Another air crash

Capt Lightning

Capt Lightning

Well-known Member
Location
Historic Buchan, Scotland
An almost new Ethiopian airlines Boeing 737 Max-8 has crashed killing all 157 people on board.
This is the same type of Lion Air aircraft that crashed last October killing all on board (although there has not been any link established) . A number of problems had been experienced and logged before this crash and now questions are being asked about about this aircraft's safety.
 

An Ethiopian Airlines plane has crashed with 149 passengers and 8 crew onboard, just minutes after take-off on Sunday. The plane heading to Nairobi left Ethiopia this morning but came down within six minutes - 37 miles from Addis Ababa International Airport. Within the first few minutes after take-off the plane's vertical speed varied from 2624 feet per minute to -1216. According to Swedish flight-tracking website flightradar24 the flight 'had unstable vertical speed' shortly after take off (top). A statement from the carrier said there were no survivors as their CEO visited the crash site just 37 miles from the airport (pictured bottom). Families of those onboard have begun gathering at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi where the plane was heading and at Addis Ababa International Airport where it took off. The plane, a 737 MAX 8, (stock image inset) is believed to be a new addition to the EA fleet having been delivered in July last year - and is the same model as the Lion Air plane which crashed in Indonesia in October. Boeing issued a safety warning last November about its new 737 Max jets which could have a fault that causes them to nose-dive. The pilot requested permission to return just moments before contact was lost with the jet. Bodies are now being retrieved from the crash site while debris can be seen strewn across the floor. The MAX-8 planes were launched in 2016 and are used by major airlines all around the world.

10807138-6791675-image-a-59_1552236115102.jpg




be aware potentially upsetting scenes on this link from the site crash...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ane-way-Nairobi-crashes-157-people-board.html
 

This is really serious stuff. I know that the new Boeing 737-Max 8 has been outfitted with a system called MCAS, which stands for “Maneuvering Characteristics Augementation System” that automatically detects when the plane may beginning to stall and forces the plane’s nose down. By the nose being pointed down, it will gain speed.

Last October, in the previous Lion Air crash, it is thought that the system was receiving faulty data that was telling it the plane was being tilted. In that accident, Boeing officials said that all the pilots had to do was to turn off the system. Boeing also sent out a bulletin directing all airlines that had the Max 8 to train their pilots that if this occurrence took place to turn off the system.

There was also a Turkish Airlines plane coming from Istanbul to New York on Saturday that hit a pocket of severe turbulence causing several injuries. The passengers not wearing their seatbelts were the most injured. This should serve again as a reminder to everyone that flies, if you are not up and about going to or from a lavatory to please stay seated and buckled. Turbulence can happen at any time, even if you have been experiencing smooth air for hundreds of miles.
 
Last edited:
More preventive maintenance needs to be scheduled for all forms of transportation from the planes in the air to the taxicabs on the ground to always be in good working order for everyone's safety whether there's budget cuts or not!
 
PopsnTuff said:
More preventive maintenance needs to be scheduled for all forms of transportation from the planes in the air to the taxicabs on the ground to always be in good working order for everyone's safety whether there's budget cuts or not!
Click to expand...

I agree. When I was working, one of the first things that I would check would be, when was the last time the plane was serviced and for what. Different parts and functions of planes require PM (preventive maintenance) at different times. After I was flying the B-767 for about a year, I noticed that on most of them the ailerons would not immediately function (deploy) when wanting to negotiate a turn. I asked the maintenance supervisor in Denver how long between maintenance are the ailerons checked. At that time, he told me that each plane’s ailerons would be checked together with a few other functions about every 10,000 cycles. The problem was, as I saw it, was that the maintenance guy or gal would check the ailerons, but if they worked according to the manual, they would do nothing. I begged and begged until finally the head of United’s maintenance department agreed to update the checks with also greasing the aileron’s actuators, no matter what.

Airplanes do not allow for many, “whoops.” Every plane should be in its’ top performance. I know for a fact that sometimes an item on a plane would go either unchecked or not be repaired because the plane had to get into the air. This is the number one issue that really jerked my chain. I still remember the time that I refused to put a plane in the air. We were taking a flight from Miami to Los Angeles. There was a tag on the autopilot, which stated, “To be repaired in LA.” Long story short, we were an hour and a half late leaving, but the AP was working just fine and I never heard anything about it from anyone, which I thought was pretty amazing. I think the reason for that was because the plane was not scheduled the rest of that day, so no other flights that may have been scheduled for that plane were affected.
 
The Ethiopian 737 had just undergone a rigorous inspection and the October crash was pilot error. So we have the media stirring up crap without a bit of knowledge.
 
Ahh yes, pilot error. That’s what the cause is listed being when the investigators can’t determine the real cause.
 
This sounds like a programing or safety feature glitch. If the pilot asked to return that seems like he couldn't control the plane or saw more trouble coming.
 
WhatInThe said:
This sounds like a programing or safety feature glitch. If the pilot asked to return that seems like he couldn't control the plane or saw more trouble coming.
Click to expand...

The aircraft has software that can be overridden by the pilot and apparently that ability to override is not being included in the pilot training. There are three toggle switches to do it. Very simple.
 
Unfortunately, Boeing never mentioned this to the buyers at the time of delivery. They (Boeing) issued a bulletin post accident that if the plane’s MCAS system activated unnecessarily, the pilot could have disengaged it.

It’s up to the operator to supply the proper training. Did that happen? When I flew the 737, I absolutely fell in love with that plane. It was only after two accidents that killed a few hundred did we learn that there was a fault with the servo valve that operated the rudder. It was not until the third occurrence that the pilot of an Eastwinds airliner was able to overcome this phenomenon and survive, so that he could explain to the NTSB what he experienced, so that they were able to figure out what was causing 737’s to crash while descending to land. Thankfully, this pilot had enough altitude to overcome the locked rudder.

In the other crashes, “pilot error” was regarded as a possibility for the crashes because there was no other evidence to suggest otherwise, however, the rudder was thought to be a possibility, but not proven at the time of the first two crashes.
 
Last edited:
[h=1]Pressure mounts on FAA as more countries ground or ban the Boeing 737 MAX 8[/h]
Boeing faces pressure to ground 737 Max 8 jets

As more countries and airlines around the world grounded the Boeing 737 MAX 8 or banned the plane from their airspace Tuesday, pressure was growing on the Federal Aviation Administration to take similar action in the United States.

Tuesday evening, acting Federal Aviation Administration Administrator Daniel Elwell said in a statement that the agency continues to extensively review all available data and aggregate safety performance information from operators and pilots, but that, "Thus far, our review shows no systemic performance issues and provides no basis to order grounding the aircraft."

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pre...tries-ground-ban-boeing-737/story?id=61627379
 
Last I heard, they are unsure of the actual cause of these crashes, but seems to be a software problem. I think that Boeing should voluntarily ground all of those planes until they are examined and safe to be in the air before more innocent lives are lost. May the victims rest in peace, my sympathy to their families. :(
 
That piece is attached to the rudder. I have never seen that before. Perhaps it may be an experimental device for lightning protection or another testing device.

As I understand it, the MCAS system that has been responsible for the two crashes is able to be turned off. This may be the reason why the FAA has not issued an order to ground the aircraft. Since the 737 is a short to midrange aircraft, it would be ideal to fly anywhere within the U.S. It’s not a plane that would be used to fly to international destinations, other than places like Miami to Puerto Rico or LA to Hawaii, which I believe Southwest is doing. Southwest flies all 737’s.

If anyone on this forum is flying soon and is concerned that they may be booked on a Max-8, call the airline or look at your ticket or reservation. Normally, on the itinerary, the aircraft is listed. If you see an “M” on the itinerary, you are likely booked on the Max-8.

I have flown on the Max-8 several times. If it were me, I would turn the MCAS off, if that will assure me as a pilot that I wouldn’t have to worry about rollover. God, I can’t even imagine what that would be like.
 
Could this be some sort of terrorism? I mean it seems too me that the planes with the latest electronics / computer controlled, would be be/could be the easiest ones to 'hack' . A computer take over of the controls & well....

Let's face it. It kills many people on the flight as well as on the ground. Add to that , that it is hurting the name/reputation of Boeing. One of Americas premier companies. And terrorist wish to do all they can to hurt America, in anyway they can.
 
oldman said:
That piece is attached to the rudder. I have never seen that before. Perhaps it may be an experimental device for lightning protection or another testing device.

As I understand it, the MCAS system that has been responsible for the two crashes is able to be turned off. This may be the reason why the FAA has not issued an order to ground the aircraft. Since the 737 is a short to midrange aircraft, it would be ideal to fly anywhere within the U.S. It’s not a plane that would be used to fly to international destinations, other than places like Miami to Puerto Rico or LA to Hawaii, which I believe Southwest is doing. Southwest flies all 737’s.

If anyone on this forum is flying soon and is concerned that they may be booked on a Max-8, call the airline or look at your ticket or reservation. Normally, on the itinerary, the aircraft is listed. If you see an “M” on the itinerary, you are likely booked on the Max-8.

I have flown on the Max-8 several times. If it were me, I would turn the MCAS off, if that will assure me as a pilot that I wouldn’t have to worry about rollover. God, I can’t even imagine what that would be like.
Click to expand...



Certainly is an odd looking attachment? Almost looks like a small parachute?
 
I was told that Boeing voluntarily asked the FAA to ground the -8 and -9. I find that amazing, but not surprising. Boeing has always been hyper-vigilante when it comes to safety. I wonder how this will affect Southwest Airlines since they fly a 100% Boeing 737 fleet.

As for, “Could it be terrorism?” At this point, I wouldn’t discount anything, but terrorism may be a longshot.

By the description of what the plane does before it crashes, it sounds like it may be what is called a hard-over rudder. It’s times like this when I wish that I was still working, so I could be more on top of what’s going on with the investigation.
 
To me, these 737 crashes sound like "technology" gone wrong, and the pilots involved not being properly trained to react quickly in case of a malfunction in this particular autopilot system. I am in favor of most types of technology, but I am not comfortable with aircraft being flown by "computer"....the Pilot should Always be fully in charge, with technology "assisting" him/her. I had a lifelong career in fixing broken computers, and never had a loss of workload.

This type of thing is why I am also rather sceptical of the day when "self driving" cars become commonplace....if/when that day arrives, I suspect that traffic wrecks will skyrocket.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top