737 MAX - Safe or Unsafe?
04-04-2019, 09:30 AM
#163
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2017
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Proximity
Incorrect. Both engines were running at near 100% N1 at impact.
04-04-2019, 10:38 AM
#164
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 805
Originally Posted by Peacock
Are you sure? He has an accident investigation background, and posts on the internet. The very picture he used is in the Wikipedia article about the mishap. I guess he didn’t read it though.
One day I will be cool enough to chat with pilots that "went to Boeing".
04-04-2019, 11:17 AM
#165
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 986
Originally Posted by Proximity
I know I'm not condescending internet troll and ETOPS expert, but I have a basic command of the English language and can read an accident report.
One day I will be cool enough to chat with pilots that "went to Boeing".
One day I will be cool enough to chat with pilots that "went to Boeing".
As for the pilots that came to Boeing if your airline flies the MAX why wouldn’t you want to hear what they have to say? I did.
04-04-2019, 11:25 AM
#166
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: B717 FO
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by pacnw77
You're saying they TRIMMED nose down? Where'd you hear that? If so... what a terrible, terrible mistake.
I just read this blog post a bit ago (link below). Perhaps there's scenario where they'd temporarily 'Elevator Nose Down' to help alleviate the forces on the jackscrew while they try to trim up....?
https://www.satcom.guru/2019/04/stab...and-range.html
I just read this blog post a bit ago (link below). Perhaps there's scenario where they'd temporarily 'Elevator Nose Down' to help alleviate the forces on the jackscrew while they try to trim up....?
https://www.satcom.guru/2019/04/stab...and-range.html
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...X-Ethiopia.pdf
Direct your attention to page 11, at the "From 05:40:42 to 05:43:11" mark. I can think of no other explanation for what is described here other than manual trim applied in the nose down direction.
04-04-2019, 11:59 AM
#167
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 805
Originally Posted by WestCoastFlyr
https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...X-Ethiopia.pdf
Direct your attention to page 11, at the "From 05:40:42 to 05:43:11" mark. I can think of no other explanation for what is described here other than manual trim applied in the nose down direction.
Direct your attention to page 11, at the "From 05:40:42 to 05:43:11" mark. I can think of no other explanation for what is described here other than manual trim applied in the nose down direction.
04-04-2019, 12:21 PM
#169
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Position: B717 FO
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by Mesabah
The FO's momentary trim down had absolutely nothing to do with the accident.
I agree, but I wonder if by accidentally trimming nose-down it lead them to believe manual trim was inop, and thus re-engaging the electric trim and then MCAS finishing the job. Or, were the aerodynamic forces too great to even allow manual trimming in the nose up condition, and possibly even moving the stab slightly nose down with the stab trim cutout activated. If this was the case, I wonder if the aircraft would ever be able to be recovered....
04-04-2019, 12:27 PM
#170
:-)
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,339
Originally Posted by WestCoastFlyr
I agree, but I wonder if by accidentally trimming nose-down it lead them to believe manual trim was inop, and thus re-engaging the electric trim and then MCAS finishing the job. Or, were the aerodynamic forces too great to even allow manual trimming in the nose up condition, and possibly even moving the stab slightly nose down with the stab trim cutout activated. If this was the case, I wonder if the aircraft would ever be able to be recovered....
Another thing, the .2 degrees is within the error margin of the recording system, the FO might not have moved the trim at all, and this is simply instrumentation.
Last edited by Mesabah; 04-04-2019 at 12:37 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
