This is how you fly the Boeing 737 Max 8 if it nose dives too much

J

JSOP

Apparently it is very difficult to wrestle control away from this new automated flight control when it thinks it's supposed to nose dive the plane to the ground once it's engaged after being fed the wrong information from a faulty angle-of-attack sensor despite the established protocol that you are supposed to be able to "fly through" any autopilot system. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/16/world/asia/lion-air-crash-cockpit.html

Now I know what to do in case I am sitting on a Boeing 737 Max 8 (why would I ever want to I dunno) and I notice the plane is nosediving right after takeoff and is not getting higher up. What a relief!! Whew!!
 
JSOP said:
Apparently it is very difficult to wrestle control away from this new automated flight control when it thinks it's supposed to nose dive the plane to the ground once it's engaged after being fed the wrong information from a faulty angle-of-attack sensor despite the established protocol that you are supposed to be able to "fly through" any autopilot system. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/16/world/asia/lion-air-crash-cockpit.html

Now I know what to do in case I am sitting on a Boeing 737 Max 8 (why would I ever want to I dunno) and I notice the plane is nosediving right after takeoff and is not getting higher up. What a relief!! Whew!!
More...

Just disengage the autopilot when a substantial input is made! Oi vey! There was a major failure here in the software development cycle. The QA department did not do enough bug testing on this, which in software circles would have been called an "A"-class bug. Young, dumb, and not full of cum. If they were, this error would not have occurred, and we'd have nearly 200 lives back that did not need to be lost to a "glitch".

Unacceptable.

By the way, why did some young engineer feel the need to implement a new "stall-avoidance" software update into their systems when the older 737s worked just fine without it? WTF man.

The three tenets of being a pilot are aviate, navigate, communicate. If the autopilot is fighting you, then aviate the shit out of the thing...TURN OFF the AUTOPILOT!
 
Overnight said:
Just disengage the autopilot when a substantial input is made! Oi vey! There was a major failure here in the software development cycle. The QA department did not do enough bug testing on this, which in software circles would have been called an "A"-class bug. Young, dumb, and not full of cum. If they were, this error would not have occurred, and we'd have nearly 200 lives back that did not need to be lost to a "glitch".

Unacceptable.

By the way, why did some young engineer feel the need to implement a new "stall-avoidance" software update into their systems when the older 737s worked just fine without it? WTF man.

The three tenets of being a pilot are aviate, navigate, communicate. If the autopilot is fighting you, then aviate the shit out of the thing...TURN OFF the AUTOPILOT!
More...

First of all, it's 346 lives back, not 200 lives, 189 (from the Lion Air crash) + 157 (from the Ethiopian Airline crash) = 346. Second, it's not just the software that's faulty, it's this angle-of-attack sensor that feeds the angle-of-attack information to this anti-stall system is faulty. And this sensor is not manufactured by Boeing; it's manufactured by another company called United Technologies which surprisingly no one has scrutinized on so far. To me, this company who makes the faulty sensor is just as liable as Boeing for causing all those crashes and making the plane unsafe. If the public is not suing United Technologies, Boeing should at least sue this company for supplying faulty parts to its planes.

Third, apparently it's not that easy to turn off autopilot once this new anti-stall system called MCAS has engaged. There is a switch button that you can press to temporarily disable it and gain back the control, but once you let go of the button, the anti-stall system would be back and continue to nose-dive the plane from where it left off. This is why in both 2 crashes, there were similar flight patterns where the plane was seen going down and up and down and up and then down permanently because the pilot was constantly trying to press on the switch to disable the anti-stall system but the anti-stall system kept taking over. This procedure that is illustrated in this article that I posted about permanently disabling the anti-stall system's control of the plane was NOT included in any of the flight manuals or documentation about how to deal with this anti-stall system. Majority of the pilots didn't even know about this MCAS, this anti-stall system until after the first crash. Those I think are major negligence on the part of Boeing.
 
I just watched an episode on Air Disasters about Qauntas Flight 72.
Very similar thing happened. The ADIRU sent bad data to flight computer making it think it was in a nose up, stall attitude. Pitched the plane down 10 degrees...twice. A number of people injured. Somehow the data labeled AOA was transposed with ALT label. Made the flight computer think they were nose up 50 degrees. They never did figure out exactly how/where the bad data originated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72
 
Last edited:
Thousands of years ago, people with brain but without computers could build super mega things like Giza Piramid.
modern computer couldn't understand how Giza Piramid was build.


In modern world, people depend on brainless computer to operate machines
and at times lead to disastrous result.
people should use brain to operate aeroplanes.
 
There were 2 more of these incidents in the general area. The Lion Air flight that crashed last Oct was just north of this area.
There was a lot of speculation that a communication station could have had something to do with it.

Aircraft interference controversy[edit]
On 7 October 2008, Qantas Flight 72 made an emergency landing at Learmonth airport near the town of Exmouth, Western Australia following an inflight accident featuring a pair of sudden uncommanded pitch-down manoeuvres that resulted in serious injuries to many of the occupants.[16][17][18][19][20] The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) identified in a preliminary report that a fault occurred within the Number 1 Air Data Inertial Reference Unit(ADIRU) and is the "likely origin of the event". The ADIRU — one of three such devices on the aircraft — began to supply incorrect data to the other aircraft systems.[19][21] The ATSB's continuing accident investigation will include assessment of speculation that possible interference from Harold E. Holt facility or passenger personal electronic devices could have been involved, although based on initial analysis, the Bureau believes these are unlikely to have been of any impact.[19][22][23]

On 27 December 2008, another aircraft, Qantas Flight 71, also had a malfunction in its ADIRU. The incident again fuelled media speculation regarding the significance of the Harold E. Holt facility, with the Australian and International Pilots Association calling for commercial aircraft to be barred from the area as a precaution until the events are better understood,[24][25] while the manager of the facility has claimed that it is "highly, highly unlikely" that any interference has been caused.[26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Communication_Station_Harold_E._Holt

Guess which other fight was in this area?

Malaysia Flight 370
 
Why does Boeing care when the CEO is in Trump's pants? These were brown and yellow people... so they are disposable in the eyes of Boeing and the WH.

And yeah, my in laws are pilots and that was the first thing they stated--not enough time (three steps?) to disengage AP/AS prior to impact.
 
I don't think they even knew how to turn it off.
Check this out...

Jump-seat pilot reportedly saved Boeing Max jet one day before Lion Air crash

The day before a Boeing 737 Max 8 crashed off of Indonesia last year, killing all 189 people aboard, pilots on the same flight struggled for control of the same aircraft but were saved by an off-duty pilot who was on the plane, a new report shows.

Lion Air Flight 610 slammed into the Java Sea on Oct. 29, and a preliminary investigation has focused on a malfunctioning flight-control system. New information from the cockpit voice recorder suggests the pilots of the doomed plane pored over a handbook trying to determine why the jet was lurching downward in the desperate moments before the crash, according to multiple media reports.

The day before, a different crew was struggling with the same issue on the flight. The problem, however, was correctly diagnosed by the "dead-head" pilot flying in a jump seat, Bloomberg reported, citing multiple sources familiar with Indonesia's investigation of the crash.

The presence of a third pilot in the cockpit wasn’t contained in Indonesia’s National Transportation Safety Committee’s report and hasn’t previously been reported, Bloomberg reported.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...jet-one-day-before-lion-air-crash/3220891002/
 
The problem was that the MAX program was rushed and critical parts of the system were categorized at a lower Design Assurance Level than was needed (e.g. DAL B vs DAL A). The aircraft manufacturer and the subcontractor that developed the flight control system are at fault.
 
I cannot even begin to imagine what the people on that plane must have experienced in their final moments. Nor do I want to try. RIP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top