patrick.net

WookieMan says

They were 5k feet in the air. I'll link it again. It was pilot error. https://youtu.be/s3LrsvaCUoo?si=9X2XqcapDAYz8wry

NOT a video.

Here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion_Air_Flight_610

The flight's cockpit crew included Captain Bhavye Suneja, an Indian national, who had flown with the airline for more than seven years and had about 6,028 hours of flight experience (including 5,176 hours on the Boeing 737) and received his training in California; and First Officer Harvino, an Indonesian who had 5,174 hours of flight experience, 4,286 of them on the Boeing 737.

So, I'm wrong about its altitude without actually checking its attitude but it was well out over the ocean so it must have happened at flight attitude, but this was not an inexperienced crew that didn't know what they were doing, and it wasn't likely pilot error although maintenance may very well have been an issue although the plane was pretty new, having its first flight on July 30, 2018 and last on October 29, 2018. The software that controlled the MCAS system was new, and I bet recalled. I don't understand errors with software, there should be triple redundancy on such systems, and they aren't complex and they should be run through every conceivable situation in simulation. I would consider this a QA problem of Boeing.

Input is just electrical signals, and can be fully simulated. It's bizarre this is not done for everything. Every self driving car goes through EXTENSIVE simulation. This seems like sloppy engineering, but as I've said, we'll find out in time.

WookieMan says

It was knowing how to fly a plane without automation.

These are fly by wire systems. The plane can ignore input from the pilots if the software decides to do that. I can make your car drive into a tree if you give me a few minutes to install a device to access your CAN interface. I can turn off your ability to break, to turn, everything. You don't have a drive shaft anymore. Real easy to kill somebody if I have access to their vehicle. Makes it a lot easier to move the steering wheel to the left or right car seat..

Plane is no different. The CAN interface needs to be upgraded in my opinion. 30 years ago it was "only a technical wizard could interact with this", today, it's any high school student interested in coding. I can buy a CAN interface at any AutoZone.

WookieMan says

This horse has been beaten dead at this point. You guys don't know WTF you're talking about.

These aren't Cesnas. Fly by wire is you giving input for it to do something, sending electrical signals, then having servos follow commands. I don't know ANYTHING about this particular plane, but I'm certain it has no real mechanical controls. I know that Aribus can ENTIRELY over-ride pilot input, not positive if this is prevented on the Boeing. This might just be software bugs.

WookieMan says

It was knowing how to fly a plane without automation.

Spoken by the (armchair) aeronautical engineer / commercial pilot.

B.A.C.A.H. says

WookieMan says

It was knowing how to fly a plane without automation.

Spoken by the (armchair) aeronautical engineer / commercial pilot.

Yeah, I'm doubtful a pilot couldn't keep a plane level at 5000 feet, if they had control of the system and these were experienced pilots. Seems like they couldn't turn off the false alarm but I really don't know, and I don't care to look into it. This is a problem for the FAA and Boeing.

Just cause they fire Boeing's C-level from CEO to Vice Presidents, does not fix the systemic or root problems. DEI and woke has corrupted and compromised it. Good luck to new bosses trying to navigate that while trying to fix it.

.



.

AD says

Just cause they fire Boeing's C-level from CEO to Vice Presidents, does not fix the systemic or root problems. DEI and woke has corrupted and compromised it. Good luck to new bosses trying to navigate that while trying to fix it.

No, that's not true. When Lou Gerstner came in, he called all the heads of their departments and asked them what they did, if they couldn't explain it in 2 minutes, they were fired and their department disbanded. He was ruthless and totally reformed the company.

.

As far as my post above with Demming, that is why if I had to work in that environment I'd rather at least have a few Patricks, Rich Wicks, and Rins around me to bring some resemblance of competency and sanity to the workspace.

.

richwicks says

When Lou Gerstner came in

But that was like over 30 years. The culture has been so corrupted like with DEI, etc. that this type of Gerstner-reform would never happen.

NY Times would have had pieces out on him, and pressure the board to fire him.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Spoken by the (armchair) aeronautical engineer / commercial pilot.

I don't care about engineers. I care about the person that flies the damn plane. There were engineers that worked on the MCAS system. Engineers that worked on the wings. Engineers that worked on the landing gear. Almost 99% of crashes are pilot error or maintenance issues. This isn't debatable. I don't own Boeing or Southwest stock. I have no interest in supporting either. I'm stating reality.

You guys are getting hung up on DEI and wokeness bull shit. The crashes were shit pilots. I get fly by wire. All of those systems can be overridden. That's not opinion. Not armchair. Go read things... US pilots figured it out when discovering MCAS on their own. They didn't crash the fucking thing into the ground. It was bad for Boeing to not talk/train about MCAS, BUT there are ways to control a plane. American pilots figured it out in the moment. The crashes were bad pilots. The tires falling off was bad maintenance. This isn't complicated.

This is no different than the Tesla autopilot crashes with drivers sleeping or not paying attention. And you all know I'm no Tesla fan boy. User and pilot error are at fault. Why create anything in the future if you're just going to get blamed for the person that fucks up? I wouldn't get in that game.

And don't say not a video. The guy, that I've met, literally shows you the controls and what they should have done to gain control of the plane. He's a commercial pilot and reviews literally almost every aircraft incident. Works with the NTSB. He not some internet schmuck. And you come at me with fucking wikipedia? I only linked wiki because it was just plane numbers at the time of the crashes. Which is likely not accurate but close enough.

AD says

But that was like over 30 years. The culture has been so corrupted like with DEI, etc. that this type of Gerstner-reform would never happen.

Well, yes, 30 years ago - but don't think this isn't true. There is eventually somebody that will have to go in and kick ass, otherwise airlines will be buying planes from China and Russia at some point.

WookieMan says

You guys are getting hung up on DEI and wokeness bull shit. The crashes were shit pilots. I get fly by wire. All of those systems can be overridden.

These pilots had extensive experience on the 737, and were well up in the air, and apparently they couldn't over-ride the systems. They had PLENTY of time to crash. I don't see how this can be pilot error or maintenance issues. I don't think the plane was responding to input.

Just saying "well, the pilots sucked" I don't think cuts it. Remember, the white race is a TINY minority in this world, I'm not surprised neither pilot was white, and I don't think that had anything to do with it. I don't think they were incompetent. I think the plane didn't respond to their input.

WookieMan says

"You keep saying this."

What part of "Boeing was found criminally liable for not informing the airlines and the
pilots about the 737 MAX instability and the presence of MCAS" don't you understand?
In addition, your so-called "pilot expertise" is irrelevant because flight simulators right after
the crashes proved that there was not enough time for any pilot regardless of experience to
get out of this deadly trap alive.

Give it a rest.

richwicks says

Just saying "well, the pilots sucked" I don't think cuts it. Remember, the white race is a TINY minority in this world, I'm not surprised neither pilot was white, and I don't think that had anything to do with it. I don't think they were incompetent. I think the plane didn't respond to their input.

Not about skin color for me at all. It's language. English was not their first language. The plane was created by an English speaking company. I know you know the term lost in translation. It wasn't the pilots first language. I can speak or listen to broken/shitty Spanish. Doesn't mean I understand EVERYTHING.

Being trained in the US means nothing as well. Again, English wasn't their first language. Getting answers right with ground school doesn't mean they understand 100% of what they learned. I can pass almost any test in most fields and not know 50% of it.

Also the hours you give are from another flight. The other crash had a pilot in the cockpit with 200 hours. Check it out yourself... Look at the airlines with incidences. Vast majority non-American and probably poor English. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_Boeing_737

This is all of the 737 history. Notice a trend?

The_Deplorable says

WookieMan says

"You keep saying this."

What part of "Boeing was found criminally liable for not informing the airlines and the
pilots about the 737 MAX instability and the presence of MCAS" don't you understand?
In addition, your so-called "pilot expertise" is irrelevant because flight simulators right after
the crashes proved that there was not enough time for any pilot regardless of experience to
get out of this deadly trap alive.

Give it a rest.

Link it.... I've asked before. Simulators are the real deal... lol. If they were, 10% of the population would be pilots. You have to fly the thing. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/simulator

#flytherealplane

Also you're literally admitting that they had to simulate the crashes.... by default you're wrong because a simulation is not real. American pilots figured it out. These pilots didn't. You're fighting a losing battle.

WookieMan says

American pilots figured it out. These pilots didn't. You're fighting a losing battle.

If we take your (il)logic at Face Value, then The Boeing Corporation should only sell to customers with solely American Pilots.

Like richwicks wrote, richwicks says

Remember, the white race is a TINY minority in this world,

If they wanna sell to the world, jobs and trade balance and all that, well then the Awesome American Pilots are not all of whom they sell for. Maybe not even half their market.

Chill out, dude. We know you love Southwest Airlines and that you love travel on their jets. You don't have to genuflect to The Stock-Price-Driven-Management Boeing Corporation's dishonesty, shoddy engineering, and malfeasance to enjoy Southwest Airlines services.

If you feel safer on Southwest jets because their pilots are mostly Americans, well good for you. But that does not excuse what Boeing did.

WookieMan says

"Link it.... I've asked before. Simulators are the real deal... lol."

This is a link from a pilot in a simulator investigating whether or not the Indonesian and Ethiopian pilots knew what to do when their planes started having problems with the Angle of Attack sensor and the MCAS system:

"The systems on a modern aircraft are designed to be easy to use and also easy to deactivate," said Captain Aaron Murphy, a retired airline pilot in Canada, who serves as an instructor on big jets.

Murphy demonstrated what should have happened in a 737 simulator set up to recreate the dynamics presented by the MCAS system... In the safety of the simulator, Murphy allowed the plane to go nose down, then killed the trim switches, and manually brought the nose up.

"This is a training issue because you should know how to deactivate the system. But if you’re not even aware that the system exists - you wouldn’t even think of it." [1]

Not only Boeing refused to inform the airlines and the pilots about the presence of MCAS, they refused to provide training to the pilots. That is why Boeing was found criminally liable.

[1] https://www.king5.com/article/tech/science/aerospace/boeing/boeing-737-simulator-helps-us-understand-final-minutes-before-deadly-crash/281-d843c45a-adef-4d84-b79b-15d929b4bbd8

The_Deplorable says

Not only Boeing refused to inform the airlines and the pilots about the presence of MCAS, they refused to provide training to the pilots. That is why Boeing was found criminally liable.

I'll listen when you have an FAA license. It's not the existence of a system... it's knowing how to fly the plane without automation. They were trained on that. Even a system you don't know about can be cut off. Clearly no one has watched the video I've posted. The trim wheel was likely going ape shit. There was a shut off. If the fucking trim wheel is going ape shit you take control of the plane manually. They didn't. Pilot error.

Even if Boeing didn't train or give information, the fucking trim wheel going bonkers should trigger the next step. Trained or not. They didn't know how to fly a plane and killed themselves and hundreds of others. Keep eating the clickbait on this topic though. It's funny. You guys look like idiots.

"Not only Boeing refused to inform the airlines and the pilots about the presence of MCAS,
they refused to provide training to the pilots. That is why Boeing was found criminally liable."

WookieMan says

"Even if Boeing didn't train or give information, the fucking trim wheel going bonkers
should trigger the next step. Trained or not."

The pilots did not have the ability to sniff the Boeing incompetence with the MCAS system. You are
defending a dead company. Give it a rest

Capt. ‘Sully’ on Boeing’s aviation safety: '" They have lost their way"

C.B. "Sully" Sullenberger comments on Boeing’s string of quality issues and safety concerns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjqsU03vMlw

WookieMan says

Not about skin color for me at all. It's language. English was not their first language. The plane was created by an English speaking company. I know you know the term lost in translation. It wasn't the pilots first language. I can speak or listen to broken/shitty Spanish. Doesn't mean I understand EVERYTHING.

English is the number #1 language in India. Everybody is taught it and everybody knows it in India.

WookieMan says

This is all of the 737 history. Notice a trend?

2 doesn't make a trend.

5 I think would.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Chill out, dude. We know you love Southwest Airlines and that you love travel on their jets.

I have NEVER given a second of thought about which airline to fly. It's just the cheapest route, period.

Flying is miserable, and you can't make it less miserable when you're 6 foot 2. I'm crammed into the damned thing for hours, and I used to purposely get intoxicated just so I could pass out and escape most of the misery. I do not like flying. Given the time, I would always take a train instead. I enjoy travelling by train, even in coach. Super comfortable, you can walk around and do work if you like. First class is great but not luxurious or anything but it's pleasant. You can often chat with other travelers or otherwise entertain yourself. IF you have the time, and you want to get on the other side of the country, take a train to do it.

It's less safe than flying, but it's fun - as long as nothing goes wrong. Your train could break down and you could be stuffed on a bus for 6 hours. THAT can happen. The train can be 3 hours late as well. First class is just a small sleeper room, but it's comfortable enough. You can get a family room which really is still quite crowded, but not too bad, roomette is the smallest and will fit 2 pretty comfortably. You wouldn't spend a lot of time in your room during the day anyhow.

The_Deplorable says

Capt. ‘Sully’ on Boeing’s aviation safety: '"hey have lost their way"

C.B. "Sully" Sullenberger comments on Boeing’s string of quality issues and safety concerns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjqsU03vMlw

Jesus christ, Sully fucked up bigly. Had a runway to land at and he freaked out and put the plane in the river. Was an Airbus anyway, so not sure the caparison or your point. Compare apples to apples. He lost a multi-million dollar plane because he didn't have a plan. But hey, get advice from a guy that crashed a plane... lol. Great point.

richwicks says

English is the number #1 language in India. Everybody is taught it and everybody knows it in India.

You do know India and Indonesia are different right? The Indian Ocean exists still, at least the last time I looked. That's where the Lion Air crash occurred. Ethiopian Air was Africa obviously. English was NOT their first language. And that does matter. They weren't proficient in the materials to fly the plane regardless of hours. Lost in translation. Fine, blame Boeing for that I suppose. They shouldn't have been flying the plane in the first place. It's okay to call out idiots.

.

You can only do so much if your a great operator like a pilot with a badly designed and/or maintained system.

.



.

WookieMan says

Jesus christ, Sully fucked up bigly. Had a runway to land at and he freaked out and put the plane in the river.

No. Boy, you think everything is pilot error. Birdstrike took out all the engines.

WookieMan says

You do know India and Indonesia are different right?

The captain was Indian.

I'm tired of arguing about this.

If Boeing has a systemic problem, we will see it in time. It's like people insisting to me that Ukraine would win, well, just wait and see, why argue about something that has to happen one way or another.

MY opinion, which is entirely worthless, is I think Boeing did a bunch of cost cutting and fucked up by doing it, but we'll see. Boeing got taken over by Lottagreed Martin, and that's when they went from an engineering company to a profit driven tripple A distilled fuckup. Same thing killed HP. You really want somebody that understands technical shit running a technical company. If they don't understand the technical shit, they will make demands that are unreasonable thinking engineers are some sort of super humans just because they got through the calculus class they couldn't imagine ever taking.

WookieMan says

Ethiopian Air was Africa obviously. English was NOT their first language. And that does matter. They weren't proficient in the materials to fly the plane regardless of hours. Lost in translation.

MAYBE - time will tell. The 737 Max was apparently unstable due to the engines being retrofitted, and the whole damned machine runs on software to correct for it.

You'd be amazed at the shit you can make work with software compensation today, but one little fuck up, a bug, and it blows apart.

richwicks says

No. Boy, you think everything is pilot error. Birdstrike took out all the engines.

He had two options to land the plane on land. There was still a semi functioning engine as well. He fucked up. His fuck up worked out for the human life aspect. He fucked up an 8 figure airplane for no reason. He could have save the humans and the plane. He fucked up. His opinion is shit to me. He's not some hero. He's an idiot and bad pilot.

richwicks says

No. Boy, you think everything is pilot error. Birdstrike took out all the engines.

Boy ? what you are starting talk like the Florida panhandle vernacular too ?

Yes, about Sully having no margin as all engines were taken out and look at how far he was from the airport.

.

AD says

.

You can only do so much if your a great operator like a pilot with a badly designed and/or maintained system.

.

.

That is why as industrial engineers we figure out how to make systems as fail safe as possible. Including use of redundancy, backups, safety interlocks, etc.

.

WookieMan says

I'll listen when you have an FAA license.

I have one of those, a Commercial + Instrument. For small planes. I know enough to know what I don't know so I'm sure as hell not gonna blame everything on pilot error for something I don't know the first thing about.

Especially where a dishonest airplane vendor managed by Stock-Price-Driven-Financial types are involved.

Do you have an ATP and type rating for jets? Just asking.

AD says

Yes, about Sully having no margin as all engines were taken out and look at how far he was from the airport.

About 10 miles. Of course I don't know where the birdstrike happened. Nobody killed. I remember when this happened, he was instantly considered a hero.

B.A.C.A.H. says

I have one of those, a Commercial + Instrument. For small planes.

I am former Air Force but I have flown small single engine planes as well. Cessna 150, Cessna 150 Aerobat, Cessna 172, Piper 140, and Piper 180 Warrior. Long ago, when flying was cheap and private pilots were in the high wing Cessna or low wing Piper camps. What planes did you fly?

WookieMan says

He had two options to land the plane on land. There was still a semi functioning engine as well. He fucked up. His fuck up worked out for the human life aspect. He fucked up an 8 figure airplane for no reason. He could have save the humans and the plane. He fucked up.

I don't know, I'm not a pilot.

I don't think you are correct. When it's a choice of taking out a building and/or the passengers or sacrificing the plane, it's the plane that goes, insurance takes care of it. I recall the incident, and I don't remember anybody saying he made the wrong decision, but it was like 15 years ago and I quit television 15 years before that.

HeadSet says

What planes did you fly?

Most of my hours were in 172's. I also flew 150 and 182. Bellanca Citabria (a tail dragger), Gruman Tiger, Piper Cherokee (forgot the model #). I flew just enough in a Rockwell 114 to get the required RG time for the Commercial. That was freaking expensive flying time, even in the early 1980;s.

The last time I flew it was a 172 in August of 1984.

Not going to do it any more. In those days as a poor college (and high school) student I had nothing to lose. I don't need life insurance any more, but the damn freaking liability insurance would make the hobby too expensive for me. Homie don't piss away that kind of money for a few hours of flying time per month.I get just as much pleasure from gardening.

The only regret is that I never shot an instrument approach in IFR where with the conditions near minimums. Probably just as well as it's a stupid thing to do in a single engine. But I was young and stupid.

B.A.C.A.H. says

The only regret is that I never shot an instrument approach in IFR where with the conditions near minimums. Probably just as well as it's a stupid thing to do in a single engine.

Why is that "stupid?" An IFR equipped C172 was designed to do exactly that, and you never would have passed your Instrument Check unless you were able to safety demonstrate that. I presume back then you flew the instrument check under a hood, and on the final approach, the FAA check pilot only lifted your hood just before Missed Approach Point.

.

Looks like the "suicide" did not have the effect it thought it was going to have as far as silencing future critics.

.



.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Bellanca Citabria (a tail dragger)

That had to be fun! My first airplane ride when I was kid in Civil Air Patrol was in a 2-cylinder Aeronca fabric covered tail dragger. It had a stick and no flaps, one had to slip it in for a crosswind landing. I also built a radio control model of a Citabria that I inherited from a guy who could not finish it.

AD says

Looks like the "suicide" did not have the effect it thought it was going to have as far as silencing future critics.

Murder doesn't matter, this will pan out regardless. IF that one man WAS murdered for his testimony and to prevent further testimony, it doesn't do anything other than up the ante.

But you can up the ante for a LONG TIME apparently. I thought the Neocon Cabal of the US would blow up when the "WMD" story turned out to be false, but here they still are almost 25 years later. I don't think that can be done with something like technology.

Right now everything is anecdotal, and I expect the FAA is fucking completely compromised and asleep at the wheel, however, I don't think airlines are. When you run a business you can fuck around with DIE if you like, if you're big enough, but that will kill major companies in time, like Disney - they're dead. I expect Disney will recover, but I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see them break up. They are going to have to spin off something that is POSITIVELY family friendly and innocuous.

WookieMan says

Jesus christ, Sully fucked up bigly.

Our aviation expert knows more than Sullenberger and everyone else. I read Sullenberger's book (did you?).

In the book, this super-competent pilot explained how he made it a point to know the geography and "lay of the land" of the places he flew in and out of. This was beyond expectation of airline pilots. He already knew the river would be an option to put down an 80-ton glider with fuel if runways weren't an option. He even knew the locations of the bridges. He did not fuck up, but your remark is kind of a fuck-up.

HeadSet says

Why is that "stupid?" An IFR equipped C172 was designed to do exactly that, and you never would have passed your Instrument Check unless you were able to safety demonstrate that.

This is true.

Part of operating the small plane is having a constant awareness of where to put the plane down in case of an emergency. A fire could happen in a multi-engine, but the most commonly expected emergency that would create a need to put the plane down would be an engine failure. We are forever scanning the ground for options, - it's a part of VFR flying. Being in California there's some flying over mountain ranges, - what to do? Well, some spots will be "less worse" than others, - like a ridge line. (But if the mountain is completely forested not so many such options).

Twin engine planes can operate with an engine out. If we're flying in real instrument conditions, we cannot see the ground. We cannot see where to safely put the plane down in an emergency. If the conditions are near IFR minimums, not enough altitude to deal with a single-engine plane's engine failure. In a twin, not a problem with one engine failure.

(Thank goodness Sullenberger wasn't flying in the clouds, - but probably the geese would also not fly in the clouds for the same reason, that they cannot visually navigate).

The worst part for an engine failure is on departure (Sullenberge). Not enough altitude to turn back to land on the runway. This is why it's important to be familiar with the geography near the airport, to already have a plan where to put the plane down if necessary. I flew into many airports that were new and strange to me. A standard VFR procedure for uncontrolled fields is to fly directly over the center of the runway at a safe altitude above the pattern altitude, to look at the windsock AND be scouting the area around the runway for places to put the plane down if necessary. You can do this at controlled fields also.

Looking back, one of the stupid things I did in my youth was instrument departures in a single engine plane.

San Jose is in a valley that's covered with a low overcast of Coastal Fog most summer mornings. There's an IFR procedure called "IFR to VRF over the top". You get an IFR clearance to fly by instruments till you're over the fog, then the IFR flight plan is ended and you're flying VFR above the fog. From above the fog you can use the mountain tops, compass, etc to visually navigate till you have flown to the Central Valley where there's no such fog. It was legal then (1980's) (maybe still legal now?, - I've been out of it for a long time so I don't know). These IFR departures in a single-engine plane were legal, but reckless.

B.A.C.A.H. says

Looking back, one of the stupid things I did in my youth was instrument departures in a single engine plane.

True, twin engine gives redundancy, but when have you heard of and engine failure in flight? I know of slop where someone has run out of gas, but true engine failures are rare. As you know, those Lycoming and Continental engines are built to aviation standards and have dual ignition systems, etc. General aviation planes also go through 100 hour inspections and you run an engine check, including testing the mags, right before takeoff. We have a different opinion of flying IMC in a single engine IFR equipped plane.

>>B.A.C.A.H. says

There's an IFR procedure called "IFR to VRF over the top". You get an IFR clearance to fly by instruments till you're over the fog, then the IFR flight plan is ended and you're flying VFR above the fog.

I do not remember "VRF," but I do remember "VFR on Top" where one could cancel IFR once you flew out of IMC. Mountains around here top out below 6,000 ft so we would not be as familiar with something like VRF. Of course, it is much more fun to fly VMC so I would typically only fly when the weather is good.

HeadSet says

True, twin engine gives redundancy, but when have you heard of and engine failure in flight?

Agreed.

Flying a single engine in IFR with a low ceiling is the same kind of reckless as not wearing a seat belt while driving a car.
Get away with it nearly all the time.

HeadSet says

I do not remember "VRF,

It's a typo, bro.