AI can push buttons by the book faster and more precisely than a human. Just have to hope the book is correct and contains every possible unique situation.

TexasRebel said:

---

You were going with the WoW lockout subtopic. I was replying to that.

Sometimes lockouts or overrides can be a hole in the cheese.

---

That's why I pointed out that RADALT < 10ft was a good failsafe for a failed WOW switch.

What are we arguing about now??

No clue. I didn't think we were.

PA24 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

Them shutting down the wrong engine is still the only explanation I can think of for them to come in gear up, and even then they could have put the gear down

---

Finally starting to realize it could have been a planned gear up by the pilot.

Was his descent high, way above the glide slope causing him to come in too hot?

As we all know, the bird strike didn't kill them, neither did the skid, it was slamming into that solid concrete block that killed them.

---

Gross negligence/incompetence in that case, like I said

TexasRebel said:

---

AI can push buttons by the book faster and more precisely than a human. Just have to hope the book is correct and contains every possible unique situation.

---

I understand how AI works. It's not that simplistic. BTW, true AI means the book does NOT contain every possible unique situation and yet, it can still return a, hopefully, good solution.

Control laws designed 50 years ago can do those...the F-16 is a prime example (not the first, but quite notable).

I worked on a helicopter program with control laws that could have your 5 year old son take off, maneuver, fly around and land (I was an FTE for a lot of flights). They were a starting point for Type Cert of a fly by wire helicopter that hope fully will be certified next year..

None of THAT stuff survived through the FAA TC process...

So, my point stands...but, to clarify, the REGULATORS will not allow AI in place of pilots anytime soon in any US air carrier (and neither will any other country's regulators).

TexasRebel said:

---

No clue. I didn't think we were.

---

Ok...

I just got confused by your comment since it didn't really match what I'd posted.

Mea culpa and gig 'em!

TexasRebel said:

---

You were going with the WoW lockout subtopic. I was replying to that.

Sometimes lockouts or overrides can be a hole in the cheese.

---

I'm not sure what supposed "hole in the cheese" you're concerned about here...I don't think you are understanding how the thrust reverser controls are actually set up.

coconutED said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

You were going with the WoW lockout subtopic. I was replying to that.

Sometimes lockouts or overrides can be a hole in the cheese.

---

I'm not sure what supposed "hole in the cheese" you're concerned about here...I don't think you are understanding how the thrust reverser controls are actually set up.

---

That is not at all what GAC originally described.

So you do retain control of thrust.

It's exactly what I described.

You described it as if full reverse thrust was the only option without independent variable control. Like a toggle. Which sounded like a horrible design flaw.

Quote:

---

Trying to use reverse thrust could result in extending the landing distance after the reversers deploy and and are ripped off and the engine hypothetically remains at a higher rpm

---

Quote:

---

Deploying the thrust reversers throttle up the engines independently of the thrust levers.

---

It's possible that reverse thrust was selected after touchdown with gear up. If the rear part of the nacelle is ripped off, theoretically the engine could continue propelling the plane down the runway. There's no inconsistency there.

Just because you don't understand the issue, it doesn't mean others don't.

What part of the issue did I miss?

Malfunctioning reverse thrust with the turbines spooled up creates forward thrust.

TexasRebel said:

---

What part of the issue did I miss?

Malfunctioning reverse thrust with the turbines spooled up creates forward thrust.

---

The part is that it can't be selected with the turbines spooled up...

Thank you

Another dumb question, is there a procedure (NATOPS like) for a belly landing in the 737? Does it include using the thrust reversers? Is it practiced in the sims?

Can't be selected with the throttles out of idle, or with the turbines above idle?

There's a difference.

TexasRebel said:

---

Can't be selected with the throttles out of idle, or with the turbines above idle?

There's a difference.

---

Well, GAC06 is a 737 pilot and said the former....

I think I'll believe him on that.

JB!98 said:

---

Another dumb question, is there a procedure (NATOPS like) for a belly landing in the 737? Does it include using the thrust reversers? Is it practiced in the sims?

---

There is a procedure but it doesn't differentiate between one gear up or all gear up. It says not to deploy spoilers or thrust reversers unless landing distance is critical. It's kind of a catch all and written with the idea that all gear being up with manual extension attempted is extremely unlikely (which it is)

TexasRebel said:

---

Can't be selected with the throttles out of idle, or with the turbines above idle?

There's a difference.

---

"Movement of the reverse thrust levers is mechanically restricted until the thrust levers are in the idle position"

There's a diagram posted earlier

No argument, and your diagram agrees, but do the turbines have to spool down before the reverse thrusters can be deployed?

Also, this is still misleadingly ambiguous:

Quote:

---

Deploying the thrust reversers throttle up the engines independently of the thrust levers.

---

It seems like he's also saying the reverse thrusters can be deployed without the turbines throttled up while the setting throttles up the turbines.

The diagram you posted is clearer.

TexasRebel said:

---

No argument, and your diagram agrees, but do the turbines have to spool down before the reverse thrusters can be deployed?

Also, this is still misleadingly ambiguous:

Quote:

---

Deploying the thrust reversers throttle up the engines independently of the thrust levers.

---

It seems like he's also saying the reverse thrusters can be deployed without the turbines throttled up while the setting throttles up the turbines.

The diagram you posted is clearer.

---

Jesus dude. You don't know what you're talking about. That's ok. What's not ok is pretending you do.

You can't select reverse thrust unless the thrust levers are at idle. Then one can select reverse thrust with different levers. Maybe do a google image search of a 737 throttle quadrant

But do the turbines have to drop to idle?


BTW, I've always wondered what the second lever on jet throttles was, but not enough to devote any time to it. TIL.

TexasRebel said:

---

But do the turbines have to drop to idle?

---

How do you think that relates to any argument you may have made

Do you know what "idle" means wrt a jet engine (or any airplane engine for that matter)?

The force it takes the vector plates to enter the exhaust stream increases if the turbines aren't spooled down.

coconutED said:

---

Do you know what "idle" means wrt a jet engine (or any airplane engine for that matter)?

---

Turbines don't respond like piston engines.

GAC06 said:

---

JB!98 said:

---

Another dumb question, is there a procedure (NATOPS like) for a belly landing in the 737? Does it include using the thrust reversers? Is it practiced in the sims?

---

There is a procedure but it doesn't differentiate between one gear up or all gear up. It says not to deploy spoilers or thrust reversers unless landing distance is critical. It's kind of a catch all and written with the idea that all gear being up with manual extension attempted is extremely unlikely (which it is)

---

Thanks. I am just trying to piece this together like all of us are. They knew they were long when they touched down, so it is possible that they tried to use reverse thrust due the limited runway remaining. If I am following along correctly, there is a chance that using reverse thrust could lead to actual forward thrust being applied to the engine. Listening to the video, it sure as hell sounds like at least one of the engines is spooled up. I also think they shut down the good engine in error since you cannot see the thrust reversers operating on that engine. Still no explanation for the lack of flaps, landing gear, or spoilers.

Who knows and this is a circle jerk until the report comes out, but is damn hard to reconcile and that keeps people coming back to try and reconcile.

Quote:

---

BTW, I've always wondered what the second lever on jet throttles was, but not enough to devote any time to it. TIL.

---

There's plenty of things I don't know about. I try to avoid opining on those things. Just a thought.

TexasRebel said:

---

The force it takes the vector plates to enter the exhaust stream increases if the turbines aren't spooled down.

---

Source

I also hope you're not an instructor.
Your technical descriptive skills still need work.

Bernoulli.

TexasRebel said:

---

Bernoulli.

---

Thrust reversers are actuated hydraulically. Normally I'd say you're embarrassing yourself but you've been doing it long enough that this may be your normal state. What is your day job?

Making machinery that doesn't kill idiots and everyone in their charge.