- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Behind the Lion Air Crash, a Trail of Decisions Kept Pilots in the Dark
Posted on 2/4/19 at 9:30 am
Posted on 2/4/19 at 9:30 am
LINK
Paging 777Tiger
Paging 777Tiger
quote:
In the brutally competitive jetliner business, the announcement in late 2010 that Airbus would introduce a more fuel-efficient version of its best-selling A320 amounted to a frontal assault on its archrival Boeing’s workhorse 737. Boeing scrambled to counterpunch. Within months, it came up with a plan for an upgrade of its own, the 737 Max, featuring engines that would yield similar fuel savings. And in the years that followed, Boeing pushed not just to design and build the new plane, but to persuade its airline customers and, crucially, the Federal Aviation Administration, that the new model would fly safely and handle enough like the existing model that 737 pilots would not have to undergo costly retraining. Boeing’s strategy set off a cascading series of engineering, business and regulatory decisions that years later would leave the company facing difficult questions about the crash in October of a Lion Air 737 Max off Indonesia. The causes of the crash, which killed 189 people, are still under investigation. Indonesian authorities are studying the cockpit voice recorder for insights into how the pilots handled the emergency, and are examining Lion Air’s long history of maintenance problems.
quote:
But the tragedy has become a focus of intense interest and debate in aviation circles because of another factor: the determination by Boeing and the F.A.A. that pilots did not need to be informed about a change introduced to the 737’s flight control system for the Max, some software coding intended to automatically offset the risk that the size and location of the new engines could lead the aircraft to stall under certain conditions. That judgment by Boeing and its regulator was at least in part a result of the company’s drive to minimize the costs of pilot retraining. And it appears to have left the Lion Air crew without a full understanding of how to address a malfunction that seems to have contributed to the crash: faulty data erroneously indicating that the plane was flying at a dangerous angle, leading the flight control system to repeatedly push the plane’s nose down.
quote:
Understanding how the pilots could have been left largely uninformed leads back to choices made by Boeing as it developed the 737 Max more than seven years ago, according to statements from Boeing and interviews with engineers, former Boeing employees, pilots, regulators and congressional aides. Those decisions ultimately prompted the company, regulators and airlines to conclude that training or briefing pilots on the change to the flight control system was unnecessary for carrying out well-established emergency procedures.
quote:
Boeing has taken the position that the pilots of the Lion Air flight should have known how to handle the emergency despite not knowing about the modification. The company has maintained that properly following established emergency procedures — essentially, a checklist — long familiar to pilots from its earlier 737s should have allowed the crew to handle a malfunction of the so-called maneuvering characteristics augmentation system, known as M.C.A.S., whether they knew it was on the plane or not.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 9:53 am to RedRifle
The day I find out there was a modification made to a flight control system that I wasn’t made aware of is the same day I tell whoever I am flying for to pound sand.
This post was edited on 2/4/19 at 9:54 am
Posted on 2/4/19 at 9:56 am to Drew Orleans
Can someone in plain english remind me what happened.
The plane thought it was stalling and automatically dived due to new software but they didn't know how to keep it from diving?
The plane thought it was stalling and automatically dived due to new software but they didn't know how to keep it from diving?
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:00 am to RedRifle
These same people who rake in export/import bank money as subsidies, build idiot drone cars, etc. want to build single pilot, or even pilot-less airplanes.
They cut corners to save a nickel on training costs for their over stretched Frankenstein 737, 180 ppl die.
An addendum to the training should have taken place for sure, but paying their way through the regulations has to stop. Aviation regulations were written in blood, and while theres no doubt some are burdensome and probably stupid, most are there for good reason.
It's not just paying, though. The ex/Im "boeing bank" that you and I pay for to backdoor their losses... ties that company directly to the taxpayer, so there's incentive to let boeing do whatever they need to compete more cheaply against the OPENLY subsidized Airbus.
They cut corners to save a nickel on training costs for their over stretched Frankenstein 737, 180 ppl die.
An addendum to the training should have taken place for sure, but paying their way through the regulations has to stop. Aviation regulations were written in blood, and while theres no doubt some are burdensome and probably stupid, most are there for good reason.
It's not just paying, though. The ex/Im "boeing bank" that you and I pay for to backdoor their losses... ties that company directly to the taxpayer, so there's incentive to let boeing do whatever they need to compete more cheaply against the OPENLY subsidized Airbus.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:02 am to RedRifle
I would lose my shite if I were a 737 Max pilot if I didn’t at least getting some kind of literature on the new system.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:03 am to GeauxxxTigers23
You'd be amazed how little systems knowledge they want you to have in this AQP day and age of training.
This post was edited on 2/4/19 at 10:04 am
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:11 am to barry
quote:
Can someone in plain english remind me what happened.
The plane thought it was stalling and automatically dived due to new software but they didn't know how to keep it from diving?
You're on it.....there's a way for the pilot to turn the computer off but for some reason no one told the pilot.....kinda important shite to know
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:28 am to RedRifle
quote:
That judgment by Boeing and its regulator was at least in part a result of the company’s drive to minimize the costs of pilot retraining. And it appears to have left the Lion Air crew without a full understanding of how to address a malfunction that seems to have contributed to the crash: faulty data erroneously indicating that the plane was flying at a dangerous angle, leading the flight control system to repeatedly push the plane’s nose down.
How can boeing think (and convince the FAA) that retraining wasn't needed, unless they lied to the FAA. How stupid. Retraining costs are minimal compared to what they will ultimately cost them.
Companies that cut costs to save a few bucks always pay more in the long run.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:28 am to barry
quote:
Can someone in plain english remind me what happened.
The plane thought it was stalling and automatically dived due to new software but they didn't know how to keep it from diving?
From what I understand, yeah. The software thought the plane was pitched up and automatically adjusted the flight surfaces to pitch down. They were in level flight, so it just pointed them at the ground. If I remember correctly, they recovered multiple times, but it kept nosediving. The last one they weren't able to recover from, and, obviously per the article, they didn't know what the root issue was, so they died still trying to figure out why the plane was doing what it was doing.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:45 am to Wtodd
The fault for most of this can be distilled down to two things:
1. Lion Air's poor maintenance standards
2. Lion Air's poor pilot training standards
Stability augmentation systems are not new. For example, the Dee Howard 500, the last great piston-engined executive plane, was certified in 1963 to the latest transport category (airline) standards. It had a rudder boost system that was automatically activated if an engine failed. This reduced the minimum controllable airspeed (VMC) from as much as 200 knots down to 95 knots (the slowest speed a multiengine plane can maintain while flying straight ahead).
1. Lion Air's poor maintenance standards
2. Lion Air's poor pilot training standards
Stability augmentation systems are not new. For example, the Dee Howard 500, the last great piston-engined executive plane, was certified in 1963 to the latest transport category (airline) standards. It had a rudder boost system that was automatically activated if an engine failed. This reduced the minimum controllable airspeed (VMC) from as much as 200 knots down to 95 knots (the slowest speed a multiengine plane can maintain while flying straight ahead).
Posted on 2/4/19 at 10:50 am to just1dawg
quote:
. It had a rudder boost system that was automatically activated if an engine failed.
could not be more apples to oranges here
quote:
This reduced the minimum controllable airspeed (VMC) from as much as 200 knots down to 95 knots (
rudder input does not reduce Vmc, in fact by definition, Vmc is lack of rudder authority
This post was edited on 2/4/19 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 2/4/19 at 11:01 am to 777Tiger
Someone posted an article earlier about the Air France crash and how the pilots really didn’t understand how the Airbus’s computer system worked . Crashed a plane that was perfectly fine . I know automation is good for the most part but dam these guys are still pilots
Posted on 2/4/19 at 11:08 am to jlntiger
quote:
the pilots really didn’t understand how the Airbus’s computer system worked .
I think the FO did have a lot of experience in that aircraft and had a good knowledge of the systems, it was a series of errors and misrecognition(there's a short, quick read book on this crash,) problem was the FB(relief pilot,) was in the left seat and he did not have a lot of experience or systems knowledge of the aircraft and they were actually fighting each other for control and making opposite control inputs, which in that aircraft nulls each other, to exacerbate the situation
Posted on 2/4/19 at 11:42 am to 777Tiger
IIRC the lead pilot was taking a nap. By the time he got back to the cockpit things had gone to shite.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 12:09 pm to RedRifle
Let’s not forget:
Also the plane should have been properly repaired at this point.
quote:
Boeing has asserted the pilots on the next-to-last flight of the same Lion Air aircraft that crashed encountered a similar, if less severe, nose-down problem. They addressed it by flipping off the stabilizer cutout switches, in keeping with the emergency checklist. Still, Indonesian investigators found, the pilots broke from the checklist by flipping the switches back on again before turning them off for the rest of the flight. That flight, with different pilots from the flight that crashed, landed safely.
Also the plane should have been properly repaired at this point.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 12:13 pm to WestSideTiger
Bet there's a maintenance log saying "ops check normal, could not duplicate, aircraft cleared for return to service"
Or something similar in there.
Or something similar in there.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 12:30 pm to 777Tiger
quote:
rudder input does not reduce Vmc, in fact by definition, Vmc is lack of rudder authority
It does in an piston-engined airplane with 2 x 2500hp engines, two small vertical tails, and unboosted flight controls.
Posted on 2/4/19 at 12:53 pm to just1dawg
quote:
It does
not
you can push the rudder full throw but until you have sufficient airflow over the control surfaces you do not have rudder authority, and have actually increased drag and worsened your state
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News