Boeing looks to perhaps have crashed for the same reasons

[Themius]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/w...-airlines.html

The entire story incase you can't read nytimes:

Sign Up for the Morning Briefing
Get what you need to know to start your day in the United States, Canada and the Americas, delivered to your inbox.

Pilots were abuzz over publicly available radar data that showed the aircraft had accelerated far beyond what is considered standard practice, for reasons that remain unclear.

“The thing that is most abnormal is the speed,” said John Cox, an aviation safety consultant and former 737 pilot.

“The speed is very high,” said Mr. Cox, a former executive air safety chairman of the Air Line Pilots Association in the United States. “The question is why. The plane accelerates far faster than it should.”


Why Investigators Fear the Two Boeing 737s Crashed for Similar Reasons
The planes flew in similar erratic patterns, suggesting to experts that an automated system might have malfunctioned on both flights.

Ethiopian Airlines officials have said the crew of Flight 302 reported “flight control” problems to air traffic controllers a few minutes before contact was lost. The new account of communications between air traffic controllers and the pilot, Yared Getachew, who had 8,000 hours of flying experience, provides much more information about what was happening in the cockpit.

Within one minute of Flight 302’s departure, the person who reviewed communications said, Captain Getachew reported a “flight control” problem in a calm voice. At that point, radar showed the aircraft’s altitude as being well below what is known as the minimum safe height from the ground during a climb.

Within two minutes, the person said, the plane had climbed to a safer altitude, and the pilot said he wanted to stay on a straight course to 14,000 feet.

Then the controllers observed the plane going up and down by hundreds of feet, and it appeared to be moving unusually fast, the person said. The controllers, the person said, “started wondering out loud what the flight was doing.”

Two other Ethiopian flights, 613 and 629, were approaching from the east, and the controllers, sensing an emergency on Flight 302, ordered them to remain at higher altitudes. It was during that exchange with the other planes, the person said, that Captain Getachew, with panic in his voice, interrupted with his request to turn back.

Flight 302 was just three minutes into its flight, the person said, and appeared to have accelerated to even higher speeds, well beyond its safety limits.

The wreckage of Flight 302.
Credit
EPA, via Shutterstock


Image
The wreckage of Flight 302.CreditEPA, via Shutterstock
Cleared by the controllers to turn back, Flight 302 turned right as it climbed further. A minute later, it disappeared from the radar over a restricted military zone.

The disaster drew immediate comparisons to the October crash of another Boeing 737 Max 8, operated by Lion Air, in Indonesia. Both took place soon after takeoff, and the crews of both planes had sought to return to the airport.

The possibility that the two crashes had a similar cause was central to regulators’ decision to ground all 737 Maxes, a family of planes that entered passenger service less than two years ago.

After the Indonesia crash, a new flight-control system meant to keep the jet from stalling was suspected as a cause. In both cases, pilots struggled to control their aircraft.

[Why investigators fear the two Boeing 737s crashed for the same reason.]

The investigation of the Ethiopian crash is still in its early stages, and safety regulators have noted that it is too soon to draw conclusions about the cause. The so-called black boxes, voice and flight data recorders that contain more detailed information about the Ethiopian flight’s final moments, arrived in France on Thursday for analysis.

Since the Indonesia crash, Boeing has been working on a software update for the 737 Max jets, expected by April. But the company and the Federal Aviation Administration face new questions over whether there should have been more pilot training as airlines added the new models to their fleets.

On Wednesday, the chairman of the transportation committee in the House of Representatives said he would investigate the F.A.A.’s certification of the 737 Max, including why the regulator did not require more extensive training.

And a comparison of the two flights:



They determined that something was off before they even radioed. The plane accelerated beyodn safety limits too so that's quite worrying...

[Machismo]

At first, I was skeptical of the connection between these incidents, now, it looks like they are clearly related. This has got to have all of Boeing groups sitting with their asses firmly clenched. You have a bunch of dead bodies, and a story that is picking up speed. There's no way in hell they can pay their way out of it, the government is going to be taking a deep look. Yes, that will mean looking into internal communications about what Boeing executives knew, when they knew it, and why they didn't fix the problem.

People will abandon ship, you will see retirements (Boeing has a great pension plan for many of its older employees), and I can guarantee you will see whistleblowers. There's going to be "bad guys" to punish in all of this, and some of the senior engineers are not going to want to take the fall for the decision to put out a half-baked product that got people killed.

[Puupi]

At first, I was skeptical of the connection between these incidents, now, it looks like they are clearly related. This has got to have all of Boeing groups sitting with their asses firmly clenched. You have a bunch of dead bodies, and a story that is picking up speed. There's no way in hell they can pay their way out of it, the government is going to be taking a deep look. Yes, that will mean looking into internal communications about what Boeing executives knew, when they knew it, and why they didn't fix the problem.

People will abandon ship, you will see retirements (Boeing has a great pension plan for many of its older employees), and I can guarantee you will see whistleblowers. There's going to be "bad guys" to punish in all of this, and some of the senior engineers are not going to want to take the fall for the decision to put out a half-baked product that got people killed.

Boeing will make everything it can to blame it on some scapegoats instead of opening their wallet for this. A trillion dollar company and its future is more important than a couple of engineers and CEO's.

[Machismo]

Boeing will make everything it can to blame it on some scapegoats instead of opening their wallet for this. A trillion dollar company and its future is more important than a couple of engineers and CEO's.

I agree, they've done it in the past. That's precisely why I expect people to jump ship, or be the one to point fingers. Boeing has a lot of friends in high places, especially the American government. I don't think that will protect them from this, because you also have the airlines and pilots pissed that they have been flying a plane with systems that are deeply flawed. This is going to put the airlines against Boeing, and the airlines are also pretty damn powerful in their own right. If it fucks up their schedules, they lose money. They have hundreds of planes that are grounded, that's lost money to them. The government has ordered this, and Boeing is going to end up taking the financial hit on it. That' long before the couple billion they will need to pay in damaged to the families of the victims.

Boeing has largely been untouchable when it comes to scandals, and they should have had many more than people really know about. I am curious to see how much more information filters out in the coming days.

[PACOX]

The basic explain it like I'm 5 reason is kind of known. The planes have faulty software that causes an issue if no dealt with appropriately. There's seems to be a routine solution to the issue.

The question are, should the planes be flying with this knowledge, and if yes then who is a fault when things go wrong.

Boeing and the airlines will say the planes are air worthy. They don't agree with who is on the hook when a pilot does not correct the issue and a plane goes down. Some say Boeing does not provide enough documentation on the issue/the planes are faulty so its Boeings fault. Boeing says the issue is documented and easily fixed but its up to airlines to adequately train their pilots on the plane.

If your car has a wide turning radius and you run into a pole while turning who is at fault? You? Your driving instructor? The car manufacturer? Planes are a bit more serious and complex but that's most basic rundown.

[Machismo]

The basic explain it like I'm 5 reason is kind of known. The planes have faulty software that causes an issue if no dealt with appropriately. There's seems to be a routine solution to the issue.

The question are, should the planes be flying with this knowledge, and if yes then who is a fault when things go wrong.

Boeing and the airlines will say the planes are air worthy. They don't agree with who is on the hook when a pilot does not correct the issue and a plane goes down. Some say Boeing does not provide enough documentation on the issue/the planes are faulty so its Boeings fault. Boeing says the issue is documented and easily fixed but its up to airlines to adequately train their pilots on the plane.

If your car has a wide turning radius and you run into a pole while turning who is at fault? You? Your driving instructor? The car manufacturer? Planes are a bit more serious and complex but that's most basic rundown.

I think it's a bit more complex than just having a wide turning radius. It would be more like your car has sensors that detect movement, and occasionally accelerates and turns on its own, without you being able to easily control it.

[luc54]

I think it's a bit more complex than just having a wide turning radius. It would be more like your car has sensors that detect movement, and occasionally accelerates and turns on its own, without you being able to easily control it.

True but in this case the pilots should be trained for this. Initially I was too quicky judge Boeing on this one, but you got this runaway stab trim procedure that you should know even from previous 737 models training:

Control column. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hold firmly
Autopilot (if engaged) . . . . . . . . . . . . .Disengage
the runaway continues:
STAB TRIM CUTOUT
switches (both) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CUTOUT
Stabilizer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trim manually

This would have prevented said thing from occuring. This is memorized items section so pilots should be able to do said things by memory. MCAS itself can cause runaway stabilizer trim to happen, but there are other causes. Pilots should be able to react to said situation wheter it's MCAS causing it or not. This website dedicated to 737 has information regarding to it.

[Machismo]

True but in this case the pilots should be trained for this. Initially I was too quicky judge Boeing on this one, but you got this runaway stab trim procedure that you should know even from previous 737 models training:


This would have prevented said thing from occuring. This is memorized items section so pilots should be able to do said things by memory. MCAS itself can cause runaway stabilizer trim to happen, but there are other causes. Pilots should be able to react to said situation wheter it's MCAS causing it or not. This website dedicated to 737 has information regarding to it.

And that is one of the focal points, pilots were reporting to NASA (weird, I know) that the training for MCAS given by Boeing was dangerously lacking in content. They said that there wasn't more simulator time given for such big changes, and Boeing sold it as being the same as the older versions of the 737. Now, I'm certainly no pilot, but stories of pilots having to fight the plane from accelerating and descending for no apparent reason are going to be problematic.

[luc54]

And that is one of the focal points, pilots were reporting to NASA (weird, I know) that the training for MCAS given by Boeing was dangerously lacking in content. They said that there wasn't more simulator time given for such big changes, and Boeing sold it as being the same as the older versions of the 737. Now, I'm certainly no pilot, but stories of pilots having to fight the plane from accelerating and descending for no apparent reason are going to be problematic.

Problem here is the training they are given isn't regarding MCAS but runaway stab trim procedure. They are given it regardless as it's procedure that's much older than the whole MCAS system. The first post I linked is from 2010 and MAX have been used sincee 2017. So yes they should know the said procedure.

Their training stipulates even before MAX : Trim starts to go haywire -> do the above mentioned checklist which also happens to prevent MCAS from downtrimming the plane too much. Problem isn't MCAS really but pilots being unable to do procecure that shuts down the electrical trim. Now given safety measures I assume Boeing will want to emphasize this in their new training that pilots should know this prodecure very well, and they did make same recomendations after the Lionair crash. Perhaps some airlines were too careless to not act on said training. I think people are too quick to rush to judgement here, especially considering people have very little knowledge when it comes to flying in general, ie. checklists and aircraft systems.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's also what I posted in the other topic about some pilots commenting on the Lionair crash.

The B-737s that I flew were well before this MCAS system. Nevertheless all the aircraft I flew had a “runaway trim” procedure to stop what apparently occurred with Lion Air Flight 610 crash. My opinion is that the pilots lacked the proper training or experience to override this situation with a proper response, regardless if they were aware of the new MCAS system.

In response to this incident the Lion Air crash the Federal Aviation Administration put out an emergency order on 7 November. It reads below in part, and is little different than the runaway trim procedure that was common in most commercial airline aircraft I have flown. Flipping the trim switches to “cutout” was key and sadly was not apparently done.

We were not told of the MCAS system before the accident, but just like the pilot before the incident pilot crashed, there is a cut-off switch to disable any trim malfunction, as well as a wheel that can be physically stopped with your hands. The pilot flying did not know how to handle the non-standard situation. We are all trained on how to correct any trim malfunction and if he had read the maintenance log he would have been aware there was a previous problem with the trim/angle of attack system. He should have been ready. He apparently was not.

Bolded parts being the important. Basically what I said in the first post is reflected by experienced pilots. They didn't follow the procedure that was part of MCAS training even before above to accidents.

[Machismo]

Problem here is the training they are given isn't regarding MCAS but runaway stab trim procedure. They are given it regardless as it's procedure that's much older than the whole MCAS system. The first post I linked is from 2010 and MAX have been used sincee 2017. So yes they should know the said procedure.

Their training stipulates even before MAX : Trim starts to go haywire -> do the above mentioned checklist which also happens to prevent MCAS from downtrimming the plane too much. Problem isn't MCAS really but pilots being unable to do procecure that shuts down the electrical trim. Now given safety measures I assume Boeing will want to emphasize this in their new training that pilots should know this prodecure very well, and they did make same recomendations after the Lionair crash. Perhaps some airlines were too careless to not act on said training. I think people are too quick to rush to judgement here, especially considering people have very little knowledge when it comes to flying in general, ie. checklists and aircraft systems.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's also what I posted in the other topic about some pilots commenting on the Lionair crash.



Bolded parts being the important. Basically what I said in the first post is reflected by experienced pilots. They didn't follow the procedure that was part of MCAS training even before above to accidents.

You clearly know more than I do, I will take your word for it.

[unbound]

Boeing will make everything it can to blame it on some scapegoats instead of opening their wallet for this. A trillion dollar company and its future is more important than a couple of engineers and CEO's.

Yep. They will do everything they can to have people ignore the fact that they took the cheap way out. Instead of designing a new plane from scratch, they tried modifying a very old platform, and tried to update the fly-by-wire software to account for the different engines and other design updates...but obviously didn't test those updates very well (or ignored the results).

The nose-dive problem after takeoff was known and ignored.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/...ed-safety-flaw

Pilots repeatedly voiced safety concerns about the Boeing 737 Max 8 to federal authorities, with one captain calling the flight manual "inadequate and almost criminally insufficient" several months before Sunday's Ethiopian Air crash that killed 157 people, an investigation by The Dallas Morning News found.

The News found five complaints about the Boeing model in a federal database where pilots can voluntarily report about aviation incidents without fear of repercussions.

The complaints are about the safety mechanism cited in preliminary reports about an October Boeing 737 Max 8 crash in Indonesia that killed 189.

The disclosures found by The News reference problems with an autopilot system, and they all occurred during the ascent after takeoff. Many mentioned the plane suddenly nosing down. While records show these flights occurred in October and November, the airlines the pilots were flying for is redacted from the database.

Like most other corporations...profits above all else.

[luc54]

Yep. They will do everything they can to have people ignore the fact that they took the cheap way out. Instead of designing a new plane from scratch, they tried modifying a very old platform, and tried to update the fly-by-wire software to account for the different engines and other design updates...but obviously didn't test those updates very well (or ignored the results).

The nose-dive problem after takeoff was known and ignored.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/...ed-safety-flaw



Like most other corporations...profits above all else.

I think people are too quick to rush to judgement of Boeings case here. If you read the above post I made, you could see that already established training should have been sufficient to prevent at least Lionair accident and possibly Ethiopian airlines one if we find it to be caused by the same issue. Here's an article about problems of instantly blaming boieng and FAA on this.

Aviation analyst Mike Boyd, president of Boyd Group International, said that misinformation has caused nations and carriers to ground the plane rather than focus on what he believes are the likely culprits: insufficient training and poor maintenance.

"What we have now is basically a lynch mob attitude toward that airplane," Boyd said, adding that much of the commentary is coming from "people who don't know an airplane from an ATM machine."

"The reality is the pilots' union of American Airlines came out and said on American carriers that airplane is safe because people are properly trained," he said. "Who am I going to listen to, Dianne Feinstein and Mitt Romney or the safety director of a major pilots union?"

I also understand concerns how airlines or airplane manufacturers might put money above their safety. I have also seen pilots suggest setting up MCAS system in planes without telling them is at fault. I wouldn't say Boeing is entirely blameless, but I would still consider not following establsihed procedures as the main cause of the said crashes.

[Themius]

At first, I was skeptical of the connection between these incidents, now, it looks like they are clearly related. This has got to have all of Boeing groups sitting with their asses firmly clenched. You have a bunch of dead bodies, and a story that is picking up speed. There's no way in hell they can pay their way out of it, the government is going to be taking a deep look. Yes, that will mean looking into internal communications about what Boeing executives knew, when they knew it, and why they didn't fix the problem.

People will abandon ship, you will see retirements (Boeing has a great pension plan for many of its older employees), and I can guarantee you will see whistleblowers. There's going to be "bad guys" to punish in all of this, and some of the senior engineers are not going to want to take the fall for the decision to put out a half-baked product that got people killed.

They've been meaning to fix the software... they just haven't done it yet, and with the delay due to shutdown. Given that there is no excuse to let these planes fly. And hundreds dead... why the fuck did they leave out overt things in the manual which internally was touched on.