Mar 13, 2019, 10:20 am
Last edit by: JDiver
Boeing 737 MAX 8 ET 302 registration ET-AVJ from Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) to Nairobi (Kenya) with 149 passengers and 8 crew, was lost 10 March 2019 shortly after takeoff at 08:44L (05:44Z). There were no survivors.
The incident appeared similar to the 29 October 2018 crash of Lion Air 610, operated by a B38M.
7 Nov 2018: The US Federal Aviation Administration / FAA issued an Airworthiness Directive (AD note) covering the AOA within a few days, giving US carriers 30 days to comply with the AD note.
6 Nov 2018: Boeing issued revised operating instructions covering the revised MCAS used in the MAX 8, updating the MAX operations manual. See the manual update and the switches referenced. See Aviation Herald discussion for information.
10 March 2019: ET 302, operated by Ethiopian Airlines 737 MAX 8 ET-AVJ departing Addis Ababa to Nairobi turned back to the airport soon after takeoff, but crashed with the loss of all aboard.
Link to BBC article.
Link to Aviation Herald discussion.
11 March 2019: The US National Transportation Board / NTSB has dispatched an investigation team, as have Boeing, to Addis Ababa to assist the Ethiopian investigators in determining the cause(s) of the crash. The “black boxes” (cockpit voice and the flight data recorder have been recovered.
11 March 2019: Ethiopian Airlines announced airline both “black boxes” - the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder are recovered.
11 Mar 2019: China grounded its 737 MAX 8 (not MAX 9) fleet, and a number of countries have followed suit on 12 March 2019, including the United Kingdom and the European Union.Link to New York Times article.
11 March 2019: The US FAA stated it would not ground US (AA, UA, WN) 737 MAX aircraft at this time.
Link to FAA Airworthiness Notification for USA registered B38M aircraft PDF.
Link to Wall Street Journal article.
12 March 2019: The USA and Canada are the only countries allowing the B38M to remain in operation.
13 March 2019: Ethiopian Airlines CEO Tewolde Gebremariam requests grounding of all B38M aircraft until the cause(s) of the crash of ET 302 is learned.
13 March 2019: Canada grounds Canadian B38Ms and bans B38M departures, arrivals and overflights.
13 March 2019: All USA operated Boeing 737 MAX -8 and -9 aircraft are grounded by US Federal Aviation Administration emergency order. At this time, all 737 MAX 8 are grounded until further notice.
14 March 2019: It is announced the French BEA will retrieve the data from the Ethiopian Cockpit Voice Recorder and Flight Data Recorder.
Link to Eight things you might not know about black boxes
By Cristen Tilley, ABC Australia
15 March 2019: Aircraft manufactured Boeing plans to roll out a software upgrade for its 737 Max aircraft in 10 days. The US FAA is expected to sign off on the anti-stall modification to the MAX software 25 March. CNBC
17 Mar 2019: The French BEA stated the Flight Data Recorder data have been given to the Ethiopian Investigation Team. Borpth CVR and FDR “black boxes” have been downloaded and turned over to investigators.
17 Mar 2019 the Ethiopian Transport Minister said: "Recently, the FDR and CVR of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 have been successfully read out. Our experts and US experts have verified the accuracy of the information. The Ethiopian government accepted the information, and the cause of the crash is similar to the Indonesian Flight 610. A preliminary reported will be published in a month with a detailed analysis. We are grateful to the French Government for its ongoing support." - Aviation Herald
17 Mar 2019 Ethiopian Airlines Twitter Account (Link) posted "The total flying time of the First Officer is 350 hours. Moreover, the Pilot in command is a senior pilot who has accumulated 8,100 hours. According to ICAO regulations any CPL holder can act as F/O in multi engine jet commercial flight up on successful completion of the full Type Rating training on the type of A/C. According to ICAO, it only requires a maximum of 200HRs to hold CPL. Ethiopean airlines in its effort to enhance safety established a crew pairing policy where by a less experienced F/O flies only with highly experienced Capt and vice versa".
17 Mar 2019: “Ethiopian transport minister Dagmawit Moge told reporters on Sunday that an evaluation of the black boxes from Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET302 and Lion Air Flight JT610 showed "clear similarities." - Link to Business Insider article.
18 Mar 2019: Aviation Herald learns new information of ET 302 departure routing and airport communication, and the possibility MAX simulator training and inclusion of training relating to MCAS and the JT 610 lessons learned may not have reached all ET cockpit crew due to the simulator training requirements of six month periodicity. Link.
19 Mar 2019: The Secretary if the US Department of Transportation, of which the Federal Aviation Administration is part of, has requested the Inspector General conduct a formal audit “to compile an objective and detailed factual history of the activities that resulted in the certification of the Boeing 737-MAX 8 aircraft” as part of an ongoing review of factors related to the MAX aviation certification. Link
Boeing 737 MAX 8 registration ET-AVJ performing flight ET-302 from Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) to Nairobi (Kenya) with 149 passengers and 8 crew, departed Addis Ababa's runway 07R and was climbing out of Addis Ababa when the aircraft levelled off at about 9000 feet MSL, radar contact was lost shortly after at 08:44L (05:44Z). The aircraft wreckage was found near Ejere at approximate position N8.8772 E39.2512. No survivors were found.
In a subsequent press conference on Mar 10th 2019 Ethiopian Airlines reported the crew reported difficulties and requested a return to Addis Ababa. The captain was with Ethiopian Airlines for 9 years and had about 8000 hours of flight experience, a first officer with 200 flight hours assisted, there were 35 nationalities amongst the 149 passengers. The crash site appears to be consistent with a steep dive, the aircraft is right inside the ground. The aircraft had undergone last "rigorous first check maintenance" on Feb 4th 2019. The aircraft had last operated to and from Johannesburg (South Africa) arriving back in Addis Ababa in the morning of Mar 10th 2019 before departing for the accident flight.
Link to Aviation Herald discussion.
In a subsequent press conference on Mar 10th 2019 Ethiopian Airlines reported the crew reported difficulties and requested a return to Addis Ababa. The captain was with Ethiopian Airlines for 9 years and had about 8000 hours of flight experience, a first officer with 200 flight hours assisted, there were 35 nationalities amongst the 149 passengers. The crash site appears to be consistent with a steep dive, the aircraft is right inside the ground. The aircraft had undergone last "rigorous first check maintenance" on Feb 4th 2019. The aircraft had last operated to and from Johannesburg (South Africa) arriving back in Addis Ababa in the morning of Mar 10th 2019 before departing for the accident flight.
Link to Aviation Herald discussion.
Indonesian carrier Lion Air Flight 610 on October 29 crashed into the sea soon after takeoff with the loss of all aboard, apparently due to the erroneous data from a faulty Angle of Attack sensor, which caused the MCAS (Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System) to assume the plane was about to stall, which activated the downward force on the Stabilizer Trim to get the nose down. Link to BBC article.
This aircraft had been written up as having a faulty AOA indicator for previous flights it had taken. It is unclear if Lion Air had performed adequate maintenance procedures after the reports or withdraw the aircraft from service until the fault could be completely cleared.
Link to Aviation Herald discussion.
“Instead of switching off the Stabilizer Trim the pilots appear to have battled the system.” Link
This aircraft had been written up as having a faulty AOA indicator for previous flights it had taken. It is unclear if Lion Air had performed adequate maintenance procedures after the reports or withdraw the aircraft from service until the fault could be completely cleared.
Link to Aviation Herald discussion.
“Instead of switching off the Stabilizer Trim the pilots appear to have battled the system.” Link
Boeing 737 MAX and MCAS: See “What is the Boeing 737 MAX Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System?”, updated November 17 to explain the MCAS and electric trim override operation, here: link.
Boeing has stated a revised MCAS is in the works, and the FAA is expected to issue an AD note when the MCAS update is done. This is expected to occur in early April, 2019.
355 B38M deliveries have been carried out through 1 March 2019, out of 5,123 orders. Link to Wikipedia B38M list of Airlines, orders and deliveries.
Boeing has stated a revised MCAS is in the works, and the FAA is expected to issue an AD note when the MCAS update is done. This is expected to occur in early April, 2019.
355 B38M deliveries have been carried out through 1 March 2019, out of 5,123 orders. Link to Wikipedia B38M list of Airlines, orders and deliveries.
Ethiopian Airlines ordered 25 Boeing 737 MAX 8 (B38M) and at the time of the crash of ET 302 on 10 March 2019. ET also operates 10 Boeing 737-700 and 16 Boeing 737-800 aircraft as part of its fleet.
Ethiopian Airlines is the flag carrier of Ethiopia, and commenced operations on 8 April 1946, expanding to international flights in 1951. The firm became a share company in 1965 and changed its name from Ethiopian Air Lines to Ethiopian Airlines. The airline has been a member of the International Air Transport Association since 1959 and of the African Airlines Association (AFRAA) since 1968. Ethiopian is a Star Alliance member, having joined in December 2011.
As of November 2017, the carrier served 105 international and 20 domestic passenger destinations and 44 cargo destinations. Ethiopian serves more destinations in Africa than any other airline. Ethiopian Airlines’ fleet consists of 106 aircraft.
- Wikipedia (link)
Ethiopian Airlines is the flag carrier of Ethiopia, and commenced operations on 8 April 1946, expanding to international flights in 1951. The firm became a share company in 1965 and changed its name from Ethiopian Air Lines to Ethiopian Airlines. The airline has been a member of the International Air Transport Association since 1959 and of the African Airlines Association (AFRAA) since 1968. Ethiopian is a Star Alliance member, having joined in December 2011.
As of November 2017, the carrier served 105 international and 20 domestic passenger destinations and 44 cargo destinations. Ethiopian serves more destinations in Africa than any other airline. Ethiopian Airlines’ fleet consists of 106 aircraft.
- Wikipedia (link)
6 Nov 2018: Boeing issued revised operating instructions covering the revised MCAS used in the MAX 8, updating the MAX operations manual. See the manual update and the switches referenced. See Aviation Herald discussion for information.
10 March 2019: ET 302, operated by Ethiopian Airlines 737 MAX 8 ET-AVJ departing Addis Ababa to Nairobi turned back to the airport soon after takeoff, but crashed with the loss of all aboard.
Link to BBC article.
Link to Aviation Herald discussion.
11 March 2019: The US National Transportation Board / NTSB has dispatched an investigation team, as have Boeing, to Addis Ababa to assist the Ethiopian investigators in determining the cause(s) of the crash. The “black boxes” (cockpit voice and the flight data recorder have been recovered.
11 March 2019: Ethiopian Airlines announced airline both “black boxes” - the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder are recovered.
11 Mar 2019: China grounded its 737 MAX 8 (not MAX 9) fleet, and a number of countries have followed suit on 12 March 2019, including the United Kingdom and the European Union.Link to New York Times article.
11 March 2019: The US FAA stated it would not ground US (AA, UA, WN) 737 MAX aircraft at this time.
Link to FAA Airworthiness Notification for USA registered B38M aircraft PDF.
Link to Wall Street Journal article.
12 March 2019: The USA and Canada are the only countries allowing the B38M to remain in operation.
13 March 2019: Ethiopian Airlines CEO Tewolde Gebremariam requests grounding of all B38M aircraft until the cause(s) of the crash of ET 302 is learned.
13 March 2019: Canada grounds Canadian B38Ms and bans B38M departures, arrivals and overflights.
13 March 2019: All USA operated Boeing 737 MAX -8 and -9 aircraft are grounded by US Federal Aviation Administration emergency order. At this time, all 737 MAX 8 are grounded until further notice.
14 March 2019: It is announced the French BEA will retrieve the data from the Ethiopian Cockpit Voice Recorder and Flight Data Recorder.
Link to Eight things you might not know about black boxes
By Cristen Tilley, ABC Australia
15 March 2019: Aircraft manufactured Boeing plans to roll out a software upgrade for its 737 Max aircraft in 10 days. The US FAA is expected to sign off on the anti-stall modification to the MAX software 25 March. CNBC
17 Mar 2019: The French BEA stated the Flight Data Recorder data have been given to the Ethiopian Investigation Team. Borpth CVR and FDR “black boxes” have been downloaded and turned over to investigators.
17 Mar 2019 the Ethiopian Transport Minister said: "Recently, the FDR and CVR of Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 have been successfully read out. Our experts and US experts have verified the accuracy of the information. The Ethiopian government accepted the information, and the cause of the crash is similar to the Indonesian Flight 610. A preliminary reported will be published in a month with a detailed analysis. We are grateful to the French Government for its ongoing support." - Aviation Herald
17 Mar 2019 Ethiopian Airlines Twitter Account (Link) posted "The total flying time of the First Officer is 350 hours. Moreover, the Pilot in command is a senior pilot who has accumulated 8,100 hours. According to ICAO regulations any CPL holder can act as F/O in multi engine jet commercial flight up on successful completion of the full Type Rating training on the type of A/C. According to ICAO, it only requires a maximum of 200HRs to hold CPL. Ethiopean airlines in its effort to enhance safety established a crew pairing policy where by a less experienced F/O flies only with highly experienced Capt and vice versa".
17 Mar 2019: “Ethiopian transport minister Dagmawit Moge told reporters on Sunday that an evaluation of the black boxes from Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET302 and Lion Air Flight JT610 showed "clear similarities." - Link to Business Insider article.
18 Mar 2019: Aviation Herald learns new information of ET 302 departure routing and airport communication, and the possibility MAX simulator training and inclusion of training relating to MCAS and the JT 610 lessons learned may not have reached all ET cockpit crew due to the simulator training requirements of six month periodicity. Link.
19 Mar 2019: The Secretary if the US Department of Transportation, of which the Federal Aviation Administration is part of, has requested the Inspector General conduct a formal audit “to compile an objective and detailed factual history of the activities that resulted in the certification of the Boeing 737-MAX 8 aircraft” as part of an ongoing review of factors related to the MAX aviation certification. Link
Ethiopian Airlines: Boeing 737 Max 8 crashes on way to Kenya [ET302 ADD-NBO 10MAR19]
Mar 10, 2019, 2:55 pm
#106
Join Date: Jun 2010
Programs: Whatever's Cheapest, Accruing Miles, Redeeming for Premium Cabins, Not Chasing Status Unnecessarily
Posts: 2,264
Someone earlier in this thread stated that 0.5% ( 2 out of 350, so there's been some rounding) of this aircraft model have crashed, but what percentage of all the Concords that were ever build have crashed? Yet it was viewed as safe until the CDG runway incident happened and possibly should have still been considered safe. Or we can look at the space shuttle for another example. One crashed (cold weather O ring failure at launch), but that one is a big fraction of the number that were build and also a relatively big fraction of the total number of space shuttle flights that were ever attempted.
It's hard to conclude much (if anything) from a few bad random draws from a distribution where the bad draws occur with extremely low frequency. For example, think about Hurricane Katrina and the "once in a hundred years" claim.
It's hard to conclude much (if anything) from a few bad random draws from a distribution where the bad draws occur with extremely low frequency. For example, think about Hurricane Katrina and the "once in a hundred years" claim.
The worrisome thing is
-- Similar circumstances
-- The failure to educate the pilots and have proper manuals
-- The possibility that the system is inherently dangerous because it relies on pilots remembering to disable it, instead of defaulting to the safe option
-- The chatter about the size of the jet engines relative to fuselage making the plane inherently unstable vis a vis center of gravity causing nose up attitude instead of stable flight
So, the prudent thing to do is GROUND all the damn planes until they sort out what happened.
And if the planes are found to be inherently dangerous, they should be written off and Boeing take a huge charge and loss.
End of story. Cannot have moral hazard here, the manufacturers and airlines must accept zero incidents and zero only.
This crashing business is BS already. And if it is just chance.... well too bad, ground first, ask questions later.
Mar 10, 2019, 2:56 pm
#107
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: Flying Blue, Diamond Club
Posts: 780
I am reading that Ethiopian has an "excellent safety record in Africa". They have had, from a relatively small fleet, major jet crashes in 1996, 2010, and now 2019. The previous two went into the sea. No other African jet airline has had anything like that. It just shows what inaccuracies journalists write.
- An Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 767-300, registration ET-AQW performing flight ET-815 from Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) to Kilimanjaro (Tanzania) with 213 people on board, was on approach to Kilimanjaro's runway 27 (length 3600 meters/11,800 feet) where a light aircraft was on the runway near the threshold of runway 09/end of runway 27 and was cleared to land on runway 27 with reduced length of 3200 meters. The aircraft however touched down on Arusha's runway 27 (length 1620 meters/5300 feet) at 13:15L (10:15Z) and came to a full stop just prior to the runway end. Subsequently the crew turned the aircraft left for backtracking, the aircraft came to a stop with all gear on soft ground. No injuries occurred, the aircraft received no visible damage.
Incident: Ethiopian B763 at Arusha on Dec 18th 2013, landed on short runway at wrong airport and runway excursion
- Early January 2019, Ethiopian Airlines flight ET338 in B738 from Addis Ababa Thursday morning overruns the runway by 125 meters upon landing at Entebbe International Airport, Uganda (weather was normal):
https://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/new...fwv/index.html
Mar 10, 2019, 2:58 pm
#108
Join Date: Jun 2010
Programs: Whatever's Cheapest, Accruing Miles, Redeeming for Premium Cabins, Not Chasing Status Unnecessarily
Posts: 2,264
I would cancel and rebook, the problem is when these airlines swap out planes and then you get stuck with that death trap... I would still cancel until more is known 2/350 and rising is **** odds
Mar 10, 2019, 3:04 pm
#109
Join Date: Jun 2010
Programs: Whatever's Cheapest, Accruing Miles, Redeeming for Premium Cabins, Not Chasing Status Unnecessarily
Posts: 2,264
I am a 737 pilot. I fly both the NG models (-700/800/900) and the MAX (-9).
The investigation on the first crash is not yet complete but a lot is known about what happened.
The airplane had an issue with uncommanded nose-down trim events on several flights prior to the accident flight. That is known. What is not known is why the airline continued to dispatch the airplane without the problem being corrected. Absent any contrary evidence, we must presume that the mechanics believed that it was fixed each time. The final report will certainly provide information on this including if established procedures were followed and if there were any faults in those procedures.
The pilots of the airplane's next-to-last flight had the same MCAS event. They followed the established procedure for a runaway stabilizer which neutralized the problem and allowed them to maintain control. This runaway stabilizer procedure has been in place since the first 737 entered service over fifty years ago. All transport jets that I've flown has had a similar procedure. It is an quick and easy procedure to accomplish. From what we know so far, the accident crew did not accomplish this procedure. We will have to wait for the final report to find out why.
The inadvertent MCAS activation that they had on the first accident flight is just another failure that can cause a runaway stabilizer. The crew has no way of knowing why the stabilizer is running away. Knowing the cause isn't even helpful to them in fixing it. It could be the MCAS. It could be an autoflight failure. It could be a failure in the speed stability system. It could be a short in a trim switch. It could be a lot of things. Whatever the cause, the proper response is to accomplish the runaway stabilizer procedure. The introduction of the MCAS system on the MAX aircraft did not change that.
Very little information on today's accident so no way to know if any of this applies to that flight or if it was something completely different. As a 737 pilot, I've seen nothing from the first accident that causes me any concern in flying the MAX. In fact, I prefer flying the MAX over the NG due to the numerous improvements that have been made in the flight deck.
The investigation on the first crash is not yet complete but a lot is known about what happened.
The airplane had an issue with uncommanded nose-down trim events on several flights prior to the accident flight. That is known. What is not known is why the airline continued to dispatch the airplane without the problem being corrected. Absent any contrary evidence, we must presume that the mechanics believed that it was fixed each time. The final report will certainly provide information on this including if established procedures were followed and if there were any faults in those procedures.
The pilots of the airplane's next-to-last flight had the same MCAS event. They followed the established procedure for a runaway stabilizer which neutralized the problem and allowed them to maintain control. This runaway stabilizer procedure has been in place since the first 737 entered service over fifty years ago. All transport jets that I've flown has had a similar procedure. It is an quick and easy procedure to accomplish. From what we know so far, the accident crew did not accomplish this procedure. We will have to wait for the final report to find out why.
The inadvertent MCAS activation that they had on the first accident flight is just another failure that can cause a runaway stabilizer. The crew has no way of knowing why the stabilizer is running away. Knowing the cause isn't even helpful to them in fixing it. It could be the MCAS. It could be an autoflight failure. It could be a failure in the speed stability system. It could be a short in a trim switch. It could be a lot of things. Whatever the cause, the proper response is to accomplish the runaway stabilizer procedure. The introduction of the MCAS system on the MAX aircraft did not change that.
Very little information on today's accident so no way to know if any of this applies to that flight or if it was something completely different. As a 737 pilot, I've seen nothing from the first accident that causes me any concern in flying the MAX. In fact, I prefer flying the MAX over the NG due to the numerous improvements that have been made in the flight deck.
The only thing that will get the execs attention is the risk of CRIMINAL charges and BIG FINES. They should do the right thing and ground the planes.
Mar 10, 2019, 3:16 pm
#110
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Staffs
Programs: BAEC, Etihad Guest, Platinum Tesco Tart
Posts: 589
This has REALLY worried me. I’m a nervous flyer and two very similar incidents has got me googling all afternoon. I’m due to fly a few intra China sectors soon and I have been frantically typing to see what airframe we are flying on.
I used to google airline safety records, now it’s airframe. My choice of intra China airline that doesn’t use Max is limited. I know that it’s far more dangerous getting to the airport but sheesh, when I’m in an aircraft I want to know that it’s designed and engineered in order to get me from A to B in the safest manner.
I don’t get that comfort right now from the 737 Max.
I used to google airline safety records, now it’s airframe. My choice of intra China airline that doesn’t use Max is limited. I know that it’s far more dangerous getting to the airport but sheesh, when I’m in an aircraft I want to know that it’s designed and engineered in order to get me from A to B in the safest manner.
I don’t get that comfort right now from the 737 Max.
Mar 10, 2019, 3:21 pm
#111
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,401
You are right that it is human nature, but you just have to rise up above your animalistic fear. I recall back in 2000 I flew on an AS MD80 right after another one of their MD-80's crashed into the Pacific. That one really captured the public's imagination as the other airplanes in the area saw the plane flying upside down and heading for the ocean. People thought about the horror of being on that plane flying upside down for a long time before they crashed.
I was of the opinion that there was no safer time in history to be flying an Alaska MD-80. All the aviation-world's attention was on those planes and horizontal stabilizer. However there was a woman sitting next to me who was trembling and crying at each moment of turbulence. It is undeniably human nature. But you don't have to succumb to that. I expect that in due time there will be some kind of information released that leads people to feeling safe again to fly the B738Max.
I was of the opinion that there was no safer time in history to be flying an Alaska MD-80. All the aviation-world's attention was on those planes and horizontal stabilizer. However there was a woman sitting next to me who was trembling and crying at each moment of turbulence. It is undeniably human nature. But you don't have to succumb to that. I expect that in due time there will be some kind of information released that leads people to feeling safe again to fly the B738Max.
Histroy has shown it's not always 'safer than ever' to fly immediately after another accident... the Comets, DC-10s, Malaysia Airlines, and now perhaps the MAX.
Until the cause is established we don't know if the problem is sitting there on every other plane (or airline SOP if the issue is caused by an airline rather than the plane itself).
There are two camps here. One refuse to speculate and will keep flying. The other will stop flying (that plane/airline) until the cause is established. I'm in the camp that the latter is simply taking precautions to protect safety and peace of mind. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Mar 10, 2019, 3:32 pm
#112
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Germany, Austria
Programs: IHG Diamond Ambassador, ALL Silver,, Miles&More
Posts: 1,122
This has REALLY worried me. I’m a nervous flyer and two very similar incidents has got me googling all afternoon. I’m due to fly a few intra China sectors soon and I have been frantically typing to see what airframe we are flying on.
I used to google airline safety records, now it’s airframe. My choice of intra China airline that doesn’t use Max is limited. I know that it’s far more dangerous getting to the airport but sheesh, when I’m in an aircraft I want to know that it’s designed and engineered in order to get me from A to B in the safest manner.
I don’t get that comfort right now from the 737 Max.
I used to google airline safety records, now it’s airframe. My choice of intra China airline that doesn’t use Max is limited. I know that it’s far more dangerous getting to the airport but sheesh, when I’m in an aircraft I want to know that it’s designed and engineered in order to get me from A to B in the safest manner.
I don’t get that comfort right now from the 737 Max.
China Train Ticket Booking Service
Try this. I travelled with many of those trains.
Mar 10, 2019, 3:40 pm
#113
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 100,368
It's not the statistics and the small numbers that are worrisome
The worrisome thing is
-- Similar circumstances
-- The failure to educate the pilots and have proper manuals
-- The possibility that the system is inherently dangerous because it relies on pilots remembering to disable it, instead of defaulting to the safe option
-- The chatter about the size of the jet engines relative to fuselage making the plane inherently unstable vis a vis center of gravity causing nose up attitude instead of stable flight
So, the prudent thing to do is GROUND all the damn planes until they sort out what happened.
And if the planes are found to be inherently dangerous, they should be written off and Boeing take a huge charge and loss.
End of story. Cannot have moral hazard here, the manufacturers and airlines must accept zero incidents and zero only.
This crashing business is BS already. And if it is just chance.... well too bad, ground first, ask questions later.
The worrisome thing is
-- Similar circumstances
-- The failure to educate the pilots and have proper manuals
-- The possibility that the system is inherently dangerous because it relies on pilots remembering to disable it, instead of defaulting to the safe option
-- The chatter about the size of the jet engines relative to fuselage making the plane inherently unstable vis a vis center of gravity causing nose up attitude instead of stable flight
So, the prudent thing to do is GROUND all the damn planes until they sort out what happened.
And if the planes are found to be inherently dangerous, they should be written off and Boeing take a huge charge and loss.
End of story. Cannot have moral hazard here, the manufacturers and airlines must accept zero incidents and zero only.
This crashing business is BS already. And if it is just chance.... well too bad, ground first, ask questions later.
Zero incidents and zero accidents at what cost? Should the world's GDP be devoted to making air travel "absolutely safe"? Would you be willing to pay millions of dollars per ticket? In fact, what would happen to GDP if air travel suddenly becomes unaffordable/nonexistent? Of course, the easy way to guarantee no plane crashes would be to prohibit all travel by aircraft, of any type, under all circumstances.
We could similarly make the auto accident death rate "zero" by manufacturing only extremely expensive cars (and banning all current cars), making it almost impossible to get a driver's license, setting speed limits under 5 MPH, etc., but it's not a practical solution.
We could similarly make the auto accident death rate "zero" by manufacturing only extremely expensive cars (and banning all current cars), making it almost impossible to get a driver's license, setting speed limits under 5 MPH, etc., but it's not a practical solution.
Mar 10, 2019, 4:15 pm
#115
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: AU
Programs: former Olympic Airways Gold (yeah - still proud of that!)
Posts: 14,401
Distinction between a product that is 'safe' and 'user error' in relation to that product. Manufacturers only make a handful of models each. I think it's fair to expect that they are inherently safe and free from defects when delivered.
Mar 10, 2019, 5:04 pm
#117
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 2,277
Someone earlier in this thread stated that 0.5% ( 2 out of 350, so there's been some rounding) of this aircraft model have crashed, but what percentage of all the Concords that were ever build have crashed? Yet it was viewed as safe until the CDG runway incident happened and possibly should have still been considered safe. Or we can look at the space shuttle for another example. One crashed (cold weather O ring failure at launch), but that one is a big fraction of the number that were build and also a relatively big fraction of the total number of space shuttle flights that were ever attempted.
It's hard to conclude much (if anything) from a few bad random draws from a distribution where the bad draws occur with extremely low frequency. For example, think about Hurricane Katrina and the "once in a hundred years" claim.
It's hard to conclude much (if anything) from a few bad random draws from a distribution where the bad draws occur with extremely low frequency. For example, think about Hurricane Katrina and the "once in a hundred years" claim.
I'll admit going the NASA route and grounding an entire model every time a single crash occurs isn't realistic for commercial air travel, you'll wipe out giant portions of airlines fleets for months at a time while an investigation occurs. However it is also concerning that two of the same model aircraft have crashed, in the same stage of flight, and based on initial reports suggest similar circumstances should raise enough eye brows. Can it be random chance? Sure, but how many other models of airplanes have we had have two crashes in a short period of time? While being a relatively new model? In a day-and-age where historically air travel has been the safest ever, shouldn't that raise even more concern that these crashes are occurring? Or has the past 20 years just been an anomaly, after all we are dealing with an overall small event rate across the millions of flights that have taken place? Perhaps the expected crash rate is actually higher than what we have been seeing over the past couple decades?
Point being, we can make any number of statements regarding probability. At what point, with the rare occurrence of airplane crashes, do we say that is enough to raise concern for a specific model? NASA's approach is one event is too many. That is obviously unrealistic for commercial airlines. One event is a data point, two events is a line, three is a trend. When you're dealing with human lives, do you want to get to a trend? That answer is going to be different to everyone, I know the medical field doesn't like negative trends; and the medical field is supposed to be learning from the airline industry.
Mar 10, 2019, 6:18 pm
#119
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Atlanta, GA
Programs: DL DM & 5MM, WN
Posts: 1,451
It would be nice to know more about the pilot work-arounds for this plane's instruments that started after the Lion Air crash. How often are they actually needed/used? Every day? Once a month? Or never?
Last edited by Justin026; Mar 10, 2019 at 6:24 pm
Mar 10, 2019, 6:33 pm
#120
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: RSE
Programs: AA Exp|VA Platinum
Posts: 15,500
There are two camps here. One refuse to speculate and will keep flying. The other will stop flying (that plane/airline) until the cause is established. I'm in the camp that the latter is simply taking precautions to protect safety and peace of mind. Absolutely nothing wrong with that.
