re: Update: Pilots in Ethiopian Air crash followed Boeing’s emergency procedures

quote:

---

Is my understanding incorrect?

---

when an aircraft manufacturer makes changes to alter/update an older version of an airplane, and the 737 is a very old airplane, they apply to the FAA to continue to keep it as a common type rating as long as differences training is provided, at some point, the updates/alterations become so different from the existing type that the Feds say no, this is a new aircraft type and it will require it's specific type rating

(no message)

quote:

---

when an aircraft manufacturer makes changes to alter/update an older version of an airplane, and the 737 is a very old airplane, they apply to the FAA to continue to keep it as a common type rating as long as differences training is provided, at some point, the updates/alterations become so different from the existing type that the Feds say no, this is a new aircraft type and it will require it's specific type rating

---

So then I guess the pivotal questions are,

1) If not for MCAS, would the MAX have required a new rating?

2) Was there any funny business going on at the FAA regarding the decision to allow Boeing to keep the same rating?

If the answer to #1 is yes, and, it's shown that failure of the MCAS is the most likely reason for the crashes, than that business decision cost over 300 lives.

You added a new piece of machinery/tech to a plane and didn't tell the pilots about it, a piece of machinery that has a very, very, very low failure rate, but just one more thing that can and did fail. And perhaps, a piece of machinery/tech that wasn't even necessary, as alternatives were available (training and re-rating).

quote:

---

If the plane was in a nose dive, all they had to do was roll it over and fly upside down to land it. Denzel did it. Why couldn't these pilots?

---

I guess they weren't drunk enough to pull that off?

quote:

---

They can finally throw away these shirts:

---

But they can feel free to keep wearing these.

quote:

---

Respectfully, that's how American pilots were transitioned.

---

any differences training, any training for that matter, must be approved by the FAA and is constantly being tweaked and scrutinized

Curious what the pilots here think about this video. LINK

Guy attempts to recreate the situation in a simulator, and his conclusion is the pilots never really had a chance.

Being unable to manually trim due to the speed explains why the Ethiopian pilots reengaged the system after initially turning it off (like they were supposed to).

quote:

---

I’ve seen it first hand foreign pilots are absolute shite compared to American pilots. American pilots are far superior and American military or ex-military pilots are among th most elite.

---

I'd love to see some of our best pilots in the sim dealing with this.

No, the big problem is saving money on training by relying on one sensor to control the pitch of the plane regardless of what the pilot is trying to do.

The plane is so forward CG that MCAS is needed to maintain flight.
MCAS,wouldn't even need to exist had they redesigned the 737 to be taller. The similar Airbus A320 (318,319,320,321) was better designed for variants as its a pretty new plane.
The 737 was designed in the 60's.
They couldn't put modern engines on it without lifting the plane or putting the engines higher and forward of the engines.

The lie was that with MCAS (which wasn't even disclosed until LYON) the plane was the same as every other 737 to fly.

It isn't.

Now they can make this plane fly. They just need to not call it a 737 and recertification is needed all around.