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

  • #31
    Originally posted by birdguts View Post
    Evan, I would steer away from "pilot error" as an excuse. The modern planes are expected to fly themselves. No offense to commercial pilots, but I don't see the hubris in their profession anymore.
    Pilots are still expected to fly the plane at all times. When using autopilot, they use the autopilot to fly the plane. Autopilot is a workload reducing tool for pilots.

    When using autoflight, the pilot is there to monitor and to immediately step in if something is malfunctioning. Autopilots do occasionally malfunction, usually when sensor data is missing or inconsistent, or when interdependent systems needed by the autopilot fail in some way.

    It appears that this flight either remained in manual control from liftoff or transitioned back to manual flight around the time of the level-off. If the latter is true, it is likely that something caused the autopilot to fail. In either case, the strong possibility of pilot error exists (Lion Air 601 crashed due to pilot error). If neither is true, and the autopilot remained engaged from 400', it is likely that something caused the autopilot to behave erratically. If this is the case, and the pilots failed to disconnect autopilot and stabilize the plane manually, that is also pilot error.

    Usually, these things are a combination of systemic failures on the aircraft and pilot error in dealing with them.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Evan View Post
      Pilots are still expected to fly the plane at all times. When using autopilot, they use the autopilot to fly the plane. Autopilot is a workload reducing tool for pilots.

      When using autoflight, the pilot is there to monitor and to immediately step in if something is malfunctioning. Autopilots do occasionally malfunction, usually when sensor data is missing or inconsistent, or when interdependent systems needed by the autopilot fail in some way.

      It appears that this flight either remained in manual control from liftoff or transitioned back to manual flight around the time of the level-off. If the latter is true, it is likely that something caused the autopilot to fail. In either case, the strong possibility of pilot error exists (Lion Air 601 crashed due to pilot error). If neither is true, and the autopilot remained engaged from 400', it is likely that something caused the autopilot to behave erratically. If this is the case, and the pilots failed to disconnect autopilot and stabilize the plane manually, that is also pilot error.

      Usually, these things are a combination of systemic failures on the aircraft and pilot error in dealing with them.
      we should have driverless planes in that case. Like Tesla are doing with cars.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by birdguts View Post
        we should have driverless planes in that case. Like Tesla are doing with cars.
        Did you get this part?

        Originally posted by Evan
        When using autoflight, the pilot is there to monitor and to immediately step in if something is malfunctioning. Autopilots do occasionally malfunction, usually when sensor data is missing or inconsistent, or when interdependent systems needed by the autopilot fail in some way.
        The self-driving car death toll awaits us.

        Comment


        • #34
          The same incident is quite similar to the Lyon Air crash.

          Is there a defect in this particular plane

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by obmot View Post
            Thx Evan.

            I hesitate to ask what to most here will be a 'duh' type question - and self-spotlight my ignorance in asking - but in a 'typical' commercial flight, when would a flight crew 'typically' (ballparkish) activate the autopilot systems (I'm assuming autoflight in your comment is akin to autopilot/autothrust etc. but - again my ignorance might be at play again lol)?

            I mean would it 'typically' be like 30secs after wheels up? Or 5 minutes after? Etc.

            [edited for spelling typo]
            This from a B777 pilot says it all.

            I am a B777 pilot. On departure, we generally hand fly until about 10,000' to keep up our skills. If the departure procedure is complicated, we will ask for the AP on at 200' so there is no chance of messing up the departure procedure.

            On approach I typically disconnect the Autopilot at about 1500' AGL once visual contact is assured and I am inside the Final Approach fix.

            If there is any chance of a possible missed approach due to weather, or other conflicting aircraft, on the runway or elsewhere, I will leave the AP on until there is virtually no chance of a missed approach.

            Most of the pilots I fly with tend to do the same.
            If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
              I don't think that any pilot has any instinct developed for trim runaway
              ???

              1. This phenomena is not unheard of- I think I know an MD-8x forumite that faced it.

              2. I would think that it would be reasonably easy to recognize- MY THOUGHT is that pilots use trim almost non-stop (my J-31 observations, numerous Youtubez, 172 actual time, and MSFS time supports this)...If you feel pressure or want to adjust pitch, you will "automatically, mindlessly apply trim"...and if the control pressure or trim doesn't fix itself PDQ, the mindlessness then ends...

              Throw in whatever twists you want- autopilot acting up...control column over ride, and trim to adjust pressures towards zero...if the control pressure doesn't let up, I think most type specific memory checklists will point you towards a trim problem...

              ...hell, you might be inspired to pull a CB.

              (PS, that word you use twice..."any"...it's kind of absolute; however I also disagree even if you meant "very few/very little").
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by birdguts View Post
                we should have driverless planes in that case. Like Tesla are doing with cars.
                Selling trips on pilotless aircraft will prove extremely difficult... and personally, I would never travel on a pilotless plane.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Math (or maths where I'm from) is a reason why Boeing should be worried.

                  Remember the Comet - new airliner (I know, it was a paradigm shift, not an 'upgrade'), same aircraft, similar accidents, same cause
                  How about the 737 (!) and the uncommanded rudder deflection, same aircraft, similar accidents, same cause

                  The PROBABILITY of the two MAX-8's crashing in similar circumstances, at similar points in their flight, while 'possible', is very 'improbabble' to be unrelated

                  If I was a betting man I'd be dumping my Boeing shares too.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by vaztr View Post
                    If I was a betting man I'd be dumping my Boeing shares too.
                    The Wall Street Data Recorder plot shows us the approximate time that something malfunctioned.
                    Attached Files

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      FAA Issues Continued Airworthiness Notification (CAN) 2019-03

                      https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/CAN_2019_03.pdf

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        From AVHerald:

                        On Mar 11th 2019 two listeners on frequency reported independently the crew declared emergency shortly after normal departure, while in the initial climb, reporting they had unreliable airspeed indications and had difficulties to control the aircraft. The listeners could not hear later transmissions due to frequency changes.
                        There is a similarity now...

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Schwartz View Post
                          From AVHerald:



                          There is a similarity now...
                          FAA Issues Continued Airworthiness Notification (CAN) 2019-03
                          Until they issue an AD specifically requiring AoA sensor redundancy for the MCAS function, this thing is unsafe at any speed.

                          (that little dot at the end is a period)

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Sentinel View Post
                            R.I.P all on board. I know I might be jumping the gun here, as this is another 737-MAX accident could this be the same problem as the Lion Air crash with the MCAS being involved.
                            You can say, bah, only 41 years old, is he really able to tell stories out of his experience?! I know, I can't really compete against Gabe, who this year becomes 42. But.

                            MCAS, that's the word which was also used in German TV news! Oh man, thanks alot for this word!

                            So, if you ask me, we definitely agree in this question. MCAS is a very bad computer. Why very bad. Well, because MCAS has killed two brandnew Boeing 737s and

                            320 human souls!

                            PS: You can further ask me, how do I come to that conclusion. Well. I'm here on this platform since more than 1 decade, with 1 special nickname.

                            And I'm really not able to remember a 747 accident which was caused by too much computers on board.

                            Since yesterday, the type 737 Max-8 is no longer able to fly in China.
                            You can tell me more, but as far as I can remember,
                            since 1989 that has never been the case for the type B744. I'm really proud to say that Randazzo, and after him me, has chosen two a/c types for the simulator, B744 and B748,

                            where the two pilots in the cockpit say the N1 numbers, the AoA, the climb rate, the moment in time when to retract gear/when to reduce flaps to zero, et cetera!!!

                            !

                            No computer involved in a B744, or, definitely not BEFORE the F/O or the Captain has engaged one! That's a fact, which, if not already fulfilled, I'd definitely ask Boeing to fulfil, if I were LH 747 fleet Captain.
                            A LH-B744 Flight Captain is able to swich off ALL computers on board, or he does not board the a/c!
                            Last edited by LH-B744; 2019-03-12, 00:54. Reason: 737 Max-8 grounded in China.
                            LH and the Hamburg - Düsseldorf - Shannon - NYC route, open since June 1st, 1955. A/C type: Lockheed Super Constellation.
                            EW, one of the dearest LH daughters, the brandnew November 19 schedule (frequency):
                            DUS - VRA (--3-5-7), DUS - EWR (1234567), DUS - MIA (1-3-56-), DUS - BGI # 1152 (Mon and Thu with exceptions), ...

                            Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years. A whole decade here on this platform.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              "FAA Issues Continued Airworthiness Notification (CAN) 2019-03"

                              So the 'American' administration issue a CAN for an American built plane, with a 'nothing to see here until it's proven otherwise', wonder what responses we'd get from 2 Airbuses having similar issues???

                              The MAX-8 now 'looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck'

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Evan View Post
                                Until they issue an AD specifically requiring AoA sensor redundancy for the MCAS function, this thing is unsafe at any speed.

                                (that little dot at the end is a period)
                                This is what I try to say in my #43. Incredible, isn't it.

                                For an a/c type, 737 Max-8, who had his first commercial flight less than 24 months ago,
                                on May 22nd, 2017, if I'm correctly informed by en wiki.

                                I don't say that all a/c types who we operate here at my favorite airline are the best. But with the support of your #42, I'm definitely able to say,

                                good that on this planet nothing exists like a LH-737Max8 !
                                LH and the Hamburg - Düsseldorf - Shannon - NYC route, open since June 1st, 1955. A/C type: Lockheed Super Constellation.
                                EW, one of the dearest LH daughters, the brandnew November 19 schedule (frequency):
                                DUS - VRA (--3-5-7), DUS - EWR (1234567), DUS - MIA (1-3-56-), DUS - BGI # 1152 (Mon and Thu with exceptions), ...

                                Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years. A whole decade here on this platform.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X