Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lion Air 737-Max missing, presumed down in the sea near CGK (Jakarta)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • vaztr
    replied
    Are we ruling out rudder hard over - it is a 737

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    ...the previous flight experienced a sudden uncommanded loss of altitude after take-off.
    Where is that coming from?

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    A sudden change from fine to a dive isn't super consistent with the minutes of it having significant (though mild) variations in speed, direction and altitude that PRECEEDED the dive...it was sort of out of control already.
    The direction was quite consistent. The latitude and speed variations where not so large, in the order of 400 ft in altitude with the speed going down when the plane went up and vice versa. I would say it is ok if you are flying with unreliable speed and unreliable altitude and show that the pilots had control of the plane. Until they didn't any more.

    Makes much more sense than just losing control in daylight VMC just because of loss of air data. As you said yourself about flying a 172.
    And remember that the feel computer was failing too and the previous flight experienced a sudden uncommanded loss of altitude after take-off.

    This has to be something else than just the pilots being unable to control the plane without reliable airspeed and altitude indications. As I said in my first post in this thread, I would be very disappointed if it is just that.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by orangehuggy View Post
    ... the thing pitches its nose towards the sea and is unrecoverable...
    A sudden change from fine to a dive isn't super consistent with the minutes of it having significant (though mild) variations in speed, direction and altitude that PRECEEDED the dive...it was sort of out of control already.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by orangehuggy View Post
    So there is an engineer on board in anticipation of the unreliable airspeed, he decides to investigate and attempt a fix in flight, pulls some CBs, attempts a reset of systems... then the thing pitches its nose towards the sea and is unrecoverable?? (if it was a bus and stalled like 8501 it would be more understandable)
    No certified airliner, neither Boeing nor Airbus, "pitches its nose toward the sea and is unrecoverable" when any CB's are pulled. That requires gross pilot error. Anyone stupid enough to pull flight control CB's in flight can be trusted to make that kind of error as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • orangehuggy
    replied
    So there is an engineer on board in anticipation of the unreliable airspeed, he decides to investigate and attempt a fix in flight, pulls some CBs, attempts a reset of systems... then the thing pitches its nose towards the sea and is unrecoverable?? (if it was a bus and stalled like 8501 it would be more understandable) anyhoo any ACARS data available here?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    STS was also running to the wrong direction, suspected because of speed difference.
    As I understand STS, that would mean it was adding to the pilot's trim commands rather than opposing them. But this doesn't seem to make sense. If there was no reliable airspeed, wouldn't STS be inop? Also, Why would STS be doing anything in level flight at that weight and balance?

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Unconfirmed Internet reports suggest that there WERE ACTUAL AIRSPEED INDICATION PROBLEMS ON THE FATEFUL FLIGHT.
    UNCONFIRMED INTERNET REPORTS suggest that there were actual airspeed indication problems on the fateful flight.

    (Fixed).

    However:

    Originally posted by AvHerald
    The KNKT is committed to release preliminary findings as soon as possible.
    Quickly followed by:

    Originally posted by AvHerald
    On Nov 5th 2018, following the KNKT release confirming airspeed indicator problems during the last 4 flights of the aircraft, a tweet posted on Oct 29th 2018 at 07:07Z by Razaan Botutihe gained sufficient weight to be rated as factual. The tweet states concerning flight JT-43 from Denpasar (Indonesia) to Jakarta, the last flight the aircraft completed: "Airspeed unreliable and alt disagree shown after take off. STS was also running to the wrong direction, suspected because of speed difference. Identified that CAPT instrument was unreliable and handover control to FO. Continue NNC of Airspeed Unreliable and ALT disagree." (Editorial Notes: STS: speed trim system. As far as is known so far the accident crew managed to control the aircraft for 12 minutes from takeoff to maintaining 5000 feet at about 290-310 knots over ground between 5000 and 5400 feet, which suggests they were flying on pitch and power for that time, it thus appears something beyond unreliable airspeed and altitude must have contributed to the loss of control in minute 13.) In addition three different versions of a maintenance logbook were leaked to the Internet, after a closer look they all appeared to show the same log book at different point in time. Apart from the remark of unreliable airspeed and altitude, which prompted the flushing of the captain's static ports, an entry for elevator feel computer light illuminated was written down by the flight crew of JT-93 (presumably a typo and believed to be JT-43), maintenance opened and cleaned a cannon plug connector for the elevator feel computer, checks by the Aviation Herald with AMEs and related Mainenance Manuals confirmed the log book appeared authentic, the maintenance activity concerning that plug however could not have changed the forces on the pitch control of the yoke, only the status and error messages concerning the system could have been affected by the maintenance activity. The elevator feel computer has its own static and dynamic ports positioned at the tail of the aircraft, is purely mechanical with no electronic components except for some status monitoring, depends on hydraulic systems A and B available and does not depend on the instrumentation/Air Data References used for pilot instrumentation.

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    I worked in a Saudi Arabian hospital that was equipped with the very latest medical technology available. Western doctors, nurses, paramedics, physiotherapists etc were employed and everything ran extremely well.....until a third world Saudi tried to use the technology.

    Thatís when it all went to ratshit and people started to die unnecessarily.

    Are you getting a message and seeing the link here ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Black Ram
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    Unconfirmed Internet reports suggest that there WERE ACTUAL AIRSPEED INDICATION PROBLEMS ON THE FATEFUL FLIGHT. (As opposed to the SPECULATION that airspeed indication MIGHT have recurred based mostly on prior flights).
    Apparently a total of 4 flights had UAS. Let's see what they say about the elevator feel/control.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    ***Analysis of the data has begun***
    Unconfirmed Internet reports suggest that there WERE ACTUAL AIRSPEED INDICATION PROBLEMS ON THE FATEFUL FLIGHT. (As opposed to the SPECULATION that airspeed indication problems MIGHT have recurred based mostly on prior flights).

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
    Here is a major problem where someone picks up the recorder.
    The box must be kept under water in case its seals were damaged, so it can be properly cleaned and decontaminated by experts.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX67McESfLY
    It was downloaded successfully though. AvHerald:
    On Nov 4th 2018 the KNKT reported the FDR has been successfully read out. It contained 1800 parameters spanning 19 flights including the accident flight. Analysis of the data has begun.

    (1800!!! How far we've gone since 4 not so long ago, altitude, airspeed, normal acceleration and mic PTT)

    Leave a comment:


  • Highkeas
    replied
    Here is a major problem where someone picks up the recorder.
    The box must be kept under water in case its seals were damaged, so it can be properly cleaned and decontaminated by experts.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX67McESfLY

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    I don’t care what the procedures are for test drives- there’s only two questions relevant: 1. Were procedures followed and 2. Regardless of procedures, would a test drive likely changed the outcome?

    Leave a comment:


  • BoeingBobby
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    No, it's ok. Maintenance procedures and practices are not my strong points. Now, I am sure that there are other ways to understand it other than being a pilot for a 121/135 carrier. What about being in the maintenance, quality control, or engineering department of a 121/135 carrier?

    And since you are a (retired) 121/135 pilot, perhaps you can be more constructive and help expand our understanding on the subject.
    I was almost hoping that would chime in and say "Gabriel (or Evan or 3WE) is wrong because in fact it works like this: ______".
    I have thinking about it. Back is f'd up and hard to sit very long at the computer. You are right about anyone that would be in "maintenance control" for a carrier. Even dispatchers would have a pretty good background.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X