Back to Squawk list
  • 66

Experts find faults on two more Lion Air Boeing 737 MAX 8

Jakarta - Inspectors have found flaws in two other Lion Air Boeing 737-MAX 8. A flight data display problem found on one of the planes might be similar to one reported in the previous flight of crashed Lion Air MAX 8, experts warned. ( 更多...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

Shenghao Han 15
But a flight data display issue cause pilot lost ability to fly VFR? I don't think so.
william baker 5
Was thinking the same thing. If the pilots before were able to over come the issue why weren’t these pilots. Granted that’s if it was the same issue.
bbabis 5
One was a day VFR departure. The other was a night VFR departure over a dark body of water. Very different scenarios. Still, there was information available to the pilots that was correct. The recorders and the investigation may tell us why it wasn't sorted out on this flight.
David Loh 9
Just because one set of pilots could overcome a certain set of flight malfunction does not necessarily mean others should be able to overcome the same identical malfunction even in identical weather or time of day. Every human is unique. Their abilities are also unique. Can we say for sure that all pilots should be able to glide a commercial jet with all engines out safely onto the Hudson river? Capt Scully could do it right? So unless we die die must protect the Manufacturer for producing a defective aeroplane let's not blame the pilots. As for Maintenance failure... We don't know. Maybe they should have checked the pitot static lines for leaks after the first incident. And check all couplings for security. Maybe they have done these checks. We don't know yet. But I feel somehow a 2 month old aeroplane should be able to fly with bare minimum line maintenance checks and still be safe. To have such an extreme failure within 2 months amd less than 1000 hours? Maybe we should be looking at the production records for this particular aeroplane at the manufacturer.
Stefan Sobol -9
The US Air A320 did most of the work when landing in the Hudson. The key decisions were to to land there and to turn on the APU which kept the flight controls in normal mode. The landing part was just hold the stick all the way back and the A320 did the flying.
chalet 5
Yes, you are right, and while the aircraft performed a perfect water landing all by herself Capt. Sully and his copilot were straightening the tie knots, combing their hair and polishing their shoes for good appearance before the world's TV cameras. You fool.
ravenshammer 2
Last I checked, the Hudson didn't have an ILS system. The plane isn't going to do a precision landing without it.
You mind providing a source for this "hold the stick all the way back"? They don't land themselves unless you've asked it to file a precision approach.
lecompte2 1
If the stab trim goes full nose down, it gets interesting
David Beattie 2
Actually, the movement of the trim can be stopped by actuating the trim cutout switch on the center console. Trim runaway is an emergency procedure required to be mastered for the 737 Type rating. The trim movement is stopped with the cutout switches at which point the airplane can be manually re-trimmed.
lecompte2 1
There is an event that I remember that when the stab trim goes to full nose down and high speed dive results, it becomes almost impossible to fight the aerodynamic forces on the stab and bring the nose up or return the trim.
Chris B 7
Pitots and Pilots seem to have their problems.
chalet 1
Right on CHRIS, they opposed nails and teeth to the adoption of the CVR and FDRs from the very begining, why: they feared that the mistakes they made may cause them to be suspended, fined or even fired.
bbabis 8
So you never make a mistake and you're ok with big brother looking over your shoulder on "everything" you do at work? Sure, if an accident happens, We need to find out why. But have one bad day at work, like WE all do, with no casualties and get fired, that is another beast. Be careful what you wish for. There has to be ground rules.
chalet 1
I bet that yop are a commercial pilot and that you opposed the implementation of the recorders. They were implemented as the "voluntary" disclosure of mistakes was a pipe dream.
bbabis 2
Actually, I was all in favor and I signed an NTSB recommendation that they also be installed on corporate aircraft. This was after losing two fiends and co-workers to an accident in 1983. I was a company rep to the investigation and what may or may not have been said in the cockpit would have helped immensely. As it was, the crew was blamed with many contradictory findings. My concern is only with security and privacy of information.
bentwing60 2
Agree totally and your experience is why, CVR & FDR are the only things left to tell the tale in so many of the serious accidents. I mentally put the R in friends cause I knew what you meant. Still wish we could edit these posts. Cheers.
bentwing60 3
Nonsense. The "voluntary" disclosure is alive and well and has been for a long time. It's called the "NASA" form to those in the know, or The Aviation Safety Reporting System officially. The "recorders", CVR & FDR, came in to existence during my, and I bet Bills climb up the jet drivers ladder and the 121 pilot unions and their affiliates fought it because they realized then what everybody with a brain realizes now, You can never trust the government! I think you are a licensed mechanic, ever fill out a NASA form? Gotta get it filed within the required time frame and certainly before the LOI shows up in the mail.
Jim Croome 4
I believe it has more to do with the stick shaker and auto response to lower the nose and adjust trim accordingly. Not good when a pilot has to fight his own aircraft for control.
How much do these Boeing Aircraft cost , you sure think that in this day and age the planes should be able to compare the data between two instruments and not put the plane in stall mode .this need to go back to Boeing as a design issue.
Allan Bowman 3
The "black box" invented in 1953 is still used by airlines. Yes the technology itself is better than in 1953 but so what. The boxes disappear with the downed aircraft. Real time data communications via satellite would obsolete these primitive antique devices and provide instant analysis of who, what, where, why and when incidents occur. But airlines and their regulators don't seem to want modern real time wireless data communications. Why is this allowed to continue?
bbabis 3
Control, privacy,and security issues of information have to be worked out.
SoNic67 1
How that help people that died? The problem is not the black box.
Live data may prevent the same problem from reoccurring, what about the cost of hunting endlessly for black boxes?
David Loh 0
People who died nothing can help them anymore. But real time telemetry to base May help the living if the reason for the crash can be found out sooner. And to heck with privacy concerns. I'm sure there are rules governing what pilots can and cannot do while flying. Just stick with what you can do. Don't do what you are not supposed to do and everything will be ok.
SoNic67 2
In this year, with computers being smaller and cheaper than 50 years ago, we still use as main speed indicator the troublesome pitot tubes. That's mind blowing for me.

Airspeed could be easily calculated from GPS speed and altitude, corrected for air temperature. At least as back-up indication.
bbabis 10
Even the sound in the cockpit is a way to get backup information but pitot static systems are the only way when it counts. Life and death is air (wind) over and under the wings. Nature's winds can change viciously in a split second and waiting for a GPS to react to it is not an option.
andromeda07 1
Can't both pitot tubes and GPS indicators be installed? Redundancy/backup could be a good thing.
bentwing60 6
They already are and neither will replace the other!
Charles Adams -1
Flying out of Boston last week we were all on a Boeing 737 MAX 8. I wonder if we could have been in danger from the same faulty sensor, or lack of crew training, or a combination of both?

About three years ago I downloaded an app for my iPhone that computed my phone's altitude, GPS location, and velocity. As long as I held onto that phone I knew where I was relative to the earth and what my velocity was. With all the damage that pitoit tubes have caused (spider nest in pitoit tube brought down a passenger liner before) why can't we have that iPhone app in the cockpit for sufficient redundancy to give the flight crew enough information to save the plane?
GPS will only give your speed relative to the ground. Proper airspeed is what keeps a plane aloft. If your airspeed is 400 kts and you are flying into a 100 kts headwind, your gps speed will be 300 kts. A helium balloon always has an airspeed of zero, but if it is aloft in the jet stream it’s ground speed (gps speed) could be 200 kts.
And the opposite of what David outlined ...

Say your app shows a ground speed of 230 kts. Now what if the aircraft had a 115 kt tailwind? That means the aircraft's airspeed is 115kts - in a 737, that means you're spiraling out of the sky.
jet4ang 1
This article really doesn't offer anything relevant. Thumbs down!
lecompte2 -2
It is starting to appear that the 737 Max design was rushed to compete with Airbus and even Bombardier, the result is suspect because the promised performance is not materializing and cost of operation is higher than anticipated. As an example the overhead panel in the flight deck weighs 400 pounds compared to Airbus Neo at 40 pounds the nose gear had to be lengthened so the engines would not drag on the ground while taxiing. Just saying


还没有帐户吗? 现在就注册(免费),设置诸多自定义功能、航班提醒等等!