Electronics do not work well in places of extreme temperatures, high or low, or pressure and don't like being vibrated, but we need to monitor environments where such conditions are frequently found and therefore we fit sensors.

Probably in a space vehicle thousands of them, for example a Formula One car has about 300 sensors and sensors on them fail frequently. And a space vehicle probably has a higher range temps and pressure and they shake rattle and roll like nobodies business. So sensor failure has to be expected, even after the space vehicle major components have been tested ad infinitum.

To overcome sensor failure you could duplicate, err maybe not 737max, or triplicate the sensors but think of the extra complexity and weight, the weight problem is not the sensors but the wiring and it's required shielding. And there is another problem currents and voltage variations from sensors are very low and almost certainly go through several plugs and sockets, that in itself electronically speaking a good idea. How many times have you heard a crackly microphone or a headphone speaker not working because a bad connector.

So when it looks like a sensor output is questionable and it stops some event, just occasionally think of all the problems faced and stop the blaming, unless exactly the same sensor fails multiple times.

And what's the betting they could have lit the blue touch paper and nothing wrong would have happened.

So when it looks like a sensor output is questionable and it stops some event, just occasionally think of all the problems faced and stop the blaming, unless exactly the same sensor fails multiple times.

You want the failures [they are going to happen - made by man] on the ground while the vehicle is safe. Looks like it did just exactly what it should have done.

Haven't seen a report and don't expect to, but what do you bet 3 of 4 engines were showing nominal temperature and only one abnominal. I'm sure they have flow rate sensors on the chill lines and you know they have a clock. Not the first time they have chilled the engines. They knew exactly how cold it was never mind the reading. Mission rules for man rated craft require all parts working when they leave the pad, if not abort. Same for test flights. Fix it on the ground.

All a game of conjecture...

However... There appear to be more excuses and politics than real detail.

Was this launch attempt as much a wet dress rehearsal with launch as a bonus?...

Except... The present incarnation of SLS is running out of time and expire dates to get to be flight worthy...


See the Angry Astronaut's take on the game of play:

The politics and excuses:

Artemis 1 scrub and the arrogance of people...
wrote:

... Everyone expects a scrub on the first attempt. HOWEVER, after learning about the series of avoidable errors that led to the scrub, and the sheer arrogance of those who ...

... especially condescending. This kind of behavior isn't going to make NASA any friends!

With the current untimely Boeing backdrop of:

Starliner on Life Support!!...
wrote:

... NASA now has more SpaceX flights that they need for ISS, if Starliner were actually going into service. Plus, Boeing has very good reasons to want out of this contract anyway. And here's why...

Here's hoping all goes well, but at what cost?...

Fly safe!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... Haven't seen a report and don't expect to, but what do you bet 3 of 4 engines were showing nominal temperature and only one abnominal. I'm sure they have flow rate sensors on the chill lines and you know they have a clock. Not the first time they have chilled the engines. They knew exactly how cold it was never mind the reading. ...

Exactly so...

Why should out of 4 well tested well proven sensors, 1 is arbitrarily deemed to be 'wrong'?

And being assumed 'wrong' just because it doesn't give the hoped for reading should be a non-starter all round!!


So why might one engine not adequately chill down?...

Assuming the sensor is fine, then all of: faulty valves; restricted flow rate; damaged/blocked pipework; adverse environment; all must be proven not applicable.

Better is to actually directly confirm what has happened to the sensor...


After all, Boeing is well known for faulty valves...

Fly safe!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... And at last we have an accurate explanation.

See:

NASASpaceflight 2022/09/03 - NASA Launches Artemis I to the Moon Aboard SLS (Temperature sensor question)

(Approximate time into the stream...)


In brief:

The temperature sensors on all four engines themselves, on the day all read the correct cool-down temperatures.

The problem temperature sensor was one that is on a bleed line high up on the core tank...

Hence, they had sensors giving the correct temperatures for the core tank itself, and for all four engines. Then also, three out of the four bleed lines were reading correctly with the fourth (for the bleed line to engine three) being anomalous.


So that does suggest that the bleed line sensor was at fault. There is still the concern and the question of why... Loss of thermal insulation or loss of thermal contact or really, somehow a faulty sensor?...

However, the end result is that the cooling of the respective engine is still indicated to be ok so... Hey ho?


Here's hoping for a good flight!

Fly safe!!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Cryo temperature sensors are sensitive beasts. At LNH temperatures (~20K) they have a surprisingly large tolerance, and they can drift in and out of calibration if you sneeze at the wrong moment. Give me 4K any day of the week, and <1K at least once a month......

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

This time it is valve related.
https://apnews.com/article/astronomy-space-launches-exploration-science-9a89bb77af17be3e3b5891a0b224ac69

Mission manager Mike Sarafin told journalists it was too early to tell what caused the leak, but it may have been due to inadvertent over-pressurization of the hydrogen line earlier in the morning when someone sent commands to the wrong valve.

The way he said it, saboteur?

This time it is valve related.
https://apnews.com/article/astronomy-space-launches-exploration-science-9a89bb77af17be3e3b5891a0b224ac69

Mission manager Mike Sarafin told journalists it was too early to tell what caused the leak, but it may have been due to inadvertent over-pressurization of the hydrogen line earlier in the morning when someone sent commands to the wrong valve.

The way he said it, saboteur?

From my view, much more likely is that of an operator tripping over unscripted or "ad-hoc" procedures...

Every little detail counts...


Fly safe!
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

For the latest ad-hoc Boeing round-up, we have:


Global air travel last year: 22 million jet flights, just one fatal accident
wrote:

How safe is air travel? Last year, when large commercial jets took off 21.6 million times throughout the world, there was just one fatal accident.

Boeing’s comprehensive annual compilation of data about air accidents involving large Western-built jet airliners, released Tuesday, shows a decades long trend toward safer air travel...

... One cannot minimize the awful tragedy of a jet airliner crash. The two deadly crashes of Boeing 737 MAXs in 2018 and 2019 still lie heavy on the minds of many in the aviation world and among air travelers. Yet those accidents were exceptional...

... The plunge in the aviation accident rates over decades is due to enormous technical and organizational advances: safer technology systems on planes, more efficient air traffic control, and thorough training of pilots and maintenance mechanics...

... in the 1990s and oversaw investigations into the deadly 737 crashes in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and Pittsburgh, recalls how those accidents resulted not only in Boeing fixing the rudder system implicated in the crashes but in pilots being trained in upset recovery maneuvers. Other accidents in that period led to changes in the way flight crews communicate with one another to ensure efficient teamwork in an emergency...

... “Boeing is saying the right things,” Hall said. “Hopefully they are doing the right things.”...

"... Congress was deluded into the changes that brought the MAX crashes,” Hall said. “Anyone in aviation safety should have been embarrassed by the information that came out after those accidents.”...

... Globally, the only fatal airliner crash among them was the crash of a Boeing 737 “classic” airplane operated by Sriwijaya Air in Indonesia, in which 62 people died. That plane may have suffered an autothrottle malfunction... may well lead to some corrective action by Boeing...

... Overseas, the record is more blemished, with nearly 1,600 deaths from 27 scheduled passenger jet accidents in the past decade. That includes the 346 deaths from the MAX crashes, which were exceptional in that the two aircraft were almost new and took off in perfect flying weather...

Boeing targets early 2023 for first Starliner mission carrying astronauts
wrote:

... Boeing Co is targeting February 2023 to fly its first Starliner mission with astronauts aboard to the International Space Station, Boeing and NASA officials said on Thursday, as the aerospace company nears the final leg of a costly and much-delayed development timeline...

... Boeing and NASA expect to fly the crewed mission after engineers correct issues encountered during Starliner's March test flight, including a few onboard thruster failures during the spacecraft's ascent to orbit that the company's Starliner boss, Mark Nappi, attributed to [internal FOD?] debris...

Army grounds fleet of Chinook helicopters after engine fires
wrote:

... The Army said Tuesday it has grounded its fleet of about 400 Chinook cargo helicopters after fuel leaks caused a “small number” of engine fires...

... the Army has identified the cause of the leaks and is working to resolve the problem. Smith said that some aircraft may not requires the fix, so they may be able to return to flight soon...

Maintenance error likely cause of Alaska Air 737 engine incident
wrote:

... the covers on both sides of the left engine pod — called a nacelle — came loose. When the pilots promptly turned back to Seattle, the covers ripped off completely on landing and pieces hit the fuselage.

The jet landed safely and none of the 182 passengers and crew onboard was injured. The passengers were rebooked on another flight...

... Dozens of such accidents have happened over the past 30 years, much more often on the Airbus A320 than on the Boeing 737. Though a couple of those incidents turned more serious, none resulted in injuries...

... The Alaska incident was the second such failure on a Boeing 737 in the U.S. this month...

... In the dozens of incidents where the fan cowl door has ripped off, overwhelmingly it’s because a mechanic failed to re-latch the doors properly before takeoff and preflight inspections by the pilots and maintenance supervisors missed the error...

... At least 45 such incidents on its A320s over three decades — some on jets with the same engines as are on the 737 — prompted Airbus to design a modification that was then mandated by both the European Aviation Safety Agency and the FAA... the culmination of a series of incidents, Airbus designed a modification to the door latches, which would have to be locked and unlocked with a specific key. This key had a “remove before flight” flag attached to it and was required to be stored in a designated area in the cockpit. Some airlines, including Air Canada and United Airlines, objected to this solution...

... Despite those objections, the FAA and EASA mandated the Airbus modification in 2018...

... Following the investigation into Monday’s incident, such “human factor” recommendations are likely to be at the top of Alaska’s agenda as it seeks to prevent future failures [on the Boeing 737].

Boeing expects MAX 7 to be certified before MAX 10 - executive
wrote:

... Boeing Co expects the 737 MAX 7 will be certified by the end of the year and the larger MAX 10 in the first half of 2023, a company executive said on Thursday.

The planemaker faces a year-end deadline from U.S. lawmakers for both or will need to meet new cockpit alerting requirements unless waived...

... mandated by Congress as part of broader regulatory reforms at the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration after fatal 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019 killed 346 people...

My summary for that little lot is that this is the same old continuing stories of fuel leaks, FOD, and of 'gaming' the safety requirements, as I see it, to cheaply cut corners and the safety be damned.



Fly safe?
Martin

FOD: Foreign Objects/Debris (or otherwise leaving manufacturing rubbish behind in fuel tanks and pipework).

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Confusion reigns between all the parties who want to have a say in the certification of 737max variants.

Exclusive: Boeing doesn't expect MAX 10 to gain FAA approval before summer 2023

WASHINGTON, Oct 3 (Reuters) - Boeing Co (BA.N) does not anticipate winning approval for the 737 MAX 10 before next summer, according to a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) letter sent on Monday that intensifies concerns about the company's timeline for deliveries.

Boeing faces a December deadline to win regulatory approval for the MAX 10, which is slightly larger than current 737 MAXs in service, as well as for a smaller variant, the MAX 7. Unless it gains an extension from Congress, Boeing must meet new modern cockpit-alerting requirements that could significantly delay the planes' entry into service.

Thanks for that.

... And the twists and turns of that gets even more convoluted for how MCAS was eventually posthumously certified:


See:

Why The FAA Should Ground EVERY Boeing MAX Again!
wrote:

The FAA Still wont certify Boeing's Max-7 Because they feel it's not been proven safe. If that's true I'll tell you why the FAA should ground ALL MAX Jets until the Seven is Certified...

Special note: The 737 Max-7 is the smallest (lightest, most agile, most easily controlled?) of the 737 variants...

Does that not suggest that MCAS hasn't been properly tested and certified for all worst case conditions for all the variants?...

Ouch!!!


That is quite a deadly pickle for everyone playing that game...

... And that is in addition to Boeing continuing manufacturing and flying old outdated cockpits that do not meet modern day safety standards.


Fly safe?...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... And that is in addition to Boeing continuing manufacturing and flying old outdated cockpits that do not meet modern day safety standards.

Does this mean every antique car should immediately taken off the road and crushed?

... And that is in addition to Boeing continuing manufacturing and flying old outdated cockpits that do not meet modern day safety standards.

Does this mean every antique car should immediately taken off the road and crushed?

There's a whole world of difference of the consequences between considering aircraft vs a few old bangers...

We retrofit buildings with improved fire safety and improved fire/security alarms and improved energy efficiency...

How far do we allow Boeing to needlessly risk the lives of people and kill yet more people by constructively ignoring the last 50 years of safety improvements?...


Note that we have regulations requiring passenger vehicles to meet present day standard or be upgraded or be scrapped. Even for just taxi cabs!... Why not similarly so for Boeing aircraft?

Fly safe?...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... And that is in addition to Boeing continuing manufacturing and flying old outdated cockpits that do not meet modern day safety standards.

Does this mean every antique car should immediately taken off the road and crushed?

There's a whole world of difference of the consequences between considering aircraft vs a few old bangers...

We retrofit buildings with improved fire safety and improved fire/security alarms and improved energy efficiency...

Really? Grenfell Tower.

May be a few bangers over there, but here it is tons. And they tried to get rid of them with smog regulations, but couldn't. Only have to pass standards of when their design was approved*. So no seat belts, no crumple zones, no smog controls ... .

*It isn't Boeing's fault that the government sets the rule that way. Bitch about the FAA and all the other regulators allowing it.

Judge for yourselves how this goes...


Boeing Charged With Stock Fraud! SEC Fines Boeing Over 200 Million Dollars! BUT Who Gets The Money?
wrote:

... Boeing and Ex Ceo charged with Stock Manipulation and Lying to Investors. But will they STILL Escape Jail? And who gets to keep the fine money?

So... What does it take to bring meaningful consequences to the Boing board for their deadly dealings?


Fly safe?...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... Boeing and Ex Ceo charged with Stock Manipulation and Lying to Investors. But will they STILL Escape Jail?

SEC can only bring civil charges.

At very long last:

US Judge: Passengers in Fatal Boeing 737 MAX Crashes are 'Crime Victims'

What next?

Fly safe?...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

US Judge: Passengers in Fatal Boeing 737 MAX Crashes are 'Crime Victims'
in sum, but for Boeing's criminal conspiracy to defraud the FAA

defraud
verb
illegally obtain money from (someone) by deception.

What money did Boeing obtain from the FAA?

I suspect this gets overturned on a technicality.

Reuters report of Boeing's 3rd qtr.

Boeing takes $2.8 bln hit in defense business, keeps cash flow goal

Pilot error, shoddy maintenance, or design fault?


Sriwijaya Air crash which killed 62 people blamed on {faulty} throttle and pilot error
wrote:

... the Sriwijaya Air Boeing 737-500 plane crash last year which killed 62 people was due to a faulty throttle system and delayed pilot response.

Flight SJ-182 plunged into the Java Sea on 9 January 2021, [just] minutes after take-off from Jakarta, killing all on board.

In their final report, investigators blamed several factors including a repeatedly faulty throttle system...

... an automated throttle system that suffered a malfunction shortly after take-off...

... The investigators noted in their report released on Thursday that this was also the result of a lack of training for pilots on how to react [to] such [an] emergency... The KNKT said the airline had enacted such training since the accident...

My understanding is that was yet another (deadly) critical single-point-of-failure. This latest example left the pilots suddenly, unexpectedly, with the plane stalled and cartwheeling onto its side and into a dive.

A previous similar incident, but instead with a Boeing 747 suffering a similar stall due to asymmetric thrust, the very alert pilots on that occasion needed over 20,000" to recover and wrote off the aircraft. Fortunately, on that occasion they were able to make a safe landing.


And from my own personal observations, Boeing continue to make and deliver hopelessly out of date cockpits...

Fly safe?
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)