Ethiopian Airlines: 'No survivors' on crashed Boeing 737 max

[BTD]

I have reached out to a good friend of mine who is very much in the know, believe me, and he has let me know there is no stick shaker or pusher on this machine.

It has stall strips on the inboard wings. "it really causes the column to shake at high angles of attack."

I am afraid your friend is mistaken. There is indeed 2 separate shakers one on each control column. They can and are tested on the ground prior to flight.

Neither my AOM nor the FCTM make reference to stall strips. I have been flying only the MAX for the last 15 months or so.

The rest of your info looks accurate.

[linecrew]

Wow, this is a whole new level of stupid right here. Worried because the aircraft are parked at their airport. How do these idiots rise to a position of power?!

https://windsor.ctvnews.ca/concerns-ove ... -1.4341177

Concerns over Boeing 737 Max fleet aircraft parked at Windsor International Airport

CTV Windsor
Published Monday, March 18, 2019 4:38PM EDT
Last Updated Monday, March 18, 2019 5:15PM EDT

Windsor West New Democrat MP Brian Masse is concerned about the Boeing 737 Max fleet aircraft at the Windsor International Airport.

As CTV Windsor reported last week, the Boeing 737 Max 8 and 9 planes arrived at the airport to be parked at AAR Aircraft Services.

“We’ll have between six and 10 on the ground,” said Dave Robertson, the vice president of operations manager of AAR.

As of Monday at 3 p.m., there are 12 Max aircraft at the Windsor airport.

The first planes arrived on Wednesday after both Canada and the U.S. announced the planes would be temporarily grounded, citing concerns stemming from a deadly plane crash in Ethiopia on March 10 that killed 157 people, including 18 Canadians.

Masse has written a letter to Transport Minister Marc Garneau , requesting information to address safety concerns.

“We know that these planes can take off and land in our community. We also know that the incidents with these planes is happening right after take-off,” stated Masse. “I believe that our community deserves answers about the public safety of these planes taking off over our neighbourhoods and what plans are in place to protect our residents.”

Robertson told CTV Windsor the planes were asked to be parked at the Windsor airport.

“We service several of the Canadian operators so, they reached out to us to see if we had places for them to park the aircraft and, of course, we help out our customers just like everybody else does,” said Robertson.

But Masse still wants answers.

“Who will be responsible should something happen, what is expected of our community during this process, and ultimately, are we safe?” wrote Masse. “Those are answers we all deserve and I hope the Minister finds them as important as we do in Windsor.”

[tsgas]

Wow, this is a whole new level of stupid right here. Worried because the aircraft are parked at their airport. How do these idiots rise to a position of power?!

Socialists rise to power by making promises to the gullible, about free stuff ,and an Utopian society.

[boeingboy]

Everybody keeps thinking everything happened all at once and the crew was overwhelmed….that is not the case. The airspeed disagree and stick shaker came on at rotation. They were known, actioned and dealt with. It wasn't until about 2000 feet when the flaps came up that they got the nose down input....That's 1 problem to deal with. The flaps were selected back out and the trim stopped. So they climbed out normal. When the flaps were selected back up - the trim issue started again. then they maintained altitude and counteracted the nose down trim for 10 min. Im sure they only had one issue front and center - The repeated nose down input. Simple - cut out the trim.

One thing that is being overlooked is I have to ask what are these crews thinking in these parts of the world. the previous Lion air crew after they cutout the trim - continued their flight all the way to destination with the left stick shaker wailing away....why? Because their QRH didn't say to land at the nearest airport. I don't know about you - but I wouldn't need a QRH to tell me that before I was turning around. It seems like more and more of these places outside North America and Europe are getting to the point where their pilots cannot fly airplanes if the smallest thing goes wrong. Look at Air asia and the 777 in SFO were the pilots couldn't hand fly a visual approach on a beautiful sunny day. I think we need to look more at pilot skill and training than the machine.

[telex]

Everybody keeps thinking everything happened all at once and the crew was overwhelmed….that is not the case. The airspeed disagree and stick shaker came on at rotation. They were known, actioned and dealt with. It wasn't until about 2000 feet when the flaps came up that they got the nose down input....That's 1 problem to deal with. The flaps were selected back out and the trim stopped. So they climbed out normal. When the flaps were selected back up - the trim issue started again. then they maintained altitude and counteracted the nose down trim for 10 min. Im sure they only had one issue front and center - The repeated nose down input. Simple - cut out the trim.

One thing that is being overlooked is I have to ask what are these crews thinking in these parts of the world. the previous Lion air crew after they cutout the trim - continued their flight all the way to destination with the left stick shaker wailing away....why? Because their QRH didn't say to land at the nearest airport. I don't know about you - but I wouldn't need a QRH to tell me that before I was turning around. It seems like more and more of these places outside North America and Europe are getting to the point where their pilots cannot fly airplanes if the smallest thing goes wrong. Look at Air asia and the 777 in SFO were the pilots couldn't hand fly a visual approach on a beautiful sunny day. I think we need to look more at pilot skill and training than the machine.

How do you explain that Air Canada 777 tailstrike in Hong Kong again?

[boeingboy]

Farther to my above post - I find this rather interesting regaurding the Ethiopia crash....

On Mar 18th 2019 the airline clarified, the first officer had accumulated a total of 350 flight hours.

Following the Nov 6th 2018 release of the Boeing Bulletin regarding MCAS in the aftermath of the crash of the LionAir the airline did distribute the bulletin to their flight crew a number of days later following a reminder. Ethiopian Airlines had been equipped with one Boeing 737-700 NG simulator only when the first MAX aircraft were put into service, the first 737-8 MAX simulator was put into service mid January 2019. Only in March 2019 a trim runaway lesson was included in the NG and MAX training syllabus. Flight crew are scheduled to go through a simulator session every 6 months (as per industry standards), the accident flight crew may thus not yet have received training on a stabilizer trim runaway (in the NG or MAX Simulator).

So let me get this straight....a newbie in the right seat (don't know captains experience yet), The airline made all pilots aware of the possible problems and the procedure to follow (stab trim runaway) and yet - at least some of their crews have never been trained on a stab trim runaway in either model?????? (They operate 26 NG models)

Yea - lets blame the machine for this.

[boeingboy]

How do you explain that Air Canada 777 tailstrike in Hong Kong again?

I admit I'm not completely up to speed on that one - however....I never said pilots here were not immune to screw ups, just that if you look at the number of accidents lately where the automation or systems failed and the pilots were unable to hand fly the airplane - there are a lot more of these accidents elsewhere.

If 2 airplanes are crashed due to pilot error - is that a reason to ground a fleet? No - it's not

Of course that's not to say Boeing didn't think things through fully. There does need to be a fix. It was foolish to run any system off just one system instead of 2, and I would have thought Boeing would have learned that after the Turkish airlines accident a few years back. An emergency AD, mods, they happen all the time. It certainly is starting to look like pilot training and decision making is playing a large factor in these 2 crashes.

[A346Dude]

If 2 airplanes are crashed due to pilot error - is that a reason to ground a fleet? No - it's not

2 hull losses likely precipitated by the same issue, on a type with less than 2 years under it's belt? Seems like a pretty good reason to hit the pause button until this is sorted out. Boeing had their chance to fix it after the first crash and did not act. To call this a simple case of pilot error is overly simplistic in my opinion.

[sportingrifle]

Boeingboy....

If the problem was pilot performance or training, or merely a substandard part, that is what the AD would have addressed. A quick software patch or new part and we are good to go. This is not the case - Air Canada just announced that the grounding for their fleet will be for a minimum of 3 months. My sources in my past certification world are telling me that this is the low end of the guestimate. Obviously the problem is way past unskilled pilots.

The problem is that the MCAS system in the airplane has been found not to meet the FAR Part 25 certification requirements. If you wish I can post the relevant parts of FAR25, but the aircraft fails on issues of reliability, redundancy, and most importantly, controllability. FAR25 are the certification requirements that mandate that an aircraft can be flown by pilots who do not posses your skill or knowledge.

The big question now is does the rest of the airplane, certified by the same people under the same process, also meet FAR25?

Cheers sportingrifle.

[tbaylx]

They'll make the AoA a dual input, prevent MCAS from activating more than once and reduce the total amount of trim. It's a software fix that will require looking at the changes to MCAS, not the entire aircraft.
The original 737 went on to be one of the most popular aircraft of all time after fixing the rudder PCU problem which required far more effort to fix than MCAS will.

[telex]

They'll make the AoA a dual input, prevent MCAS from activating more than once and reduce the total amount of trim. It's a software fix that will require looking at the changes to MCAS, not the entire aircraft.

I hope you have advised Boeing of this simple solution!!

[boeingboy]

I hope you have advised Boeing of this simple solution!!

They have already informed the operators of this. They will do all that and MCAS will be prevented from operating if there is an airspeed disagree message.

[boeingboy]

Boeing had their chance to fix it after the first crash and did not act.

Actually - they did. they started on the revised software shortly after the accident and they advised everybody of what was going on and how to deal with it.

To call this a simple case of pilot error is overly simplistic in my opinion.

Really? A crew that was not trained in a common NNC item has to be blamed on the machine??????

[telex]

I hope you have advised Boeing of this simple solution!!

They have already informed the operators of this. They will do all that and MCAS will be prevented from operating if there is an airspeed disagree message.

I do not share your enthusiasm for an easy fix to this situation.

Transportation Department seeks audit of FAA’s certification of Boeing 737 Max 8

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/19/transpo ... 7-max.html

[A346Dude]

Really? A crew that was not trained in a common NNC item has to be blamed on the machine??????

I'm pretty sure there is no "Unfounded MCAS Activation" checklist, and I know there wasn't at the time of the first crash because no crews even knew MCAS existed. If such a checklist existed, and was trained for at time of delivery, I would agree with you that this is pilot error.

[Meatservo]

Everybody keeps thinking everything happened all at once and the crew was overwhelmed….that is not the case. The airspeed disagree and stick shaker came on at rotation. They were known, actioned and dealt with. It wasn't until about 2000 feet when the flaps came up that they got the nose down input....That's 1 problem to deal with. The flaps were selected back out and the trim stopped. So they climbed out normal. When the flaps were selected back up - the trim issue started again. then they maintained altitude and counteracted the nose down trim for 10 min. Im sure they only had one issue front and center - The repeated nose down input. Simple - cut out the trim.

One thing that is being overlooked is I have to ask what are these crews thinking in these parts of the world. the previous Lion air crew after they cutout the trim - continued their flight all the way to destination with the left stick shaker wailing away....why? Because their QRH didn't say to land at the nearest airport. I don't know about you - but I wouldn't need a QRH to tell me that before I was turning around. It seems like more and more of these places outside North America and Europe are getting to the point where their pilots cannot fly airplanes if the smallest thing goes wrong. Look at Air asia and the 777 in SFO were the pilots couldn't hand fly a visual approach on a beautiful sunny day. I think we need to look more at pilot skill and training than the machine.

Boeingboy, even though I don't know what happened to the Ethiopian machine,I couldn't agree more with the sentiment in the last part of your post.

But this business of not being able to fly aeroplanes- what's being done about it, even here in Canada? Maybe you work for a carrier that has S.O.P.s that encourage a certain amount of autopilot-off flying. The SOPs where I used to work specifically mention it. Once upon a time they even encouraged manual flight with AND without the flight directors, but this part disappeared after a revision and I suspect it was after they found out some of us were actually doing it. And if your S.O.P.s "allow" a certain amount of manual flight, how is this paying off for the company in terms of ensuring that it's actually happening? If you engage the automation at 400' and leave it on right until short final, on every flight, no matter if it's dark, rain, or shine, even on bluebird days, how does this get picked up? When a guy gets 1000 hours in the right seat of a King-Air with all the automated bells & whistles, logs some of that as PICUS, screws off to Jazz or Encore as soon as the ATPL quizzes are passed and starts doing whatever they do there until one day a year or less later he's the captain, at what point did anyone ever evaluate his ability to actually fly a plane, or encourage him to get comfortable with it? I know guys who say they have done so much hand-flying that they don't care if they ever do it again and feel they don't need to practice. I know guys who are roundly praised as "great pilots" by sim instructors and management because if their amazing memorization and button-crunching but who I know and have seen, still can't be trusted to know where the wind is coming from in a crosswind or actually judge when and where and how much to flare, let alone watch over someone who has even less flying experience. It's all very well to talk about people knowing how to actually fly, but apart from one or two old farts who actually LIKE to fly, who's actually doing it? Who's actually making sure we are doing it?

I think for some companies, the only reason handflying isn't outright forbidden is because no chief pilot wants to be the first one to go THAT far. I think there are companies that allow for hand-flying in the SOPs and then use company culture to actively frown on it. Which makes me wonder, if, like me, you consider it your moral duty to retain all your flying skills, does that make you one of those anti-authority CRM nightmares, or does it make you the last sane man among fools?

[digits_]

I can see some similarities between the different levels of automation for cars vs airplanes.

With cars, they need to go from no automation to full autodriver where no human interaction is required, because an auto driver that only works 99% of the time and switches off just as you are about to hit something, won't work. So they need to bypass the zone where "some" interaction of the driver is required.

If you look at airplane automation, I believe we are operating in that grey zone where everything works 99% of the time. And while the consequences of in aviation are not as disastrous as they would be with cars, every now and then you have failures as these 2 accidents where things get out of hand. One could wonder why we don't jump straight to the 100% automation, until you realize that it was actually the safety equipment that failed, which doesn't install much confidence for 100% automation airplanes.

[tsgas]

Wow, this is a whole new level of stupid right here. Worried because the aircraft are parked at their airport. How do these idiots rise to a position of power?!

Socialists rise to power by making promises to the gullible, about free stuff ,and an Utopian society.

It's pretty gutless to falsify another poster's post to get in your little high school right wing cracker spew.

What are you talking about , Tovarishch ? Stick to the AOC program and all will be find, you silly commie.

[Meatservo]

It's pretty gutless to falsify another poster's post to get in your little high school right wing cracker spew.

What are you talking about , Tovarishch ? Stick to the AOC program and all will be find, you silly commie.

I'm just going to go copy the last couple of posts and move them ahead of this horseshit so the conversation between adults can continue

[Meatservo]

[quote=boeingboy post_id=<a href="tel:1072627">1072627</a> time=<a href="tel:1553024463">1553024463</a> user_id=763]
Everybody keeps thinking everything happened all at once and the crew was overwhelmed….that is not the case. The airspeed disagree and stick shaker came on at rotation. They were known, actioned and dealt with. It wasn't until about 2000 feet when the flaps came up that they got the nose down input....That's 1 problem to deal with. The flaps were selected back out and the trim stopped. So they climbed out normal. When the flaps were selected back up - the trim issue started again. then they maintained altitude and counteracted the nose down trim for 10 min. Im sure they only had one issue front and center - The repeated nose down input. Simple - cut out the trim.

One thing that is being overlooked is I have to ask what are these crews thinking in these parts of the world. the previous Lion air crew after they cutout the trim - continued their flight all the way to destination with the left stick shaker wailing away....why? Because their QRH didn't say to land at the nearest airport. I don't know about you - but I wouldn't need a QRH to tell me that before I was turning around. It seems like more and more of these places outside North America and Europe are getting to the point where their pilots cannot fly airplanes if the smallest thing goes wrong. Look at Air asia and the 777 in SFO were the pilots couldn't hand fly a visual approach on a beautiful sunny day. I think we need to look more at pilot skill and training than the machine.

Boeingboy, even though I don't know what happened to the Ethiopian machine,I couldn't agree more with the sentiment in the last part of your post.

But this business of not being able to fly aeroplanes- what's being done about it, even here in Canada? Maybe you work for a carrier that has S.O.P.s that encourage a certain amount of autopilot-off flying. The SOPs where I used to work specifically mention it. Once upon a time they even encouraged manual flight with AND without the flight directors, but this part disappeared after a revision and I suspect it was after they found out some of us were actually doing it. And if your S.O.P.s "allow" a certain amount of manual flight, how is this paying off for the company in terms of ensuring that it's actually happening? If you engage the automation at 400' and leave it on right until short final, on every flight, no matter if it's dark, rain, or shine, even on bluebird days, how does this get picked up? When a guy gets 1000 hours in the right seat of a King-Air with all the automated bells & whistles, logs some of that as PICUS, screws off to Jazz or Encore as soon as the ATPL quizzes are passed and starts doing whatever they do there until one day a year or less later he's the captain, at what point did anyone ever evaluate his ability to actually fly a plane, or encourage him to get comfortable with it? I know guys who say they have done so much hand-flying that they don't care if they ever do it again and feel they don't need to practice. I know guys who are roundly praised as "great pilots" by sim instructors and management because if their amazing memorization and button-crunching but who I know and have seen, still can't be trusted to know where the wind is coming from in a crosswind or actually judge when and where and how much to flare, let alone watch over someone who has even less flying experience. It's all very well to talk about people knowing how to actually fly, but apart from one or two old farts who actually LIKE to fly, who's actually doing it? Who's actually making sure we are doing it?

I think for some companies, the only reason handflying isn't outright forbidden is because no chief pilot wants to be the first one to go THAT far. I think there are companies that allow for hand-flying in the SOPs and then use company culture to actively frown on it. Which makes me wonder, if, like me, you consider it your moral duty to retain all your flying skills, does that make you one of those anti-authority CRM nightmares, or does it make you the last sane man among fools?
[/quote]