morrisond wrote:MSPNWA wrote:XRAYretired wrote:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-14/boeing-updates-older-737-simulators-in-wake-of-fatal-max-crashes
Confirmed NG simulator did not accurately reflect manual trim wheel forces.
Yeah, and it's easier to turn than in a real aircraft in some circumstances.
If anything that article suggests the potential issue between sim and real is less than had been speculated.
It also says the SIM was harder in some situations than real life.
So what is everyone's point? How would that have changed what happened on ET302? It would not have changed what happened on ET302 one iota.
If you take the interpretation from the Pre-lim report that they were actually trying the trim wheels - the Co-pilot if he actually tried the trim and not just Manually flicking the Electric trim - tried in total for maybe 2-3 seconds if you take into account the time it would have taken for the conversation as well.
Here is the relevant part of the prelim report
At 05:41:46, the Captain asked the First-Officer if the trim is functional. The First-Officer has replied that the trim was not working and asked if he could try it manually. The Captain told him to try. At 05:41:54, the First-Officer replied that it is not working.
There is only 8 seconds between these two.
Time for yourself how long it takes to ask someone if the trim was working and how long long it takes to ask back - should I try manually - that takes 5-6 seconds especially on headsets where you try not to talk over each other.
That would leave 2-3 seconds for the co-pilot - if he actually did try the Manual trim wheels to extend the handle and try it.
Somehow I think it entirely implausible that he accomplished that task in the time available - and if he did why so little time and effort spent on it or why did he not ask for help from the pilot or why not some remark that it is stuck.
However 2-3 seconds is long enough to try an electric trim switch.
All this however is all irrelevant anyways though as even if he did try the manual trim wheel they were well above Vmo and it's debatable how effective it would have been anyways.
Leaving it in TOGA thrust at this point was a much larger issue to the safe conclusion of the flight than not being able to control the trim.
This all being said - even if the MAX is scrapped (which is highly unlikely - and not necessary - but some on here think it's a good idea) - these Pilot training issues still exist and need to be corrected.
How can anyone on these boards not say that Pilot performance could have been better and training could be beefed up to improve safety?
The 100% it's not the Pilot's fault crowd continues to ignore these training issues and continues to ignore ET409 - a perfectly good airplane (737NG) that was flown into the ground by a Captain who went through primary 737 Training at about the same time as the ET302 Captain.
Then we also have media reports that even if ET did give it's pilot's the MCAS procedure - it was literally in an email and did not even require it's pilots to acknowledge receipt - Yes that is a real safety first culture.
However if you are comfortable flying with ET (or almost any Modern trained pilot) in instrument conditions or even Visual and facing a loss of automation then good for you.
You like gambling with your life a lot more than I like to with mine.
It's a pretty simple concept to me
ZERO point analysing details of pilots actions as every disaster is different anyway.
We have ZERO concerns about safety on NG.
We don't want situations on planes full stop where manual trim can crash a plane or turning automation off can make a plane more dangerous
Why introduce new risks we don't need??
So don't design planes that bring more likelihood of manual trim being needed or automation having to be turned off etc etc because of issues on the new design
Me personally I don't want any pilot training to be needed a tiny percentage more than its already needed on the NG. If they get more training great. But I want it to be irrelevant anyway.
Weve moved so far forwards in aviation safety in recent decades - why would we ever want to move backwards and relying on pilots to bail plane design out?
Weve lost before we've even started if we need better training on NG just to maintain existing safety rates that don't need better training on NG?
Surely you can understand this logic??