Hoping and Relying on the ECAA won’t do much. Just look what those goons did with EgyptAir 990. Are we really expecting them to come up with an actual conclusion? They’re probably looking for dirt on Boeing far more than investigating the accident.
There’s a reason why Lion Air rushed to the families after the incident, and forced them to sign papers agreeing not to sue them, nor Boeing. They simply didn’t wanna ruin their relationship with Boeing over something their pilots should have known. Like not selling them anymore aircraft till they prove otherwise. All the talk from airlines regarding the max is just politics. I remember what the CEO for United said right after the incident too lol.
If we wanted to make sure every plane was perfectly built, then we would be grounding every single one. I can’t even begin to tell you how many aircraft have been cleared to fly that have “design flaws” but haven’t affected a single flight today. Not even Boeing’s “design flaw” affected either accident. It wasn’t the engines that caused the plane to crash. They both had a software malfunction. Which is Impossible to prevent. And any malfunction that is improperly handled, will end up the same way. Both of which were handled improperly. To me, this is more important that what happened at Boeing because even a perfectly designed and certified airplane can have failures and the crews are the ones who are left to handle them. Crews must be prepared to handle whatever emergency we are presented with, even those like UAL232, Aloha 243, Qantas 32, Qantas 72, and SWA1380 which were failures that were never anticipated and for which no crew had ever been trained.
So how much longer are we going to act like the crashes were very controllable, and entirely preventable? Of which happened in third world countries andone FO with a low amount of hours, flying the plane.
Regardless, neither crew completed a single step on their procedures for runaway stabilizer OR unreliable airspeed. Both of which have to be done in a reasonably manner to prevent an accident.
Lions crew knew what procedure to follow, but forgot it. As you can see on the final report. What I wanted to know, was why did the Captain keep them in trim through 21 MCAS activations, but the FO, to whom took control, did not. Neither of them went to their procedure. We know why though, now. Because they forgot it. Sounds like Lion Air if you ask me, just how many times have their pilots missed the runway, and confused the ocean for the runway? And how many drug charges have been in the news for their pilots?
Let’s not forget that Boeing promised the Max would come without any additional training. And the issues with the engine position was nonexistent till the end of certification. It wasn’t until the stick force per g, which involves banking the aircraft and pulling back on the yoke, and of course banking more and pulling back more, it should be harder to pull back each time, and never easier. But because of Boeing’s engine positioning, an aerodynamic nose up appeared. This nose up created a feeling of it being easier to pull back. The aircraft didn’t Meet FAA longitudinal stability anymore. So the easiest fix was to add some nose down. So it’s quite comical to watch the media call it a “stall prevention system” which is far from true. Just because Airbus has one, and calls it that, and yes, they’ve killed people with their system as well, but doesn’t mean it’s the same for Boeing. Their products do not need a stall prevention system nor recovery system. They’ll recover a stall with the control column in neutral.
Boeing figured one sensor shouldn’t be too bad, after all, the issue would appear itself as a runaway trim and there’s a procedure for that, and it has been around for 5 decades. Shouldn’t be too difficult for pilots already typed in the aircraft, right? Well they under looked these third world countries and the training issues they have. Oops. And it’s not like the system in Airbus aircraft, ya know? Like the one where the crews gotta call to the ground team to figure out what’s going on, who’s hiding systems? Airbus has been dealing with the same and has already been told by both US and Europe to fix it, but haven’t. So while everyone expects Boeing to fix this issue in under a year, Airbus hasn’t fixed theirs, in over 10 years now. Could it be, that designing an aircraft is just difficult? Nah, totally easy. Anyone can do it and Boeing should have knew better. It’s not like airlines had the option to purchase a second sensor but chose not to, and how did the airlines know to buy one or two? The 737 has always looked at one sensor the same way the Max did. It was just based off whoever was flying the plane.
It’s not like the Brazilian authority has MCAS on paper and listed as “B” training from January 2018. Besides all of that, the runaway stabilizer procedure has been the same and hardly changes. As you guys probably already know, the procedure that will disable MCAS. And Ethiopias crew knew it, because they verbalized it, and did it, and undid it. Then accelerated beyond the design limit and crashed. Blame Boeing. If anything, we can say Lions crew had the harder battle due to them not “knowing” not considering the fact that it literally the same as a runaway stab malfunction. Ethiopias crew was already reminded of the issue, due to the Lion crash. Boeing highlighted the issues on the checklist. And sent it out. It’s important that airlines inform their pilots of the new changes
That say “In the event of an uncommanded nose pitch down, hit the stab trim cut out switches to CUTOFF and stay in the CUTOUT position for remainder of flight” yet Ethiopias crew battled with the entire issue until it was near full nose down, then they cut out the switches. They also skipped over step 2 which was too disengage auto throttles, and that allowed the aircraft to fly to and past VMO and out of the flights envelope. Increasing nose down trim and increasing airspeed will result in a stronger nose down force. It’s also clear that when the FO took control, after hitting the cut out switches, he trimmed in the WRONG DIRECTION. And told his captain “it’s not working” followed by his captain saying “pitch up with me”
One of them re engaged the stab trim switches, and that allowed MCAS to reactivate and drive the nose down back down, and it did. Despite them knowing what was going on, and the entire procedure, and lions crash, they still failed the aircraft. I’m not trying to be harsh, but the blame is all going on Boeing when it shouldn’t. It’s clear there’s enough blame to around here. And allowing such training issues to go unnoticed is going to be a disaster for the aviation industry.
You seem very eager to point the blame at the pilots and cite deficient training and lack of experience (hours) amongst crews at airlines operating in 3rd world countries while seemingly casting aside any culpability on Boeing’s end.
My understanding is that there are a plethora of 3rd world airlines operating the 737NG , 32x CEO and 32x NEO in their fleets. How many instances can you cite where a 737NG, or 32x, operated by a 3rd world airline was turned into a lawn dart ? How do you suppose these 3rd world crews can safely operate thousands of NGs, CEOs and NEOs everyday but somehow they managed to plow 2 MAXs into the ground within half a years time ?
If poor training and lack of experience amongst 3rd world crew members is as big of a problem as you seem to claim, isn’t it reasonable to expect we would see higher numbers of catastrophic hull losses from other variants operated by these airlines. 3rd world airlines have massive fleets of 32x NEOs in their fleets. Given your stance, I assume you feel the NEO is 3rd world pilot proof given there hasn’t been a single hull loss, and thusly a superior aircraft ?
And before you go off citing Lion Air’s runway excursion incidents and attributing that to their status as a 3rd world airline you really ought to consider WN is usually good for an excursion or 2 every year. Beyond that, they have 2 very high profile runway excursions in their history (BUR/MDW). DL had a rather violent one at LGA a few years back too. I suppose you consider WN and DL 3rd world ?
Moreover, I could cite a number of US airlines that have had accidents/incidents, some resulting in fatalities due to poor maintenance. Again at the forefront of my mind is WN. To use your own examples, correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t it an improperly installed fan blade on UA232 that ultimately led to the crash? AQ243 had metal fatigue so extreme that a passenger noticed a crack prior to take off that ultimately led to the top of the fuselage peeling back. If a passenger noticed such wear and tear certainly the maintenance team should have. I guess we can add United and the now defunct Aloha to the list of 3rd world airlines.
Almost forgot, you brought up questionable professional conduct by crews of 3rd world airlines to, citing drug charges was it ? I seem to recall several threads just this year regarding several US crews being arrested at the airport attempting to board their aircraft intoxicated... Oh and let’s not such professional conduct like the US crew that overflew their destination by approximately 150 miles or another that landed at the wrong airport.
Speaking candidly your posts sound quite ignorant.