Malfunctioning Pitot System Caused Malaysia Airlines Boeing 737 Dive
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 апр 2022
- Malaysia's civil aviation authority has blamed last week's rapid descent of Malaysia Airlines flight MH2664 on a malfunctioning pitot-static system causing a quote-unquote 'technical issue.'
Article link: simpleflying.com/malaysia-air... 
Развлечения
There was a fatal crash decades ago due to blocked pitot tubes.
Why have the designers not built in a self test & clearing system in to them yet ???
Because a blocked pitot tube will still have air trapped inside it. And how would it self clear?
Blocked pitot tubes don’t cause a crash. They cause a loss of airspeed indication. And even then one blocked pitot affects one instrument. There are 2 others on a commercial aircraft. A well trained pilot (combined with latest technology) can still fly with an approximate airspeed by using known pitch power settings and/or other sensors to get estimated airspeed.
They don't cause "a loss of airspeed". They cause an incorrect airspeed indication.
@@coolbreeze253 corrected
Pilot training is also a factor in malfunctioning indicators.This scenario is trained for.
What makes me worry here again is not the blocked pitot tube and a wrong airspeed indication but the autopilot pitching up before it was deactivated or it deactivated itself. The autopilot should cross check the air data before making any pitch changes. If the IAS on the left and right side differs more than a specific value the autopilot should disconnect and warn the pilot about unreliable airspeed.
I've been following this, and other MAS events recently. And there's one outstanding factor in this case that NEEDS a mention, the excellent airmanship from the pilot in control.
Top notch work bringing a safe ending to that flight.
I admire how the local authorities immediately started working on the incident to make aviation safer
They learned from their past tragedies
Lucky that this was the Boeing 737-800 Next Generation because Malaysia Airlines right now has 45 of these in the current fleet
47*
@@marcusianaviation9372 for a while until Firefly take 2 of them
@@nurrizadjatmiko21 Oh yeaa I forgot
@@nurrizadjatmiko21 yeah
The tube has been an issue in numerous incidents, maybe they should look at improving that system and how the aircraft reacts.
I wonder if the pitot tube heat was turned on because if it wasn’t it stands a good chance of freezing when climbing to colder altitudes. This would be hard to figure out in if the plane lands in a warm climate.
@@Chris_at_Home if it insect infested, it's hard
Reminds me of the AirAsia snake on the plane incident, it's not that long ago
Was one of the pitot/static heating units inop prior to departure?
If so the MEL says no operation in RVSM airspace or into known or forecasted icing conditions.
Wow I kinda figured it was a pitot issue
They could always adopt the method used to check the pitot tubes on airbus aircraft after AF447
Yh this is a BOEING aircraft
@@AirportPlaneSpotting so? There's always a way around it right? You do know there are common parts shared between the two manufacturers, unless you don't
@@AirportPlaneSpotting Right, even if it is a boieng, they have gone safer with a new CEO and really just find another way to do it and also you probably flown on one
well done to the pilots for their fast and correct actions!
This isn't the first time a Malaysian Airlines aircraft has had an issue involving the Pitot, I believe an A330-300 of there's took off with the covers still on back in 2018.
Yes, that was taking off from Brisbane, the ATSB just released their final report. If you're interested in investigation reports I strongly recommend this one it was fantastic
So is it a Malaysian airlines thing?
This also isn"t the first time Boeing had an issue with rapid deccent .
@@harsharyan9044 It also isn't the first time that this has happened to any aircraft, as we've seen on AF447, the incidents mentioned above involving the Malaysian A330 and 737, and several other cases.
I remember in the Navy someone turned the pitot heat on with the cover still on when on the ground. This was in the winter in a northern climate and it was common to turn the heat on during preflight if it was snowing.
This doesn’t make sense. If it was a pitot tube issue then that only affects airspeed. There are 3 pitot tubes on a 737. One for Capt, one for FO and one for standby. If one fails then it only affects that instrument. But it should warn if there is an IAS DISAGREE and pilots should then disconnect automatics and find out which is correct.
For a static port issue the altitude may then fluctuate but the plane shouldn’t suddenly dive for the altitude
Which is why we should ban all boeing planes. Who knows wht else they secretly put inside the plane system so they can save money. Too many incidents involve boeing plane recently, compared to airbus? Zero
There's more than that. "Unreliable Air Speed" is just 1 of them. Autopilot is a complex system, works with various instruments system and subsystem. If source data mismatched it would behave erratically and on severe disagreement will disconnect autopilot. Pilots have to analyze what's going on when these malfunction happens - which requires time, if it's within few minutes and they re-gain control.. well, hats off to those pilots - good airmanship.
@@nt4hx if a plane is in an uncommanded descent I’d like to think the pilots aren’t sat there wondering what is going on
If there is a disagreement between the three pitot system inputs then the aircraft will look for the two that agree and warn the pilots that there is a fault in the system. The aircraft won’t simply follow one faulty system ignoring the other two. That’s how the redundancy should work.
nothing about this story makes sense to me
FYI, it’s pronounced ‘tah-wow’. Keep up the great content! 👍🏽
Great job ,,, CAPT.
No mention of which pilot tube was "blocked, or malfunctioning". There are three separate systems. Unlikely one system failure cause this along. I don't buy it. There's more to thus than meets the eye. Why suggest a manufacturing issue? 737 NGs go back almost 20 years. How many millions of miles have they flown collectively without a pilot "malfunction".? Something is wrong with this picture. My view is that system knowledge has deteriorated substantially. Over the years, I've seen training degrade. Why suggest upset training (UPRT), when the crew recovered correctly, and flew around to burn fuel before landing? Another mysterious red flag.
If it didn't happen from time to time (and it does -- on the NG and others), they wouldn't bother incorporating an IAS DISAGREE warning. Usually (AFAIK) it's more than a single unit malfunctioning which triggers the situation, but that does happen. Blockage in the source or drain, heater failure, short circuit, and just reliability problems in general. AF447, on its way across the Atlantic, was slated for replacement of its pitot tubes with a more reliable model once it landed it Paris. But because of pitot tube problems, it never made it to Paris (that crash would be one reason to suggest a manufacturing issue).
Spend enough time working airliner problems (or at least enough time reading SDR's), and none of this looks "mysterious".
Can happen to any aircraft types flying today really. In this case, its not a boeing issue. Reference to the maker of that pitot tube could be made... if required. Again it depends on severity and frequency etc
Glad to see they learned from their past mistakes
Just to be clear, there is no sudden 7000ft drop? From the chart it looks like a sudden 1500ft drop.. and a 10 minute descent later on after the turn around.
great video
those passengers are lucky that dive even lasted a minute 😳
If that's the case, the China Eastern Crash may have lead the same situation. But it's just a possible theory.
The plane would not dive at that high rate due to pitot static failure
Would a pitot static malfunction result in a near 90 degree dive? I don’t think so.
I heard that the China crash is caused by the pilot like the Germanwings. (I heard, so not sure how much truth is within it)
So many problems and accidents due to obstructed pitot tubes... What if they were replaced in every check instead of just inspected? Or made bigger so it's less likely that they'll get obstructed.
aviation stuff tend to be really expensive, a winglet addon costs like 10 million for a single plane
There are so many things they could do.
A quick software fix would be checking against GPS. Then the pitot tube could report itself malfunctioning.
You can put a sensor in the tube to check for blockage.
I doubt that a physical tube is even necessary but no one wants to invest the money to make something digital.
There's also no reason for the autopilot to freak the hell out because of a sensor malfunction. Out of family readings should be disregarded.
Boeing has the worst case of "not invented here" I have ever seen.
If it's Boeing, I'm not going.
@@jtjames79 GPS measures ground speed. Not airspeed which is what you need
@@tomstravels520 It's called a sanity check, you don't rely on GPS for airspeed. Your mentality is exactly the mentality that causes these things to persist.
Thank you for proving my point.
@@jtjames79 how can you use GPS for a sanity check? If GPS says 400 knots but you have a 200 knot tail wind then your airspeed is only 200 knots. At 35000ft you’d be stalling. Clearly you don’t understand how these different speeds work.
Here’s a better idea. Calculate a synthetic airspeed using the AOA sensors and use that to compare against the computed speeds. Oh wait….the 787, A350 and newer A320/A330 already have that capability
Did they resume meal service?
Sounds more like a maintenance issue rather than a problem with the design. This could have happened to any airliner.
I actually have a flight back to my hometown due next week in one of these MAS babies. I'm not saying an entire grounding of the B738 fleet would be possible, but damnit if it ain't a possibility at this point.
Now that I think about it, what happens if one of the MAX series have a similar pitot tube malfunction? Would the MCAS react violently in this case?
From my understanding, MCAS is only affected by the angle of attack sensor, which is different.
@@scaffoldbw thank heavens only that
@@scaffoldbw I see! Thank you for your input, much appreciated.
And where is ur hometown
Cause if u sayin like kota bharu or terengganu, malaysia airlines NEEDS TO FLY 737 cause the runway is too short so grounding 737 isnt a choice for them cause most of malaysian airports needs the 747 or they cant land
And at, the same time costing them money cause they cant fly the plane and need to replace the passengers ticket
So as i say Grounding the 737 is not a choice cause it will effect the whole malaysia airlines
@@haqeemridzwan1932 You're probably right about the consequences. They were hit just as hard as AirAsia during the pandemic and was effectively bleeding money by letting most of their widebodies grounded (since their business model won't allow a packed single widebody to fly domestic routes like in many foreign countries).
While I'm pretty sure my flight to Kota Kinabalu would be uneventful, it goes without saying that MAS should really keep an eye on their service routine. After all, we knew exactly worse examples of a pitot tube issue.
There was definitely not a clogged pitot tube or they would of had an airspeed disagree message on takeoff. Possibly an air data module failed in flight. Hopefully there will be a thorough investigation to really see what happened. The 737-800 is a fabulous relatively trouble free aircraft
If the ADM failed on the same side as autopilot it should just shut off. Not cause a dive
@@tomstravels520 agree. Pilot issues?
Probe heat failure can occur at any time. If it happens inflight, ice buildup inside the probe will happen if icing conditions exist at that point in time, causing the pitot probe to be blocked and affecting the pitot system.
@@contactssync2160 I don’t know how it works on the 737 but on the A320 each pitot is heated by a different electrical system. Failure of one shouldn’t affect the others
@@contactssync2160 nothing mentioned about a pitot heat amber heat light illuminated
Boeing whistleblower said after about 6 -7 years you'll start seeing all the defects and cheap labor and problems start to show
The 737 ng has been flying for around 25 years
737 NG has been flying for 25 years..
And you probably flown one since its the most popular plane in the world
@@coleswack5513 boeing 737 jurassic didnt have major issues up till the 90s with the rudder.. They started flying in 1967..
@@coleswack5513 Not all 737NG, some planes of that same model were recently manufactured. China Eastern 737NG that went into a nosedive and crashed was only 6 years old, this particular Malaysian airlines 737NG is only 11.4 years old, perhaps that statement do hold merit considering the fact that Boeing's design philosophy has changed since then, Boeing nowadays prioritise profit over safety and the 737-MAX is proof of that fact...
God, Malaysia airlines does not need any more Boeing issues
I find it unbelievable that a mosquito can knock down an airplane.
As someone who knows the 737 I find that hard to believe!
If it does happen the response has to be correct.
What that means is the simulator and finding a solution.
Possibly new and improved design of the pitot and system with fail safe. If airspeed is compromised at any point during flight it can have bad consequences.
somethim ram
Coulda Sworn this was titled “Malfunctioning Pilot System…”!!
Wired thing is there are always Boeing737 incidents
FAA accident investigator? Don’t you mean NTSB?
Gonna happen from time to time.
Is it the same problem with the crashed China Eastern airline?
What do y’all think?
America brand are of those made in Taiwan back in the old days.
I know checking petot tubes isn't easy on all airliners before a flight but by now it should be a regular exercise before taking off and hauling hundreds of lives. If we sent people to the moon using nothing but a mere current power calculator, checking that which gives the outside conditions when flying high and fast should be a given.
I think i shall choose to fly with Boeing aircraft or not...as customer...
This makes no sense. Once the auto pilot is off, and it should be disabled right away, any competent pilot should just fly the plane. For it to drop that far means the pilot was late responding.
It’s so wired!
737 can’t catch a break.
It's a Boeing 737 what do you expect
Their always involved in issues and crashes.
@Levi Well it is the most popular jet airliner of the world, what do you expect.
@@moteroargentino7944 Still cannot figure out why public tend to blame everything on 737s and Boeing. Those things are pretty much cherry-picking or even misinformation.
@@Levi-in8eq u hear an Air France A330 overhead -_- ?
@@dopepopeurban6129 Ah yes Air France 447 the co pilot pitching the nose up without even knowing causing a stall
did you hear Air France Boeing 777 with control problems overhead ?
Airspeed unreliable & Altitude dissagre…. ???.. 🧐🤔
Don’t believe a pitot tube would do this
The B737 hasn't had any luck these past few years.
good
Let's hope the 737 was designed using sound principles, not luck!
Pilot could not fly power/pitch ?? !!
Lucky it was daylight or it could have been another Air France !!
Yes exactly,but it was airperu not airfrance...
@@AD-km4dg Dear Adn....another Air France. ...no basic concept of manual flight without airspeed..
Over reaction from the pilot flying.......
Just fly the plane......usual power and pitch for the cruise and determine which pitot system is in error.
Use the working system....
You also have GPS speed ......
At high altitude your GPS speed is not identical to your airspeed due to difference is air density and wind component
No matter whatever assurance is given, I vowed to travel by land or sea whatever the distance, I don't care. No more air travel for me unlezz, unless they make flying saucers
I think that Pitot inspection should be mandatory. An aircrash (maybe more) already occurred because of pitot malfunction. This one was a near miss, time to watch it.
A single pitot malfunction does not cause a crash because only 1 instrument is affected, not the other 2. And even if 3 fail it just means loss of airspeed indication. You can still fly with pitch power settings
I wanna imagine being in the toilet while this whole thing happend and coming out back at KL
Mate if you’re going to cover more regarding this, I’m gonna do you a solid and let you know the pronunciation of Tawau is “tah-wow” instead of “toh-whoa”
Source: am Malaysian
Was excited to hear my hometown’s name being said aloud but then just to hear it being butchered LOL
I doubt I would ever fly with this company. Much the same as Aerosucre.
We live in a mechanical world. Stuff bound to happen
Uhh, the 737 has 5 sets of pitot tubes. There's no way in hell they were all damaged or suddenly plugged up. Most likely reason is the pilots forgot to turn on the pitot heat before takeoff and they iced up on the climb through a cloud.
The very early 737 models had five sets of pitot tubes, later models do not. It is highly unlikely the pilots forgot to turn on the pitot heat because the resulting OFF lights would trigger a master caution indication on both sides of the cockpit.
The 737 maxs only had 1 pitot tube, that's what made them mcas into the ground
@@robinross6701 - Wrong on both accounts. Your statement shows how little you know about the 737 and the MCAS incident.
@@Hopeless_and_Forlorn considering the red light(s) that come on are on the overhead panel and rather high up and you can totally forget about clearing the recall warnings, AND some 737NGs are equipped with auto vs on/off pitot heat switches, it's actually easier to overlook & forget than you might think.
why not consider creating Simple Flying discord server! where all the av geeks can discuss
man, that airline cant catch a break!
i'm being picky here, but Tawau is pronounced as 'tar-wow'
So the pitot tubes are prone to blocking and are located on the aircraft in a position that makes checking them for blockages from the ground difficult. Two basic design faults that should never have gone past basic approval for the aircraft to fly. The pitot tubes need to be redesigned so they don't block. And they need to be repositioned on the aircraft so they can easily be checked before every flight. It's been reported elsewhere that they are also prone to icing up. So they need to be heated during flight so ice cannot form in them.
How do you block something that needs an open air gap at the front to measure airspeed. And they are position where the air is smoothest which is usually the sides
The phrase you are looking for is "design tradeoffs". As already noted, location of the tubes is largely determined by aerodynamics. Presumably on some airliner types they could be down lower to allow for better inspection, but then they are going to be more suseptible to damage from normal ground operations (unreported damage, assuming someone doesn't feel like losing their job). Many of the problems they have aren't going to be cured by the ability to do a closer visual inspection anyway: Short circuit, blockage down inside the tube, drain blockage, heater failure (yes, heaters already got thought of).
As someone interested in aviation, after reading dozens of such reports, I wonder how many things can go wrong in a flight! And yet it is dubbed as the safest mode of transport!
by stats it is the safest
It's just statistics. At the end of the day, when you're plummeting to your death in a can with wings or drifting towards it in a can with wheels, the last thing you're interested in is how likely was that to happen.
Such is the nature of life, it only takes one bad day.
If cars were all driven by highly trained professionals they would be much safer.
It all depends on the people who maintain/manage/Fly it
Tawau is pronounced "taawow" not "thowooo"
The airspeed pitot system is TRIPLE redundant. Maintenance washed the plane and forgot to uncover the pitot tubes.... shoddy
If you blame Boeing for this incident, the only way to make your logic behind this conclusion valid is to blame Airbus for AF447
troll comment
@@ant2312 ikr!
Could this also be the cause for China eastern crash.
No
Oh dear, did the airline opt out of the $300000 dual pitot option!
Corrective Action: Seats reupholstered in brown vinyl for easier cleaning.
I wonder if this is what happened to the China Eastern Flight
No. The plane would not dive at that speed
Could there be a chance that the China Eastern flight could have had this malfunction,but the pilot may not have reacted quick enough,therefore making it fatal?
No. The autopilot would not have caused the plane to dive at that rate and speed
@@tomstravels520 maybe it disconnected?
@@rannnn5498when it disconnects it sounds an alarm that can’t be ignored
@@tomstravels520 yes,that’s true,but maybe the pilots tried to engage it and it failed?therefore,their attention was towards engaging the autopilot,not realizing t he plane was plummeting,however,you probably are right.I just like to imagine lpl
@@rannnn5498 I don’t know how the pilots could fail to spot there would be no sky on ADI and their altitude dropping rapidly or not even feel the negative G
Is this what happened to that China eastern flight?
No. It would not cause it to dive that quick
Hold up. That’s the second 737-800 NG that’s had an major incident
Unfortunately it sounds like an air-readiness problem with the airline company or industry in Malaysia...Sounds as if the pitot systems on any bird can suffer the same ailments...Need to be careful in suspecting the manufacturer only.
Yep, first they blame the manufacturer, then the pilots, and lastly the airline. It's always like that.
Malaysia Airlines has some kind of history with technical incidents for the last 30 years now. Mainly because of the stiff hirachy within the employment bases and lacking cost coverage for maintainance. They do try and solve this problem for the better half of 10 years now, rebranded and made multiple other changes. Seemed not to be sufficient though
It certainly sounds like the same problem as the 737 Max. In the 737 Max the MCAS cuts in automatically and deactivate the autopilot and pitch up as was reported here. Is the 737-800 just a 737 Max with less pitch up?
The -800 doesn’t have MCAS
Hahahaha dude, lmao
If it due to the Mcas, the outcome can be a lot worst
No, MCAS pitched the Max down not up, in this recent incident the aircraft pitched up causing a stall.
Incorrect. On the max, MCAS was never active with the autopilot on.... MCAS is only active flaps up, gear up and autopilot off.....
Just teach pilots to fly.
Surely there has to be a better technological solution to this rather than outdated pitot static tubes.
You need to know what the air outside is like to get accurate airspeed. Therefore the sensor needs to be outside
This is the same type of B737-800 that crashed in China some weeks ago. That plane also went through a deep dive in flight which unfortunately it did not recover from. I will not be surprised if investigators on the Chinese crash at the moment end up discovering that this is also the 'culprit' behind the crash in China.
Yeah right, because aircraft tend to fly for more than 20 years without sensor related issues and suddenly develop said sensor issues within a week across all NGs…
The autopilot disengages in this situation so the pilot has to hand fly the aircraft. Also, this type of plane won't put itself into a steep almost vertical dive. It has to be deliberately induced. I became a military pilot in 1969 and was later trained as an aviation crash investigator there.
Impossible. I once asked a 737 pilot how he would handle a total loss of airspeed indications in flight. "Simple," he said. "Attitude and N1." In other words, monitor the aircraft pitch angle and engine power settings. Maintain the same values that are usual for the desired flight conditions, and of course try to maintain VMC.
I thought the same, even if it's a "convenient truth".
@@Hopeless_and_Forlorn It's not impossible. AF447 crashed when the pitot tubes became blocked due to icing, and the pilot reacted inappropriately by stalling the aircraft.
What concerns me, is that if I have understood it correctly, the malfunction of a single component has had such a potentially catastrophic effect.
Should it turn out to be an inadequacy in a design carried forward from earlier models which would not be permitted on a new aircraft, it makes me wonder if it is time for the regulatory bodies to re-consider which 'Grandfather rights' are or were appropriate to be carried forwards.
Could this be another case of automation not included in previous designs using input from sensors which were originally installed more to inform and warn rather than to control the aircraft no longer being appropriate?
this seems pretty similar to the China Eastern 5735, which was another B737-800 that crashed about 3 weeks ago, no one lived in that one. Basically that plane also just went into a sudden nosedive without warning, and fell 30000ft in a minute iirc
The problem is Boeing's computers response to faulty input data, not the tubes generating the faulty input. It should never be ok for the flight computer to put a plane into a dive like that.
It’s highly unlikely that the autopilot commanded a dive like that, so it’s highly unlikely that the dive was caused by automation unless all three pitot tubes were blocked at the same time. In that event it’s up to the pilots to intervene and disengage all automation and hand fly the aircraft.
My thoughts about this? 1 sensor fails and the aircraft dives or does strange things. That's just ridicules that they still got the certification for this type (and the MAX). THY 1951... MCAS... what's wrong with those engineers? How many more do have to die until they finally do something? Why do we have multiple sensors and redundancy and still 1 single failing sensor can crash an aircraft!
Airlines should have redundancy built into such systems. Have several pitot tubes and compare the results. If one is out of line with the others, stop using the signal and raise a warning for it to be checked when the plane lands. Really basic systems engineering.
It does. That’s why this makes no sense
They do.....
I will NEVER fly Malaysia airlines, no matter how much you pay me
What are the chances that the same issue occured on the recent China Air crash? I mean same plane correct (737-800)? Same sudden steep dive? Fortunately the pilots were able to regain control on this one...
It wouldn’t cause it to dive that steep
another pitot system problem
bruh it happened on an american experimental super-maneuverable jet
Man what's with these 737s nose diving ?
I’m pretty sure it wasn’t an abrupt dive, there’d be some major injuries if so… in most of these cases it wasn’t the aircraft issue.
Would this be the reason that caused the china eastern flight crash?
Maybe
I think so
A 10 minute dive vs a 2 minute dive seems very different, but until the investigations are over, we won't know.
Boeing is in a real dark serie
Maintenance problem, why Boeing?
@@classicicemc2848 no, several Boeing airplanes had accidents and/or incidents in the recent days
@@classicicemc2848 It reflects negatively on them. Same with the DHL 757-200F crash recently, the China Eastern crash, and a few more incidents recently.
@@jackson3190 you got a point
@@jackson3190 The DHL crash was not Boeing's fault as that aircraft had been produced over 20 years ago. Look to blame the maintenance engineers. As for China Eastern, the cause is still unknown.
Wonder if the same thing happened in China....
So they left a cover on agaaaaaaiiiiinnn!
No, they did not
If they did the failure would have been noticed during the takeoff roll
Boeing planes have been having many problems recently.
I think Boeing and possibly Airbus need to find a different way to measure the AOA other than the pitot tubes because it is ALWAYS these sensors that either bring down the planes or nearly brought down and this has to stop. Find a better way to measure the AOA please.
AOA isn’t measured by pitot tubes. Speed is. And there isn’t really any other way because the sensor needs to know how the air is flowing over itself
@@tomstravels520 yes they do measure the AOA and ok the speed as well and there is another way and Boeing are having to incorporate it into the Max right now.
@@abritabroadinthephilippines AOA sensors measure AOA. Pitot tubes measure airspeed. That why aircraft have 2 or 3 sets of both.
What Boeing are adding to the max is a synthetic version but that is not as accurate. It’s a way to check against the 2 real sensors with artificial one. If one suddenly fails or gives readings wildly different to the synthetic and other real one, the computer then knows it has failed. This is to make up the fact that currently with only 2 sensors if 1 give wild readings, the computer can’t tell which is correct.
Airbus have had 3 physical AOA sensors in all aircraft since the A320 and has now produced software to track if any have failed against the load factor
@@tomstravels520 ok well they still need to find a better way to measure everything can we agree on that. I know the work around on the Max is another software based fix though so maybe it's an actual new sensor or rather set of sensors is needed.
@@abritabroadinthephilippines the plane and its computers need to know what the air outside is like which means sensors have to be on the outside. You can’t compute airspeed accurately without knowing how fast the air is flowing around you. Even the backup system I mentioned uses another set of sensors on the outside
This could be used to solve the china eastern crash
Doubt it. A pitot failure would not cause the plane to dive as quick as it did
Pitot tube is too high so they wouldn't want to check it ? Why doesn't they have a GPS on board 😃
They do. But GPS measures ground speed, not airspeed
By the time it's low enough to shine a flashlight into (which still wouldn't reveal some problems), it's subject to damage by ground operations.
This could also be the cause of the recent Chinese accident
Doubt it. Would not cause it to dive that quick
Most likely blocked pitot tubes from insect etc especially if this tail has just been RTS after parking /storage..blow out may not be a 100% fix..Boeing needs to find a solution/..maint practice for sure
Then it would have been picked up during takeoff
@@tomstravels520 Only heating of pitot tubes is monitored by CMS, not blockages! There is no guarantee when an FOD, and at which profile, can block the tube if present.
@@praseninamdar4743 I known blockages can’t be detected but a small object even if not fully blocking the probe will still likely cause a difference in airspeed reading
This sounds like the Boeing 737 max, this is how the Indonesia lion air flight crashed in 2018.
Totally different issue in this incident. Not the same as the previous MCAS issue.
Hope its not what caused the Chinese plane to crash ..if so the problem might be wide spread
If its a Boeing I ain't going.
This wasn't Boeing's fault. It was pilot and ground crew error.
Cool! Ride a bike then. 🤣
There are thousands of them flying everyday. And in case you didn’t know Airbus caused some crashes too…
@@igormocko7625 in fact, if I did the math right, Airbus has a higher rate of crashes a year than Boeing.
Sounds like a motto:
"If it's a Boeing I ain't _goeing_ " 🤣
Just trash all 737s.
Chickens coming home to roost and boeing uglyplanes, one thing after another
If the plane was a B38M using the old 2016-2019 MCAS it would have been crashed
I'm glad this was a B738
The NG isn’t fly-by-wire buddy.
MCAS wasn’t a thing back in 1998 yk…
@@dopepopeurban6129 oh no, a guy doesn't get it
@@classicicemc2848 ^^
@@dopepopeurban6129 edited the comment for you
@@classicicemc2848 dude its fine, it was just a joke xD
B737 design is 50 years old now and still they can't get it right
It's not Boeing's fault. It is the pilot and ground crew that are at fault here.
@@jackson3190 its pilot system not the pilot
@@faizierazali3494 If you can’t handle the autopilot disconnecting, you should be in the back, serving drinks.
@@faizierazali3494 A. You just said it was a pilot system.
B. I know it was the pitot system. I'm saying the pilot didn't check to see if it was clear before takeoff.
What does the manufacturer have to do with airline staff disregarding a manufacturers manual?