pilots out there remember this?

(Written on 18/01/2019)(Permalink)

Thank you, Joel. Chilling.

(Written on 06/01/2019)(Permalink)

Another shorty was a scheduled 2 minute UA flight from Oakland to San Francisco. One wheels down "S" turn over the bay. Frequent Flyers used it to rack up a quick 750 miles, the minimum for a scheduled UA flight.

(Written on 07/09/2018)(Permalink)

There's a fun way to try it out, if you have a full-scale public flight simulator in your area. For example, in Anaheim, CA, FlightDeck (https://flightdeck1.com/) has a fixed-base simulator of a Boeing 737-800. The screen is high-fidelity 180 degree wrap around and the cockpit is an exact replica. "Fixed-base" means the cockpit does not physically move like the pro simulators, so no "seat of the pants" feedback. Nevertheless, it's a hoot, and pilots have given it good reviews. While they have several standard packages of training and short flights, the folks there love what they do and would probably be willing to set up a scenario where you would sit down in the pilot seat with no training and with the simulator in a stable flight scenario and then coach you down to a landing by "radio".

(Written on 13/07/2018)(Permalink)

Let's see, a Concorde and a space shuttle. That's 2 out of 4 at the NY Intrepid museum. So let's get the Growler doing tours out in the harbor too. Lots of former Dolphins to help with that. Not sure about the Intrepid itself. We're going to need more volunteers ...

(Written on 08/06/2018)(Permalink)