"No Survivors": Second New Boeing 737 to Crash in Four Months

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by Megalith, Mar 10, 2019.

  1. Flogger23m

    Flogger23m [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,755
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Fly it. Two airlines of questionable maintenance/pilot quality had issues, one of which we don't currently know the cause of. Did people stop flying A330s when Air France (it is safe to say, superior maintenance & pilots) lost one? No.

    The PRC is forcing most of their airlines to purchase their indigenous aircraft. I assume this is a political move to help further push adoption of it. It is called the C919. So far about 1000 have been ordered, with all but 10 being Chinese airlines more than likely forced to purchase it.

    COMAC_B-001A_May_2017.jpg
     
    the901 likes this.
  2. gamerk2

    gamerk2 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,550
    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    In the case of the MAX, there's an additional step that needs to be done to disable the autopilot. And most airlines did NOT spend the necessary time to re-train their pilots; hell, Boeing specifically had to make the MAX as close to existing planes as possible for this exact reason.

    So given the lack of retraining, it's not tetribly shocking something like this would happen.

    [As an aside, I've created software fault detection & correction systems for various platforms. As a general rule, automatic recovery systems only kick on after detecting two or more independent indications of a problem. In the case of Lion Air, Boeing's system kicked in after ONE. This is a major design fault as far as I'm concerned; you never work on the assumption your sensors do not fail.]
     
    N4CR and Marees like this.
  3. M76

    M76 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,002
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    It is not autopilot it is a "safety" feature that kicks in even if the plane is being flown in manual mode. Which apparently wasn't part of the re-training when it was originally issued by boeing.
     
    Marees likes this.
  4. YeuEmMaiMai

    YeuEmMaiMai [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,120
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004

    the pilots at any time can override the automation simply by moving the flight controls to a certain degree... pull/push yoke far enough the plane will cede control to the pilot. Ditto for thrust control...

    rule #1 fly the plane
    rule #2 have the co pilot help assist with the problem.

    i suggest watching a dude called captain Joe or Mentour pilot

    AF 441 is a prime example of how someone with a ton of experience forgot the flight rules

    if the plane is saying stall, u need to push the nose down

    if the dudes flying these planes do not know how to disable the automation, then they should not be in the pilot seat, amirite?
     
    Sulphademus likes this.
  5. Marees

    Marees n00b

    Messages:
    50
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2018
    I believe it is not easy to disable certain automated features, such as the, automated anti-stall feature, in Boeing 747 max
    That was clearly the issue in the Lion air flight
     
  6. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    I'd recommend you immediately ground all automobiles and stop driving.
     
  7. Zepher

    Zepher [H]ipster Replacement

    Messages:
    16,716
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    There was one crash where the 1st officer accidentally engaged Go-Around-Mode while on approach, which increases throttle and pitches the nose up.
    1st officer pulled back on the throttle and the Captain told the 1st officer to push the yoke forward and nothing was happening, plane was still pitching up, he then pushed it as hard as he could and nothing.
    Captain took control and he was pushing it as hard as he could and the plane was still pitching up and they were only a few hundred feet above the ground when the plane eventually stalled and just fell to the ground just to the right of the runway.

    The flight simulator for this aircraft the captain trained on would disengage Go-Around-Mode when the control stick was pushed forward, on this aircraft it didn't function like that and there was a procedure to disable Go-Around_Mode that the captain and 1st officer
    didn't know. After the investigation, the manufacturer made it so that Go-Around-Mode would disengage if the control stick was pushed forward.
     
  8. c3k

    c3k 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,085
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    The most important factor is not going to be what piece of metal you're flying on...it's going to be what airline is operating it. There is a wide difference in experience and training between third world and first world airlines.
     
  9. YeuEmMaiMai

    YeuEmMaiMai [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,120
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    then it is the airline/pilot's job to learn what the differences are in this model vs it's predecessor... this is not he first time that a pilot was unfamiliar with a new aircraft and it directly resulted in a crash...
     
  10. deton8

    deton8 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    390
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2007
    It seems like in these cases people always want a single "smoking gun" but it's usually a perfect storm of events which prevent the failsafes in place from successfully averting a disaster.
     
    Marees likes this.
  11. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Airlines in multiple countries have suspended the use of Boeing's new 737 MAX 8 aircraft over concerns about its safety.

    fwiw
    An eyewitness saw smoke coming from the plane before it crashed on Sunday.
     
  12. Flogger23m

    Flogger23m [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,755
    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Too early to tell and there is a massive chance that "what they saw" is entirely false, but it wouldn't amaze me if poor maintenance or pre-flight checks was the fault. As someone else mentioned, underdeveloped countries don't exactly have the same standards as wealthy ones.
     
  13. faugusztin

    faugusztin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,629
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2008
    At same time you talk about airlines which are allowed to fly to EU and US, which automatically means very high standards and demands. Airlines literally can't fly to EU if you are put on a blacklist of untrustworthy airlines due safety issues. Just because it was a semi-local flight doesn't mean it is a local small airlines:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ethiopian_Airlines_destinations
     
    N4CR and Jim Kim like this.
  14. surlyroad

    surlyroad [H]Lite

    Messages:
    88
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2018
    I'm not a pilot, nor am I an avionics expert.

    What I am is a US Air Force vet whose AFSC (job title) was "Comm/Nav." My job covered all aspects of radio communication and RADAR, capitalized because it's an acronym, not talking down to anybody who knows that. I have more hours in the back of MC-130H's than most airline pilots have hours as aircraft commanders. I was called up to the cockpit/flight-deck many, many times, to troubleshoot the TF/TA system while in flight. I know, none of you give a fuck. Trust me, I know. I just wanted to throw my credentials out there. Give a fuck, or don't give a fuck, I don't give a fuck.

    Ok, I think it is way to early to blame Boeing, or Ethiopian Airlines, for the crash. The Orange Boxes will need to be thoroughly gone through, that means flight controls, air-speed, angle of attack, RADAR, CVR, weather, and a hell of other "etc."

    It might be easy to equate Ethiopian Airlines with rust-bucket C-47's that are deathtraps. But that is not the case. Why would Boeing want to get a rep for crashes? Shoddy maintenance? Absolutely could be. BS loading that the flight crew didn't know about? But let's not forget about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ValuJet_Flight_592

    Just my "take."

    Again, I understand that few, if any, of you will give a shit about my opinions.

    That's fuzzily-fine with me.



    EDIT:
    Just what I figured, ambivalence. I'm kinda on the fence as to whether or not that's a good thing or not.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2019
  15. umeng2002

    umeng2002 Gawd

    Messages:
    923
    Joined:
    May 23, 2008
    Automation is exactly probably why this and the other 737 Max crashed.

    A faulty sensor confuses the automation or makes it think everything is alright.

    Meanwhile, a human can just look out and see what's what.

    I'm going to guess it's the same issue as the other 737 Max accident; but this time, the pilots didn't know the corrective bulletin Boeing put out to bypass the anti-stall system.
     
  16. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    FAA just announced that they will announce changes to all 737 Max 8 aircraft next month.
     
  17. ewb302

    ewb302 Gawd

    Messages:
    727
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    My generalized guess is that this is a new variant and these pilots are not experienced to deal with the behavior of this plane. It took out of the norm behavior (faulty sensor, etc) to cause unexpected behavior and the pilots did not know how to handle it. Now, this could be a design issue with the plane, it could be lack of training for the pilots, it could be faulty maintenance. It could be a combination of all. Boeing's reputation is down right now, you can be sure they are going to do everything possible to come out as unscathed as possible. Their predicament is likely walking the fine line of blaming on the airline, vs taking blame for a design. Issuing a software update can be argued as some admittance of a design flaw.
     
    YeuEmMaiMai likes this.
  18. Nafensoriel

    Nafensoriel Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    230
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2015
    Just a question.

    This is a 737 variant which has been around for a while with no more or fewer problems than its comparable airframes right? Does the flight system in any way override the pilot entirely? As in, can it force the plane to dive even if they have active control of the aircraft?
    And if it does... how the hell did ANYONE think that was a good feature?
     
    Marees likes this.
  19. zrikz

    zrikz Gawd

    Messages:
    764
    Joined:
    May 29, 2006
    Nothing useful to add, just found out a friend was on that flight unfortunately =/
     
  20. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    France's aviation authority bans Boeing 737 MAX aircraft from its airspace
    “French airline companies do not have Boeing 737 MAX in their fleets. Nevertheless, given the circumstances of the accident in Ethiopia, the French authorities took the decision, as a precautionary measure, to prohibit any commercial flight carried out on a Boeing 737 Max to, from, or over French territory."
     
    Darth Kyrie likes this.
  21. Marees

    Marees n00b

    Messages:
    50
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2018
    This is an example of Artificial Intelligence
     
  22. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    No, the system you are referring to can be turned off. The pilots just have to work the checklists correctly.
     
  23. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,982
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Would have saved that one flight where the rookie pilot kept pulling up and the plane pancaked into the ocean from 40,000 feet because it stalled.
     
  24. ewb302

    ewb302 Gawd

    Messages:
    727
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    I think you are referring to AF447. Totally different plane, different manufacturer, different issue all together.
     
    Flogger23m likes this.
  25. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Indeed, but as the argument always goes that is design philosophy difference between Boeing and Airbus. The classic argument is Boeing believes in the pilot while Airbus believes in the computer. Automation versus handflying. Sidesticks versus yokes. Computer limits versus human override. Etc.
     
    Flogger23m likes this.
  26. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Darth Kyrie and Marees like this.
  27. Clickjocky

    Clickjocky n00b

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Calm down. I know what you meant. Sometimes it's fun just to throw darts in the dark, and when the lights come on and you've hit something you can pat yourself on the back.
     
  28. focbde

    focbde Gawd

    Messages:
    546
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    That very much depends on what you've hit...
     
  29. focbde

    focbde Gawd

    Messages:
    546
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    That was more true a while ago but less so these days to be honest... the main difference is that in a Boeing you can exert enough force through the yoke to 'override', whereas in the Airbus you can't do that with the sidestick, but have to actually disable the flight augmentation computers. Boeing planes are also now fly-by-wire in any case.
     
  30. Clickjocky

    Clickjocky n00b

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    I would agree with your assumption from above that they were having to deal with a faulty/iced sensor, likely creating havoc for the automatic systems and the pilots.

    When I saw the preliminary flight telemetry (sorry can't find link again) It looked like its possible they were fighting the autopilot.

    M76 Posted an AD that was sent From the FAA on 12-12-2018 describing a possible flight characteristic that looks like a good fit to this situation.

    I remembered the details from AF477 and it seemed both problems stemmed from faulty air speed data and thus posted the comment. It may or may not be in anyway related. The comment was made in response the the AF crash.

    More questions about decimation of information and pilot training concerning the AD.
     
  31. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    That is not quite accurate. The "exert" enough force through the yoke is one way that allows human override in Boeing aircraft. In Airbus aircraft you can not fully override the flight envelope protection. You can select an alernate control law but the software restrictions can not be completely removed on Airbus aircraft. It is exactly as I stated, the classic argument is Boeing believes in the pilot while Airbus believes in the computer. It is excactly why barring a structural failure of some sort (or take over, etc.)at least part of the cause of this accident will end up being pilot error as would be the case on all Boeing aircraft. The pilot has ultimate control, the computer can not say no if the pilot works the procedures correctly.

    As for Boeing being FBW, that doesn't mean anything in the scheme of things. An electronic signal to actuator is no real difference than the old method of manipulating control surfaces other than it weighs less, is less maintence, and more reliable. The FBW systems employed by Boeing are meant to mimic the older hydraulic/mechanical while Airbus are completely divorced from the interaction.
     
  32. SPARTAN VI

    SPARTAN VI [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,045
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2004
    This. To the tune of over 100 times more likely. According to 2017 mortality data, a typical American runs a lifetime risk of 1/103 odds of dying in any automative collision, or 1/572 if specifically a vehicle passenger (e.g. not a pedestrian struck by a vehicle nor motorcyclist) versus 1/10764 odds of dying in a plane/space travel incident. Hell, you're more likely to die just by walking on the sidewalk than being a passenger in a car or plane. Car fatalities are so common in the United States that some automotive commuters would become catatonic if MSM reported on every single fatality. I doubt there are enough hours in a day to report every fatality on nationwide news.

    Personally the psychology of a plane crash weighs more heavily in my mind because of the helplessness, the instantaneous fatalties of upwards of 200 passengers at once, and the MSM love affair with reporting on them. I know that's somewhat irrational because although I have control of my own vehicle, there are probably hundreds of ways to die in a car that are outside of my locust of control.
     
  33. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    It may be irrational, but that is why it makes the news. No one cares about the normal even when it is far deadlier. They only care about the sensation outliers in every situation. It is a weird part of human psychology that we have to actively control and not let people manipulate in us to get the desired effect like you are seeing now with this crash and the media.
     
    Marees and SPARTAN VI like this.
  34. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Canada banned it.

    Man Who Grounded the Boeing Dreamliner, former U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, says the FAA Should Ground the Boeing 737 Crash 8.
    But what does he know.
     
    Darth Kyrie likes this.
  35. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    You mean the same guy who then let 787's fly again without actually fixing the root cause of the battery issue but instead let an engineered containment be used so the problem can happen again?
     
  36. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,366
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    Spin it however you like.

    The Aviation Safety Reporting System captures confidential reports, analyzes the resulting data, and disseminates vital information to the aviation community.
    ASRS - Aviation Safety Reporting System - NASA

    Cool idea, but if we're are just gonna ignore the reports it captures I don't see what good it does.
     
  37. Paul_Johnson

    Paul_Johnson [H] Admin Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,475
    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2004
    Well, some one had to give the key information you intentionally left out in your spin since with the WHOLE story you get a much different picture of how things actually work.
     
  38. Westwood Arrakis

    Westwood Arrakis Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    509
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    If I were to ever fly, I wonder if bringing a parachute on board would cause any suspicion.
     
    The Mad Atheist likes this.
  39. capnstabn

    capnstabn Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    439
    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    I had some friends that assembled components for planes in college. If you screwed something up you could face criminal charges on what you touched for the next 20 years. I am curious if the engineers of these systems are facing jail time.
     
  40. ewb302

    ewb302 Gawd

    Messages:
    727
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    It would have to be proven that they knowingly let a faulty design into production/operation. That'll keep the lawyers busy for the next decade or so. And there will be no clear answer in the end.