The Dreaded Boeing 737-MAX

[striderman]

it was not a 737 max. so talking about those 2 events is pointless.

the 800 variant almost 5 thousand built and i think over 4,000 still flying about a quarter in china. so like all events working out what happened is crucial. the 1 in question only about 7 years old.

Edited March 22, 2022 by striderman

[forqalso]

The 737 is the most common commercial passenger jet ever produced.  Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 plane models have a crash rate of 0.07 crashes per million flights. I wouldn’t hesitate to book or fly on one.

[Zeb]

2 hours ago, forqalso said:

The 737 is the most common commercial passenger jet ever produced.  Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 plane models have a crash rate of 0.07 crashes per million flights. I wouldn’t hesitate to book or fly on one.

Also i see that 'speculation' is that the pilot(s) may have crashed the Chinese airliner?

Who knows? Interesting to see what further info comes out.

Poor buggers onboard though. Very sad.

[usexpat46]

5 hours ago, forqalso said:

The 737 is the most common commercial passenger jet ever produced.  Boeing 737-600/700/800/900 plane models have a crash rate of 0.07 crashes per million flights. I wouldn’t hesitate to book or fly on one.

When it comes to old Boeing planes its hard to beat the USAF B-52,  I think the last one to come off the production line was around 1963,  The USAF is still flying them and they are projected to stay in the inventory until around 2050.

[1tooth]

17 hours ago, Wingeing Pom said:

not rely on computers to over ride a big design flaw

 honestly don't understand why plots cannot manually overide the autopilot?

[jetdoc]

58 minutes ago, 1tooth said:

 honestly don't understand why plots cannot manually overide the autopilot?

They can but then THEY have to FLY the airplane and therein lies the CHALLeNGE.

[jetdoc]

8 hours ago, Whalley said:

 

 

I have more than 40 years on the B737 and routinely go on test flights following major maintenance checks.  The pilots I fly with say it’s inconceivable that these 2 aircraft crashed because of a runaway stabilizer.  Such a simple thing that takes a few seconds to correct.
 

 An emergency procedure that B737 pilots here are routinely drilled on, in a simulator.   A procedure that by law is required to be accomplished competently as a memory item.  (No check list allowed during the drill).

 

The Max became so politicized that the facts of what really happened got lost in the rhetoric. 
 

The first Lion Air crash was the result of their maintenance staff installing a faulty angle of attack sensor (rigged 22 degrees out of tollerance by a shop not legally certified to work on this part) and never properly tested as required by the maintenance manual once installed, before Lion Air released the aircraft.  This happened the evening before the crash.

The evening before the crash, the aircraft departed and the faulty sensor triggered a stab runaway.  The pilots flying initially failed to do the non-normal procedure (memory item) that requires them to simply correct with the thumb switch & cutout the Stab as shown in my video.  
 

They panicked, didn’t know what to do and declared a Pan-Pan emergency.

Lucky for them, a dead-heading pilot in the cockpit observer’s seat understood the situation and advised the pilots to use the cutout switches (as shown in my video)

The procedures take a few seconds to accomplish and pilots are legally required to know this.  In the western world that I live in, pilots do know this and for this reason find the whole situation bizarre.  
 

Back to Lion Air on the evening flight prior to the crash.  The pilots finally did do the simple cut-out procedure and cancelled their emergency Pan-Pan with air traffic control.

 

The pilots are now legally required to land at the closest airport.  But as history tells us by the number or aircraft Lion Air has crashed, with no safety culture they didn’t do what is required and just soldered on.

Unbelievable in my opinion.  This shit simply doesn’t happen in my world.
 

Now the flight crew has to cover up the fact that they decided to continue with an unsafe aircraft.  To help with the cover up they failed to make proper log book entries. Fucking unbelievable!

By doing so, they set up the next crew for the impending disaster who departed the next morning without a clue.

When the fatal flight departed.  The same scenario occurred.  Flight crew not properly trained to accomplish this extremely simple procedure did everything wrong and the rest is history.

In the cover up that followed Lion Air went so far as ripping pages out of the log-book.  In fact 31 pages were ripped out of the log-book.

The Ethiopian fatal flight is even more bizarre given the heightened awareness of the importance to follow this simple memory item shown in my video.

A world wide emergency Airworthiness Directive was issued by Boeing following the first crash explaining how to recognize the failure and step by step to do the stabilizer correct/cutout procedure just as I show in my video.  A procedure that take just a few second to accomplish.

.

 

 

Good analysis.

[simon46]

watch ‘the case against Boeing” a real blood boiling movie.

The pilots flying the Lion jet had no knowledge the MCAS was installed, that was the plan all along of Boeing to pretend that the Max was just a derivative of the 737 when retraining pilots would have killed sales. The FAA lapdogs didn’t bark.

Following this crash instructions were given to the pilots of action in the event of similar failures.  

In the second crash the pilots performed exactly as instructed, it did not help.

In Europe I have seen the same “it is all about return to investors” zero interest in the engineering which made companies great, e.g.the Transoceanic Gulf BP fire.

In the late 90s the new M-Benz MD made it clear that Mercs were built too well, I understand perfectly- why change a 10 yr old W123 or 124.

Within months the quality was reducing, (and the price) to what we have now.

The MD financial guru of Boeing seemed to leave with $60m +, Boeing will never recover to what it was.

[Atlas]

9 hours ago, Whalley said:

 

 

I have more than 40 years on the B737 and routinely go on test flights following major maintenance checks.  The pilots I fly with say it’s inconceivable that these 2 aircraft crashed because of a runaway stabilizer.  Such a simple thing that takes a few seconds to correct.
 

 An emergency procedure that B737 pilots here are routinely drilled on, in a simulator.   A procedure that by law is required to be accomplished competently as a memory item.  (No check list allowed during the drill).

 

The Max became so politicized that the facts of what really happened got lost in the rhetoric. 
 

The first Lion Air crash was the result of their maintenance staff installing a faulty angle of attack sensor (rigged 22 degrees out of tollerance by a shop not legally certified to work on this part) and never properly tested as required by the maintenance manual once installed, before Lion Air released the aircraft.  This happened the evening before the crash.

The evening before the crash, the aircraft departed and the faulty sensor triggered a stab runaway.  The pilots flying initially failed to do the non-normal procedure (memory item) that requires them to simply correct with the thumb switch & cutout the Stab as shown in my video.  
 

They panicked, didn’t know what to do and declared a Pan-Pan emergency.

Lucky for them, a dead-heading pilot in the cockpit observer’s seat understood the situation and advised the pilots to use the cutout switches (as shown in my video)

The procedures take a few seconds to accomplish and pilots are legally required to know this.  In the western world that I live in, pilots do know this and for this reason find the whole situation bizarre.  
 

Back to Lion Air on the evening flight prior to the crash.  The pilots finally did do the simple cut-out procedure and cancelled their emergency Pan-Pan with air traffic control.

 

The pilots are now legally required to land at the closest airport.  But as history tells us by the number or aircraft Lion Air has crashed, with no safety culture they didn’t do what is required and just soldered on.

Unbelievable in my opinion.  This shit simply doesn’t happen in my world.
 

Now the flight crew has to cover up the fact that they decided to continue with an unsafe aircraft.  To help with the cover up they failed to make proper log book entries. Fucking unbelievable!

By doing so, they set up the next crew for the impending disaster who departed the next morning without a clue.

When the fatal flight departed.  The same scenario occurred.  Flight crew not properly trained to accomplish this extremely simple procedure did everything wrong and the rest is history.

In the cover up that followed Lion Air went so far as ripping pages out of the log-book.  In fact 31 pages were ripped out of the log-book.

The Ethiopian fatal flight is even more bizarre given the heightened awareness of the importance to follow this simple memory item shown in my video.

A world wide emergency Airworthiness Directive was issued by Boeing following the first crash explaining how to recognize the failure and step by step to do the stabilizer correct/cutout procedure just as I show in my video.  A procedure that take just a few second to accomplish.

.

 

 

IMG_3441.MOV 17.56 MB · 0 downloads

Great insight mate.

[Whalley]

5 hours ago, simon46 said:

In the second crash the pilots performed exactly as instructed, it did not help.

Perhaps they did in the movie you watched.  But in real life, the pilots fucked up badly!

Not entirely their fault.  They were never properly trained.  The information they were meant to have never made it to the Ethiopian pilots.

The real tragedy stems from the first crash.  Boeing issued an Emergency Airworthiness Directive (EAD) 4 months and 3 days prior to the second crash, clearly instructing pilots how to recognize the AOA sensor failure and instructing pilots exactly what to do in the event of a resulting runaway stabilizer.

The information was to be incorporated into the Aircraft Flight Manual within 3 days from date of issue, but never was with Ethiopian Air.

On the Ethiopian flight in the minutes leading up to the crash, there were 4 stab runaway events clearly visible on the flight data recording readout.  

The pilots incorrectly responded by pulling back the control columns rather than using the thumb switch to relieve control column forces.

After the 4th event one of the pilots finally did use the cutout switches but without first correcting the severe stab out of trim condition using the thumb switch as instructed in the EAD (and shown in my video).

The aircraft is now heading straight towards the ground.  The thrust levers still at take off thrust.  Stab trim thumb switches disabled by the cutout switches.  Aircraft in an over speed condition (clacker can be heard on the voice recorder) The stabilizer trimmed full nose down and control columns pulled fully aft with all the strength both pilots could manage.

.

Emergency Airworthiness Directive that Ethiopian Air failed to inform their pilots:

.
 

Edited March 23, 2022 by Whalley

[1tooth]

1 hour ago, Whalley said:

Perhaps they did in the movie you watched.  But in real life, the pilots fucked up badly!

Not entirely their fault.  They were never properly trained.  The information they were meant to have never made it to the Ethiopian pilots.

The real tragedy stems from the first crash.  Boeing issued an Emergency Airworthiness Directive (EAD) 4 months and 3 days prior to the second crash, clearly instructing pilots how to recognize the AOA sensor failure and instructing pilots exactly what to do in the event of a resulting runaway stabilizer.

The information was to be incorporated into the Aircraft Flight Manual within 3 days from date of issue, but never was with Ethiopian Air.

On the Ethiopian flight in the minutes leading up to the crash, there were 4 stab runaway events clearly visible on the flight data recording readout.  

The pilots incorrectly responded by pulling back the control columns rather than using the thumb switch to relieve control column forces.

After the 4th event one of the pilots finally did use the cutout switches but without first correcting the severe stab out of trim condition using the thumb switch as instructed in the EAD (and shown in my video).

The aircraft is now heading straight towards the ground.  The thrust levers still at take off thrust.  Stab trim thumb switches disabled by the cutout switches.  Aircraft in an over speed condition (clacker can be heard on the voice recorder) The stabilizer trimmed full nose down and control columns pulled fully aft with all the strength both pilots could manage.

.

Emergency Airworthiness Directive that Ethiopian Air failed to inform their pilots:

.
 

That's all very good, but why make such a critical procedure so overly complicated?

[jetdoc]

When I was wrench'n we called the thumb switches "pickle switches', don't know why, but one powered the stab motor up or down and the other releases the stab brake so the motor can move the stabilizer.

[duke main]

24 minutes ago, jetdoc said:

When I was wrench'n we called the thumb switches "pickle switches', don't know why, but one powered the stab motor up or down and the other releases the stab brake so the motor can move the stabilizer.

The pickle button (for the planes I flew) was next to the trim switches. It was used to activate the flight director on an initial takeoff or a go around, and to deactivate the autopilot when required.

[Whalley]

9 hours ago, 1tooth said:

That's all very good, but why make such a critical procedure so overly complicated?

 

Perhaps you missed my video on the simple procedure.  

Perhaps you missed the fact that all pilots must know this simple procedure as a memory item and must practice the drill routinely in a simulator.

For the past 50 years this has been a B737 training requirement.

Let’s review the overcomplicated procedures that in reality takes only a few seconds to accomplish.

 

When the Stabilizer trim is running away:

1) Countermand with the thumb switch until stab is returned to normal trimmed condition.

2) Move cutout switches to the cutout  position.

3) Need further trim during the remainder of the flight, use the manual trim wheels.

[Whalley]

Watch pilots practice the procedure in a simulator.

 

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjj7JSN2dz2AhWPHM0KHWiGC2gQwqsBegQIAxAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D3pPRuFHR1co&usg=AOvVaw0jIoBWJzpYvznxSqSaQUvg

[forqalso]

8 hours ago, jetdoc said:

When I was wrench'n we called the thumb switches "pickle switches', don't know why, but one powered the stab motor up or down and the other releases the stab brake so the motor can move the stabilizer.

In the Marines, we would “pickle the load” meaning we had to drop an external load from our helicopter unexpectedly. I just Googled “pickle switch” and it goes back to WWII bomb sights that could “drop a pickle in a pickle barrel from 1,000 feet. 

[jetdoc]

6 hours ago, forqalso said:

In the Marines, we would “pickle the load” meaning we had to drop an external load from our helicopter unexpectedly. I just Googled “pickle switch” and it goes back to WWII bomb sights that could “drop a pickle in a pickle barrel from 1,000 feet. 

When I started 9/9/59 with the airlines most pilots were x military, so maybe the source as I think it was also related to releasing bomb loads.

[Whalley]

Coincidentally, I travelled on a B737 Max today.

I flew on one of the newest B737s in the world on my way to work on an aircraft (C-GNLK) that has the distinction of being the worlds oldest 737 in commercial  operation today.  
 

Perhaps C-GNLK holds the world record as the oldest passenger transport category jet aircraft in operation today.

C-GNLK has been in continuous service since 1974 (48 years).

 

.

 

[gentleenforcer]

Hi Whalley,

What’s that apparatus extending aft from the nose wheels of the old 737? Never seen anything like that before.

Thanks

GE.

 

[Whalley]

53 minutes ago, gentleenforcer said:

Hi Whalley,

What’s that apparatus extending aft from the nose wheels of the old 737? Never seen anything like that before.

Thanks

GE.

 

The aircraft is fitted with a gravel kit to enable operating on gravel runways.

The nose gear has a gravel deflector and the booms on the front of the engine inlet cowls are vortex  disapators designed to prevent the engines from ingesting gravel during takeoff and landings.

 

 

[gentleenforcer]

Much appreciated Whalley.

[ocka]

2 hours ago, Whalley said:

C-GNLK has been in continuous service since 1974 (48 years).

Those engines sure look old-school. Are they pure jets rather than turbofans?

[jetdoc]

4 hours ago, ocka said:

Those engines sure look old-school. Are they pure jets rather than turbofans?

JT8's fan but lower bypass, we called those Boings "fluf's

[LoneCelt]

On 21/03/2022 at 06:48, 1tooth said:

The thing I'm suspicious about is that they will rebrand the 737 Max to an unrecognizable name or model, to avoid the wary. Then there is always the last minute plane switch, especially on code shares.

I was flying Ryanair last week on a sparkly new Max.
It was called a 747-8200 but the shark wings and MOL, bless him, has managed to squeeze another two seats in. One of these days he will either make seats like bunks or take them out and standing only.

 

The Max was definitely sharper and quieter than the older 800's, the slimline seats I think are an improvement also 

[Pradit]

On 21/03/2022 at 04:29, 1tooth said:

What steps are you taking to avoid flying the Dreaded Boeing 737-MAX?

None. What steps are taking to avoid crossing the road?