Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Ethiopian pilot pleaded for training after Lion Air Boeing 737 Max crash
Just days after a Lion Air Boeing 737 Max nosedived in Indonesia and killed all 189 people aboard, an Ethiopian Airlines pilot began pleading with his bosses for more training on the Max, warning that crews could easily be overwhelmed in a crisis and that one of their planes could be the next to go down. “We are asking for trouble,” veteran pilot Bernd Kai von Hoesslin wrote in a December email obtained by The Associated Press, adding that if several alarms go off in the cockpit at once, “it… (www.yahoo.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Has anybody considered simply disabling this anti-stall system- permanently? I'm no pilot, but it seems like it wouldn't hurt for pilots to "regress" back a bit to piloting instead of increasingly becoming IT managers. When does automation go too far? It's when "safety" kills. Computers offer speed and convenience, but you shouldn't be compelled to use them for everything. They lack one essential characteristic: nuanced judgement based on experience. That characteristic is exactly what automated systems can strangulate when they fail. The "emergency backup" should be the pilot and not the computer.
Unless some knowledgeable people are barking up the wrong tree, the plane is not airworthy without MCAS. It's a pitch stability enhancer, and not directly an anti stall system. It wouldn't be certified under part 25 without it.
The plane is airworthy without MCAS. MCAS is only needed because at low speed, flaps up, autopilot off, the plane would pitch up with the application of power. Not dangerously so, but it did so very easily with little force required, which was different then other 737's - and Boeing needed it to handle like every other 737 so it could fall under the same type certification and not require extensive additional training. Take MCAS out, pilots need some sim training to see how the handling is different. The MAX is a stable platform - Boeing was trying to force a square peg in a round hole, even though there were square pegs available.
Removing MCAS and the need for extra training for the Max over standard 737's is what would void the certificate. This is why it was installed.
Let's say your car naturally drifts to the right every time you accelerate. To compensate, the car automatically pulls to the left to keep a straight course. Sure it's possible that you can drive without the car automatically compensating for the drift, but it's much safer to just not drive the car until the issue is dealt with.
Or, since we are taught to actually drive a car and use our eyes etc, design the car so it does not need the "automatic lane compensater", or don't bother putting it in, inform Joe driver the car may drift over, and to be vigilant of it may happen.
Even cars today are getting wayyy too automated.
Even cars today are getting wayyy too automated.
Or don't put it in- exactly. I'd like to hear how many pilots would say that the lack of this anti-stall feature would have caused them to crash at any point in their careers. It might seem that the obsession with safety could reach a limit even with passenger air travel. Going back to the car analogy, one thing strikes me about the newer cars besides the abundance of features I don't need: there's a lot more things in them that can break or fail. How much feature management can be piled on a pilot- before the pilot fails?
Its not an anti-stall program
Oh but it is...it was designed that if it noticed a pitch up attitude far greater than called for, it would force nose down to prevent a stall. That to me is an anti-stall program. See Boeing had to put it in to not have the jet completely re-certified as a standalone...they said to "mimic other 737's" and allow it to fly on same play field/certification.