Jump to content

Ethiopian Airlines flight bound for Nairobi crashes, all 157 on board killed

Pikachu
 Share

Recommended Posts

osxmatt

osxmatt

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

How common are these planes? I have no idea if I've flown on one recently.

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-cb-boeing-737-max-passengers-avoid-20190312-story.html

 

Quote

Boeing has two main versions of the 737 Max — the Max 8 and Max 9. According to the FAA, there are 387 Boeing 737 Max 8 and 737 Max 9 aircraft registered worldwide, and 74 registered in the U.S. Southwest Airlines has 34 of the 737 Max 8, American Airlines has 24 and United Airlines has 14 of the 737 Max 9.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link200

Link200

Posted
Posted
On 3/11/2019 at 1:18 PM, SaysWho? said:

 

Three people?

 

Dude, that's not a commercial flight. I am not talking about all planes for any flight.

Technically it is a commercial flight. You mean it isn't a passenger flight. This is true, but what happened to this 767 could happen to a passenger version as well. Time will tell as the NTSB pieces the puzzle together. Every accident needs to be taken seriously regardless if it is full of people or iPads.

 

Sadly because the public only seems to care about passenger aircraft; cargo has been left in the dust when implementing new safety regulations. You can do a search on the Part 117 cargo cut out. Apparently cargo pilots don't get fatigued like passenger carrying pilots. Then again, I almost killed myself one night due to fatigue while flying cargo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CitizenVectron

CitizenVectron

Posted
Posted
Just now, Link200 said:

Currently this is being sensationalized. From what I gather they just got the black boxes for analysis. There is no way to know if the two accidents are linked until investigators actually analyze all the data.

 

Apparently the satellite telemetry was obtained by Canada's transportation ministry and the two planes exhibited the same behaviour as they crashed. That isn't conclusive, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link200

Link200

Posted
Posted

Also let us not forget at this time that the second accident isn't 100% Boeing's fault. I know AA implemented new procedures for a trim runaway after the lion air crash. I do not know if Ethiopian actually made the changes or not.

 

Also the government shutdown delayed the new software update from Boeing by ~5 weeks according to the WSJ.

 

8 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

  

Apparently the satellite telemetry was obtained by Canada's transportation ministry and the two planes exhibited the same behaviour as they crashed. That isn't conclusive, of course.

 

Yeah you can only get so much information based on satellites/radar. I personally don't like this information because it only fuels speculation. It is fine if people use the data to error on the side of safety but it isn't great for the people actually involved. Flight Data Recorders should clear this up shortly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link200

Link200

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, Jason said:

What is a trim runway?

 

I don't know if you know what trim is so I will explain just in case. Think of a car that wants to always pull to the left. That happens with the control surfaces on all aircraft. Sometimes a plane wants to always roll right, flies crooked, or wants to pitch up or down. For a pilot this causes us to have to hold control pressure to maintain the aircraft on the desired course. This can be caused for a number of reasons. In the case of pitch trim this will constantly need adjusted during the flight as fuel burns and the center of gravity changes. Pitch trim is also needed for configuration changes such as when extending or retracting the flaps.

 

Trim itself is basically a small change to the control surface that allows you to fix the problem for the flight. For example in the aircraft I fly if it always wants to roll left I can hit the aileron trim switch to the right. The result is an electronic motor that runs and biases the aileron cabling to the right to correct for the left roll tendency.

 

A trim runaway is when the trim does not stop at the desired spot and continues till it reaches its limit. This can cause a dangerous situation as it is possible to trim an aircraft to a point where the flight crew may not be able to overpower the extreme trim setting. It essentially is the equivalence of forcing the yoke full ward or aft when at the limit.

 

The jets I have flown have an aural warning to warn us of a runaway situation. Some aircraft have auto-disconnects and others require pilot action to fix. In the case of one of the aircraft I currently fly we have a button on the yoke that disconnects our pitch trim and circuit breakers that have a plastic collar so they are easy to pull in case the button does not work. We test these systems every day.

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link200

Link200

Posted
Posted

I will add one thing. The Boeing 737 Max is an interesting example of over-engineering. The 737 is a great airframe and that has resulted in it being the most popular airliner in the world. However due to the popularity customers have been wanting bigger and more efficient versions of the 737. This is because a lot of the parts they already have on hand will work with the new version and airlines will be able to phase out their older 737s at their leisure while not needing to replace or add significantly to their parts inventories.

 

Being able to buy what is essentially the same aircraft and getting modern benefits make it a very cost effective proposition. Pilots need minimal training for the new versions. Maintenance already knows the aircraft and has a similar parts inventory. Customers know and understand the aircraft. Cost is reduced by changing a design rather than making a new design. Boeing already has 737 plants so they will require minimal change thus reducing the cost of the aircraft. I could keep going but you all get the point.

 

Where the over-engineering comes into play is when you realize what Boeing has had to do in order to make these customer demands work. They are literally taking a 1964 design and stretching it far beyond the original design. The Max 8 and 9 for instance required a larger engine size for better fuel efficiency. The 737 design was unable to use the larger engines (plane isn't tall enough) but Boeing made it happen by moving the location of the engines. This changes the aerodynamics of the aircraft quite a bit. As a result they created the MCAS system to help compensate for the changes and make the aircraft fly "normally" when hand flying.

 

It has been mentioned many times that had the auto-pilot been on the Lion Air crash would not have happened. When automation fails pilots tend to revert to a lessor state of automation. It is not normal nor is it in our muscle memory to engage the AP when a form of automation has malfunctioned.

 

Honestly the 737 needs to be scrapped and Boeing needs to create a new aircraft that fits the desired mission rather than forcing an old dog to do new tricks. 

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nokra

Nokra

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Link200 said:

I will add one thing. The Boeing 737 Max is an interesting example of over-engineering. The 737 is a great airframe and that has resulted in it being the most popular airliner in the world. However due to the popularity customers have been wanting bigger and more efficient versions of the 737. This is because a lot of the parts they already have on hand will work with the new version and airlines will be able to phase out their older 737s at their leisure while not needing to replace or add significantly to their parts inventories.

 

Being able to buy what is essentially the same aircraft and getting modern benefits make it a very cost effective proposition. Pilots need minimal training for the new versions. Maintenance already knows the aircraft and has a similar parts inventory. Customers know and understand the aircraft. Cost is reduced by changing a design rather than making a new design. Boeing already has 737 plants so they will require minimal change thus reducing the cost of the aircraft. I could keep going but you all get the point.

 

Where the over-engineering comes into play is when you realize what Boeing has had to do in order to make these customer demands work. They are literally taking a 1964 design and stretching it far beyond the original design. The Max 8 and 9 for instance required a larger engine size for better fuel efficiency. The 737 design was unable to use the larger engines (plane isn't tall enough) but Boeing made it happen by moving the location of the engines. This changes the aerodynamics of the aircraft quite a bit. As a result they created the MCAS system to help compensate for the changes and make the aircraft fly "normally" when hand flying.

 

It has been mentioned many times that had the auto-pilot been on the Lion Air crash would not have happened. When automation fails pilots tend to revert to a lessor state of automation. It is not normal nor is it in our muscle memory to engage the AP when a form of automation has malfunctioned.

 

Honestly the 737 needs to be scrapped and Boeing needs to create a new aircraft that fits the desired mission rather than forcing an old dog to do new tricks. 

For what it's worth and as a random aside, I love your posts about your flying experiences and aircraft knowledge. It's really fascinating stuff. Thank you! :D

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...