B737 Max Type rating or just additional training ?

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Boeing has now admitted that simulator training will be required for flying the B737 Max, also known as the B737-8 and B737-9.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... r-training

One thing that is not clear to me is if the B-737 Max will have it's own type rating. In Canada and in Europe, there are three B-737 type ratings:

B73A which covers the -100 and -200 series
B73B which covers the -300, -400 and -500 series
B73C which covers the -600, -700, 800, -8 and -9 series

All Canadian type ratings are listed here:

https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/transport-canad ... dix-a.html

Sometimes, when the difference between two sub groups of a same type rating is not significant, a small course that does not involve simulator is required to switch from one aircraft to another sub-type of the same Type rating, ie to go from an Airbus 330 with RR powered engines to one with GE powered engines.

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... -4286.html

The 2017 Transport Canada document listed above is an Operational Evaluation Report that was made on the B737. It lists the training required to go from one Type Rating to another and also that required to go from the B737NG to the B737 Max. MCAS is never mentioned. It concurred with Boeing and EASA that the B737-800 and the B737-8 were the same Type rating (B73C) with minor changes that just required level A or B training to prepare for the transition where

A stands for

Self-instruction,
Operating manual revision (HO)
Flight crew operating bulletin (HO)
Crew has already demonstrated understanding on base aircraft (e.g. updated version of engine).
Minor or no procedural changes required.
No safety impact if information is not reviewed or is forgotten (e.g. different engine vibration damping mount).
Once called to attention of crew, the difference is self-evident

and B stands for

Aided instruction
Audiovisual presentation (AV)
Tutorial computer based instruction (TCBI)
Stand-up instruction (SU)
Systems are functionally similar.
Crew understanding required.
Issues need emphasis.
Standard methods of presentation required.

E stands for

Level C/D FFS or Aircraft
Level C or D full flight simulator (FFS C-D)
Aircraft (ACFT)
Motion, visual, control loading, audio, and specific environmental conditions are required.
Significant full task differences that require a high fidelity environment.
Usually correlates with significant differences in handling qualities.

What will happen now ? Will the B737-8 and B737-9 become a fourth B737 type rating (ie B73D) or will a B73C rated pilot still be able to fly the B737 Max on the same type rating as long as he/she does some (ie an hour or two ) type E training (a simulator) ?. And if that is the case, how often will B737 Max E Level Training be required of Max pilots who also fly NGs (very critical for operators whose pilots train in locations where a Max simulator is not available.

In this set of messages between Boeing engineers, « Level B « is often mentioned as a Level of Training that must never be exceeded, at all cost. Anything that can possibly make the Regulators require any Level C training or more, is ironed over, avoided or hidden.

https://www.scribd.com/document/4423466 ... or-1-of-3




There are only 35 about Max simulators in the world right now.......

[GoHomeLeg]

CAE YYZ has three 737MAX simulators. Two on the Air Canada side and one on the other side that Sunwing will have exclusive rights to.

I've flown the NG and the MAX. The first time I flew the MAX was the day after I did my MAX differences ground school. I flew it with another first timer. It was an easy transition.

There are additional QRH items that don't exist on the NG, but I don't necessarily think there needs to be a new type rating.

[altiplano]

CAE YYZ has three 737MAX simulators. Two on the Air Canada side and one on the other side that Sunwing will have exclusive rights to.

The first two sims are Air Canada's exclusively.

But we also use the third sim often. It isn't Sunwing's exclusively.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

I've flown the NG and the MAX. The first time I flew the MAX was the day after I did my MAX differences ground school. I flew it with another first timer. It was an easy transition.

Just to be clear. You mention the existence and availability of Max Simulators and having done a differences ground school. Please confirm that you first flew the Max without having used a Max simulator ?

You think the differences course, along with an hour in a Max SIM doing MCAS drills and NNC would be sufficient (for someone who has done all his/her training in an NG SIM ?

And reading through some of the Boeing IM documents, one wonders if some of the Memory Items were not kept identical to those of the NG for the specific purpose of maintaining Level A or B Training, when in fact, technical differences would have required Different or New Memory Items and NNCs, which themselves would have required Level C, D or E training........

[GoHomeLeg]

CAE YYZ has three 737MAX simulators. Two on the Air Canada side and one on the other side that Sunwing will have exclusive rights to.

The first two sims are Air Canada's exclusively.

But we also use the third sim often. It isn't Sunwing's exclusively.

We were told it would be soon after air Canada finishes their quota. I should have added that. Exclusively was the wrong word. Sunwing will have priority booking after that. The memo said it's an 18 month transition to move all sim training to the max sim as we eventually move to an all MAX core fleet. But with the MAX not back in service, who knows.

[GoHomeLeg]

I've flown the NG and the MAX. The first time I flew the MAX was the day after I did my MAX differences ground school. I flew it with another first timer. It was an easy transition.

Just to be clear. You mention the existence and availability of Max Simulators and having done a differences ground school. Please confirm that you first flew the Max without having used a Max simulator ?

You think the differences course, along with an hour in Max SIM doing MCAS drills and NNC would be sufficient (for someone who has done all his/her training in an NG SIM ?

And reading through some of the Boeing IM documents, one wonders if some of the Memory Items were not kept identical to those of the NG for the specific purpose of maintaining Level A or B Training, when in fact, technical differences would have required Different or New Memory Items and NNCs, which themselves would have required Level C, D or E training........

Yes I flew the MAX in 2018 and the first month of 2019 before I ever hopped in a MAX SIM. I flew in a max SIM for the first time this year 2020 for recurrent SIM. We just did normal SIM stuff we do in the NGs.

Yes I think it would be sufficient to do all training in a NG SIM and a one to two hr difference course in a MAX SIM.
The runaway stabilizer memory items so far is the same for both NG and MAX.

After the Lion Air crash they revised the NG and MAX memory item (which are the same) to simplify it because it was to wordy at first. In regards to MCAS drills, the new software update requires consensus from both AOA sensors to activate the MCAS. If one AOA sensor fails, the MCAS is deactivated.

The initial sign off on the MCAS system and how it worked and what was required to trigger it was a major f**k up.

[RippleRock]

What's the need for specific MCAS related training on the Max?

MCAS as it was on the pre-Ethiopian aircraft --does not exist--either in the actual aircraft, or in the new sim software pack----and it hasn't since June of 2019. You can not train for something that can not be replicated. The software solutions and explanation of how the "new MCAS" works can be found in multiple locations on the web. Based on the fix, it's fair to say that an MCAS runaway will NEVER occur again in the history of the 737.

Any additional MCAS related training (runaway in mind, with the exception of an actual trim event demonstration in a stall scenario) will be unnecessary fluff on Transport Canadas part.

Runaway stab trim training will be sufficient, as it is with the NG.

[GoHomeLeg]

What's the need for specific MCAS related training on the Max?

MCAS as it was on the pre-Ethiopian aircraft --does not exist--either in the actual aircraft, or in the new sim software pack----and it hasn't since June of 2019. You can not train for something that can not be replicated. The software solutions and explanation of how the "new MCAS" works can be found in multiple locations on the web. Based on the fix, it's fair to say that an MCAS runaway will NEVER occur again in the history of the 737.

Runaway stab trim training will be sufficient, as it is with the NG.

I agree with all of that. Unfortunately the media as done such a bad job of explaining MCAS to the public. Now airlines are going to put on a show for the flying public to say, "see it's safe and our pilots are trained."

I still think the iPad course was good enough with differences being brought up in recurrent ground school every year.

[BTD]

There will now be differences in FCC architecture as well. This will change the way certain things occur. Example: if one FCC fails there is no longer a trim cross compare for MCAS so it inhibits itself. If I recall correctly, that will now show as a speed trim fail. Whether that changes the checklist for that item I don’t know. However, there will be other things in the mix that could behave in a similar way which might require specific training. As the NG will still be as it always has been.

Regardless, Boeing agreed specific sim training in their differences course back in January. So, unless they fight back against that now, after admitting it should be required, Max specific training will happen. As to a new type rating, I don’t think that has been decided yet by the committee assessing training requirements.

I have never flown the NG but flew the MAX for a year and a half as a training captain and spent last year as a sim instructor. I hope they sort this out soon. That last 13 months has been eye opening in many respects.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

What's the need for specific MCAS related training on the Max?

MCAS as it was on the pre-Ethiopian aircraft --does not exist--either in the actual aircraft, or in the new sim software pack----and it hasn't since June of 2019. You can not train for something that can not be replicated. The software solutions and explanation of how the "new MCAS" works can be found in multiple locations on the web. Based on the fix, it's fair to say that an MCAS runaway will NEVER occur again in the history of the 737.

Any additional MCAS related training (runaway in mind, with the exception of an actual trim event demonstration in a stall scenario) will be unnecessary fluff on Transport Canadas part.

Runaway stab trim training will be sufficient, as it is with the NG.

You are stating that the software fix (comparing both AOA signals) will prevent with certainty any undue MCAS activation in the future, so training for it is now unnecessary ?
That would be a simple outcome. It's true that attempting to backtrack after already admitting that Simulator was necessary is going to be a hard sell.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Regardless, Boeing agreed specific sim training in their differences course back in January. So, unless they fight back against that now, after admitting it should be required, Max specific training will happen. As to a new type rating, I don’t think that has been decided yet by the committee assessing training requirements.

It will be embarrassing if after doing the training on an NG simulator, a pilot has to be flown to another country, put up in a hotel to practice a procedure identical to those done in an NG and that could in fact have been have been done in an NG Sim.....

I sure as hell hope the regulators do not begin doing such things just to satisfy the general public......we've seen too much of these things in the past:

the flight attendant in the cockpit
the removal of the drop down oxygen masks in the lavatories....

[BTD]

Regardless, Boeing agreed specific sim training in their differences course back in January. So, unless they fight back against that now, after admitting it should be required, Max specific training will happen. As to a new type rating, I don’t think that has been decided yet by the committee assessing training requirements.

It will be embarrassing if after doing the training on an NG simulator, a pilot has to be flown to another country, put up in a hotel to practice a procedure identical to those done in an NG and that could in fact have been have been done in an NG Sim.....

I sure as hell hope the regulators do not begin doing such things just to satisfy the general public......we've seen too much of these things in the past:

the flight attendant in the cockpit
the removal of the drop down oxygen masks in the lavatories....

As far as I’m aware, the syllabus for the training hasn’t been finalized yet, and it remains to be seen whether it will be accomplished in a max sim or NG sim. We don’t know yet if all the procedures will be the same. See my example from above. There may be slight differences in memory or checklist items as a result of the new FCC logic or some other change we aren’t aware of yet.

I agree that there shouldn’t be changes to training just for appeasement, but there may in fact be real change that needs to occur. I’m sure glad at my airline we have taken to downtime to train some items that aren’t part of the normal matrix, and that has been a good thing IMO.

[RippleRock]

What's the need for specific MCAS related training on the Max?

MCAS as it was on the pre-Ethiopian aircraft --does not exist--either in the actual aircraft, or in the new sim software pack----and it hasn't since June of 2019. You can not train for something that can not be replicated. The software solutions and explanation of how the "new MCAS" works can be found in multiple locations on the web. Based on the fix, it's fair to say that an MCAS runaway will NEVER occur again in the history of the 737.

Any additional MCAS related training (runaway in mind, with the exception of an actual trim event demonstration in a stall scenario) will be unnecessary fluff on Transport Canadas part.

Runaway stab trim training will be sufficient, as it is with the NG.

You are stating that the software fix (comparing both AOA signals) will prevent with certainty any undue MCAS activation in the future, so training for it is now unnecessary ?
That would be a simple outcome. It's true that attempting to backtrack after already admitting that Simulator was necessary is going to be a hard sell.

From the Boeing website:

The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) flight control law was designed and certified for the 737 MAX to enhance the pitch stability of the airplane – so that it feels and flies like other 737s.
MCAS is designed to activate in manual flight, with the airplane's flaps up, at an elevated Angle of Attack (AOA).
Boeing has developed an MCAS software update to provide additional layers of protection if the AOA sensors provide erroneous data. The software has been put through hundreds of hours of analysis, laboratory testing, verification in a simulator and numerous test flights. Before it is finalized, the software will be validated during in-flight certification tests with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) representatives.
The additional layers of protection that are being proposed include:
Flight control system will now compare inputs from both AOA sensors. If the sensors disagree by 5.5 degrees or more with the flaps retracted, MCAS will not activate. An indicator on the flight deck display will alert the pilots.
If MCAS is activated in non-normal conditions, it will only provide one input for each elevated AOA event. There are no known or envisioned failure conditions where MCAS will provide multiple inputs.
MCAS can never command more stabilizer input than can be counteracted by the flight crew pulling back on the column. The pilots will continue to always have the ability to override MCAS and manually control the airplane.
These updates are expected to reduce the crew's workload in non-normal flight situations and prevent erroneous data from causing MCAS activation.
We continue to work with the FAA and other regulatory agencies on the certification of the software update.


In essence, the updated MCAS is an extremely "neutered" version of the old. One trim event which is easily counteracted by the Flightcrew. Again, it would be difficult to train for something it is specifically programmed to avoid.

My opinion only, but 737 Max specific training would be for political optics for the most part.

[Eric Janson]

Just a question for those flying the -MAX

How do you differentiate between the operation of the Speed Trim system and the operation of MCAS?

[ayseven]

Question for Gilles: who do you think is going to get on the MAX as a passenger? I for one, am hesitant, and I know quite a bit about flying, although nothing about the B737 as a pilot. Everyone else needs a little reassurance to say the least.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Valid question. I have no idea. With all that has surfaced about the manner in which the Max was certified, many people who are very knowledgeable about aviation were shocked, let alone for the general public......
But that's a different subject.....

[GoHomeLeg]

Just a question for those flying the -MAX

How do you differentiate between the operation of the Speed Trim system and the operation of MCAS?

Unfortunately the MCAS system operation and it parameters are not included in the FCOM Vol. 2 (systems manual).

The Speed Trim System operation and it parameters for operation are explained in the manual.

For those not familiar with STS on the the 737, it automatically trims the aircraft during takeoff, go-around, and initial climb without pilot input during AFT CGs, low gross wts, and high power settings with the autopilot off. Its function is to pitch the aircraft to an on trimmed speed condition roughly speaking. Airspeed drops, it trims down. Airspeed increases, it trim up. It's momentarily inhibited with pilot activation of the electric trim for 5 seconds. Etc.....

MCAS is designed to assist the pilot in stall recovery at the first sign of an impending stall (stick shaker). It automatically trims the nose down to overcome the higher pitch up forces due to applying full trust during recovery. These forces are a lot higher on the MAX vs. the NG.

To answer the questions, an MCAS RUNAWAY will be associated with stick shaker activation and possible AOA disagree msg

The pilots ability to quickly cross check airpeed readouts between capt., FOs, stby, and groundspeed will determine if the stabilizer runaway is due to an MCAS malfunction. Being in VMC conditions will make this less difficult.

At the time of the Lion air and Ethiopian crash, we weren't that educated on the system. So you can imagine the confusion in the flight deck.

[Blue42]

Question for Gilles: who do you think is going to get on the MAX as a passenger? I for one, am hesitant, and I know quite a bit about flying, although nothing about the B737 as a pilot. Everyone else needs a little reassurance to say the least.

Offer fares $50 cheaper and people will get on it.....honestly, there are people think they are still flying the MAX these days!

[Localizer]

The first two sims are Air Canada's exclusively.

But we also use the third sim often. It isn't Sunwing's exclusively.

TOOT TOOT!

[BTD]

What's the need for specific MCAS related training on the Max?

MCAS as it was on the pre-Ethiopian aircraft --does not exist--either in the actual aircraft, or in the new sim software pack----and it hasn't since June of 2019. You can not train for something that can not be replicated. The software solutions and explanation of how the "new MCAS" works can be found in multiple locations on the web. Based on the fix, it's fair to say that an MCAS runaway will NEVER occur again in the history of the 737.

Any additional MCAS related training (runaway in mind, with the exception of an actual trim event demonstration in a stall scenario) will be unnecessary fluff on Transport Canadas part.

Runaway stab trim training will be sufficient, as it is with the NG.

You are stating that the software fix (comparing both AOA signals) will prevent with certainty any undue MCAS activation in the future, so training for it is now unnecessary ?
That would be a simple outcome. It's true that attempting to backtrack after already admitting that Simulator was necessary is going to be a hard sell.

From the Boeing website:

The Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) flight control law was designed and certified for the 737 MAX to enhance the pitch stability of the airplane – so that it feels and flies like other 737s.
MCAS is designed to activate in manual flight, with the airplane's flaps up, at an elevated Angle of Attack (AOA).
Boeing has developed an MCAS software update to provide additional layers of protection if the AOA sensors provide erroneous data. The software has been put through hundreds of hours of analysis, laboratory testing, verification in a simulator and numerous test flights. Before it is finalized, the software will be validated during in-flight certification tests with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) representatives.
The additional layers of protection that are being proposed include:
Flight control system will now compare inputs from both AOA sensors. If the sensors disagree by 5.5 degrees or more with the flaps retracted, MCAS will not activate. An indicator on the flight deck display will alert the pilots.
If MCAS is activated in non-normal conditions, it will only provide one input for each elevated AOA event. There are no known or envisioned failure conditions where MCAS will provide multiple inputs.
MCAS can never command more stabilizer input than can be counteracted by the flight crew pulling back on the column. The pilots will continue to always have the ability to override MCAS and manually control the airplane.
These updates are expected to reduce the crew's workload in non-normal flight situations and prevent erroneous data from causing MCAS activation.
We continue to work with the FAA and other regulatory agencies on the certification of the software update.


In essence, the updated MCAS is an extremely "neutered" version of the old. One trim event which is easily counteracted by the Flightcrew. Again, it would be difficult to train for something it is specifically programmed to avoid.

My opinion only, but 737 Max specific training would be for political optics for the most part.

Specific MCAS training in a sim is not likely to result in any substantial benefit. However, over the last 13 months there have been other things that have shown up that slipped through the cracks or have changed and may or may not require specific sim training. I think the main question will be, how does the change in FCC logic change pilot actions or operational requirements. I’m gonna bet that is where specific training will focus.

I’m glad we have had opportunities to practice UAS and trim runaways and adjust initial course syllabi, although that could be accomplished on a NG sim.

In addition to the MCAS operating approaching a high angle of attack, the STS also has a function to trim down to increase airspeed if the Stall Managment Yaw Damp computer determines it. Good luck in the moment figuring out if it is a MCAS or STS function. If flaps are up I suppose you could tell because the STS will trim at the slow rate but the MCAS would trim at the faster rate.