I teach at an aviation school, and I show them many episodes of aircraft mishaps. Not to scare, but to educate on events that may have been mechanical, human etc... where we where and where are now with regards to aviation safety. My students love to know this information going into their careers. Greg, you are the prominent professional in a lot of these investigations we watch. Seeing you do this is fantastic. Your hair is a little whiter now, but the knowledge you share can only be obtained by a first-rate investigator with years of experience! You have educated and inspired probably more than you know. I feel I've known you for years, and wish I had your job,...but maybe not. As aviation maintenance, we want to know the past, and we want to make sure the tragic incidents of past never repeat. Cheers. Thanks again 👍✈️ I
Greg, I’ve been following your work since Valujet in the Everglades. Your work has been commendable in all the accidents you supervised. Thank you for your service sir.
Stumbled on this channel recently and Wow, presented by two of the finest minds in crash investigations. Liked and subscribed; no hesitations and looking forward to the next episode.
@@HotTakeHQ Ha ha, now There There, No surprises, mate, and I’m not trying to be a Creep, but like Spinning Plates, these aviation techies do leave me High and Dry. You.🙈
My father was an airframes mechanic for the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm in WWII and you talk about owning your aircraft as a mechanic. When my Dad fixed a plane the pilot would say Suit up and we are going up together. You better have confidence in your work. Great video and lots of great points.
This is very interesting, we watched you guys for decades on the news so we know how much expertise you have. Remember Greg, we as maintenance ride on these airplanes too, we also have a vested interest in safety.
Greg is a national treasure, loved your work for many years. From the first day I saw deliberate act im this, this just screams struggle in the cockpit. We may never know the thruth bc we are dealing with a communist country.
I'm a total novice when it comes to airplane maintenance and flying but I learn so much from experts like you folks! I appreciate you taking the time to make these videos and share your expertise. I only just found your channel today but I will be watching for more now. Thanks again!
To all the people comparing to previous accidents, none of those were a full vertical dive straight into the ground.... It's extremely unlikely that a mechanical failure would produce a straight nose dive into the ground.... airplanes don't do that, even if the tail were to come off, it would still not do that.... The recovery at 8000ft and immediate nose dive points to a struggle in the cockpit
In order for the pitch to be totally vertical would have to be someone pushing yoke down and pulling back to maintain vertical, if they continue to push it then it would have gone past vertical (+90 deg).....
You mentioned JAL123. If my recollection serves me right, Boeing actually sent their own technicians to conduct repairs to the JAL123 accident aircraft after it suffered a tail strike in Osaka back in 1978. To cut a long story short Boeing's own technicians botched the repair. I must say, I take my hat off to that flight crew for keeping that aircraft airborne for as long as they did. God bless everybody aboard.
You’re actually wrong on this information! It was the Japan Airlines technicians who incorrectly fixed the tail back in 1978. In fact, after the 1985 accident the head of JAL Maintanance committed suicide.
@@jamesbget Hi Daniel, I went and had a little shufty back through the final report again because my memory does get a bit rusty from time to time. The report mentions specifically that Boeing technicians performed the repair as agreed upon with JAL It says nothing about JAL maintenance being involved as far as I can see. See section 1.2.2, page 100 of the final report. Please also could you give me your source of information?
If this ends up being a self inflicted act - The Faa and companies need to figure out something cuz we have had 1 too many of these . Some flyers that are nervous of flight having to now worry that a pilot wants to end his life and take everyone else with him is a different level of anxiety.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't a pilot break part of the rudder that caused a crash by over use of the controls while trying to save his plane a while back it was an air crash program. I'm no engineer but that shouldn't be able to happen.. I would not include this as a self inflicted act.
@@philipmcdonagh1094 I remember that, his plane was caught up in the "back wash" from a plane that had just taken off before them, the manufacturer made changes to procedures advising againt wiggling the vertical stabiliser violently from side to side.
@@philipmcdonagh1094 it was an airbus plane, fly by wire. The issue was that in most planes the rudder was controlled by a system of cables and hydraulics like all of the other flight control systems. These kinds of systems get harder and harder to move the more extreme your movements are. With fly by wire, the pilot was unaware that he was quickly moving the rudder from full stop to full stop. The fix was to add a "feel" system which gives the pilots tactile feedback over the system.
There was a captain at Continental in 1979 who, in protesting mandatory retirement at 60, was purposely diverting flights to the alternate airport despite acceptable weather at the destination. He would deplane and vanish, leaving passengers and crew and the airline wondering what to do. After about 5 of these, he was finally arrested and, I guess either prosecuted or just retired. Legally, he could declare to alternate as he was ultimate authority on the flight. Never heard the disposition of his case. In this one, the FDR and CVR should be helpful if the data is recoverable.
The one accident that I remember with a huge maintenance problem was Alaska air when they were cutting corners in their maintenance putting planes in the air when they should not have been flying…
There's a great podcast by a Boeing maintenance guy. I think it's Bryan Wheels, The Good The Bad & The Ugly. He sounds the alarm often about the drive from airlines to appease stockholders by cutting costs and time down for the planes in maintenance. He's been a long time mechanic and gets overriden by management time and again. It's worrisome hearing some of his revelations.
That competition sounds amazing! Keep on it - the more efficient you become and the more companies that see the value, you'll be able to expand to ensure every team gets a chance! Sponsorship sponsorship sponsorship! This has almost brought a tear to my eye.
This sure as hell looks like a depressed, disturbed pilot decided to off himself and take a planeload of passengers with him. By the way this is not as rare as you think. Malaysia Air, Egypt Air, German Wings and Silk Air come immediately to mind.
Seems like maybe you didn't actually watch this because they reference all of those accidents and more... I bet it's funny for people who actually investigated these accidents to be told by you that it's not as rare as you think. Should you be telling NTSB and FAA investigators about their own cases?
You know what isn't rare as you think? Horizontal stab trim malfunction, both of the last disasters was directly related to this issue. I know that was an NG, however remember MCAS is a part of STS system, that already was in NG planes. Let's wait for the preliminary report before have any conclusion.
@@Parc_Ferme Since the NG planes have flown billions of miles safely all over the globe, not likely to be a horizontal trim malfunction, however, we shall see.
My family always ask why am I afraid to fly? I was in this aerospace space business from 1984 to 2006 as an engineer. Many times, Manufacturing used to force me to sign accepting the work done improperly or equipment installing on the aircraft were not manufactured properly. I have a friend working at the most popular airline in the USA as a lead aircraft mechanic. he always complained to me about many lazy mechanics producing shoddy repair on aircraft at the maintenance workshop. He told me a horror story that he encountered many years ago. He was invited to joint with two pilots to a flying test on the jump seat after he replaced a Flight Control PCU. The Boeing 737 did take dive and both pilots struggled to recover the aircraft. Luckily, all three survived thru the ordeal. I wondered if two pilots trying to teach my friend about the improper repairing on the aircraft.
I'll give you a scenario. Pilot monitoring has his chair slid back and isn't wearing his seat belt. This is normal with most flight crews. Pilot flying (we don't know which) has a heart attack or stroke and collapse right on top of the yoke. This disconnects the auto-pilot and puts the plane into a dive and a spin. All three gets thrown from their seats. They are bouncing all over the place, screwing up the dials, levers, and switches as they flail about trying to grab a hold of something. Eventually one of them somehow gets into a seat, and the other moves the stricken pilot away from the controls. This is difficult because the plane is still spinning and diving. Eventually they got out of the spin, sees the ground coming out, and attempt to pull the plane out of the dive. They do it too quickly, parts of the plane gets torn off, it stalls, and then drops straight down.
I came upon your channel and familiar with Greg Fieth on other channels. This accident is so troubling and hopefully some answers arise. Also new sub here.
I have to wonder, after binge watching Air Crash Investigations/Mayday… from s01-15 (am currently waiting for dvd onwards…) how many commenters have actually watched even ONE SEASON of the season, which introduced me to Greg Feith(fieth), which is what attracted me to this channel… his input is so invaluable, i cant remember the name of the other guy- my ADHD memory that doesn’t mean much… BUT if A name is repeated enough for me to remember, it equals trust, knowledge, experience (aka Greg)… One thing I learnt and will never acknowledged throughout my fast binge watching- it takes SO MUCH TIME for an air crash investigation, to even release a preliminary/mid report… That anyone expecting an answer within 6 months (considering how long it seems to take to recover wreckage debris… let alone analyse certain buts and pieces- even with CVR/FDR…)
I just wanted to say i'm a huge fan of Greg. You have had to deal with some big high profile intense investigations and I have always liked the way you explained and solved all those accidents. Especially the value jet swamp crash how you and your team figured that one out is amazing. To me the rudder pcu problem they had with the boeings back in the day always scared me when i got on 737s it took years and 2 crashes and one plane that survived it to figure it out. People think Im crazy for picking what planes i fly on. When most people have no ideal and look at cheap price. My favorite plane is the airbus 220 which is a bombardier cs300 with a airbus badge on it (what a great flying plane). When i first saw this accident i either though pilot commanded to make plane dive like that or a rudder issue.I mean the plane has to be commanded to dive like that or a mechanical or structural failure. I'm not no where near a investigator but just a very curious on how accidents happened. Im wondering it being china if we will every find at all info on this one.
Mechanics and inexperienced engineers always fail to read the manuals probably due to the nature of human. I had seen the repair on the JAL aircraft via the JAL evidence video , the repair was done with single row in the straight line rivets. Thus would act as a zipper. Boeing issued the instructions to repair with double row rivets with zig zag pattern. I had spent many hours to interpret the work orders for mechanics. At the Edward Air Force base, a crew chief decided to do the engineering job by substitute the synthetic oil coolant with automobile anti freeze. Many coolant pumps were fails due the conductive of Anti Freeze, luckily no aircraft was blown up. I have to put a technical alert for not using any different fluid from the technical orders. Aircraft can have a fire or blow up for not using the correct lubricant to the coupling seals of the oxygen systems. I fixed an aircraft almost blow up at the fire pit. There was a leak in the oxygen generation system, the crew chief pumped more 50 gallons of cooling oil to fill the reservoir, and he decided to start the aircraft at the fire pit. The coolant oil was distributed all over the aircraft from forward looking radar to the aft defense radar. The cockpit was covered with oil, and oil in every electronic equipment required cooling air. I had to spent two months to provide instructions to clean up the very big aircraft. I was supported with a team of six engineers at the central of engineering and a team of a dozen mechanics at the production shop.
If the plane came down because of structural damage, it doesn't make sense, that the plane regained control and actually climbed. But it would fit the narrative of a struggle in the cockpit for control. Also the point of impact, straight down! Very interested to see how this plays out.
It was mentioned in one of the many videos posted about this incident that the indication of a momentary level off and [then] continued decent could have been a false signal, and not actually what had occurred. That all appeared to have occurred in too short of a period of time and would have put too much stress on the aircraft. Things like that happen in cartoons, not in real life.
Deano, the structural damage resulted from the airframe being overstressed due to a too sudden attempt at recovery. An airliner is not a fighter or an acrobatic plane. There are many things you can't do with a vehicle that large.
It's all speculation and no particular theory is sensationalizing it more than the others. Deliberate pilot action can be clickbait, but catastrophic failure of an aircraft is also clickbait. Go ahead and point out actual lies, but stop demonizing people for putting out their own opinions.
I say pilot flying had a heart attack or stroke and collapsed on top of the yoke putting the plane into a dive and a spin. Everybody gets tossed like a salad. No click bait? Unfortunately, there is also no solution to this.
December 19, 1997 Flight 185. Parker Hannifin or Distraught Human? Engines not throttled back, Speed breaks not deployed. Of course once the Aircraft lost a certain amount of Altitude it would have been wrong to deploy flaps. Many speculated pilot suicide in the case of flight 185. It does take much research to determine an Air Crash cause. In the case of 185 they (it just hit me "you") ran simulations that determined if a systems or mechanical malfunction could lead to the ATC flight profile, summary of that test is below. This case is still unclear to those who don't fully grasp the extent of an Air Crash Investigation. I have an Engineering background and as such am used to digesting huge amounts of information and tracking down minor details that lead to major problems and require Corrective Actions. Anyway, this new incident was the first time I jumped to a conclusion because it so poignantly reminded me of Flight 185. Official report : The results of these simulation studies (Appendix G) are summarized as follows: · Any single failure of the primary flight controls such as hard-over or jamming of aileron, rudder or elevator did not result in a descent time history similar to that of the last ATC radar points. In simulations of these flight control failure conditions the aircraft could be recovered to normal flight manually. Examination of the main rudder power control unit (including the servo-valve), the yaw damper modulating piston, the rudder trim actuator, the rudder trim and feel centering unit, the standby rudder PCU, the aileron PCUs, the elevator PCUs, and the horizontal stabilizer jack-screw components, revealed no indications or evidence of pre-impact malfunctions.
He was demoted. Obviously unhappy about it - and the pay drop is massive. All pilot appointments are political appointments in China. A heady mixture.....
I was looking forward to this discussion only to find that it was still based on the same speculative drive that John complained about, furthermore, I was disappointed that the possible causes mentioned in the discussion were being reduced to "human causes", and "cultural issues" by making assumptions that Korea and China are the same. Firstly, the Chinese don't have this upper-lower social hierarchy that Korea and Japan has, but they do respect their elders the same way you respect your teacher. It is incredibly rare to find someone with the motivation to try and murder hundreds of people. The guilt doesn't stop with the murderer, it extends to his/her families, friends, workplace and even cultural background (see Virginia Tech massacre). This is why nobody would do it if it means a lifetime of shame for all of these people. Greg mentioned that if something unusual happens in flight then one "should naturally" slow down, but there have been many things going at high speed but never had the chance to slow down. This appears to be one of those cases, we really do not know what happened until the investigation can report what they know. But to reduce this accident to pilot suicide is just ridiculous. I have never heard anyone blamed Boeing outright in this event, and even when 737-Max planes were crashing. I refused to believe that these planes still being put in the air for decades are reliable like some Rolls Royce, when I wouldn't even drive a 10 year old RR, not even a maintained one.
You can't speak for the actions that any one individual person could take on their own just because whatever culture they are or aren't.... Your statement is completely pointless and flawed .... Any human being can reach a mental state where they could act irrationally, regardless of race or culture. That applies to "humans" period.
@@puerco911 I'm sorry that you don't like the fact that the plane itself can be questioned, just like every form of transportation, but the fact is they have failed too many times.
What you pointed out makes sense. We expect to get rational analysis from the experts with no bias. At this stage, we expect to hear from experts about what possible reasons to explain that casualty, including any potential technical failures of the plane or false operations of the pilots. etc.
@@MikeJones-iq8zo That's right, only the experts on the ground can make that assessment based on the evidence at hand. All this conspiracies of pilot suicide and nothing to attribute to plane and equipment failure is just being ridiculous.
I fear this will come down to a deliberate act by one of the pilots. Apart from the near vertical descent pointing to an intentional act, the absence of any distress call to ATC is telling. Let’s hope the CVR survived and can be read; I suspect it will contain the evidence needed. As you say, these events are becoming more frequent; it’s a troubling trend.
It's those flying with Islamist pilots I feel more sorry for. Not that one can tell, but it's scary as hell when you have no idea who may rush you so indecoriously into the next realm.
It could be, but these days peoples are posting shit without any proof, evidence or facts. We don't know yet, and what makes me sick is that since day one media and peoples who are respected in aviation world are throwing this 'pilot did it' card without proof or facts. '' Dead people can't speak'' It could be problem with plane or problem with pilot, we don't know yet!
You’re quite right; we don’t know the cause yet. So all comments, mine included, are speculative and should be read as such. Hopefully the sequence of events leading to this accident will be uncovered so we can learn what actually happened.
@@mike747436 Your comment was totally okey one. My point was these days media and known people on industry make this sick thing called click baiting with dead people who are innocent till the facts come. For me, it's so hard to imagine myself doing that. It's like they don't understand how huge sentence is to blame someone of murdering 131 people, and blame without actual evidence and known facts.
Take into consideration of how that conclusion would NOT be in the CCP's interest. And when they can install a Pretendent in America, misallocation of the cause of this crash would be easy as pie!
do you know the same thing happen to malaysia airlines 737-800 on Sunday 3 April? the plane took off for 30 mins, and suddenly dive from 31000 ft to 24000 ft? and the pilot decided to turn back, all the passengers was horrified
@@puerco911 but it was still a dive, and it happened not long after china eastern accident, fortunately it was not as bad as china eastern and they survive to tell the story
There is an enormous pay difference between Captain and Co Pilot in China - massive. The CP was busted down from Captain. This is a huge loss of face for him. And if he had property debts etc it puts huge psychological pressure on him. Also all pilot appointments are political appointments in China. ABCD - Always Be Connecting Dots.
Av channels is like all i watch and i cant believe i just this station. Smh. But im glad it did! You ol pro guys are awesome together. Like/share/sub/support! 👍👍
To Flight Safety Detectives : Mr. Feith and Mr. Goglia - I have just one question. Is it the 737-800 series are having problems with the build or this aircraft ? Besides the China Eastern Airline's crash, actually there's another incident happened in my country just about 2 weeks ago It didn't made too globally known about it coz it's an domestic flight and perhaps the authories in my country felt it's a small issue. The incident happened on April 3rd 2021, A Sunday. This domestic flight was supposed to reached to East Malaysia a city called Tawau from West Malaysia here Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA). The flight was an afternoon 14:30 pm's flight and a 8 years old 737-800. After it took off from KLIA, some 30 minutes when the flight was cruising at 30,000 ft altitude, it suddenly went through the same nose dive dropped of 7,000 ft in a matter of a few seconds or so ... The fleet crew did managed to regained the altitude and survived the entire flight at 23,000 ft. Fortunately they haven't flew far yet and was on the way out of West / Peninsula Malaysia, somewhere near the South China sea. And extremely fortunate, it didn't crash ... The fleet immediately returned back to KLIA and landed safely on 17:03 pm. According to the interview reports by the media on several passages, they mentioned the weather was all good, bright sunny day, no stormy weather. And the seat beat's sign was off, so several had loosen their seat belts. Unexpectedly when the jet suddenly dropped, it sends several that untied with the seat belt went floating in the cabin, I believe it's the G Force. So my question is, is this 737-800 series really safe ? Or it's there something about the builds like perhaps the avionics or powerplants are having real serious issues ? You can check it out by Google or RUclips here about this incident. The flight was MH2664. Except the only differences between MH2664 with China Eastern Airline MU5735 was, just "Luck". I hope you'll look into this matter and please educate us those that seriously wants to knows and learn more. Coz there are so many 737-800 series around the world ... Who knows will it happens again ... Sincerely Thank You very much.
I think there’s little chance of anything other than intentionally crashing this plane, just like the Chinese bus driver did on the bridge. The airlines insulted this pilot in the worst way possible. We always here about the airlines watching pilots mental health but what they did to this guy would’ve caused the worst mental shock that they could do to a person. I find it hard to believe the plane could do anything near that short leveling off if it was a structural problem bad enough to cause that type of dive. But I’m not any expert, that’s why I like you guys. I’m also shocked that China let the ntsb get their hands on either box. Everything needs to be investigated tho in case it was a failure of something mechanical or structural. Especially with a plane this popular and widely used. No doubt Boeing needs to have everything cleared up so there’s no doubts about what the cause is.
I believe you are correct mental health stability of the co-pilot in all likelihood was the cause. I find it inconceivable that the Chinese government would cancel culture one of its most experienced Pilots, with no regard of the possible outcome.
I have seen elsewhere that the co-pilot was very senior and previously held very responsible position. If true, he would have been demoted and close to retirement. In the absence of official reports, we can't take everything that we see to be true.
@@andrewlim7751 Who is "they"? The FAA doesn't take the lead on aircraft accident investigations. The NTSB doesn't even have the lead in this investigation, the Civil Aviation Administration of China has the lead role in this incident. Better know some facts before you make allegations.
You see, my problem with the theory of deliberate crew action causing the China Eastern disaster relates to what Greg says about previous accidents - SilkAir in particular - where the flightpath and flight recorder traces did not indicate any attempt to recover. The ADS-B data for China Eastern 5735 indicates an initial loss of control at cruise altitude followed by what looks like an attempted recovery around FL080 - which unfortunately resulted in a zoom climb and a second departure from controlled flight, leading to the eventual crash. Furthermore, while the JAL123 and Dynasty 611 disasters were both traced to structural failure through fatigue stemming from improper repairs, there are important and significant differences in how each scenario came about. Crucially, JAL123 was caused by an improper repair to the rear pressure bulkhead following tailstrike damage (performed by Boeing themselves - though that's not particularly relevant), whereas the tailstrike damage to Dynasty 611 was not sufficient to require repairs to the rear pressure bulkhead. As I understand it, the B747 structural repair manual contained at least two procedures for repairing tailstrike damage, with the correct procedure being determined by the surface area and degree of damage. Below a certain threshold, the manual required basic repairs and the fitting of a doubler plate, but above that threshold the manual required more extensive assessment and more thorough repairs to the underlying skin and structure. For reasons we don't know, China Airlines' maintenance applied the former procedure when the latter procedure was warranted due to the extent of the damage. Whether this was driven by an honest mistake regarding the damage assessment or management pressure to get the aircraft back in service we can never know for certain.
How do you know it was "loss of control"???? A consistent vertical dive is not a typical loss of control situation, if you don't know anything about aerodynamics then don't talk about what theory could be wrong
@@puerco911 - It wasn't a "consistent vertical dive" according to the ADS-B data, as I said. There was an initial loss of altitude from cruise down to approximately FL080, where what looks like a recovery was initiated, followed by a zoom climb and a second dive. The video evidence indicating a nose-down attitude only applies to the second dive - we currently do not know the orientation of the aircraft during the initial descent (which is why I'm hoping the FDR/CVR data can be recovered). To be clear - what I'm saying is that Greg says that the reason he suspects the SilkAir crash was deliberate was because the FDR traces indicated no attempt at recovery, whereas the ADS-B data for China Eastern 5735 arguably does indicate an attempt at recovery - and if so, it doesn't fit the pattern of previous deliberate sabotage events. Does that make sense?
@@turricanedtc3764 ok so you call an altitude loss from 27000ft to 8000ft just "an initial loss of altitude"..... No my friend, that's not a loss of altitude, that's a catastrophic nose dive position uncharacteristic to aircraft aerodynamic forces An no sorry doesn't make sense, the recovery at 8000ft actually could be easily explained as a struggle in the cockpit
@@puerco911 - I didn't say "just" an initial loss of altitude - until we have more evidence as to what happened, a loss of altitude (or potential loss of controlled flight) is the only thing we can characterise that portion of the trace as. We don't know the orientation of the aircraft during that first descent, so we cannot call it a "nose dive position" or, indeed, anything else until we have the FDR data. My understanding regarding the first rule of accident investigation is this - nothing can be ruled out until the evidence to do so can be found and proven. The apparent recovery attempt followed by the secondary stall and dive *may* be the result of a struggle - but it could just as easily be the result of one of the crew winding on too much nose-up trim to try to arrest the descent.
I was thinking of Alaska Flight 261 and the jack screw jamming, causing the elevators to jam. This plane went in to a dive and briefly recovered, only to resume another dive. Similar happened to Alaska 261
That plane did all sort of flying attitudes all over the place, including flying inverted..... Not a real good comparison to this one which was a full - 90 degree pitch nose dive, nothing else
Has anyone though to check the rudder PCU dual-servo valve? Back in 90s, TWO 737s crashed in similar fashion - uncontrolled roll which turned into vertical high-speed dive. The problem with the dual-servo valve back then was that it could jam and let fluid go in opposite direction. This meant that when pressing the rudder pedals, it would have opposite result and pilot flying would not be able to detect and that would result in vertical dive. It also explains why the plane seemed to regain control but then lose it. Would someone please relay this theory to the NTSB!!!
On 911 there was a plane nosedive into the paddock and kill all on board. Do you know where that engine data is stored or indeed what was held in the black boxes? There is no data feedback on what the pilot was attempting to do at the time of impact?
Some time ago I talked to senior Delta Airlines Inspector and he told me that young people are not interested in going into maintenance and make their hands dirty. This was before CV 19 and current events.
A few facts on that, though. In the last generation, the parents that toiled away in physical positions stressed that they didn't want their kids doing the same. College has been pushed at an entire generation. Now, we have young people in debt everywhere and jobs that don't pay near enough to survive. Plus, the wealthy invest in big companies like airlines and Boeing and they become the bosses to appease. Mechanics and service workers get burned out because of the intense workload. The internet has allowed people to diversify. We have to make those jobs more appealing (better pay, fair workload, mgmt support) and get big money out of issues where safety is paramount.
THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL As is usual in any analysis of accidents it is often the 'small stuff' that emerges to give us the true picture. Greg and John are remarkable advocates for aviation and have enviable track records in understanding and explaining things. Aft Pressure Bulkhead failure as a result of poor repairs post tail-strike damage looks like the cause of the China Eastern Flight 5735, although finding coverage of this has not been easy to locate. John's analysis of the concept of 'The Intentional Act' by a member, (or members), of a flight crew is as spot-on as it is informative, and likely points us in two directions worthy of further examination. Firstly, we have the need for better and more frequent psychological examination of flight crews and their state of mind.This involves understanding how they are acting and thinking both on and off the job, and as a consequence extends to understanding inputs that may come from colleagues about their general disposition, as well as from family and friends. Second, in understanding the concept of 'The Intentional Act' we have to understand much more about just who the pilots and co-pilots are in this day and age. More precisely perhaps we need to ask an important question. Has it become too easy to become a pilot with so much new technology now an integral and necessary part of an airplane in general and of the flight deck in particular.....? Understanding this latter point is fraught with difficulties in so many ways and will be controversial, but it must be addressed.. Post 9/11 we have had secure cockpit doors introduced, but as the German Wings crash demonstrated we had the unintended consequences of a security measure working to thwart security. Had the pilot in the German Wings airplane had the means to open the cockpit door from the outside there might easily have been a different outcome. James Hennighan Yorkshire, England
I hope China gives the aircraft manufacturer access to the crash site and recovery of the black box for reconstruction. Something catastrophic happened and elimination of any computer generated fault is a prime focus.
Not a pilot or have ANY knowledge of flying. Like many I have watched a lot of videos and am aware that most pilots receive extensive training including what to do if your plane (for what ever reason) goes into a dive etc. Now this will probably sound stupid, but maybe just maybe there are some pilots who perform these tasks in a simulator with excellence and seem to be very competent but when it comes to a real situation they just freeze up. I understand that time is critical in these situations you must act instantly but if they freeze up for, even a minute, (that's a long time) then their training kicks in it is probably too late to save the plane. I am not suggesting that anyone has made incorrect judgement calls just maybe in this case (with a lesser experienced Pilot flying with a very experienced co-pilot) the pilot felt intimidated didn't respond quickly enough the co-pilot maybe was doing everything but also considering the possibility of not great CRM it became confusing and well that was it...Of course we will not know until a full and extensive investigation is done, I just hope that it is just that and one day we find out what really happened up there...
Hello I am subscribing to you channel. You are fresh air. Saludos God speed to those who are affected by this tragedy. Pavelavietor1 visigoth1 Iberian1
5:18 Actually...with the right settings/gear you can see the vertical stabilizer in the video from "The Sun". It shows up at the very top of the screen and then again midway down. When it enters the top of the screen it is inverted with the belly facing the left of the screen and the tail pointing to the right. Shadows appear under the tail section and the nose. Watch the original video from "The Sun" in 1080p on a good monitor. Go to full screen, pause and zoom-out to stretch the time-line. It then appears to rotate slightly to the left midway down.
Also it may help to adjust brightness and contrast as well. As you step through each frame with a mouse you can take a pic with a still camera (to zoom-in even further for more detail) You can spot the huge vertical stabilizer a couple of times.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't a pilot break part of the rudder that caused a crash by over use of the controls a while back it was an air crash program. I'm no engineer but that shouldn't be able to happen.. I would not include this as a self inflicted act.
this was an airbus A300 that crashed over NYC shortly after 9/11.....the pilot used excessive and agressive rudder inputs during takeoff, in a low airspeed, low altitude setting, so yes once it lost the rudder , being so close to the ground, it hit pretty quick....
@@xsu-is7vq Even though the NTSB is downloading the data, the CAAC is part of the data review committee and I expect CAAC will actually release the information or will at least certainly review what information is released by the NTSB. The CAAC has said they will issue a preliminary report within 30 days of the incident and that report might include only a preliminary description or analysis of what was found on the black boxes. Not sure about how the CAAC treats it, but per US Federal law, the NTSB cannot release any detailed transcript of the cockpit verbal communications recorded on the CVR until an NTSB public hearing is held or until the final NTSB accident investigation report is made public (often a year or more after the incident).
There are a lot of rumors here in China saying this accident has to do with bad replacement parts used from cost savings. If so the truth will not be revealed but hidden and covered with some created stories. Lets see.
The tail is kinda the most important part of a plane as without it your plane won't be able to fly level. The tail controls how the plane tilt and turn. Possible it broke off and the plane flew out of control causing a straight dive.
@@Junispro31 incorrect, it would not go into straight nosedive at all..... It would tumble around significantly as it loses forward momentum inertia....
A very good question btw. Answer: No (if it lost the entire tail section) But a malfunction or failure of the "horizontal" stabilizer could send it into a nosedive. This plane didn't lose it's entire tail. It may not have lost any parts from the tail section until it finally hit the ground. The "vertical" stabilizer (the tall upright triangle) was in fact still on the plane. (in the video originally posted on RUclips by "The Sun") I was only able to see it after tweaking the video's quality, contrast and brightness on a large/wide monitor and using a still camera to enlarge it (frame by frame). The shape of the 737 vertical stabilizer is very distinct and it is in fact visible in just 1 or 2 frames. (I've managed to find things in other unrelated crime videos in the past with the same method) I could not verify the smaller "horizontal" stabilizer was intact because that did not show up very well in the pixelated/distorted video. The "initial nosedive" itself suggests the horizontal stabilizer was there, but could have been damaged or "misguided" so to speak. (simply my interpretation/speculation/could be wrong etc)
@@robnation2475 if a control surface was stuck in a given position the aircraft would follow the angular rotation of such force (ie. elevator stuck pitch down, the aircraft would continue pitch down pass vertical (a clear example of this is Alaska airlines md83 crash where elevator jack screw was stuck, and airplane pitched 180 upside down)..... In order to maintain a vertical dive the control input would have to be pushed all way down but then relieved some to prevent pitch over and maintain full vertical dive... Autopilot doesn't do this, so it's pretty good indication of human control
Mechanics are the unsung heroes of everyday flights, for sure. I'm a pilot. I lived and flew in China for 5 years. I know that one big factor affecting safety over there is the verticality of authority, which leaves no room for true leadership. You cannot (if you want to keep your job) tell an instructor, chief pilot, etc. that what they are saying or doing is wrong. It is a MAXIMUM SIN. This cascades into all sorts of failures within the system. For example, flight examiners design Simulator Proficiency Checks that are highly improbable if not impossible, with the only purpose of showing they are better than the pilot being checked. First Officers are not expected to contribute to anything in the cockpit, as they are just that, subservient apprentices of the captain. So imagine a scenario of a demoted captain - instructor - highly decorated pilot into a copilot just because he made some kind of enemy within his company? I'm actually more surprised there aren't a lot more accidents in China just because of this cultural flaw.
I highly doubt the situation is as bad as described. You can’t have the safety record that Chinese aviation industry had maintained, 12 years and more than 100 million total fight hours without a fatality within the entire industry prior to this crash, with that kind of culture.
@@davidj4662 it isn’t that facts are “boring.” If facts were boring, who would try to learn the truth? Speculation is a necessary part of the investigation process. If you ever watch crash documentaries you’ll notice when they arrive at the answer to why/how something happened, it’s because they considered many different possibilities for what caused the accident or incident. You have to speculate, simulate, and eliminate.
Chinese airline pilots are treated less than as they are in the rest of the world. Why is a young/relatively inexperienced captain flying with a very senior f/o that had been demoted from captain status? My money is on it being an intentional act by the f/o.
@@xsu-is7vq Compared to 32,500 hours it IS relatively inexperienced, do you have any idea how many hours it normally takes to captain an airliner in the USA?
@@NighthawkCarbine Lesser experience is NOT inexperienced. Otherwise, an airline would have only ONE experienced pilot, and every other are "inexperienced" because they have less hours than that ONE. US airlines in general takes a minimum of 3000 hours to be considered for Captain promotion, and 5000 for long haul flight. So, what's your point?
It's funny how when an accident happens in an oriental country, the instantly bias is to blame the flight or maintenance local crew. C'mon, we just had an huge crises due to manufacture deliberately act and regulatory agency fail. The first thing that we can presume here is the Big one, who word's worth nothing, found something in NG's STS system and made an unknown to the public update that make the fault worst.
human performance is and will always be in question until completely ruled out. I am not sure when did we humans become perfect, I must have missed that milestone
@@puerco911 Considering the provocative - useless - irony at the ending, i thought that your reply would had more than an obvious statement at the beginining. You pretty much totally agreed with me, even with such a narrow perspective. I'm embarassed to make clear that decisions regarding Design, Manufacturing and regulatory issues is made by... humans! And can be more decisive than operational human actions in the chain of events of an accident.
You guys are way off on the rudder PCU. In the Pittsburg crash, the airplane went int o barrel roll and did not dive straight down like this plane did. The fact that you didn’t know that a rudder hard over would cause a dive shows me you two clowns are not aviation experts..
The problem is that if the builder of an airplane would benefit by offering to pay commentators and investigators to push the blame on human error we the people might not get correct information. I can prove that has in the past happen or at least I know someone who has that proof
hey guys, you sounded off as though the mechanic can not be trusted to work on your plane. if i was that mechanic you were referring i would just hand you the tool and step out of your way. the mechanic has their ethic to go by. as a USAF technician, i dealt with fighters and cargo types maintenance. the very first thing the instructor told us "you fly what you fixed". as a former major airline technician, i also flew standby on the aircraft i fixed. you both sounded very paranoid. just do your investigation and let the grease monkeys do their work professional way.
Perhaps is the incidents 737-800 on April 3 and the 777-300 of air France...And trouble landing 🤔....Could the landing computers on the Ground (Q-5) and computers on planes not Communicating properly...we were listening to the pilots talking on about theirs landing in Paris on Sunday . Just a interesting Theory.....?????
Whats takin so long for finding from Blackboxs????? Believe me, they already know by now... It's been plenty of time, even with some damage, thry already know......
![YoungBoy Never Broke Again - Sneaking [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ILUps2zDFU/mqdefault.jpg)
I teach at an aviation school, and I show them many episodes of aircraft mishaps.
Not to scare, but to educate on events that may have been mechanical, human etc... where we where and where are now with regards to aviation safety.
My students love to know this information going into their careers.
Greg, you are the prominent professional in a lot of these investigations we watch.
Seeing you do this is fantastic.
Your hair is a little whiter now, but the knowledge you share can only be obtained by a first-rate investigator with years of experience!
You have educated and inspired probably more than you know.
I feel I've known you for years, and wish I had your job,...but maybe not.
As aviation maintenance, we want to know the past, and we want to make sure the tragic incidents of past never repeat.
Cheers.
Thanks again 👍✈️
I
Greg, I’ve been following your work since Valujet in the Everglades. Your work has been commendable in all the accidents you supervised. Thank you for your service sir.
Stumbled on this channel recently and Wow, presented by two of the finest minds in crash investigations. Liked and subscribed; no hesitations and looking forward to the next episode.
Exactly- this is an amazing yt ch
Absolutely!! 👍
And holy cow how did I not say anything: greetings fellow Radiohead fan - we plants r happy plants
@@HotTakeHQ
Ha ha, now There There, No surprises, mate, and I’m not trying to be a Creep, but like Spinning Plates, these aviation techies do leave me High and Dry.
You.🙈
Yes me too!
My father was an airframes mechanic for the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm in WWII and you talk about owning your aircraft as a mechanic. When my Dad fixed a plane the pilot would say Suit up and we are going up together. You better have confidence in your work. Great video and lots of great points.
This is very interesting, we watched you guys for decades on the news so we know how much expertise you have. Remember Greg, we as maintenance ride on these airplanes too, we also have a vested interest in safety.
Thank you gentlemen for your insight and years of dedicated service!
Greg is a national treasure, loved your work for many years.
From the first day I saw deliberate act im this, this just screams struggle in the cockpit. We may never know the thruth bc we are dealing with a communist country.
Greatings fellow pilots! Glad to see Greg & Co. in RUclips!!!!! We now have “ The Right Stuff” on aviation safety and Accident Analysis!!!!
I'm a total novice when it comes to airplane maintenance and flying but I learn so much from experts like you folks! I appreciate you taking the time to make these videos and share your expertise. I only just found your channel today but I will be watching for more now. Thanks again!
I’m so excited to find this channel. Literally overjoyed 😍😍😍
To all the people comparing to previous accidents, none of those were a full vertical dive straight into the ground.... It's extremely unlikely that a mechanical failure would produce a straight nose dive into the ground.... airplanes don't do that, even if the tail were to come off, it would still not do that.... The recovery at 8000ft and immediate nose dive points to a struggle in the cockpit
or the pilots passed out then woke up..??
@@TheBillaro no, I really think this WAS mechanical failure, something in the rudder, unfortionately, Again.
@@TheBillaro Why would they "pass out"?
@@Powerpoe lol, the rudder doesn't even control pitch....you are not well versed on aerodynamics.
In order for the pitch to be totally vertical would have to be someone pushing yoke down and pulling back to maintain vertical, if they continue to push it then it would have gone past vertical (+90 deg).....
You mentioned JAL123. If my recollection serves me right, Boeing actually sent their own technicians to conduct repairs to the JAL123 accident aircraft after it suffered a tail strike in Osaka back in 1978. To cut a long story short Boeing's own technicians botched the repair. I must say, I take my hat off to that flight crew for keeping that aircraft airborne for as long as they did. God bless everybody aboard.
You’re actually wrong on this information! It was the Japan Airlines technicians who incorrectly fixed the tail back in 1978. In fact, after the 1985 accident the head of JAL Maintanance committed suicide.
@@jamesbget Hi Daniel, I went and had a little shufty back through the final report again because my memory does get a bit rusty from time to time. The report mentions specifically that Boeing technicians performed the repair as agreed upon with JAL It says nothing about JAL maintenance being involved as far as I can see. See section 1.2.2, page 100 of the final report. Please also could you give me your source of information?
If this ends up being a self inflicted act - The Faa and companies need to figure out something cuz we have had 1 too many of these . Some flyers that are nervous of flight having to now worry that a pilot wants to end his life and take everyone else with him is a different level of anxiety.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't a pilot break part of the rudder that caused a crash by over use of the controls while trying to save his plane a while back it was an air crash program. I'm no engineer but that shouldn't be able to happen.. I would not include this as a self inflicted act.
All these crashes could have been prevented by software not allowing crashes and forced corrective maneuvers.
@@philipmcdonagh1094 I remember that, his plane was caught up in the "back wash" from a plane that had just taken off before them, the manufacturer made changes to procedures advising againt wiggling the vertical stabiliser violently from side to side.
@@adoreslaurel Yea that was it thanks for jogging my memory.
@@philipmcdonagh1094 it was an airbus plane, fly by wire. The issue was that in most planes the rudder was controlled by a system of cables and hydraulics like all of the other flight control systems. These kinds of systems get harder and harder to move the more extreme your movements are. With fly by wire, the pilot was unaware that he was quickly moving the rudder from full stop to full stop. The fix was to add a "feel" system which gives the pilots tactile feedback over the system.
I could listen to these two men talk for hours!
There was a captain at Continental in 1979 who, in protesting mandatory retirement at 60, was purposely diverting flights to the alternate airport despite acceptable weather at the destination. He would deplane and vanish, leaving passengers and crew and the airline wondering what to do. After about 5 of these, he was finally arrested and, I guess either prosecuted or just retired. Legally, he could declare to alternate as he was ultimate authority on the flight. Never heard the disposition of his case. In this one, the FDR and CVR should be helpful if the data is recoverable.
The one accident that I remember with a huge maintenance problem was Alaska air when they were cutting corners in their maintenance putting planes in the air when they should not have been flying…
There's a great podcast by a Boeing maintenance guy. I think it's Bryan Wheels, The Good The Bad & The Ugly. He sounds the alarm often about the drive from airlines to appease stockholders by cutting costs and time down for the planes in maintenance. He's been a long time mechanic and gets overriden by management time and again. It's worrisome hearing some of his revelations.
It’s crazy. How the heck will these teams do their job when the plane is in a million pieces. Salute!
That competition sounds amazing! Keep on it - the more efficient you become and the more companies that see the value, you'll be able to expand to ensure every team gets a chance! Sponsorship sponsorship sponsorship! This has almost brought a tear to my eye.
If you ever get a chance to attend we can stand together and watch some amazing young people and shed a tear together
@@johngoglia3977 don’t think it’ll be turning up anywhere near me anytime soon tho
This sure as hell looks like a depressed, disturbed pilot decided to off himself and take a planeload of passengers with him. By the way this is not as rare as you think. Malaysia Air, Egypt Air, German Wings and Silk Air come immediately to mind.
Mozambique 🇲🇿
Seems like maybe you didn't actually watch this because they reference all of those accidents and more... I bet it's funny for people who actually investigated these accidents to be told by you that it's not as rare as you think. Should you be telling NTSB and FAA investigators about their own cases?
@@tiffanyray5360 is
You know what isn't rare as you think? Horizontal stab trim malfunction, both of the last disasters was directly related to this issue. I know that was an NG, however remember MCAS is a part of STS system, that already was in NG planes. Let's wait for the preliminary report before have any conclusion.
@@Parc_Ferme Since the NG planes have flown billions of miles safely all over the globe, not likely to be a horizontal trim malfunction, however, we shall see.
I loved Greg Feith in the Air Crash Investigation series. Liked, subscribed. You've grown a bit older, Greg, but I still recognize you.
My family always ask why am I afraid to fly? I was in this aerospace space business from 1984 to 2006 as an engineer. Many times, Manufacturing used to force me to sign accepting the work done improperly or equipment installing on the aircraft were not manufactured properly.
I have a friend working at the most popular airline in the USA as a lead aircraft mechanic. he always complained to me about many lazy mechanics producing shoddy repair on aircraft at the maintenance workshop. He told me a horror story that he encountered many years ago. He was invited to joint with two pilots to a flying test on the jump seat after he replaced a Flight Control PCU. The Boeing 737 did take dive and both pilots struggled to recover the aircraft. Luckily, all three survived thru the ordeal. I wondered if two pilots trying to teach my friend about the improper repairing on the aircraft.
How does one explain this jet coming straight down from 39000 feet entact at less than it's cruising speed? That was no accident.
Αυτοκτονία Πιλότου δυστυχώς
I'll give you a scenario. Pilot monitoring has his chair slid back and isn't wearing his seat belt. This is normal with most flight crews. Pilot flying (we don't know which) has a heart attack or stroke and collapse right on top of the yoke. This disconnects the auto-pilot and puts the plane into a dive and a spin. All three gets thrown from their seats. They are bouncing all over the place, screwing up the dials, levers, and switches as they flail about trying to grab a hold of something.
Eventually one of them somehow gets into a seat, and the other moves the stricken pilot away from the controls. This is difficult because the plane is still spinning and diving.
Eventually they got out of the spin, sees the ground coming out, and attempt to pull the plane out of the dive. They do it too quickly, parts of the plane gets torn off, it stalls, and then drops straight down.
@@danielch6662 flight crews may take off their shoulder harnesses but never their seatbelts. 🙄
@@danielch6662
Sounds good,
How about,
You get busted down from Captain, lose half your pay, public shame, and the only way out is death.
I came upon your channel and familiar with Greg Fieth on other channels. This accident is so troubling and hopefully some answers arise. Also new sub here.
How did I not know about this channel. You guys are my heroes! Air Disasters is my fav! 💖🛩💖
It is clear we need both black boxes.
It Still sounds like a Kamakazi.
I have to wonder, after binge watching Air Crash Investigations/Mayday… from s01-15 (am currently waiting for dvd onwards…) how many commenters have actually watched even ONE SEASON of the season, which introduced me to Greg Feith(fieth), which is what attracted me to this channel… his input is so invaluable, i cant remember the name of the other guy- my ADHD memory that doesn’t mean much… BUT if A name is repeated enough for me to remember, it equals trust, knowledge, experience (aka Greg)…
One thing I learnt and will never acknowledged throughout my fast binge watching- it takes SO MUCH TIME for an air crash investigation, to even release a preliminary/mid report…
That anyone expecting an answer within 6 months (considering how long it seems to take to recover wreckage debris… let alone analyse certain buts and pieces- even with CVR/FDR…)
I just wanted to say i'm a huge fan of Greg. You have had to deal with some big high profile intense investigations and I have always liked the way you explained and solved all those accidents. Especially the value jet swamp crash how you and your team figured that one out is amazing. To me the rudder pcu problem they had with the boeings back in the day always scared me when i got on 737s it took years and 2 crashes and one plane that survived it to figure it out. People think Im crazy for picking what planes i fly on. When most people have no ideal and look at cheap price. My favorite plane is the airbus 220 which is a bombardier cs300 with a airbus badge on it (what a great flying plane). When i first saw this accident i either though pilot commanded to make plane dive like that or a rudder issue.I mean the plane has to be commanded to dive like that or a mechanical or structural failure. I'm not no where near a investigator but just a very curious on how accidents happened. Im wondering it being china if we will every find at all info on this one.
Mechanics and inexperienced engineers always fail to read the manuals probably due to the nature of human. I had seen the repair on the JAL aircraft via the JAL evidence video , the repair was done with single row in the straight line rivets. Thus would act as a zipper. Boeing issued the instructions to repair with double row rivets with zig zag pattern. I had spent many hours to interpret the work orders for mechanics. At the Edward Air Force base, a crew chief decided to do the engineering job by substitute the synthetic oil coolant with automobile anti freeze. Many coolant pumps were fails due the conductive of Anti Freeze, luckily no aircraft was blown up. I have to put a technical alert for not using any different fluid from the technical orders. Aircraft can have a fire or blow up for not using the correct lubricant to the coupling seals of the oxygen systems. I fixed an aircraft almost blow up at the fire pit. There was a leak in the oxygen generation system, the crew chief pumped more 50 gallons of cooling oil to fill the reservoir, and he decided to start the aircraft at the fire pit. The coolant oil was distributed all over the aircraft from forward looking radar to the aft defense radar. The cockpit was covered with oil, and oil in every electronic equipment required cooling air. I had to spent two months to provide instructions to clean up the very big aircraft. I was supported with a team of six engineers at the central of engineering and a team of a dozen mechanics at the production shop.
If the plane came down because of structural damage, it doesn't make sense, that the plane regained control and actually climbed. But it would fit the narrative of a struggle in the cockpit for control. Also the point of impact, straight down! Very interested to see how this plays out.
Finally a reasonable post!!!
Shredded pork dim sum
If not, can you imagine the adrenaline rush of the pilots trying to pull up?
It was mentioned in one of the many videos posted about this incident that the indication of a momentary level off and [then] continued decent could have been a false signal, and not actually what had occurred. That all appeared to have occurred in too short of a period of time and would have put too much stress on the aircraft. Things like that happen in cartoons, not in real life.
Deano, the structural damage resulted from the airframe being overstressed due to a too sudden attempt at recovery. An airliner is not a fighter or an acrobatic plane. There are many things you can't do with a vehicle that large.
Great job Greg and John
This is a great podcast.
Thank you! If you haven't already, please subscribe.
Loved John’s sharing the mechanics would go look to see investigation and apply what they learned to daily job. 💖
I listen to this show on Pod bean, always insightful.
It's all speculation and no particular theory is sensationalizing it more than the others. Deliberate pilot action can be clickbait, but catastrophic failure of an aircraft is also clickbait. Go ahead and point out actual lies, but stop demonizing people for putting out their own opinions.
I say pilot flying had a heart attack or stroke and collapsed on top of the yoke putting the plane into a dive and a spin. Everybody gets tossed like a salad. No click bait?
Unfortunately, there is also no solution to this.
December 19, 1997 Flight 185. Parker Hannifin or Distraught Human? Engines not throttled back, Speed breaks not deployed. Of course once the Aircraft lost a certain amount of Altitude it would have been wrong to deploy flaps. Many speculated pilot suicide in the case of flight 185. It does take much research to determine an Air Crash cause. In the case of 185 they (it just hit me "you") ran simulations that determined if a systems or mechanical malfunction could lead to the ATC flight profile, summary of that test is below. This case is still unclear to those who don't fully grasp the extent of an Air Crash Investigation. I have an Engineering background and as such am used to digesting huge amounts of information and tracking down minor details that lead to major problems and require Corrective Actions. Anyway, this new incident was the first time I jumped to a conclusion because it so poignantly reminded me of Flight 185.
Official report :
The results of these simulation studies (Appendix G) are summarized as follows:
· Any single failure of the primary flight controls such as hard-over or jamming of
aileron, rudder or elevator did not result in a descent time history similar to that of the
last ATC radar points. In simulations of these flight control failure conditions the
aircraft could be recovered to normal flight manually.
Examination of the main rudder power control unit (including the servo-valve), the
yaw damper modulating piston, the rudder trim actuator, the rudder trim and feel
centering unit, the standby rudder PCU, the aileron PCUs, the elevator PCUs, and the
horizontal stabilizer jack-screw components, revealed no indications or evidence of
pre-impact malfunctions.
Very good gentlemen!
Thank you! If you haven’t already, please subscribe.
Do you think it's odd that the co pilot was easily the most experienced pilot on board?
He was demoted. Obviously unhappy about it - and the pay drop is massive. All pilot appointments are political appointments in China. A heady mixture.....
Blah Blah Blah. That airplane was _AIMED_ at the ground.
Thank you Capt obvious. Yeah it really doesn't take Lt Columbo does it.
Outstanding!
I was looking forward to this discussion only to find that it was still based on the same speculative drive that John complained about, furthermore, I was disappointed that the possible causes mentioned in the discussion were being reduced to "human causes", and "cultural issues" by making assumptions that Korea and China are the same. Firstly, the Chinese don't have this upper-lower social hierarchy that Korea and Japan has, but they do respect their elders the same way you respect your teacher. It is incredibly rare to find someone with the motivation to try and murder hundreds of people. The guilt doesn't stop with the murderer, it extends to his/her families, friends, workplace and even cultural background (see Virginia Tech massacre). This is why nobody would do it if it means a lifetime of shame for all of these people. Greg mentioned that if something unusual happens in flight then one "should naturally" slow down, but there have been many things going at high speed but never had the chance to slow down. This appears to be one of those cases, we really do not know what happened until the investigation can report what they know. But to reduce this accident to pilot suicide is just ridiculous. I have never heard anyone blamed Boeing outright in this event, and even when 737-Max planes were crashing. I refused to believe that these planes still being put in the air for decades are reliable like some Rolls Royce, when I wouldn't even drive a 10 year old RR, not even a maintained one.
You can't speak for the actions that any one individual person could take on their own just because whatever culture they are or aren't.... Your statement is completely pointless and flawed .... Any human being can reach a mental state where they could act irrationally, regardless of race or culture. That applies to "humans" period.
@@puerco911 I'm sorry that you don't like the fact that the plane itself can be questioned, just like every form of transportation, but the fact is they have failed too many times.
@@beauhatman4395 Where does it say that?
What you pointed out makes sense. We expect to get rational analysis from the experts with no bias. At this stage, we expect to hear from experts about what possible reasons to explain that casualty, including any potential technical failures of the plane or false operations of the pilots. etc.
@@MikeJones-iq8zo That's right, only the experts on the ground can make that assessment based on the evidence at hand. All this conspiracies of pilot suicide and nothing to attribute to plane and equipment failure is just being ridiculous.
I fear this will come down to a deliberate act by one of the pilots. Apart from the near vertical descent pointing to an intentional act, the absence of any distress call to ATC is telling. Let’s hope the CVR survived and can be read; I suspect it will contain the evidence needed. As you say, these events are becoming more frequent; it’s a troubling trend.
It's those flying with Islamist pilots I feel more sorry for. Not that one can tell, but it's scary as hell when you have no idea who may rush you so indecoriously into the next realm.
It could be, but these days peoples are posting shit without any proof, evidence or facts. We don't know yet, and what makes me sick is that since day one media and peoples who are respected in aviation world are throwing this 'pilot did it' card without proof or facts.
'' Dead people can't speak''
It could be problem with plane or problem with pilot, we don't know yet!
You’re quite right; we don’t know the cause yet. So all comments, mine included, are speculative and should be read as such. Hopefully the sequence of events leading to this accident will be uncovered so we can learn what actually happened.
@@mike747436 Your comment was totally okey one.
My point was these days media and known people on industry make this sick thing called click baiting with dead people who are innocent till the facts come. For me, it's so hard to imagine myself doing that. It's like they don't understand how huge sentence is to blame someone of murdering 131 people, and blame without actual evidence and known facts.
Take into consideration of how that conclusion would NOT be in the CCP's interest. And when they can install a Pretendent in America, misallocation of the cause of this crash would be easy as pie!
With the initial discussion, we shouldn’t forget the LAM Mozambique E190 that went down in 2013
do you know the same thing happen to malaysia airlines 737-800 on Sunday 3 April? the plane took off for 30 mins, and suddenly dive from 31000 ft to 24000 ft? and the pilot decided to turn back, all the passengers was horrified
That was NOT a complete straight vertical dive like the latest China airlines crash... Do your homework
@@puerco911 but it was still a dive, and it happened not long after china eastern accident, fortunately it was not as bad as china eastern and they survive to tell the story
@@yanyanL90 unfortunately it appears you aren't well informed about aerodynamic trajectories under gravity loads and fluid dynamics
@@yanyanL90 did you hear what the man said? it was NOT the same dive.
It dived twice and fortunately the pilot managed to recover the flight.
There is an enormous pay difference between Captain and Co Pilot in China - massive. The CP was busted down from Captain. This is a huge loss of face for him. And if he had property debts etc it puts huge psychological pressure on him. Also all pilot appointments are political appointments in China. ABCD - Always Be Connecting Dots.
Yep, If I were busted down, I'd fly that jet straight into the ground.
that's just misinformation, the co pilot was retiring and acted as an instructor
@@zuluwhiskey9049 He still took a massive pay cut.
@@zuluwhiskey9049
What?
He wasn't busted down?
If you have information, let's hear it.
Hey Dude, I remember seeing you working for the FAA on Airline Crash Investigations on NatGeo and Discovery Channel, wow ! GOD bless you.
Greg looking great 👍. Follow you on manyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy crash investigation. Great team. Rip Amen 🙏. Passengers.
Av channels is like all i watch and i cant believe i just this station. Smh. But im glad it did! You ol pro guys are awesome together. Like/share/sub/support! 👍👍
To Flight Safety Detectives :
Mr. Feith and Mr. Goglia -
I have just one question.
Is it the 737-800 series are having problems with the build or this aircraft ?
Besides the China Eastern Airline's crash, actually there's another incident happened in my country just about 2 weeks ago
It didn't made too globally known about it coz it's an domestic flight and perhaps the authories in my country felt it's a small issue.
The incident happened on April 3rd 2021, A Sunday.
This domestic flight was supposed to reached to East Malaysia a city called Tawau from West Malaysia here Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA).
The flight was an afternoon 14:30 pm's flight and a 8 years old 737-800.
After it took off from KLIA, some 30 minutes when the flight was cruising at 30,000 ft altitude, it suddenly went through the same nose dive dropped of 7,000 ft in a matter of a few seconds or so ...
The fleet crew did managed to regained the altitude and survived the entire flight at 23,000 ft.
Fortunately they haven't flew far yet and was on the way out of West / Peninsula Malaysia, somewhere near the South China sea.
And extremely fortunate, it didn't crash ...
The fleet immediately returned back to KLIA and landed safely on 17:03 pm.
According to the interview reports by the media on several passages, they mentioned the weather was all good, bright sunny day, no stormy weather.
And the seat beat's sign was off, so several had loosen their seat belts.
Unexpectedly when the jet suddenly dropped, it sends several that untied with the seat belt went floating in the cabin, I believe it's the G Force.
So my question is, is this 737-800 series really safe ?
Or it's there something about the builds like perhaps the avionics or powerplants are having real serious issues ?
You can check it out by Google or RUclips here about this incident.
The flight was MH2664.
Except the only differences between MH2664 with China Eastern Airline MU5735 was, just "Luck".
I hope you'll look into this matter and please educate us those that seriously wants to knows and learn more.
Coz there are so many 737-800 series around the world ...
Who knows will it happens again ...
Sincerely Thank You very much.
I think there’s little chance of anything other than intentionally crashing this plane, just like the Chinese bus driver did on the bridge. The airlines insulted this pilot in the worst way possible. We always here about the airlines watching pilots mental health but what they did to this guy would’ve caused the worst mental shock that they could do to a person. I find it hard to believe the plane could do anything near that short leveling off if it was a structural problem bad enough to cause that type of dive. But I’m not any expert, that’s why I like you guys. I’m also shocked that China let the ntsb get their hands on either box. Everything needs to be investigated tho in case it was a failure of something mechanical or structural. Especially with a plane this popular and widely used. No doubt Boeing needs to have everything cleared up so there’s no doubts about what the cause is.
I believe you are correct mental health stability of the co-pilot in all likelihood was the cause. I find it inconceivable that the Chinese government would cancel culture one of its most experienced Pilots, with no regard of the possible outcome.
Okay, where is this completion taking place…..can a retired Airline Maintenance supervisor, international Operations come and observe.. Please
I have seen elsewhere that the co-pilot was very senior and previously held very responsible position. If true, he would have been demoted and close to retirement. In the absence of official reports, we can't take everything that we see to be true.
Question what do guys make of the cloud of smoke coming threw the engines about 1500 ft before t hit the ground ?
I wondered this too. It almost looked like fuel leaking from the wing?
They'll say it's pilots fault as usual, even the FAA shield Boeing on every incident. 🥱🥱
@@andrewlim7751 Who is "they"? The FAA doesn't take the lead on aircraft accident investigations. The NTSB doesn't even have the lead in this investigation, the Civil Aviation Administration of China has the lead role in this incident. Better know some facts before you make allegations.
@@andrewlim7751 the FAA doesn’t investigate accidents.
A collective evidence from multiple independent teams can analyze what they all discovered and group together similar findings.
You see, my problem with the theory of deliberate crew action causing the China Eastern disaster relates to what Greg says about previous accidents - SilkAir in particular - where the flightpath and flight recorder traces did not indicate any attempt to recover. The ADS-B data for China Eastern 5735 indicates an initial loss of control at cruise altitude followed by what looks like an attempted recovery around FL080 - which unfortunately resulted in a zoom climb and a second departure from controlled flight, leading to the eventual crash.
Furthermore, while the JAL123 and Dynasty 611 disasters were both traced to structural failure through fatigue stemming from improper repairs, there are important and significant differences in how each scenario came about. Crucially, JAL123 was caused by an improper repair to the rear pressure bulkhead following tailstrike damage (performed by Boeing themselves - though that's not particularly relevant), whereas the tailstrike damage to Dynasty 611 was not sufficient to require repairs to the rear pressure bulkhead. As I understand it, the B747 structural repair manual contained at least two procedures for repairing tailstrike damage, with the correct procedure being determined by the surface area and degree of damage. Below a certain threshold, the manual required basic repairs and the fitting of a doubler plate, but above that threshold the manual required more extensive assessment and more thorough repairs to the underlying skin and structure. For reasons we don't know, China Airlines' maintenance applied the former procedure when the latter procedure was warranted due to the extent of the damage. Whether this was driven by an honest mistake regarding the damage assessment or management pressure to get the aircraft back in service we can never know for certain.
How do you know it was "loss of control"???? A consistent vertical dive is not a typical loss of control situation, if you don't know anything about aerodynamics then don't talk about what theory could be wrong
@@puerco911 - It wasn't a "consistent vertical dive" according to the ADS-B data, as I said. There was an initial loss of altitude from cruise down to approximately FL080, where what looks like a recovery was initiated, followed by a zoom climb and a second dive. The video evidence indicating a nose-down attitude only applies to the second dive - we currently do not know the orientation of the aircraft during the initial descent (which is why I'm hoping the FDR/CVR data can be recovered).
To be clear - what I'm saying is that Greg says that the reason he suspects the SilkAir crash was deliberate was because the FDR traces indicated no attempt at recovery, whereas the ADS-B data for China Eastern 5735 arguably does indicate an attempt at recovery - and if so, it doesn't fit the pattern of previous deliberate sabotage events. Does that make sense?
@@turricanedtc3764 ok so you call an altitude loss from 27000ft to 8000ft just "an initial loss of altitude"..... No my friend, that's not a loss of altitude, that's a catastrophic nose dive position uncharacteristic to aircraft aerodynamic forces
An no sorry doesn't make sense, the recovery at 8000ft actually could be easily explained as a struggle in the cockpit
@@puerco911 - I didn't say "just" an initial loss of altitude - until we have more evidence as to what happened, a loss of altitude (or potential loss of controlled flight) is the only thing we can characterise that portion of the trace as. We don't know the orientation of the aircraft during that first descent, so we cannot call it a "nose dive position" or, indeed, anything else until we have the FDR data.
My understanding regarding the first rule of accident investigation is this - nothing can be ruled out until the evidence to do so can be found and proven.
The apparent recovery attempt followed by the secondary stall and dive *may* be the result of a struggle - but it could just as easily be the result of one of the crew winding on too much nose-up trim to try to arrest the descent.
I was thinking of Alaska Flight 261 and the jack screw jamming, causing the elevators to jam. This plane went in to a dive and briefly recovered, only to resume another dive. Similar happened to Alaska 261
That plane did all sort of flying attitudes all over the place, including flying inverted..... Not a real good comparison to this one which was a full - 90 degree pitch nose dive, nothing else
It is a clear case of a pilot suicide.
your statement is a clear case of jumping to conclusions too quickly
According to the Chinese CAAC, “Nothing to see here folks, move along”
Has anyone though to check the rudder PCU dual-servo valve? Back in 90s, TWO 737s crashed in similar fashion - uncontrolled roll which turned into vertical high-speed dive. The problem with the dual-servo valve back then was that it could jam and let fluid go in opposite direction. This meant that when pressing the rudder pedals, it would have opposite result and pilot flying would not be able to detect and that would result in vertical dive. It also explains why the plane seemed to regain control but then lose it. Would someone please relay this theory to the NTSB!!!
On 911 there was a plane nosedive into the paddock and kill all on board. Do you know where that engine data is stored or indeed what was held in the black boxes? There is no data feedback on what the pilot was attempting to do at the time of impact?
The entire investigation and your show is still as clear as mud. You two gentleman are wasting a lot of time for everyone to watch your show.
Some time ago I talked to senior Delta Airlines Inspector and he told me that young people are not interested in going into maintenance and make their hands dirty. This was before CV 19 and current events.
A few facts on that, though. In the last generation, the parents that toiled away in physical positions stressed that they didn't want their kids doing the same. College has been pushed at an entire generation. Now, we have young people in debt everywhere and jobs that don't pay near enough to survive. Plus, the wealthy invest in big companies like airlines and Boeing and they become the bosses to appease. Mechanics and service workers get burned out because of the intense workload. The internet has allowed people to diversify. We have to make those jobs more appealing (better pay, fair workload, mgmt support) and get big money out of issues where safety is paramount.
lets see. could it be that a car Repair man makes more ,money then a A&P repair man
THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL
As is usual in any analysis of accidents it is often the 'small stuff' that emerges to give us the true picture. Greg and John are remarkable advocates for aviation and have enviable track records in understanding and explaining things.
Aft Pressure Bulkhead failure as a result of poor repairs post tail-strike damage looks like the cause of the China Eastern Flight 5735, although finding coverage of this has not been easy to locate.
John's analysis of the concept of 'The Intentional Act' by a member, (or members), of a flight crew is as spot-on as it is informative, and likely points us in two directions worthy of further examination.
Firstly, we have the need for better and more frequent psychological examination of flight crews and their state of mind.This involves understanding how they are acting and thinking both on and off the job, and as a consequence extends to understanding inputs that may come from colleagues about their general disposition, as well as from family and friends.
Second, in understanding the concept of 'The Intentional Act' we have to understand much more about just who the pilots and co-pilots are in this day and age. More precisely perhaps we need to ask an important question. Has it become too easy to become a pilot with so much new technology now an integral and necessary part of an airplane in general and of the flight deck in particular.....?
Understanding this latter point is fraught with difficulties in so many ways and will be controversial, but it must be addressed..
Post 9/11 we have had secure cockpit doors introduced, but as the German Wings crash demonstrated we had the unintended consequences of a security measure working to thwart security. Had the pilot in the German Wings airplane had the means to open the cockpit door from the outside there might easily have been a different outcome.
James Hennighan
Yorkshire, England
I hope China gives the aircraft manufacturer access to the crash site and recovery of the black box for reconstruction. Something catastrophic happened and elimination of any computer generated fault is a prime focus.
Nah, they don't trust u.s.a.
Not a pilot or have ANY knowledge of flying. Like many I have watched a lot of videos and am aware that most pilots receive extensive training including what to do if your plane (for what ever reason) goes into a dive etc. Now this will probably sound stupid, but maybe just maybe there are some pilots who perform these tasks in a simulator with excellence and seem to be very competent but when it comes to a real situation they just freeze up. I understand that time is critical in these situations you must act instantly but if they freeze up for, even a minute, (that's a long time) then their training kicks in it is probably too late to save the plane. I am not suggesting that anyone has made incorrect judgement calls just maybe in this case (with a lesser experienced Pilot flying with a very experienced co-pilot) the pilot felt intimidated didn't respond quickly enough the co-pilot maybe was doing everything but also considering the possibility of not great CRM it became confusing and well that was it...Of course we will not know until a full and extensive investigation is done, I just hope that it is just that and one day we find out what really happened up there...
Hello I am subscribing to you channel. You are fresh air. Saludos God speed to those who are affected by this tragedy. Pavelavietor1 visigoth1 Iberian1
5:18 Actually...with the right settings/gear you can see the vertical stabilizer in the video from "The Sun". It shows up at the very top of the screen and then again midway down. When it enters the top of the screen it is inverted with the belly facing the left of the screen and the tail pointing to the right. Shadows appear under the tail section and the nose. Watch the original video from "The Sun" in 1080p on a good monitor. Go to full screen, pause and zoom-out to stretch the time-line. It then appears to rotate slightly to the left midway down.
Also it may help to adjust brightness and contrast as well. As you step through each frame with a mouse you can take a pic with a still camera (to zoom-in even further for more detail) You can spot the huge vertical stabilizer a couple of times.
Rotates slightly to the right (not left. my mistake, going from memory)
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't a pilot break part of the rudder that caused a crash by over use of the controls a while back it was an air crash program. I'm no engineer but that shouldn't be able to happen.. I would not include this as a self inflicted act.
this was an airbus A300 that crashed over NYC shortly after 9/11.....the pilot used excessive and agressive rudder inputs during takeoff, in a low airspeed, low altitude setting, so yes once it lost the rudder , being so close to the ground, it hit pretty quick....
It's pointless to speculate until Boeing releases black box recordings
Boeing doesn't download data or release data from the black box recordings. That is done by the NTSB and in this incident, the CAAC.
@@omcbob37 actually this incident it’s still NTSB going to release the data, since both black boxes are in US right now.
@@xsu-is7vq Even though the NTSB is downloading the data, the CAAC is part of the data review committee and I expect CAAC will actually release the information or will at least certainly review what information is released by the NTSB. The CAAC has said they will issue a preliminary report within 30 days of the incident and that report might include only a preliminary description or analysis of what was found on the black boxes. Not sure about how the CAAC treats it, but per US Federal law, the NTSB cannot release any detailed transcript of the cockpit verbal communications recorded on the CVR until an NTSB public hearing is held or until the final NTSB accident investigation report is made public (often a year or more after the incident).
Good to hear the NTSB have been let in. Not Boeing yet?
Would you please invite Larry Vance to talk about this? he is excellent in aviation accident analysis
I'm 34 minutes in, and haven't heard a thing about the China Eastern investigation, yet.
There are a lot of rumors here in China saying this accident has to do with bad replacement parts used from cost savings. If so the truth will not be revealed but hidden and covered with some created stories. Lets see.
Yes, there is a tendency when a certain amount uncertainty exists to blame the accident on pilot error.
Hey guys
STOP being rude to the public who have their own views you are NOT God's
Would a plane that lost it's tail inherently go into a nosedive and be able to travel at such a high rate of speed?
The tail is kinda the most important part of a plane as without it your plane won't be able to fly level. The tail controls how the plane tilt and turn. Possible it broke off and the plane flew out of control causing a straight dive.
@@Junispro31 incorrect, it would not go into straight nosedive at all..... It would tumble around significantly as it loses forward momentum inertia....
@@puerco911 right sorry ya it would tumble around instead of a straight dive
A very good question btw. Answer: No (if it lost the entire tail section)
But a malfunction or failure of the "horizontal" stabilizer could send it into a nosedive.
This plane didn't lose it's entire tail. It may not have lost any parts from the tail section until it finally hit the ground. The "vertical" stabilizer (the tall upright triangle) was in fact still on the plane. (in the video originally posted on RUclips by "The Sun") I was only able to see it after tweaking the video's quality, contrast and brightness on a large/wide monitor and using a still camera to enlarge it (frame by frame). The shape of the 737 vertical stabilizer is very distinct and it is in fact visible in just 1 or 2 frames. (I've managed to find things in other unrelated crime videos in the past with the same method) I could not verify the smaller "horizontal" stabilizer was intact because that did not show up very well in the pixelated/distorted video.
The "initial nosedive" itself suggests the horizontal stabilizer was there, but could have been damaged or "misguided" so to speak. (simply my interpretation/speculation/could be wrong etc)
@@robnation2475 if a control surface was stuck in a given position the aircraft would follow the angular rotation of such force (ie. elevator stuck pitch down, the aircraft would continue pitch down pass vertical (a clear example of this is Alaska airlines md83 crash where elevator jack screw was stuck, and airplane pitched 180 upside down)..... In order to maintain a vertical dive the control input would have to be pushed all way down but then relieved some to prevent pitch over and maintain full vertical dive... Autopilot doesn't do this, so it's pretty good indication of human control
Will the black box have the answer?
Was it genuine mechanical failure or deliberate suicide event?
Mechanics are the unsung heroes of everyday flights, for sure.
I'm a pilot. I lived and flew in China for 5 years.
I know that one big factor affecting safety over there is the verticality of authority, which leaves no room for true leadership. You cannot (if you want to keep your job) tell an instructor, chief pilot, etc. that what they are saying or doing is wrong. It is a MAXIMUM SIN. This cascades into all sorts of failures within the system.
For example, flight examiners design Simulator Proficiency Checks that are highly improbable if not impossible, with the only purpose of showing they are better than the pilot being checked. First Officers are not expected to contribute to anything in the cockpit, as they are just that, subservient apprentices of the captain.
So imagine a scenario of a demoted captain - instructor - highly decorated pilot into a copilot just because he made some kind of enemy within his company?
I'm actually more surprised there aren't a lot more accidents in China just because of this cultural flaw.
Thats sounds like what happened
Yep. The whole country is like that. You do what your elders/superiors tell you without question. That is why they are the way they are.
I highly doubt the situation is as bad as described. You can’t have the safety record that Chinese aviation industry had maintained, 12 years and more than 100 million total fight hours without a fatality within the entire industry prior to this crash, with that kind of culture.
i thought increasing air speed when plane is about to stall will actually increase the lift?
That was what I thought after watching many documentaries. Suppose this is wrong
The co pilot did it
Also, mh370…
Pure speculation and BS, and "if this", and "if that", and "may be this" and "may be that". Wait till the investigation is completed.
People like speculation and guessing games. Facts are boring.
@@davidj4662 it isn’t that facts are “boring.” If facts were boring, who would try to learn the truth? Speculation is a necessary part of the investigation process. If you ever watch crash documentaries you’ll notice when they arrive at the answer to why/how something happened, it’s because they considered many different possibilities for what caused the accident or incident. You have to speculate, simulate, and eliminate.
Chinese airline pilots are treated less than as they are in the rest of the world. Why is a young/relatively inexperienced captain flying with a very senior f/o that had been demoted from captain status? My money is on it being an intentional act by the f/o.
Sadly it's looking that way. With the time it took to go down how could there not be a distress call?
The younger pilot had about 6000 hours. That’s NOT inexperienced
@@xsu-is7vq Compared to 32,500 hours it IS relatively inexperienced, do you have any idea how many hours it normally takes to captain an airliner in the USA?
@@NighthawkCarbine Lesser experience is NOT inexperienced. Otherwise, an airline would have only ONE experienced pilot, and every other are "inexperienced" because they have less hours than that ONE. US airlines in general takes a minimum of 3000 hours to be considered for Captain promotion, and 5000 for long haul flight. So, what's your point?
It's funny how when an accident happens in an oriental country, the instantly bias is to blame the flight or maintenance local crew. C'mon, we just had an huge crises due to manufacture deliberately act and regulatory agency fail. The first thing that we can presume here is the Big one, who word's worth nothing, found something in NG's STS system and made an unknown to the public update that make the fault worst.
human performance is and will always be in question until completely ruled out. I am not sure when did we humans become perfect, I must have missed that milestone
@@puerco911
Considering the provocative - useless - irony at the ending, i thought that your reply would had more than an obvious statement at the beginining.
You pretty much totally agreed with me, even with such a narrow perspective. I'm embarassed to make clear that decisions regarding Design, Manufacturing and regulatory issues is made by... humans! And can be more decisive than operational human actions in the chain of events of an accident.
@@Parc_Ferme you don't need to feel any embarrassment for some random internet user like me.... I was clearly referring to operations human aspect.
You cannot open flap when the plane are in over speed.
China 🇨🇳 vs Taiwan next?
You guys are way off on the rudder PCU. In the Pittsburg crash, the airplane went int o barrel roll and did not dive straight down like this plane did. The fact that you didn’t know that a rudder hard over would cause a dive shows me you two clowns are not aviation experts..
Now, i am afraid to ride an airplane Boeing trademark.
The problem is that if the builder of an airplane would benefit by offering to pay commentators and investigators to push the blame on human error we the people might not get correct information. I can prove that has in the past happen or at least I know someone who has that proof
and i can make the same argument the secretive CCP is up to no good trying to blame manufacturer ....show your proof
Rrriiiggghhhttt🙄
Still no news
hey guys, you sounded off as though the mechanic can not be trusted to work on your plane. if i was that mechanic you were referring i would just hand you the tool and step out of your way. the mechanic has their ethic to go by. as a USAF technician, i dealt with fighters and cargo types maintenance. the very first thing the instructor told us "you fly what you fixed". as a former major airline technician, i also flew standby on the aircraft i fixed. you both sounded very paranoid. just do your investigation and let the grease monkeys do their work professional way.
If it's a purple fluid, it's probably Skydrol, You wouldn't want to do a taste test on that!
Perhaps is the incidents 737-800 on April 3 and the 777-300 of air France...And trouble landing 🤔....Could the landing computers on the Ground (Q-5) and computers on planes not Communicating properly...we were listening to the pilots talking on about theirs landing in Paris on Sunday . Just a interesting Theory.....?????
And the Malaysia airlines.
and still waiting and waiting, not even a hint of a preliminary report yet from Chinese authorities.....
Notice how Chinese government didn't allow the NTSB to get involved on site until a couple days ago..... I have a good explanation for that!
U r a liar,
Bad General Tso!
Btw, you should visit our school..js
They are paid to say pilot false
These planes never break down like the Chevy Dodge and Ford!
i bet safety wire was messing up people. nice screwball for a competition though.
Whats takin so long for finding from Blackboxs????? Believe me, they already know by now... It's been plenty of time, even with some damage, thry already know......
Airworthiness? Lol, I don't think that’s an issue!