Este sitio web utiliza cookies. Al usar y seguir navegando por este sitio, estás aceptando su uso.
Descartar
¿Sabías que el rastreo de vuelos de FlightAware se sostiene gracias a los anuncios?
Puedes ayudarnos a que FlightAware siga siendo gratuito permitiendo que aparezcan los anuncios de FlightAware.com. Trabajamos arduamente para que nuestros anuncios sean discretos y de interés para el rubro a fin de crear una experiencia positiva. Es rápido y fácil whitelist ads en FlightAware o por favor considera acceder a nuestras cuentas premium.
Descartar
Back to Squawk list
  • 77

Ethiopian Airlines: Boeing 737 crashes on way to Kenya

Enviado
 
An Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 passenger jet has crashed on a flight from Addis Ababa to Nairobi in Kenya. The flight is believed to have had 149 passengers and eight crew members on board, the airline says. (www.bbc.com) Más...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


tbpera
Tom Pera 23
As a tower controller for a number of years I witnessed several crashes... there was one every 2 weeks or so up at So Lake Tahoe...anyway.. we were not allowed to talk among ourselves and compare our memories... and had to write statements on what we saw... amazing that 2-3 experienced controllers, seeing the same event, had such divergent recalls.. I don't place much stock in eye witness accounts from general public on the ground
Baywooff
James Bruton 3
Curious as to the frequency of crashes at So. Lake Tahoe. Why? Inbound or outbound? Mostly general aviation -prop or jet?
tbpera
Tom Pera 5
Sunday afternoon "gotta get home".. downdrafts/turbulence every summer afternoon, 9000+ density altitude and inexperienced pilots = GA crashes..... always had 2-3 wrecks hidden behind hangars...
bbabis
Bill Babis 4
Yes, you can read almost any aircraft accident report and someone will have seen smoke or fire and would say that the engine was running rough. Rarely is it found to be true though. This one was so close to the ground at times that it may have been leaving a trail of dust and debris kicked up in its wake.
wingbolt
wingbolt 2
In a accident investigation class I took it was stated that eyewitness accounts are very unreliable. What they see it mostly colored by their Aviation experience or lack of. One eyewitness once stated that “The hand of God struck it from the sky”. I don’t even have much faith that the truth will come out. I’m sure governmental officials of Ethiopia are already taking bribes.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Very true, even though you can discount most of them, it appears little boys seem to pick up on the most minor details and you would not believe the detail and accuracy of some of them...
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
sparkie, I picked up somewhere that the Ethiopian airplane had a digital CVR/FDR in a combined unit and Honeywell, L3 and Universal all make them. Do you know if they are being installed on U S registered aircraft?
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
Should have added Part 121.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
All 737's manufactured have DFDR, CVR's. (DFDR stands for Digital FDR, FDR is analogue/tape). There are some FDR's out there, but most all are DFDR's I do not know about the HoneyWell L3.
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
I meant the combined unit. One box.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
I doubt it.... I personally don't think that I would like both in 1 box.... At least if you find 1 you got one or the other... Better to have 1/2 of something vs all of nothing.
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
My thoughts exactly, kinda like the Bendix "dual" magneto.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Yeah... Better to have 1 than none!
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
I believe the FDR and CVR will be read in Washington. It would be hard to cover that info up I would think.
wingbolt
wingbolt 3
It might be read in Washington...only if Ethiopia invites the NTSB to participate. The NTSB has no authority in countries other than the US and most likely won’t publish their findings. They will, as in most cases, let the controlling agency of the host country publish the findings. If you spend time on the NTSB site as far as I know they won’t publish anything on foreign accidents.
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
Not 100 percent true.... It was an American Made Plane with US Citizens that lost their life... The NTSB will probably release a report, but is not obligated to.
wingbolt
wingbolt 4
This says nothing about loss of American lives. You might consider doing some research.

Assistance to foreign governments: The NTSB may assist in incident or accident investigations occurring outside the United States under certain circumstances. These may include accidents or incidents involving American-registered or American-owned civil aircraft or aircraft with U.S. manufactured components in foreign air space. Officially, NTSB employees are prohibited from releasing information about "another country's investigation".[18] The NTSB will also on occasion provide technical and other advice to transportation investigative boards in countries that do not have the equipment or specialized technicians available to undertake all aspects of a complex investigation
crk112
crk112 1
What article did you read? Says right here "eight Americans .. were among the passengers"
crk112
crk112 2
Actually I re-read the thread and realized what you were referring to... disregard my previous comment
gsuburban
Garth Clark 0
Sounds about right. They all worry about their reputation. The elites and investigators get their stories combined then create the "final report" as to who is responsible.
MKanzler
Mark Kanzler 1
A lot of people will just say something spectacular to get their 15 seconds of television news fame.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
And I pray never to be on the tv news.
FloridaFan34
James Steiner 7
Aircraft was a Boeing 737-MAX 8 just about 4 months old. The aircraft was delivered to Ethiopian in November 2018. From planespotters.net: https://www.planespotters.net/airframe/Boeing/737/ET-AVJ-Ethiopian-Airlines/jKwyiw2p
bbabis
Bill Babis 18
Boeing's gonads are on the table with this one. AFM, Training, Systems, or whatever, they have a real problem with this airplane. Had either one of these accidents, if you can call it that, happened in the US, It would already be over.
williambaker08
william baker 1
Yes they are. From what I see on flight tracking released this flight was low and fast and from the photos this plane hit hard and fast as you can see from the crater it made. Somethings telling me this wasn’t stall related. But time will tell.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
Looking at the ADS readout at
twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1104676048317362177

If, note if, the terrain rises east of HAAB then he wasn't gaining anything despite reasonable airspeed. I don't have terrain chart for his route but its almost like a terrain hugging profile, like he can't get above ground effect.

"Airspeed don't matter, if the nose don't come up it ain't gonna climb"
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
FDR will tell, but once again it looks like the crew fought the airplane until something broke or disengaged in the elevator control system.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey -1
Well one thing its way too new for wear in the jackscrew
williambaker08
william baker 3
That was lack of greasing on that Alaskan jet lol.
wiganerwiganer
wiganerwiganer 0
I find it odd that you would say LOL about a crash that killed over 100 people. Did you really mean that?
djjamar
Jamar Jackson 10
Seattle we have a problem 😳
ebrites
scott ebrite 17
Lion air had an unstable vertical speed event. Ethiopian has an unstable vertical speed. It may be time for Boeing to re-visit the anti-stall automation and let real pilots fly the aircraft.
yr2012
matt jensen 1
After all the comparisons on this site - re: Airbus vs Boeing. It seems to me Ethiopian would have had Airbus jets, instead of our beloved Boeing. JMO - Airbus seems to sell more to 3rd world countries where the pilots aren't well trained.
bbabis
Bill Babis -1
Yes, Boeing needs anti-diveintotheground automation with these recent crashes. The stall hasn't been the problem in a long time.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
I'm sorry. I sometimes forget to engage the sarc font.
bbabis
Bill Babis 4
The law of diminishing returns on aircraft safety systems, or let's see how else WE can screw with the pilot, has gone past 0 and is starting to go the other way. It looks like the MCAS system alone has claimed 346 victims so far.
VivPike
Viv Pike 12
Reading through all the comments, it appears - to me, anyway - that many are making "assumptions" on the cause of this tragedy, and making references to "stall", "trim", "nosedive", "pilots", "Boeing", etc. However, what about this?

(quoted extract). "The plane was already on fire when it crashed to the ground. The crash caused a big explosion," said witness Tegegn Dechasa at the site, littered with passenger belongings, human remains, and airplane parts.
"The plane was in flames in its rear side shortly before the crash. The plane was swerving erratically before the crash."
Farmer Sisay Gemechu, said: "The plane seemed to be aiming to land at a nearby level open field, but crashed before reaching there."

Why don't we wait for the official cause, instead of speculation?
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 7
Most if not all of the eye witnesses are not used to seeing aircraft close up. These reports are suspect.
VivPike
Viv Pike 2
OK, I hear you. But are you subtly trying to say, "forget the eye witness accounts, this was an MCAS problem/issue as with Lion Air" ?? Let us wait for the official reports, I say.
weecosse
David Burns 4
A large problem with eyewitness accounts is conversation pollution. When many people see an accident and then start to share information on what they saw their own version of the accident changes. I was told some years ago by a friend who who was an accident investigator with the N.T.S.B. Eyewitness accounts can help to a certain degree but the real version will come from the flight data and voice recorders. Is is pretty shameful when the news media puts the spin on the story before the outcome is verified, but then the almighty dollar rules the day.
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 3
"forget the eye witness accounts"...I never said that. These people are a long way from the airport, likely with little close up experience with aircraft. Confused and stunned at what they were seeing. Hard for them to describe it.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 2
At least one eyewitness strongly maintained he saw flames coming from the fuselage of a DC-8, Arrow Air 1285, as it passed low over him at CYQX moments before crashing in December 1985 but the Canadian AIB found the cause was icing.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 1
DC-8-63 were equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT3-D turbo-jet engines that just screamed when at take off power. They also poured thick black smoke out the back at full thrust and many people on the ground thought they were on fire. We used to get compressor stalls on landing when the thrust reversers on the outboard engines disturbed enough of the airflow into the inboard engines causing the banging like backfire heard inside and outside of the plane. Just reduce the reverse thrust on #1 & #4 and it stopped. Interesting that the -DC 8 had “slots” in the wings not slats which are located on the leading edge of the wings.
CHBHA
CB HARDY 1
Those "slots" were holes from bird strikes.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
Like Sparky I remember the very thick black smoke. The first, and most memorable, time it was pouring out of all four cans of a 4 engine job (707 or DC-8) climbing up from under the cliff at LPAZ in the late 1960s. Back then LPAZ runway 22 (?) ended at the top of a cliff, there was no 18/36. He seemed to be rolling long before they fully spooled up and he used up all the runway before getting it off the deck, hopped over the threshold and disappeared over the edge of the cliff. We tensed up waiting for the crash. After a long 3 or 4 seconds he reappeared out over the sea with these four really thick black plumes, heading west, presumably across the Atlantic, climbing really slowly. It was a very hot summer afternoon and I assume he was quite heavy.
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
Yes.... I remember that Black Smoke... May sound crazy... but part of me misses those engines and those days... You would have to go and due trim runs to get the throttles set right.. Now we use FADEC's and that takes all the fun out of it.. LOL...
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 1
Most reports of fire and explosions are a result of compressor stalls (as in the Arrow Air incident). The observer DID see fire, as compressor stalls do send an impressive flame shooting out the rear of the pipe in some conditions.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 0
Thanks Jim, and Sparkie, for the clarifications. Its great to receive explanations from knowledgeable, experienced people without any demeaning or condescending tone. And, Sparkie, your anecdotes really help to graphically illustrate issues that arise. Responses like these really help make a forum like Squawks pleasant and successful. Its like reading the "I learned about flying from that" column. And who knows they may actually save lives if someone can recall a solution when a similar situation is encountered. Many thanks.
sparkie624
sparkie624 -1
LOL... I remember one on a 727 back in the 90's at about 2 AM on our maintenance Ramp... Tower called the fire department and when they showed up we explained to them what had happened and no worries... But it was a night and it was an impressive show with a very nice Boom... JT8D-17 engine could handle that where the new CFM engines can't do it....
afcjr1201
I think it would be fairly easy to see the smoke/fire from the ground and it would explain the creator created from the crash itself, but, there are many different theories and as Bill said that's why we are posting our views/opinions, but to say forget about eye witness accounts, seems strong.
tbpera
Tom Pera 3
as I posted before... I've witnessed several crashes... along with other trained observers... when we later compared our FAA/NTSB witness statements they were alarmingly different... untrained ground observers are not reliable... forget their statements? no... but... "take them with a grain of salt"....
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 2
I'm thinking...As far away as these people are from the airport, their only experience with jet aircraft might be movies or television. Operative word, might.
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
We'll all wait for the report Viv. Nothing said here on FA will be part of it. WE have thoughts, speculations, and questions associated with the submitted squawk that WE post here. Others have no issue with what you say. Please have no issue with what others say. You are as welcome as the next to vote comments up or down as you please.
VivPike
Viv Pike 0
There we go.
sgbelverta
sharon bias 2
Anyone who's lived under any kind of commercial flight path knows what to expect as to size, sound, and timing of aircraft from the airport. I can tell the Delta B717 that takes off from SMF every morning because it sounds so different from the 737 everyone else is flying at that time of day. You just know when something is new, different, or wrong. The eye witnesses might not know all of the details of the aircraft, but they know JAR "Just Ain't Right". With calm and quiet interviews, the investigators might get some surprising answers from the folks that saw this tragedy.
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 1
As are everyone's speculation here other than waiting for the investigation to release information gathered from facts.
yr2012
matt jensen 1
Even if living under flight path? No, no - all relavent
42ezra
will wynne 1
All those folks on Long Island who eye-witnessed the upward shooting "missiles"from water surface that early evening in 1996 just imagined what they saw, right? I think that includes 172 different descriptions of individuals stating similarities in what they saw. FBI rejected all accounts because it didn't fir with what the Government wanted the FBI to conclude.
KatzyBaby
KatzyBaby 0
You are not alone in still having concerns about that flight, no matter what any of the documentaries show.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
Discussing possibilities is, in large part, what this forum is all about.
francrimi
Fran Crimi 6
The Lion Air MAX 8 crashed 12 minutes after takeoff last October. Now this, 6 minutes after takeoff.
williambaker08
william baker 3
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/10/africa/ethiopia-airline-crash-nairobi-intl/index.html
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
From AVHerald:
http://avherald.com/h?article=4c534c4a&opt=0
mattwestuk
Matt West 3
Does anyone remember the problem with the original 737 that caused an uncommanded hard over on the rudder? It took the NTSB years to figure that issue out...I only hope this doesn’t end the same way.
sparkie624
sparkie624 5
The only reason that they found out was one plane actually landed safely with the fault. They took the actuator and ran it under extreme conditions... Once it failed it was not until some time later that someone noticed that it failed in the opposite direction of the commanded input... That is when they instructed the flight crews that when the Hard Over happened to release the rudder back to neutral and the system would return to normal.... That was actually more of a lucky find than it was skill.
waterfall925
No, US Air Flight 427 did not survive. All 127 aboard died in 1994.
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
The one that I was referring to lost control, regained control and landing in KRIC... The FAA and NTSB jumped on that plane like Stink on... Well you know what and got the rudder actuator that they were never to find in tact on the other planes. If memory serves, I think it was Metro Jet that had the fault and recovered... The way they recovered was to turn off all the hydraulic systems and fly it manually... After that the training of crews in that kind of situation was to return the rudder to neutral when the fault happened and that would reset the system.

I remember that time very well... I worked on the planes and replace many many Rudder Packs (Actuators)...

In regards to 427 where the NTSB report has been questioned. That plane was carrying sone cartel member scheduled to testify in federal court in Pittsburgh. The FBI was the first on the scene, and parts of the plane was seized by the FBI and never released to the FAA... A mechanic friend was there and witnessed the plane fall out of the sky when he was at his sons baseball game.... that one is in question, but was real easy to blame on the Rudder.
waterfall925
Thanks for clarifying that for me sparkie624! I was unaware of the Metro flight. Also unaware of the 427/FBI connection. I also thought that 427 suffered rudder failure
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
427 was labeled that way and the FBI covered up as much as they could and laid Boeing out to dry on it..
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 2
Eastwind 517 did not crash and that is where the data came from
williambaker08
william baker 1
No the data came for the Us air 427 rudder dual servo valve. They did a torture test of it which consisted of soaking the valve for 4 hours in dry ice then blasting it with liquid nitrogen and then using super heated hydraulic fluid thru it and the valve stopped working and it wasn’t commanded to stop. Upon looking at the data from it a Boeing engineer found out not only did it stop it reversed it self. The three flights from these issues were United 585 heading to Colorado Springs Colorado and then is air 427 was headed to Pittsburg Pa and east wind flight 517 headed to Richmond Va. Us air 427 and United 585 were deamed rudder reveresals and East wind 417 was a rudder hard over.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
The data came from the Eastwind flight...
williambaker08
william baker 0
The data came from the torture test of us air 427 dual service valve. Yes the eastwind helped but they found nothing wrong with that 737 after they found out about it and talked to the pilot. They even did flightests with the plane and found nothing. I heard they did the torture test on the us air valve and that’s where the data came from.
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
The NTSB investigated the incident, with a particular focus on determining whether the events of Flight 517 were related to previous Boeing 737 crashes.[1]:44

During the investigation, the NTSB found that prior to the June 9 incident, flight crews had reported a series of rudder-related events on the incident aircraft, including abnormal "bumps" on the rudder pedals and uncommanded movement of the rudder.[1]:263

Investigators conducted interviews with the pilots of Flight 517, and removed rudder components from the aircraft for examination, which helped to establish the cause of the previous crashes of United Flight 585 and USAir Flight 427. The NTSB determined that all three incidents could only be explained by pilot error or a malfunction of the rudder system, and based partly on post-accident interviews with the Flight 517 pilots, concluded that rudder malfunctions were likely to have caused all three incidents.[1]:272–73

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastwind_Airlines_Flight_517
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
Sparkie is talking about a different flight that did land safely after experiencing the rudder issue, that helped to solve the two fatals.
dunkleym
dunkleym 3
Should be interesting to see the FDR CVR and MCAS analysis
ebrites
scott ebrite 5
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/china-ethiopia-halt-boeing-737-104622527.html

I find this quite interesting...

"The plane was very close to the ground and it made a turn. We looked and saw papers falling off the plane," Malka Galato, the farmer whose land the plane crashed on, told Reuters from the rural area where horse-drawn carriages ply rough roads.

"Cows that were grazing in the fields ran in panic ... There was smoke and sparks coming from the back of the plane."

The plane tried to climb but failed, then swerved sharply trailing white smoke and objects including clothes before crashing, said farmer Tamirat Abera, who was walking nearby.

The investigation will sort this out.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 4
You are not the only one finding this type of accident interesting or weird. The fact that the aircraft managed to fly for 60+ km before crashing, all the time unable to climb suggests to me at least then following: with the Lion Air crash, every Max operator in the world would be aware of the MCAS system operation and where those two trim cut out switches were located., if less than rated thrust was available for whatever reason the aircraft would defintely be in a nose high attitude but not gaining any altiitude, if the crew attempted any turn greater than, say 15 degrees of bank the MCAS could activate and all this is happening at approx. 9000’ ASL.....ac performance may have been so degraded it could not fly? A 200 hour (if correct) co-pilot would not have necessarily helped the situation whether PF or PNF! I would assume that in 45 miles the crew would have communicated that they had a thrust or a control issue? At least the recorders were recovered.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 3
Further adding to this issue, the plane was going over 440kts which is hard to do with partial power unless straight down so the investigators will have their hands full with this one, again!
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 2
I know its not possible in the same way in the 738 but have you ever looked at the flight profile of an a/c which takes off with the elevator gust lock in place ? It gets off the runway but he just cannot get it above ground effect. Its almost as if the elevator wasn't allowing him to raise the nose. But then if this were the case here they'd have known it when they hit Vr.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
I have never seen Elevator locks on a 737... I do not know of any instance where they would have been needed.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 2
Hi Sparky. That was why I started with "I know its not possible in the same way in the 738.." I was just thinking of where I'd seen this kind of terrain hugging flight profile before. I once saw someone taxiing (a low tail Piper) with a long "Remove before flight" streamer hanging from the empennage and he wasn't listening to Unicom. Luckily that guy realised it when he couldn't get the yoke to move in and out and taxied back looking very embarrassed.
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
I very much agree. All that speed and little altitude gain tells me they could not get the nose up and were hesitant to reduce power which would cause the nose to want to go down even more. Could the trim have started to run away on takeoff and the crew missed it due to their concentration on the takeoff? What I don't understand is why no one doesn't just grab a trim wheel and horse it toward trim up. Are they locked somehow when auto systems are on? I would certainly try anyway.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 2
I sure would like to know what the simulator sessions are showing with what we appear to see happening? Failed flight displays, AOA giving false signals, aircraft in a turn near indicated max AOA and thrust still set at take off setting all with activation of the MCAS. What did the stby flight instruments show and to Bill’s point, just grab the trim wheel and start manually trimming and more to the point what the crew of the previous Lion Air flight experienced on the their flight and were able to control the aircraft?
talktalatka
F A 1
Bill - runaway trim would force the crew to turn off the system. If the switches themselves somehow failed then yes, grab the wheel
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
Rhetorical questions
1. Is there a manual trimwheel on the MAX and is it physically permanently connected or is there just a neat little electrical thumbswitch on top of the yoke.
2. If there is a wheel can it be electrically locked out by some (conditional) law ?

If this were an Airbus I would assume lots of things, but this is a Boeing.
talktalatka
F A 2
1. Yes and yes
2. No
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
Thanks FA
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Only thing that could lock it would be the captains leg and after that he would not be able to walk off the plane.. LOL... The Mechanical drive is great and that wheel turns very fast.. Keep in mind that the gearing is such that it is is easy to turn, but on it's own, it would be very difficult to stop.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
Thanks Sparky. CA being removed from the a/c on a wheelchair. You come up with some interesting images.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
According to purported ADS-B from : twitter.com/flightradar24/status/1104676048317362177

Rotation appears to have occurred at 05h38Z.

HAAB OAT at 05h00Z was 16C. Wind 070 at 10
HAAB OAT at 06h00Z was 18C. Wind 060 at 8

Could not find winds aloft

After 05h38Z Groundspeed never drops below 200 kt
MSL does drop but recovers.
yr2012
matt jensen 1
Half a dozen witnesses interviewed by Reuters in the farmland where the plane came down reported smoke billowing out behind, while four of them also described a loud sound.

“It was a loud rattling sound. Like straining and shaking metal,” said Turn Buzuna, a 26-year-old housewife and farmer who lives about 300 meters (328 yards) from the crash site.

“Everyone says they have never heard that kind of sound from a plane and they are under a flight path,” she added.

[This poster has been suspended.]

jhudson35
Jeff Hudson 8
found this on MCAS........http://www.b737.org.uk/mcas.htm
sparkie624
sparkie624 4
That site is the single best 737 site in the world.. Have used it often and thanks for sharing... two things that I do not understand is:

1.) Why does the system not look at both AOA's and if there is a difference, disable the system and post a caution on the screen,

2.) Why have to search for a CB in such an emergency... Why not a button on the Glare shield to disable it when needed... Since it is so important, make it a guarded switch.

Just thinking out loud.
bentwing60
bentwing60 3
"Why not a button on the Glare shield to disable it when needed... Since it is so important, make it a guarded switch". Boeing and the certifying agency disclosed their opinions of the relative importance of this system by not disclosing it's existence before the Lion Air crash. They postulated that trim runaway emergency procedures would negate the consequences of any failure of the MCAS system and here we are.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
Good thoughts.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
Why are you screaming and "lol" - Laughing at a system that potentially may have killed some people, and keep in mind most of this is speculation.... Until the investigators complete their investigation we do not know if this is a plane failure, Crew Failure, or Weather Failure....

[This poster has been suspended.]

joelwiley
joel wiley 2
People have also concluded that Elvis is still alive.... belief doesn't necessarily make it so.
sparkie624
sparkie624 0
All upper case on the internet corresponds to shouting!
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 1
It’s looking like that more and more. I still can’t find an answer to this MCAS system: does it activate with only one AOA false input? Most AOA systems require agreement from two inputs. Has Boeing confirmed that the two pedestal trim cut-out switches will in fact disable MCAS? There seems to be a false input trigger here and nobody can put a label on it yet, whether something is happeneing in routine maintenance, training, or a factory wiring issue but Being had better get to the bottom of it?
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 2
The system needs to be disconnected by pulling the CB's. Turning off the AP won't do anything as the system is not part of the AP, it is separate, and pulling the trim s cut-out will only disengage the system momentarily - if the issue is not resolved, it will retrigger the MCAS.
SteveCutchen
Steve Cutchen 1
"This AD was prompted by analysis performed by the manufacturer showing that if AN ERRONEOUSLY HIGH SINGLE ANGLE OF ATTACK (AOA) SENSOR INPUT IS RECEIVED by the flight control system, there is a potential for repeated nose-down trim commands of the horizontal stabilizer."

Capitalization emphasis added
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey -2
I don't understand why it has to shove the stick forward itself. Why can't it switch on a cassette tape recorder pre-recorded with a dominant male voice saying very loudly "Shove the Stick Forward NOW - Stall Imminent" and let the 200 hour PF earn his $15,000 a year.

[This poster has been suspended.]

SteveCutchen
Steve Cutchen 2
Total change of subject... It is also called Controlled Flight Into Ground? That's what I was told...
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Ground and Terrain - basically same
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
It is amazing that so many have flown into the ground when they didn't have to that we have an acronym for it 'CFIT' - Pretty Sad....
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
It is a Safety related item... Utilizing the "Stick Pusher".... When you stall and don't respond the Stick Pushes Forward... It is not used too often, but when it is needed... It is usually really needed... People are human and human's make mistakes... and "Cassette tape" - LOL I still have a few, but geez, speaking of old technology!
stephenjshaner
s s 6
Tragic start for air safety in this new year. If there is a problem with the MAX, Boeing better get it sorted fast as their future is heavily invested in this one.
Cade2005
Cade Emtage 1
I fully agree! This is basically Boeing's future, and they are letting it run right into the ground, literally!!!

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Falconus
Falconus 10
As an American, I have to say that I prefer to rely on skill, knowledge, and training to fly my aircraft, not my nationality.
sgbelverta
sharon bias -1
Maybe the access to training simulators is more available in the US and Europe? With the declining number of qualified pilots world wide, can Lion and Ethiopian afford to have pilots gone for any length of time for specialized training? I mean, a 737 and a 737 MAX can't be that different to fly, right? Just read the manual for changes, right? Oh, maybe not.
stephenjshaner
s s 14
Ethiopian is a large airline, modern fleet, Star Alliance member, and good maintenance and crew. They were the 787 launch airline, or at least one of the first few to fly it, I believe.
VivPike
Viv Pike 6
Correct - but some people believe that if you're not an American, you're nothing. Only Americans "count".
williambaker08
william baker 0
Excuse me. All Nippon Airlines was the launch airline for the 787. Ethiopian was one of the first to fly is sure but and I’m sure they were the first in Africa if I’m not mistaken lol. Anyways like always Boeing and the investigators will find the cause and Boeing will fix the plane and save the day. Just sad they can’t do it before we have deaths. RIP to all the people on board and my heart goes out to all those affected by this terrible crash.
VivPike
Viv Pike -5
So you're of the sort that thinks only "Americans" can do things? Get a life, loser !!

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

btweston
btweston 5
Wow. Brainwashing is one thing, but how does one get to where you are?
jgccpa
jgccpa -2
USA has higher standards...if that offends you then too bad.

Too many problems with your sort of jealousy.
KineticRider
Randy Marco 4
The FAA said in its notice on 3/11 Monday, that it expects to mandate design enhancements to the automated system and signaling on board the Boeing planes by April 2019.

Boeing confirmed that it was planning to make changes to flight-control software for the planes’ MCAS system and said the changes are “designed to make an already safe aircraft even safer.” 

Obviously there is a problem.... it's irresponsible not to ground the fleet worldwide until it's figured out; but corporate American dictates revenue must not stop while working on the solution, just like the rudder problem.  There were three rudder incidents with complete loss of control, two which were all souls lost. The fleet kept flying with the FAA & Boeing saying the plane was safe.
waterfall925
i agree with you. I have questions about "fly by wire" and ""developing software." We'[re getting more than a little carried away with electronics and computers on airplanes. We're at a critical juncture now...we need to settle the question of who is PIC these days...a human being? Or AI? Boeing has some explaining to do, but for now a troubling question is that these foreign incidenrs have not yet shown up in American operations. Why not?
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 3
You will have to then pose this question to every aircraft manufacturer because FBW is the norm in just about every plane now. Pilots are increasingly becoming "systems monitors" rather than pilots. FBW and the background systems handle all the failures automatically...until it can't...and then hands it over to the pilots in whatever shape the plane is in at that moment. We have pilots who can't fly visual approaches on clear days (Asiana at SFO), we have pilots who fight stick shakers (Colgan at BUF) hence the technology.
waterfall925
I agree that FBW is here to stay, unfortunately. However, there must also be a fail-safe syatem that returns complete control to the pilot via a manually linked backup to the controls. The answer to Colgan and Asiana is better stick-and-rudder training. We simply have to have more Sullenbergers in the cockpit, and fewer syatems "monitors,"
cordery
Alan Cordery 3
Part of the problem may be that the configuration of the plane, with the new engine placement, has made the plane only able to FBW, assuming perfect software and sensors. Pilots cannot handle the plane manually because the feel is strange. Boeing looks bad on this one. Imagine degree of flight training required being part of the pricing?
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
I agree... So many only know how to fly normally.... I remember I had 1 captain that wrote up his autopilot and I have to defer it for him... He said great... He needed hands on practice and per company policy he could not get as much as he wanted.... there are not many of those crews left now days...
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
There could be a software/hardware difference between domestic and export models or it may be blind luck. I think boeing knows the answer and is trying to fix it while admitting the least liability.
waterfall925
Or perhaps Boeing has been too eager in promoting sales to operators overseas with thin training?
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
Keep in mind that the level of training is negotiated at the time of sale... The company decide how much they want or don't want and pay accordingly in concerns to the price of the plane.
bbabis
Bill Babis 3
Thanks Sparkie,I did not know that. So...you truly get what you pay for.
KatzyBaby
KatzyBaby 1
There have been complaints by US pilots to the FAA, just no fatal accidents yet.
M20ExecDriver
Dale Denisar 1
They've adapted GEICO's marketing scheme.
Gclanman
Greg Clanfield 1
Most likely because US pilots are better trained than their third world counterparts.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
Do you have a link to this notice? I checked the Congressional Record and FAA's postings did not seem to include anything 373 or MCAS. Didn't find reference elsewhere either. Could you post a link?
KineticRider
Randy Marco 3
https://m.nasdaq.com/article/us-to-mandate-design-changes-on-boeing-737-max-8-after-crashes-20190311-01163
RNOSteve
Steve Alcorn 4
There's a lot to be said about bell cranks, pulleys and cables..
tbpera
Tom Pera 8
never trusted "fly by wire" let alone all the automation... 777 landed short at SFO because the crew forgot
"how to fly the airplane"
btweston
btweston 7
The automation did exactly what it was supposed to do in SFO. The pilots simply lost track of it.
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 1
The pilots didn't understand how it worked, and in their "button pushing" managed to push them in a sequence that disabled basic laws and allowed the aircraft to get too slow. That was pilots who didn't understand their aircraft, not an aircraft issue. Might the same be at play here? Sure, Ethiopian is a carrier with a good reputation, but a 200-hr co-pilot?
VivPike
Viv Pike 1
Just 2 questions. 1) Is the 200-hr the total experience, or on type? 2) How does one accumulate hours without sitting in the right seat? Just asking.
whip5209
Ken McIntyre 1
Yep, the plane got well ahead of the Asiana crew. Nothing wrong with the aircraft.
Falconus
Falconus 4
The 777 is a good airplane. As far as I know, there have been five fatal incidents. Two of these incidents were ground fatalities (firefighter and ground handler - no passengers or crew), one of these was an act of mass murder by Russia, one of them cannot conclusively be proven to be an accident (and it's reasonable to suspect that it was not), and the other was the Asiana Airlines flight in which the pilot at the controls did not know how to fly an airplane (he said he was uncomfortable with a visual approach, if I recall).

Clearly, with this safety record and over 1500 Boeing 777's produced, either the design (including the fly by wire systems), the training, or a combination of both have made this one of the best aircraft ever constructed in terms of safety. The safety record of the 787 is still very new, but I cannot think of any older mass-produced plane other than the 717 that has a cleaner record.
tbpera
Tom Pera 1
there is nothing wrong with the airplane... seems like too much reliance on automation led to SFO crash
jgccpa
jgccpa 0
video game pilots
francrimi
Fran Crimi 2
Just in --- Britain just banned the 737 MAX 8 from it's airspace. So what say you all? Premature? Correct in doing this?
waterfall925
I expected better from the British CAA. They of all people know that calm, rational investigation is the way to go in this case. We simply don't know the answer yet. But the circumstances are these---that American Airlines and Southwest Airlines continue to operate the Max 8 with no reported problems. That raises an important question: Why is that?
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
They learned their lesson with the Comet in the 50s.
talktalatka
F A 0
40,000+ flights no issues

[This poster has been suspended.]

thenotoriousrob
rob strong 4
You saying "Mob rule" is speculation as well. No one knows right now, so countries are being cautious. Nothing wrong with that. I have four flights this week and I'm making sure none of the are MAX 8s. Why risk it?
jmadunleavy
John D 2
Not an aviator, just a user of aviation to get to work weekly, so pardon this question if its simplistic. I am reading here and elsewhere that the Max should be grounded. It "seems" the common denominator is MCAS. Assuming that's true, instead of grounding the entire fleet, could MCAS be disabled until the problem is worked out or is it not that simple?
pwpereira
pwpereira 1
Probably not.

Although a malfunctioning MCAS or one reacting to a failed AOA sensor can be effectively disabled by turning off the Electric Stab Trim system, I doubt a flight could be dispatched in that condition.

Reason: I suspect MCAS contributes far more to safe flight than the mere “augmentation” of maneuvering characteristics as its name indicates.
pwpereira
pwpereira 1
Probably not.

Although a malfunctioning MCAS or one reacting to a failed AOA sensor can be effectively disabled by turning off the Electric Stab Trim system, I doubt a flight could be dispatched in that condition.

Reason: I suspect MCAS contributes far more to safe flight than the mere “augmentation” of maneuvering characteristics as its name indicates.



P.S.: Even after the nose-down commands from MCAS are rendered ineffective, the stick shaker function that it also activated will continue. So yeah, just blocking the nose-down commands won’t really bypass MCAS to allow normal scheduled operations without a nose-down risk. Note: Lion Air criticized the pilots on the Denpasar-Jakarta flight for flying with the Captain’s stick shaker active from takeoff to touchdown! But they also noted that none of the non-normal procedures the pilots executed on that flight included “Find a suitable place and land ASAP!” 🙄
stephenjshaner
s s 2
This just posted from Reuters seems to suggest a different cause:

GARA-BOKKA, Ethiopia (Reuters) - The Ethiopian Airlines plane that crashed killing 157 people was making a strange rattling noise and trailed smoke and debris as it swerved above a field of panicked cows before hitting earth, according to witnesses.
ebrites
scott ebrite 1
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ethiopia-airplane-witnesses/ethiopian-plane-smoked-and-shuddered-before-deadly-plunge-idUSKBN1QS1LJ

Not to be speculative... but it's starting to look like a catastrophic event and not the MCAS may be the culprit. The investigation will tell.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
The plane reached 400kts, hardly hovering. That low that fast it rattled everything. With pilots fighting to get the nose up and miss obstacles it's easy to explain wing rocking or swerving as a witness would say. The low and fast aircraft would also leave a dust and debris trail in its wake that would easily look like fire and smoke to casual observers. Everything needs to be looked at but the bottom line is fire, smoke, bomb, engine trouble would not have kept the crew from raising the nose of the aircraft. MCAS would and has in the past.
ebrites
scott ebrite 0
Very true. And, if MCAS was the problem and it was not switched out... pilot error is a contributing factor. If there was some sort of catastrophic event in the tail section, control systems could be compromised.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
Hence, WE won't solve it but the investigators should get this one figured out.

[This poster has been suspended.]

waterfall925
Yeah, I think the French would be advising extreme caution if we were talking about an Airbus crash.
jhudson35
Jeff Hudson 2
Found this on MCAS........http://www.b737.org.uk/mcas.htm
chipper295
chipper295 1
I agree that it's far too early to know what caused this. However, the court of public opinion is souring quickly on the MAX family. That alone is likely to cause Boeing some major headaches in the next few months.
stratofan
stratofan 2
What does not help is when AP spews out a headline of "Another 737MAX crash, does Boeing have a problem?" That is NOT, repeat NOT journalism, but sensationalism. Of course, the media thrive on fresh graves instead of factual reporting. It would seem that speculation has replaced truth in journalism In recent years. Let the investigations go forward w/o media interference.
williambaker08
william baker 2
Ethiopian Airlimes CEO is reporting that the pilot has reported to atc that he was having flight control issues and they weren’t responding to his inputs.

https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/index.html
paultrubits
paul trubits 2
Did anyone ask a Max driver how they feel about flying this craft?
ebrites
scott ebrite 1
Yes, Close relative is a 4000+ 737 captain with 23000+ flying time. He has no problems with flying this aircraft. Been trained on how the deal with the situation.
talktalatka
F A 0
Better question would be to ask a 200 hour F/O how they feel flying this craft.
pwpereira
pwpereira 2
I noticed something regarding the Lion Air AOA sensor in the Indonesian Preliminary Report...

It had been removed & replaced at Denpasar—the Report indicated that the investigators had retrieved the original unit and would be examining it. I wouldn’t be surprised if that sensor turns out to be A-OK. Reason: The messages that preceded the sensor replacement were not the ones that indicate an AOA sensor failure.** The IAS DISAGREE and ALT DISAGREE messages only showed up AFTER the replacement, on the flight to Jakarta, and the accident flight. Per Boeing, those messages may appear due to an AOA sensor failure (though I can’t see why airspeed and altitude would become discrepant with an AOA sensor failure. ?!)

So, although no AOA messages appeared on the flight deck, because AOA SIGNAL FAIL and AOA SIGNAL OUT OF RANGE got latched in the ADIRU (together with numerous other messages) on the previous two flights, in addition to other maintenance actions to deal with the reported events, the mechanic decided to replace the AOA sensor, entering it as “For troubleshooting due to repetitive problem perform replaced angle of attack sensor...” Thereafter, the problems of the previous two flights did not reappear, but AOA problems started.

It’s quite probable that a good AOA sensor was unnecessarily removed @Denpasar and replaced with a failed unit, which woke up the MCAS, twice. :(

============
** See separate comment on MH124.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Good info.. Thanks
raleedy
ALLAN LEEDY 2
They're all paying attention to the MCAS software. But the AOA sensor feeds it. What about that? Garbage in, garbage out.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
I think software is a definite suspect. To err is human but to really muck things up takes a computer. I don't know what type of AoA vane is used on the MAX but many are deltas mounted on an arm that trail with the relative wind and move a potentiometer for signal. Many of these are easily blown to the max up position when the aircraft is stopped with its tail into the wind as this aircraft would have been during taxi. If it gets slammed to the up position it may get damaged and/or give incorrect information that could start the ball rolling. Just a thought.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 1
Good point Bill, On a few commercial jets and a great number of large business jets that I commanded we did have an AOA display either separate or integrated into the flight displays at each pilot station. Wind does in fact affect the AOA Vanes but they usually reset at very low speeds on takeoff, if one doesn’t move into the normal range the takeoff is aborted.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
That is pretty much true with any hardware - Software/Firmware situation...
raleedy
ALLAN LEEDY 1
I understand the MCAS operates on input from a single AOA sensor; the aircraft carries two and the standard configuration has no sensor indicator in the cockpit. It seems unusual for the software to override crew inputs on such a flimsy basis. How long have AOA sensors been around? How reliable are they? The LionAir hull loss seems to have involved a defective one.
pwpereira
pwpereira 1
There are two instances of MCAS, the left gets data from the left AOA sensor and drives the Captain’s display and stickshaker, the other is for the F/O. Boeing indicates this in its list of flight deck effects that manifest due to an AOA sensor failure. Either MCAS instance will issue a pitch-down command to the FCC if it thinks a stall is imminent. The FCC then drives the Stab Trim nose-down.
talktalatka
F A 1
There is an option to display the flight path marker, which can be used to compare against the “deck angle” or “boreline” etc...there are other displays that are tied to AOA that appear under certain situations as well
jmanley20
John Manley 3
IF this was indeed the faulty stall sensor problem that Lion Air had problems with, then this would have been completely avoided if the crew cutout the STAB TRIM as is standard procedure for runaway trim or a faulty stall sensor pushing the yoke forward when the plane is not actually in a stall.
westfly
kyle estep 4
Going through 737 (including MAX) training right now and yes this is exactly what they are saying about the Lion crash, as the Ethiopia crash just happening, there is no word yet but likely the same action so far. This feels like the rudder issue the classics had back in the early 1990's. Only worse since Boeing didn't bother to mention the new system initially.
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
Kyle, maybe you can answer a question I have. I am not familiar with the 737. In the Lion Air investigation a chart derived from the FDR showed how only one control yoke was being used to counter the aircraft's nose down tendency up to the point that pull pressure went to zero on that yoke and the aircraft quickly nosed in even though pull pressure started on the other yoke. My question is: Is there a weak link designed into the 737's elevator control system that will let a yoke separate from control with a certain amount of pressure? The FDR has now been recovered from this accident and it will be interesting to see if it shows similar findings.
jmanley20
John Manley 1
Congrats Kyle on the initial training for the 737! Best airplane in the world by far! I know you probably cant say the carrier you work for but can you at least say whether it is a Part 121 operator or a Part 129 operator?
Again, congrats sir! (:
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 3
Well, we don’t know who was the PF and the airport is almost 8000’ asl so first thought maybe an over rotation and Activation of the MAS system. 200 hours is very low logbook time & inexperience may have been a factor? However it is clear that there has to be more investigation into this new 737max?
talktalatka
F A 1
If this situation required one of the pilots to devote all attention to maintaining aircraft control...who should be the PF? The 200 hour F/O or the Captain? I don't see a clear answer.
bbabis
Bill Babis -1
Apparently, they were both pulling to keep the nose out of the ground and no one was shutting off trim systems or applying manual trim.
nasdisco
Chris B 5
Sorry Bowing fans, but this model 737 needs to be grounded. The similarities in this and the Lion crash are too great to ignore.
stephenjshaner
s s 5
Why is the need to turn everything into rooting for one team or another? It's a tragedy that has nothing to do with "fans" and if there is a major flaw with the MAX, it ultimately affects EVERYONE in aviation in a negative way.
btweston
btweston 5
If a couple of 320s took a nose dive in the span of a few months people would be saying the same thing. It’s not about teams. It is about airline passengers being drilled into the ground at a high rate of speed.

Hopefully everyone is wrong and this incident has nothing to do with the MAX’s newfangled stall protection system. But at this point we need to verify that.
JimG4170L
Jim Goldfuss 2
I don't believe they grounded the A320's after the loss of control issues in flight, the Air France landing in the woods, and the Air Inter flight.
angelruki
a p 4
If it`s not Boeing I`m not... Ohh wait...
amiablebird
Ed Merriam 1
that joins the hall of fame with "Does more. Costs less. It's that simple"
jbqwik
jbqwik 2
Today's digital cockpit and controlling software is so complex with inter-referenced and co-dependant line after line of 'if-this-then-that- code... even the programmers can become unresponsive. Add to this where the manufacturer -apparently- was vague regarding a critical system and you get a situation where training is in constant update mode, and pilots overwhelmed, under-informed, and behind the automation curve.
Here's just one example, maybe not totally relevant but is why I am so negative: A decade ago I sat down to parse the control logic of a much simpler circuit description. After a half-day I felt like I had gone stupid because it made no sense. I kept thinking it must be me because the manufacture would surely know their product. Right? Wrong. Turns-out if I reversed a single "off" for "on" the routine then worked logically. It was a typo.
blitzebill
Bill Christy 2
the phones should be ringing off the walls at the Boeing offices tomorrow morning. every airline in the world flying this plane should be demanding answers and solutions.
peaktammy
Tammy Peak 2
Why isn't Southwest looking into grounding their 737 Max 8's? At least until something is confirmed or disproven between the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes.
jgccpa
jgccpa 2
Clint Eastwood..."Excuse me Captain, can you fly?"...Magnum Force (1973)
cyberbiker
cyber biker 1
It is a shame financial liability issues delay release of preliminary info from the voice recorder of Ethiopian Flight 302. It would be interesting to hear the dialog in light of yesterday’s announcement by the Ethiopiann Aviation Authority that the crew did everything right.
CHBHA
CB HARDY 1
Wish I could hear from MAX pilots. Probably not allowed to comment.
CHBHA
CB HARDY 1
Probably too busy trying to fly the plane. LOL
danoriginie
Dan Sherrerd 1
Time will tell. Keep in mind the QRS11. Search Field McConnel.
picturetaker
Another brand new 737 Max 8.
arunhn
Arun Nair 1
Does anyone know what all US Airlines currently fly this type?
tfultz
Timothy Fultz 2
Southwest, American, and United currently. .
arunhn
Arun Nair 2
Thanks. I'll keep an eye out when I book my next ticket on those. I know statistically I have a higher chance of getting into an accident on the way to airport than even on a 737-MAX. But i'll just stay away for now.
tfultz
Timothy Fultz 7
Understandably. The EAD issued after Lion Air covered this issue. I recall that in the US, it came out that AA and SW were sluggish at best to get the information to their crews, at least until that news story broke. I wonder if international airlines were even slower to do so. There’s a switch at the bottom right of the pedestal that allows the crew to override the Auto Stab Trim if an erroneous AOA reading is suspected. Just a single switch.

Over 300 people have now died as a result of poor design on some 3rd party vendor’s part (assuming AOA sensor isn’t produced by Boeing) and lack of clear communication.
bbabis
Bill Babis 6
If I were the captain of a MAX, that switch would be OFF and guarded.
Decades ago I had a false activation of the stability augmentation system on a SA-227 and it tried to dive into the ground right after gear retraction. The AFM said "Must be on for takeoff and landing." It was never on again when I flew the plane.
bentwing60
bentwing60 2
"Just a single switch". From Fultz comment above. That single switch is actually two switches and are controlling for Pri. and Sec. pitch trim. Ergo, turn them off and you neuter MCAS but you have no electric pitch trim. There is no MCAS disable switch other than by disabling pitch trim. Boeing still provides manual pitch trim capability (pitch trim wheels) out of fidelity to something that works in the ultimate trim emergency. Can't say that for any part 25 GA jet I have a type rating for!

https://theaircurrent.com/aviation-safety/what-is-the-boeing-737-max-maneuvering-characteristics-augmentation-system-mcas-jt610/

This is not from Boeing, but clearly has been researched. The comment section has a couple of knowledgeable responses, and the usual 90% other.

bbabis
Bill Babis 1
Agreed bentwing! "Something that works in the ultimate trim emergency." Like society in general, manufacturers are replacing things that WORK with things that sound good. No matter how many trim systems a plane may have, I love the trim wheel. Most if not all of Cessna's jets have a wheel.
bentwing60
bentwing60 1
I believe the 500 series all have trim wheels but I don't have a 500 series type of any kind so I can't say for sure. The 650, 680, 750 and on do not. There is a reason two or three week initial courses at FSI and CAE now take five weeks or more and cost $50,000 or more.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
There is a picture of a column with two guarded switches circled in red, showing "Normal" with an up arrow, purporting to be the ones on the MAX, if you scroll all the way to the bottom of webpage www.b737.org.uk/mcas.htm
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 2
It seems it might be more than just a faulty AOA on Lion Air. I am under the impression that the Lion Air crew asked ATC for their altitude and (ground) speed several times during their flight, reported altimeter reading mismatch(es) and requested large vertical separation as they could not determine their altitude. I do not know if the Lion Air CVR has been recovered.
williambaker08
william baker 0
Both recorders of lion air have been recovered.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 0
Thanks William. Hopefully the transcript will clarify matters.
talktalatka
F A 1
Tim - the two switches turn systems OFF, not really an override per se. Even if the switches themselves fail mechanically, either pilot can physically grasp their respective trim wheel to stop the stab. I’m a big fan of smart design, and I think the cockpit/trim system interface is one of the better designs on the jet.
dee9bee
dee9bee 3
I'm not going to go through all those airline websites, but will you know exactly what type of 737 you will be flying on until you get to the gate and see the winglets and scalloped engine nacelles? You could call the airline (for a fee) but even he or she may not know.
FelinaGrimm
FelinaGrimm 1
That info should be on the ticket if you buy it ahead of time. I use Travelocity and on the available tickets, they display the airplane model. I'm sure most sites including the airline site will include the model.
ebrites
scott ebrite 0
With the number of 37's flying worldwide,I would consider it one of the safest air frames to fly.
btweston
btweston 2
The airframe is not the issue. Neither of the MAX crashes occurred because the wings magically stopped working, from what we can tel.
ebrites
scott ebrite 1
Neither 37 MAX incident has had a final investigative report issued.
nasdisco
Chris B 1
You have about a 7.5% chance of getting a Max 7 or 8 when flying Southwest.
Southwest has another 276 ordered so yes they want to fix this.

2.5% of American fleet is 737 Max with 76 ordered

gskarad
Hi Chris. My wife and daughter are scheduled to fly from Denver to Baltimore and then on to Charlotte this Wednesday on Southwest. The info on the plane type is shown as 787-8. Is this different than the Max 8?
williambaker08
william baker 1
The 787 is a different plane then the 737?
gskarad
I'm sorry - typo. 737-8.
williambaker08
william baker 1
Well there is a 737-8 and a 737-800max I’m not sure how to tell the different on the website of a airline so I’m no help much there.
RNOSteve
Steve Alcorn 1
Alaska also, I believe.
tfultz
Timothy Fultz 1
Alaska has 32 Max-9’s on order according to Wikipedia, with no deliveries yet. Their data might be out of date, though, I’m not certain.
gsuburban
Garth Clark 1
It appears that this model MAX 8 won't fly without the MACS. it's design from the gate allows it to stall, tail heavy.
lecompte2
lecompte2 5
Somebody has to say it so I will. The 737 Max is a cheaply built airplane sold at a discount by Boeing, the price is lower than competitors because it is a disguised 60 year old model that has been stretched, re powered, modified to the point that computers have to intervene to make it flyable. Basic aerodynamics are exceeded to the point of having to modify the shape of the engines and move them away from the wing tip, lengthen the nose landing gear so the engines clear the ground. Priority to the horizontal control surfaces is given to a complicated computer program to move the stabilizer which is larger than the elevator controlled by the pilot. It is a mystery to me that the airlines engineers would advise the management to buy such a machine or even worse for the appropriate authorities to certify such a machine. There is much more.
cgraydon
You need to ask Boeing why they built a plane that is tail heavy and cannot fly without a MACS system , When we know all fundamentals say that this thing should not be flying , did they just rush the MAX 8 into production ?
pwpereira
pwpereira 1
** MH124... The Lion Air failure and warning messages prior to the AOA sensor being replaced were an eclectic assortment that reminded me of Malaysian Airlines Flight MH124 on August 1, 2005. The 777-200 suffered an extended in-flight upset at 38,000 ft, with autopilot and autothrottle driving wild altitude excursions, with climb rate as high as 10,560 ft/min, large throttle changes, absurd warnings of simultaneous overspeed limit and stall speed limit, high g forces in all axes—a roller-coaster ride.
The main problem: Corrupt x, y, z axis acceleration data from a known faulty accelerometer was output from the ADIRU as “valid.” The A/P and A/T reacted to that wildly fluctuating data, giving the passengers a thrill ride at 38,000 ft.

AAIB Report: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/pdf/aair200503722_001.pdf

Replay of black box data: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XNnEzFF5fg
KatzyBaby
KatzyBaby 1
If automation removes the pilots from the cockpit, then who will "they" have to blame crashes on?
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
The manufacturer, of course.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
There is always the current president, whoever that may be at the time.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
The subcontracting programmer that wrote to code from incomplete specs.
Then there's the CVR transcript snip reading "I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that"
Greg77FA
Greg77FA 1
At the very least, this incident put Boeing on further alert, and the pilots who fly the 737 Max. But most importantly, its the passengers on alert as well, who will decide whether to fly on this plane.
CraigWeis
Craig Weis 1
And as it was described in one article, Boeing had to find a way — with the 737 Max 8 — to fit 12 gallons into a 10-gallon jug, if you can visualize this. The bigger engines that they designed required a different airplane. It really isn’t a Boeing 737. They call it a 737; it’s got the basic overall shape, but it isn’t.

It’s got entirely new flight characteristics because of these new engines and the changed center of gravity. The nose gear, for example, is eight inches longer. You’ve noticed 737s. They’re really low to the ground, and the engines on a 737 at the bottom are flat because they’re so close to the ground. Well, you can’t put a bigger engine on that airplane. You have to change the design. So you need to have it higher off the ground with longer nose gear. Not main gear.

Just the longer nose gear, which has to do with the perceived angle of attack as the airplane is taking off — which is the key to all this, if you strip it all down. They changed some of the aerodynamics of the tail cone. They added some new winglets and fly-by-wire spoilers and they put gigantic new big displays in the cockpit for Millennial-age pilots, who love screens. So the 737 Max ends up with a nose pointed higher in the air to begin with, and it has larger engines. And the design of engines is such now that they create lift on their own, of course, with their aerodynamic thrust, in addition to the lift created aerodynamically over the wings.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/APP-031419-737.jpgSo that makes the airplane nudge even higher. The nose nudges even higher in terms of angle of attack flying through the air. Now, Boeing discovered through analysis and flight testing that under certain high-speed conditions both in wind-up turns and wings-level flight, that upward nudge of the nose created a greater risk of stalling. Stalling is when you don’t have power to maintain your level of ascent. So the natural way to correct for a stall is to drop the nose and ram the throttles forward full-fledged power. You have to have enough altitude to do that.
jhudson35
Jeff Hudson 1
Would anyone here know what changes, differences in parts, added or omitted parts, added or deleted testing of the systems in the manufacturing of the 737 Max compared to the previous generations of the 737? Just saying why the Max having more problems then previous platforms.
timrivers
Tim Rivers 3
Your link above gives a lot of good information to your question. To the main topic of this discussion, MAX carries new LEAP engines located forward from the previous NG 737. The result is a strong up pitch at stall speeds. MCAS was introduced to provide automatic nose pitch down during certain parameters. A factor in the Lion Air crash was a faulty sensor activated MCAS unnecessarily.
An AD was issued to pilots to override/cutout MCAS in this event. One question now for investigators in this crash (among many other possible causes which is why we should wait for the investigation to be completed) will be determining if MCAS activated, if so why, and did pilots follow proper procedure to override. BTW thanks for the link!
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Will be interesting to see what they find out.... Sounds remarkably similar to the Lion Air crash.
herbertlbowmaker
I agree with FBW USA, stick and rudder until you are at flight level.

Yes, I agree Boeing needs to fix the problem. Do not allow the Autopilot to engage until the aircraft is at least 15,000 feet, 350 kts, less than a 5° attack angle minimum. The MCAS won't think it's in a stall condition. You don't engage the cruise control until you are up to speed.
jgccpa
jgccpa 1
If this is an AI failure...Dennis Muilenburg is FIRED!

It was 1986 when last covered this company and hit its floor on Black Thursday to the PENNY!
jgccpa
jgccpa 1
Was this a "15:17 to Paris" (2018), or a fight between a pilot and AI?

Simple question.
ah6oy
Jim DeTour 1
My bets a desk jockey came up with the system. Would like to see the record of how many 737's ever stalled then if there were stalled 737's how many needed help pushing the nose down. .
nasdisco
Chris B 1
Black box found. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-47521744
jmanley20
John Manley -1
For those boycotting the Max... you really think that is prudent to do? You gonna boycott the 767 as well for the recent nose dive by GTI? For what reason do you believe you know more than the experts do? Trust me, if the FAA felt the need to ground an entire type of aircraft they would. I would rather say it is more so appropriate to boycott specific airlines/ specific regions and not necessarily an entire airplane type. The problem smells more so training/pilot experience related and not so much the airplane. A good pilot knows how to fly his bird in normal conditions and when his airplane breaks. Just my thought on the matter.
btweston
btweston 1
You’re comparing apples and orangutans here.
VivPike
Viv Pike 1
Was that an auto-correct? Damn funny, either way.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

joelwiley
joel wiley 1
I will never regain the 10 seconds wasted in reading your obnoxious comment.
The bad taste it left will wash out.
angelruki
a p -5
You think my comment is obnoxious but you dont have any problem with racist comments.
Ok... another racist redneck. I'm not surprised at all...
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
Angelruki:
First, your profile lists your language as "Español (España)". As your selected language, one can infer that English is not your primary language. One might also infer from your facility with American slang that that is not the case.

Second, your characterization of Mr. Manly as "Mr. Redneck" could be seen in this light from OED:

REDNECK - 3. orig. North American (usually derogatory). Originally: a poorly educated white person working as an agricultural labourer or from a rural area in the southern United States, typically considered as holding bigoted or reactionary attitudes. Now also more generally: any unsophisticated or poorly educated person, esp. one holding bigoted or reactionary attitudes.
and:
bigoted: 1. Characterized by bigotry; obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, faction, etc.; intolerant towards others, their beliefs, practices, etc.

If English is not your primary language, you may have overlooked the cultural nuances of the term.

Third, you assert that since I found your comment objectionable that I have no problem with racist comments. Perhaps you should research "non sequitur".

Fourth: I cannot respond you your assertions "another racist redneck" without knowing your definition of "racist". Please provide and we can discuss the whether your use is fitting.

This will do nothing for the fate of the 157 souls aboard, alleviate the suffering of their loved ones nor further the inquiry of the cause of the tragedy.
angelruki
a p 0
Who cares if my native language is English, Spanish, Russian or Chinese?
Is my opinion more or less important for being Japanese, American, Ethiopian, Spaniard, Swedish, or British? The answer should be NO. If the answer is YES, you don't need a definition of racist, you just need a mirror...

Anyway, some of you were very comfortable yesterday saying that this accident had to do with the skills of pilots in certain regions and it had nothing to do with the quality of an American aircraft. currently he type is grounded in the most of developed countries. There you have the definition of racism and arrogance.

Btw, do you want to know what really did not help the 157 souls aboard? Blaming Lion Air pilots 4 months ago just for being "third world Asian pilots". There you have a second definition of racism and arrogance.

I hope you have enough definitions now. Enjoy.
spopol518
steven polley 1
This may sound a little strange but is it possible that the altimeter settings on the plane were incorrect and when the plane was put on autopilot the aircraft was forced to the ground. That happened to me once on my flight simulator.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
If you mean was it like the UK where we used to take off with QFE set and once away from the pattern we would change it to Region QNH I don't think ET 302 was airborne long enough to make the transition.
cgraydon
Garth I hope you are wrong about the Max 8 , it is hard to believe that manufactures would build a plane that can not fly naturally , scares me to think that we have regress to requiring such systems to stay in the air!
ebrites
scott ebrite 1
Talking heads in the media and nitwits in politics need to let the investigators do their jobs and determine what, of hundreds of scenarios, brought this aircraft down.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -4
Spoken like a true synapse challenged dolt.
ebrites
scott ebrite 0
And just what is your level of expertise?
jdarling56
James Darling 1
They should stop flying the plane until this is figured out. Maybe it is unrelated, but until that is known, or the problem is identified and corrected the Consequences are just to high.
talktalatka
F A 1
Did I read "F/O had 200 hours"? In the 737 Max? Surely not just 200 hours.
btweston
btweston 5
Well, it’s a new model. The first Captain to fly the MAX had *gasp* zero hours.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 2
But that's zero hours in type. Behind that there's got to be X,000 total. I once had a book called "Teach yourself to fly". I think it was written around 1920 or so, but it fell apart and I lost it in one of my moves. It covered things like prop starting (with chocks) and navigating with road maps and railroad tracks. I guess if I still had it I could get a laugh by showing up at an FBO with it and trying to rent a Tomahawk or 152
FedExCargoPilot
In most places in the world you can get an airline job with 200 hours and a CPL
talktalatka
F A 2
I cannot imagine operating a MAX with only 200 hours. I wouldn't be much help in any situation outside of normal ops.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 1
How can someone build hours in type without sitting in the right seat on revenue ops ? And when a brand new model comes out where can you find guys with real air (non-simulator) time to sit on the left ?
talktalatka
F A 1
Did the F/O have 200 hours in the MAX or 200 hours total time? That is the question.
FrankHarvey
Frank Harvey 2
Ah, I don't know, When I read 200 hours I assumed 200 hours in the 73X as I couldn't imagine 200 total would have gotten him everything required to legally sit in the right seat of a 738.
talktalatka
F A 1
The news story claimed the CA had 8000 hours and the F/O had 200. I was confused too. I don't think the CA could have amassed 8000 hours in the MAX, so I assumed the reporter published total time. THEN in reading the amount of time the F/O presumably had (200) I was completely floored and reached out here to FA to try and get a different perspective.
I just cannot conceive of any governmental body responsible for aviation allowing that low of a threshold.
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
It plays into a previous squawk on single pilot airline ops. In that case, how many hours does your copilot have?
CarlSmeraldi
Carl Smeraldi 1
Ground B737-800 Max PERIOD .
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
Some will. I would at least make sure MCAS is disabled.
tbpera
Tom Pera 0
wow... should be grounded...won't fly on MAX....
waterfall925
Why have no American carriers had any problems with the 737-MAX 8? Don't believe thw CNN PC hype until we find out some answers/ . But generally, these crashes in developing countries do raise some questions about whether or not their training is up to it. Another question is whether or not the 737 MAX 8 has crossed the line in removing control of the airplane from thje pilot? I'm not quite ready for "doftware" to have no-recourse control of any airplane. Sure am sorry about those people aboard. Let's find out what happened, no matter how unpleasant the truth may become.
jgccpa
jgccpa -1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzbCBfi5-Bw

Dirty Harry! Det. Callahan
williambaker08
william baker 2
I thought it was Lt. Callahan and Captain Harris lol.
jgccpa
jgccpa -1
238 comments and a lot of HOT air & other...
joelwiley
joel wiley 0
Ecclesiastes 1:9
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Ecclesiastes 1:9 King James Version (KJV)
9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 3
Translation: What is, is.

[This poster has been suspended.]

VivPike
Viv Pike 2
Really ?? ... just no comment available. Try again later.
ah6oy
Jim DeTour -3
Some information floated was turbulence and heavy aircraft requiring them to maintain higher than standard airspeed and pitch. Wouldn't be the first time a plane was over loaded and if nose high wasn't a freak of weather a load shifted. Being the region is remote I don't take a websites data on speeds and altitude as being a real time flow.

If it was over weight, near max gross or unusual cargo....there is non standard loading that might happen. There's the toggles that lock pallets in place front and back that sometimes are left down for bent and damaged pallets. Also if long palleted cargo or loose cargo netted load toggles can be left off because load and nets are in the way. I don't know if the new 737 or any other passenger airlines have rated attachment points for cargo straps. Like the 747 in Afghanistan I don't think either tie-down points are heavy load rated. Worse yet is when guys attach to vertical load braces on cargo tracks.

After the Indonesia and this crash I'd like to see the EPROM's and programming machines of the EPROM's. I don't think it would be funny if some virus was resident that extracts data from aerospace companies. Worse case would be if a certain agency investigation Boeing during Comey era plied that sort of software on Boeing. EPROM's are a data chip with processor. If a virus is present that spreads itself it might detect an interaction when inputs are being made and go into a forceful connect mode to spread. I wonder because for some reason a plane flying its self into the ground doesn't seem right. I've never seen mention of a possible system flaw except for contacting ground. Hopefully Boeing can do a good check and know how to detect rat systems that international hackers use including our own.

There just isn't any sense in the accidents. Something worse than weather or a designed system flaw.
KineticRider
Randy Marco -4
You are REALLY an idiot... buying into the crap that Comey was somehow a traitor. The only traitors are "individual 1" and the idiots that believe ANYTHING he says!

Go back to your conspiracy and alt right propaganda sites and for the sake of people that have to deal with you.... get an education.

Entrar

¿No tienes cuenta? ¡Regístrate ahora (gratis) para acceder a prestaciones personalizadas, alertas de vuelos, y más!