China Eastern 737 Crash
04-04-2022, 10:11 AM
#131
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 1,920
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
When you say "it may have been a mental issue with one of the pilots," are you referring to the wild speculation and conspiracy theory that this was planned months in advance, by a disgraced check airman on the verge of a forced retirement? The questionable conspiracy theory that looks more like "fake news," like what was already removed from this thread, presented without evidence and existing as little more than rumor? Or is there something credible, now?
I'm not an engineer but I have flown the B737 for 2500 hours and I'm very curious what malfunction could cause the jet to behave the way it did. I have more confidence we'll eventually find out the truth since the CVR was sent to Washington.
04-04-2022, 02:35 PM
#132
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,293
Originally Posted by AirBear
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/01/us-n...oeing-jet.html
China sent the recovered CVR from the China Eastern crash to Washington to be processed. I'm a bit surprised by this since it **may** have been a mental issue with one of the pilots but maybe China doesn't have the tech needed to read a damaged CVR.
China sent the recovered CVR from the China Eastern crash to Washington to be processed. I'm a bit surprised by this since it **may** have been a mental issue with one of the pilots but maybe China doesn't have the tech needed to read a damaged CVR.
But once again, there is zero plausible basis to start blaming this on an intentional act. As I've pointed out these sorts of "rumors" seem to spring up like clockwork... frankly I'm disappointed that the big players are resorting to this sort of innuendo crap in the 21st century.
04-05-2022, 08:46 AM
#133
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 854
Originally Posted by AirBear
I'm not an engineer but I have flown the B737 for 2500 hours and I'm very curious what malfunction could cause the jet to behave the way it did.
04-06-2022, 06:14 PM
#134
New Hire
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 1
JB = Spot on
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
Wrong again.
The Chinese had nothing to do with the Ethiopian mishap, and the CVR and flight data recorders were removed and sent to France, for analysis. The mishap occured on March 10. BEA didn't get the CVR and FDR in France until the 14th. On the 17th, the Ethiopian aviation authority (a term to be used loosely) jumped the gun and made an announcement that the FDR showed similarity to the Lion Air mishap. In the interim, on the 13th of March, the FAA announced ,based not on CVR or FDR data, but initial observation of wreckage, that the stabilizer jackscrew appeared to be fulll down. The Ethiopians released a preliminary report on April 4, over three weeks later, and didn't mention MCAS, and did note that the captain didn't touch the throttles, correctly identified and verbalized the correct procedure, executed it...and later reports verified that the captain undid this action and ultimately caused the loss of control.
You HAVE read the reports and not just wikipedia, haven't you?
The Ethiopians announced, one year after the mishap that the final report was coming. A day prior they released an interim report.
When you stated that "they have had both black boxes for a while now," knowing that it had been two days at the time of your statement, what did you mean, exactly? Two days is "a while," suggesting that the data should be available within two days? When you stated that it was available with the Ethiopian crash, knowing this wasn't true either, what did you mean there? You know these things aren't true: why are you saying them?
You've linked the preliminary report, not the interim (https://web.archive.org/web/20200310...209%202020.pdf), published a year later, and are clearly not very familiar with it. Two points for your ability to use google.
As for the Ethiopian crash, read the damn report. Educate yourself. You have no idea what you're talking about, and so far as "every major aviation authority in the world" disagreeing, again, do your research. You'll find that the opposite was true, and that most were reluctant to ground the aircraft. The initial grounding wasn't by the Indonesians or the Ethiopians; it was the Chinese and it was very much a political move in the face of a political trade war with the US. The last agency to respond? The FAA. Go figure. The events were largely political, and even Sullenberger noted the pilot inexperience and actions, particularly a 200 hour copilot (the 25 year old copilot had 360 hours, with 200 in type...all of it in the prior 90 days. His entire flight experience outside of primary training, less than 3 months total).
Go read the report and familiarize yourself with the events, before you spout off again. You're embarrassing yourself. If you read the Lion Air report, you'll find that the flight crew wound up with a flight control force of 103 lbs; that force isn't just dependent on flght control positioning, but on airspeed; in both cases, the flight crews flew the airplane right out of the envelope by accelerating and ultimately causing the loss of control. If airspeed had been kept at the time the crew became aware, both aircraft were fully controllable. When faced with a potential flight control problem, airmanship 101: don't change anything, including airspeed. The stab trim procedure, regardless of the cause, is the same in every 737, and has been since inception; also the same in every other Boeing. Stab trim cutout switches to cutout. The cause of any unscheduled trim, at that point, is irrelevant. Again, airmanship 101, basic procedures, and in the case of the Ethiopian flight, read the report and you'll learn that the captain verbally identified the problem, stated it, reiterated the memo, applied the correct procedure so far as stab trim cut out (after trying repeatedly to solve his problem by resorting to autopilot). Even the prelim report notes that stab trim stopped moving, coincident with application of the stab trim cutout switches. The captain didn't touch the power again, let the airplane keep accelerating, then changed the stab trim cutout switches, violating the procedure and even his own verbally stated identification of the problem. The captain caused that crash. Read the report.
The Chinese had nothing to do with the Ethiopian mishap, and the CVR and flight data recorders were removed and sent to France, for analysis. The mishap occured on March 10. BEA didn't get the CVR and FDR in France until the 14th. On the 17th, the Ethiopian aviation authority (a term to be used loosely) jumped the gun and made an announcement that the FDR showed similarity to the Lion Air mishap. In the interim, on the 13th of March, the FAA announced ,based not on CVR or FDR data, but initial observation of wreckage, that the stabilizer jackscrew appeared to be fulll down. The Ethiopians released a preliminary report on April 4, over three weeks later, and didn't mention MCAS, and did note that the captain didn't touch the throttles, correctly identified and verbalized the correct procedure, executed it...and later reports verified that the captain undid this action and ultimately caused the loss of control.
You HAVE read the reports and not just wikipedia, haven't you?
The Ethiopians announced, one year after the mishap that the final report was coming. A day prior they released an interim report.
When you stated that "they have had both black boxes for a while now," knowing that it had been two days at the time of your statement, what did you mean, exactly? Two days is "a while," suggesting that the data should be available within two days? When you stated that it was available with the Ethiopian crash, knowing this wasn't true either, what did you mean there? You know these things aren't true: why are you saying them?
You've linked the preliminary report, not the interim (https://web.archive.org/web/20200310...209%202020.pdf), published a year later, and are clearly not very familiar with it. Two points for your ability to use google.
As for the Ethiopian crash, read the damn report. Educate yourself. You have no idea what you're talking about, and so far as "every major aviation authority in the world" disagreeing, again, do your research. You'll find that the opposite was true, and that most were reluctant to ground the aircraft. The initial grounding wasn't by the Indonesians or the Ethiopians; it was the Chinese and it was very much a political move in the face of a political trade war with the US. The last agency to respond? The FAA. Go figure. The events were largely political, and even Sullenberger noted the pilot inexperience and actions, particularly a 200 hour copilot (the 25 year old copilot had 360 hours, with 200 in type...all of it in the prior 90 days. His entire flight experience outside of primary training, less than 3 months total).
Go read the report and familiarize yourself with the events, before you spout off again. You're embarrassing yourself. If you read the Lion Air report, you'll find that the flight crew wound up with a flight control force of 103 lbs; that force isn't just dependent on flght control positioning, but on airspeed; in both cases, the flight crews flew the airplane right out of the envelope by accelerating and ultimately causing the loss of control. If airspeed had been kept at the time the crew became aware, both aircraft were fully controllable. When faced with a potential flight control problem, airmanship 101: don't change anything, including airspeed. The stab trim procedure, regardless of the cause, is the same in every 737, and has been since inception; also the same in every other Boeing. Stab trim cutout switches to cutout. The cause of any unscheduled trim, at that point, is irrelevant. Again, airmanship 101, basic procedures, and in the case of the Ethiopian flight, read the report and you'll learn that the captain verbally identified the problem, stated it, reiterated the memo, applied the correct procedure so far as stab trim cut out (after trying repeatedly to solve his problem by resorting to autopilot). Even the prelim report notes that stab trim stopped moving, coincident with application of the stab trim cutout switches. The captain didn't touch the power again, let the airplane keep accelerating, then changed the stab trim cutout switches, violating the procedure and even his own verbally stated identification of the problem. The captain caused that crash. Read the report.
04-18-2022, 04:14 PM
#136
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Round Luggage
“While we can only speculate as none of the facts are known…” Thanks for the linky I’ll go ahead and stop the video there.
China's aviation authority says it's still investigating the cause of last month's plane crash in Guangxi region. All 132 people onboard a China Eastern Airlines jetliner were killed when it plunged to the ground on March 21st. At a press briefing on Monday, the Civil Aviation Administration of China said it was investigating major risks and hidden hazards in the industry to prevent more air accidents. It said it was vital that more emphasis is placed on assessing the psychological status of air crews.
04-23-2022, 05:14 PM
#137
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by sailingfun
You need to always read between the lines with the Chinese however the 737-800’s were returned to service and this announcement put out. Timing is about what you expect for getting the CVR data from the damaged chips.
China's aviation authority says it's still investigating the cause of last month's plane crash in Guangxi region. All 132 people onboard a China Eastern Airlines jetliner were killed when it plunged to the ground on March 21st. At a press briefing on Monday, the Civil Aviation Administration of China said it was investigating major risks and hidden hazards in the industry to prevent more air accidents. It said it was vital that more emphasis is placed on assessing the psychological status of air crews.
China's aviation authority says it's still investigating the cause of last month's plane crash in Guangxi region. All 132 people onboard a China Eastern Airlines jetliner were killed when it plunged to the ground on March 21st. At a press briefing on Monday, the Civil Aviation Administration of China said it was investigating major risks and hidden hazards in the industry to prevent more air accidents. It said it was vital that more emphasis is placed on assessing the psychological status of air crews.
04-23-2022, 06:54 PM
#138
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by vzelevator
Just like Atlas 3591 unless it's a white man the truth will never be told.
*The truth of the Atlas crash is widely known (Unless I missed something). Was it on the news? Not as much as most of us would have liked. Sadly, it was forgotten by the masses a week after it happened. Is it widely disseminated in the aviation community? Absolutely.
04-24-2022, 01:00 AM
#139
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,026
Originally Posted by vzelevator
Just like Atlas 3591 unless it's a white man the truth will never be told.
Boeing will disregard it over skin color? The CVR and FDR data won't be visible because of skin color?
What might you have posted, for first post, if you had chosen something other than a non-professional, racist remark?
Hopefully something better, and more worthy, and professional.
04-27-2022, 07:02 AM
#140
Banned
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
With multiple global aviation authorities and operators involved, it won't be addressed because someone involved is not "white?"
Boeing will disregard it over skin color? The CVR and FDR data won't be visible because of skin color?
What might you have posted, for first post, if you had chosen something other than a non-professional, racist remark?
Hopefully something better, and more worthy, and professional.
Boeing will disregard it over skin color? The CVR and FDR data won't be visible because of skin color?
What might you have posted, for first post, if you had chosen something other than a non-professional, racist remark?
Hopefully something better, and more worthy, and professional.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
