Every time there is an incident/accident, this place is bombarded with posts made by 'instant experts' based upon ADS-B data and tenuous links to previous events.

There is nothing professional about this. Nothing. It's also wholly disrespectful to those who have been tragically effected by these sad events.

I just wish we could leave this to the experts from the relevant countries safety authorities, accident investigation departments and other relevant stake-holders who are highly trained in such investigations and who are also motivated to get the answers as to 'why' as soon as practicable.

I know this is an open 'forum' but perhaps the moderators might consider some filtering to at least retain professionalism, facts and accuracy from posts made on PPRUNE, rather than drivel and conjecture, when we are faced with tragic events such as today.

RIP to all those lost.

I don´t get it.
You have 3 independent sources for speed and hight. If you have different indications then compare the 3 values. When the CAPT indication is different to IFSD (integrated standby flight display) and FO indication and these two are equal then switch indication and NAV on 2 (FO) and have a good flight.

It's a bit early to state with confidence that the accident resulted from A: Unreliable airspeed indications, and B: specifically, the crew's failure correctly execute said procedures.

There is nothing unprofessional or disrespectful about taking the facts that are known, and applying knowledge of aviation to consider how an accident may have occurred. This is not a news organization presenting speculation as fact. If is a forum. Forums are for discussion. We are discussing things.

Guys, all ideas about the cause of the crash are pure speculation at the moment. Could be a fault in the engines, pivot tube covers, pilot faults or a big bird ****ted into the engines.

We'll read it soon, latest in the accident report and personally I hope, that they'll learn about this accident. Lion Air and Indonesia in general showing a pretty poor safety record....

Certainly unreliable airspeed indication is one possible cause whcih shouldn't be discounted. We are, however, a long way from being able to say that we *know* that this was the cause. Yes, the fact that the airplane was previously written up for unreliable airspeed is an important clue. But it is in no way proof positive that the problem repeated itself. If it were, accident investigation would be vastly simplified. We could just pull out the maintenance log, find the last problem reported, and list that as the cause of the accident.


To put it differently, it is one thing to speculate that unreliable airspeed may have been a factor, and that there is evidence whcih supports that speculation. It is something completely different to state as fact, as you have done, that we know that the passengers were killed by the incompetence of the crew. Sadly, I suspect that you may lack the intelligence and basic human decency to grasp that distinction.

If it was UAS then crew competence comes in. It could be flight controls problem.

If airspeed is unreliable, it does not matter that it indicates the aircraft is going fast.
Unreliable might mean too hig, unreliable might mean too low, for sure unreliable means neither the pilot nor any speculations should rely on it...

Anyway, the aircraft took of around 90 Minutes after sunrise in good weather. Quite different from Birgenair or AF, there was clear visual reference all the time. Good pilots could handle aircraft under such conditions even after full loss of instruments...

Is the 737 max full mechanical controls? Or are there some FBW elements in the control systen which require valid air data to work properly?

The "...seemed to be going quite fast" observation is a reference to the "Flight Radar24" data, whcih is ADS-B data, derived from GPS measurements and is completely independent of, and unaffected by any problem with airspeed indications.

If your GPS reported groundspeed is is approximately 300 knots, a stall is pretty unlikely.

Two minutes in to the flight, 334 KTS at 1600 ft, I 'd be interested to know about flap retraction and whether something broke off leading to flight controls issue ongoing and unrecoverable.

Full mechanical.

did the accident crew know about the technical issues of the previous flight? I know they *should* know since it was written up, but we saw in the Air Canada SFO pre-flight briefing the crew totally missed vital information about the runway closure. Perhaps the same thing here, the accident crew omitted reading the tech writeup, or didn't take onboard the significance of it?

G

This one is really staring you in the face. Airspeed problem previous flight. System flushed and tested OK on ground.
New flight, loss of control.
Not 100% sure, but I believe a test flight by one of our technical pilots would have been done before the aircraft was released to the line if this snag happened in my airline.

Except for the spoilers. see

So at least two people above have no grasp of critical angle and what a stall actually is. :rolleyes:

Indeed, forgot to mention it. By the way, out of curiosity if someone has a MAX QRH handy, is there any reference to the operation of LAM in case of airspeed unreliable ?