Ethiopian 737-800 Max crash - No survivors

[IBob]

Yes, one of the earlier videos in this thread had a pilot and copilot in a simulator, talking it through. And when it came to the bit about hand-trimming via the trim wheels, the copilot was barely able to turn them, so the pilot then lent a hand from his side.

 

I wondered then how this would go on a flight deck where the crew were already fighting for their lives.

 

 

[kgwilson]

Listening to the ABC news yesterday, an American aviation commentator is now calling for all 737 Max aircraft to be recalled and scrapped as it has surpassed the original design limitations & calling for a complete new airframe design. Something I opined in post No 68. At an Av-safety meeting on Thursday I was talking to a retired Qantas pilot who has many hours in 737 & 747 aircraft and also worked for Boeing for a number of years. He commented that the engineering group at Boeing was a very powerful lobby group that often over rode other departments decisions or recommendations & they they were effectively wagging FAAs tail.

 

Even if the so called fix is implemented this sorry saga could go on for years and could cripple Boeing. With billions already wiped off the stock value already, decisive action now to arrest a steadily worsening scenario for the company may be best in the long run. It may take a large head rolling process and restructure with completely upgraded accountability processes and all certification functions to be completely divorced back to FAA to restore some confidence by the industry and public.

 

 

[Litespeed]

Some say a fine and maybe some jail time is required.

 

I think a fine unless it is say upwards of 20 billion plus full compensation of all airline losses and a minimum of 5 million per death to the families and jail for manslaughter for those who signed it off. 

 

Unless this costs Boeing really big then it is all a joke.

 

VW group have paid many billion over diesel gate and no one died.

 

All 737 max should be scrapped as inherently unsafe for a passenger aircraft, it is not a fighter that needs computers for stability.

 

Been too big to fail, is no excuse.

 

All execs and shareholders should pay big time. They can bankrupt the company, under chapter 11. That way it survives, jobs survive and keeps making aircraft. But the owners of the company forfeit the value of shares.

 

Otherwise any cost is considered just a business expense rather than reparations for manslaughter on mass.

 

 

[M61A1]

Listening to the ABC news yesterday

There's your problem right there.....

 

 

[kgwilson]

There's your problem right there.....

Your opinion, so that doesn't matter. 

 

 

[Thruster88]

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

This guy has been following it and all the official reports. he is a jet pilot for one of the USA companies. This last video he did recounts everything that happened in the cockpit and what was done until the end. Look up the previous videos its very well explained    

 

 

 

 

 

[kgwilson]

I've watched them all. More succinct and easier to understand than the mentour guy.

 

 

[kgwilson]

I came across this documentary originally filmed in 2002 regarding 2 Boeing whistle blowers. They had found that the supplier of fuselage ribs AHF Ducommun were supplying sub standard parts for the new 737 NG & Boeing sent these people after pressure from employees to audit Ducommun. Instead of CNC & CCM manufactured parts as specified by Boeing they found the equipment in poor condition and the parts being made by hand, hence the fact that holes didn't line up, material was thinner than specified etc. Boeing management & FAA clammed up & eventually the 2 employees went to the Justice dept. Their names were leaked & they lost their jobs. Boeing & FAA hushed it up & did nothing. Three 737 NG aircraft all 8 years old overshot runways injuring people & killing 1. The fuselages of all 3 broke up in the same places that the Ducommun parts are used. Lawyers & ex Boeing employees agreed back then that Boeing was self certifying & desperately trying to regain lost market share from Airbus. One person reckoned the FAA should be renamed BAA (Boeing Approval Agency)

 

This story is interesting in that it went nowhere at the time, the certification issues were known back in 2002 & probably earlier and to date nothing has been done except the Max groundings.

 

 

 

 

 

[Thruster88]

http://flash.avweb.com/eletter/4312-full.html?ET=avweb:e4312:2460744a:&st=email#232568

 

For anyone who is not signed up to Avweb, Paul Bertorelli is a very good and amusing aviation journalist. 

 

 

[Downunder]

http://flash.avweb.com/eletter/4312-full.html?ET=avweb:e4312:2460744a:&st=email#232568

For anyone who is not signed up to Avweb, Paul Bertorelli is a very good and amusing aviation journalist. 

Too much of a shill for my liking unfortunately....

 

 

[IBob]

First, I don't think much of the 'Oh they didn't do it right' attitude from some of these armchair 'experts'.

 

And second, if they physically could not manually trim due to the pressures on the stab/elevator (and only one crew member would have been available for that if the other was fighting to get the nose up) then maybe re-engaging the trim servos was a last desperate effort to trim using the trim switches. Certainly there are 2 videos from different pilots in this thread so far suggesting that manually working the trim wheels could have been very hard, and harder by the moment with the speed rising: in one of the sim recordings the copilot makes a futile attempt to hand trim, and the pilot then gives him a hand.

 

 

[kgwilson]

In that situation the trim wheels are almost impossible to turn manually unless pressure is relieved by pushing the nose down. The assumption is that they did not follow this recommended procedure as they did not have the luxury of altitude. They were at almost 500 knots heading towards the ground at 40 degrees nose angle when the trim was switched back on with less that 2000 feet of altitude. All the armchair experts saying they should never have retracted the flaps when there were indications of abnormalities not long after takeoff are not helpful. The pilot was very experienced with an excellent record. There was never any time in the entire flight to get the manual out & start working through options.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

... There was never any time in the entire flight to get the manual out & start working through options.

That's the really scary part. These ships of the sky have become so complex that, in an emergency, even the best pilots have got to look up the instructions.

 

 

[Thruster88]

That's the really scary part. These ships of the sky have become so complex that, in an emergency, even the best pilots have got to look up the instructions.

Both problems they had are memory items.

 

 

[Tommy T-Bird]

Interesting to note the pilots never touched the throttle during the whole process and ultimately were WAY over Vne

 

Easy to be critic and the stress of an emergency is far different from sitting on a computer typing, but clearly the pilots did not follow the procedure set out by Boeing.

 

Boeing's aircraft system is a clearly a contributing factor in the crash though.

 

I ask myself, would I get into a 737 MAX....not for all the tea in China.

 

 

[Garfly]

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

 From where I sit, that explanation sums it up pretty well. There appears to be no end in sight yet either.  As a well as the wasted lives, there's a companies future and reputation at stake here, and the FAA's. Nev

 

 

[onetrack]

The 737 MAX is a classic example of a company trying to squeeze too much out of an existing designs limitations.

 

If Boeing had bitten the bullet and started with a clean sheet new aircraft design, to match the new bigger engines, rather than trying to shoehorn the new engines into an airframe that was designed in the early 1960's, the total cost would have been much less.

 

 

[kgwilson]

It's all about money. A new design would have cost an enormous amount of money and taken some years to get certified. More cost. Meanwhile the A320 NEO family's share of the market skyrockets.

 

The Boeing accountants win & say fix the existing design. So they make changes, self certify as approved by FAA and don't tell pilots much about the MCAS system as their Max upgrade is just a couple of hours on an ipad. They get 5000 orders as the MAX is well priced & they are back in the race.

 

Then the excrement hits the proverbial fan. 2 crashes & over 300 deaths, all Max's grounded, share price plummets, orders stop, production is slowed and the recriminations have hardly begun. The accountants will be passing the buck to the engineers who will blame the certifiers who will blame the software etc and it goes on.

 

The cost has probably already surpassed the option of the new design. A billion or so for the deaths, but the big costs are going to be the claims for parking, maintenance & loss of income from the 54 operators of about 350 planes for however long they are on the ground.

 

 

[M61A1]

It's all about money.

So why have western nations not crashed any despite reporting similar events?

 

I think a significant portion of the blame is squarely on the shoulders of third world airlines and their pilot training. ( and possibly third world ground handling for the damage they do to aircraft)

 

I'd be more careful WHO you fly with than worry about the type of aircraft.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

you're never going to get the cream of aviation flying in africa or south east asia when the chinese and middle eastern airlines offering much better money. I can't understand how when the autopilot is engaged the MCAS system is also active? seems like having 2 systems active at the same time is a recipe for a conflict. Also why does the AOA device not shutdown when it goes off the scale after a bird strike?

 

 

[IBob]

Well, first off, after the first crash, Boeing 'sat down' with SW Airlines pilots, and also the US pilot's union(?) or some such, and gave them some info on the MCAS system. If you look back in this thread, you will see that they were reported as being 'furious' that they had not been properly informed on the system.

 

So, it sounds like essential extra info was delivered verbally to US pilots at that time.

 

From there, it seems likely this info would have spread informally and in an uneven fashion.

 

I see no mention of any formal transfer of information from Boeing to owners/operators until after the second crash, but possibly I missed that bit???

 

 

[IBob]

^ That was intended in response to M61A1

 

 

[kgwilson]

The problems reported by 4 US pilots did not involve runaway trim attributed to the MCAS system with faulty AOA indication. They disengaged the autopilot & continued the flight. Training may be an issue with some of the "3rd world" airlines but the captain of the Ethiopian aircraft had over 2000 hours though the first officer only 200. They have a good safety record and a category 1 rating with FAA allowing them to fly to the US & have EASA certification for Europe. They have the largest fleet in Africa operating both 787 Dreamliners and A350s.