Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Breaking news: Ethiopian Airlines flight has crashed on way to Nairobi

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

  • Originally posted by birdguts
    Please note, the USA DHS conducted a remote control test on a Boeing 757 in 2016.
    Yes, if intentionally set up, it should be possible to program the FMS remotely. But to control the flight, the autopilot must be engaged. A pilot on that 757 would need only to press the autopilot disconnect to regain control. And MCAS doesn't work with the autopilot engaged. And we know the autopilot was disengaged. The 737, even the MAX, is hydro-mechanical in pitch, aside from MCAS, so anything other than an MCAS issue in manual flight could not be remotely controlled. We also know that an AoA sensor was malfunctioning, which explains the MCAS upset.

    A lot of people died here and there is a hard lesson to be learned from it. Please don't use this forum to entertain your conspiracy theory fantasies.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Evan View Post
      .....

      A lot of people died here and there is a hard lesson to be learned from it. Please don't use this forum to entertain your conspiracy theory fantasies.
      +1

      Comment


      • People who are not "stupid" make mistakes all the time. Even pilots.
        Be alert! America needs more lerts.

        Eric Law

        Comment


        • If speculation that someone did something wrong is "slander", 90% of the content on this forum and a large amount of content on the entire Internet is going to have to be removed.
          Be alert! America needs more lerts.

          Eric Law

          Comment


          • Originally posted by birdguts
            I can understand the cynicism. However, the alternative hypothesis on this forum seems based on the idea that the pilots were "stupid".
            It's not cynicism, it's logic based on the known facts. Also, there is no idea being presented here that the pilots were "stupid". They were almost certainly confused however, and quite understandably. If you want to learn more about what happened here, research 'human factors' and 'situational awareness'. There are plenty of accident reports that go into detail about these phenomena. They represent one of the greatest threats to aviation today. They often arise in situations involving a blend of manual flight and automation or result from a weak understanding of the automation (as was the case here).

            If you continue to push your 'alternative theory' here, you are not going to make any friends. Take that to the '911 inside job' forums instead.


            *

            Comment


            • Originally posted by birdguts
              The Cynicism remark relates to your view that I am enjoying entertaining the idea of conspiracy. That I am the same as the flat earthers and 9 11 people. A total mistrust of my intentions.
              But you also imply the flat earthers and the 911 truthers are the same? What if the flat earthers were sent out to discredit the 911 truthers?

              Originally posted by birdguts
              "from a weak understanding of the automation (as was the case here). " -> so see me as acting as defense team of the pilots who died. You as prosecutor have decided they were weak in their understanding, and I want to keep the channel open that they were the best pilots whom ever existing. Innocent until proven guilty through objective investigation. I have no care about making friends as I am Mr Objective.
              You definitely won't win any court cases this way either. It would be much more effective if you said they were overwhelmed by multiple malfunctions at the wrong time that didn't give them a chance. You can also try and blame the airline for not training them properly. Don't go and say someone hacked their MCAS. Why can't Trump say it was Airbus that hacked their MCAS and slap 1000% import tariffs as retaliation? Or why can't we blame HAARP? Maybe unintentional antigravity interference from aliens?

              Comment


              • Another -MAX had made an immediate return after an engine shutdown at or after takeoff. Reports say the crew declared emergency and landed 11 minutes later. While unrelated to the other accidents, Boeing should be wise and release the key details before the media blows it up. Oops, too late.

                I believe this is the first IFES incident since the -MAX entered service. First one I've heard of, anyway. I just would like to know if it had anything to do with a failure of any aircraft systems aside from the engine, as we've been getting a strong whiff of shoddiness from certain people who worked on the -MAX.

                Also, one pilot who flew the -MAX blogged about how the new materials in use on the LEAP have thermal issues that can result in some distortion of the engine core if the type-specific -MAX start-up and shutdown procedures are not followed. Was this in the 56-minute iPad lesson?

                Anyway, even if this incident has nothing to do with the airframe, its only going to throw more shade on the -MAX, which has pretty much been branded a lemon by now.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                  I believe this is the first IFES incident since the -MAX entered service. First one I've heard of, anyway.
                  I stand corrected:

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Evan View Post
                    They often arise in situations involving a blend of manual flight and automation or result from a weak understanding of the automation (as was the case here). *
                    uh no. the case here was HIDDEN automation

                    Comment


                    • forget that i'm a lawyer, even though i don't do aviation law or personal injury or wrongful death or product liability.

                      from purely a frequent flyer perspective, will i ever be happy to board one of these slapped together half-breeds?

                      who wants to bet that under el cheeto, the faa will re-approve the max-discomfort without a truly in-depth review of the entire airframe, avionics etc etc. boeing will have its minions convince the stuffed suits that their software bodge and adding a second sensor to the mix, along with dumping the enormous cost of real training for the pilots of the airlines that bought this turd (can you say, "fraudulent inducement"?) cured the ONLY problem the max had and it is now just as safe as the NG.

                      Comment


                      • A grounded Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft declared an emergency landing Tuesday in Florida after experiencing a reported engine problem, the Federal Aviation Administration said. No passengers were aboard Southwest Airlines Flight 8701, which was being ferried from Orlando International Airport to Victorville, California.

                        Comment


                        • horrible.

                          Comment


                          • It is not clear if Tuesday's emergency landing was related to suspected problems with the aircraft. An investigation into the crashes focuses on an automated anti-stall system and not engine problems.
                            The engines, by the way, are basically the same ones than in the A320 neo family.

                            --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                            --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                              The engines, by the way, are basically the same ones than in the A320 neo family.
                              which reportedly also have issues with parts fatigue if a type-specific startup/shutdown procedure isn't followed.

                              more and more citrusy every day

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                                The engines, by the way, are basically the same ones than in the A320 neo family.
                                The A320 NEO is available with either the PW GTR (1000G-series) or the CFM LEAP. Most of the A320 NEO engine failures involved the PW GTR (1127G), which was temporarily grounded in February of 2018 pending a design reversion. The LEAP appears to be far more reliable, and, as of a year ago, was chosen on 57% of A320 NEO orders.

                                Boeing seems to have made a wise choice with the LEAP over the GTR, although both of these engines are pushing the envelope of new material technologies. They both attempt to increase physical dimensions (and thus bypass ratio) without a large corresponding increase in weight, by leveraging composite structures (such as resin fan blades that actually twist as they increase in speed).

                                The only way to really prove an engine design is through years of service. The Rolls Royce Trent 1000 on the B787 has also had its share of failure issues (not cool on an ETOPS-360+ airframe). The CFM-56 used on previous versions of the B737 was a very reliable engine, but progress demands lighter, more powerful solutions.

                                My concern is not so much with the design of these engines, but with the speed in which they are being produced, their build quality. Just as both Boeing and Airbus are ramping up production times to compete with one another in a back-ordered, volume-driven market, the engine manufacturers live or die on their ability to keep up. That can lead to corners being cut and less-skilled outsourcing.

                                My other concern is the operational differences. Pilots need to be well aware of these differences in order to prevent damaging them or causing them to prematurely fail.

                                The bottom line to all of this is that uncompromised, government-provided regulation and oversight has never been more important.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X