Posted on 05/20/2019 1:24:03 PM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Bjorn Fehrm, a Swedish pilot and aerospace engineer who is an analyst for Bainbridge Island-based Leeham.net, said the report assumes the accidents could have been avoided by “a really proficient pilot … on a good day.” But he said Boeing and Airbus cannot rely on the roughly 300,000 pilots flying worldwide having a good day and being perfectly trained for every emergency.
The veteran U.S. airline captain said that the American aviation community needs to avoid getting “too cocky about U.S. pilots being immune from mistakes.”
He said he’s spent a lot of time flying with local pilots in western China where the mountains are high and the flying is hazardous. I’d put them up against American airline pilots any day,” he said. “They are exceptional airmen.” And he criticized Boeing for designing an airplane in which a system triggered by a single sensor failure would present such challenges and require such a high-performance response from the pilots.
(Excerpt) Read more at moneymaven.io ...
Failure to even manually ‘uncrank’ all the down stabilizer MCAS put it?
C’mon ... those guys COULD have even grabbed the STAB TRIM wheel even and stopped its action ...
Are there instances when a pilot has been subject to the false indications and inputs AND managed to land the aircraft?
“Are there instances when a pilot has been subject to the false indications and inputs AND managed to land the aircraft?”
False inputs AND false inputs on the SAME FLIGHT and managed to land the aircraft? I have heard of both situations, but never both on the same flight.
“And yet, many pilots would have landed the plane safely. So what is it when some pilots can handle the situation, and some pilots cannot? Pilot error? Pilot ignorance?
Boeing’s mistake is not having an idiot proof airplane.”
Two good points. Where were the thousands of pilots that flew the 737 MAX over the years without complaint?
On the other hand, commercial airliners need to be controllable by moderately skilled pilots.
And Boeing deceived.
Ain’t that a kick when you’re shooting touch and goes and the instructed suddenly says ‘Stop the plane”. Then gets out, shakes your hand ands says “Do 3 touch and goes” then walks away? Well, that’s the way it happened to me.
Decades ago, a jet took off and one of the engines flipped forward from the bottom of the wing to the top. Now aimed in the wrong direction, the plane crashed. The cause was a pin that wasn’t put back in correctly by a mechanic. Who was officially blamed? The pilot.
Not at all. The FAA would never certify for airworthiness a system with a known single point of failure, period.
Engineers inside Boeing would never not point out the software system had a single point of failure to their superiors.
The low end variant of this plane override pilot commands based on a single sensors input.
Meaning if that single sensor failed it would override the pilot, which is exactly what appears to have happened in both these crashes.
Which means Boeing either lied, explicitely or by omission to the FAA about how this software and variant operated, or they bribed someone or someone’s in the FAA to get the certification.
There is zero doubt that BOEING engaged in criminal activity to get this plane certified.
Not (even hardly) proven.
If the horizon was visible the flts should have been able to be saved if manual control was possible.
Mine was a bit of a surprise, too! Eric the instructor took me out and had me do everything on my own and we did a takeoff and landing and then he got out and had me repeat the whole inspection, checklist, and then told me to go out and bring it back in one piece!
I was up for fifteen minutes and it was wonderful!
Welcome to the club!
“That may well be true!
And what in your vast (recently soloed) experience do you base that on?
Do the 737 MAX aircraft even have STAB TRIM wheels?
My vastly limited experience as a pilot has nothing at all to do with my non-existent skills as an investigator and prosecutor so your question is illogical.
All I said was that an allegation of criminal activity may well be true.
And given that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into Boeing then they think it may well be true just like I do.
“The FAA would never certify for airworthiness a system with a known single point of failure, period.”
I guess single engine aircraft are all hallucinations, right?
“All I said was that an allegation of criminal activity may very well be true.”
Well, damm, that’s profound.
“And given that the FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into Boeing then they think it may well be true just like I do.”
That not just defines illogic but idiocy as well.
It will be.
There is zero path to airworthiness certification with a known single point of failure, period.
To get to a point of certification without criminality you have to believe that the entirety of the engineering team at BOEING, all of them, from top to bottom were utterly incompetent and that everyone in the FAA involved in the certification process was also incompetent to an impossible degree.
There is no doubt whatsoever that criminality was involved in the certification of this plane. It’s not a matter of if it will be proven, only when.
From the cited article, I think this part is crucial:
What Does the Simulator Say?
Starting from the point where the Ethiopian pilots hit the cut-off switches and stopped MCAS from operating, the U.S. MAX crew tried in the simulator to recover.
Even though the U.S. crew performed the simulator experiment at a normal speed of 250 knots instead of the more than 350 knots of the Ethiopian jet, the forces on the jet’s tail still prevented them from moving the manual wheel in the cockpit that would have corrected the nose-down attitude.
To get out of it, the pilots used an old aviator technique called the “roller coaster” method — letting the yoke go to relieve the forces on the tail, then cranking the wheel, and repeating this many times.
This technique has not been in U.S. pilot manuals for decades, and pilots today are not typically trained on it. Using it in the simulator, the U.S. MAX crew managed to save the aircraft but lost 8,000 feet of altitude in the process. The Ethiopian MAX never rose higher than 8,000 feet, indicating that from that point in the flight, the crew couldn’t have saved it.
Awesome Megan! Congratulations!
Congratulations! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.