OT: Lion Air brand new 737 crash

What's up with that? Looks like it may be an airspeed indicator problem followed by the crew being unable to deal with it and fly the plane? Really bizarre on a brand new plane. And unlike the Air France crash off Brazil, this was in daylight and I think relatively clear weather.
Some good questions:
Did the pilots know the plane had a problem with erratic flight the night before and that maintenance had worked on it? Is it standard procedure that the pilots would be informed of any maintenance done, especially for something serious like this?
You'd hope that there would be some judgment made that for serious problems that are supposedly fixed, the plane would be taken for a test flight before loading it with 190 passengers, but I guess $$$ rules.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 09:16:49 -0700 (PDT), trader_4

Lion air is banned in the US because they think maintenance is an optional expense. They also scrape pilots from the scum at the bottom of the barrel so mechanical failure vs pilot error is push. As you say, it is probably a recoverable problem that they did not recover from.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/30/2018 06:39 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

They were banned in Europe for some time too. I think it's back in the bozo bin for them. The plane will fly, Allah willing...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

More complicated than that with the roller coaster ride the previous flight got.

Yes to both.

Not anymore.

The owner is actually a xtian.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 14:24:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"

Not according to the FAA
<https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/mission/office-policy/aviation-policy/3185/certificated-list102017.pdf
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That's a year old.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/30/2018 09:24 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

And the pilots and mechanics?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The main pilot was an Indian, from New Delhi.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 30 Oct 2018 09:16:49 -0700 (PDT), trader_4

First time I heard this I thought they said Ryan Air.
After the crash, passengers on the previous flight said the floor was hot. I wonder if they told anyone. It might have been the catalytic converter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/31/18 3:32 AM, micky wrote:

Or the lead in the 100LL plugged the converter? LOL!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 at 6:50:36 AM UTC-4, devnull wrote:
Latest news is that on the previous flight in, the plane had the same symptoms on climb out. The plane dropped 500 ft, the pilot issued a pan pan stating that he was having trouble with altitude and airspeed and asked for a return to the airport. The airport cleared other traffic, but then apparently the problem subsided and they decided to continue on. But that flight was made at 20000, instead of 35000 apparently indicating that something still wasn't right or the pilots were concerned.
So the plane landed at 11PM, they did maintenance over night and it took off again at 6:30AM. So far they said the maintenance people "followed the Boeing book procedure". Wonder what they did? Possible they followed the flow chart, everything tested OK and nothing was fixed. It also seems inconceivable that a failure in a single airspeed or altitude system component could produce a plane that is unflyable.
The flight profile is weird too, from the data on the flight tracking website, it looks like it was flying at about 300 knots, steady, steady altitude right before the plunge, then it just plunged. If they stalled it, you'd think there would be a decline in airspeed, erratic airspeed, etc. I guess that could have happened so quickly that it wasn't reported back to the ground tracking systems though. Very strange.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Friday, November 2, 2018 at 12:04:25 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
So now the United Airlines pilots union is disagreeing with American and Southwest. The latter too issued statements that said that pilots being trained on the new 737 Max should have been informed of the new stall avoidance system, what it does, how it operates. The United union says we don't want to know how it works:
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/dispute-arises-among -u-s-pilots-on-boeing-737-max-system-linked-to-lion-air-crash/
"Insler said many systems on an airplane work in the background without the pilot’s knowledge. He compared it to watching television: ? ?I don’t need to know how it works.”
Quite amazing. What was added to these new planes is a "feature" where the computers monitor the angle of attack for an impending stall and if detected, it uses the trim to force the nose down. It will continually nose it down, unless the pilots press and hold the trim in the opposite direction. If they release it, the system resumes nose diving the plane. To disable it requires open breakers on the electric trim system.
The training for the new planes for pilots already qualified on the older 737s is 3 hours of training, followed by a one hour flight. American, Southwest and certainly Lion Air are saying that Boeing should have made this significant change a part of that training. United? We don't care. Nice, real nice.
It looks like the likely scenario for the deadly crash was the plane was having problems with the air speed and angle of attack sensors, or the computer that monitors those had a problem, or something was wrong in the connections, because one AOA sensor caused the plane to think it was stalli ng, so it did the trim to force the nose down. Apparently in the confusion, the pilots could not figure out what was happening and apply the correct recovery procedure. MAybe if they had been trained and knew about the different way these planes behave, they would have. I still haven't seen anyone say whether absent getting the trim corrected the two pilots would have been able to pull back with enough force on the controls to overcome the wrong trim. You'd think with it nose diving for the sea, they would be pulling with all their might.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 15:36:43 -0800 (PST), trader_4

This still gets back to an air speed indicator they knew they were having trouble with. This is far from the first crash in recent history blamed on them. I agree there should have been some training and a simulator exercise pointing out the new system and what to do when it was fighting them. Avweb had a pretty good article about this Monday.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 17 Nov 2018 22:08:35 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Air speed and angle of attack are two totally different things. Training IS paramont - and any pilot or airline who does NOT want to know how his plane flies should NOT be flying
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The defective part appears to be the air speed indicator. The pilots knew they were flying much faster than indicated air speed and were not taking maneuvers to avoid a stall. The computer thought otherwise and put them in a high speed dive. At least that is the way I read it. It was a system on the plane that they were not aware of. The training they were missing was why the plane wanted to dive and how to stop it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, November 18, 2018 at 1:54:31 AM UTC-5, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

on

among-u-s-pilots-on-boeing-737-max-system-linked-to-lion-air-crash/

t the pilot’s knowledge. He compared it to watching television: ? ??I don’t need to know how it works.”

e
f
y
e
ne.

der

de

re.

as

the

talling,

n,

ct

een

uld

ome

ld

It's still not clear what was defective and what wasn't. That plane had airspeed indication problems on it's three prior flights too and mechanics each time tried to fix it. It hasn't been stated what they did on each of the three attempts, only that on the last they replaced the angle of attack sensors. It could be they introduced the final problem or it could be that the same problem has been there all along and was not found. If they did the replacement correctly and it was still there, it would suggest that something other than the sensors was the cause or that the replacement ones were also defective. IDK how they work, presumably it's a small vane that aligns itself with the airflow, so you'd think it would be easy to verify that it was responding, indicating correctly, etc. It could be that all al ong there was a fault in the other end, ie in what reads the sensors. Other big question is how a fault in a single sensor could produce this.
Those trying to say that the pilots had adequate training point to the fact that these pilots are trained in how to recover from runaway trim, ie where the trim system gets screwed up and goes out of control. What apparently happened here was the pilots didn't recognize that was what was happening. You'd think if they had been told in the training for the Max that it has this new system that uses trim to avoid stalls, that may have enabled them to make the connection and figure it out. Which is why what that head of the pilots at United said is almost unbelievable, ie that he doesn't think pilots need to know about a system like this being on the plane.
They haven't found the voice recorder yet and no more pings have been heard .
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/17/2018 5:36 PM, trader_4 wrote: ...
...

The controls are mechanically linked to hydraulics that actually are the control surfaces actuators.
The Q? is rather whether can wrest control away from the computer that has a mind of its own...
--



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/18/2018 9:40 AM, dpb wrote:

That's right. Things can go wrong and there should be a way for a real person to overtake and correct it. Makes me wonder if we put to much faith in computers and think nothing can bad will happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen happen
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/18/2018 9:20 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

I'd've thunk there would be FAA required input sensor verification logic and/or redundancy but I've seen no indication of such reported. Then again, I've not looked for anything beyond the discussion here...there's nothing I can do about it. :)
I did find a description of the controls at <http://www.737ng.co.uk/B_NG-Flight_Controls.pdf
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 11/18/2018 08:20 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

It doesn't apply to commercial aircraft but I remember reading in the IEEE magazine when fly by wire was first being used that fighter planes achieved high maneuverability by being unstable to the point where a human couldn't fly them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.