Ethiopian 737-8 MAX down. No survivors. | Page 8 | FerrariChat

Ethiopian 737-8 MAX down. No survivors.

Discussion in 'Aviation Chat' started by RWatters, Mar 10, 2019.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. TheMayor

    TheMayor Nine Time F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Feb 11, 2008
    98,539
    Vegas baby
    FERRARI-TECH likes this.
  2. Argosy

    Argosy Formula Junior

    Mar 8, 2013
    415
    A320 is a much more modern design that had adequate space and ground clearence beneath the wings to put larger engines without the need to move the engines forward. Thus it has much the same CoG as before and no handling issues. It was also FBW from the beggining and has more redundancies than the 737 MAX, which is an old plane with only a partial FBW system.
     
  3. energy88

    energy88 Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 21, 2012
    26,819
    West of Fredericksburg, VA
    Full Name:
    John
    Can someone speculate why the nose gear collapsed from 5:15 to 5:17 in the video?
     
  4. Kuba

    Kuba Rookie

    Sep 19, 2013
    46
    https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/failed-certification-faa-missed-safety-issues-in-the-737-max-system-implicated-in-the-lion-air-crash/

    "The FAA, citing lack of funding and resources, has over the years delegated increasing authority to Boeing to take on more of the work of certifying the safety of its own airplanes.

    (...)
    After the Lion Air Flight 610 crash, Boeing for the first time provided to airlines details about MCAS. Boeing’s bulletin to the airlines stated that the limit of MCAS’s command was 2.5 degrees.

    That number was new to FAA engineers who had seen 0.6 degrees in the safety assessment.

    The FAA believed the airplane was designed to the 0.6 limit, and that’s what the foreign regulatory authorities thought, too,” said an FAA engineer. “It makes a difference in your assessment of the hazard involved.”

    (...)

    But both said that sometimes agreements were made to update documents only at some later date.

    “It’s possible the latest numbers wouldn’t be in there, as long as it was reviewed and they concluded the differences wouldn’t change the conclusions or the severity of the hazard assessment,” said the former Boeing flight controls engineer.


    If the final safety analysis document was updated in parts, it certainly still contained the 0.6 limit in some places and the update was not widely communicated within the FAA technical evaluation team.


    “None of the engineers were aware of a higher limit,” said a second current FAA engineer.

    (...)

    On Monday, before the grounding of the 737 MAX, Boeing outlined “a flight control software enhancement for the 737 MAX,” that it’s been developing since soon after the Lion Air crash.

    According to a detailed FAA briefing to legislators, Boeing will change the MCAS software to give the system input from both angle-of-attack sensors.


    It will also limit how much MCAS can move the horizontal tail in response to an erroneous signal. And when activated, the system will kick in only for one cycle, rather than multiple times.


    Boeing also plans to update pilot training requirements and flight crew manuals to include MCAS."
     
  5. Argosy

    Argosy Formula Junior

    Mar 8, 2013
    415
    It's quite possible that EASA and some other agencies elsewhere will require recertification of the 737 MAX8. They were reluctant to grandfather the plane in the first place and wanted changes even before these accidents. It's not outside the realms of reality that the MAX line loses a lot of orders due to this because it would add cost to the airlines. The only thing that might save the 737 is the fact that no one wants monopoly in the market and that Airbus might raise prices if there is no competition.
     
  6. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    There have been hundreds of 737 MAX 8 flights which were perfectly normal, so it's hard to convince me that the aircraft has a "fatal flaw". Yes, it has a problem in certain circumstances, but let's not over-exaggerate the extent of that problem.
     
    FERRARI-TECH and afterburner like this.
  7. Argosy

    Argosy Formula Junior

    Mar 8, 2013
    415
    That problem has most likely caused over 300 deaths so far, not even 3 years into service of the aircraft. So, yes, I don't think anyone is over exaggerating about it.
    In the end, passangers will decide the faith of the airplane with their wallet. And Boeing will have no one to blame but themselves if the buying public abstains from flying on the MAX, which will force companies to cancel orders
     
    ChipG likes this.
  8. RWP137

    RWP137 Formula 3

    Apr 29, 2013
    1,588
    AZ
    Full Name:
    Rick
    Agreed. The largest US MAX8 operator reported 41,000 flight and over 90,000 hours of safe operation.
     
  9. Argosy

    Argosy Formula Junior

    Mar 8, 2013
    415
    Some pilots may disagree, as they have complained about both the aeroplane and Boeing company and training/lack of information
     
    ChipG likes this.
  10. INRange

    INRange F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2014
    10,013
    Virginia/Florida/Caymans
    Full Name:
    JD
    It's a bit early to defend Boeing by saying "look at all the safe hours of operations".

    300 souls lost their lives because the plane allegedly killed them. Sure the pilot's training matters but it was the plane and its associated software that allegedly flew the plane into the ground. Boeing knew the AoA was a problem with the MCAS system after Lion Air went down.

    One crash in the airplane business can be acceptable. Twice for the same problem means you were incompetent and hid behind what your lawyers and media advisers told you to say. A third strike and your CEO and the Executive team are gone.
     
  11. RWP137

    RWP137 Formula 3

    Apr 29, 2013
    1,588
    AZ
    Full Name:
    Rick
    I’m not trying to defend Boeing or the MAX. I’m trying to say there is a larger problem here than MCAS trim limits. The first accident could have been avoided had the pilots responded to a runaway stab trim condition properly.
    The only thing we know about the second accident is that it was a MAX and the radar data looks similar to the first accident aircraft. The FO in the second accident had 200 hours.
     
    afterburner likes this.
  12. Rifledriver

    Rifledriver Three Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 29, 2004
    33,736
    Austin TX
    Full Name:
    Brian Crall
    As a member of the flying public not connected to the aviation business but with a technical background Boeing has already handled this badly but before condemning the airplane I am happy to wait for the reports. If it shows an aircraft design issue or a failure on their part to properly inform parties operating the airplane....they're screwed. By how much? Time will tell.

    Their PR machine is seriously lacking at the very least. Like I said a couple of days ago, they should have grounded it themselves, to wait for a business friendly President to do it was beyond stupid.
     
    Boomhauer, tritone and INRange like this.
  13. donv

    donv Two Time F1 World Champ
    Owner Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 5, 2002
    23,988
    Portland, Oregon
    Full Name:
    Don
    As I understand it, it only does anything at very high angles of attack when the autopilot is not active. Other than the landing flare, how often are are you operating at very high angles of attack in a 737?

    Or am I wrong about what it does? As I said, I am not a 737 pilot.
     
  14. donv

    donv Two Time F1 World Champ
    Owner Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 5, 2002
    23,988
    Portland, Oregon
    Full Name:
    Don
    Has that been confirmed? I think that's highly unlikely. The FO could have had "as little as 200 hours" but if he actually had only 200 hours, that would mean that this was the first leg of his IOE and he had done everything to minimum requirements... is that the case?
     
  15. Steelton Keith

    Steelton Keith F1 Veteran
    Owner Rossa Subscribed

    Aug 19, 2009
    6,558
    Raleigh NC
    Full Name:
    Keith Hall
    Mr. Parks and other vets: do I remember correctly that the original 737 ("The Guppy") had 20 inches of engine/ground clearance?
     
  16. Jeff Kennedy

    Jeff Kennedy F1 Veteran
    BANNED Owner Silver Subscribed

    Oct 16, 2007
    6,546
    Edwardsville, IL
    Full Name:
    Jeff Kennedy
    After the Lion Air crash and the subsequent identification of MCAS as a significant part of the cause, it makes no sense to me that any airline and all their pilots flying the Max were not aware of the disconnect procedure. Apparently the disconnect procedure is the same for run away trim in an NG. Can't say if recognizing the situation and doing the disconnect procedure is the part of anyone's simulator training.

    I would fault Boeing for making it an option, assuming the reports are accurate, for the installation of the 2nd AOA and the annunciator for dissimilar input. According to a report I saw, it is claimed that both Lion Air and Ethiopia did not order their aircraft with this option.
     
    boxerman likes this.
  17. INRange

    INRange F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Jan 27, 2014
    10,013
    Virginia/Florida/Caymans
    Full Name:
    JD
    I believe the issue is the Angle of Attack sensor providing erroneous data to the MCAS system (Lion Air). Yesterday, after reviewing the data from the Ethiopian Air flight data recorder....authorities said the data was similar to the Lion Air data recorder. More detail will come out over time.....but if it was a different cause....I believe they (authorities and Boeing) would have told the public.
     
  18. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    I don't remember the actual figures for ground clearance of the engines on the original 737 but we are talking about two entirely different airplanes now. The original had JT-8's , a much smaller diameter engine and tucked up under the wing. Therefore, a short landing gear. You cannot lengthen the landing gear that is already set in a position on the wing without designing a shrinking mechanism on the landing gear strut or other modifications. The larger engine on the Max was moved into some of that unused space ahead of and below the wing. Several degrees of positive incidence to the thrust line were added, I think, to possibly gain more clearance. This is when the frog jumped into the punchbowl because when the higher thrust engine was powered up it produced a nose pitch up. Another frog jumped into the punchbowl when Boeing added the software to control the pitch up. The experts can take it from here before I get myself into more trouble. I'm going to say one more thing. I would not hesitate to fly on a Max with a crew trained in this country. They found the frogs and knew what to do about it. Remember, no Max crashes happened in this country.
     
    FERRARI-TECH, Jaguar36 and INRange like this.
  19. RWP137

    RWP137 Formula 3

    Apr 29, 2013
    1,588
    AZ
    Full Name:
    Rick
    That is what is being reported from several outlets for a few days now. Not that the media is reliable these days. I believe this is going on I developing countries. Commercial aviation has exploded in the 3rd world and they’re short on pilots. Not as many expats to fly since jobs are good in their home countries. One of the flight schools I worked at in the past used to train pilots for the major Chinese airlines. We’d send them back to China with 250 hours total time (the minimum for a commercial pilot cert). They would go right into the right seat of. 737 NG or 747. “Meat in the seat” to satisfy a 2 pilot limitation.....Crazy
     
  20. Rifledriver

    Rifledriver Three Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 29, 2004
    33,736
    Austin TX
    Full Name:
    Brian Crall

    One report I heard was that of the 200, 150 was in sims. But you know how news services are.
     
  21. mike01606

    mike01606 Formula Junior

    Feb 21, 2012
    794
    Cheshire UK
    Full Name:
    Mike M
    Hasn’t every pilot got to start ‘real flying’ somewhere.
    Surely everyone is zero hours to start with?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  22. Racedrvr

    Racedrvr Formula 3
    Silver Subscribed

    Mar 24, 2008
    1,161
    Kentucky/Florida
    Full Name:
    Don
    Here is an article that answers many of the questions posted above. Black box data from the Lion Air crash shows that readings from the two angle-of-attack sensors differed by 20 degrees even while the plane was taxiing on the runway, indicating that the instruments were faulty from the start.

    Boeing designed a warning light that would alert pilots when the sensors measuring their plane’s angle of attack differed widely, which would give notify them of a faulty MCAS activation.

    The manufacturer does not install the warning light as a standard feature on the 737 Max 8. Airlines have to pay extra for it.



    https://qz.com/1575509/what-went-wrong-with-the-boeing-737-max-8/
     
  23. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    I agree that items that important should be standard equipment on all jetliners. Redundancy should always be standard equipment.
     
  24. Rifledriver

    Rifledriver Three Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 29, 2004
    33,736
    Austin TX
    Full Name:
    Brian Crall
    No question but not at the controls of an airliner.
     
    FERRARI-TECH likes this.
  25. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,986
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    AOA indicators are often off until you get some air flow over the sensor.
     
    jcurry likes this.

Share This Page