And Boeing is going the same way! "Outsourcing" their IP, design and production.

... and clearly, they have dispensed with testing altogether. And they wonder why sales orders have suddenly dried up.

It shows with the latest 737. Even if that plane does make it back into the sky, I certainly will not be getting on board. Pushing the newer, heavier engines forward and expecting a computer programme to compensate for it was madness. Why didn't Boeing keep the engines where they were on the previous model and install taller landing gear to keep the engines off the runway?

Why didn't Boeing keep their original engine configuration?

Because they wanted to appease the screaming climate wankers. The new configuration is supposedly 'less harmful'
to the planet.

Airbus claims of better planet-saving flight needed a response from their competitor.

Seems more sensible to please the loud minority feel-good class these days than worry about tiny details like safety.

Welcome to the brave new madness epoch.

Selling a commercial aircraft that flies like a military design is madness.
The 737 is a flying crash, too many systems to depend on just to keep the airframe level in flight.
All you need is one system to go ( "I'm afraid I cant do that Dave") bonkers and by the time the aircrew get to page 99 of the panic book the thing has hit the ground!
The best commercial aircraft are the ones that naturally find trim and so long as you have petrol basically fly them selves.
I'm with you Brad don't even get on board unless you are a test pilot paid to do it or want to star in a "seconds to disaster" episode!
They have to scrap the lot of them, re wind, and start again.
Fred.

They needed the new engines to compete with Airbus on running costs, i.e. fuel efficiency. High bypass turbofans have to be larger diameter.

Fitting taller landing gear would have needed a MAJOR redesign of the airframe (which they should have done).
Had they done the redesign it would have looked just like an A321!

Like the 707 on which it was based (a 1959 design!) the 737 better suits airports without airbridges, of which there are still many in the US. That was another reason they tried to keep it.

Hey! How about putting the engines ABOVE the wings? Or on the tail (like the DC9 / MD80 / B717)?

I don't feel any sympathy at all for Boeing. Because their 777 wasn't ready, they lobbied the regulators into banning twin engine planes for intercontinental flights, forcing Airbus into designing the 4 engine A340. A lovely plane but more expensive than the B777. Funny how the rules changed just in time for the release of the B777!

Another reason was that the Airbus competitor to the 737 Max was designed with engine change only, was because it was then deemed to be the same plane as its predecessor. This meant that the aircrew could then be trained on simulator only, reducing costs for the airlines.

For Boeing to be competitive, it had to do the same thing.

Trouble was that the larger engines would not fit under the wings of the 737 with the existing undercarriage. So the larger engines had to be moved forward and upward, changing the balance of the aircraft. This in turn required the automatic system to adjust the aircraft attitude.

It seems that aircrew were not made fully aware of the implications of this automatic system. Also, the crashed aircraft had only one angle of attack sensor, and it is possible that malfunctioning sensors fooled that automatic system to believe that aircraft were nosing up. So the automatic system pushed the nose down, out of control of the pilots.

Not being aware of the implications of the automatic system, they didn't twig to that as a cause.

Bang.

Fred, your first sentence reminded me of something. When the B2 stealth bomber was being devised, the Americans wanted to be sure that no radar system anywhere in the world could pick up its approach. This is why it looks a bit like a hang glider after Christmas lunch. No tail fin, no exposed engines, etc, just a big pair of wings.

This plane requires a similar computer system to the 737 Max, though to be fair to the B2, alot more time, money and effort was put in on it to make sure that it'd stay in the sky when the pilot wanted it there and like you mentioned, the B2 is a military aircraft deisgned the way it is from the ground up, the 737 a civilian one that has been modified many times since it first took to the skies a few decades ago.

The only problem for the Americans was that once the Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar was brought online, apparently it could see a B2 coming from a long way off. I never saw a report that any other radar managed to spot it. The US is just lucky that we are on their side.

Could I just add that we are doubly lucky they are on our side?

Well, it is true that teamwork is a two way street. They probably wonder about it a bit during naval exercises when their destroyers are in search of our submarines only to end up being told that our sub is under the keels of their ships.



I can hear the US captain saying, "Those gard-dang Australians!"

Dear Fred.

Thanks for showing me your shed.

I don't feel so bad about mine after seeing yours.

Wayne.

Now seeing there is no Mens Shed, meetings etc. and I am laying low as the lungs decided to chuck a wobbly (not unusual) A lot of "put off" jobs are being mowed down. Still not time to reset the engine in the fergy yet, after its little incident but it has two new rear tyres. Only got 50 years out of the last lot..

Now seeing we have two pics of Lathes, mine has had new belts in stock for a while. No instructions on how to remove them however, the parts list has a series of detail engineering drawings. I knew just by looking at it, that it was going to be fun. That's why the belts were still in stock.

OK! Bit the bullet. In order to get the two belts changed, one has to remove parts of the change gears (some not yet replaced as not needed) That has to happen to remove a bearing cap. Actually both have to come off as one has to dismantle the spindle to get one belt off the cone pulley. Naturally it runs both sides of the cluster gear that reduces the speed for thread cutting. So it needs dismantling. Then we progress to the cantilever yolk. It conveniently splits to allow the belt (what's left of it). Inconveniently (of course) these bolts are below the fulcrum pin and socket headed and they're is no way an Allen key is going there, so out with the pin, and it.

There is of course no clearance to change the other belt, so in either case the yolk has to come out, so you do not change one only. I will send Brad a couple of happy snaps to clarify the situation. Interesting way to consume hours.

Naturally there was cleaning & oil changes.

Marc

Hi Marc, looking forward to seeing snaps.
I have a bad feeling i'll be up for a similar job with mine.
Fred.

Yeh! One needs to be careful, there are hidden traps like where they hid the retaining grub screws, shaft exit points and the treacherous key.

On this one if you do not remove the keys, they will rip the oil seals. Another bit of dumb; when you see the spindle oil level eyes, these are set into a socket hole with a cenral hole around 6mm. Brilliant it gas locks and whilst it looks like the sump is full it could be over full and if you don't appreciate how it's supposed to work empty. A 1mm drill sorted that.

Do not use thick oil, or engine oil in that type of sump. Mine has taper rollers like a car wheel bearing & Fergys gearbox. There is a right & wrong way to tighten those bearings.

Saddle also has a sump. I noted that sealing was not good & cutting fluid could get into it.

Marc

Photos uploaded to Post 41.

Has anyone ever rebuilt an Aussie 4 speed gearbox? I had fun with one of these about 25 years back when youngest son and I were restoring a Torana (as you do!).

Fascinating design, these things. After the imported Opel 4 speed box was found to be unable to handle the torque of the local 6, they took the relatively bulletproof local 3 speed column shift box and added an extra gear by moving the reverse gear into the extension housing! Then came up with an external shift linkage system that, when adjusted properly, actually works quite well.

Here is a pic:

http://oldholden.com/node/37748

There is a story here which I'll relate if anyone is interested.