-
Re: irrational fear of flying
-- yes sir Saab 2000..,
-- in 1970.., when i returned home.., so many assumed i was a killer of innocents, war-mongers, or even worse...
i followed orders, cried when i lost life / took life and protected my men to the best of my ability...
we were the best trained, best equipped and all wanted to return home safely ----- shit happens...
thank Jehovah for the medevac chopper pilots...
we were not stupid idiots or killers "we were soldiers.."
ronnie
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Well said Jorn, and I am in agreement.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveP
Apologies for any misstatements I have made.
I appreciate your response Saab and know that this hits home for you.
I'm just a guy who gets on the plane and hopes to get off afterward.
It is compelling reading to see the info come out afterward and see the flight lines of these 2 crashes and not connect them.
Bigger picture though is that it seems apparent that additional pilot training should be expected to fly this new plane.
Details will no doubt come out at some point about the actions of the pilots in both crashes.
And note that several USA pilots made comments on the issue on the anonymous board that can be used to make observations about flight anomalies.
Boeing did expect a software update by the end of 2018... to address this issue? Seems like it.
On the USA and it's acting FAA finally grounding the planes ( not the ones that were flying at the time* They had to land before they were grounded. WTF?* ).
It would make interesting reading to see how many ticket holders were refusing to get onto these planes at that point.
* trump comment.
Flawed analysis, failed oversight: How Boeing, FAA certified the suspect 737 MAX flight control system | The Seattle Times
out of the Seattle Times. The article was largely written before the Ethiopian crash
1. FAA has over-delegated(abdicated) certification duties to manufacturers
2. MCAS was massively misrepresented by BA to FAA
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
vertical_doug
This country has spent decades building effective regulatory frameworks and cultures, across all areas of human endeavour, to make life better for people. In the USA and other Western countries the results make it look easy; so easy that folks who aren't very astute or inquisitive think it is easy, and that it, which ever "it" we're talking about (clean water, reliable air transport, public health), just spontaneously happened....or at the more egregious end of the spectrum it happened in spite of government, hence the acquaintance of mine opining that having a dedicated Secretary of the FAA isn't really important and that the job isn't difficult.
Regulating aviation and keeping airplanes from falling out of the sky isn't easy. But we're good at it. And like anybody who's really good as something we make it look easy. But since the days of Reagan many have been chipping away at the foundations of our regulatory bodies and impugning the very notion of their necessity. I haven't read the article but I don't need to, to realize that there are too many foxes guarding the regulatory hen houses (FAA, EPA, DOE, you name it) and that, once you get into the upper floors of regulated corporations, money makes misrepresentation of "stuff" happen. Even in the aircraft industry. Nobody wanted to make Alaska 261 happen but it did; and it was about money and maybe an FAA that wasn't quite as sceptical of extending elevator jackscrew service intervals as it should have been.
If this country keeps electing people like Trump, if the population doesn't reject the notion that govt is inherently bad, and reject the divisiveness that he and his ilk foster, we'll see more of this sort of thing. We already are.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
This Boeing thing gets more bizarre by the day.
Check this out.
Off-duty pilot who hitched a ride saved Lion Air 737 day before deadly crash - The Boston Globe
and, despite this the plane was still in use the next day.
Jayssus, heads need to roll on this fiasco.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
On a positive note, my wife and I are headed to Europe next weekend and we are on the top deck of an Airbus A380...the Airbus model that was just discontinued. I am really looking forward to the flight as I've never been in such a beast and I've never walked up and down stairs in an aircraft.
Transport designer Paul Priestman on designing the Airbus A38 interior
Reasons why the Airbus A38 failed - SlashGear
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
A380s are great planes. Customers love them, the airline's bean counters do not!
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BBB
A380s are great planes. Customers love them, the airline's bean counters do not!
A380-800 is overweight, the popular model was intended to be the never built larger A380-900
Wings and landing gear are sized for the larger a/c. Didn't help the fuel consumption.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveP
"The so-called dead-head pilot on the earlier flight from Bali..." What does this mean? Was he wearing tie-dye?
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bcm119
"The so-called dead-head pilot on the earlier flight from Bali..." What does this mean? Was he wearing tie-dye?
Deadheading is when crew fly between working assignments, to get to and from shifts.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Here's my two cents on the Lion Air crash. First of all, don't draw conclusions from media reports being circulated. Google "lion air preliminary report" and draw your conclusions from facts. Look at the graphs of the trimming being done by the airplane and the crew. Count how many times the crew countered the airplane's nose down trim. Because there were times when the crew stopped and started trimmimg very quickly, different people will come up with different counts but I counted 37 times. That's too many. The crew needed to accomplish the required memory items for runaway trim. Did the crew need to know which system was causing the runaway trim? Nope. Runaway trim is runaway trim. There are a number of potential causes but the response is always the same. Memory items for runaway trim. Saab can tell us what they are for the 73. In my airplane it's "Stab trim cutout switches-cutout. Don't exceed current airspeed." Probably not much different in the 73. Memory items must be known cold and accomplished immediately. A crew that can't recall memory items isn't qualified to fly that airplane.
The other problem was unreliable airspeed. We have a sticker on the yoke with the proper steps. I've heard that these are memory items on the 73. Again, Saab can tell us more. Accomplishing these items will bring the crew to a point where the airplane is stabilized and the crew can think again and then do the unreliable airspeed checklist. All the while, the stick shaker is going off telling the crew they are close to stall speed (actually, stall angle of attack). That's got to be very unnerving when it's unexpected but the same thing happened on the previous flight with a different crew. Did they not stop to consider that it might happen again?
This is a difficult situation but it's not impossible to survive, as proven by the three previous crews that encountered this problem on this airframe.
The 73 max isn't perfect but it didn't kill those people. I hate that the end conclusion for almost every crash is pilot error but this one sure points that way. When the crew doesn't even try to do the proper procedures for the problems they encounter, it's hard for me to see it any other way.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Earl,
I appreciate your comments on this and I understand that, as a pilot, you know far more about this than I ever will.
Would it not have made sense to require pilots flying this plane to have specific training in this system*?
Pretty clearly these pilots were panicked ( 37 times trying to correct ) and all the while unable to control the plane?
Somewhere in all this I remember from the first episode to unrecoverable descent was only 40 seconds?
And maybe the " safety equipment " that Boeing made optional would have helped these pilots if they just used the i-pad model update that I understand that they were given?
* this was a new system, unlike the "standard" one used in prior models, correct I believe?
For a simple guy looking on this is a disaster for Boeing, the FAA and the airlines that have bought these planes.
It will be a long time before travelers will comfortably get onto one of these "software updated" planes.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
I'm familiar with running fast complex technical systems and it resonates with me that you can't automate everything, when it goes sideways it comes down to human preparation - and predisposition. Some people can pull up the memory items no problem and some people can't. But the system to put them in that position more often is an issue. I'd have easily gotten on one of those planes before a fix, even more so after. But Boeing needs to learn from it and not have a series of coincidental problems again. I'm having a tough time connecting it other than it's the new model which may just be enough.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveP
Earl,
I appreciate your comments on this and I understand that, as a pilot, you know far more about this than I ever will.
Would it not have made sense to require pilots flying this plane to have specific training in this system*?
Pretty clearly these pilots were panicked ( 37 times trying to correct ) and all the while unable to control the plane?
Somewhere in all this I remember from the first episode to unrecoverable descent was only 40 seconds?
And maybe the " safety equipment " that Boeing made optional would have helped these pilots if they just used the i-pad model update that I understand that they were given?
* this was a new system, unlike the "standard" one used in prior models, correct I believe?
For a simple guy looking on this is a disaster for Boeing, the FAA and the airlines that have bought these planes.
It will be a long time before travelers will comfortably get onto one of these "software updated" planes.
Steve, I've been scratching my head about the "40 seconds til you die" test results. The articles I can find are short on details but they seem to say that everybody will die in 40 seconds when faced with this emergency unless they place the stab trim cutout switches to cutout. The reality is, the Lion Air flight flew for 11 minutes this way. The Etheopian flight flew for 6 minutes but, until the preliminary report comes out, we don't know what actions they took. Since there are no problems I've seen with the stab trim cutout switches functioning properly, I'm going to assume that they didn't use them. There's either a problem with that test or a problem with the writers' interpretation of the test.
Back to the memory items. In the Air Force, they were called, as a group, "boldface". My company calls them "Phase Ones". They MUST be memorized along with a collection of operational limits. Typically, when training on a new airplane, the first step a pilot takes is to memorize phase ones and ops limits. If a pilot can't memorize and recall phase ones under pressure, they can't fly that plane. There's no wiggle room. You're not a pilot if you can't do phase ones.
On the flight prior to the fatal Lion Air flight, the crew didn't do the phase ones until prompted by the jumpseater from another airline. We don't know how long that took so I can't comment on just how bad it was but the phase ones needed to be initiated by the crew, not the jumpseater. On the fatal flight, they never did the phase ones. That's simply an unacceptable level of performance. I don't know any other way to phrase it.
There is a very real "startle factor" that must be considered and the crew must collect themselves and figure out what is happening. The time allowance for that is well short of 11 minutes.
The media is making a big deal out of the fact that the manuals don't describe the MCAS well enough. That doesn't matter. When the trim starts running and the crew didn't ask it to, that's runaway trim. There are a number of potential causes for runaway trim, MCAS only adds one to the list. The proper response to any runaway trim event is to do the memory items. The crew doesn't care what caused it. That's what maintenance will find out after the plane is safely on the ground. If you're riding in the back of an airplane and the oxygen masks suddenly drop, are you going to ask the flight attendant how the pressurization system works before you put the mask on?
This AOA vane malfunctioned and caused problems on the previous flight. It should have been written up in the maintenance logbook that the flightcrew reviewed before the flight. The crew should have talked about the possibility that it could happen again. It'll be interesting to see what they discussed during preflight.
Boeing can't design a plane that will overcome that level of performance. No manufacturer can.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Ethiopian Airlines Pilots Initially Followed Boeing’s Required Emergency Steps to Disable 737 MAX System - WSJ
Just to add to this, it appears the crew may have followed Boeing procedures regarding trim issues. Again, we must wait for the real report but the WSJ is at least a reputable publication. Let’s see where the facts lead.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Thanks for the replies from actual pilots.
We will see how it all turns out.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveP
Thanks for the replies from actual pilots.
We will see how it all turns out.
+1. Appreciate the input from people who actually know what they are talking about. Means more for me - and a lot of us, I'm guessing - than a lot of preliminary (semi-sensationalist, perhaps) stuff in the media.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Question about MCAS, are there other planes that have used software to address a stability issue?
If I understand it correctly, the original 737 was designed around the long, narrow JT8D engines with cigar-like nacelles. When they stretched it and re-engined it with the higher-bypass, larger-diameter CFM56, they had to move the gearbox off the bottom of the engine for ground clearance, which gave the nacelles that distinctive flat-bottomed shape.
On the MAX, with still higher bypass and larger diameter engines, they had to move them even farther forward. Now those flat-bottomed nacelles decrease stability at high angles of attack by generating lift that's well ahead of the center of gravity. Addressed by the MCAS software.
Has there ever been another airliner with a stability issue like this, that was compensated for by software? I thought the F-16 was the first aircraft ever purposely designed with "relaxed" stability.
TH
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thollandpe
Question about MCAS, are there other planes that have used software to address a stability issue?
Yes.
Pretty much every airplane you can imagine since about 1970.
Think 777s or 787s or Airbus of all models are flown with cables and pulleys? Think again.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Saab2000
Yes.
Pretty much every airplane you can imagine since about 1970.
Think 777s or 787s or Airbus of all models are flown with cables and pulleys? Think again.
My question is different from fly-by-wire. I remember the Airbus A320 trimming the trees at a French airshow in the 80's, that crash was blamed on pilot error. That was the auspicious launch of fly-by-wire on commercial aircraft.
Have there been other commercial airliners with unstable traits or relaxed static stability? If that's the same answer, thanks for the clarification.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thollandpe
My question is different from fly-by-wire. I remember the Airbus A320 trimming the trees at a French airshow in the 80's, that crash was blamed on pilot error. That was the auspicious launch of fly-by-wire on commercial aircraft.
Have there been other commercial airliners with unstable traits or relaxed static stability? If that's the same answer, thanks for the clarification.
I don't know specifically, but my understanding is that the SAAB2000, from which I drew my online name and in which I started my career, had some significant center-of-gravity issues that were resolved with fly-by-wire elevators. As it happens, the rudder on the SB-20 is also FBW. This aircraft was produced in only relatively small numbers but it was certified for passenger airline flying by responsible aviation authorities.
I am not an engineer so I really can't answer your question but I'm inclined to think that MCAS by itself is not a bad thing. The bad thing is when it overrides pilot inputs, can't be fully disabled or when it leads to an area of the flight envelope which is unrecoverable. It would surprise me if the 737 MAX series was the only airplane with a trim system designed to compensate for some potential inherent instability in some part of the CG range. If it were only a CG issue Boeing could simply add mass somewhere in the airframe and call it good. I suspect it's a bit more complicated than that. Having the engines slung below the wing and in front of the wing will create forces that need to be trimmed. The already existing "speed trim" on the 737 is an example of this.
We still need to wait for more facts. Meanwhile, the grounding of the airplanes is a good thing because they must be safe for crews and passengers and this safety needs to be pretty much verified in near-absolute terms for public confidence.
I suspect they won't fly again until summer, at least.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
There are some new bits of information coming out about the latest max crash. As Saab mentioned, the crew did the right thing and shut off the electric trim. At some point they turned it back on because they were having trouble with manual trim. Somewhere else on the internet, a 73 pilot points out that manual trim can get very hard to move due to friction/ binding in the system when high air loads put pressure on the various components. If that's the case, that points the finger back at Boeing. However, does the 73 Max trim wheel have a fold out handle like we had on the 72? Maybe Saab will answer. I think both aircraft use the same trim wheel. If so, the handle would allow two handed operation and a much improved ability to overcome the binding. There aren't any reports so far that discuss how the crew went about trying to move the manual trim though. Another question I still have is, how did the airspeed get that high? The pitch and power settings for unreliable airspeed, especially in the area of an airfield that's already up at 8000 feet, shouldn't let the airspeed get very high. There's a lot going on at that time though. Stick shaker going off, stab trim running, unreliable airspeed on one side of the cockpit displays. That's a lot to sort through. These guys flew for 6 minutes. Lion Air for 11 minutes. Ther's time there to come up with a plan. It's not easy to come up with a plan in a situation that's complicated by multiple failures/problems. A good read is "QF 32". It's the story written by the captain of the Quantas A380 with the uncontained engine failure that took out a whole bunch of other systems on the airplane. At one point he simply had to shift gears and quit trying to figure out what systems were lost. That didn't matter to him any more. He figured out what he still had and came up with a plan to use those systems to get back on the ground safely.
It'll be a while before a complete report comes out. It'll be interestiong to see the whole story of the crew's responses in this case.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
busdriver1959
There are some new bits of information coming out about the latest max crash. As Saab mentioned, the crew did the right thing and shut off the electric trim. At some point they turned it back on because they were having trouble with manual trim. Somewhere else on the internet, a 73 pilot points out that manual trim can get very hard to move due to friction/ binding in the system when high air loads put pressure on the various components. If that's the case, that points the finger back at Boeing. However, does the 73 Max trim wheel have a fold out handle like we had on the 72? Maybe Saab will answer. I think both aircraft use the same trim wheel. If so, the handle would allow two handed operation and a much improved ability to overcome the binding. There aren't any reports so far that discuss how the crew went about trying to move the manual trim though. Another question I still have is, how did the airspeed get that high? The pitch and power settings for unreliable airspeed, especially in the area of an airfield that's already up at 8000 feet, shouldn't let the airspeed get very high. There's a lot going on at that time though. Stick shaker going off, stab trim running, unreliable airspeed on one side of the cockpit displays. That's a lot to sort through. These guys flew for 6 minutes. Lion Air for 11 minutes. Ther's time there to come up with a plan. It's not easy to come up with a plan in a situation that's complicated by multiple failures/problems. A good read is "QF 32". It's the story written by the captain of the Quantas A380 with the uncontained engine failure that took out a whole bunch of other systems on the airplane. At one point he simply had to shift gears and quit trying to figure out what systems were lost. That didn't matter to him any more. He figured out what he still had and came up with a plan to use those systems to get back on the ground safely.
It'll be a while before a complete report comes out. It'll be interestiong to see the whole story of the crew's responses in this case.
Yes, it still has the fold-out handle.
I’ve used it on the ground but never in the air. Having never used it in flight I don’t know how the forces change.
I suspect next year’s training program at my carrier will include a lot of hand flying and trim issues, including using this fold-out handle.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Saab2000
I suspect next year’s training program at my carrier will include a lot of hand flying and trim issues, including using this fold-out handle.
I sure bet that this is true.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Thinking of you guys...flying from Heathrow to Venice late this evening and the pilot aborted the landing while the gear was down...always interesting. He told us later that the ATC’s diverted us at the last minute due to bad weather/runway issues. First we were supposed to divert to Bergamo and then we finally landed in Milan, where I type this post from 10C. Hope this 2hr flight doesn’t turn into 5hrs as we’ve been waiting on the runway for over an hour for a bus and they made me check luggage as I have no status on British Airways. First world problem I know.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Good luck.
My favorite country but I have had a couple of unusual flight occurrences there.
" Bad weather flight cancellation" out of Florence...
We were in Florence heading back to Munich... the plane never arrived.
The weather was fine... some breeze, a few drops of rain. Nothing.
Another page on this Max thing seems to be turned every day.
Big story. Shakespeare wrote about it..
" There's something rotten in Denmark..."
We aren't sure yet where Denmark is yet.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Still haven’t heard from BA Steve, as they essentially abandoned a plane load of people at the Milan airport at 1:00am, eventually loading 7 passengers at a time into a van for a ride to a hotel...no rebooked flight news. The skeptic in me booked a hotel in Milan, took an 80 euro cab ride into the city at 2:30 am and booked a train to Venice. Almost there and another reason not to check luggage...thank goodness they unloaded the aircraft.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rwsaunders
Thinking of you guys...flying from Heathrow to Venice late this evening and the pilot aborted the landing while the gear was down...always interesting. He told us later that the ATC’s diverted us at the last minute due to bad weather/runway issues. First we were supposed to divert to Bergamo and then we finally landed in Milan, where I type this post from 10C. Hope this 2hr flight doesn’t turn into 5hrs as we’ve been waiting on the runway for over an hour for a bus and they made me check luggage as I have no status on British Airways. First world problem I know.
I experienced the same scenario about a year ago. Same airports. Same airline. Same baggage situation. My luggage was delivered to my home 10 days after the trip was completed. I hope your experience differs from mine.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
busdriver1959
That's a lot to sort through. These guys flew for 6 minutes. Lion Air for 11 minutes. Ther's time there to come up with a plan. It's not easy to come up with a plan in a situation that's complicated by multiple failures/problems. A good read is "QF 32". It's the story written by the captain of the Quantas A380 with the uncontained engine failure that took out a whole bunch of other systems on the airplane. At one point he simply had to shift gears and quit trying to figure out what systems were lost. That didn't matter to him any more. He figured out what he still had and came up with a plan to use those systems to get back on the ground safely.
Great info and I'll read up on QF32.
FWIW "QANTAS" is an acronym so there's no U.
Queensland And Northern Territory Air Service: started out as a mail run for some of the least accessible bits of the big brown land.
Edit: having read up a bit on QF32 I'll be buying deCrespigny's book.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rwsaunders
Still haven’t heard from BA Steve, as they essentially abandoned a plane load of people at the Milan airport at 1:00am, eventually loading 7 passengers at a time into a van for a ride to a hotel...no rebooked flight news. The skeptic in me booked a hotel in Milan, took an 80 euro cab ride into the city at 2:30 am and booked a train to Venice. Almost there and another reason not to check luggage...thank goodness they unloaded the aircraft.
Good luck.. Better choice than waiting and hoping.
There is a nice hotel right at Malpensa that I have overnighted a few times to get an early am flight...an old estate converted.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
weather and machines can go wrong. In a plane it is more dangerous than the bus breaking down. You have to accept this. I fly in Europe about 30 times a year. Either BA or Easyjet. I have had a few quite exciting aborted landings and diversions involving either Innsbruck, Munich, Heathrow or Gatwick. Without exception, the Flight Crew and Cabin Crew have been excellent. You have entrusted your safety to them. If the Captain/First Officer go quiet over the PA system it is because they are busy looking after you, and themselves.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
thollandpe
Question about MCAS, are there other planes that have used software to address a stability issue?
If I understand it correctly, the original 737 was designed around the long, narrow JT8D engines with cigar-like nacelles. When they stretched it and re-engined it with the higher-bypass, larger-diameter CFM56, they had to move the gearbox off the bottom of the engine for ground clearance, which gave the nacelles that distinctive flat-bottomed shape.
On the MAX, with still higher bypass and larger diameter engines, they had to move them even farther forward. Now those flat-bottomed nacelles decrease stability at high angles of attack by generating lift that's well ahead of the center of gravity. Addressed by the MCAS software.
Has there ever been another airliner with a stability issue like this, that was compensated for by software? I thought the F-16 was the first aircraft ever purposely designed with "relaxed" stability.
TH
Bring back the elegance
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Saab2000
It would surprise me if the 737 MAX series was the only airplane with a trim system designed to compensate for some potential inherent instability in some part of the CG range.
I think it's relatively common in the helicopter world to have an elevator that is controlled via computer and responds automatically to the present conditions. From the couple I'm familiar with it varies pretty widely how big of a deal it is if that system fails or is stuck in one extreme position or the other. But in the hovering world you usually have the advantage of not having to worry about being too slow or stalling.
I've been following the 737 Max mostly via the NYT and their articles. It's been very interesting, sadly the 737 Max and this same issue had already made the front page in between the first accident and second.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mark Kelly
Great info and I'll read up on QF32.
FWIW "QANTAS" is an acronym so there's no U.
Queensland And Northern Territory Air Service: started out as a mail run for some of the least accessible bits of the big brown land.
Edit: having read up a bit on QF32 I'll be buying deCrespigny's book.
That’s funny about the u. I never noticed that it wasn’t there.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveP
And more from him,
Boeing’s effort to get the 737 Max approved to fly again, explained
A bigger problem than a software update.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
"Should be ok, works most of the time, flying is very safe almost always..."
Boeing executives.
They need to subpoena some of the engineers and get them under oath.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
The preliminary report from Ethiopian has been out for a week. Not much is different from the Lion Air crash except that this crew was able to do the memory items for runaway trim but they had stopped flying the aircraft by that time. They never pulled the power back and about 20 seconds after stab trim cutout, they oversped the aircraft. They exceeded the max mach speed. The airloads on the control surfaces caused binding in the trim system and they couldn't move the trim manually. There's no mention of the fold out trim handle. That would've allowed more force to be applied and possibly two hands applying force. I'm assuming there's not a data recorder sensor on the handle so unless they talk about it or the investigators determine that it was out when they hit, we don't know if they used it and then stowed it.
The media reports I've seen show a lack of understanding of some pretty basic stuff by the reporters doing the writing. They only want to blame Boeing. While this is a complicated emergency, in both the Lion Air and Ethiopian crashes the crews had information that should have improved their chances of survival but they still performed poorly. Boeing shouldn't sell the airplane with the cheaper option where MCAS activates without looking at both AOA vanes. They should take that hit but Boeing didn't kill anybody, poor crew training and maintenance practices did.
-
Re: irrational fear of flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by
busdriver1959
They should take that hit but Boeing didn't kill anybody, poor crew training and maintenance practices did.
As is usually the case in accidents like this, it seems to be a number of different factors that combine to result in a tragedy.
Others can play the blame game and decide how much is apportioned to whom.