Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ethiopian Airline crashes, no survivors

Collapse
X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Its not getting better for Boeing....

    US Air Force: Boeing has 'severe situation' after flawed inspections on refueling plane
    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world...cid=spartanntp

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Junglejim View Post
      In order for Boeing to keep up with Airbus NEO 320/321, they needed the 737 to be able to accept the newer engines, problem is the 737 is low to the ground, so they redesigned the engine pylons placing the engines a bit for ward and a lil bit higher. This fucked up the center of gravity of the 737. So they created the MCAS to monitor and automatically correct the instability, using the Angle of Attack indicator (the lil fin that moves up and down usually near the front of the AC)... This also, made sure that the aircraft acts and flies like the old 737s, so that they can continue to market it as a "no new training required" a big deal for most airliners. So to do that the MCAS, was rushed into acceptance and no mention was made in the manuals. Boeing used its weight fior the FAA and EASA to rubber stamp approval without further testing, specially on what happens when it failed.
      I was reading from a friend post regarding the incident,
      At high alpha, the cowl produces lift and thereby increasing the pitch. MCAS was installed to add nose down trim to counter that pitch, and the pitch can be trim by either switch on the wheel, ( cancel the MCAS for 10 seconds then trim it again) or deactivating the trim completely( manually trim the wheel).

      Comment


      • #93
        "NBC News has learned that physical evidence is a jack screw, a mechanism that controls the angle of the horizontal stabilizer, that smaller wing structure in the rear of the plane. A new automated system called MCAS is connected to the horizontal stabilizer, and is only found on the 737 MAX.

        MCAS is a safety device designed to run in the background and keep the plane from stalling. But it’s been implicated in the Indonesian accident through Airworthiness Directives from last November issued by the FAA.

        The jack screw was found in a position that would have raised the leading edge of the stabilizer up, which would have forced the nose down. Fixing a condition known as “runaway trim” would have been easy, a matter of turning off a couple of switches.

        In the Indonesian crash, data released in a preliminary report by the Indonesian government indicated that didn’t happen and the pilots were fighting the automation."

        If this is true, it is not good. MCAS worked when it shouldn't.. Plus the audios from the ATC with the A/C are starting to come out, and they say that the 737 was flying with over-speed not managing to reduce it and going up and down hundreds of feets.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by thounaojamtom View Post
          I was reading from a friend post regarding the incident,
          At high alpha, the cowl produces lift and thereby increasing the pitch. MCAS was installed to add nose down trim to counter that pitch, and the pitch can be trim by either switch on the wheel, ( cancel the MCAS for 10 seconds then trim it again) or deactivating the trim completely( manually trim the wheel).
          Thats if the MCAS is working as it should.

          Comment


          • #95
            The investigation may leave something to be desired also....

            Please note the last couple of paras in the this link regarding the crash of the cargo 767 in Texas and the comment that there have not been any grounding calls for passenger 767s?/?/?

            https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/20...ted&yptr=yahoo

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by JUNKHO View Post
              The investigation may leave something to be desired also....

              Please note the last couple of paras in the this link regarding the crash of the cargo 767 in Texas and the comment that there have not been any grounding calls for passenger 767s?/?/?

              https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/20...ted&yptr=yahoo
              That might be because the model 767-300ER (which the F version is) has had only had 4 "major incidents" [that was due to issues with the aircraft] of only which two caused fatlities (28 years apart).

              The 737-Max8 has had two in five months and the flight manuals don't even cover a critical system.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Hildemel View Post
                Its not getting better for Boeing....



                https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world...cid=spartanntp
                Serious for the air force maybe, not so much Boeing, if Airbus was allowed that contract it might put some manners on Boeing, but hey ho Air Force can suck it up and take whatever Boeing see fit to give them. Deliveries of KC46 have resumed after suspension, air force guys can roll up sleeves and do some cleaning ;-)

                Comment


                • #98
                  Misplaced tools or other hardware inside planes isn't uncommon. I know it happens with most airlines.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Sniffit View Post

                    The 737-Max8 has had two in five months and the flight manuals don't even cover a critical system.
                    Someone at airliners.net calculated that if that failure rate would hold up and all ordered planes (5000) would be delivered, there'd be one crash every week.

                    Comment


                    • New report by the Seattle Times. Looks damning all around.

                      https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...ion-air-crash/

                      The key points:

                      As Boeing hustled in 2015 to catch up to Airbus and certify its new 737 MAX, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) managers pushed the agency’s safety engineers to delegate safety assessments to Boeing itself, and to speedily approve the resulting analysis.

                      But the original safety analysis that Boeing delivered to the FAA for a new flight control system on the MAX — a report used to certify the plane as safe to fly — had several crucial flaws.

                      That flight control system, called MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System), is now under scrutiny after two crashes of the jet in less than five months resulted in Wednesday’s FAA order to ground the plane.

                      Current and former engineers directly involved with the evaluations or familiar with the document shared details of Boeing’s “System Safety Analysis” of MCAS, which The Seattle Times confirmed.

                      The safety analysis:
                      • Understated the power of the new flight control system, which was designed to swivel the horizontal tail to push the nose of the plane down to avert a stall. When the planes later entered service, MCAS was capable of moving the tail more than four times farther than was stated in the initial safety analysis document.
                      • Failed to account for how the system could reset itself each time a pilot responded, thereby missing the potential impact of the system repeatedly pushing the airplane’s nose downward.
                      • Assessed a failure of the system as one level below “catastrophic.” But even that “hazardous” danger level should have precluded activation of the system based on input from a single sensor — and yet that’s how it was designed.
                      The people who spoke to The Seattle Times and shared details of the safety analysis all spoke on condition of anonymity to protect their jobs at the FAA and other aviation organizations.

                      Both Boeing and the FAA were informed of the specifics of this story and were asked for responses 11 days ago, before the second crash of a 737 MAX last Sunday.

                      Makes me wonder if the managers over at Boeing and FAA possess even one working brain cell among them.

                      They had this report lying on their desks when the Etihad plane went down. The report which basically told them "We know how you fucked up both implementation and certification of a safety critical feature which probably already killed people once". How anyone could at this point have thought that not grounding the birds ASAP is a good idea is beyond me.

                      Comment


                      • When you see a 737 Max taxiing in front of you...
                         

                        Comment


                        • So...initial reports form the CVR of the Indonesian jet was that the pilots were frantically looking thru the manual trying to figure out why their plane was doing the nose down thing and they crashed before they could figure things out. Not looking good for Boeing.


                          The pilots of a doomed Lion Air Boeing 737 MAX scoured a handbook as they struggled to understand why the jet was lurching downwards, but ran out of time before it hit the water, three people with knowledge of the cockpit voice recorder contents said.

                          Comment


                          • Heard an NPR story yesterday about the 737 Max. Boeing is making 57 of them a MONTH!!! A big problem for them is where to store these planes as they can't be delivered to end-user customers. I was shocked at the production rates - holy hell, that's like 3 planes a workday rolling of the line..

                            Comment


                            • The FBI has joined the criminal investigation into the certification of the Boeing 737 MAX, lending its considerable resources to an inquiry already being conducted by U.S. Department of Transportation agents, according to people familiar with the matter.
                              The federal grand jury investigation, based in Washington, D.C., is looking into the certification process that approved the safety of the new Boeing plane, two of which have crashed since October.
                              The FBI’s Seattle field office lies in proximity to Boeing’s 737 manufacturing plant in Renton, as well as nearby offices of Boeing and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) officials involved in the certification of the plane.
                              The investigation, which is being overseen by the U.S. Justice Department’s criminal division and carried out by the Transportation Department’s Inspector General, began in response to information obtained after a Lion Air 737 MAX 8 crashed shortly after takeoff from Jakarta on Oct. 29, killing 189 people, Bloomberg reported earlier this week, citing an unnamed source.
                              It has widened since then, The Associated Press reported this week, with the grand jury issuing a subpoena on March 11 for information from someone involved in the plane’s development, one day after the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines 737 MAX 8 near Addis Ababa that killed 157 people.
                              https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...oeing-737-max/

                              Comment


                              • Sleepless in Seattle.
                                Someone at Boeing probably isn't getting much.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X