Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Indonesian aircraft missing off Jakarta

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Indonesian aircraft missing off Jakarta

Old 10th Nov 2018, 02:39
  #941 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,194
c'mon, Rana....... tell us how you really feel or opine or assert or whatever. We can handle it.

As a pilot, my worst fear is when the plane does something I didn't command or ask it to do. And to do it at a critical phase of flight.

This "discovery" that a poor AoA input to one or more subsystems can result in runaway trim is scary beyond belief. Especially when it only occurs when flying without the A/P engaged. You know, the so-called hand flying or manual flying exercise that many of we geriatric folks talk about.

My feeling is all the technical aspects about static stability and Boeing's efforts to help with trim and feel and so forth would be better discussed over on the Tech Log as we did with AF447.

Meanwhile we wait for news and maybe another bulletin from Boeing or the U.S. and other country aviation agencies.

out,
gums is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 03:08
  #942 (permalink)  
ZFT
N4790P
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Asia
Age: 69
Posts: 2,026
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 View Post
@winemaker: it would appear that low cost airlines (or a number of them) do just enough training to get by the regulators' requirements. The difference between currency, and recency, and proficiency is lost on the profit driven philosophy of a low cost airline's management and ownership. So while your point on pitch and power certainly fits how I was trained to fly, how pilots are trained, kept current, and retain proficiency (across their entire area of responsibility) in the year 2018 is not a fixed value. It varies with corporate culture, among other things. There isn't a single standard ... and more's the pity.
It's a pity you added the words low cost to your post because otherwise IMHO it is spot on! Standards should be determined and enforced by the regulators. Globally, they fail dismally.
ZFT is online now  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 04:01
  #943 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oakland, CA
Age: 68
Posts: 427
Originally Posted by Winemaker View Post
Is this a training issue in that it seems the most important part, keeping the plane flying, has become secondary?
Per your logic world should be perfect and every pilot should always respond in a most efficient way. But we live in a different world, we live in a world in which a professional pilot with paying passengers is capable of taking off from wrong runway or even a taxiway, or landing on a wrong runway, in other words big errors are possible in a perfectly well functioning aircraft so it should be of no surprise to you that when things no longer go 'perfect' - even bigger errors can ensue.
olasek is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 04:06
  #944 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 64
Posts: 2,749
Originally Posted by ZFT View Post
It's a pity you added the words low cost to your post because otherwise IMHO it is spot on! Standards should be determined and enforced by the regulators. Globally, they fail dismally.
Oh, come on now - if "Globally, they fail dismally", how do you explain the simple fact that commercial aviation has never been safer? With the growth in commercial aviation, if we had the same accident rate now that they had in the 1970s, we'd be having a major accident at least once a week. Heck, even the Indonesian accident rate - as poor as it is compared to most of the world, is still better than what was considered good 50 years ago. I regularly visit Indonesia, and I still consider flying there to be safer than taking a bus or boat.
Sure, we need to know what happened, and why, and make changes to ensure it doesn't happen again. That's the way the industry works (and why it's gotten so much better than it was even 20 years ago). But don't loose track of how far we've come.


BTW gums, ignore the critics. Most of us know who you are, value your inputs and piloting accomplishments, and don't mind you being slightly eccentric (you've earned it).
tdracer is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 04:38
  #945 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 91
Per your logic world should be perfect and every pilot should always respond in a most efficient way.
Didn't say perfect, just asking where situational awareness overcomes reliance on stuff. Is it too much for us SLF to expect the pilots who have our lives in their hands to start asking themselves if maybe they are just repeating things with no new result? When the same actions don't change the results training might suggest an alternate path. I understand the overload that might take place, but still, point the plane at the right angle and give it the right power. Is this too much to ask?
Winemaker is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 04:42
  #946 (permalink)  
ZFT
N4790P
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Asia
Age: 69
Posts: 2,026
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
Oh, come on now - if "Globally, they fail dismally", how do you explain the simple fact that commercial aviation has never been safer? With the growth in commercial aviation, if we had the same accident rate now that they had in the 1970s, we'd be having a major accident at least once a week. Heck, even the Indonesian accident rate - as poor as it is compared to most of the world, is still better than what was considered good 50 years ago. I regularly visit Indonesia, and I still consider flying there to be safer than taking a bus or boat.
Sure, we need to know what happened, and why, and make changes to ensure it doesn't happen again. That's the way the industry works (and why it's gotten so much better than it was even 20 years ago). But don't loose track of how far we've come.


BTW gums, ignore the critics. Most of us know who you are, value your inputs and piloting accomplishments, and don't mind you being slightly eccentric (you've earned it).
tdracer

No argument from me.

Aviation today is incredibly safe just about everywhere and this is testament to just about every facet involved.

My comment referred to the great variation in applied standards, that are (or are not) enforced, even with the major regulators and I stand by my comment that "Globally they fail miserably"
ZFT is online now  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 05:15
  #947 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 561
Maybe it’s the planes got safer?

I can’t seem to copy paste but above the post questions why safety has apparently improved so drastically...

Maybe the automatics, etc - those things that seem to be so maligned - are the reason? Certainly blind trust in them is flawed, but in the 99.9% of cases everyone goes home happy and we hear nothing more. But the tiny percentage of times, when something really unusual happens and the crew get it wrong (whether unknowingly or just missing something) we want to tear into the very systems that worked so well the rest of the time.

My bet is the automatics are far more beneficial than the edge cases where things go wrong. The important but painful point is statistic are sometimes brutal. Yes, any crash is terrible, but those that didn’t happen are just as important.

A conundrum.

-GY

GarageYears is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 05:20
  #948 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: KBOS USA
Posts: 42
28:20 into the video,
Golden Rivit is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 06:27
  #949 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 518
If aviation today is indeed safer not because we have pilots but in spite of us having pilots. And the machines can be made better but the pilots cannot....then the day comes sooner when there will be no pilots. Because pilots will have by then lost mastery of their art while also losing full control of their aircraft by design of the aircraft makers.

For they have been judged by regulators and plane makers to be the weakest link.

armchairpilot94116 is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 07:21
  #950 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Originally Posted by armchairpilot94116 View Post
If aviation today is indeed safer not because we have pilots humans but in spite of us having pilots humans.
...
For they [HUMANS] have been judged by regulators and plane makers to be the weakest link.
And who will program the machines? The problem will be shifted from the flight deck to the software development cubical. Humans are deeply flawed decision makers, machines cannot construct themselves, so we are stuck with a strange amalgam of the two.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 10:37
  #951 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: New York / Southern France
Age: 66
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by gums View Post

Meanwhile we wait for news and maybe another bulletin from Boeing or the U.S. and other country aviation agencies.

out,
BTW, do we know whether the Boeing Bulletin was based on the early results from the recovered FDR, or are they based on details of the previous incidents with this a/c and/or this type?
AGBagb is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 10:43
  #952 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Originally Posted by AGBagb View Post
BTW, do we know whether the Boeing Bulletin was based on the early results from the recovered FDR, or are they based on details of the previous incidents with this a/c and/or this type?
See this press release from Boeing:
https://boeing.mediaroom.com/news-re...ts?item=130327
Excerpt:

Boeing is providing support and technical assistance to the Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee and other government authorities responsible for the investigation into Lion Air flight 610.



The Indonesian National Transportation Safety Committee has indicated that Lion Air flight 610 experienced erroneous input from one of its AOA (Angle of Attack) sensors.



Whenever appropriate, Boeing, as part of its usual processes, issues bulletins or makes recommendations regarding the operation of its aircraft.



On November 6, 2018, Boeing issued an Operations Manual Bulletin (OMB) directing operators to existing flight crew procedures to address circumstances where there is erroneous input from an AOA sensor.
So that sounds to me like they released the Bulletin due to recovered FDR data.
wiedehopf is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 11:02
  #953 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Age: 73
Posts: 587
Two excerpts from From 'How Airliners Fly' by Julien Evans:

The debate continues, as it has done for the last few decades, as to the degree to which pilots should allow the ever more capable automatic systems to take control. Should the aircraft be allowed to fly themselves with minimal pilot input in order to maximise precision and efficiency? But will this policy reduce basic piloting skills, which might be demanded when the automatic systems malfunction, or when circumstances arise which are beyond their capabilities? The human mind brings to the flight deck the element which machines and computers lack - judgement.

Will pilots be able to fly their aircraft without the assistance of autopilots and autothrottles when necessary if they never get the chance to practise these skills during normal operation? A related factor is that a pilot whose job is merely to watch the aircraft fly itself is unlikely to be as well motivated as one who can get their hands on the controls now and then. Designers of aircraft and airline managers must address the issue of how much and under what conditions pilots should be allowed, or indeed encouraged, to fly their aircraft manually. It is likely that compared to a mere aircraft monitor, a skilled, motivated pilot will always make a greater overall contribution to flight safety.
Discorde is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 13:24
  #954 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: New York / Southern France
Age: 66
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by A Squared View Post
I would expect that Boeing would be *extremely* reluctant to draw technical conclusions that specific from an ATC conversation, whcih by nature would be fairly ambiguous about what exactly the problem was at a technical level. I haven't seen a transcript, but I'd be extremely surprised if it contains: "Pan Pan Pan, Lion XXX experiencing control difficulties due to Speed Trim System receiving bad Angle of Attack data!!!!!!!"
Agreed! But I should have added that Boeing etc will (I hope) have looked at the previous problem flights and their crews. It's at least possible that a picture from previous flights of UAS following an AoA error, compounded by unexpected, strong STS movements following the switch to Manual Flight (if the previous crews reported this), coupled with this being consistent with the rather abrupt upset the existing data shows the crashed plane suffered after alerting ATC to a UAS problem, all might lead to an advisory bulletin - which says, be aware that there's a Runaway STS QRF too - being issued independent of the FDR data. Anyway, we shall see..... I'm just a bit cautious of 100% concluding - from the Bulletin wording - that Boeing have the FDR data in front of them yet.
AGBagb is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 13:25
  #955 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by Chu Chu View Post
And if the pilots really did say that, it would be a pretty strong indication that it was not the problem -- the outcome of the flight suggests that the pilots hadn't correctly identified the problem, whatever it was.
The current outcome is suggesting that the pilots were never likely to solve the problem(s) they were experiencing, as the systems augmentation was working contrary to their training expectations, suggesting a fundamental difference in systems design philosophy/control architecture between 737NG and 737MAX variants.
sAx_R54 is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 13:25
  #956 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 764
The Boeing philosophy is to have the pilot fly the aircraft where as Airbus want the automation to do it. Regardless of which manufacture's aircraft you are flying, the pilot needs to be able to deal with control system malfunctions. Engine fire/failure is regularly practiced and tested, as are RTOs and TCAS, perhaps stick and rudder ability needs to be looked at as well. Accidents such as this one highlight a lack of basic flying skills which is sadly becoming more common as pilots move straight from basic training onto highly automated aircraft.

Everything is fine as long as the automatics behave themselves and nothing occurs which isn't covered in the manuals, though in this case it seems it was covered by a laid down procedure.

This could have been prevented if any one link in the accident chain had been broken, failures in equipment, maintenance and flight crew all coincided and the chain held.
krismiler is online now  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 14:07
  #957 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: VA, USA
Age: 54
Posts: 561
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
The Boeing philosophy is to have the pilot fly the aircraft where as Airbus want the automation to do it. Regardless of which manufacture's aircraft you are flying, the pilot needs to be able to deal with control system malfunctions. Engine fire/failure is regularly practiced and tested, as are RTOs and TCAS, perhaps stick and rudder ability needs to be looked at as well. Accidents such as this one highlight a lack of basic flying skills which is sadly becoming more common as pilots move straight from basic training onto highly automated aircraft.

Everything is fine as long as the automatics behave themselves and nothing occurs which isn't covered in the manuals, though in this case it seems it was covered by a laid down procedure.

This could have been prevented if any one link in the accident chain had been broken, failures in equipment, maintenance and flight crew all coincided and the chain held.
Except the cause of the trim behavior (AOA sensor invalid) in this case wasn’t understood to affect the STS, or even that this was an AOA sensor related issue. The use of AOA within the STS system is a ‘new’ feature for the MAX, and I’m pretty sure this exact malfunction isn’t even available on any flight sim currently, leaving the crew facing an array of failures (no AP, UAS indications, stick-shaker) and the trim system surreptitiously winding on nose down trim.

The armchair coach pretty much always wins the game, but even with clear hindsight I don’t believe anyone had pinned the exact cause of the crash prior to the Boeing AD.

All I can say is it was a good job the FDR was found, because that was what let the cat out the bag with respect to this being AOA sensor related and linked to the STS.

- GY
GarageYears is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 16:38
  #958 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 9
Originally Posted by WillFlyForCheese View Post
unless they find the CVR (seems odd it's not been found yet)
If I may, here's an update on the CVR search:
CVR No Longer Transmitting Signals
SATURDAY, 10 NOVEMBER, 2018, 21:16 WIB
TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - The National Search and Rescue Agency (Basarnas) announced that it has officially stopped its search for the remaining victims of the Lion Air flight JT 610 that crashed at Tanjung Karawang.
However, the search for the airplane’s missing cockpit voice recorder (CVR) will continue until an undetermined time. “We will search for it up to a one-kilometer radius,” said the head of the National Transportation Safety Commission (KNKT), Soerjanto Tjahjonoat JICT II, North Jakarta, on November 10.
The search for the missing CVR is hampered by the fact that unlike the week before, this device is no longer transmitting signals to the search team. “The ping signal can no longer be heard now,” said Soerjanto.
However, the recovery team is set to utilize an ROV equipped with the needed features to search for the missing CVR that is believed to be buried under the seabed. “The device that we prepared is able to detect objects buried 4-meters under the bottom of the ocean,” he explained.
The ROV itself, according to Soerjanto, was lent by a foreign country that happened to be docking in East Java and is currently on its way to Jakarta and will be operated in the Lion Air flight JT 610 recovery operation next week.
LaissezPasser is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 16:47
  #959 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,502
Originally Posted by ZFT View Post
It's a pity you added the words low cost to your post because otherwise IMHO it is spot on! Standards should be determined and enforced by the regulators. Globally, they fail dismally.
OK, I'll accept that correction.
FWIW, I have a number of close friends who fly with American major airlines (we all share a military background, and some of us were in training squadrons together as instructors).
While they are not all that pleased with the training opportunities, versus box checking, I get the idea that they each have a corporate culture where training is a bit more than a box check. But maybe that's getting worse, not better, as time goes on.

@Golden Rivit: thanks for the link, nice refresher. I note that the training film is dated in 1997.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 10th Nov 2018 at 17:11.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 10th Nov 2018, 17:23
  #960 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Scotand
Age: 64
Posts: 57
If only the warning to the pilots had been "AoA disagree - A/P off, STS off" or something precise and useful. And Feel Diff Press should NOT alarm.
mross is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.