ET crash ADD NBO

[barkingmad]

Has there been analysis of the Lionair CVR published yet?

Or will we have to wait as long for an official report as we've had to after the Ryr Ciampino crash?

I won't hold my breath for either at my age, not good turning blue!

[Undried Plum]

The co-Joe had 200hrs TT.

[Alisoncc]

AvHerald suggestions AoA sensor driving the trim. Possibly same as LionAir. They also reckon only 150 of type operational. Two hull write-offs from 150 - not looking good for Boeing.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Well, the height profile certainly matches the crew trying to fight something the machine is trying to do.
I think the merits of a single - 'Give Me the F#cking Airplane' button need considering again. Bearing in mind AF447, this needs to include cutting out the other pilot as well as everything automatic.
Plus, unfortunately it needs saying, regular pilot handling practice with it in that mode.

[Boac]

Comes back to my age-old suggestion (which was for Airbus at the time) of a black and yellow guarded button which places the a/c in Direct Law - although from what I read of 'modern' pilot ability, I'm not sure Direct Law would be something many could handle.

[Slasher]

Direct Law is shitlessly feared by most of the puter generation as they have to become real pilots to fly this way. One of my missions as a 320 sim destructor has been, and will be soon again, to belt into them that DL is nothing but a normal 737 with a sensitive stick.

A lot of old-timers like meself flew much better during sim check manouvres involving DL.

[Boac]

Ethiopian state TV is reporting that one of the black boxes from Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 MAX 8 has been recovered.

[Alisoncc]

Beeb saying it's the CVR that's been found.

[Pontius Navigator]

I think the merits of a single - 'Give Me the F#cking Airplane' button need considering again. Bearing in mind AF447, this needs to include cutting out the other pilot as well as everything automatic.

The Vulcan had what I dimly recall as "Autopilot instinctive cutout". Not being a member of the two-winged master race it would seem to be along the lines of what you suggest.

[Capetonian]

unfortunately we've reached the stage of development of modern aircraft where instead of being an aeroplane which is computer-assisted, it's now become a computer driven aeroplane.

To err is human but it takes a computer to make a real f****up.

[OFSO]

Is it the Tornado which has a 're-boot system' trigger on the 'stick ?

[Boac]

PN - things have moved on a bit since the Vulcan It is not the 'Autopilot' that needs disconnecting - it is ALL the software stuff.
IE Please revert to a 'normal' aircraft, even if that means the controls are electrically signalled vis computers, give me direct, UNALTERED basic controls - as much as that is possible. In the case of the 737, no MCAS, no STS for starters.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

Tornado - Not in my day.
But yanking on the controls would automatically cut out the autopilot, ditto the throttle and the autothrottle.
The CSAS, if you included the manual backup, gave you 57 different jets to fly depending on what combination of failures had happened, but all of them could be adjusted to with about a minute of handling on the approach to top of glide, and if you flew it like you were leading a four ship you would be fine. A bit prone to PIO in pitch in some modes, but it would behave if you flew like a gentleman. Some modes lost the rudder, as this had no manual backup, so crosswind limits varied quite a bit.
The CSAS, using test switches, could be failed in the air to give manual control of the tailerons, but this was only done on early test flights. In flight fires could knacker the CSAS, but the most common ones that did also tended to warp the manual control rods, so you would be stepping over the side anyway.
In practice, I do not know anyone who had a major failure on normal sorties. Minor failures would be failures of individual units, but the system was triplex so it flew normally with one unit in any section failed. You came home and flew it as if a major failure was about to happen. I flew jets just out of a long stint in the shed for a time, and did have 2 or 3 red caption failures due to connection problems, but it was barely noticeable on the handling for a straight in approach.
There was a Spin incidence limiting system, SPILS, with a similar function to the MCAS on the 737 MAX. This could be turned off, but since it was only active at high alpha (21 limit IIRC), and there was almost no 'feel' at high alpha, one could not in practice fly better than the system. It had to be switched off separately
I was the flying controls lecturer on the Groundschool for a time.

[Pontius Navigator]

PN - things have moved on a bit since the Vulcan It is not the 'Autopilot' that needs disconnecting - it is ALL the software stuff.
IE Please revert to a 'normal' aircraft, even if that means the controls are electrically signalled vis computers, give me direct, UNALTERED basic controls - as much as that is possible. In the case of the 737, no MCAS, no STS for starters.

BOAC, I know, my point was "instinctive cut out" and that it was a feature considered relevant 65 years ago.

[Boac]

Yes, PN - but now-a-days the problem is what decides the 'instinctive' bit - a computer.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

There are two basic problems. The first is that modern automatics, not just in aircraft, are designed to replace the operator not aid him/her. The second is that they are normally used all the time, so too many operators are not in sufficient practice to take over correctly when the automatics fail. In these cases, there is no effective human back up. If the automatics fail, everybody dies. The airlines and airliner manufacturers do not want that stated out loud. They are hoping to sneak it in with a very low failure rate on the automatics.

[Boac]

Back to the 'low failure rate;' again! There is a fatality rate that the travelling public will accept, even without recognising they are 'accepting' it. Like rail and marine accidents - the rate is sufficiently low to not bother most folk. Aviation is generally well below that rate. It is only when the accident hits people in the face - big headlines, smoking hole etc, do people fret. Then after a week or two, they forget about it, look for the lowest fare' (that will probably be the 'one-crew airliner, of course, with computers 'looking after' it all),. Human nature will not change.

[Boac]

Reported both boxes found now.

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

The publically acceptable rate, not just in aviation, seems to be about 1 in 10^7, one crash every 10 million hours, from what I've read. This has long been known. That's for the western world passengers anyway, it varies depending on the general level of perceived safety - I would get on an Egyptair aircraft if it got me out of somewhere that had just become a war zone*. Activities where the person is one of the operators, like driving, has a higher acceptable crash rate, presumably because individual operators feel they have better chances due to their own skills. A Cathay training captain told me 25 years ago that he expected the airlines to recruit much less capable pilots, and to start treating them as just another company resource, as the accident rate was now going below 1 in 10^7. He was right.

dt930303dhc0.gif (62.55 KiB) Viewed 345 times

p.s. That's not to say all current airline pilots are poor quality, far from it, but there are some right idiots in the front seats these days, and they are tired, and it's getting worse.

* I'd rather take on the rampaging hordes with my bare hands than fly Ryanair, but that's just me

[ribrash]

Doomed Ethiopian Boeing jet 'had smoke pouring from the rear' before 'crashing with a loud boom as luggage and clothes came burning down', killing all 157 on board, witness says . Guess the newspaper ?