Another 737 MAX-8 down

a reply to: Zaphod58

Another thing to consider is that both flights had just taken off and were still "low and slow" as they say

In this environment don't had lot of time and altitude to analyze problem and take action

Quantas 72 which experienced a violent pitch down from faulty computer was at 33,000 ft when it occurred

Add to that pilot was ex US Navy Top Gun fighter pilot so had both altitude and experience to respond when a/c
began to act up.

a reply to: firerescue

Crew experience showed in the JT610 crash. Crews on flights prior to the crash saw similar events, but were able to safely make it through the flight.

The EU and Canada will not allow any aircraft to fly in their airspace until they verify the software update.

Source


Boeing has confirmed their full cooperation with the audit.

www.transportation.gov...

Fighter pilots don't make the best of transport pilots
a reply to: firerescue

This just popped up on the Sky New website..

The pilots of a Boeing 737 MAX frantically scoured a manual before their plane crashed into the Java Sea in October, killing all 189 people on board. Recordings from the cockpit of the Lion Air plane suggest that the pilots were struggling to understand why the jet was lurching downwards, but ran out of time before it hit the water. Two minutes into the flight, the first officer reported a "flight control problem" to air traffic control and said that they intended to maintain an altitude of 5,000ft

news.sky.com...

a reply to: solidshot

According to this, a pilot deadheading in the cockpit helped the crew the day before to identify the flight control issue and deactivate the system. But apparently they didn't feel it was necessary to write it up or tell anyone else.

www.cnbc.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

That shows how important it is to communicate. When I pass down work to the next shift, or among my guys, I try to give them as much detail as I can even small seemingly trivial details. It could be the difference between life or dead/hurt.
So the deadhead pilot had enough experience to save them, but not enough smarts to follow through and raise the flag?!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
The DOT has formally requested an audit of the certification process.

And a former Delta executive will be nominated to head the FAA.

Time to dump my Boeing stock!

a reply to: JIMC5499

727 service entry.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: solidshot

According to this, a pilot deadheading in the cockpit helped the crew the day before to identify the flight control issue and deactivate the system. But apparently they didn't feel it was necessary to write it up or tell anyone else.

www.cnbc.com...

Terrifying (I keep having to use that word in this thread). So, any flight I take, I can't assume that any problems encountered with that aircraft recently have been addressed and fixed?

How common is that? Actually, what is the normal procedure for a plane when it experiences a problem during flight? I know you'll have to say "It depends on what kind of problem they had," but what is the general practice?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
So, you know how you're laying in bed, trying to fall asleep, and that thought hits and you're wide awake again?

I think MCAS caused the crash, but didn't start it. I think the crew engaged the autopilot, the aircraft pitched down, they disengaged the autopilot and pulled up, at which point MCAS did its thing and started pushing the nose down, resulting in rapid oscillations, and at some point they either had some kind of structural failure, or lost power.

I agree. That was the point I was trying to make in my long-winded post a couple of days ago (which also occurred after lying in bed, trying to get to sleep).

If our fever-dream explanation is correct, then it must be the case that, for some reason, the flight computer continued to think the AOA was too high, even after the nose was actually lowered, multiple times. That would suggest that either the AOA sensor itself mechanically stuck in the high AOA direction, or the sensor worked perfectly but the flight software failed to recognize when the AOA actually decreased.

The fact that the LionAir airplane showed the same fault two days in a row (although the pilot in the jump seat was able to fix the problem on the first day) suggests to me that the problem was with the sensor.

a reply to: 1947boomer

In the case of Lion Air, the had a write up for a bad left side AoA sensor. That's the only input that MCAS currently reads from. And right side AoA showed +20, while the right side showed normal.

a reply to: KansasGirl

Long explanation, going off the military workings...

Before arrival, the crew calls ahead with aircraft status, and tells the guys on the ground if they're Code 1, 2, or 3. Code 1, nothing is wrong and the aircraft needs minimal service (fuel, fleet, food, etc.) Code 2, something is wrong, but it won't affect the ability of the aircraft to fly (second navigation radio is out, engine exhaust temp is high or low but within limits, etc) Code 3, airplane is broke and needs maintenance before it can fly again.

Once on the ground, the crew briefs maintenance on what they saw, and documents it in the forms. Maintenance then troubleshoots the problem and determines what needs to be done to fix it, and documents it in the forms once it's done.

It basically comes down to the crew being able to accurately describe the problem. If the crew comes to me, and says, "the left side angle of attack sensor was reading high on our last flight" then I'm going to look at the sensor. I'm not going to look for a runaway stabilizer, because the crew didn't say anything about that. You have to be able to fix and turn these aircraft quickly, so outside scheduled maintenance, you don't sit and check every single system. You run basic system checks, such as control movement checks, and if everything passes, you sign it off.

Ethiopian investigators are fast tracking the investigation, and could publish a preliminary report as early as next week.

Thur FBI has gotten involved in a criminal investigation into the Max certification. Someone is trying to make a name for themselves by using Boeing.

a reply to: Zaphod58


Old computer saying - "Garbage in, Garbage Out" ………

Bad inputs result in unpredictable results

As alluded to un earlier post where Airbus 330 had problem with sudden nose down do to corrupted data getting into
navigation computer and being interpreted as wing angle of attack too steep

That is why need redundant sensors/processors - if one system starts throwing out erroneous results others can cut it out of loop

Something is in the wind that is putting a bug up a lot of asses. The Air Force Chief of Staff just ordered all transport and large aircraft pilots, including the pilots of Air Force One, to undergo a review of all emergency procedures for their aircraft, because of this accident.

amp.cnn.com...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: solidshot

According to this, a pilot deadheading in the cockpit helped the crew the day before to identify the flight control issue and deactivate the system. But apparently they didn't feel it was necessary to write it up or tell anyone else.

www.cnbc.com...

I was just about to post that. It certainly raises a few questions re: reporting and pilot training at Lion. I guess when you’re low and slow there’s only so much you can do as well.

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: anzha

What a load of crap.

a reply to: AussieNutter

I can think of two things you can do.

1. Remember the damn memory items from your emergency checklist.

2. Know how to fly the damn plane besides turning knobs and flipping switches.