Ethiopian Max 8 crashes, Canadians on board

[Red]

Originally Posted by FLAME ENVY

Seriously - Your continued correlation to this aircraft crash and automobiles is ridiculous and non-sensical.

I am not surprised the point I'm making is missed on you. Carry on smart guy.

[FLAME ENVY]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

I wonder if you'll ever lay blame to Boeing. At all

It's all Boeing's fault, there I said it!

Now back to trying your darnedest to get CPS to arrest panhandlers...

[FLAME ENVY]

Originally Posted by Red

I am not surprised the point I'm making is missed on you. Carry on smart guy.

Missed on me? Okay...

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Red

Read his earlier posts. He said the system was very simple and it looked like pilot error from the beginning. He keeps bringing it up.
Would you blame a young driver for crashing a car that lost its steering wheel?

I've mentioned in almost all my posts I think Boeing is at fault. The only other point I'm making is that you can't trust a plane to function 100% all the time, and when something goes wrong, pilot experience matters. I'm not going to change my opinion that I don't think the pilots had enough experience, and that a more experience pilot would have had a better chance of overriding the failing system.



My shorthand for "other countries" is just that, ones that don't require the training that ours and other first world countries do. If you are insinuating I feel the same way Trump does about less developed countries, I assure you, I do not.

[Ryan Coke]

There appears to definitely be a significant problem with this system in the aircraft, I don’t think anyone is disputing that. For myself, I am certainly not ‘blaming’ the pilots.

Comments about safety data from Africa, Russia, and some Asian countries is a statistical comment, and has nothing to do with any kind of racial undertones.

Better trained and more experienced pilots don’t guarantee anything, but they do increase the odds of dealing with an unexpected event. This malfunction was a manageable malfunction....I don’t say that dismissively, it may have been a very challenging situation that would’ve taxed any pilots abilities, regardless of experience or training. But it was manageable in the sense that it isn’t like a wing broke off, where there is really nothing the pilots could’ve done. There was a way to handle this, as evidenced by the previous days crew to the Lion air accident.

As for the report that the pilots disabled the software but the system continued trimming anyway....be very cautious and skeptical. It is highly unlikely. Nothing is impossible, but the odds of that being an incorrectly worded news story is magnitudes more likely than the trim continuing to run with the stab trim cutout switches placed in cutout. Even the wording about disabling the software is very awkwardly worded, and has me trying to understand what the writer means by that.

[Ryan Coke]

So the wording from that other article was very poor. Here is a more accurate article.

WSJ story

They selected the stab trim cutout switches to cutout, but then for some reason turned them back to norm, allowing power to the trim system and MCAS started trimming downward again. So why they did that after correctly turning them off is going to be the question.

It DID NOT continue to trim in spite of the correct actions being taken, according to this article.

[Red]

Here is the problem Ryan Coke. Better trained pilots this, poor training that, poor 3rd world country this, ####ty standards that.

We keep hearing these assumptions that these pilots were not as good as the folks from NA. Less training does not mean worse pilots. It can, but it does not. Especially that the training may be presented differently across the world. Do we have a monopoly on best instructors and pilots?

Ethiopia is a poor country, but that does not mean they can't afford a good plane, good pilots or good training.

And standards. Are we talking about the really high standards set by the FAA that allowed Boeing, a publicly traded company certify their own planes because they didn't have enough resources to do it themselves? Planes that needed a software patch to compensate for poor physical design? A software patch that was kept secret as not to rise questions that could delay delivery (my assumption here)? Poor design due to lower cost? So $$$ again? Are those the golden standards that we want to throw at Ethiopian Air?

Yeah, we are truly an example to follow.

I don't know how these pilots get trained. I don't know how the pilots in NA are trained. But I do know that the standards here are very questionable. Criminally negligent and probably corrupt. I mean the US was the last place to ground these now proven faulty planes.

Some high standards.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Red

Here is the problem Ryan Coke. Better trained pilots this, poor training that, poor 3rd world country this, ####ty standards that.

We keep hearing these assumptions that these pilots were not as good as the folks from NA. Less training does not mean worse pilots. It can, but it does not. Especially that the training may be presented differently across the world. Do we have a monopoly on best instructors and pilots?

Ethiopia is a poor country, but that does not mean they can't afford a good plane, good pilots or good training.

And standards. Are we talking about the really high standards set by the FAA that allowed Boeing, a publicly traded company certify their own planes because they didn't have enough resources to do it themselves? Planes that needed a software patch to compensate for poor physical design? A software patch that was kept secret as not to rise questions that could delay delivery (my assumption here)? Poor design due to lower cost? So $$$ again? Are those the golden standards that we want to throw at Ethiopian Air?

Yeah, we are truly an example to follow.

I don't know how these pilots get trained. I don't know how the pilots in NA are trained. But I do know that the standards here are very questionable. Criminally negligent and probably corrupt. I mean the US was the last place to ground these now proven faulty planes.

Some high standards.

Tin foil hat much?

I literally don't even know what you're trying to argue.

At any rate Boeing and the FAA are two highly respected, world class organizations in their respective fields. Pilot standards are extremely high in US and Canada and these standards are lower elsewhere. No conspiracy here, just facts.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Tin foil hat much?

I literally don't even know what you're trying to argue.

At any rate Boeing and the FAA are two highly respected, world class organizations in their respective fields. Pilot standards are extremely high in US and Canada and these standards are lower elsewhere. No conspiracy here, just facts.

Enron was once a model company. So was BreX.

Facts my ass. Propaganda more likely. Everyone is squeeky clean until they get caught. The FAA couldn't handle this worse even if they tried.

I know it's easy to be a couch judge here. But tell me how you would feel if your kid or parent died in one of those crashes . Completely avoidable had Boeing and FAA done what's right.

[Red]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...EbvaWF&ampcf=1

Hm....Sully better get his tinfoil hat out.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by FLAME ENVY

It's all Boeing's fault, there I said it!

Now back to trying your darnedest to get CPS to arrest panhandlers...

Nice to see you can focus your hostility's away from the dead untrained foreign pilots to me.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Tin foil hat much?

I literally don't even know what you're trying to argue.

At any rate Boeing and the FAA are two highly respected, world class organizations in their respective fields. Pilot standards are extremely high in US and Canada and these standards are lower elsewhere. No conspiracy here, just facts.

NASA is also highly respected, yet they still found errors in their process that lead to fatalities. I think valid points are being made that there may have been an issue with the rollout of these new planes. Perhaps Boeing made some bad decisions, perhaps the FAA failed in their oversight.

There is commercial and other pressure points that can result in failure, and it happens to “world class” organizations as well. You cannot just say that it’s Boeing, they are “World class” and never fail.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

NASA is also highly respected, yet they still found errors in their process that lead to fatalities. I think valid points are being made that there may have been an issue with the rollout of these new planes. Perhaps Boeing made some bad decisions, perhaps the FAA failed in their oversight.

There is commercial and other pressure points that can result in failure, and it happens to “world class” organizations as well. You cannot just say that it’s Boeing, they are “World class” and never fail.

Ya, guess I wasn't saying Boeing and FAA are infallible, but moreso I literally had no idea what the guy was ranting about. Anytime someone start going on about the FAA certification process and having the manufacturer perform a lot of it, I know they likely don't know what they're talking about and taking talking points from the media.

It was like listening to that crazy sandwich board "Harper is a Nazi" guy in downtown Calgary. There might have been a point or two valid in there, but the message was so poorly provided and jumbled that its hard to discern what the point is.

[Firebot]

Information is out. Live updates here for those who want to get it. Below are some takeaways.

https://www.cnn.com/africa/live-news...ort/index.html

The preliminary report of the Ethiopia Airlines crash paints a graphic picture of the last minutes of the flight, including details about how the two pilots tried in vain to end the dive together.

“The Captain asked the First Officer to pitch up together and said that pitch is not enough,” the report reads. “The data indicates that aft force was applied to both columns simultaneously several times throughout the remainder of the recording.”

The report does not specifically name the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, which is a stabilization system, but makes it likely the MCAS pushed the plane into a dive fueled by erroneous angle of attack sensor readings. Boeing is currently working on a change to the system’s software.

It says the flight data recorder indicated “automatic aircraft nose down (AND) trim command four times without pilot’s input.”

One key difference between the two accidents: The Ethiopian pilots correctly diagnosed the issue and effectively disabled the MCAS system about three minutes before the crash.

3 key takeaways from the Ethiopian Airlines crash investigation
From CNN's Thom Patterson

Ethiopian aviation authorities discussed a preliminary report on the Ethiopian Airlines crash at a press conference Thursday, concluding that the pilots did everything they were trained to do to regain control of the plane.

The main takeaways are as follows:

Software may have played a role in the crash: The automated anti-stall software called the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) is under suspicion.
No sign yet of a problem with the sensor: Although it doesn't rule out a possibly faulty sensor, a top Ethiopian accident investigator said Thursday they have not identified any damage to the aircraft's sensors that could have contributed to the crash.
MCAS training didn't appear to help prevent the crash: Overall, Ethiopian aviation authorities are making it clear that pilot error does not appear to be an issue in the crash and the pressure is now on Boeing to ensure the 737 Max is safe.

“We can confirm that we haven’t found any foreign object damage,” Amdeye Ayalew, AIB investigation chairman, told reporters at a news conference on Thursday, speaking through a translator.

He also said investigators have not identified any “structural design problem” with the aircraft.

The pilots followed exactly what Boeing advised after the Lion Air incident. It crashed despite knowing what to do and those actions taken.

But yes, let's continue to blame the pilots and where they were born and their training (one of 'those' countries) . I wonder if you guys also thought that Sully should have been able to fly US Airways Flight 1549 to LaGuardia instead of the Hudson because simulators could do it? [Mod edit- let's not make this personal.]

[Red]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Ya, guess I wasn't saying Boeing and FAA are infallible, but moreso I literally had no idea what the guy was ranting about. Anytime someone start going on about the FAA certification process and having the manufacturer perform a lot of it, I know they likely don't know what they're talking about and taking talking points from the media.

It was like listening to that crazy sandwich board "Harper is a Nazi" guy in downtown Calgary. There might have been a point or two valid in there, but the message was so poorly provided and jumbled that its hard to discern what the point is.

You literally had no idea what I was saying and you responded with "tin foil" ?
How else would one respond?

You know exactly what I am saying. You just don't like hearing it because you have your head stuck in the sand.
The FAA lost a lot of credibility here. They knew of these issues in August of last year and did nothing. Then did nothing after the first crash. And only grounded these planes after they couldn't land anywhere outside of USA.

And then there is the Boeing CEO asking the POTUS to not ground the planes so the brand wouldn't take a hit? Again, $$$ over safety.
And why is Boeing certifying its own planes?

It all sounds a little, dare I say, 3rd world?

But don't take my word for it. Many people in the aviation business said the same thing. One article above. Many others out there point out the conflict of interest and the plane's design flaws. So let's stop putting blame on the low standards in Africa because evidently ours are not any better.


Aviation expert: The FAA has blown its reputation
CNN aviation analyst Mary Schiavo has criticized the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for its oversight of Boeing.

The FAA has come in for criticism for its role in approving the Boeing 737 Max aircraft that were involved in fatal crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia.

Schiavo questioned the quality of the FAA's oversight of Boeing and claimed that the administration's previous reputation for excellence has been tarnished.

"The FAA has finally blown that image," said Schiavo.
There should be triple redundancy for different systems to ensure safety, said Schiavo, but the MCAS software systems aboard both crashed Max 8s were fed by only one angle of attack (AOA) sensor.

Schiavo claims this reliance on just one sensor begs the question as to why Boeing didn't originally build the planes with two AOA sensors, and why the FAA did not require it.

Another issue with the 737 Max is its tendency to point slightly upward due to the use of larger engines which altered its aerodynamics compared to previous 737s.

Boeing tried to remedy this using the MCAS software, but Schiavo questioned why the FAA approved a software fix for the issue.

"Why was MCAS put in to solve what looks like a center of gravity problem, a pitch up problem?" she said.

[Red]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

There appears to definitely be a significant problem with this system in the aircraft, I don’t think anyone is disputing that. For myself, I am certainly not ‘blaming’ the pilots.

Comments about safety data from Africa, Russia, and some Asian countries is a statistical comment, and has nothing to do with any kind of racial undertones.

Better trained and more experienced pilots don’t guarantee anything, but they do increase the odds of dealing with an unexpected event. This malfunction was a manageable malfunction....I don’t say that dismissively, it may have been a very challenging situation that would’ve taxed any pilots abilities, regardless of experience or training. But it was manageable in the sense that it isn’t like a wing broke off, where there is really nothing the pilots could’ve done. There was a way to handle this, as evidenced by the previous days crew to the Lion air accident.

As for the report that the pilots disabled the software but the system continued trimming anyway....be very cautious and skeptical. It is highly unlikely. Nothing is impossible, but the odds of that being an incorrectly worded news story is magnitudes more likely than the trim continuing to run with the stab trim cutout switches placed in cutout. Even the wording about disabling the software is very awkwardly worded, and has me trying to understand what the writer means by that.

Now that the initial report is out. Should we still be very cautious and sceptical when reading news or should we apply that when we are reading your opinions on this subject?

[Fuzz]

Overall, Ethiopian aviation authorities are making it clear that pilot error does not appear to be an issue in the crash and the pressure is now on Boeing to ensure the 737 Max is safe.

I'm sure there would be no ulterior motive for the Ethiopian Aviation Authority to try to blame Boeing over their own training standards. None at all.


I'm not suggesting that they aren't correct, but they have been proclaiming no pilot error from the start. I'm not sure anyone has enough info to make a fully conclusive statement in that regard yet.

[Bigtime]

One key difference between the two accidents: The Ethiopian pilots correctly diagnosed the issue and effectively disabled the MCAS system about three minutes before the crash.

So what happened after that? If they flipped the trim switches to 'off' shouldn't that have been the end of it? Flying manually at that point and having to operate the trim wheel by hand. Or did the switch not work? Or did they switch it back on?

[Red]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I'm sure there would be no ulterior motive for the Ethiopian Aviation Authority to try to blame Boeing over their own training standards. None at all.


I'm not suggesting that they aren't correct, but they have been proclaiming no pilot error from the start. I'm not sure anyone has enough info to make a fully conclusive statement in that regard yet.

That's because they heard the conversations between the pilots and the tower. It's likely that all the steps taken were communicated to the tower as they were doing them.

And the recordings from the black box were examined by an independent body in Europe.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

[/B]

So what happened after that? If they flipped the trim switches to 'off' shouldn't that have been the end of it? Flying manually at that point and having to operate the trim wheel by hand. Or did the switch not work? Or did they switch it back on?

I'm wondering if they maybe didn't reset the trim manually, or as has been mentioned, it takes to long to manually crank it if it was at full deflection? Is it's also maybe possible the whole MCAS thing is a red hearing, and something else broke?