But the whole point of this article is that the pilots did have the needed info.
Posted on 03/10/2020 3:13:13 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
First World Piots knew what to do and how to fly out of all it.
Third World “pilots” do not have air sense nor do they have judgment.
Exactly!!! They are not qualified to fly sophisticated Aircraft! They might be able to fly a Constellation but I doubt it!
A Canadian man who was a pilot for Ethiopian Airlines before resigning last year said he tried before the crash to warn the carrier that crews weren’t adequately prepared.
Computer 2 wins, Pilots 0 wins
Let me tell you something! I worked for Boeing on Their AWACS project and they put their planes through a rigorous flight test. Evidently the AOA never faulted during their flt test or they would have fixed it before delivery of their first jet.. When they found out something was amiss they sent out advisories telling of the danger. If the airlines ignored that that is their fault.. Like I said before these foreign 3rd world countries do not train their crews very well..
Bad Pilots without the needed info....
The day before the fatal crash another crew in the same aircraft experienced the same MCAS problem due to the broken AOA sensor. A check pilot in the jump seat immediately recognized what was happening, switched of the stab trim motors, and was able to complete the flight safely.
Why was this pilot able to react correctly but the other company pilots couldn’t? Why was the problem not reported or fixed before the same plane was flown the next day? There are 10,000 mechanical things that can and do go wrong with complex aircraft that aren’t due to design flaws and must be handled by trained and alert human crews. The incident happened because of a chain of small errors that accumulated into a fatal disaster.
Boeing was made the responsible party because they had the financial resources to compensate the victims and juries view them as greedy and evil. They forget that Boeing employees and families fly on the same aircraft as everyone else and have the best safety record of any aircraft manufacturer in the world. I would fly comfortably on any aircraft that the pilot and first officer put their own lives on.
“The bulletin listed nine possible symptoms in such a failure. If any of them occurred while the plane tried to nose down on its own, the directive said: “do the Runaway Stabilizer NNC ensuring that the STAB TRIM CUTOUT switches are set to CUTOUT and stay in the CUTOUT position for the remainder of the flight.” “
Shutting off those switches also kills the electric trim control on the yoke since they those switches disconnect the motors entirely. If not for that then the planes would not have crashed. And if anyone a number of design issues were not present then the plane would not have crashed.
Doesn't mean much; son "Ace" never even finished high school. Went directly to college and flight school at 16.
'Course not every sixteen year old can pull that off!
You can google any airframe for the accidents and incidents. The majority of them are not by US carriers. Why?
Something should be done to address this big picture.
Maybe the rest of them thought that he was just a bad pilot.
Yes I worked for Boeing for 32 1/2 years and Boeing would never put out a A/V they knew was unsafe.. I worked on AWACS program. When we saw something wrong we wrote it up.. The engineers had to show it was fixed to the Air Force’s standards.. When I retired in 2007 Boeing did away with their Quality Control and started self policing.. I don’t know if that caused this problem or not.. Probably not!
We don’t need to learn how to land
The only thing that Boeing did right was to accept responsibility. Because at the end of the day the responsibility was theirs. The design issues were glaring to anyone with a brain and the slightest amount of technical understanding/experience.
And when you are designing an airplane then you always need to apply the premise that if anything can go wrong then it will.
But the whole point of this article is that the pilots did have the needed info.
The important thing is how many wimmens they have on their board.
It will fly again. And it will be the safest airplane ever manufactured.
You beat me by a few months, but I agree. Everyone at Boeing knows that safety is number one. Everyone.
My early background was in aircraft instrumentation and later on, after earning a degree in Computer Science, I worked in aerospace for a good number of years, so I feel pretty qualified to comment on this.
The crash of both planes seems to have been caused by faulty Angle of Attack (AOA) information being fed into a computer system which then drove the flight controls to force the nose down in order to avoid a perceived stall.
In my experience, sometimes the pilots would complain that their altimeters were erratic and after investigation we found that the problem was often caused by a dirty AOA probe. How’d we know? We had test equipment that we could hook up and fake out the aircraft by changing the static pressure in the tubing. We would power up the test equipment and simulate an altitude of, say, 10,000 ft., and then engage the computer which made changes to the altimeters. Then we would slowly turn the AOA probe and watch the altimeter. If it’s OK, it will change the altimeter in a controlled steady change. If the AOA probe was dirty, this would suddenly drive the altimeters thousands of feet in one direction and then thousands of feet in the other direction unpredictably. Of course, that’s not good. The point is that a dirty and/or corroded AOA probe can produce WILDLY inaccurate AOA information.
On the 737-Max aircraft they apparently also sent the AOA information to a computer system, which is tied into the autopilot system, which drives the control surfaces and when they got wild AOA information they also got wild control surface changes. The pilots at first turned off the system but then, for some reason, turned it back on and couldn’t recover the 2nd time. I’m not a pilot, but after watching many, many episodes of “Air Disaster” I’ve concluded that a lot pilots today just aren’t very good at flying the plane manually anymore.
Many people have suggested that they should have a backup AOA probe. But with two probes how do you know which one is right and which one is wrong? I suppose you could have a third probe and then “vote” to see which data to use. I think this might lead to more problems than it fixes.
Knowing that the AOA data can be wild at times, I think I would use my computer systems to sample it at, say, 5 times per second. Within 1/5 of a second I think the readings should be pretty close together, within some reasonable limit. If consecutive readings were wildly different I’d try to figure out the real AOA reading, discard the other(s), and raise some sort of fault code in the maintenance records. If it gets too bad, at some point the computer system may have to warn the pilots and shut itself down. My offhand thinking is in terms of perhaps 3-5 seconds.
I’d probably look back farther than just two readings. A mathematician would be good here. There are mathematical techniques that can take a set of input data points and generate a smoothed output. This might be a good place for one of those. Use the smoothed out data in the autopilot system in order to avoid the wild behavior. Perhaps they already did this; I don’t know.
Another thing would be to change out the AOA probes fairly quickly and refurbish them, hopefully before problems occurs. I don’t think we did this in the Air Force but then our pilots had ejection seats.
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.