Ethiopian 737 MAX 8 crash
06-09-2019, 09:21 AM
#743
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,271
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
Now the military argument? Military missions are different. Part 121 airliners are for taking grandma from Point A to point B as safely as possibly. They are stable transport category aircraft.
The problem with MCAS was that it was an expedient bandaid, which got modified late in the design process apparently without due diligence or adult supervision. MCAS is in no way representative of a purpose built FBW system... which the newest Boeing planes all have, and will continue to have.
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
You refuse to admit it, but in this case to *certify* the aircraft it had to have MCAS because the test pilots felt it behaved differently at certain high alpha/go around situations. The whole thing s was being designed and built without having any additional sim training or ground training more than 2 hrs.
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
STS activates, are you going to identify that as a trim runaway? Not if it’s momentary and it stops. No doubt the Ethiopian made their issues worse by leaving the power levers where they were, and certainly a “pilot error” cause can be found, but MCAS l, single sensor failure, and constant stick shaker will be contributing factors. Take any one of those elements out, and the accident wouldn’t have happened.
Step back and look at the overall picture. 2 separate planes killing nearly 350 people, all because software on the plane was pushing the nose down over and over, and the pilots in the first case didn’t even know about MCAS. Planes shouldn’t be diving to the ground over and over again with an unlimited number of nose down cycles. That goes against the concept of stable aircraft designs.
If these are “just” simple pilot errors, the plane would be flying today. But it’s not. And they are taking the appropriate steps by having MCAS connect to both AOA sensors and compare, limit the amount of travel, and amount of activation per high alpha event. This should have been diagnosed like that from the get go, but no one envisioned failure modes of MCAS in their rush to get this thing on the market.
Step back and look at the overall picture. 2 separate planes killing nearly 350 people, all because software on the plane was pushing the nose down over and over, and the pilots in the first case didn’t even know about MCAS. Planes shouldn’t be diving to the ground over and over again with an unlimited number of nose down cycles. That goes against the concept of stable aircraft designs.
If these are “just” simple pilot errors, the plane would be flying today. But it’s not. And they are taking the appropriate steps by having MCAS connect to both AOA sensors and compare, limit the amount of travel, and amount of activation per high alpha event. This should have been diagnosed like that from the get go, but no one envisioned failure modes of MCAS in their rush to get this thing on the market.
06-09-2019, 01:51 PM
#744
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,019
Originally Posted by 2StgTurbine
CVR?
Do you really need an explanation of cockpit voice recorder?
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
I’m sure at Avantair you actually got to take a real Piaggio into stalls and spins and recovered them in real life scenarios with G force effects.
You can't help but drag in irrelevant discussions of airbus operations, other unrelated mishaps, and now even a piaggio avanti, instead of actually addressing the subject at hand. In so doing, you continue to be wrong at every turn. Including regarding the piaggio...which if you didn't know, was one of the only business aircraft to have no simulator until Flight Safety International (FSI for you millennials) eventually introduced one. Training was done by factory representatives, classes taught personally by the factory chief pilot, and yes, stalls and all other maneuvers were done in the aircraft. The aircraft was not certificated for spins and consequently spins were not required to be demonstrated or performed. Full stalls aerodynamic stalls through buffet, unusual attitudes, upsets, and even single engine stalls, however, were performed in the aircraft. Apparently you didn't know that, either.
As with the bulk of your rambling, it is also irrelevant.
06-09-2019, 06:46 PM
#745
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
You seem to type out of anger towards presumed millennials. 
You made my point about training in the actual airplane vs sims. Those AF447 or Air Asia guys had never been in a plane in real life to stall like that, whereas as someone flying a Piaggio got to see it in the plane. On the flip side, there are many deceased pilots from training on V1 cuts in real planes, whereas 0 deceased on V1 cuts in a Level D sim.
Anyway, you really seem stuck on ET in terms of pilot error only. I don’t think anyone is denying leaving the power setting in takeoff hurt them. Exceeding VMO (if that coincided with trying the manual trim) would very well have been the final straw. Their desperation then re-engaged the trim motors. Actually if I’m reading right, it looks like they manually did trim, but 0.2 nose down (did he trim down instead of up? Seems likely). If so, that’s a fatal mistake too.
We have the prelim. It is thorough. Very thorough. But it still is the prelim. I’d like to see and read the final report and see what that says.
rickair777, you are correct the Boeing needs to be “made” with a 400 hr pilot in mind. It’s just the reality of Asia and China which represent a huge portion of airline aircraft customers.
You made my point about training in the actual airplane vs sims. Those AF447 or Air Asia guys had never been in a plane in real life to stall like that, whereas as someone flying a Piaggio got to see it in the plane. On the flip side, there are many deceased pilots from training on V1 cuts in real planes, whereas 0 deceased on V1 cuts in a Level D sim.
Anyway, you really seem stuck on ET in terms of pilot error only. I don’t think anyone is denying leaving the power setting in takeoff hurt them. Exceeding VMO (if that coincided with trying the manual trim) would very well have been the final straw. Their desperation then re-engaged the trim motors. Actually if I’m reading right, it looks like they manually did trim, but 0.2 nose down (did he trim down instead of up? Seems likely). If so, that’s a fatal mistake too.
We have the prelim. It is thorough. Very thorough. But it still is the prelim. I’d like to see and read the final report and see what that says.
rickair777, you are correct the Boeing needs to be “made” with a 400 hr pilot in mind. It’s just the reality of Asia and China which represent a huge portion of airline aircraft customers.
Last edited by ShyGuy; 06-09-2019 at 07:09 PM.
06-09-2019, 10:06 PM
#746
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,019
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
Anyway, you really seem stuck on ET in terms of pilot error only.
But you just did.
You still can't focus on the thread or the Ethiopian mishap.
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
Actually if I’m reading right, it looks like they manually did trim, but 0.2 nose down (did he trim down instead of up? Seems likely).
06-09-2019, 11:22 PM
#747
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
I have said no such thing.
But you just did.
You still can't focus on the thread or the Ethiopian mishap.
But you just did.
You still can't focus on the thread or the Ethiopian mishap.
The entire thread is full of you saying just that and writing off the crew. Like:
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
MCAS is such a minor part of it that it's nearly irrelevant. The ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the airplane. MCAS didn't. An AoA sensor didn't. The combination of the two didn't. If the speed had been kept in check (fly the damn airplane, remember?), the down-force would have been controllable. Had they not re-engaged the stab trim, it would have been controllable. Had they kept the speed in check and re-engaged the stab trim, the stab was controllable with the control wheel pitch trim switch. They didn't do any of that. They simply accelerated to their death, and at the last moment, made it worse by reversing the stab trim motor cutoff switch position.
You’ve been parroting narratives like that for pages.
06-09-2019, 11:30 PM
#748
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,019
Given your comprehension problem, this isn't surprising, but at no time did I state that this mishap involved only pilot error.
The death of the pilots and crew and passengers is the fault of the pilots, without question, and there is no debate that they flew the aircraft well beyond the design certification and operating limits of the airframe and type certificate, nor that they violated the procedure, not that they knew the procedure, nor that they were fully aware of the problem, it's nature, and the fact that it stemmed from one angle of attack indicator (and which one). All clearly identified and spelled out in the preliminary report.
One could argue all day long that if the crew didn't get into the airplane, or if the crew hadn't climbed out of bed that day, then no mishap would have occurred...but that is also speculation, and irrelevant.
We know that faulty data came from an AoA probe. We know that the MCAS feature ran the trim. We know that spurious cockpit warnings, airspeed data, AoA data, shaker, etc, occurred. This has never been in question.
None of those made the aircraft crash.
The fate of the aircraft was in the hands of the crew, whom the passengers expected to be competent pilots, rather than passengers who let the airplane accelerate to destruction, killing all.
Neither AoA probes, nor MCAS, nor shakers, nor trim, nor airspeed errors, nor cockpit warnings made the airplane unflyable or caused it to crash. It took a crew failing to fly the airplane, failing to do their job, failing to accomplish the most basic of tasks, to not allow the aircraft to crash, but to CAUSE it to become uncontrollable...thanks to excess airspeed and failure to follow the procedure that they knew and verbally identified and performed. The crew killed everyone by not doing their job, and that is incontrovertible.
The death of the pilots and crew and passengers is the fault of the pilots, without question, and there is no debate that they flew the aircraft well beyond the design certification and operating limits of the airframe and type certificate, nor that they violated the procedure, not that they knew the procedure, nor that they were fully aware of the problem, it's nature, and the fact that it stemmed from one angle of attack indicator (and which one). All clearly identified and spelled out in the preliminary report.
One could argue all day long that if the crew didn't get into the airplane, or if the crew hadn't climbed out of bed that day, then no mishap would have occurred...but that is also speculation, and irrelevant.
We know that faulty data came from an AoA probe. We know that the MCAS feature ran the trim. We know that spurious cockpit warnings, airspeed data, AoA data, shaker, etc, occurred. This has never been in question.
None of those made the aircraft crash.
The fate of the aircraft was in the hands of the crew, whom the passengers expected to be competent pilots, rather than passengers who let the airplane accelerate to destruction, killing all.
Neither AoA probes, nor MCAS, nor shakers, nor trim, nor airspeed errors, nor cockpit warnings made the airplane unflyable or caused it to crash. It took a crew failing to fly the airplane, failing to do their job, failing to accomplish the most basic of tasks, to not allow the aircraft to crash, but to CAUSE it to become uncontrollable...thanks to excess airspeed and failure to follow the procedure that they knew and verbally identified and performed. The crew killed everyone by not doing their job, and that is incontrovertible.
06-10-2019, 10:45 AM
#749
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,898
So pilot error only, since you wrote off that “MCAS was such a minor part, it’s irrelevant. The ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the plane.” Those are literally your own words. If the ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the plane, that is by definition pilot error. But keep circling around your words. 
You’re entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. You constantly attack others for “comprehension problems” yet you play on your own words all day long. Most people have acknowledged that the MAX crashes go beyond just pilot error and a “failure of the crew to control their airplane.”
We’ll see what the world decides once the MAX is cleared to fly. You said that the “grounding had more to do with politics reasons than safety reasons.” That again would be your opinion. I’d say the FAA kept it going as long as they did because of political pressure as opposed to the other way around. It was only after pretty much every other regulator authority grounded the plane that the FAA did so. But they did so to save face, and not be the only country still flying these planes. Of course they claim they were the first to do so after studying data, whereas other countries didn’t and just grounded it on the basis that 2 MAX jets plummeted into the ground shortly after takeoff.
Grounding the plane was the right decision. The FAA has lost credibility to the rest of the world as a pillar and leader of aviation safety.
You’re entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. You constantly attack others for “comprehension problems” yet you play on your own words all day long. Most people have acknowledged that the MAX crashes go beyond just pilot error and a “failure of the crew to control their airplane.” We’ll see what the world decides once the MAX is cleared to fly. You said that the “grounding had more to do with politics reasons than safety reasons.” That again would be your opinion. I’d say the FAA kept it going as long as they did because of political pressure as opposed to the other way around. It was only after pretty much every other regulator authority grounded the plane that the FAA did so. But they did so to save face, and not be the only country still flying these planes. Of course they claim they were the first to do so after studying data, whereas other countries didn’t and just grounded it on the basis that 2 MAX jets plummeted into the ground shortly after takeoff.
Grounding the plane was the right decision. The FAA has lost credibility to the rest of the world as a pillar and leader of aviation safety.
06-10-2019, 10:53 AM
#750
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,019
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
So pilot error only, since you wrote off that “MCAS was such a minor part, it’s irrelevant. The ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the plane.” Those are literally your own words. If the ONLY thing that killed them was their failure to fly the plane, that is by definition pilot error.
I'm done with you.
Originally Posted by ShyGuy
This message is hidden because ShyGuy is on your ignore list.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
