Ethiopian Airlines 737 crashes on way to Kenya 157 onboard.
- Thread starter MrSki
- Start date
Bahnhof Strasse
Met up with Hannah Courtoy a week next Tuesday
Good on the Donald.
According to that NY Times article Boeing’s boss begged Trump to declare the aircraft safe, something Trump rightly cannot do, he’s an orange person, not an aircraft engineer.
Don't worry yourself. He didn't do it. He announced it.
2hats
Dust.
The FAA refer to new satellite data and physical evidence that was retrieved from the crash site in the last 24 hours as being factors in their grounding decision.
e2a: It seems the physical evidence is of aircraft configuration at take off, so possibly some cockpit switch settings and/or state of aircraft control surfaces.
e2a: It seems the physical evidence is of aircraft configuration at take off, so possibly some cockpit switch settings and/or state of aircraft control surfaces.
Last edited:
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Boeing are now making a recommendation that the global 737-MAX fleet be grounded.
Utter and absolute bollocks.
Should read:
We got caught with our hand in the till and trousers round our ankles. Despite this, we are still as decent and honest as we've always been. (Apart from installing an undocumented system in the planes in order to cover up a fatal flaw that we've known about for a long time.).
2hats
Dust.
There have been a few investigations outside Oz that they have taken the lead on (in the Pacific and Indian Ocean regions) but they probably don't get many requests being quite a few time zones away from most others. Notably though, the Indonesians passed the JT610 flight recorders over to the ATSB to pull the data from them.
Looks like we do now.
The flight data was way too similar to be an coincidence, and Boeing have finally admitted this. The aircraft had to be grounded as a safety measure until the reason was found, but it looks like Boeing have finally been forced to admit they have a serious problem with the aircraft.
It's far too early to assign blame, but blame there is and the guilty should have to face up to their culpability.
As for large corporations deliberately hiding information that could lead to a scandal, or covering up their portion of blame in a serious accident - course they wouldn't.
Only because he ran out of options
I've watched Aircrash Investigation and the when the block boxes end up at the BEA its usually when the country where the crash happened doesn't trust the Americans.
ETA: As an aside it must be absolutely harrowing to listen to the CVR after a crash like this.
2hats
Dust.
Anyone sane at the NTSB/FAA should be happy - it eliminates any accusations of collusion/cover-up on their part. Note that a French company (Safran) has a hand in the CFM engines so they are part of the official investigation anyway (standard, internationally agreed aircraft accident investigation procedure).
Sure there is always politics at play in these things and the tangerine isn't shy about interfering in anything he doesn't understand (which is pretty much everything). But most likely the Ethiopians initially wanted to send the flight recorders to Germany because much of ET's tech/maintenance work has always been handled by Lufthansa in the past so that would have been a natural channel to turn to. Also, it's fair enough to pick a country closer, that is in an adjacent time zone in order to make the most of the time available and aid communication. Seems the BFU rejected the request as they haven't yet got the licensed software from Honeywell for the read back - because the first German operator of the MAX series wasn't due to start taking delivery of them until next week. I don't doubt that they could have read the data back if they really tried but it is about following the correct procedure and preserving evidence to a recognised, standardised forensic level. Very professional of them to put their hand up right away and say we can't do this properly (at this time).
Sure there is always politics at play in these things and the tangerine isn't shy about interfering in anything he doesn't understand (which is pretty much everything). But most likely the Ethiopians initially wanted to send the flight recorders to Germany because much of ET's tech/maintenance work has always been handled by Lufthansa in the past so that would have been a natural channel to turn to. Also, it's fair enough to pick a country closer, that is in an adjacent time zone in order to make the most of the time available and aid communication. Seems the BFU rejected the request as they haven't yet got the licensed software from Honeywell for the read back - because the first German operator of the MAX series wasn't due to start taking delivery of them until next week. I don't doubt that they could have read the data back if they really tried but it is about following the correct procedure and preserving evidence to a recognised, standardised forensic level. Very professional of them to put their hand up right away and say we can't do this properly (at this time).
elbows
Well-Known Member
Safety authorities should act not only with an abundance of caution and care in regards safety issues, they are also supposed to act in a way that maintains public confidence, both in themselves and the wider industry/mode of transport. That didnt happen here, and even before the media and other countries made this apparent, the story of what happened to the Lion Air flight, combined with the data Flight Radar released, was enough to know it.
I know people have a thing about not rushing to judgement and waiting for more facts and details, but in this sort of area of safety it is prudent to make preliminary judgements rather quickly, with what data you have at the time. This isnt rash, and you can refine or totally change your judgement later if and when a different picture emerges.
I know people have a thing about not rushing to judgement and waiting for more facts and details, but in this sort of area of safety it is prudent to make preliminary judgements rather quickly, with what data you have at the time. This isnt rash, and you can refine or totally change your judgement later if and when a different picture emerges.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Looks like we do now.
The flight data was way too similar to be an coincidence, and Boeing have finally admitted this. The aircraft had to be grounded as a safety measure until the reason was found, but it looks like Boeing have finally been forced to admit they have a serious problem with the aircraft.
It's far too early to assign blame, but blame there is and the guilty should have to face up to their culpability.
As for large corporations deliberately hiding information that could lead to a scandal, or covering up their portion of blame in a serious accident - course they wouldn't.
Said Volkswagen...
2hats
Dust.
That's the DFDR (flight data) which is located in the ceiling above the rear galley on a 737. The CVR is in the aft cargo hold. They are almost always placed in/towards the tail in most aircraft (statistically the most survivable/least damaged zone).
That has had a good battering but they can take 3400g and the crash survivable memory unit (the central cylinder) is intact (where the memory chipsets will be located).
That has had a good battering but they can take 3400g and the crash survivable memory unit (the central cylinder) is intact (where the memory chipsets will be located).
2hats
Dust.
Si cela vous intéresse, voici la procédure à suivre par BEA pour récupérer et lire les données:
BEA recovery of data from a flight recorder. After inspecting for damage, removing individual ICs and remounting them or even recovering, washing the silicon die for probing, if necessary.
BEA recovery of data from a flight recorder. After inspecting for damage, removing individual ICs and remounting them or even recovering, washing the silicon die for probing, if necessary.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
I've been reading various threads on an aviation forum about the two 737 MAX crashes, and what might have gone wrong. I was shocked to discover that many Boeing aircraft (including the MAX) rely on two, and apparently sometimes just one, AoA and speed sensors.
The safe minimum of sensors measuring a given critical valueshould must surely be three. If you have one sensor and it malfunctions, you're fucked. And if you have two and they're giving mismatching readings, the pilot (or the computer) has no way of knowing which one is right and which wrong. If you have three, a majority rule ensures the faulty sensor is disregarded.
A single AoA sensor (or even two for that matter) feeding information to the MCAS system on the 737 MAX is little short of criminally negligent ffs...
The safe minimum of sensors measuring a given critical value
A single AoA sensor (or even two for that matter) feeding information to the MCAS system on the 737 MAX is little short of criminally negligent ffs...
2hats
Dust.
The general rule of thumb in aerospace is at least three. The shuttle had at least three of everything critical (eg engines, APUs, fuel cells), indeed 5 flight computers. A similar method was used to that used in modern FBW airliners FMS. Four of the computers (running software written by different teams, in different languages) vote on inputs and if one disagrees it gets booted out of the voting set and the fifth is brought in. If one fails permanently the procedure is repeated, gradually reducing the size of the voting set.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Boeing certainly have some questions to answer.
I wonder if they have had any order cancellations due to this?
Fixed or not, people will not be terribly happy with flying on this aircraft in the future.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
AFAIK, this feature was specific to the 737 Max, whose old-style low-slung wings made installation of large modern high-bypass turbofans difficult. The compromised engine position is what necessitated the software "fix".
The 777 is a much more modern plane, already designed to handle large engines.
2hats
Dust.
Yes. It is in effect a retrofit to the 737 body, the engine dimensions and design, and consequent effects on trim and aerodynamics necessitate the tweakery which in turn necessitates pilot retraining, which seems to be somewhat lacking in at least a few instances.
