Extra pilot saved doomed Lion Air jetliner on next-to-last flight | The Seattle Times
Some of the training pilots received on the new model was on iPads! I mean the haptics and screen resolution on the new pro models are great - but, really?
you couldn’t make this stuff up
Some of the training pilots received on the new model was on iPads! I mean the haptics and screen resolution on the new pro models are great - but, really?
you couldn’t make this stuff up
Last edited:
Wow, that's pretty scary.
"self-certified"? By who?
Boeing doesn't self certify.
I'm far from on expert on anything related to flight controls, but I would have thought if you can move a control surface, then it has to be DAL A.
And unless things are REALLY screwed up, they will reclassify the system as DAL A now.
Training and communication - not FBW fault.
If pulleys were involved instead, I doubt it would have resolved itself and disaster averted anyway. Once an air liner stalls its game over.
Problem is at night, in a storm, any idea that you have a clue about your orientation is fantasy. I've watched enough Air Crash Disaster' shows to know that if the pilots are in trouble and they don't have orientation it almost always ends badly.
As more info appears it seems more like a level pilot error - reports tonight that as it crashed they were trying to read the manual.
Lion Air pilots were looking at handbook when plane crashed | World news | The Guardian
Lion Air pilots were looking at handbook when plane crashed | World news | The Guardian
Seems like a false stall detection, which the plane tried to auto correct by pitching the nose down.
Last edited:
I did say an unfortunate sequence of events. However on a Boeing if one pilot is pushing and one pulling both pilots know about it as the columns are linked.
As someone who very emphatically does NOT have 'the right stuff' I have no ability to get my head around how to handle the combination of a plane misbehaving and the junior officer seeming to have frozen in a panic with the stick pulled fully back. Even if a pilot explained it very slowly I have no reference frame to fit this into.
But it does appear that an Airbus suddenly going into Alternate law in a storm is not what a pilot would view as a good day in the office.
There have been various other worrying computer issues on Airbus over the years reported. Squeaky clean they are not. But I am still far more likely to die crossing the road taking my children to the child minders in the morning by half asleep nutters coming round the corner at 150% of the speed limit. Each day I give thanks for my ears and the fact that I can hear them before I see them.
In the end, this is a failure of process. There is no way the FMEA should have allowed the plane to ship in single AoA sensor configurations. There is also no way the pilots should be this poorly trained.
Might I mention again that NOTHING NEW has been revealed about the Ethiopian crash.
EVERYTHING so far is conjecture.
Many of you are falling into the trap of reading/seeing something in the news/internet/TV and thinking it’s factual when there is no new information.
PLEASE stop speculating. Particularly from a basis in ignorance. Which is what everybody has regarding the 2nd crash.
Think critically guys, you are a smart bunch of people.
EVERYTHING so far is conjecture.
Many of you are falling into the trap of reading/seeing something in the news/internet/TV and thinking it’s factual when there is no new information.
PLEASE stop speculating. Particularly from a basis in ignorance. Which is what everybody has regarding the 2nd crash.
Think critically guys, you are a smart bunch of people.
In the last bit of the article:
I do not have any police hat or anything, but here goes anyway.
... It must be a horrible way to go, you're second guessing on all your decisions, trying to keep a cool head, desperatly trying to avoid the worst end result.
Everyone please consider:
This will go on for months, possibly years or decades, and every single person that has ever set foot in an aircraft will ofcourse be concerned about the outcome.
Whatever comments any of us make, I suggest not to make assumptions or allegations towards any individuals, groups or particular roles. Every single person involved is hurt and looking for answers, and unknown people pointing fingers around on some online forum is probably not the best course of action.
I am certain that if we try to distill facts as best as possible, and look more at the technical or financial side of things, we can avoid getting this thread closed.
Hope I am not overstepping some boundaries here.
This article is quite an eye-opener to how things have changed:
Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing, FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system | The Seattle Times
I feel this is quite a mis-characterisation by the media.
Depending on the aircraft*, when an abnormal event occurs the pilots will first conduct whatever actions are necessary by memory then consult the quick reference handbook. This handbook lists the procedures and actions required appropriate to the fault scenario presented. (*Modern aircraft may have this integrated into the electronic systems).
Quick Reference Handbook (QRH - SKYbrary Aviation Safety)
There is so much false information out there, it is better just to be patient and let the investigators do their thing. Failings - and there are always multiple failures that culminate in an accident (go read Prof. James Reason's work) - will be identified, addressed and the world of aviation will be safer.
I agree -- the truth is a long way from being determined. But analysing the rolling news is interesting too - it's not like this is a news media site which will affect anything. I'm surprised to see such early info from the actual investigators rather than a "wait, we're working on it, it takes time" message.
That is so totally NOT what I took from reading the article.
Especially not since we know that the DoJ, DoT and now FBI started criminal investigations into Boeing and the FAA.
Also it might be a struggle to switch off a system Boeing hasn't told anybody existed until after that crash.
Also it seems odd to me that what appears a quick way of overriding, the 'AoA Disagree' thing, is only offered as a cost option.
Fair enough. I lifted that comment from another report on the same info.
Following the news on this is interesting, as it's fake - or iffy - news at times on a technical subject. So at least we can discuss it!
Following the news on this is interesting, as it's fake - or iffy - news at times on a technical subject. So at least we can discuss it!
Years ago I developed a paramedical instrument, and self-certified it for CE marking.
I really did my best to document how I designed hardware as well as software to avoid critical situations, preclude a wrong sequence of operator inputs leading to dangerous situations, that sort of thing. There's a lot of guidance on the 'net and you save many kilo-euros.
But self-certification totally depends on honesty of whoever does it, and it should specifically NOT been done by an outfit in trouble or under pressure. For that the US has put a lot of effort and money to set up an outfit do it independently, and the hell with the interest of the company, called the FAA.
An FAA that accommodates a manufacturer because of pressures is failing in its basic mission and just as guilty in my book.
Jan
I really did my best to document how I designed hardware as well as software to avoid critical situations, preclude a wrong sequence of operator inputs leading to dangerous situations, that sort of thing. There's a lot of guidance on the 'net and you save many kilo-euros.
But self-certification totally depends on honesty of whoever does it, and it should specifically NOT been done by an outfit in trouble or under pressure. For that the US has put a lot of effort and money to set up an outfit do it independently, and the hell with the interest of the company, called the FAA.
An FAA that accommodates a manufacturer because of pressures is failing in its basic mission and just as guilty in my book.
Jan
This is so true! I am in the nuclear power industry and am involved heavily in plant system design. Listening to news media accounts and explanations of the Fukushima event was absolutely frustrating. There was so much misinformation and interviews with "experts" who didn't know what they were talking about. I wish more people knew how incorrect the "news" is. It's almost like the media are only in it for selling advertising 🙄
I'm absolutely sure there's plenty of extremely well meaning journalist and news organizations. This said, the work initiated by Dunning-Kruger highlights a double whammy of ignorance: namely, a lack of expertise in a field lends one to believe one understands the field better than one does. This has been replicated by testing experts in subjects outside their domain, so it's a human problem, i.e. all of us to varying degrees not a "that idiot" problem.
Granted there is a blood lust and profit incentive for all media to fill the 24/7 news cycle, but I think that once the findings of the numerous investigations into not just the crash, but the development of the entire Max series and pilot training are in, a sober and objective analysis of the coverage will bear out that some of even the earliest “conjectures” were correct.
Last edited:
I've worked on CE Mark program (just a few) and FAA programs, and really is apples to oranges.
I'll try to add more explanation later. In a nutshell, FAA trains and delegates limited responsibility to employees of companies such as Boeing and others that build commercial avionics. Training is extensive, timeframe is months.
Oh, and yeah its clear in reading some of the articles some of the so called "experts" do not understand what's involved here.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.