OT: Ethiopian 737 Max crash

That would be 200 hours on type. Type being any 737.

Because the new 737 is SO similar to the outgoing model little time is spent in "transitional training" and the pilots of both Max planes that crashed likely were not aware of the 2 toggle switches and their function in over-riding the anti-stall "feature" of the new plane.

Until the issue is solved it should be MANDATORY that the ant-istall feature be on "over-ride" for all flights. The computer is a bit "headstrong" and it is virtually impossible for a pilot to "out-muscle" it when it is engaged. 2 have tried so far and died trying. Like the Airbus 320 it is a "fly by wire" plane from what I have read. The pilot tells the computer what he wants the plane to do,and the computer attempts to force the plane to do it. With anti-stall engaged on the Max, it points the nose down when it thinks it is approaching a stall. Either a faulty sensor (or circuit) or faulty logic is apparently convincing the computer it is approaching stall when it is not. Without over-riding the ant-stall it becomes a one-sided battle of wills.

That’s what the investigation will find out. Likely it isnt actually possible to override the anti stall system and there is no way to just turn it off.

Clearly they couldn’t and there is very little possibility that the pilot wasn’t able to get involved because he had gone for a piss etc so soon after takeoff.

I doubt its as black and white as that.

That’s there on all modern heavys already.

Yeah, unlikely to be a coincidence and easy to see what happened from the FDR.

I hope that is the fix. My brother in law worked as a test engineer at Boeing and I have visited their faculties myself. They do not release a new model until it is thoroughly tested. They also continue to test old models for problems that might develop.

snipped Of course we still don't know what really happened, but it sure looks

No, we don't know yet but I'd not fly on one until it is known and resolved.

Quite a few of my company's customers are aerospace.

I've been thinking of getting a horse.

Cindy Hamilton

That's BS. After the Lion Air crash it was clear how it worked and that it can be turned off with two switches. It's also the same procedure pilots would use for runaway trim on any plane, which they are supposed to be trained in. Also, while the computer can push the nose down, the pilots can immediately push it back up by using their trim buttons. That's what apparently produced the up and down flight path of Lion Air.

Actually it is and Boeing admits it. Not only did they create a design that relies on just one sensor, they also didn't put any explanation of the new MCAS into the manuals, what it is, what it does, how to override it, etc.

Heavy? A 737 isn't a "heavy".

There is also an eyewitness that says the rear of the plane was on fire as it was coming down, but having people think they saw things in cases like this isn't unusual.

Rather unlikely that post the Lion Air crash, all current Max pilots arent aware of that, even if the transition training didn’t rub their noses in that effectively enough prior to the crash.

That clearly didn’t work with the Lion Air. Not yet clear why not.

Yes, but its still not clear why it crashed anyway.

Tho I spose its possible he had a heart attack or something.

Gotta cite for that ?

Corse it is compared with a light aircraft.

Sure, but that’s different to 24FlightRadar which has no humans involved.

Something new and interesting. John Nance, ABC's aviation expert was on this morning. He said that the ADSB flight data from the Ethiopian plane ended minutes BEFORE the crash. That's the streaming data that the planes send to ground sensors, which are used to track them. I had tried to look at the flight profile online and that's what I had seen, that the data just ends with the plane still at ~8,000 feet, but I wasn't sure it was correct, etc. Nance said it could indicate the crew was shutting down circuits, possibly because of smoke, fire, etc. There was an eyewitness that said the plane was on fire at the tail before it went down, but then that would not be the first time someone got it wrong on that either. Or I suppose the pilots could have been shutting down the wrong things, instead of following the run away trim procedure, if it was the same thing as Lion Air, which they knew about and were trained on. Biggest problem right now is those damn Ethiopians still haven't turned over the black boxes to anyone so that we can find out. That's quite amazing, but not unheard of. You have most of these planes grounded now, couple days after they recover the boxes and the AHs are sitting on them.

That's another lie as you dig your usual ignorance hole ever deeper. The MAX is cable driven and has mechanical trim just like it's predecessors and many other planes.

Fool, then the plane would be at full nose up trim and would not be pointing to the ground.

What a complete moron.

We'll see...

The trim tab isnt.

Have fun spelling out how a trim tab that is entirely cable driven from a wheel on the pilots' consoles can be driven by the MCAS system when it decides that the plane has stalled.

Depends on what the elevator has been told to do.

Another bold lie.

I suppose just because your birdbrain can't figure out how a car can have power steering and power brakes and have that work either with or without power means that does not exist either. In the case of the plane, how hard is it to envision a cable system where the cable moves either with an electric motor or by turning a gear driven wheel that is next to the pilots? Think birdbrain, think!

More hyperbole and BS. But just keep digging that ignorance hole ever deeper.

Easy to claim.

Neither of those are done by cable, stupid.

How odd that the manual wheel on the pilot console doesn’t actually rotate when the computer is driving it.

No hyperbole involved. Look it up.

Yes it is clear, the PILOTS DID NOT FOLLOW THE RUNAWAY TRIM PROCEDURE, which if part of all pilot training, not specific to the 737 or any specific plane. And what's the procedure? Just turn off the two switches that are right next to the spinning trim wheels beside the seat! That disables the ELECTRIC TRIM, regardless of whether a plane has MCAS or not and then the pilots are supposed to use the trim wheel to mechanical adjust the trim.

A big mistake Boeing made here is thinking pilots are more competent than they really are. It's the opposite of what Trump is claiming, ie that it's a complicated plane that's the real problem. In the case of Lion Air at least, the pilots were incapable of identifying a trim problem, disabling the electric trim and using manual. Even though they are trained in exactly that. And with those trim wheels beside their seat spinning back and forth, over and over, as they used the electric trim buttons to fight with the MCAS system. And then, even more stunning, the pilot was doing that for minutes, the plane was flying, then he handed control to the co-pilot and the co-pilot just stopped using the electric trim to correct, at which point it crashed. How do we know that? From the FDR data, that despite your lies, has been released.

Yes it is clear to all involved and anyone who is interested enough to have followed it. Boeing is in the later stages of a fix. Do you think Boeing and the FAA are going to deploy a fix, without knowing what the problem was? Again, the problem was the MCAS relied on just one angle of attack sensor and if it gets a bad reading, for whatever reason, it incorrectly believes the plane is stalling. The fix addresses the reliance on one sensor as well as limiting how aggressively and for how long MCAS will continue to nose down the plane. Got it now?

Then a single engine prop plane is a "heavy" too, because it's heavier than an ultra light. If you want to come here and talk about aviation, at least become familiar with the terms. ATC calls out planes regularly as "heavy" so that other pilots are aware that they are in the area and can be on the caution for wake turbulence. A heavy is any plane with a take off weight of 300,000 lbs plus, fool. A 737 is not a heavy, not even close.

We don’t know that yet. The final report hasn’t happened yet.

Don’t believe that the FAA would ever have approved the MAX like that.

You don’t know that either.

Or that either,

That’s not how the term light aircraft is defined, f****it.

Heh, you're stupid enough to believe trolls that say they've seen electric pole transformers glowing orange hot. You're stupid enough to come here and try to BS us about owning a 50" CRT TV. So, it's irrelevant what you believe or don't believe.

But heh, for the rest of the crowd:

After making sure pilots knew about the problem and how to resolve it, Boeing would work on a longterm solution. Essentially, it would rejigger the software governing MCAS so that it wouldn’t be as prone to jumping into action based on one scary sensor reading, instead considering more data. And it would limit how many times it can engage.

After the October crash, Boeing began updating the plane's software so multiple sensors would provide data to the stall prevention system, the company said in a statement on Monday.

This critical software change would be done no later than April, says Boeing.

Yes I do, f****it, because unlike you, I know how to use Google and learn.

I never said how the term light aircraft is defined. I simply said that a 737 is not defined as a "heavy" in the airplane world, most importantly not by ATC. You telling us it is, just deepens that ever deeper hole of ignorance you just insist on digging. You think a 737 is a "heavy" and then you're gonna try to tell us how things work? What an asshole. No wonder you have an internet following.

Doesn’t say that the MCAS system uses just one AA sensor to determine that the plane is stalling.

Just because some f****it journo claims that...

Don’t believe that the FAA would ever have approved that.

And never said it used just a single AA sensor to determine that the plane had stalled.

But can't provide a cite for the Boeing actually saying that.

Still havent.

On Thursday, March 14, 2019 at 9:23:53 PM UTC-4, Rod Speed wrote:

Yes it does lying fool:

"After making sure pilots knew about the problem and how to resolve it, Boeing would work on a longterm solution. Essentially, it would rejigger the software governing MCAS so that it wouldn’t be as prone to jumping into action based on one scary sensor reading, instead considering more data. And it would limit how many times it can engage."

Sure, the Wall Street Journal isn't credible, but you are.

Here it is again:

"Boeing's 737 MAX, the model being flown by Indonesia's Lion Air that crashed last October killing all 189 on board, had been criticized for relying on a single sensor to detect the aircraft's angle of attack, according to today's Wall Street Journal. A preliminary investigation by Indonesia's National Transportation Safety Committee (NTSC) blamed the stall prevention system (known as Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or MCAS) which relied on a the single sensor that provided erroneous data, causing the MCAS to misfire, leading to a series of events that put the plane into a nosedive.

After the October crash, Boeing began updating the plane's software so multiple sensors would provide data to the stall prevention system, the company said in a statement on Monday. "

BTW, where are YOUR sources? Show us the sources that explain MCAS and say that it relies on both AOA sensors? Hello? You never have any sources for anything.

It's irrelevant what you believe. You're just like Trump, deny the basic facts as reported and instead deny, make up BS and make a complete ass of yourself.

You won't believe anything I present. And what do you think Boeing is going to do? Hold a press conference and say, "We screwed up, we came up with a really bad design that relied on just one AOA sensor"? Of course they aren't going to do that. But they have made it clear that their fix will rely on more than one.

And all this coming from the resident village idiot who told us:

What happened in the Lion Air crash hasn't been determined.

The flight data from Lion Air has not been released.

The 737 doesn't have a mechanical, manual trim capability

It's impossible to have both an electric trim and manual available as backup.

The 737 is considered a "heavy" aircraft

Electric pole transformers can glow orange hot. (Still waiting for the pics of those)

He owns a 50" CRT TV (Still waiting for the pics of that with a tape measure)

Sub Chapter S corps can't be formed for speculation

What a track record of stupidity.

I think it's shocking that Boeing came up with a system that relied on one sensor and that the FAA approved it. But the big mistake here was in both thinking that today's pilots are competent, well trained in how to deal with runaway elevators and that they could handle that in an emergency. The MCAS doing the nose down due to a single point failure was evaluated and they categorized it as not so serious that it would cause loss of the aircraft. It's no worse than a similar failure in any aircraft's electric trim system, where the trim runs away. A trim button sticking would do it, so would a short, maybe a relay if they use one in the system. That's probably the thought process Boeing and FAA went through. And the rest of the world's regulators who also approved the plane. You think Boeing couldn't do that, but they did. They also didn't put anything about the MCAS into the manual either, which is shocking, but heh, they did that too.

The next big mistake was again made not only by Boeing, but by all the world's aviation regulators. Following Lion Air they decided that now that a directive has been put out to inform all 737 pilots of MCAS and the issues arising out of Lion Air, the pilots would be able to correctly address it in the rare chance the single AOA screwed up again before a fix is put out. The Ethiopian Airline says those pilots were trained on it. And yet it looks like the Ethiopian Air pilots probably did it again. Which is shocking. It's shocking it happened the first time. This has happened only a few times on any flights and has a 25% to 50% failure rate, where the pilots can't handle a very basic emergency problem. It's not rocket science. What does the trim do? It controls the force required on the controls to keep the controls at a neutral position. The trim wheels are by their seats, they spin when the trim moves, the indicators show clearly what position the trim is at. So, in Lion Air, they flew for 15 minutes, with those trim wheels spinning back and forth. First in one direction by the computer, then in the other by the pilot using the trim buttons. And neither pilot thought, heh, let's just disable the electric trim, use manual to adjust it and keep it at a neutral setting, where they could then fly the plane with reasonable force on the controls? Also, this problem started just as they withdrew the flaps. With flaps, MCAS is disabled. It would not seem to be rocket science for at least one pilot to think, heh, maybe flaps has something to do with it, lets try extending them again. Also, flaps would allow for more margin and for them to fly slower. Flying slower means the trim would have less force on the controls, it would be easier to overpower the trim by control force. But instead LA didn't slow down and the Ethiopian flight went to an even higher speed.

Of course in the middle of an emergency I realize a crew may not be able to sort through that all, at least not right away. But LA had ~15 mins to figure this out. They could have had hours if they had just kept using the electric trim buttons. Another factor that could have made a difference is the co-pilot in the Ethiopian crash apparently had just 200 hours. He could not get a commercial license here, 1500 is the minimum.

That’s not saying that only a single AA sensor is ever used.

The FAA would never approve that approach.

Corse it isnt on something like that. Just some f****it journo who clearly doesn’t have a f****ng clue.

Don’t need one. There is no way that the FAA would have ever approved the use of just one AA sensor for something that important when the plane has more than one AA sensor.

There might just be a reason that the plane has more than one of them.

I will believe a cite which shows Boeing saying that.

Boeing hasn’t ever said that.

There has only been the preliminary report so far which does not say what the reason the MCAS decided that the plan had stalled when it had not done so.

You don’t know that that is what happened, or why, if that is what happened, the FAA didn’t ground the MAXs until that was fixed once it became obvious that they had f***ed up that badly.

OK, time to put you in charge of the FAA.

You don’t know that happened.

You don’t know that either.

Funny that. So they are all incompetent fools eh ?

That’s great coming from the clown that can't even manage to work out that when a LED bulb does flash a bit when wiggled, that it can't have been killed by the surge when the fan itself was turned off.

We'll see...

Yeah. clearly time to put you in charge of them all. Even if you can't actually work out the basics with LED bulbs.

You don’t know that either given that the FDR and CVR havent even been analysed yet.

Those numbers are straight from your arse, we can tell from the smell.

Yeah, we definitely need you flying them all. You're going to be busy, boy.

Same with LEDs that have failed. Too much for you tho.

Yeah, we definitely need you flying all the planes anywhere.

Yeah, we definitely need you flying all the planes anywhere.

Yeah, we definitely need you flying all the planes anywhere.

Yeah, we definitely need you flying all the planes anywhere.

On the 737. So now with you in charge of all the world's regulators, all pilots will have to have flown at least 1K hours on that plane type with the plane empty before they will be allowed to even be a co-pilot, and that flying can only be from and back to an airport with no houses or buildings with anyone in them, and the flying must be over some desert or water with no people anywhere near the plane, in case they f*ck up due to inexperience.

We do actually have a few places where an airport like that could be built, so you had better order that too once you are put in charge of all the regulators tomorrow.

Your mate Trump might well buy that approach, send him this post of yours immediately.

Yeah, time for the USA to take over all the world's airlines.

Putin is gunna be pissed...

Heh, we're waiting......

Where are the pics of that 50" CRT TV you lied about having. You know, a pic with a tape measure across the screen, not a pic of a 27" that we can't verify.

Where are the pics of your orange glowing hot electric pole transformers that you claim exist?

Where are your cites for your assertion that the 737 is considered a "heavy" (There are no such sources, it's wrong)

Where are your cites for your assertion that the 737 doesn't have electric trim that can also be worked MANUALLY by turning a wheel? (Can't provide them because that was more pure BS)

Where are the cites for your assertion that it's impossible to have a trim system like that, worked by electric motor or hand? (Can't provide that either, because it too is obviously BS)

How about the stupid claim that Boeing is working on a fix following Lion Air, yet no one knows what was wrong yet? And then we're supposed to believe your big mouth?

ROFL

Why does one asshole insist on constantly showing how ignorant he really is? You're just like Trump, spewing BS, making it up on the fly, claiming to know so much about everything, getting caught in lies and BS and then just lying some more. Someone here could post that the sun rises in the east and you'd be arguing about that. "It doesn't rise! That hasn't been established yet! You can't see it on cloudy days so we don't know!

What a total asshole.

Some gutless f****it desperately cowering behind trader_4 snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote just the s*it you'd expect from a desperately cowering gutless f****it that can't even manage to work out that a LED bulb that flashed when wiggled cant have been killed by the fan turning off.