Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 353

Thread: Lion Air Flight 610 Crash

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,766
    Nothing substantial yet... But I just wanted to note, an Ethiopian Airways plane crashed about a day ago, six minutes into the flight, and it was also a 737 800 Max. Boeing may have some explaining to do here.

    ETA: I really meant to say "may". At this point nothing is clear, so it could have been a bomb or a bird strike or whatever. So I'm not making any conclusions, just pointing to the possibility.
    Last edited by Jens; 2019-Mar-11 at 01:00 AM. Reason: spelling
    As above, so below

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    The flightradar24 data shows two very different profiles for the Lion Air flight and ET302.

    Lion air: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/p...ff318#1e5ff318
    ET302: https://www.flightradar24.com/data/f...et302#1fc0cdb5

    ET302 seems to have made a steady climb and with an increase in speed and then just stopped. Also there is this:

    Geoffrey Thomas, the editor in chief of Airline Ratings, told CNN the Ethiopian Airlines crash on Sunday had "significant differences" to the Lion Air crash last year. On the Lion Air flight, there were "wild fluctuations in air speed and... we continued to get data from the plane all the way down to impact."

    Sunday's crash, however, had "no fluctuations and all of the sudden transmission" ceased, he said. "That transmission ceasing indicates catastrophic failure in air."
    But yeah, little hard evidence of the accident right now. The photos show what seems to be a very hard impact, with very little visible debris.

    ETA: When you bring up the flightradar24 sites you'll probably need to click on the little icon that looks like a mountain range to show a graphical view that reflects changes in altitude and speed.
    Last edited by schlaugh; 2019-Mar-10 at 04:21 PM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,766
    According to the CEO of the airline the pilot asked to return to the airport. So it might have been a technical problem.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,766
    Quote Originally Posted by schlaugh View Post

    ET302 seems to have made a steady climb and with an increase in speed and then just stopped. Also there is this:

    It's funny, though, according to this article:

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/worl...e-know-so-far/

    The "planes vertical speed became erratic." And they are citing data from flightradar24. I haven't looked myself, admittedly.
    As above, so below

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813

    Lion Air Flight 610 Crash

    I saw the rate of climb/descent numbers from FR24. I’ll post them tomorrow but they can be found as an
    Image in the FR24 Twitt feed.

    I charted the altitude with the rate of climb/descent numbers and while the rate changes do look erratic the altitude maintains a consistent rise until near the end when it dips and then comes back. Also rate of climb/descent numbers can be deceiving. A quick pull or push on the yoke can produce a large rate of climb number. The key is how long that rate is maintained. Or how quickly it flips from climb to descend.
    Last edited by schlaugh; 2019-Mar-11 at 01:21 PM.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    FR24 created a chart aligning altitude and vertical speed data. Maybe the most telling is that the data simply cuts off around 8200 feet.

    https://www.flightradar24.com/blog/w...ical-Speed.png

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    Yikes! The altitude is measured above sea level but Addis Ababa is at 7700 feet! So all of this activity took place around 1000 feet above the ground.

    The FDR and the CVR have been recovered. And a witness says the plane was smoking and swerving before it hit.

    “I was in the mountain nearby when I saw the plane reach the mountain before turning around with a lot of smoke coming from the back and then crashed at this site,” Gebeyehu Fikadu, 25, told CNN.

    “It crashed with a large boom. When it crashed luggage and clothes came burning down,” he told the network. “Before it crashed the plane was swerving and dipping with a lot of smoke coming from the back and also making a very loud unpleasant sound before hitting the ground.”

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,530
    Curious how to interpret "from the back".

    -the APU itself? But that shouldn't cause a crash in itself, nor swerving etc. Unless the APU had a huge explosion which damaged critical (hydraulic) systems at the back.
    -coming from the engine(s)?
    -engine smoking, ingested into the cabin through the aircon, expelled through the back?

    Awaiting further reports...

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    Now from Reuters, more witnesses saying the plane was smoking, shuddering, and making strange sounds before it hit.

    Half a dozen witnesses interviewed by Reuters in the farmland where the plane came down reported smoke billowing out behind, while four of them also described a loud sound.

    “It was a loud rattling sound. Like straining and shaking metal,” said Turn Buzuna, a 26-year-old housewife and farmer who lives about 300 meters (328 yards) from the crash site. “Everyone says they have never heard that kind of sound from a plane and they are under a flight path,” she added.

    Malka Galato, 47, a barley and wheat farmer whose field the plane crashed in, also described smoke and sparks from the back. “The plane was very close to the ground and it made a turn... Cows that were grazing in the fields ran in panic,” he said.

    Tamirat Abera, 25, was walking past the field at the time. He said the plane turned sharply, trailing white smoke and items like clothes and papers, then crashed about 300 meters away.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,530
    If items already fell out of the plane during the flight, that sounds like an uncontained engine explosion damaging the hull?

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    The investigators will need to nail down if the witnesses actually saw debris falling from the plane or if the debris resulted from the first moments of the crash. If pre-crash then maybe the fuselage opened up from a bomb, fuel tank explosion, etc. Also the "smoke" might have been condensation produced by vortices from the wingtips and other surfaces. But...we'll see.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    49,148
    Moved from OTB to S&T
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

  13. #43
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is online now Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,301
    Bans now all over Europe.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,589
    Boeing 737 Max 8 pilots complained to feds for months about suspected safety flaw
    -Dallas Morning News

    The disclosures found by The News reference problems during Boeing 737 Max 8 flights with an autopilot system, and they all occurred while trying to gain altitude during takeoff - many mentioned the plane turning nose down suddenly.
    https://www.dallasnews.com/business/...ed-safety-flaw

    Huh.
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    12,589
    Boeing to Make Key Change in 737 MAX Cockpit Software
    -Wall Street Journal

    The (flight control software) change was in the works before a second plane of the same model crashed in Africa last weekend—and comes as world-wide unease about the 737 MAX’s safety grows.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/boeing-...re-11552413489

    Progress, if a bit late.
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don’t alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  16. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,766
    Quote Originally Posted by schlaugh View Post
    Now from Reuters, more witnesses saying the plane was smoking, shuddering, and making strange sounds before it hit.
    I guess that if a plane passed 1,000 feet overhead and was having problems maintaining altitude, a sensible explanation for the "strange sounds" would have been the engines being throttled up or down.
    As above, so below

  17. #47
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    Apparently other pilots have reported odd behavior with the 737-Max or issues with training and the aircraft manual. The content below comes from the link and are from pilot reports filed to the ASRS - Aviation Safety Reporting System:

    Narrative: 1After 1000 feet I noticed a decrease in aircraft performance. I picked up that the
    autothrottles were not moving to commanded position even though they were
    engaged. I'm sure they were set properly for takeoff but not sure when the
    discrepancy took place. My scan wasn't as well developed since I've only flown the
    MAX once before. I manually positioned the thrust levers ASAP. This resolved the
    threat, we were able to increase speed to clean up and continue the climb to 3000
    feet.

    Shortly afterwards I heard about the (other carrier) accident and am wondering if
    any other crews have experienced similar incidents with the autothrottle system on
    the MAX? Or I may have made a possible flying mistake which is more likely. The
    FO (First Officer) was still on his first month and was not able to identify whether it
    was the aircraft or me that was in error.

    Synopsis
    B737-MAX8 Captain reported the autothrottles failed to move to the
    commanded position during takeoff and climb.
    Narrative: 1The recently released 737 MAX8 Emergency Airworthiness Directive directs pilots
    how to deal with a known issue, but it does nothing to address the systems issues
    with the AOA system.

    MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) is implemented on the
    737 MAX to enhance pitch characteristics with flaps UP and at elevated angles of
    attack. The MCAS function commands nose down stabilizer to enhance pitch
    characteristics during steep turns with elevated load factors and during flaps up
    flight at airspeeds approaching stall. MCAS is activated without pilot input and only
    operates in manual, flaps up flight. The system is designed to allow the flight crew
    to use column trim switch or stabilizer aisle stand cutout switches to override MCAS
    input. The function is commanded by the Flight Control computer using input data
    from sensors and other airplane systems.

    The MCAS function becomes active when the airplane Angle of Attack exceeds a
    threshold based on airspeed and altitude. Stabilizer incremental commands are
    limited to 2.5 degrees and are provided at a rate of 0.27 degrees per second. The
    magnitude of the stabilizer input is lower at high Mach number and greater at low
    Mach numbers. The function is reset once angle of attack falls below the Angle of
    Attack threshold or if manual stabilizer commands are provided by the flight crew.
    If the original elevated AOA condition persists, the MCAS function commands
    another incremental stabilizer nose down command according to current aircraft
    Mach number at actuation.

    This description is not currently in the 737 Flight Manual Part 2, nor the Boeing
    FCOM, though it will be added to them soon. This communication highlights that an
    entire system is not described in our Flight Manual. This system is now the subject
    of an AD.

    I think it is unconscionable that a manufacturer, the FAA, and the airlines would
    have pilots flying an airplane without adequately training, or even providing
    available resources and sufficient documentation to understand the highly complex
    systems that differentiate this aircraft from prior models. The fact that this airplane
    requires such jury rigging to fly is a red flag. Now we know the systems employed
    are error prone--even if the pilots aren't sure what those systems are, what
    redundancies are in place, and failure modes.

    I am left to wonder: what else don't I know? The Flight Manual is inadequate and
    almost criminally insufficient. All airlines that operate the MAX must insist that
    Boeing incorporate ALL systems in their manuals.

    Synopsis
    B737MAX Captain expressed concern that some systems such as the MCAS are not
    fully described in the aircraft Flight Manual.
    More under the link, which is to a PDF from the ASRS site.

  18. #48
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    No longer near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    4,865
    It seems to be taking forever to get the flight recorder data read.

    Ethiopian authorities have supposedly said that it will be done in another country.
    While understandable, I hope that politics isn’t delaying the effort. I suspect the data will quickly rule in/out any commonality with the Lion Air crash.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  19. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    12,860
    Pres. exec. order just issued shutting-down Max 8 and Max 9 models.
    Last edited by George; 2019-Mar-13 at 08:57 PM.
    We know time flies, we just can't see its wings.

  20. #50
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813

    Lion Air Flight 610 Crash

    Quote Originally Posted by Extravoice View Post
    It seems to be taking forever to get the flight recorder data read.

    Ethiopian authorities have supposedly said that it will be done in another country.
    While understandable, I hope that politics isn’t delaying the effort. I suspect the data will quickly rule in/out any commonality with the Lion Air crash.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Different nations have different policies regarding accident investigations. Not long ago the US adopted a more incremental approach to releasing information, and more rapidly. IIRC Indonesia does not plan to release the Lion Air CVR information for almost a year.

    ETA: Specifically August or September.

    (Reuters) - Indonesian authorities do not plan to provide a public update on the contents of a cockpit voice recorder from a Lion Air jet that crashed, killing 189 people, until a final report is released in August or September, an official said.
    The crash was in October of last year.
    Last edited by schlaugh; 2019-Mar-13 at 07:31 PM.

  21. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    No longer near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    4,865
    I wasn’t saying that the data should be made public, rather that the NTSB (or equivalent agency) have access to it ASAP so they can make an initial assessment.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  22. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Great NorthWet
    Posts
    14,576
    Quote Originally Posted by George View Post
    Pres. exec. order just issued shutting-down Max 8 and Max 9 models.
    I wonder where he got his Aerospace Engineering degree?
    Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt.

  23. #53
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    That may have taken place already but it’s up to the local government as to what they want released, even if it’s something as simple as the NTSB saying “yes we’ve listened and reviewed the data and shared our observations with Ethiopia. “

    I agree with you that a fairly quick but thorough review of the CVR should produce a quick result. But there are many factors in play; how much damage to the CVR, how difficult to download, where is the review taking place (the US or Ethiopia) etc. and I’m sure politics plays a role if only to a small extent.

    And it looks like haggling is taking
    Place about where the data should be downloaded; in the US or the uK.

    Wall Street Journal
    U.S. air-safety investigators on Tuesday engaged in intense behind-the-scenes discussions with their Ethiopian counterparts regarding where the black-box recorders found amid the wreckage of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 will be downloaded, according to people familiar with the matter.

    Parts of the devices were damaged in Sunday’s crash of the Boeing Co. 737 MAX airliner that killed 157 people, these people said, and Ethiopia doesn’t have the required laboratory facilities and experienced staff to ensure crucial data will be recovered. The information is eagerly sought by airlines and regulators world-wide, as more than 30 countries have grounded the latest Boeing models. But the plane maker and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration have said MAX 737s are safe and shouldn’t be ordered out of service.
    And of course the last sentence is now outdated.

  24. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
    I wonder where he got his Aerospace Engineering degree?
    I’m not sure why he would need one. They’ve been grounded just about everywhere else as a precaution.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  25. #55
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    13,766
    It appears that the FAA decided to ground them because satellite data showed similarities with the Lion Air crash and the pilot reported control problems.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    As above, so below

  26. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    No longer near Grover's Mill
    Posts
    4,865
    NBC news says the recorders are going to France for analysis, and that there was “some damage” to them. Hopefully, not too much.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I may have many faults, but being wrong ain't one of them. - Jimmy Hoffa

  27. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,573
    The latest
    https://www.vox.com/2019/3/16/182686...7-similarities

    We see a lot of twin-jets, and engines get wider and wider with ever higher bypass designs.

    The engines are larger, more powerful--and were moved a bit forward. The result--an opportunity for software fails (MCAS angle of attack errors)

    In rockets folks try to avoid changing the profile of rockets because new aerodynamic studies would be needed.
    Last edited by publiusr; 2019-Mar-16 at 08:42 PM.

  28. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    I've found the videos from Mentour Pilot to be very interesting and informative related to commercial aviation. He's had some helpful things to say about the two crashes most notably that the investigations have proved nothing yet. In this video he talks about why MCAS was introduced to the 737MAX and how the new engine configuration can enable a pilot to unintentionally power into a stall. This is interesting because the other bit of data that isn't being reported as much is that the ET 302 aircraft was a) nosing up just before crashing and b) was accelerating all through the short flight (as if the pilot was trying to power out of a problem....hmmm...)

  29. #59
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Falls Church, VA (near Washington, DC)
    Posts
    8,754
    If the sources for this Seattle Times article are accurate (I realize this is a big if), it is starting to look like a gruesome combination of poor software programming choices, poor internal communications, insufficient oversight by FAA personnel in the certification process, and commercially motivated rushing of the process.
    https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...ion-air-crash/

    They described three levels of failure scenarios.
    1. Major. Passengers shaken up but no real damage.
    2. Hazardous. Violent enough motion to injure or possibly kill passengers.
    3. Catastrophic. Loss of the aircraft.

    As I think I understand it, only if a bad angle of attack sensor caused something no worse than #1 should MCAS have acted on one sensor instead of reading both and comparing them. It appears that an inappropriate MCAS action could easily cause #2 or worse in certain situations. In addition it appears that the system had unlimited authority to keep kicking in despite attempts by the Lion Air crew to reset it. Apparently the bursts of action rather than a continuous runaway stabilizer trim change confused them. The article goes on to say that many engineers were unaware of these issues.

    It will be perversely interesting to see how this plays out.

  30. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    NEOTP Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,813
    A detail raised in the article was that the MCAS reacts to data ONLY from a single input, such as the airspeed or angle of attack sensor, and does not compare the incoming data from the redundant sensors. In other words it trusts the data even if that sensor is failing and even if pilots can see it failing And that is a crazy design for something so critical.

    What wll be interesting is why the ET 302 pilot did not cut the stab trim switches as per the Boeing directive in November. Dealing with a runaway trim tab is a memory item for commercial pilots because it's one of the situations when they dont have time to reference a check list.

    ETA: Just adding this quote from the story:

    Like all 737s, the MAX actually has two of the [Angle of Attack] sensors, one on each side of the fuselage near the cockpit. But the MCAS was designed to take a reading from only one of them.

    Lemme said Boeing could have designed the system to compare the readings from the two vanes, which would have indicated if one of them was way off.

    Alternatively, the system could have been designed to check that the angle-of-attack reading was accurate while the plane was taxiing on the ground before takeoff, when the angle of attack should read zero.

    “They could have designed a two-channel system. Or they could have tested the value of angle of attack on the ground,” said Lemme. “I don’t know why they didn’t.”

    The black box data provided in the preliminary investigation report shows that readings from the two sensors differed by some 20 degrees not only throughout the flight but also while the airplane taxied on the ground before takeoff.
    Last edited by schlaugh; 2019-Mar-19 at 12:41 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •