Page 6 of 52 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 1031

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

  1. #101
    Senior Member TeeVee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    1,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    And this is the opinion of a high time ATP rated pilot, with 10000+ hours and multiple type ratings in jet aircraft. Right?
    i gotta side with evan here. it certainly appears as though the separation between the wall street whores and the regulators has disappeared, as it has in just about every sector of american life. sure, as the conservatives demand, the all important shareholders are making more money. i guess no one cares that they too occasionally fly on these contraptions. too bad the 159 ET pax weren't all boeing shareholders on the way to a shareholder meeting, eh?

    not too long ago, in handling a large condominium lawsuit in FL, i discovered that in certain municipalities, a developer can be its own building official. that is, the developer self-certifies its work in constructing a high-rise and all of its core life-safety systems and there is near ZERO government oversight. this is so in the same municipalities where a single-family home owner, can't change a window without permits and inspections.

    cowtowing to money while sticking it to the little guy? protecting money at the expense of life? i mean, we all KNOW that no developer ever cuts corners. shit, for that matter, no wall street whore in any sector would ever cut a corner to make the shareholders a penny.

  2. #102
    Senior Member BoeingBobby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    1,408

    Default

    TeeVee, I am surprised that you have found the suspect guilty already without all of the facts being presented yet. Why don't we settle back and let the REAL experts do their job before we start the construction of the gallows.

  3. #103
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HalcyonDays View Post
    While I give the FAA some credit for not giving in to social media pressure and wanting to wait for clear data...
    What?! There is clear data. I am ONLY referring to the Lion Air crash. The investigation has determined that the MCAS system malfunctioned due to a single AoA sensor fault. The FAA has already issued an emergency AD and Boeing has redesigned the software 'enhancement' to remove certain vulnerabilities directly related to that crash. Those vulnerabilities still exist and will continue to exist until the new software 'enhancement' is in place. That vulnerability may have now caused an additional crash and massive loss of life.

    Given all that, how can you argue with temporarily grounding the aircraft? It's logic vs bias.

  4. #104
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    I agree with you. I think they should send them to Evan's house, have LH 744 flown in from Germany, and the two of them can take them apart in Evan's parents garage and let the world know what the problem is.
    I think LH744’s input would be a useful second opinion. They’re going to Europe, I hear, so he’ll be on hand.

  5. #105
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    And this is the opinion of a high time ATP rated pilot, with 10000+ hours and multiple type ratings in jet aircraft. Right?
    What has that got to do with anything? The Lion Air crew were ATP rated with a combined 11,000 hours. They didn't have a clue about the systems we are discussing. You didn't either. That's the point.

    Honestly, tell us how you feel about being kept in the dark on systems that might interfere with your commands or destabilize your aircraft?

  6. #106
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    What?! There is clear data. I am ONLY referring to the Lion Air crash. The investigation has determined that the MCAS system malfunctioned due to a single AoA sensor fault. The FAA has already issued an emergency AD and Boeing has redesigned the software 'enhancement' to remove certain vulnerabilities directly related to that crash. Those vulnerabilities still exist and will continue to exist until the new software 'enhancement' is in place. That vulnerability may have now caused an additional crash and massive loss of life.

    Given all that, how can you argue with temporarily grounding the aircraft? It's logic vs bias.
    I’m not comfortable with mass groundings driven by social media hysteria. At least the 787 and DC-10 groundings were driven by less emotion. However, I accept that in today’s atmosphere it’s unavoidable and expedient. I also note unconfirmed reports that some US pilots have encountered problems. Boeing’s CEO is either brave or foolhardy in pushing his luck on the Max’s safety.

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    What?! There is clear data. I am ONLY referring to the Lion Air crash. The investigation has determined that the MCAS system malfunctioned due to a single AoA sensor fault. The FAA has already issued an emergency AD and Boeing has redesigned the software 'enhancement' to remove certain vulnerabilities directly related to that crash. Those vulnerabilities still exist and will continue to exist until the new software 'enhancement' is in place. That vulnerability may have now caused an additional crash and massive loss of life.

    Given all that, how can you argue with temporarily grounding the aircraft? It's logic vs bias.

    And no grounding would have occurred without the second crash.

  8. #108
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HalcyonDays View Post
    I’m not comfortable with mass groundings driven by social media hysteria.
    Neither am I. That's not what is happening here.

    And no grounding would have occurred without the second crash.
    I'm sure that's true. That's the sad thing. Regulation continues to be reactionary rather than visionary. And if this crash turns out to be related to Lion Air, it will also be true that, with a grounding, no second crash would have occurred.

  9. #109
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    Why don't we settle back and let the REAL experts do their job before we start the construction of the gallows.
    The REAL experts have already done their job on Lion Air. And nobody is constructing a gallows. They are just making sure nobody is flying in one.

    Here, there is more USEFUL information about the issue at hand compiled at this link. You will learn more about THIS ISSUE in five minutes than you did in your previous 25,000,000 hours of flight time:

    http://www.b737.org.uk/mcas.htm

    And then tell us how comfortable you are with a system that COUNTERACTS your commands (potentially without warning and for no actual reason) being vulnerable to a SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE.

    The ONLY thing thus far that I see wrong with MCAS is the lack of fault-tolerance. The software 'enhancement' should solve this. That is why I will fine flying on the 737MAX once the new software is certified and in place. Until then, it belongs on the ground.

  10. #110
    Senior Member BoeingBobby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    1,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    What has that got to do with anything? The Lion Air crew were ATP rated with a combined 11,000 hours. They didn't have a clue about the systems we are discussing. You didn't either. That's the point.

    Honestly, tell us how you feel about being kept in the dark on systems that might interfere with your commands or destabilize your aircraft?
    It will ALWAYS come down to, click click, click click, and fly it like a regular old airplane. They all have standby artificial horizons.

  11. #111
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    It will ALWAYS come down to, click click, click click, and fly it like a regular old airplane. They all have standby artificial horizons.
    But it doesn't ALWAYS come down to that, does it. Sometimes it comes down to 'what's it doing now' and scrambled SA and pilot error. Sometimes, it's all over in a matter of seconds.

  12. #112
    Senior Member BoeingBobby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    1,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    But it doesn't ALWAYS come down to that, does it. Sometimes it comes down to 'what's it doing now' and scrambled SA and pilot error. Sometimes, it's all over in a matter of seconds.
    That's why they pay us the big $$$. So you DON'T say, "what's it doing now". Unfortunately in Africa as well as some other places, they let 200 hour pilot's in the right seat of a complex jet aircraft. I hate to say it but, I don't think that the Captain of the Ethiopian airplane got much help from his F/O.

  13. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    That's why they pay us the big $$$. So you DON'T say, "what's it doing now". Unfortunately in Africa as well as some other places, they let 200 hour pilot's in the right seat of a complex jet aircraft. I hate to say it but, I don't think that the Captain of the Ethiopian airplane got much help from his F/O.
    I doubt he got any help. But I question how deeply and broadly qualified an 8000 hour 29-year old captain also was - in the context of a carrier with a diminishing safety and business reputation in recent years, whose flight crewing policies were criticised in the report of the 2010 Beirut 737 crash, which pursues FTLs as targets not guidelines, which discounts fares to absurdly low levels in the aim of creating an ‘African hub’, which trades on a glory reputation as Africa’s ‘leading’ airline in decades past..... In other words, we’ll surely find systemic corporate and culture deficiencies contributing to this disaster.

    That doesn’t get Boeing off the hook, however. I trust the NTSB totally. But the NTSB is advisory only, only the FAA can decide, with its famed dual mandate. And when the Boeing CEO basically asks the president for his support (as a pay-off for political contributions ?), the optics are horrible. There will be justifiable skepticism in the media if the boxes are analysed in the US.

  14. #114
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    6,873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    What has that got to do with anything? The Lion Air crew were ATP rated with a combined 11,000 hours. They didn't have a clue about the systems we are discussing. You didn't either. That's the point.
    Ok, but that was BEFORE the Lion Air crash. That crash itself did a lot to fix that.

    AFTER the Lion Air crash, NO MAX PILOT should be NOT_AWARE of that there is a think called MCAS in their plane, how it works, when it works, and how to kill it, which by the way is the standard trim runaway procedure existing in the 737 since perhaps the dash 100. That should have been enough mitigation while the improvements take place. That's why I said I really hope that this crash was NOT due to the MCAS. It would have been like having a crew grossly mishandling a UAS event after the events of Air France were kn own and understood. The vulnerabilities that allowed the Air France accident to happen when the pilots did NOT follow the UAS memory times (or even reasonable general airmanship) are still there. Should all Airbuses have been grounded and kept grounded until now?

    Perhaps the MAX should have been grounded immediately after the MCAS issue became known after the Lion Air crash until the contingency measures were implemented.
    But I think that the grounding of the MAX at this point is pure neurotic reaction.

    --- 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 ---

  15. #115
    Senior Member TeeVee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    1,997

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HalcyonDays View Post
    I doubt he got any help. But I question how deeply and broadly qualified an 8000 hour 29-year old captain also was - in the context of a carrier with a diminishing safety and business reputation in recent years, whose flight crewing policies were criticised in the report of the 2010 Beirut 737 crash, which pursues FTLs as targets not guidelines, which discounts fares to absurdly low levels in the aim of creating an ‘African hub’, which trades on a glory reputation as Africa’s ‘leading’ airline in decades past..... In other words, we’ll surely find systemic corporate and culture deficiencies contributing to this disaster.
    You just described EVERY US airline. thank you.

  16. #116
    Senior Member Peter Kesternich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HalcyonDays View Post
    I think I’d agree for once that the recorders should not be sent to the NTSB, if only to ensure the strictest impartiality. While I give the FAA some credit for not giving in to social media pressure and wanting to wait for clear data, there’s no doubt that the worldwide perception of US credibility has been damaged, and it’s hard to counter that now.
    The NTSB is an independent agency that is not linked to the FAA (besides also being a U.S. government agency).

  17. #117
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    6,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    Ok, but that was BEFORE the Lion Air crash. That crash itself did a lot to fix that.

    AFTER the Lion Air crash, NO MAX PILOT should be NOT_AWARE of that there is a think called MCAS in their plane, how it works, when it works, and how to kill it, which by the way is the standard trim runaway procedure existing in the 737 since perhaps the dash 100. That should have been enough mitigation while the improvements take place.
    This is where we have to disagree. I've already stated as clearly as I can why the 737MAX would have been grounded, out of caution, by any wise and impartial agency. Your point is also clear. No pilot should have been unaware of the danger AFTER the Lion AIr crash. But, as you tend to do, you choose to disregard human factors and the inconsistent quality of pilots across the entire fleet. You cannot confidently depend on a correct pilot action to a sudden upset from a new and bewildering source. That just doesn't show enough concern for public safety in all parts of the world.

    It would have been like having a crew grossly mishandling a UAS event after the events of Air France were known and understood. The vulnerabilities that allowed the Air France accident to happen when the pilots did NOT follow the UAS memory times (or even reasonable general airmanship) are still there. Should all Airbuses have been grounded and kept grounded until now?
    Airbus jets have an abundance of fail-safe and fail-operational fallbacks built in. The A330 that the AF447 crew were piloting did what the 737MAX should do: it degraded when data sources were unreliable. Thus, it was perfectly functional AND responding to their commands. It was not fighting them because it had a mind of its own. There was no reason to ground it. The Lion Air 737 did, in a sense, have a mind of its own. It's ironic how all the Airbus haters pinned the moniker HAL on the FBW setup, but when a Boeing jet goes HAL, it's all fine, it's still safe.

    But I think that the grounding of the MAX at this point is pure neurotic reaction.
    You know, coming from me, this is not a pure neurotic reaction. You know coming from the EASA and the CAA and CASA et. al., this is not a pure neurotic reaction.

    I actually think the idea that it is all due to an ignorant social media reaction is itself an ignorant social media reaction.

    Again, it's a case of logic vs bias.

  18. #118
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobieee
    It will ALWAYS come down to, click click, click click, and fly it like a regular old airplane. They all have standby artificial horizons.
    Quote Originally Posted by Evanie
    But it doesn't ALWAYS come down to that, does it. Sometimes it comes down to 'what's it doing now' and scrambled SA and pilot error. Sometimes, it's all over in a matter of seconds.
    I guess I'd maybe like a redundant imminent stall warning thingie advising the nose-over thingie…

    But let's not gloss over some facts.

    I'm thinking 8000 feet is plenty of time to pull a CB (I know you don't like that Evan) and crank the trim wheel back where it should be...

    Just like 36,000 feet is enough time to consider if a relentless pull up might be causing a voice to say "stall stall" along with a mushing descent at low airspeed.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  19. #119
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Yes, bait
    Good point. Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    You're going to take it anyway.
    Lesson learned

  20. #120
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    6,873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    This is where we have to disagree. I've already stated as clearly as I can why the 737MAX would have been grounded, out of caution, by any wise and impartial agency. Your point is also clear. No pilot should have been unaware of the danger AFTER the Lion AIr crash. But, as you tend to do, you choose to disregard human factors and the inconsistent quality of pilots across the entire fleet. You cannot confidently depend on a correct pilot action to a sudden upset from a new and bewildering source. That just doesn't show enough concern for public safety in all parts of the world.
    Then ground all airplanes that have trim runaway as a possible failure mode. That is, ban all airplanes.

    --- 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 ---

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •