Another 737 down

[Shuffler]

you guys can sit here and debate all you want.  fact is Manu already admitted there's a problem with software, they're fixing it. fact is none of you experts were there.  one crew correctly identified the problem not because he knew but because he looked thru the manual and he wasn't distracted in flying the airplane. that info should have been passed but they didn't.

anyway what do I know about flying airplanes other than ah.

semp

They crashed because there were no experts in the cockpit.

You just posted something not in evidence. I have not seen anything about the jump seat pilot looking through a manual.
If he was looking for something that is supposed to be known and not on a checklist, that is more proof of sub par training.

[guncrasher]

They crashed because there were no experts in the cockpit.

You just posted something not in evidence. I have not seen anything about the jump seat pilot looking through a manual.
If he was looking for something that is supposed to be known and not on a checklist, that is more proof of sub par training.

maybe i misread, but the pilot in the jump sit wasnt worrying about flying the airplane.  that was a plus, he just concentrating on finding out what was wrong.  you could say the copilot should have done that, in the airplane that crashed, whatever.

I remember watching a documentary on airplane crashes, i dont really remember which airline but it was somewhre in south america similar to this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroPeru_Flight_603

pilots received incorrect stall and overspeed warnings and many others, the pilots were confused as to which instrument was giving a correct reading. turned out the altitude was the only one giving correct readings but they disregarded because they couldnt trust any instrument. airplane crashed.

in the documentary they asked this pilot that was analyzing the crash. he flat out said he wasnt gonna blame the pilots, they did what they could based on the info they had. he said based on the info i have now, i would have put the airplane in cruise control and wait for another airplane that was near by coming to help them sort the problem. but i was not in the airplane.  cant really tell you for sure if i had done anything different had i been inside the cockpit.

some of you guys have typed responses that took you longer to think than the air lion or the the Ethiopian crash were up in the air.  you have hindsight, they didnt.  you have read news reports, and preliminary data , they didnt.

you could say I would have, should have, whatever, you were not there.

that's all i see, people blaming somebody when it was not a single thing that made the airplanes crash, it was several things.

anyway what do i know about airplanes.


semp

[MiloMorai]

Boeing has admitted they knew there was a problem a year before the crash.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48174797

[Vraciu]

maybe i misread, but the pilot in the jump sit wasnt worrying about flying the airplane.  that was a plus, he just concentrating on finding out what was wrong.  you could say the copilot should have done that, in the airplane that crashed, whatever.

No, he just happened to know the procedure for a stab trim runaway, which is a memory item every 737 pilot is required to know. 

I remember watching a documentary on airplane crashes, i dont really remember which airline but it was somewhre in south america similar to this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AeroPeru_Flight_603

pilots received incorrect stall and overspeed warnings and many others, the pilots were confused as to which instrument was giving a correct reading. turned out the altitude was the only one giving correct readings but they disregarded because they couldnt trust any instrument. airplane crashed.

in the documentary they asked this pilot that was analyzing the crash. he flat out said he wasnt gonna blame the pilots, they did what they could based on the info they had. he said based on the info i have now, i would have put the airplane in cruise control and wait for another airplane that was near by coming to help them sort the problem. but i was not in the airplane.  cant really tell you for sure if i had done anything different had i been inside the cockpit.

some of you guys have typed responses that took you longer to think than the air lion or the the Ethiopian crash were up in the air.  you have hindsight, they didnt.  you have read news reports, and preliminary data , they didnt.

you could say I would have, should have, whatever, you were not there.

that's all i see, people blaming somebody when it was not a single thing that made the airplanes crash, it was several things.

That crash was a pitch, power, performance issue.   I cover it regularly.   Have had it thrown at me in the sim plenty, as well.  It is a scenario that is easily handled if one is properly trained.    A blocked static port is a situation that is taught from at least the earliest days of Instrument training.

The altimeter would be stuck and the airspeed indicator would act unreliably by behaving more like an altimeter in reverse. In this case the airspeed indicator was reading faster than they were flying.    The crew reduced power until they stalled it.  Basic airmanship failure.  Pitch, power, performance would have saved the day.  Simple. 

X Degrees of Pitch + Y Fuel Flow = Z Airspeed

I have never done a preflight inspection on a 757 but I am wondering why a taped over static port went unnoticed.   I can physically touch them on all the jets I’ve flown.   Things I can’t touch I point at to verify they’re there.  How was this missed?  The plane should never have left the ground. 

As for the rest...   We are saying what we say because we are trained professionals.  We’ve seen these scenarios in real life or the sim.   We teach them.   We focus on these things in training.

Hindsight is the first step in foresight.    We learn from the mistakes of others.   In the end, when it comes to flying jets if you are not thinking ahead you’re already behind. 

anyway what do i know about airplanes.


semp

Indeed.

[Vraciu]

Boeing has admitted they knew there was a problem a year before the crash.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48174797

#FakeNews

[bustr]

The BBC is pro Airbus and this is a hit piece. Nikki Haley was just added to the board of directors of Boeing, they know this crap will have to be countered with an individual who has dealt with it at the global level for the USA. Boeing and the US are seen as the same entity just as Airbus and the EU are, the BBC is pro EU.

In the US there have been no MAX problems like those two crashes outside the US with companies that are not as rigorous as American companies in their training of pilots and service of their aircraft. Look up the incident history of those two airlines across all of their aircraft for the last 20 years. Unless this is devolving into a purse fight to attack Vriacu regardless of the fact he is a professional in the industry in question.

I won't do that because it's an expression of pure ignorance, especially since my father was a commercial pilot. Now if this was a game related matter, kowabunga and go for the throat.

[Vraciu]

Thanks, bustr.   

[ACE]

Very good points Guncrasher/Semp. You took the words out of my mouth. Obviously there was several issues with the aircraft (the crew being one of them).

People in these threads tend argue from authority and it’s always a bad take or a jab at the pilots. No one wants to blame a manufacturer here. In my world of chillers and refrigeration if the guy who builds the unit screws it up and ships several orders out guess who takes the loss and blame? The manufacturer. Boeing shipped a plane with a problem and then said hey here’s a bandaid, they messed up they clearly know this hence why it’s grounded and they publicly apologized saying so.

Don’t waste your time Semp as it’s not worth the name calling you’ll receive.

[bustr]

 Look up the incident history of those two airlines across all of their aircraft for the last 20 years.

[Vraciu]

Look up the incident history of those two airlines across all of their aircraft for the last 20 years.

Don’t waste your time feeding trolls. 

[guncrasher]

think vraciu missed the point I was trying to make.

the pilot making the review in the documentary was right on. he wasn't there.

now think about the 2 crashes. 3 different crews and one pilot in the jump seat who correctly identified the problem.  1 out of 7 pilots did identify the problem.  2 airplanes crashed and 1 got lucky possibly.

was it pilot training, or Manu's software problem.  design problem. or a combination.  think about that, cause I find kind of funny that a software update is waiting approval.

anyway, what do I know. for all I know airplanes fly on sail boat fuel since I don't see fuel pumps addy the airport.  it's a joke btw.

semp

[Busher]

Don’t waste your time feeding trolls. 

I don't know why "your trolls" cannot understand that 1: post certification upgrades and modifications to airliners are common even when there has been no accident. And 2: that way beyond a system like MCAS, there are dozens of other systems that can kill you if they malfunction or they are mishandled. That's why pilots are there - to fly the f***ing jet when these events happen.

I have no idea why Boeing decided to get AIRBUSSY and install a stall intervention system. Pilots have been trained for a 100 years... He who stalleth..falleth.

[Vraciu]

think vraciu missed the point I was trying to make.

the pilot making the review in the documentary was right on. he wasn't there.

now think about the 2 crashes. 3 different crews and one pilot in the jump seat who correctly identified the problem.  1 out of 7 pilots did identify the problem.  2 airplanes crashed and 1 got lucky possibly.

was it pilot training, or Manu's software problem.  design problem. or a combination.  think about that, cause I find kind of funny that a software update is waiting approval.

anyway, what do I know. for all I know airplanes fly on sail boat fuel since I don't see fuel pumps addy the airport.  it's a joke btw.

semp

It’s a crew training/experience problem.   Period. 

The latest accident was pilot error.   They had everything they needed to save the jet, just like the crew with the jumpseater did.

[Vraciu]

I don't know why "your trolls" cannot understand that 1: post certification upgrades and modifications to airliners are common even when there has been no accident. And 2: that way beyond a system like MCAS, there are dozens of other systems that can kill you if they malfunction or they are mishandled. That's why pilots are there - to fly the f***ing jet when these events happen.

I have no idea why Boeing decided to get AIRBUSSY and install a stall intervention system. Pilots have been trained for a 100 years... He who stalleth..falleth.

I wish I knew.   It’s clearly the “triumph” of the uncluttered (uninformed) mind.  Every pilot that has chimed in on this thread would have saved the day—even without a type rating in the danged thing.   There are some things you just don’t do in any plane.    This last crash is an example of several...

Agree with your points, Busher. 

[Toad]

As for the rest...   We are saying what we say because we are trained professionals.  We’ve seen these scenarios in real life or the sim.   We teach them.   We focus on these things in training.

Shame on you Vraciu! Don't you realize that you are "arguing from authority" ?

Just because there are people that have spent 30,000 hours in transport category cockpits, who have spent thousands of hours in Category D simulators of transport category cockpits practicing normal/abnormal/emergency procedures, who have spent thousands of hours instructing and training other pilots to fly transport category aircraft and who also have held Designated Examiner status for the FAA and given the tests and evaluated pilots to determine if they are worthy of a Type Rating in a particular transport category jet......

.....that DOES NOT mean that such people have any particular insight into what pilots should do when confronted with a simple AOA failure in a transport category aircraft.

No, far better to listen to those with absolutely no experience in aviation who know that any malfunction in an aircraft is impossible for a well trained pilot to handle and clearly indicates a fatal design flaw by the manufacturer. After all, no manufacturer should have the expectancy of a basic, reasonable level of competency in the end user trained and certified as competent by a national aviation authority, right?

This despite the fact that malfunctions do happen in transport category aircraft and are successfully handled every day by well trained pilots. Why....kind of like what happened on the Lion Air MAX aircraft with the well trained pilot on the jumpseat.