Lion Air

[svandamme]

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/27/boeing_737_max_mcas_lion_air/

I distinctly remember some people quite some time ago flaming Airbus as absolute crap because the fly by wire limits the pilot inputs... followed by statements, That would never happen on a Boeing they leave the pilot in control.

Oh well.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

The esssence of true piloting is control and you simply don’t have it in “modern” aircraft anymore. The mindset is that computer programs can do better than humans and as such the pilots are mostly just there for show and passenger comfort - and to monitor things.

I am just fine with old fashioned airplanes with cables and pushrods of hydraulics connected to pumps and valves with no computers at all. In my cargo flying days I remember being snickered at in the pilots longue because my planes (PA31s, Be99s) were all ratty looking and had “old fashioned” instrumentation / steam gauges whereas the hotshots might have glass cockpit this or that, computer aided everything, FADEC, GPS, etc. on their jet or turboprop. I didn’t care. I actually hand flew my aircraft (seldom an autopilot of any sort and even rarer if they actually worked). I had actual skills. Those guys were (IMO) more lucky than good.

Modern airplanes have a few too many “black box” decision makers for my liking. Maybe I’m old fashioned but I like predictability and knowing what result a particular control input is going to make, 100% of the time.

[GH85Carrera]

Evidently there are two switches that can be flipped or circuit breakers, that turn that system OFF. The pilots never did that for whatever reason. The system can de turned off, unlike so many thing on an Airbus.

[flipper35]

To be fair, that aircraft was not airworthy when it took off and should have never flown until the sensors were replaced properly.

Also, Boeing has the two yokes tied together so if one pilot does something, the other knows it. AF447 would not have crashed had Airbus tied their side sticks together.

That said, the fact that Boeing did not fully disclose the new "feature" is unforgivable.

Pilots are like any other profession. Do you want the doctor that got straight As or the one that barely passed. Both are certified.

I don't think Sullenberger was an extraordinary pilot, but he is sharp and I bet he was a straight A student and I have no doubt had he been flying the Lion Air flight it would have been a much better ending.

(That does not diminish in any way, shape or form my opinion that he is a hero)

[flipper35]

A couple months ago pilots flew a plane into the ground in Russia because of faulty data readings and they had full manual control of the aircraft. In Buffalo the pilots held the stick back when the commuter aircraft stalled due to icing. I think we need better standards for pilots world wide and far better "incident" training. As PoP stated, they need more actual seat of the pants flying. Make them fly a J3 or something every 6 months.

[Nate2046]

Originally Posted by flipper35

I think we need better standards for pilots world wide and far better "incident" training. As PoP stated, they need more actual seat of the pants flying. Make them fly a J3 or something every 6 months.

Do you have any experience in airline pilot training? I do, and can tell you that we are among the most highly trained and closely scrutinized of any occupation. Commercial aviation’s safety record is testament to that irrefutable fact. Still, we’re always striving to improve on that record through better training, better practices, better standards, etc. I’m in the sim every 6 months training and being evaluated on different emergencies on the aircraft I’m certified to fly. Trust me, I’d much rather go feck about in a J3, but that’s not going to make me better at my job. Just my opinion

[flipper35]

Nate, I meant world wide standards and stated so in my response. Sorry if there was confusion there. I know what you have to go through and is part of the reason I think Sully was not an anomaly in his skills as a pilot.

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by Nate2046

Do you have any experience in airline pilot training? I do, and can tell you that we are among the most highly trained and closely scrutinized of any occupation. Commercial aviation’s safety record is testament to that irrefutable fact. Still, we’re always striving to improve on that record through better training, better practices, better standards, etc. I’m in the sim every 6 months training and being evaluated on different emergencies on the aircraft I’m certified to fly. Trust me, I’d much rather go feck about in a J3, but that’s not going to make me better at my job. Just my opinion

I have a buddy who is retired from American...he flew F-111's from Uncle before going to American. He did spend a lot of time in 737's. I sent a link to the opening article asking his opinion. So far, no response. So, I'll wait to hear from a guy with many hours in a 737.

But Nate, I'll back you up on the SIM time...my buddy was frequently in a sim...

Gawd, how my buddy hated aging out of the air national guard. He did indeed love flying fighters.

[Nate2046]

Originally Posted by flipper35

Nate, I meant world wide standards and stated so in my response. Sorry if there was confusion there.

Yeah, I guess I didn’t really catch that, sorry. I’ll agree with your concern over international standards. In my current job we deadhead frequently on Asian carriers so it’s definitely an area where I have a vested interest.

Originally Posted by pwd72s

I have a buddy who is retired from American...he flew F-111's from Uncle before going to American. He did spend a lot of time in 737's. I sent a link to the opening article asking his opinion. So far, no response. So, I'll wait to hear from a guy with many hours in a 737.

I’m sure he’ll have some great insight. I believe I read that the system in question is unique to the new Max aircraft. That can be one of the challenges when you’re assigned to a fleet that spans several generations. Boeing and the airlines want to keep training requirements to a bare minimum when they certify a new series of aircraft. Typically, you’ll get what they call ‘differences training’ but the initial type certification, in this case 737, applies to all variants. I’m getting a sense that there wasn’t much awareness of this new system and possibly no training on handling a malfunction.

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by Nate2046

I’m getting a sense that there wasn’t much awareness of this new system and possibly no training on handling a malfunction.

That's my take (at this stage) as well. Seems like the MCAS (AOA nanny) system was implemented on the MAX series discreetly, with no accompanying differences/conversion training.
Several MAX pilots have reported they didn't even know what it was, much less that it was a system incorporated on the A/C they were flying. Not good.

Potentially worse (from a legal liability perspective) is the possibility that it was implemented due to a pitch-up tendency on the MAX, as a result of the new engines/nacelles (larger/heavier/further forward/etc.).
I mean, I am sure it's a sound system, but in the eyes of litigators, they will likely try to say that Boeing was "hiding" something, and/or "covering up" a known design flaw.

Still, in the Lion Air case, even with a FUBAR'd MCAS system/sensors, there were several options they could/should have been aware of to disable it, had they known what they were "fighting" in the first place.

[Scott R]

It was a Max 8 built in Renton to be specific.

[Jeff Higgins]

Lion Air is well known in the industry as being a cheap ass, cut any corner to save a buck, unscrupulous, untrustworthy, bunch of money grubbing cretins. Did I miss anything? Hell, their under maintained, unsafe aircraft were banned for an awfully long time from just about everyone else's airspace.

From what I recall, this particular aircraft had had issues on previous flights and had been "repaired" by Lion Air's "mechanics". God only knows where they got their new AOA sensor, how it was installed, what inspections it received, or any of that. I could tell you guys some real horror stories about some of the shoddy crap we would find when working on some of these fly-by-night carriers' aircraft. Enough to maybe make you reconsider flying.

I'm not letting Boeing off the hook entirely. The manual override, or any changes to it, absolutely should have been conveyed more clearly, and in a more timely fashion, to the operators. No excuse for that. That said, I doubt Lion Air would have taken the time to pass it on to their pilots. That's just how they are. Cheap bastards.

[Brian 162]

My neighbor is a captain on a 737. We were talking about the Lion Air crash. He said he received a technical bulletin related to what happened a few days after the crash.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Jeff is correct, the findings of the initial safety investigation is that the Lion Air aircraft was not properly repaired from previous squawks and was flown in a non-airworthy state multiple times before the accident. Not that Boeing is infallible but the incompetence of the maintenance staff and the indifference of the pilots appears to be the blame here.

[p911dad]

"The following is an example of just the type of scenario that you must avoid. Again, the message here is to always disengage first!

The autopilot suddenly goes into a nose down situation. The autopilot and autotrim are engaged and the pilot reacts by applying backpressure. Unless the pilot immediately disconnects the autopilot, autotrim does its job by further applying down trim. As you can imagine, things can get ugly fast, especially at low altitude."

This comes out of an old article talking about Century autopilots and autopilots in general. I have no jet or turbine time in my logbook, this is from a Piper Owners site, and relates to the Aztec, which I am familiar with. I realize that modern aircraft are way beyond anything I ever flew, but it seems the advice above should be well known to any pilot flying 737's. We had a simple trim/autopilot disconnect button on the yoke, push the button and the autopilot disconnects instantly. Don't Boeing aircraft have such a device? Or are the computers so powerful the pilot can't disengage the trim if the computer says no?

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by p911dad

"The following is an example of just the type of scenario that you must avoid. Again, the message here is to always disengage first!

The autopilot suddenly goes into a nose down situation. The autopilot and autotrim are engaged and the pilot reacts by applying backpressure. Unless the pilot immediately disconnects the autopilot, autotrim does its job by further applying down trim. As you can imagine, things can get ugly fast, especially at low altitude."

This comes out of an old article talking about Century autopilots and autopilots in general. I have no jet or turbine time in my logbook, this is from a Piper Owners site, and relates to the Aztec, which I am familiar with. I realize that modern aircraft are way beyond anything I ever flew, but it seems the advice above should be well known to any pilot flying 737's. We had a simple trim/autopilot disconnect button on the yoke, push the button and the autopilot disconnects instantly. Don't Boeing aircraft have such a device? Or are the computers so powerful the pilot can't disengage the trim if the computer says no?

In this case, it would appear to be just the opposite (and thus an even more unintuitive system, IMO). The MCAS system (AOA trim nanny) activates when the AP is disengaged. They were already flying manually, and it may have helped their situation if they had actually re-engaged the AP. That said, it should have been easily override-able with manual trim inputs. They could have flipped the stab-trim switches down (cut-out), grabbed hold of the console trim wheel, or even temporary relief from the electric trim switches on the yoke.

But as Jeff and Matt mentioned above, negligence WRT to maintenance was certainly a contributing factor. Seems like a text-book example of the "error chain theory" at work here.
And from what Jeff describes, I am surprised it hadn't bit them sooner.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Flying an aircraft with known unresolved issues with the primary flight indication systems is gross negligence. No excuses for this one. Aircraft have a minimum equipment list for a reason, systems like the airspeed and angle of attack indication aren’t on that list. I’ll be damned if I will sign up to fly on any Indonesian Airline considering their recent appalling safety record, this isn’t the only Lion Air incident nor the first issue from Indonesia.

[RSBob]

Mr. Higgins, care to share the other sub standard cheap ass carriers we should avoid? Ryan Air? Easy Jet? Malaysian Air?

[petrolhead611]

RSBob why have you slagged off two airlines with almost impeccable safety records? Look a bit closer to home , only 2 US airlines are among the top twenty safest in the world

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by Nate2046

Do you have any experience in airline pilot training? I do, and can tell you that we are among the most highly trained and closely scrutinized of any occupation. Commercial aviation’s safety record is testament to that irrefutable fact. Still, we’re always striving to improve on that record through better training, better practices, better standards, etc. I’m in the sim every 6 months training and being evaluated on different emergencies on the aircraft I’m certified to fly. Trust me, I’d much rather go feck about in a J3, but that’s not going to make me better at my job.

Originally Posted by Nate2046

I believe I read that the system in question is unique to the new Max aircraft. That can be one of the challenges when you’re assigned to a fleet that spans several generations. Boeing and the airlines want to keep training requirements to a bare minimum when they certify a new series of aircraft. Typically, you’ll get what they call ‘differences training’ but the initial type certification, in this case 737, applies to all variants. I’m getting a sense that there wasn’t much awareness of this new system and possibly no training on handling a malfunction.

Excellent posts.

"Differences training" is a really difficult task since pilots often revert to their training regimen learned and honed for years before the "difference" system is introduced.

I was an aircraft commander in a type-model-series of aircraft that had subtle, yet very important differences in cockpit layout and emergency procedures.

I nearly gooned a check ride (airborne) because I reflexively responded to an emergency procedure checklist for the TMS of aircraft I was initially qualified to fly and had the most hours in, not the aircraft I was flying.

Oops.