Even in cars if they are a bit different than you are used to.

When I was building my Cobra replica the engine was not yet running so dad and I pushed it out of the garage with mom operating the brakes since the driveway has an incline and it would roll across the street if we didn't use the brakes. In that car the pedals are off set due to the wide transmission tunnel. Well, it dropped of the little ledge between the garage and driveway and started rolling so mom of course stood on the brakes. Except I could hear the gas pedal hitting the stop over and over as she thought she was pumping the brakes. Dad and I both yelled to use the brakes and she was yelling back that she was, though clearly she was not. Even after the car rolled across the street and got stopped and we showed her she insisted she was hitting the brakes. Panic can make you do wierd things. Good thing there was no gas in it yet, she would have had a pool of gas in the manifold as much as she was pumping.

If you are talking generic 737 then not exactly but pretty close. It would be similar to being in a car where the simulator has the ABS malfunction and you pull the fuse. The new sport car MAX has a stability control that works with the ABS and malfunctions causing the ABS to not work right.

''Doomed Jets Lacked 2 Safety Features That Boeing Sold as Extras''

'' The planes that crashed in Ethiopia and Indonesia weren’t equipped with optional safety features that could, in part, have helped the pilots detect erroneous readings.
Now the company is making one of those features standard.''

NYT, 2h ago,1295 comments.

Sounds like Boeing actually knows what the problem is, and has known. The airplane has diabetes. The insulin was an optional extra.

The manufacturer may cover some of the costs of a retrofit due to an AD, usually only the parts costs. As to the downtime, that is the operators problem, and the aircraft manufacturer will not compensate for it. I have never seen insurance to cover an aircraft on ground due to AD. Depending on the issue, with business jet aircraft occasionally a high end manufacturer like gulfstream will help cover costs of chartering other aircraft during down time, but I have never seen that applied in an AD situation, only in one of problems unique to that hull. And I would doubt an airline manufacturer would be inclined to expose themselves to a liability that high. The cost to blanket cover all the downed max's and offer compensation to airlines would break boeing, it would be an astronomical amount of money.

So it was missing the oil pressure gauge and oil pressure sensor disagree warning light.

This is a +$100M airplane. Just how much are those options in cost? $10k? $50k ?

More than you'd think lol.

As flipper said, it was missing a disagree warning light to do with oil pressure, totally unrelated to the crash, and not a necessity as it is a light telling you to pay attention to the gauges already there. The one relevant to the crash is I believe an additional stall push light to tell you that the stall system is active, which again is a light to tell you you have a warning light on, not really a necessity. Those are now being installed in all Max on the line from what I understand, but it has been made into more of an issue in the press than it really is. I have seen a few reports going on about how the airline chose to turn down a safety based option due to cost. That is a vast simplification of the situation I think.

Reminds me of the Audi "unintended acceleration" claims from the 80s. It was almost always pedal misapplication in a panic situation. Got me a nice 1985 Audi 5000 for a song in 1987 for that very reason.

I have heard talk of "book pilots" vs. "natural pilots" for years, but don't know if it's true or just a load of BS. Supposedly, book pilots are rule followers, and always a bit constrained by their training, and tend to freeze in unfamiliar situations, whereas natural pilots think outside the box and come up with way to overcome and survive. Back during the 737 rudder scare, there was a lot of talk about the USAIR captain involved in the Pittsburgh accident being a "book pilot"who just couldn't deal with the anomaly. I'd be interested in what the pilotos here think.

Flying, like anything else is either intuitive or not. Some people take to it like a duck to water, some people you can teach for years and they’d never be any good. The same is true of motorcycle riding and many other things.

No matter what, the number one rule is that you always have to fly the plane.

I instructed many years ago (in helicopters), there’s nothing graceful about learning to fly a helicopter. An airplane wants to fly and will fly reasonably well if you let it. With a helicopter - you have to make it fly.

Some students were naturals and could pick it up very quick. Others you wondered how they chewed gum and drove their car at the same time.

...so if I get it right, Boeing extended 60's airframe in order to compete with hot-selling A320NEO without making costly new design, mended aerodynamic controlability issues with badly designed "FBW", self-certified the system (on basis of wrong info given to FAA?).
And then they told nothing to pilots about the system until planes started falling out from the sky...And the failure mode of system itself is such that it needs observant pilot to recognize the issue and flip correct switch?

I am sure plenty of questions will be asked...

No, you’re not getting it correct. That’s a bit of a melodramatic mischaracterization of the entire issue.

It is like GM competing with Prius by fitting Chevy Nova Gen 4 with hybrid drivetrain. Taxi operators are desperate for cars and there is a long backlog to buy a Prius, so they sign up for Novas as well. They need cars like, right now!

But new hybrid engine is too heavy for Nova so car fishtails easily. GM fixes stability with new "steering wheel yanker system" ... fed by same fuse as trunk light...which manual doesnt say anything about. When cars start ending up in ditches due to burnt out fuse (yanking the wheel from drivers hands), GM says it is drivers fault... they should have bought extra equipment (a red dash light telling them that trunk light is not working, 100$) or switched the ignition (like manual said they should if "engine races").

Now the fix: "steering wheel yanker system" will only yank once, weaker and will get power from both trunk and cigarette lighter fuse. Red dash light will be installed free of charge.

How's that for melodrama ;)

The biggest problem with aerospace is that it’s a small niche industry that is very complex and not easily understood by those that haven’t lived it. Not due to intelligence, simply due to the extensive red tape and very industry specific processes, tools, and product. What Boeing did isn’t unique or particularly novel, you’ll find similar features on basically every commercial aircraft flying.

Well, don’t quit your day job. You don’t have a career in writing.

Ask yourself whether or not the pilots had a role in this, in particular pilots that weren’t as skilled or as well trained as they should have been. Ask yourself what role an airline might have played if they had access to a simulator for training and didn’t use it. Ask yourself whether or not it might matter that the airline procedures are so lax that they cannot fix a mechanical problem properly or verify that problems experienced on a previous flight have been corrected properly. Ask yourself how a pilot with 200 hours of total flying time can get into the cockpit of an airliner and fly it.

I could go on, but I have other things to do today.

Yes, they sold hybrid Chevy Novas to countries where drivers tests are not as strict as in say, Germany.
But it does not change the fact that your steering wheel might got yanked from you when merging on the interstate by "yanking stability system" tied to burnt out trunk light and statistically, many more people will end up in ditches.
If GM keeps saying "you should have trail braked, you lousy driver" to people who crashed, taxi companies might annulate their Nova orders and get in line to buy a Prius (which has proven ESP fed by four sensors and own power fuse).

Apparently there was an “upgraded sensor package” that Boeing charged extra for and at least two airlines were to cheap to buy?

WTF?

I think what you’re referring to is not a package that includes updated sensors but involves the installation in the cockpit of indicators that give more information on what the angle of attack sensors are reading.

Some airlines, such as Southwest, specify additional things to be added to the airplanes, above and beyond what you’re talking about.

There’s a lot of flexibility in what airlines can specify on orders for new jets.

https://www.washingtonpost.com

“One pilot said the airline didn’t “have the infrastructure” to support the fleet of Boeing and Airbus jets it ordered, and alleged the airline had a “fear-based” management culture in which “safety is being sacrificed for expansion and profit margin.” The pilot also accused the airline of failing to update pilot manuals and leaving out certain checklists designed to help pilots respond to “non-normal” situations. Another pilot criticized Ethiopian regulators for maintaining lax standards with respect to crew flight and rest time. The FAA’s data does not identify the pilots by name.”

Here’s an interesting article if you want to delve into what likely happened and how there was more than one factor at play, including a lack of understanding by the pilots. It also makes the point that the investigators of the Lion Air crash could’ve done a better job of getting the word out about all of the factors involved in that crash.

https://leehamnews.com/2019/03/22/bjorns-corner-the-ethiopian-airlines-flight-302-crash-part-2/