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 20th Nov 2018, 13:45
  #1421 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: The South
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
Nothing to do with Indonesia - it is the lackadaisical aviation industry way of dealing with disasters. There is no technical reason why CVR and for that matter DFDR data cannot be streamed into remote storage, the communication bandwidths available now are sufficient. Instead the aviation industry prefer to use barely 'survivable' recorders with cheap short range pingers with cheap short life batteries. Like the ELBs that never seem to work these recorders are antediluvian and need to be replaced. Just think if both DFDR and CVR recording had been retrievable from an online escrow system a lot of the current speculation would not have happened. And, either the 737 Max would be grounded or MCAS could have been completely exonerated within hours of the crash. MH370 would not be a mystery and AF447 would also have been properly investigated within a day or so rather than years. Billions of dollars could have been saved.
Succinctly put.
Timmy Tomkins is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 14:27
  #1422 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Age: 55
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
There is no technical reason why CVR and for that matter DFDR data cannot be streamed into remote storage, the communication bandwidths available now are sufficient.

Strongly disagree. Let's put this claim to bed. The only global means for real time data transfer (streaming) is via satellite, and all aircraft satellite antennae are directional (vertically oriented) and placed on a surface that is upward facing during normal flight. An accident aircraft could possibly be gyrating through any axes before impact and thus unable to reliably stream data. The last moments of an accident flight tend to be the most critical to preserve. With current technologies, only a local storage device onboard can reliably store telemetry data when not in stable flight.
eppy is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 14:57
  #1423 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,325
Originally Posted by eppy View Post
Strongly disagree. Let's put this claim to bed. The only global means for real time data transfer (streaming) is via satellite, and all aircraft satellite antennae are directional (vertically oriented) and placed on a surface that is upward facing during normal flight. An accident aircraft could possibly be gyrating through any axes before impact and thus unable to reliably stream data. The last moments of an accident flight tend to be the most critical to preserve. With current technologies, only a local storage device onboard can reliably store telemetry data when not in stable flight.
But up until that point of total LOC even the standard SatCom antennae would be streaming normally. So in the Indonesian case all bar the final dive and perhaps most of that would be captured. In AF447 the entire drop in stable 'wrong side of the drag curve' stall would have been streamed. In MH340 the entire flight to the South Indian Ocean would have been streamed. For all three of these accidents and almost all others, there would be close to, if not complete recordings of both DFDR and CVR. If I give an Iridium or INMARSAT engineer a requirement for an omnidirectional antenna that would stream in unusual orientations they could design one. We are no longer in the 2400bd SatCom era.
Ian W is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 15:12
  #1424 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,986
Originally Posted by Ian W View Post
MH370 would not be a mystery and AF447 would also have been properly investigated within a day or so rather than years. Billions of dollars could have been saved.
There was very little clamour for real-time streaming of FDR/CVR data prior to those events.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 15:35
  #1425 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Lakeside
Posts: 428
Originally Posted by eppy View Post
Strongly disagree. Let's put this claim to bed. The only global means for real time data transfer (streaming) is via satellite, and all aircraft satellite antennae are directional (vertically oriented) and placed on a surface that is upward facing during normal flight. An accident aircraft could possibly be gyrating through any axes before impact and thus unable to reliably stream data. The last moments of an accident flight tend to be the most critical to preserve. With current technologies, only a local storage device onboard can reliably store telemetry data when not in stable flight.
Emphatically disagree. Ask Rolls, who monitor their engines like they are separate from the airframe. In flight, the engines report in real time to a complex in (Devon?). If the data on the airframe can be streamed like Rolls does, the problem is solved. As an investigator in another life, I have been skeptical of the “authority” role in post crash research.

Almost like the truth is to be avoided....

IanW. #1432. Spot on.



Concours77 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 15:37
  #1426 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,197
Originally Posted by CONSO View Post
FWIW in seattle times re world wide conference call ..Boeing to hold global conference call with airlines that fly 737 MAX model that was involved in crash
Looks like the lawyers said no on the conference call.

Boeing shares fell 4.3 percent in trading Tuesday after the company canceled conference call with airlines to discuss systems on the 737 MAX model which crashed in Indonesia in October.

A 737 MAX operated by Lion Air crashed on Oct. 29, killing all 189 people on board. It was the first major accident involving the Boeing's latest version of its popular narrow-body plane. Since the crash, investigators have been looking at whether or not the pilots were fully aware of changes in the software of the 737 MAX for a particular part of the plane and how it reacts in extreme situations.

Instead of a conference call, the aerospace giant will continue contact with individual airlines on a regular basis, CNBC has learned. Boeing has steadily spoken with different operators of the 737 MAX airplane over the last two weeks.

But the reaction among shareholders in the stock Tuesday furthers the perception that Boeing has not been forthright with its customers. Airlines, as well as members of the pilot's union, told CNBC that Boeing had not provided detailed updates about changes to the 737 MAX's software system.

However, CEO Dennis Muilenburg adamantly denied in an email to employees on Monday that Boeing has withheld information.

"Continued media speculation has introduced false assumptions. It's important you know the facts to the extent we can share them at this stage of the investigation," Muilenburg wrote in the email.

"I have supreme confidence in all of you and our products, including the 737 Max, but when it comes to safety, our standards of excellence can never be too high," Muilenburg added.

Indonesia investigators are expected to release a preliminary report regarding the Lion Air crash on Nov. 28 or 29.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/20/boei...37-issues.html
Airbubba is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 16:02
  #1427 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: LPL, UK
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by Hi_Tech View Post
Following from FCOM
B737 NG FCOM
STS operates most frequently during takeoffs, climb and go-arounds. Conditions for speed trim operation are listed below:
• Airspeed between 100 KIAS and
Mach 0.5
• 10 seconds after takeoff
• 5 seconds following release of
trim switches
• Autopilot not engaged
• Sensing of trim requirement

B737 -300 (non-EFIS) FCOM
Flaps not up
Air speed 100-300 KIAS
N1 above 60%
(Rest of the conditions same as NG above)

MAX unknown. (some one in this forum can help)
Only Tristar_Drvr has mentioned he is flying the MAX in this forum. So he should know.
From the MAX FCOM, Rev 5, Feb 2018 ....
STS operates most frequently during takeoff, climb and go-around. Conditions for
speed trim operation are listed below:
• STS Mach gain is fully enabled between 100 KIAS and Mach 0.60 with a fadeout to zero by Mach 0.68
• 10 seconds after takeoff
• 5 seconds following release of trim switches
• Autopilot not engaged
• Sensing of trim requirement
CaptainSandL is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 16:40
  #1428 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,986
Originally Posted by Concours77 View Post
Emphatically disagree. Ask Rolls, who monitor their engines like they are separate from the airframe. In flight, the engines report in real time to a complex in (Devon?). If the data on the airframe can be streamed like Rolls does, the problem is solved.
It's not about the technical feasibility.

It's about the two questions: Who pays? and Who benefits?

I'd suggest that the answers to those two questions differ significantly depending on whether we're talking about an airline/OEM arrangement for sending EHM data which has pretty immediate benefits, or an operator sending a ton of flight parameters (to whom?) against the statistically highly unlikely probability of a hull loss rendering the recorders inaccessible.

Don't sell those L3 shares just yet ...
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 17:01
  #1429 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Europe
Posts: 32

explained on youtube by a captain
Bonzo777 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 17:04
  #1430 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 61
Originally Posted by CaptainSandL View Post
From the MAX FCOM, Rev 5, Feb 2018 ....
STS operates most frequently during takeoff, climb and go-around. Conditions for
speed trim operation are listed below:
STS Mach gain is fully enabled between 100 KIAS and Mach 0.60 with a fadeout to zero by Mach 0.68
10 seconds after takeoff
5 seconds following release of trim switches
Autopilot not engaged
Sensing of trim requirement
Thanks CaptsandL. You have filled out the blank in our info. Very few MAX Pilots or Tech in this forum. I am sure there will more questions addressed to you by others in the near future.
Hi_Tech is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 17:39
  #1431 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 61
Wonderful & well made video. A picture = 1000 words, but your video = million.
Hi_Tech is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 18:03
  #1432 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 505
One word. Delegated certification. (OK 2 words)
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 18:20
  #1433 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Lower Skunk Cabbageland, WA
Age: 69
Posts: 354
Originally Posted by GlobalNav View Post
One word. Delegated certification. (OK 2 words)
One word: UNACCEPTABLE!
Organfreak is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 20:50
  #1434 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,325
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
It's not about the technical feasibility.

It's about the two questions: Who pays? and Who benefits?

I'd suggest that the answers to those two questions differ significantly depending on whether we're talking about an airline/OEM arrangement for sending EHM data which has pretty immediate benefits, or an operator sending a ton of flight parameters (to whom?) against the statistically highly unlikely probability of a hull loss rendering the recorders inaccessible.

Don't sell those L3 shares just yet ...
A lot of data is already streamed and both A and B are moving to 'connected' aircraft so sending data on a connection oriented always on broadband link should not be a problem.
A benefit is the huge amount of analytics that can be carried out while the aircraft is in flight.

(It is said that the most eager supporter of Alexander Graham Bell's novel telephone saw a case for each town having one.)
Ian W is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 21:08
  #1435 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 10,986
Originally Posted by Concours77 View Post
Either flight data is important enough to warrant archiving, or it is not, the Industry says it is, else why bother at all?
That's a rather sweeping assumption. Parts of "the industry" may well share that view, other parts clearly don't (yet). The jury is still out.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 21:28
  #1436 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: under the sea
Posts: 2,311
Boeing was meant to have a conference call today to Max operators to discuss the issue, but it has been cancelled.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/...mpression=true
tubby linton is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 21:37
  #1437 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 74
Posts: 1
Update on conf call - FWIW

https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...ure-employees/

Boeing rescheduling 737 MAX conference call with airlines, while execs try to reassure employees

Originally published November 20, 2018 at 1:18 pmBoeing has rescheduled a planned Tuesday conference call with airlines to answer questions about the safety of the 737 MAX. And in an internal message to employees, CEO Muilenburg denied that a procedure to deal with the malfunction of a new flight control system is not covered in the 737 pilot manual.
The Boeing spokesman said it proved difficult to find a time that worked for all participants around the world and that the rescheduled teleconference call may not happen until after the Thanksgiving break.Separately, Boeing is offering reassurance internally to employees.
However, though the manual omits mention of MCAS, it does describe exactly how a pilot should deal with uncommanded and unwanted movements of the horizontal tail, whatever the cause may be. An emergency checklist describes a short procedure needed to cut off automated signals to the tail and stop the nose-down movements.So in Muilenburg’s message, he specifically denied reports in some media outlets that the procedure pilots need to deal with such uncommanded movements was not in the 737 pilot manual and that pilots were not trained on how to handle it.“That’s simply untrue,” Muilenburg said.His message ended by saying that Boeing will not debate details in the media so as not to “violate the integrity of the investigation.”
Uhhh isn't that what Denni just did ???

Last edited by CONSO; 21st Nov 2018 at 03:06.
CONSO is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 21:39
  #1438 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by rog747 View Post
So in a nutshell, it seems MCAS was a newly formatted super duper safety thing for the new Maxed out MAX to prevent a stall, ...
Actually, that doesn't quite seem to be the case. From the reported characteristics (speed of trimming, limited authority, etc.) it's nowhere near what i would consider a stall prevention device - either a pusher on older types or full authority FBW on newer; what is seems to be doing is providing more scope for the existing stall recovery procedure to be successful on the newer 737s, trying to avoid a case where the stab is inadvertently (or automatically?) trimmed too nose-up approaching the stall, where the nose-up trim (possibly combined with high thrust levels) then makes the pitch down to recover from the stall more questionable.

As such it presumably had a relatively low perceived design criticality, since it isn't "essential" to most stall recoveries, and maybe not truly for any. That may have led to a relatively simple - perhaps too simple - design concept in terms of sensor architecture and dependencies (all armed with 20/20 hindsight, of course)
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 21:44
  #1439 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 298
Look, there's a lot we don't know. Here's what I have good probabilities for:
1. The CVR will be recovered in due time. Yes, there's a lot of noise at the moment, but it'll happen. They may even "call off the search", but they'll get it.
2. They flew into an undocumented state. Odds are it was the same undocumented state as the previous flight or three. And odds are that this flight crew, for whatever reason, was less well equipped to deal with it. A potentially lethal situation just needs to keep reappearing before someone takes up the offer. Fate is the hunter.

so, say all you want about corporate safety culture and cultural norms for cockpit behavior. I'm sure something of it played a role. Probably mx too. But the aircraft should never have put the crew in a position for this to matter, and especially not due to some feature withheld from the manuals. That's the point Boeing is going to have to eat.
​​​​
​​​​​
DingerX is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 22:03
  #1440 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by edmundronald View Post
There's a well written CNN article that describes the issues surrounding this event and the lack of information around MCAS.

In particular one learns that Lion Air has ordered $21 Billion of Max 8 737 Boeing jetliners in 2011, and another 6 Billion worth of Max 9 and Max 10 this year.
Doesn't sound like there will be a low cost carrying-profit line driven factor in this case!
sAx_R54 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.