Don't have the link. Sorry but I also understand that the FAA has given Beoing a deadline of some date in April to fix the problem that they new existed since the the Lion air crash. The deadline was just imposed after the Ehtiopia crash. AS I said earlier. Ii'm definitely not getting on one. IF they do the right thing I woun't be able to get on one!

43 minutes ago, zmak said:

And US has announced no ban and the 737 is safe. 300 dead in 6 months! 

Boeing's lawyers must be bricking it.  after going through the 787 rolls royce debackle the last thing Boeing will want is for them all to be grounded. 

Allegedly-Boeing had an engineering team stationed at Shannon who would go over the Norwegian 737 every time at landed from New York as they were a little “cautious” shall we say about it going across an ocean.

1 hour ago, DrumsArt said:

Germany,  Norwegian airlines  added... The list grows by the hour.

initially Tui said they wanted to keep operating the max,  it was only the CAA that pushed them,  (I know quite a few people at TUI)   

Luckily its winter and they have a ton of spares floating around, had they had been told by the CAA to ground them in August it would be another ball game trust me.

I bet they dropped a left bollock at Iceland Air today as well.

Edited March 12, 20197 yr by tooting

I wonder if the same sort of sarcastic ready-FIRE-aim knee-jerk firing squad attitude exhibited here and at the CAA was evident after Air France flew a nominally-functioning A320 (AF296) into the trees at Habsheim (caused by a logic fault in the flight control computers and pilot error), or after an Air France crew rode an A330 (AF447) all the way from FL380 into the ocean due to a problem caused by nothing more ominous than pitot-static icing.  Of course it wasn't...not in the EU, and not in the US.

The FAA is waiting for, well, you know, actual evidence, rather than just jumping to a conclusion that there's a fatal, unrecoverable flaw in the aircraft's systems.  In the Lion Air crash, there is reportedly a lot of evidence that the airline allowed the plane to fly with a known uncorrected malfunction from several previous flights that ended up being causal in the crash, and in the Ethiopian Air crash, well, there is no evidence at all yet.

Runaway trim is a pilot memory action item...IOW, during FAA check rides, the crews are required to handle the critical corrective action for the problem immediately, and without reference to a checklist.  Personally, I think there's quite probably a bad underlying theme here relating to crew training and proficiency in an automated world.  I have long been concerned that crew flying proficiency is becoming so degraded by the large percentage of flying time on autopilot, that when faced with a malfunction that should be completely recoverable by a proficient crew, they instead first let critical time pass trying to "make it behave," troubleshooting when they should be doing pilot stuff.  And then, when flying skills matter most, they lack the requisite proficiency to recover because "George" has been flying the airplane 98% of the time...for years.

So my biggest worry isn't that there's a problem that might be popping up that puts the 737 Max into an unrecoverable unsafe state, or even one that requires immediate crew reaction...my biggest worry is that the crews may not be up to that and other critical tasks when they happen.  A few days in the box twice a year does not a proficient pilot make.

Regards

 

5 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I wonder if the same sort of sarcastic ready-FIRE-aim knee-jerk firing squad attitude exhibited here and at the CAA was evident after Air France flew a nominally-functioning A320 (AF296) into the trees at Habsheim (caused by a logic fault in the flight control computers and pilot error), or after an Air France crew rode an A330 (AF447) all the way from FL380 into the ocean due to a problem caused by nothing more ominous than pitot-static icing.  Of course it wasn't...not in the EU, and not in the US.

The FAA is waiting for, well, you know, actual evidence, rather than just jumping to a conclusion that there's a fatal, unrecoverable flaw in the aircraft's systems.  In the Lion Air crash, there is reportedly a lot of evidence that the airline allowed the plane to fly with a known uncorrected malfunction from several previous flights that ended up being causal in the crash, and in the Ethiopian Air crash, well, there is no evidence at all yet.

Runaway trim is a pilot memory action item...IOW, during FAA check rides, the crews are required to handle the critical corrective action for the problem immediately, and without reference to a checklist.  Personally, I think there's quite probably a bad underlying theme here relating to crew training and proficiency in an automated world.  I have long been concerned that crew flying proficiency is becoming so degraded by the large percentage of flying time on autopilot, that when faced with a malfunction that should be completely recoverable by a proficient crew, they instead first let critical time pass trying to "make it behave," troubleshooting when they should be doing pilot stuff.  And then, when flying skills matter most, they lack the requisite proficiency to recover because "George" has been flying the airplane 98% of the time...for years.

So my biggest worry isn't that there's a problem that might be popping up that puts the 737 Max into an unrecoverable unsafe state, or even one that requires immediate crew reaction...my biggest worry is that the crews may not be up to that and other critical tasks when they happen.  A few days in the box twice a year does not a proficient pilot make.

Regards

 

A  plane on normal climb out suddenly becomes uncontrollable pitch wise ( in the latest accident reported to ATC by the pilots) , and nose dives straight down into the ground.  Doesn't sound like any training issue to me. 

1 minute ago, Bobsk8 said:

A  plane on normal climb out suddenly becomes uncontrollable pitch wise ( in the latest accident reported to ATC by the pilots) , and nose dives straight down into the ground.  Doesn't sound like any training issue to me. 

Uncontrollable?  Or just uncontrolled?  We don't know yet.  "We" meaning you as well as I.

 

38 minutes ago, tooting said:

I bet they dropped a left bollock at Iceland Air today as well.

Excellent defeat of the "Word not allowed" system. Well done brother! 🤣🤣🤣

13 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Uncontrollable?  Or just uncontrolled?  We don't know yet.  "We" meaning you as well as I.

 

This from the Airline CEO

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_9dee508ccc0a80f533a2bdafb8d5b536

"The pilots of the doomed Ethiopian Airlines flight told air traffic control they were having “flight control problems” before the crash, airline CEO Tewolde GebreMariam told CNN’s Richard Quest Tuesday."

That statement and the nations banning it does lean more towards automation problems. 

Richard Quest CNN's resident aviation reporter is extremely well connected in the aviation industry so he is not shooting from the hip here

 

 

Edited March 12, 20197 yr by zmak

Let us all hope and pray that another accident does not happen before a "fix" is installed.

1 minute ago, zmak said:

This from the Airline CEO

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/boeing-737-max-8-ethiopia-airlines-crash/h_9dee508ccc0a80f533a2bdafb8d5b536

"The pilots of the doomed Ethiopian Airlines flight told air traffic control they were having “flight control problems” before the crash, airline CEO Tewolde GebreMariam told CNN’s Richard Quest Tuesday."

That statement and the nations banning it does lean more towards automation problems. 

Richard Quest CNN's resident aviation reporter is extremely well connected in the aviation industry so he is not shooting from the hip here

 

 

Richard Quest?  The CNN reporter and ABC game show host that got busted for crystal meth in NYC?  He was hired by CNN as a business reporter...he has no bona fides in aviation other than being assigned as CNN's talking head on the subject. 

I saw a bunch of his reporting on MH370, and from a pilot's perspective, he's pretty much a clueless layman.  He doesn't know what he doesn't know, but like most reporters, that doesn't stop him.

Regards

30 minutes ago, w6kd said:

The FAA is waiting for, well, you know, actual evidence, rather than just jumping to a conclusion that there's a fatal, unrecoverable flaw in the aircraft's systems.  In the Lion Air crash, there is reportedly a lot of evidence that the airline allowed the plane to fly with a known uncorrected malfunction from several previous flights that ended up being causal in the crash, and in the Ethiopian Air crash, well, there is no evidence at all yet.

Bob, I take your point that jumping to conclusions is not helpful when looking at aircraft accidents. No disagreement there. But I do I think your argument here about waiting for investigation results raises a further question: how many crashes would it take for you to think an appropriate precautionary measure would be to ground a fleet even before answers came in about exactly what had happened? Surely at some point you'd say that would be appropriate, right? After all, we're talking about balancing a risk to lives with a hit to the financials of airlines and aircraft manufacturers.

Personally, I think two crashes of a new type in six months are an appropriate place to draw that line while we wait to for all the details to become clear.

James

25 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Richard Quest?  The CNN reporter and ABC game show host that got busted for crystal meth in NYC?  He was hired by CNN as a business reporter...he has no bona fides in aviation other than being assigned as CNN's talking head on the subject. 

I saw a bunch of his reporting on MH370, and from a pilot's perspective, he's pretty much a clueless layman.  He doesn't know what he doesn't know, but like most reporters, that doesn't stop him.

Regards

Im referring to reporting correctly, in other words he didnt just create a BS story and certainly not suggesting he has airline pilot level knowledge , How did you come to that conclusion? He is nothing but a well connected talking head..but with the right connections.

Past life is irreverent , I had a very very dodgy past but became successful and sold out my biz and retired at 48.

As I said the CEO reports that pilots contacted ATC with aircraft control problems. That puts Automation right up there as a probable SPECULATIVE cause. IMO

 

 

Edited March 12, 20197 yr by zmak

1 hour ago, honanhal said:

Bob, I take your point that jumping to conclusions is not helpful when looking at aircraft accidents. No disagreement there. But I do I think your argument here about waiting for investigation results raises a further question: how many crashes would it take for you to think an appropriate precautionary measure would be to ground a fleet even before answers came in about exactly what had happened? Surely at some point you'd say that would be appropriate, right? After all, we're talking about balancing a risk to lives with a hit to the financials of airlines and aircraft manufacturers.

Personally, I think two crashes of a new type in six months are an appropriate place to draw that line while we wait to for all the details to become clear.

James

I think that Boeing, the FAA, the CAA, NTSB, and others with significant input to the regulatory process know a lot more than we do...info that hasn't been publicly released yet.  I suspect that, if the stories are true about uncorrected maintenance issues relevant to the cause of the Lion Air crash, that it'd be hard to draw a conclusion that there's a fatal flaw in the jet's design.  If, for example, an acft had an engine fire indication that spontaneously went out, and the jet was allowed to fly again without a thorough check of the fire warning system, the fire detect loops, hot section, etc, and then the jet had a fire on the next flight and crashed, would we engage in a witch hunt for the engine or plane manufacturer?

I'm pretty confident that the FAA will act--quickly--if presented actual evidence of an uncorrectable flight control system problem.  Back in 2013, they grounded all of the 787s due to Li-Ion battery fires after several occurrences of a battery overheat/fire that would not be preventable or correctable by crew action inflight, forcing a more than $1 Bn redesign of that system.  That said, if crew awareness and action can resolve the issue when it occurs, then it becomes a crew training issue while they work design changes to mitigate the problem.  Gulfstream had an uncommanded spoiler deployment on one of its jets a long time back, and training focus on the problem was the stopgap until a redesigned actuation system was deployed.  Every aircraft flying has a whole host of potential problems that crews are trained to deal with...that's why we HAVE crews.

As an example, the aforementioned AF447 crash identified a problem where the pilots were both making conflicting simultaneous control inputs, and as a result Airbus added a warning system to identify that dual inputs were being made by the flight controllers.  Airbus didn't ground all their FBW jets until they had this system upgrade--in fact not all of them have it even today.  Crew training on the problem was the first line of defense.  Imagine if, instead, every Airbus was forbidden to fly in US airspace because of this known safety issue.

Regards

EASA  suspending all flight operations of all Boeing Model 737-8 MAX and 737-9 MAX aeroplanes in Europe and all commercial flights performed by third-country operators into, within or out of the EU of the above mentioned models. 

source:

https://www.easa.europa.eu/newsroom-and-events/press-releases/easa-suspends-all-boeing-737-max-operations-europe