Ethiopian airliner down in Africa
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some people, in the heat of the moment, might miss the nuances...
Otherwise..., carry on...!
That cost saving is looking very expensive right now. The backstory will be in MBA textbooks in the future.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From BEA tweet:
Data from the CVR has been successfully downloaded by BEA and transfered to the Ethiopian investigation team / communication on their behalf / BEA did not listen to the audio files
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I would not point the bullet that low. I’d say bigger picture. “Folks we are not going to build a new type because there are commercial advantages in sticking with our 1967 design, like not updating to modern safety requirements through grandfather rights and no pesky pilot conversion costs. Put bigger engines on it, increase the TOW and seats. We’re in this to make money. Make it work. Do your best.”
That cost saving is looking very expensive right now. The backstory will be in MBA textbooks in the future.
‘Lets get this through and share as little information as possible because we don't want to answer technical questions in case they shine a light on the certification short cut we've just about managed to pull off. Pilots won't notice the difference anyway.’
All about money.
Last edited by Chronic Snoozer; 17th Mar 2019 at 08:28.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree completely with this summary. Add in
‘Let’s get this through and share as little information as possible because we don’t want to answer technical questions in case they shine a light on the certification short cut we’ve just about managed to pull off. Pilots won’t notice the difference anyway.’
All about money.
Unit cost reduction obsession.
As Gordon Gekko said "It's all about the bucks, the rest is just conversation"
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would not point the bullet that low. I’d say bigger picture. “Folks we are not going to build a new type because there are commercial advantages in sticking with our 1967 design, like not updating to modern safety requirements through grandfather rights and no pesky pilot conversion costs. Put bigger engines on it, increase the TOW and seats. We’re in this to make money. Make it work. Do your best.”
That cost saving is looking very expensive right now. The backstory will be in MBA textbooks in the future.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assume Boeing is already under an internal "document preservation" -- do not delete -- order. Discovery is coming. This is going to get ugly, Trying to dodge a preservation order, or even presumption, is going to make it worse.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The question is how do you define the trigger(s) for applying the runaway stabiliser trim drill? STS, MCAS and the AP will (and do) adjust the trim without pilot input, so what exactly are you looking for? Also, this is not on a low workload flight deck level at 20,000’, this is shortly after takeoff in a critical flight phase where all margins are much smaller and spare cognitive bandwidth is much reduced. It needs to be simple logic, not a large branching flowchart.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that suppose the trim starts moving after takeoff: is that a runaway or is it normal operation? I can’t see a quick and easy way to figure it out ...
I guess what I’m trying to say is that suppose the trim starts moving after takeoff: is that a runaway or is it normal operation? I can’t see a quick and easy way to figure it out ...
Again:
The nose attitude keeps wanting to go low. You keep applying trim to make it go up. You make a trim up input, but the aircraft then trims nose down. You are spending a lot of time and effort on trying to trim for nose-up, but something keeps trimming nose-down. Pretty easy to figure out.
Last edited by FGD135; 17th Mar 2019 at 07:31.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ham-fisted
What a ham-fisted fix MCAS is. Others here have referred to it as a "kludge", which would have to be a similarly appropriate description.
As designed, the MCAS can (and will) produce nose-down pitching moments far, far stronger than the small nose-up moments it was designed to counter.
As designed and certified!
Can anybody seriously describe such a fix as anything other than ham-fisted?
As designed, the MCAS can (and will) produce nose-down pitching moments far, far stronger than the small nose-up moments it was designed to counter.
As designed and certified!
Can anybody seriously describe such a fix as anything other than ham-fisted?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can anybody seriously describe such a fix as anything other than ham-fisted?
BA will no doubt blame the janitor or low level manager.
The section of commercial involved ( design-aero- software- certification ) by whatever name must be held accountable - whomever pushed-signed- approved needs be fired up to and including the commercial president and probably the Boeing CEO.
bring in those who argued against it- get some northrup- Lockheed types in and have them fix it.
Anything less will doom the 737 series yet to be built
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: shiny side up
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simply stated, Boeing rushed the ac into production to counter the NEO series. The extended landing gear to counter the long standing issue withe engine size, larger diameter engines that weigh far more, yet no new wing design.
Put them further forward and higher on the wing to fit, and when instability issues show up, a software patch. Forget to mention this in the FCOM or training.
It appears to get the ac to actually fly, you have to turn off the AP....
Broken dreams or broken promises?
Put them further forward and higher on the wing to fit, and when instability issues show up, a software patch. Forget to mention this in the FCOM or training.
It appears to get the ac to actually fly, you have to turn off the AP....
Broken dreams or broken promises?
[QUOTE=CONSO;10421152]FUBAR ^3 for starters. BA will no doubt blame the janitor or low level manager./QUOTE]
Still have to work on reinforcing the flight crew response. The cues appear to have been lost in the noise, and even with being forewarned by the JT accident, the crew of ET has had a bad day.. The HF side of this will hopefully filter into a responsive training of crew. The question is what interrupted the crew getting to the stab cutout step.
Still have to work on reinforcing the flight crew response. The cues appear to have been lost in the noise, and even with being forewarned by the JT accident, the crew of ET has had a bad day.. The HF side of this will hopefully filter into a responsive training of crew. The question is what interrupted the crew getting to the stab cutout step.
Extra crew training is just keeping a link in the chain.
A modern civil airliner should be designed not to rely on the flight crew having to adopt non standard (unique?) piloting techniques to counter a faulty bandaid put there to mask inherent aerodynamic flaws.
A modern civil airliner should be designed not to rely on the flight crew having to adopt non standard (unique?) piloting techniques to counter a faulty bandaid put there to mask inherent aerodynamic flaws.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: oztraylia
Age: 72
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: China
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keeping Danny in Sandwiches
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A modern civil airliner should be designed not to rely on the flight crew having to adopt non standard (unique?) piloting techniques to counter a faulty bandaid put there to mask inherent aerodynamic flaws.
Let's hope the regulators inject some common sense into the Boeing brain.