Boeing 737 Max 8 Ethiopia Airlines Crash

My uncle was a pilot in the Air Force. He flew several different type aircraft but one in particular I remember was the B-58 Hustler. I was fairly young then but do remember getting a tour of the B-58. Quite the jet bomber. He too was always cool as a cucumber.

 

Would it be reasonable to say that no automated systems should be able to physically overpower the pilots inputs to flight controls?

I mean, if the aircraft thinks it should nose-down, and the pilot is fighting it, shouldn't the pilot always take priority?

 

I passed the USAF pilots written test but didn't have 20-20 so my goose was cooked. Why did they even give me the test? I tell ya--the part of the test where you had to identify objects on the ground in seconds from aerial photos turned and tilted left me humbled and feeling like I failed for sure.

 

Pilot would be able to do that if they turned off the autopilot.

 

I understand that, but my point is that the autopilot should not ever be able to overpower the pilot.

 

Okay, but is it CONFIRMED that MCAS was the cause of the Lion Air crash?

 

But a human error, which was catastrophic due to a clear construction weakness! And if you take the compensation process on your own, which follows, then the whole evil and clear and almost takes your breath away!

 

It was the autopilot, stupid.
paraphrase Bubba Clinton

And a failure of pilots to turn off the auto pilot
in such critical times.
Such as nose down, nose up, nose down, etc.

I am not a pilot nor do I play one on TV
What is incorrect about turning off auto pilot and taking full control
under critical circumstances?


Moi

​

 

Uh, what?

 

In many cases pilots get disoriented and want to look out the window for a visual reference instead of relying on their instruments. When a computer is functionally normally it is better at determining an aircraft's situation (nose up or nose down, left roll or right roll, etc.} At high altitude there is no horizon to focus on. Watch "Why Planes Crash" to see how many times pilots become disoriented. In most cases if pilots just let go of the yoke and allowed the AP to take full control many accidents would not have happened.

 

When picking up pieces of an aircraft that slammed into the ground is it possible to CONFIRM the actual cause of the crash? Read my link if you haven't already for your answer.

 

Yes, we're probably talking about 2 different incidents. And possibly, the one you refer to makes 3.

In the other 2 incidents, the aircraft were straight and level on autopilot. Instantly a 90 degree pitchdown was commanded by the computer/autopilot. My friend on the carrier incident reviewed the radar record because he was on the board. He said the downward track was absolutely perpendicular to level flight.

That means the pilot was dead instantly from negative G forces, which I think they calculated out to be something like -9

Computer malfunction, and I guess over the years they have changed the software accordingly.

 

Just watching how NASA trains it's astronauts using the "puke machine" gives me serious heeby jeebies. At least you learned you were intellectually qualified to be an AF pilot. I enlisted in the army in 1974 an completed the UH-1 helicopter repair course. My goal was to attend the flight school at Fort Rucker, Alabama. I lost focus of that goal sad to say. I enlisted in the Coast Guard in 1985 and worked on C130s as an electrician and a dropmaster/loadmaster aircrewman. By then I was to old to become a pilot.

 

I understand all that. My question revolves around the ability for an automated system to be able to physically overpower the pilot.

In my opinion, it is really poor design to do that, if for no other reason than it shifts responsibility for a crash from the pilot to the manufacturer.

Such systems should assist the pilot in making good decisions, it should never physically prevent the pilot from making them. Even if they aren't good decisions.

Imagine if Tesla's autopilot prevened a driver from steering his vehicle.

 

Autopilots can quickly be disengaged by either pilot. Autopilot switches are located on the yokes, the joy sticks or the center console. Even when the autopilot is engaged the pilot can still manually move the elevator trim tabs to adjust for CG shift during the flight. The burning of fuel moves the CG forward forcing the nose pitch down. Small trim tab adjustments during the flight can compensate for this.

 

You mean beyond reasonable doubt? Of course! Not sure what you are on about.

 

CG?

 

Center of Gravity.

 

Read the link I posted to learn what I'm on about.

 

I played sports and lost my lunch on more than a few occasions. I don't think I'd enjoy a run or two eith the "puke machine."

Reminds me of a Canadian friend who enlisted in the Canadian forces and in a similar fashion missed his chance to be a pilot. He was plenty smart enough to be a pilot.

 

Just a media report but...
Yes, to turn of the MCAS once activated requires the additional step of throwing the circuit breaker. Something not in the manual.
Bad sensor data told it the plane was in stall.
A safety feature (sold at extra cost) looks at both sensors and only warns of a conflict if they don't agree.

 

Crappy move by Boeing, I agree. Instead of selling extra feature they should have included it in the aircraft package price.

 

Yep. And they should have released it right after the first crash since it was already developed. This is the part that smacks of coverup since they & the FAA claimed to be debating a fix.

 

Let me get this straight. Are you saying that MCAS is to blame before the investigation is complete? And do you think that the planes should've been grounded?

 

Glad to see something happening in Africa actually getting media coverage for a change, even if it's only about how it could affect everyone else.