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

Ethiopian airliner down in Africa

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

Ethiopian airliner down in Africa

Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:16
  #721 (permalink)  
hum
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: zzzz
Posts: 147
AoA display

AoA is a fundamental parameter in aerodynamic lift generation, it should be displayed to flight crew in airlines.

The AoA/G awareness training mandated for all EASA pilots that start training from the end of 2019 as part of the new mandatory UPRT package for professional licence issue is long overdue.

AoA/G awareness training cannot be done in a Simulator. Anyone who does not understand this needs to do a UPRT course.

hum is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:17
  #722 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 116
Originally Posted by El Bunto View Post
The V-22 took 18 years to reach IOC from date of first flight. If airliners followed a similar length of development I reckon they'd be pretty well debugged, too...

In contrast the 737 Max was certificated and entered service within 16 *months*.
after the 787 farce, you would think they would have learned not to rush this stuff?

I'm not sure who to blame here, FAA seem all too keen to pass Boeing's stuff without enough scrutiny..
Scuffers is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:20
  #723 (permalink)  
adr

PPatRoN
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: England
Posts: 304
CAA: "[...]after 1300 hrs on 12 March 2019 [...] [the affected models of] aircraft registered in the UK are not to be flown anywhere."
G-TUMB departed ALC at 1307.

"Oops. Sorry,er, the captain's watch was slow."
adr is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:20
  #724 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: United States
Posts: 11
Yesterday about 24 hours ago I checked how many 737 Max 8 were in flight - there was 145 around the world. Today there are currently 102.
FanControl is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:21
  #725 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 456
France and Ireland have joined the ban.
Are there any news from first recorder readouts available? Must be something going on?
Less Hair is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:23
  #726 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ USA
Age: 61
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by Tech Guy View Post
Going back to the statement about the Co Pilot having 200 hours exerience. Was this total, or on type?
I was under the impression you needed minimum 400 hours for a commercial licence and 1500 for ATPL
How are you allowef to fly a passenger jet with below the minimum required, or is Ethiopian licencing somewhat more lax regarding hours/experience.
The FO had an MPL not an ATPL, The program provides for 70 hours of actual flight time and 130 hours of simulator training. From an earlier post of a pilot who actually flew with ET he stated that most MPL holders had roughly 230 total hours before they were released to Line (vs. Training) captains.
SLFinAZ is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:33
  #727 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: london
Posts: 3
RE: Comments that the pilots don't know how to fly. If this was true the issue would not be concentrated on this aircraft.

RE: Comments that flights should continue until the problem is identified. This is backwards and people who believe this obviously don't understand basic risk management. The fact that you may be a pilot is irrelevant, pilots are not trained in data analysis and risk and a lot of you seem to be allowing your personal politics and biases come into your opinions.

The correct approach is to ground the craft until faults are identified, the idea that the craft should continue flying until we discover the fault is backwards and seems to be a common line of thought nowadays amongst people who like to think that they are scientific but do not understand data analysis.
loob is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:34
  #728 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,915
I find it mildly irritating that folks here warn about putting the blame on MCAS prematurely while at the same time it seems to be perfectly legit to point the finger at this poor FO without the slightest hint that he has done anything wrong or could have stopped the aircraft from falling out of the blue sunny sky with more hours under his belt (which, btw, begs the question: how many more hours?)
virginblue is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:34
  #729 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 319
What surprises me most, since the Lion Air crash, is how very very very far Boeing and the FAA are behind in this. Historically Boeing has often been ahead of events (having the benefit of validated information of course). Viewed from the outside this is a watershed in Boeing culture. In the coming years we will find out if this has anything to do with the move to Chicago, or that they have just been surprised and startled by social media speed.
A0283 is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:42
  #730 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 6
Boeing just delivered a 737 Max 8 (C-FAXD) yesterday from Seattle to Toronto (Sunwing with PH livery), so it doesn't look like they have grounded anything from their end for now.
kyden is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:45
  #731 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 319
UK CAA as I read it:
"as we do not currently have sufficient information from the flight data recorder,
we have, as a precautionary measure, issued instructions to stop any commercial passenger flights from any operator arriving, departing or overflying UK airspace."

Which sounds logical because they are not in the direct line of the investigation. The recorder(s) are probably under way to either NTSB or BEA or ... And the UK AAIB/CAA will not be present at the first readout(s) (hoping that they can be read).

You would think that when FDR information comes available they would compare that with the Lion Air case and investigation and design discussions associated with that. And based on that comparison every party informed will decide on lifting a ban or making it less temporary.

Next to this you would at least expect a press release by EASA stating they are following events ... that individual countries can make a decision ... and list the status of the decision by individual EU countries.

Last edited by A0283; 12th Mar 2019 at 16:02.
A0283 is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:53
  #732 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 871
[COLOR=left=#000000]So, is the CAA taking action on the basis of objective evidence, or is it being driven by social media and apparent public opinion?[/COLOR]
Probably a bit of both- sooner or later TUI pax were probably not going to get on a Max. Just being prudent until more is known.

[COLOR=left=#000000]while at the same time it seems to be perfectly legit to point the finger at this poor FO without the slightest hint that he has done anything wrong [/COLOR]
Just for the record my posts are not criticising the FO or the system - just letting folks know how it is - some in the USA do not seem to realise.

Last edited by 22/04; 12th Mar 2019 at 15:54. Reason: spelling
22/04 is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:55
  #733 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 587
Netherlands airspace is closed for the MAX.
fox niner is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:56
  #734 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 452
OSLO (Reuters) - Norwegian Air will temporarily ground its Boeing 737 MAX 8 passenger jets at the advice of European regulators, it said on Tuesday.

“Following the decision by the relevant aviation regulatory bodies to temporarily suspend operations of Boeing 737 MAX, Norwegian will not operate any flights with this aircraft type until further notice,” the company said in a statement.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-e...-idUSKBN1QT1U5
ChicoG is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:57
  #735 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 428
THOUGHTS ON A POSSIBLE FIX

On the subject of a 'software fix', as well as possibly feeding data from both AoA sensors to the microprocessor concurrently rather than consecutively, would adding another precondition to MCAS operation affect certification?

What I am suggesting is a >minimum altitude to be achieved before operation of the system.

The stabiliser is a very powerful control surface and having a system which can repeatedly trim the nose down at an altitude where time to recover is limited has the potential to cause more harm than it can prevent. A system which can require both pilots to simultaneously apply greater than normal elevator control added to the need for either the system to be disabled (one hand off the control column to operate two guarded switches or selection of flaps), opposing the MCAS trim by repeated manual trim control, or all three is quite frankly an ergonomic mess!

Despite the 'it wouldn't happen in a Western/white airline' nonsense we keep hearing, as many people on here have said, MCAS operates normally most of the time and even the best forewarned crew would (and should) not immediately respond to every upset as though it was an MCAS problem. Even a very quick and efficient diagnosis of the problem could still take the same length of time as it takes for the automatics to put your aircraft in a potentially fatal nose down trim. This is not primarily a training issue, it is a systems issue which Boeing now seems to be accepting despite the 'making a very safe aircraft even safer' statement.

This is a general observation, regardless of the cause of this particular incident. As mentioned above, the best time to have an AoA sensor failure is just after take off (even at night) when there are still some visual references to help you decide whether to believe either what your instruments are telling you or what you are seeing outside the cockpit.

So if we don't get a rethink of the whole system, would putting a minimum altitude requirement for its operation pass existing certification or is MCAS protection required for all phases of clean flight? As MCAS is intended to provide protection in low energy situations a great deal of thought would need to be given to how the minimum operating altitude would be determined.
Speed of Sound is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:58
  #736 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: NY
Posts: 6
Originally Posted by A0283 View Post
What surprises me most, since the Lion Air crash, is how very very very far Boeing and the FAA are behind in this. Historically Boeing has often been ahead of events (having the benefit of validated information of course). Viewed from the outside this is a watershed in Boeing culture. In the coming years we will find out if this has anything to do with the move to Chicago, or that they have just been surprised and startled by social media speed.
This MCAS system was half-assed designed... behested on only one AOA sensor, which is simply criminal. They did not think it fully through, by any means. Nor were they weren't true to their philosophy, and took a poke at Airbus' philosophy, and it is gonna bite them.
diclemeg is online now  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 15:59
  #737 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 871
Posting a bit too much but

If it were the AAIB they would put out a preliminary as soon as possible I think to try to clarify - as we saw with the recent heli crash in Leicester, with an almost concurrent AD. Can we expect the same from an Ethiopian inquiry?
22/04 is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 16:02
  #738 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Vienna
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by loob View Post
The correct approach is to ground the craft until faults are identified, the idea that the craft should continue flying until we discover the fault is backwards and seems to be a common line of thought nowadays amongst people who like to think that they are scientific but do not understand data analysis.
That is, if we want to place lives and people before profits
If profits come first, continuation of operation might be the only option. E.g.: we continue, ET crash was not mcas related -> best possible profit outcome. All others are just loss minimisation.

Just saying.
derjodel is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 16:02
  #739 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Posts: 562
FAA EASA

Be it MCAS in this case or not, the MCAS certification of the MAX series smells. To certify a system that directly controls primary flight surfaces AND that is reliant on a single sensor (AOA), is against written and unwritten rules in aircraft design, engineering and certification. If we were not living in times of massive commercial global rivalry (US, Europe, China) I would have expected the FAA and subsequently EASA coming under enormous public and political pressure how they ever had accepted the MCAS certification proposal by Boeing. But it had become a political and commercial case where no country wants to damage its industry and protects its agencies. This is too sad as it damages the culture of aviation safety in lieu of local interests.
threemiles is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2019, 16:02
  #740 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 456
It's really strange that the relevant certifying authorities like FAA and EASA are so far behind the operators and many nations this time and seem to come to different conclusions. Has this ever happened before on this level?
Less Hair is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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