Lion Air Report

[Toad]

Another armchair aviator weighs in on the crew aspect of the Lion Air Accident.

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/highly-respected-aviation-experts-critical-lion-air-pilots-crash-report/

Former NTSB crash investigator is highly critical of the Indonesian NTSC report and the primary conclusion that the MCAS software caused the crash of LionAir Flight 610 in October last year.

Well known, former NTSB crash investigator and air safety expert Greg Feith, says the Indonesian NTSC 322-page report, issued last month, into the LionAir 737MAX tragedy presents an in-depth account of the “factual” information developed during the course of the investigation.

Ok, I admit. He's not your average armchair investigator. He's an experienced NTSB investigator.

However, Feith says of the report, “there are so many flaws in logic, failures to properly analyze the facts, and failures to hold persons or organizations accountable and much more. They (NTSC) obviously reverse-engineered the “facts” to support their preconceived conclusions that the airplane and MCAS are to blame,” said Mr Feith.

“The NTSC stated the pilots, especially the First Officer, had significant training deficiencies and lacked basic flying skills. These same deficiencies occurred during the accident flight. These two pilots had no business being in the cockpit and the airplane should not have been operated because of all the maintenance issues that began at the beginning of October, and were not corrected, making the airplane unairworthy.”

Training deficiencies? Lack of basic flying skills? Maintenance issues? This all seems like I've read it all before. I wonder where I read that stuff?

Mr Feith’s views are supported by a well-respected Airbus training captain, who told AirlineRatings.com the first officer “could not fly”.

“The report on the FO is an eye-opener as he is constantly very poor in all phases of operating an aircraft,” the training captain said.

“The report indicates a lot of additional training in standard operating procedures and emergencies and this was repeated on almost every subsequent training session but the problems were never resolved.

“There is a continual mention of a very poor instrument scan which was also never resolved. Even more deeply troubling was that, according to the pilot reports, the first officer didn’t understand and had difficulty handling aerodynamic stalls, a fundamental of flying.”

“That FO could not fly and I wonder why the Lion Air trainers didn’t cull him as his performance at proficiency checks are all fail items.”

That assessment is supported by one of the world’s leading flight crew trainers, who told Airline Ratings.com “it would appear that much had been overlooked in order to keep the FO operational”.

But yeah...it's all Boeing's fault.

[guncrasher]

Strange, the pilot had flown for 7 years and lacked basic flying skills. Co-pilot, also had several years.

Can somebody explain to me how somebody that lacks basic skills can up and land several hundred times. Shouldn't they have had crashed the first time?

I know nothing about planes but I'm skeptical. Did the plane had a fault, I say yes, did the pilot made errors, yes. Was boeing totally at fault, no, were the pilots? no.

I saw a film on YouTube describing that to be certified on that plane other than having experience on other planes was an iPad. This was a us pilot by the way.


semp

[Puma44]

Can somebody explain to me how somebody that lacks basic skills can up and land several hundred times. Shouldn't they have had crashed the first time?

semp

Saving face.  Just got lucky numerous times until a very serious malfunction occurred.  Now, the company can’t admit to training and leadership failure.

[Mister Fork]

Saving face.  Just got lucky numerous times until a very serious malfunction occurred.  Now, the company can’t admit to training and leadership failure.

... Chuck Yeager said it well for all pilots "It's the man, not the machine."

Unless your wings explode and fall off your aircraft. 

[Vraciu]

Another armchair aviator weighs in on the crew aspect of the Lion Air Accident.

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/highly-respected-aviation-experts-critical-lion-air-pilots-crash-report/

Ok, I admit. He's not your average armchair investigator. He's an experienced NTSB investigator.

Training deficiencies? Lack of basic flying skills? Maintenance issues? This all seems like I've read it all before. I wonder where I read that stuff?

But yeah...it's all Boeing's fault.

I love Greg Feith.   He's a top notch guy all the way.    Been a fan of his since I saw him on SURVIVAL IN THE SKY in 1996.  This is a scathing commentary by Mr. Feith.  Long overdue.

[Vraciu]

Strange, the pilot had flown for 7 years and lacked basic flying skills. Co-pilot, also had several years.

Can somebody explain to me how somebody that lacks basic skills can up and land several hundred times. Shouldn't they have had crashed the first time?

I know nothing about planes but I'm skeptical. Did the plane had a fault, I say yes, did the pilot made errors, yes. Was boeing totally at fault, no, were the pilots? no.

I saw a film on YouTube describing that to be certified on that plane other than having experience on other planes was an iPad. This was a us pilot by the way.


semp

They get lucky.   Nothing bad happens to them, the automation and other pilots babysit.    It's for those times when HAL 9000 won't open the pod bay doors that we get paid.  These happen to be the moments when skill deficit is all-but-guaranteed to kill the inept.  Heck, they even sometimes get the good ones.

The pilots were let down by the system.   Their company didn't train them properly and the certification authority didn't mandate it.    But the pilots are the ones who flipped the switch back on.    Once that happened it was game over.    The jet could have been saved.     They blew it.

As for being certified on an iPad that's nonsense.    Context is everything.    They're already typed on the aircraft.  There is a lot of training that takes place to get there, at least in the US.  An iPad might explain what we call Differences.  Perfectly acceptable.  I don't need a complete course to use my EMB-145 type rating to fly a -140 or -135.  They're nearly the same.

[Vraciu]

Saving face.  Just got lucky numerous times until a very serious malfunction occurred.  Now, the company can’t admit to training and leadership failure.

I just heard that the data was sent to Toulouse after the crash.  Hmmmmmm.

[Ramesis]

Are not we all arm chair pilots?
 

[Vraciu]

Are not we all arm chair pilots?
 

I fly for a living, so no.   

[Ramesis]

But... u are in aces high

[Ciaphas]

But... u are in aces high

Might be in Aces High but real world experience will always trump a video game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ramesis]

Might be in Aces High but real world experience will always trump a video game.

Exactly my point C... tho AH closely mimics the physics of flight...
It is not exactly like flying a real plane much less a ftr

[Ciaphas]

Exactly my point C... tho AH closely mimics the physics of flight...
It is not exactly like flying a real plane much less a ftr

Your comment then seems to be a bit to boxed in, speaking from experience refers to RL experiences. For instance, if there was an issue posted concerning an ejection mishap, I could speak on that all day long from an SME standpoint and still fly AH3.

Make sense?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mister Fork]

Your comment then seems to be a bit to boxed in, speaking from experience refers to RL experiences. For instance, if there was an issue posted concerning an ejection mishap, I could speak on that all day long from an SME standpoint and still fly AH3.

Make sense?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And I'll add... nothing, and I mean nothing can prepare or train some than real-life experiences.  Simulator training is just that - simulated training. And simulated cockpit trainers contain a real-life motion-cockpits that mimics flying so you can go through systems failure training and LEARN what to look for and start the long process of memorizing key emergency checklists. The difference that if you muck up in the sim, you can learn from your mistakes again and again so that when real life does happen, your flying experience + sim training = successfully overcoming aircraft issues.

This is what we know:
1. The Lion Air pilot's inability to decipher the technical issues was simply from a lack of proper training and experience and as a result thundered that plane into the sea.

2. The Ethiopian pilots were even more inexperienced and made a 200-foot smoking hole in the ground for exactly the same reason. 

3. The EU was quick to jump on the "BAN THE MAX" simply to put pressure on Boeing to prop up Airbus and the sheeple effect took over. They know the MAX is safe.

4. Boeing did cheap out/over-simplify on the re-cert program for the MAX and the design. But this has happened with dozens of other aircraft version upgrades and yet no one is talking about those or that the 737 has actually 3 similar trim systems for in their airplanes for decades.

5. Boeing also didn't anticipate equally inexperienced pilots behind the controls who couldn't figure out a runaway trim procedure and that the maintenance programs would be terrible as it was contributing to this issue.

I'm really happy to see Greg Feith comment on this - I always loved the aircraft accident shows he was interviewed in. Always direct. Always honest. Always spoke the truth.

[Vulcan]

3. The EU was quick to jump on the "BAN THE MAX" simply to put pressure on Boeing to prop up Airbus and the sheeple effect took over. They know the MAX is safe.

Suck it up, the USA happily do that all the time to non-US products (see Huawei).