Author Topic: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'  (Read 78213 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline BradC

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1661
  • Country: au
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1225 on: November 29, 2019, 07:02:47 am »
Maybe there’s no way for MCAS to be safe, but given the long successful history on Boeing aerial refueling tankers, I suspect there is a way.

While I agree with you in principle, my emotive side says "Yeah, but would you ever trust it?". Remember you are trusting both the system to "do the right thing" and the guys in the big hats up the front to recognise when it's "not doing the right thing" and knobling it before it (to mis-use a Billy Connolly quote) "sends it into the ground like a fucking dart".

Both of those elements have failed simultaneously twice now. They may (mostly) fix the first one, but given the poor training dished out in some of these schools/airlines I'm not sure I can be confident of the second.
 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3867
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1226 on: November 29, 2019, 05:32:04 pm »
I could be wrong.

1. The MCAS used in some military planes is not broken/flawed the way the one on the MAX was.
    IIRC, the MCAS on the refuelling tanker plane relies on multiple AOA sensors.
2. Military planes have a different level of acceptable risk/redundancy
3. MAX trim adjustment system was not designed to handle the aerodynamics produces by the engine change. The MAX pushes the limits of what the plane's control system can achieve at its extreme limits and and still fly straight. This is very serious, because it means a loss of redundancy. If MAX is wrong, the pilots may not be able to undo the result of this faulty MAX by using the redudant/backup trim adjustment system.
4. Regarding the Canadian official comment, about removing MAX, completely; Sokoloff has stated that the MAX is likely not certifiable, at all, without MCAS, no matter how much additional training is provided to the pilots.

This last bit is curious. The American media has since the beginning made it out to sound like MCAS was a convenience item to make the plane more like the previous plane to reduce pilot workload, or something to that effect. To reduce training costs. This may have essentially been spin doctoring or damage control.

Considering the flight record of the MAX to date, it is conceivable that some tweaks to MCAS will make the plane statistically fine. But the reputation problem may be too big to overcome. The FAA was also exposed by these disasters, so there's no one left to say "safe now" and be taken seriously. This MAX will perhaps have to go through multiagency endorsement. The regulatory bodies in EU for instance may not like MCAS  and they may be loathe to put their endorsement on it, but they also feel the pressure of getting these planes back in the air rather than turning into a gigantic IOU from Boeing that may never get paid.

Could Boeing go bankrupt?
« Last Edit: November 29, 2019, 11:23:15 pm by KL27x »
 

Online Nusa

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1698
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1227 on: November 29, 2019, 09:58:43 pm »
I could be wrong.

... stuff  I applied the previous statement to ...

Could Boeing go bankrupt?

We are in agreement.

COULD (point at any business) go bankrupt? The answer is YES. Not my fault you asked a silly question. Is it likely to? Different question.

Remember bankruptcy in a business the size of Boeing is usually more of a cash-flow crisis, and is almost never an actual going-out-of-business situation. The results of which range from "never mind" (after having frozen things in legal limbo for a while) to making partial payments to creditors in the interest of maintaining the industry and/or getting bailed out by the government. In any case, since it's the stockholders that usually get screwed the most in the latter case, you can use wall street to judge the odds of it happening in the first place.
 

Offline sokoloff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1397
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1228 on: November 29, 2019, 11:00:44 pm »
4. Regarding the Canadian official comment, about removing MAX, completely; Sokoloff has stated that the MAX is likely not certifiable, at all, without MCAS, no matter how much additional training is provided to the pilots.
I am not a Boeing insider, but I believe that Boeing took the MCAS route by virtue of the unmodified airplane being unable to meet the requirements of FAR §25.173. I don't see any reason to think that a properly implemented/modified MCAS would not be certifiable.

This not a requirement that you can waive by pilot training. MCAS was not just a convenience / similarity to other airframes feature.
 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3867
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1229 on: November 30, 2019, 12:48:54 am »
Quote
Blanco Lirio channel from Aug30

If you start the vid at 3:25, it seems this is circular logic to prevent calling a spade a spade. If you have time, just listen from 3:25 onward for about a minute or 3. It's quite impressive.

"MCAS is ONLY there to make the plane behave like previous models. The plane is stable, because it meets FAR 25. FAR 25 is important so that the plane will behave predictably. The MAX does not behave correctly in two spots which are pretty important; namely high speed stall and low speed stall. So basically anywhere that the feel of the controls is especially important. So MCAS is added to fix this. Only to make the MAX behave like other 737's, not because it doesn't meet stability requirements of FAR 25. Now are you 100% confident?"

It seems like regulatory body red tape and doublespeak is replacing engineering either for legal reasons or an attempt to avoid public scare from key buzz words. It would be more reassuring if the industry PR's kept to logic. 

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
I've been mixed up a few times, before. But my current understanding, to date:
It sounds like Boeing added MCAS to make the control feedback feel right at normal cruising speed. Then they increased it 3-4 fold after finding out that at lower speed you need even more angle for the controls to feel right. Basically, that stunt that Airbus pulled with one of their planes, by doing the "low and slow" in front of a live press audience? If the plane were a 737 Max without MCAS, it wouldn't necessarily have crashed. But the pilot may have declined to perform it in the first place, not feeling it was safe to do on purpose. Esp so low, forcing him to distribute his attention across multiple variables while having less than ideal feedback on the control column.  :-//  I hope this is right. And no it doesn't sound terrible, as long as this part of the AOA envelope is fairly extreme and unlikely to ever be utilized in the course of duty, and even if, probably not intended to remain in this state for long. 
« Last Edit: December 06, 2019, 07:03:37 pm by KL27x »
 

Offline sokoloff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1397
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1230 on: November 30, 2019, 01:28:09 am »
"MCAS is ONLY there to make the plane behave like previous models. The plane is stable, because it meets FAR 25. FAR 25 is important so that the plane will behave predictably. The MAX does not behave correctly in two spots which are pretty important; namely high speed stall and low speed stall. So basically anywhere that the feel of the controls is especially important. So MCAS is added to fix this. Only to make the MAX behave like other 737's, not because it doesn't meet stability requirements of FAR 25. Now are you 100% confident?"
Your quotation/transcription is sufficiently inaccurate as to be misleading, IMO.
"We also want to clear up some common misconceptions that were initially promulgated by the mainstream media and spread through social media like wildfire by folks that really don't understand some of the basics about aircraft stability in aviation. Those basic misconceptions are this. One, the MCAS is an anti-stall system. I see/hear this all the time on media reports. The MCAS is not an anti-stall system. The pilots of Boeing designed aircraft are the ultimate anti-stall system. MCAS is a means to provide the pilots the control feel inputs that they need to recognize an impending stall and recover from it. The other common misconception is that the 737 is an inherently unstable aircraft because of the design change, the bigger engines. No, the 737 is not an unstable aircraft; it cannot be an unstable aircraft as per the FAR FAA design requirements for basic transport category aircraft stability. MCAS is not installed in the 737 Max to meet the requirements of FAR Part 25.171 ("Aircraft Stability")."

I think that everything he said there is correct.

Right after that though, he starts to wade into territory where he's saying things that are not backed by facts and range from opinion to likely misleading/false statements.
"Again, what MCAS is all about is an effort to get the new 737 Max to handle and feel like previous iterations of the 737 so that all of these aircraft can be operated on a single type certificate [sic] rating."

Confusing a type certificate with a type rating and opining about whether this is all about control feel and money without acknowledging that though the aircraft meets 25.171, it fails something in 25.173 or 25.175 is also misleading, IMO.
 
The following users thanked this post: KL27x, m98

Offline sokoloff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1397
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1231 on: November 30, 2019, 01:29:05 am »
I also think that's just some flight instructor with a YouTube channel, not a Boeing spokesperson to my knowledge. (No way does counsel let him talk gibberish like the second part of that if he's in an official capacity.)
 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3867
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1232 on: November 30, 2019, 02:27:28 am »
^Yeah, but he is a commercial pilot. Like Mentour Pilot. If these guys waded very far from their employers' agendas, they would probably hear about it.

I completely understand everything he said. Taken individually, each statement can be interpreted in a way that it is true, by itself. It just doesn't connect the way he suggests. It's like a big circular non sequitur, and it offends my brain to consider this video logical or illuminating. It's skirting around important legal issues, which is perfectly reasonable. There's no way these guys are going to put their jobs and reputations on the line to go there and make statements that could be used to point blame. But it's... disingenuous. That's the word. Or maybe you could call it PR or lawyer speak.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2019, 12:21:19 pm by KL27x »
 

Online Nusa

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1698
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1233 on: November 30, 2019, 04:02:54 am »
I also think that's just some flight instructor with a YouTube channel, not a Boeing spokesperson to my knowledge. (No way does counsel let him talk gibberish like the second part of that if he's in an official capacity.)

He's never claimed to be a spokesman for anyone, just a citizen reporter. He occasionally goes through his aviation history in videos, but I'm not going to hunt one down for you. Short story is he flew for the military, mostly large transport aircraft, then transitioned to civilian airline pilot decades ago. He identifies his employer as a large major airline in videos (open secret that it's American Airlines, however), and has many thousands of hours and type ratings in many of the aircraft they fly or flew, including the 737. His current gig is in the 777. Bottom line, he's far more qualified to opine than 99.9% of the people in this thread, including those of us who are some kind of pilot. Here's a short video from his day job that was easy to find. The caption in the youtube description is:
HKG-LAX 35,000. '84 Mach
A short clip from my day job...
 
The following users thanked this post: SeanB, KL27x

Offline GeorgeOfTheJungle

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2411
  • Country: tr
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1234 on: December 16, 2019, 03:01:47 pm »
"Boeing considers suspending or halting 737 Max production"

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/dec/16/boeing-737-max-production-faa

Quote
On Thursday, Boeing abandoned its goal of winning approval this month to unground the 737 Max after its chief executive, Dennis Muilenburg, met FAA administrator Steve Dickson. Dickson said on Wednesday he would not clear the plane to fly before 2020 and disclosed the agency had an ongoing investigation into 737 production issues in Renton, Washington.

Dickson said there were nearly a dozen milestones that must be completed before the Max returns to service. Approval is not likely until at least February and could be delayed until March, US officials told Reuters last week.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2019, 03:04:50 pm by GeorgeOfTheJungle »
http://brave.com <- THE BEST BROWSER
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4670
  • Country: fr
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1235 on: December 16, 2019, 03:50:19 pm »
This was to be expected.

That's gotten really bad for Boeing. How are they going to get out of this?
 
The following users thanked this post: Towger

Offline SilverSolder

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1312
  • Country: 00
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1236 on: December 16, 2019, 04:24:01 pm »

[...]
How are they going to get out of this?

By spending the time, care, attention, and professionalism that they didn't muster the first time round.  They cannot regain trust any other way.
 

Offline GeorgeOfTheJungle

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2411
  • Country: tr
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1237 on: December 16, 2019, 05:02:12 pm »
I don't think many people will want to fly in a 737 MAX never more. I would not want.
http://brave.com <- THE BEST BROWSER
 

Offline MT

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1281
  • Country: cn
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1238 on: December 16, 2019, 05:25:18 pm »
This was to be expected.

That's gotten really bad for Boeing. How are they going to get out of this?

Bribe FAA a bit more?
 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3867
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1239 on: December 16, 2019, 06:22:57 pm »
They don't need to bribe FAA. FAA and Boeing are in the same bed at this point. They both need to regain public trust. If FAA rushed and made another mistake, then it would be a real problem. So far it seems like Boeing stock is going along fine. Increase in executive bonuses this year for the good job in fixing MAX?

It seems like some kinda noise in the press and social media when people eventually start seeing "Boeing MAX" on their tickets is unavoidable, at this point. It's not like the old days when we had just live TV broadcast. So I think there is still some sort of PR challenge ahead.

Quote
I don't think many people will want to fly in a 737 MAX never more. I would not want.
If I were given a choice, I would certainly feel strange choosing a MAX, even if the statistics say it is safer than walking and chewing gum. But a choice between a direct flight on a MAX or a layover might be all it takes? I wonder how many people flew on a MAX before the grounding who don't even realize it? I didn't pay attention to plane models, before. I think confidence in Boeing's credit line will get people back on the planes. Heck, if Boeing is going to pay my family million dollars for my death, maybe I'll sign up for the first flight.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2019, 06:49:17 pm by KL27x »
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
  • Country: ca
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1240 on: December 16, 2019, 08:44:30 pm »
It's a whole new level scary  :(

Shutdown likely for 12,000 employees in the region. A lousy Christmas for them and suppliers too.

FAA probes 737 MAX production
"The manager, Ed Pierson, drew a link between faulty Angle of Attack sensors in two recent 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people and what he called a “chaotic and alarming state” inside Boeing’s factory that undermined quality and safety.
“It is alarming that these sensors failed on multiple flights mere months after the airplanes were manufactured in a factory experiencing frequent wiring problems and functional test issues,” Pierson said at the hearing.
“I witnessed a factory in chaos,” he said. "

Boeing removed copper ground straps in the 787's fuel tanks... carbon fiber I guess lightning arcs across fasteners in the fumes, so they added a nitrogen gas system. Just silly complicated stupid way to save bucks on safety.
 

Offline MT

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1281
  • Country: cn
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1241 on: December 16, 2019, 09:16:43 pm »
They don't need to bribe FAA. FAA and Boeing are in the same bed at this point. They both need to regain public trust. If FAA rushed and made another mistake, then it would be a real problem. So far it seems like Boeing stock is going along fine. Increase in executive bonuses this year for the good job in fixing MAX?

It seems like some kinda noise in the press and social media when people eventually start seeing "Boeing MAX" on their tickets is unavoidable, at this point. It's not like the old days when we had just live TV broadcast. So I think there is still some sort of PR challenge ahead.

Quote
I don't think many people will want to fly in a 737 MAX never more. I would not want.
If I were given a choice, I would certainly feel strange choosing a MAX, even if the statistics say it is safer than walking and chewing gum. But a choice between a direct flight on a MAX or a layover might be all it takes? I wonder how many people flew on a MAX before the grounding who don't even realize it? I didn't pay attention to plane models, before. I think confidence in Boeing's credit line will get people back on the planes. Heck, if Boeing is going to pay my family million dollars for my death, maybe I'll sign up for the first flight.
So you will give your life just for the "fiats" printed by FED? :o

They have been in beed for a long time but now neither side wants to sleep on the wet cold spot on the beed sheet.
Its about optics, what the dumbed down public is gonna be exposed to, a crash is difficult to cover up for so the optics are adjusted dependent on the things need to be covered up in the aftermath.

Well,apparently 787 workers dont want to fly on what they build.  :-//
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/boeing787-a-motherfucker!(words-from-boeing-assembler)/

« Last Edit: December 16, 2019, 09:25:06 pm by MT »
 

Offline langwadt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1722
  • Country: dk
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1242 on: December 16, 2019, 10:06:15 pm »
It's a whole new level scary  :(

Shutdown likely for 12,000 employees in the region. A lousy Christmas for them and suppliers too.


and airlines using 737, they all made plans expecting to get new planes and made contracts to sell off old planes etc.
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4700
  • Country: ch
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1243 on: December 16, 2019, 10:09:26 pm »
It's a whole new level scary  :(

Shutdown likely for 12,000 employees in the region. A lousy Christmas for them and suppliers too.

FAA probes 737 MAX production
"The manager, Ed Pierson, drew a link between faulty Angle of Attack sensors in two recent 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people and what he called a “chaotic and alarming state” inside Boeing’s factory that undermined quality and safety.
“It is alarming that these sensors failed on multiple flights mere months after the airplanes were manufactured in a factory experiencing frequent wiring problems and functional test issues,” Pierson said at the hearing.
“I witnessed a factory in chaos,” he said. "

Boeing removed copper ground straps in the 787's fuel tanks... carbon fiber I guess lightning arcs across fasteners in the fumes, so they added a nitrogen gas system. Just silly complicated stupid way to save bucks on safety.
Nitrogen and other fuel tank inerting systems have been required on apparently most airliners since 2008. As the article you link says, the nitrogen system was one of the three remaining safety components. So ALL 787s have it, not just the ones without the copper foil! Read carefully, mmkay? ;)
 

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9747
  • Country: au
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1244 on: December 17, 2019, 12:36:29 am »
A shut-down of the 737 MAX production line is in the wind....  Will it happen?
 
The following users thanked this post: 3roomlab, KL27x

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 9747
  • Country: au
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1245 on: December 17, 2019, 12:43:27 am »
Boeing have still been making the MAX (though since the grounding they've reduced production by about 20%) - which begs the question: Where do you put them all?

Answer:  Wherever they can find the space. (They can still be flown - but ONLY to a "parking" destination.)

(That did make me smile)

 

Offline KL27x

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3867
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1246 on: December 17, 2019, 01:21:34 am »
Boeing could take 10 of these MAX planes sitting in parking lots, and loan them out.
... to stunt pilots they sponsor to put on air shows, doing dare-devil stuff.

Bad taste? Definitely. I still want to see it. And (as long as they could perform some cool stuff in close formation and don't crash, fingers crossed) that would instill some confidence to me, in the least. It's irrational, but seeing is believing.
 

Online BravoV

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6672
  • Country: 00
  • +++ ATH1
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1247 on: December 17, 2019, 01:47:40 am »
How are they going to get out of this?
By spending the time, care, attention, and professionalism that they didn't muster the first time round.  They cannot regain trust any other way.

Have doubt if Boeing will prioritize that path 1st, as it will take too much time and will piss off the share holders big time.

Only smart & quick maneuvering will help, and imo this already started, like the action on increasing the pressure at Airbus thru international tariff war, which is quite successful as WTO basically punished Airbus (EURO).

Next step is to do similarly to what NRA have been done for decades at the US senates, not very sure how this move extend to, maybe declare or campaigning "nationalism" by pressuring US airlines not to buy Airbus for initial stage ?

Or if the current administration shows a big chance will get elected in 2020, just give a fair share to one of the POTUS's family member and give a seat at the board of directors, this will be an "ideal" case as the orange dude is one of the best salesman on earth, and also has an ideal leveraging power on this matter internationally.

Yeah, I'm dreaming.  :-DD

Offline floobydust

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3345
  • Country: ca
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1248 on: December 17, 2019, 03:19:28 am »
... Boeing removed copper ground straps in the 787's fuel tanks... carbon fiber I guess lightning arcs across fasteners in the fumes, so they added a nitrogen gas system. Just silly complicated stupid way to save bucks on safety.
Nitrogen and other fuel tank inerting systems have been required on apparently most airliners since 2008. As the article you link says, the nitrogen system was one of the three remaining safety components. So ALL 787s have it, not just the ones without the copper foil! Read carefully, mmkay? ;)

I didn't know aluminium-body aircraft first got nitrogen gas "inerting system" in the fuel tanks, I thought it was only newer for carbon-fiber bodies. Lightning can't generate arcs inside a metal fuel tank as a Faraday cage.
It was the fuel tank level-sensor as an ignition source, implicated in TWA Flight 800's center tank explosion, that changed the rules and caused a fiasco for existing aircraft.
Carbon-fiber fuel tanks introduce a new risk but what's a little arcing inside the tank between fasteners...
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC 120-98A.pdf
 

Offline sokoloff

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1397
  • Country: us
Re: Lion Air crash: Jakarta Boeing 737 'had prior instrument error'
« Reply #1249 on: December 17, 2019, 11:03:55 am »
I didn't know aluminium-body aircraft first got nitrogen gas "inerting system" in the fuel tanks, I thought it was only newer for carbon-fiber bodies. Lightning can't generate arcs inside a metal fuel tank as a Faraday cage.
It was the fuel tank level-sensor as an ignition source, implicated in TWA Flight 800's center tank explosion, that changed the rules and caused a fiasco for existing aircraft.
Carbon-fiber fuel tanks introduce a new risk but what's a little arcing inside the tank between fasteners...
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC 120-98A.pdf
Not just carbon fiber planes/tanks:
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=4b9ea1a9-bfd6-4967-9ee9-6d6c47298243
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf