More MAX information

[Vraciu]

And at least the Ethiopian pilots had additional training on the MAX including MCAS but apparently it didnt save them.

Because the right seater had 200 hours and the left seater was some wet behind the ears 29-year old who didn’t know what a trim switch was.   


How’s that for conjecture?



SMH.

A stab runaway is a stab runaway.   The reason is irrelevant as the procedure is the same with or without MCAS.    Any 737 pilot worth his salt knows this.    And this isn’t the first time an AOA sensor has failed.   A PROPERLY trained pilot will fly the airplane using pitch, power, performance.   

[Zimme83]

We know that you think Africans are inferior but as long as you dont come up with something substantial I will not bother to reply.

[Vraciu]

I did not say THEY were inferior I said their TRAINING is inferior, troll.

As for substance, you lack it completely.   Among the professionals on this board your ill-informed “analysis” has become a source of laughter and head shaking.

[Puma44]

The vast difference of technology in the NG and Classic required a lot of intense concentration at first while flying the NG, even with several thousand hours of Classic time.  Can only imagine attempting to stay in the loop with only 200 hours of flying time when a “what’s it doing” event occurs. 

[Toad]

Why do I get the feeling some folks in this thread didn't read the Rob Graves blog piece that Oldman put up?

Still, I enjoy the humorous aspect of some posts here similar to what Graves got in his comment section.

Never turn down a good chuckle.

[ACE]

I did not say THEY were inferior I said their TRAINING is inferior, troll.

As for substance, you lack it completely.   Among the professionals on this board your ill-informed “analysis” has become a source of laughter and head shaking.

You keep clinging to this word “Troll.”  When I go and read the definition of that it really reflects back on you. You keep throwing slight Jabs and insults only to cave and back peddle and report people when they do it to you. The United States and the FAA made the correct decision regardless if you like it or not. Lives are being spared as we speak and for that we should be thankful. Your complete disregard of human life is rather shocking to say the least. I hope you find comfort in your thoughts eventually.

[Vraciu]

Why do I get the feeling some folks in this thread didn't read the Rob Graves blog piece that Oldman put up?

Still, I enjoy the humorous aspect of some posts here similar to what Graves got in his comment section.

Never turn down a good chuckle.

Because they didn’t. 

Well, at least the world is safe from poorly trained and inexperienced MAX pilots—as opposed to the outstanding professionals at Southwest, American, United, et al.   US passengers had nothing to fear because our outstanding crews know how to run the NNC for Stab Trim Runaway. 

[Toad]

The United States and the FAA made the correct decision regardless if you like it or not.

Clearly, I think this, from Rob Graves' bit posted by Oldman, applies here. Perhaps some missed it.

(GRAVES) So the FAA bowed to international and media pressure and grounded all Max aircraft, which is proving to be a minor inconvenience to most operators of the aircraft. I was personally walking out to a Max to fly to Phoenix when the announcement came. Someone somewhere had done some preparations and an -800 was towed to the gate by maintenance about 10 minutes later for a slightly delayed departure.

We of course are now treated to the circular logic of all the "I told you so" stories. The process starts as media sensationalism whips up a gullible and credulous public followed by outraged calls for the aircraft to be grounded. After weather-vaning politicians cave into public pressure, preening media talking heads then get to state that something must have been really been wrong. And so it goes.

Make no mistake: this grounding has more to do with public relations and marketing than safety. As of yet, there is very little evidence that the two Max crashes are in any way related other than the most superficial of circumstances. But the tsunami of media scare stories and sensationalism showed no signs of abatement, so this was the correct decision.

Lives are being spared as we speak and for that we should be thankful. Your complete disregard of human life is rather shocking to say the least.

Again, from Graves:

One commenter offered, based on no information other than two 737s had crashed, that all of them should be grounded. I pointed out that by that logic, it would be even more beneficial to ground all airplanes everywhere as it would be safer still. The response was "I didn't say all airplanes should be grounded" displaying an ironclad grip on logical fallacies.

 

[ACE]

Clearly, I think this, from Rob Graves' bit posted by Oldman, applies here. Perhaps some missed it.




Again, from Graves:

 

I read the article. I mentioned it was a good read. And that I respect his point of view. I’m just more on the let’s stop potential casualties and fix the issue before it happenes again.

[Toad]

I’m just more on the let’s stop potential casualties and fix the issue before it happenes again.

Who isn't?

I suspect the difference is that since the causal factors in the accident chain have not yet been identified in either the Lion Air or Ethiopian accident, some here are a bit more restrained with respect to calling for knee jerk solutions to a problem that hasn't been identified or even understood.

Accident chains are called "chains" because there is usually not a single factor that causes the accident.

Since the dawn of electrical elevator and stab trim systems in aircraft, there have been "runaway trim" incidents. As a result, since the dawn of electrical trim, there have been runaway trim and runaway stab procedures. These procedures generally prevent an incident from becoming an accident.

It is quite possible that runaway trim is a link in these accident chains. At this point, it can't be ruled out as nothing is truly known at this stage.

if that were so, one key solution would be making sure the pilots are aware of the possibility and have absorbed the procedural knowledge necessary to counter such a possibility.

It would not necessarily follow that all the aircraft should be immediately grounded. Rather, it may just call for a simple solution such as, at the extreme, a sim session or two for pilots featuring a Lion Air scenario. As I pointed out, many, many aircraft with the potential for runaway trim have been flying passengers since the very dawn of electrical trim...and still are. MCAS is, by the way, an electrical trim function.

So, I'll come down on the side of waiting until the actual problem has been identified.

It's possible Boeing forged a link in the chain if they did not properly explain MCAS in the flight manuals and did not point out the procedural knowledge necessary to counter a MCAS malfunction. Perhaps they thought a MCAS runaway would be dealt with in the same way runaway trim has always been handled. If this oversight is a factor, it is easily remedied. In fact, they have already put out an Emergency Bulletin on the subject. It just emphasizes the use of the "Runaway Stabilizer NNC" (Non Normal Checklist) in the event of a Lion Air situation.

[Busher]

I will make no comment on the quality of pilot training anywhere in the world.
The worldwide pilot shortage has begun. The FAA made it harder for airlines to recruit after the Colgan Airlines Dash-8 accident in Buffalo due to a much higher flying experience level required to occupy a flying seat in an airliner.
When jet aircraft first appeared in the B707 and the DC8, autopilots were extremely basic. They could roughly hold a heading and altitude. Since the automation technology was basic, highly limited and very unreliable, pilots were expected, trained, and were actually quite willing to be able to hand fly the airplane with precision. A slew of new airplanes began to appear; DC9, B727, B737, L1011 etc. but the automation was still basic. Pilot recruits that could not qualify in manually manipulating the airplane were extremely rare but they did exist and the did not make it.
Fast forward a few years when automation of the 757/767 went nuts. Many of us old farts had a hard time learning to manage an airplane that could think. Some of my peers went to the airbus' (I never did) and had some serious "fun". We all laughed at the rule that none of these airplanes could even be dispatched if the autopilot did not work.
Finding new recruits with high levels of flying experience is very difficult now. Make no mistake, these young pilots are wizzes at operating the automation; likely thanks to being born in an era of computer technology. Whether they can manually fly the airplane without the automation is anyone's guess - I can say from first hand experience, they are not allowed to do so. Be it airline policy or the airplane's own operating manual, hand flying is strongly discouraged.
To place a value on the ability to hand-fly is totally subjective. I think its fundamental and vital but I remind you, I am an old fart. You can appreciate that giving young pilots a significant level of manual training is ultra-expensive and for cost reasons would be resisted by their Employers. The sad part is accidents like Air France's A330 and Colgan Air's Dash-8 demonstrate that basic skills like straight and level are wanting in some aviators.
Whether hand-flying has anything to do the loss of two 737's, only time and the investigation will tell, and only then if the authorities decide to tell all.

[Vraciu]

The Colgan crash also emphasized the need for experience in the right seat.   The F/O retracted the flaps on her own initiative (i.e. without the Captain requesting it) after the airplane stalled thereby eliminating any possibility of recovery. 

[Puma44]

Well said, Buster.  The modern day automation goes a long way toward reducing pilot fatigue.  But, when it hits the fan, there still has to be proficient muscle memory to save the day. 

This last MAX incident with a 200ish hour FO, suggests his lack of experience (not at all his fault) may have put the young Captain in a quasi single pilot situation. Establishing and maintaining situational awareness is quite challenging as a newbie in a high tech modern airliner, especially with no previous type experience (which this pilot couldn’t have had at 200 hours).   Then there’s the question of who was flying the jet when it happened.

[Oldman731]

from Rob Graves' bit posted by Oldman

um, just to keep things straight, that was Puma who posted the Graves blog.  Mine was the AOPA thing, apparently by a different pilot.  I just thought his/her comments on the MAX handling issues were interesting.

Given that grounding the MAX isn't as economically drastic as cancelling all, or even a lot of airline flights, I'm unsure why people would not want to err on the side of caution.  May be the plane, may be the pilots, may be the maintenance people (my own guess), but there are enough issues out there to raise some questions.

- oldman

[Puma44]

A non issue, Oldman.  A lot of different vectors to keep track of in this thread.