Another brand new 737 Max crashes

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by dewolf

People on the ground are saying that the plane was billowing smoke and flames from the rear. Bomb??

I posted the Cut-A-Way diagram for that reason, it shows something back there but not the tiny toilet rooms.

Here is another view.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Aircraft Seating Charts - Airline Seating Maps and Layouts


Looks like that tank-like thing is the galley.

Originally Posted by Crowbob

I agree with kach.

It was pilot error or a mechanical problem.

Page-1

Originally Posted by kach22i

....... - we will have to wait and see.

No point in guessing now.

dewolf, the same eyewitness also mention and erratic flight path or words to that effect, a suddenly out of balance jet engine could be one cause I would hazard to guess.

I'd hesitate to guess based on any early report, next thing you know people will come out of the woodwork to say they saw a missile, nothing should be discounted just yet.

For historical reference.

http://www.b737.org.uk/fuel.htm

Centre Fuel Tank Inerting

To date, two 737's, 737-400 HS-TDC of Thai Airways on 3 Mar 2001 and 737-300 EI-BZG operated by Philippine Airlines on 5 Nov 1990 have been destroyed on the ground due to explosions in the empty centre fuel tank. The common factor in both accidents was that the centre tank fuel pumps were running in high ambient temperatures with empty or almost empty centre fuel tanks.

Fuel will be near the C of G and Center of Lift, a jet fuel sourced fire at the rear of the plane seems unlikely, but I am not an aircraft designer, just using some common observations based on published information.

[pavulon]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

Interesting. The anti-stall system is not likely to cause smoke and flames in the rear of the aircraft.

APU fire?

[GH85Carrera]

The flight data and voice recorders have been retrieved. Lets hope they survived that massive impact as they are designed to do. That will answer a lot of questions.

[flipper35]

Originally Posted by beepbeep

it is a bit strong to talk about "3:rd worlds pilots" causing this, considering that Boeing hung large engines on airframe made for 60's turbojets and had to move them forward/up (as landing gear is too short). But this caused pitch-up issues at hi AoA (nacelles acting as lift bodies), they tacked on stick-pusher ... but did not told the pilots. How is that for ethics?

Mind you, A320 stall protection has three AoA sensors that are voted. MCAS seems to use one. So if sensor fails and A/C starts nosing over , it is up to pilot to troubleshoot it as runaway trim and pull correct breaker...rather tall order on climb out.

First, triple redundancy does not mean fool proof as evidenced by AF447 flying a perfectly good aircraft into the ocean even with the audible ant tactile warnings, after the pitot tubes had thawed and were functioning.

The system is not much different that what has been around for ages, but lets have a real pilot (Mac McClellan) explain that.

"Because the new MAX version of the 737 has heavier engines and other changes, Boeing added a system that under certain conditions of airspeed, CG location and weight, automatically moves the pitch trim to modify stick force. The pilot who is hand flying feels this as though he is pulling on the yoke and would naturally reduce pull force to lower the nose and angle of attack (AOA)."

"In the non-aviation media, this system is being called everything from new, to radical, to untested. In reality, nearly all airplanes larger than a basic four-seat piston single use some sort of device to alter the forces a pilot feels while maneuvering the airplane."

https://airfactsjournal.com/2019/03/can-boeing-trust-pilots/

[javadog]

This is a table of radar-sourced data on the initial phase of flight. The altitude of the runway is around 72xx ft. I am not sure that the data shows the entire flight. Note the steadily increasing ground speed and the oscillations in the vertical speed. Note also the time intervals between the swings in vertical speed. Lastly, note the initiation of a turn near the end of the data.

[atcjorg]

Originally Posted by javadog

I have spoken English all my life and I can’t understand half of what ATC says on the radio. And that’s in the US, if you listen to what goes on overseas, they may as well be speaking Swahili, for all I know.

I doubt it was a problem in this case, but language may be an effective barrier to training.

yes air traffic communications are in english however it's a different vocabulary it's like verbal shorthand and is designed to be very precise with minimum verbage. the best controllers are not the ones that speak @ 100 words a min. they get too many "say agains" the best speak at a comfortable rate that is understood the first time . speaking so fast you have to repeat yourself is counter productive more so when your busy.

[widebody911]

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/12/stocks-making-the-biggest-moves-midday-boeing-dicks-stitch-fix--more.html

[widebody911]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-to-make-key-change-in-max-cockpit-software-11552413489

[kach22i]

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3441964-boeing-make-significant-cockpit-software-update-737-max-wsj

Separately, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency says it is suspending all flights of Boeing’s 737 MAX 8 and 9 jets pending more information.

I only found one example of a galley fire, and it was not a major one, and different aircraft. Posting because this is the approximate location of a fire an eye-witness claimed to have seen.

2014
United Airlines 777 diverts to Canada after galley fire

Fire Protection - Boeing

[jyl]

Eyewitnesses are often unreliable. Still, if turns out wasn't the auto trim control then BA stock will pop. If it was, then BA will roll out the software fix and it all blows over, except for the families.

[Captain Ahab Jr]

The UK today banned the 737Max from flying in UK airspace

[Wayne 962]

Are you kidding me? I couldn't believe this when I read it, if true:

Boeing publicly released details about the planned 737 MAX software update on its website late Monday. A company spokesman confirmed the update would use multiple sensors, or data feeds, in MAX’s stall-prevention system—instead of the current reliance on a single sensor.

Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-to-make-key-change-in-max-cockpit-software-11552413489?mod=hp_lead_pos1

[kach22i]

...........current reliance on a single sensor

Oh boy.

[Wayne 962]

I'm sorry, but in this day an age, with the invention of self-driving cars and other automated equipment, the MCAS system should *not* be able to slam the plane into the ground unimpeded. I mean, the stupidity of that is insane. When I first heard about the system, I thought, well, it must be more complicated than that, and perhaps a software error (which is notoriously difficult to plan for when there are anomalies). But depending upon a single sensor to then send the airplane directly into the ground? At the very least, the system should have redundancy to know that it's about to destroy the airplane. My 20-year old BMW doesn't have a single-sensor system for ABS or the airbag deployment, it's inconceivable that an airliner would.

Still flabbergasted.

-Wayne

[Eric Coffey]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

Its prolly been said on here B4-
200 hours seems a lot shy of prerequisites for a particular big new passenger platform.(or any large piece of equipment )
Yes I know they are rated as pilots..............still

I must have missed this. Are you saying the Captain and/or FO had only 200 hours total? Or was it just 200 in type?

ATP is 1500 hrs minimum, IIRC.

[Captain Ahab Jr]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

A Knee Jerk reaction to an unknown problem.

Maybe the UK know more about the problem than you give credit for

Sounds like only the USA and Canada are allowing them to fly

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/12/africa/airlines-suspend-boeing-flights-intl/index.html

Better to be safe than have another one fall out the sky onto your citizens

Jeff, I can't imagine the mood at Boeing, the guys must be working all hours, checking and rechecking systems, design's and flight scenario's

[Wayne 962]

If they have the black boxes, then they should absolutely know right now if the MCAS anti-stall system was triggered on this flight? I would think that transparency in releasing information would be paramount right now.

-Wayne

[Eric Coffey]

Wow, 200 hrs. is crazy low time for ANY seat in a 737.

TIA, my bru.

[Jeff Higgins]

Wayne, I cannot read your WSJ article (not a subscriber), but I think I'm sensing a bit of confusion between what constitutes the MACS and the simple Angle of Attack sensor.

Yes, indeed, there is typically only one AOA sensor on an aircraft. It's a pretty simple and very reliable mechanical device. While MACS relies upon input from the AOA sensor, it also receives input form a number of other sources. MACS only intervenes when the combined input from all sources tell it that the aircraft is approaching a stall.

Boeing may be looking at adding redundancy to these other systems. Adding another AOA sensor would not be a simple software upgrade - it would have to be a mechanical modification to the aircraft, adding another AOA sensor.

AOA is sometimes difficult to understand. It's not a function of how high the nose is, it's a function of how high it is relative to direction of travel:

[p911dad]

Originally Posted by afterburn 549

No-
The first officer had 200
PIC had 2000 i think they said.

The airline said in a statement that the PIC, Yared Getachew, had 8,000 hours, they did not say how many hours in type.