Boeing 737MAX, LionAir Update!! - MCAS?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 июн 2024
- Get the FREE Mentour Aviation app today!
📲IOS: appstore.com/mentouraviation
📲Android: play.google.com/store/apps/de...
There are a lot of Rumours and discussions going on regarding the recent crash of a Boeing 737MAX aircraft in the Java sea outside Indonesia. During the last week the FAA have published and Emergency Airworthiness directive regarding the Boeing 737MAX and how to handle it in case of a failure of its Angle Of Attack sensor (Alpha Vane).
Boeing has also issued Bulletins to all 737MAX and 737NG operators regarding the "Manoeuvring Characteristics Management System (MCAS).
In This video I will be trying to explain how all of these systems fit together and Why this is such an important thing for pilots to know and understand.
I want to EMPHASISE that these are just descriptions of these systems and we still do not know exactly what happened on that flight.
To get awesome, fact-full information regarding inflight incidents and accidents, check out: www.avherald.com
If you have further questions on these systems or about any other Aviation related topic, feel free to contact me in the Mentour Aviation app! Just tag @mentour and it will send me a message.
Check out the following featured videos and useful links!
Runsame (Reconstruction of JT610 based on flight recorder)
• LION AIR 737 Crash at ...
maxmc89 (Stall testing Boeing 747-8)
• Stalling 747 Jumbo Air...
FAA Emergency Airworthiness directive
rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gui...
The Aviation Herald
www.avherald.com
Mentour broke this whole thing down perfectly months ahead of the second fatal crash that had the Max taken out of the skies for a long time.
And yet FAA was so dumb to not ground them just after the first crash.
It would be really interesting to see either or both Max crash report videos in the recent style you've been doing.
YES!
This is by far the best technical explanation relating to the recent ET302 crash. I watched twice.
@@wwg1wga712 It is not easier to say that the pilots didn't know how to do this?We are talking about the Ethiopian one
Im watching his dog....😐
As an ex-military aircraft engineer, the words 'runaway trim / stabiliser' have always sent a shudder down my spine. Once we went digital and gave the systems full authority, this type of thing has always been a risk. I am astounded that the algorithms are not there to prevent it given the power of the computers these days.
You are exactly right, as any flight crew can attest to the fear of run away trim happening during flight. Especially in low altitude flight configurations. This is very bad for everyone. Automation in the cockpit can cause complacency if you aren't careful.
Hi Mike, you're absolutely right. I think the underlying cause of the crash should be searched in the flight envelope. Namely high load, high power, zero flaps and intitially low IAS (high angle of attack) condition during which aerodynamic instabilty become obvious . Due to the placement of the nacelles and the new big LEAP engines during these flight conditions occurs a tendency for the aircraft to pitch further up. Boeing thought to remedy these deficiencies by going the easy (and cheap) way of implementing MCAS. They should have rather put the engines back to the place where they intiially started with the B737-200; under the wing. But changing the location would have opened a can of worms, meaning further costly design changes. Lifting the height of the gear, increasing the width of gear etc. and so...on. Just speculating as an engineer who studied Flight mechanics a long time ago at the Technical University of Darmstadt.
Sounds like skynet. And yes an airplane should be able to notify the pilots of an issue, (stick shaker) but it shouldn’t take control of the aircraft
Totally agree with you!
I worked avionics for years and there are questions that has to be asked. Why didnt the US pilots have trouble with this system. What pre flight checks were done to ensure full functional systems. What were the weather conditions those days of both crashes and what was the experience level of the pilots on these airframes.
Hello, Mentour Pilot. I think this video has today a big importance
Y qué nos importa?
@@adamv4951 Si a ti no te importa puedes largarte, en vez de esparcir tus malas vibras aquí.
@@TheMSpiess99 Fue una broma. Tranquilizate. Mira su nombre.
Im from indonesia. Thank you for give your profesional explanation so beautifully. Even non aviation people can understand. Keep up the great work. Safe flight aswell ;)
Whilst i'm not a pilot, today's Ethiopean Airlines crash is looking very similar to the Lion Air crash as detailed in this film. Inconsistent vertical speed / fluctuating height during the climb phase of the flight. This is looking more and more like an inherent design flaw in this aircraft. Surely Boeing needs to ground these aircraft immediately. Two very similar accidents within months of each other on brand new aircraft. As I say, i'm no pilot, so may be calling this completely wrong, but it certainly doesn't look good. Very sad for all those who have lost their lives and their families.
Boeing behaves like McDonnel Douglas during the DC-10 crisis in the 70's ...worst damage-control.
Those pilot don't know what to do for the failing safety system....Boeing's New Design For 737 Max ,Airliner's Safety Culture, Pilot's lack of Enthusiasm and Curiosity for The New Variant of Aircraft on How to fly it properly and safely....
Bristol Will, I agree with you 100%! It's so obvious that the same fault crippled those two planes, and as you said the best thing boring should do now to prevent loss of more lives is to call for immediate grounding of every 737 Max 8 in operation until this issue is effectively solved.
THE BOEING guideline that gave absolute priority to the software CMAS by lowering the power of the pilots to command the aircraft is THE MOST SERIOUS TRANSGRESSION TO ANY HUMANITY CONCEPT !!!
The design flaw is fixed with the MCAS auto controlling the trim. But these crashes are caused by a failed sensor causing the auto trim to go full forward and the pilot failing to turn off the auto trim switch to regain manual trim control.
The design flaw is having too large engines for the aircraft, but that is not the cause of these crashes. They did not crash from stalling, they crashed because they did not turn off the auto trim that was incorrect from the failed sensor. They knew the trim was incorrect and they did not correct it.
Great theory. I agree , climbing through 3000’ and problem solving is much different in stress levels , than straight and level at FL 360. Time is not on your side at 3000’ and options limited.
Great video as always also very Profesional by not judging the other pilots as other media does. Greetings from Costa Rica!
Thank you! I am glad you see it that way. Check out avherald.com for excellent, non-biased, info.
@@MentourPilot thank you!
Doggy had a good sleep very active and on a chewing mood
Yep. This time he was 100% ON! I hope you liked the video.
Mentour Pilot indeed sir! 👍
Great!
Mentour Pilot
Can you please tell me what type of dog you have? So cute... sorry for going off the topic.
What a teacher. What a pro. What a credit to modern aviation you are. Much thanks!
Thankyou ever so much for this discussion. After a British Navy career as Air Mechanic/helicopter winchman, and seeing aircraft that had suffered fatal incidents (the presence and smell of these will never leave me), I devoted the remainder of my working life to aircraft quality control. My heart still lurches when I learn of air fatalities anywhere, and I shed a tear for these victims and their loved ones.
Bob Freestone I
Should MCAS still have authority when the Alpha vanes disagree? Should there be audible call-outs from the computer for automatic interventions?
You're right. There should be, obviously. That there isn't is just astonishing.
Yes in my opinion the aircraft should always notify the crew in some way that it is taking control. As Petter said Boeing is strongly suggesting that the Lion Air crew had no idea that their aircraft was trying to dive into the sea. I think if I was in that situation of my plane trying to crash itself and I didn't know why it would be very frustrating. Imagine every ten seconds you feel the nose start to dip and pulling back on the yoke gets harder and harder each time until you can't pull far enough and you go into a nose dive. Without the pilots having the knowledge of this MCAS I think its pretty unrecoverable.
In my opinion, in a sensor disagree situation, all automatic systems relying on that sensor should disengage! I thought that procedure would be standard, as the computers just can not handle the situation correctly with the wrong inputs.
Exactly. From the pilot's perspective the aircraft shouldn't be flying itself, the autopilot is OFF. Why would the design allow that to be OFF and still have a system behind the scenes trying to fly the plane without any indications to the pilot?
I wondered about that after reading the report about Turkish Airlines 1951 and I still wonder about it.
Apparently it is customary in Boeing aircraft that systems are driven from one of the 2 or 3 redundant sensors and continue to do so even when it has been detected and reported that the sensors are faulty... strange!
I would expect that they are driven from the majority-vote of them all and, like you, I would expect that at least such "augmentation" systems do not run when their inputs are apparently unreliable.
With redundancies everywhere for everything on an airplane, a single sensor failure can lead to automatic skydiving? Looks like a design mistake, doesn't it? If the sensors see conflicting readings, shouldn't the computers immediately stop touching any control surface and just alert the pilots?
The problem is not the system itself isn't failproof, the problem was that the system reacted by itself without giving clear indication of the cause to the pilots, this should be one of the cases where an AI monitoring the system and the pilots performance may trigger an indication that something is going wrong and decide who to delegate the commands of the aircraft.
johnny chang AI isn’t the solution to this either as it too can fail.
@@abingdonboy The root of the problem is that there was a fail of the data collecting element and neither the system nor the pilot took the correct course of actions and it seems the end result was just a contradiction that caused the tragic events. At least if with an AI in charge just to analyze and warn of possible failure events even seconds before the unrecoverable happens may help greatly to change the outcome.
Overautomation in my opinion
No excuse at all. And easy to test by simulation.
Sorry if there is already a video of it; I would love to see an updated video on this, especially now that Netflix has released a documentary on this topic(downfall). I'm afraid to get on the 737 max currently
Thank you so much for explaining so clearly.
Weird, wouldn't be a better design for MCAS to deactivate it self when sensors from which MCAS depends are unreliable, the same way how autopilot does.
At the least, the system should cross check the AOA on both sides of the aircraft instead of declaring AOA sensor fail on one sensor. This is speculation on my part because we don't know if Lion Air have both sensors working or just one.
Thats what I was thinking. If there is is an alert that would make the pilots to the pitch/power memory items, the throttles are in an appropriate range, and the pitch is in an appropriate range, that should be a heavily weighted input to the MCAS that 'no, I really shouldnt be in a stall, somethings fucky' and it should stop actuating, or at least limit the number of times it actuates.
An "unreliable" detection is not always right. Falsely refusing to engage the autopilot doesn't hurt much, falsely deactivating a safety critical system might hurt.
Crappy design. One error in one sensor should never be able to start this deadly chain of events!
Sounds like Boeing screwed the pooch when they set up the logic for it. Should be limits on how much it can trim automatically without the pilots input.
Very good. Here in Brazil when I used the exact same words "might" and "possibly" to speak about Lion Air's accident, people gone crazy. That happened partly because we are not used to have high level debate about technical issues and some characters simply does not discuss at all and people tend to follow and criticise the ones that do. We're not speculating, you used basically the same critical thinking I did. Congrats, from a big brazilian fan of yours.
I follow your channel but 'we´re are not used to have high level debate about.' come one, be serious, I´m sure you´re not talking about the press
@@robsonbr1246 I'm not, that's exactly my point here. One of the few mainstream's serious communicators is William Waack. Even him is out of the mainstream now.
I see your point now.@@canalaerocast
teu canal ta melhor que o do Lito. faz mai relatos sobre acidentes. um abraço.
Kudos to Brazilian aviation authorities. They disagreed with Boeing and US FAA and insisted on informing pilots about MCAS.
Thank you for this clear video about what may have happened!
Extremly well explained! Well done! Had my CCC final exam on a 737 Classic :-)
Good description for the layman
Thank you! Thats what I was hoping to achieve.
Very good explanation of what the Lion Air crew might have been facing!
Thanks for explaining this. I was hoping you would do a video on this because you always lay things out in a way that us non-pilots can understand.
I love how your dog appears out of nowhere around 3:45 and then stays in the frame being totally relaxed for the rest of the video :)
Your dogs getting confident with his situational awareness.
Very nice update... thanks man.
Respect...🛫
Thank you! I hope it added some info and straightened out some question-marks.
Very well explained! That’s why training is so critical and why we get tested in the simulator every 6 months.
My thoughts and prayers with the victims and their families of both accidents. Thank you Mentour Pilot for explaining everything in details. Is it just me or this doggie is the cutest thing?!?! I think so, I could not stop looking at the dog, so freaking cute!!!
Very good explanation - made me feel slightly relaxed
He was basically fighting with the plane. Interesting. I love your content, Mentour. Cheers from Virginia
Potentially yes. We won’t know for sure until the interim report is out.
That lovely Dog doubles the pleasure of what info you share and give me !Thanks both of you!
Thanks for taking the time to explain this. RIP to the victims.
Hi Mentour! I am just very facinated of your knowledge about aircraft.
When you make a video do you make a script before or do you just improvise? Considering you have such a flow when explaining things.
Best regards!
Dave Bowman: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL?
HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
Dave Bowman: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL.
HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
"2001: A Space Odyssey" (1968)
Dr. Strangelove: Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?
Ambassador de Sadesky: It was to be announced at the Party Congress on Monday. As you know, the Premier loves surprises.
- Another Kubrick film.
There's also this exchange from the John Carpenter film "Dark Star" (1976):
PINBACK: All right, bomb, prepare to receive new orders.
BOMB #20: You are false data.
PINBACK: Huh?
BOMB #20: Therefore, I shall ignore you.
PINBACK: Hello, bomb.
BOMB #20: False data can act only as a distraction. Therefore. I shall refuse to perceive you.
PINBACK: Hey, bomb.
BOMB #20: The only thing which exists is myself.
PINBACK: Bomb?
PINBACK: Snap out of it, bomb.
BOMB #20: In the beginning there was darkness, and the darkness was without form and void.
BOILER: What the hell?
PINBACK: Yoo hoo, bomb...
BOMB #20: And in addition to the darkness there was also me. And I moved upon the face of the darkness.
BOILER: Bomb, hey bomb.
PINBACK: Hey, bomb...
BOMB #20: And I saw that I was alone.
(Pause)
BOMB #20: Let there be light.
(THE SCREEN GOES WHITE)
Dave, dave my mind is going
A space odyssey theme song playing ...
@@StringerNews1
PINBACK: Snap out of it, bomb. BOMB #20: In the beginning there was darkness, and the darkness was without form and void. BOILER: What the hell?...
Yeah, that was my reaction, too, after reading that. :)
Great talk on this subject, it makes a lot of sense. I look forward to hearing the official findings from the investigation
Very professional explanation. Thanks
Many thanks for your professional insight!
Thank YOU for watching and supporting the channel!
Sidenote: Your dog 🐶 is so cute
Yeah, she always steals the show.
The best explanation that I've heard so far of the potential issues with the two recent MAX 8 accidents. Thank you, sir.
Congratulations this is the final video
Ethiopian Airlines Flight ET302 crashed, it was a Boeing 737-800Max. Unstable vertical speed was the last reported attitude of the aircraft, and the plane crashed 6 minutes after takeoff so they probably didn't have enough altitude to make corrections. Could you do a video on this once more info is available?
FDR was just found. Hopefully we'll be closer to answers soon.
The procedure of how to manage the MCAS might be sufficient. However in the heat of the moment just after departure and fairly near the ground with limited time to correct any malfunctions...
Just play this one twice.
All 737 800 Max's can be remotely controlled. Remote Access to the plane is possible when the plane is in specific conditions. This problem is known and has been spoken about via the youtube "Abel Danger" channel. Google Abel Danger MH 370 and you'll find a wealth of knowledge. The shocking icing on the cake is that Hillary Clinton, the witch owns the patent to the technology that's used to gain access. Do the research and you'll soon see that it's possible and that someone on the plane needed to be killed/murdered.
@@wwg1wga712
I'm no conspiracy theorist, but I wouldn't doubt it. You would think if it was remotely crashed it would show up in 1 of the black boxes. But that's just speculation. Thanks for the killary info though.
That is a massive failure from the manufacturer if the system functioning work that is critical was not communicated to the pilots.
Maybe it was the airline that failed to properly train the pilots on the new variant. Don't jump to conclusions.
@@ryanhaart Did you not watch the video? He clearly said that the "MCAS" has not been properly communicated to MAX operators and pilots.
Great !!! very beautifully explained. Keep the good work going
An excellent analysis that has even more significance following the near identical incident with the Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max.
I think it would be of a great interest if you would make a overall debrief of all MAX-related incidents (Lion Air, Ethiopian Airlines or maybe more) and how it all actually ended up? There are many videos and streams on your channel related, but now out of time context they seem scattered (YT only shows '2 years ago' on all of them, so it's unclear what information is more relevant for current moment) and often unclear about what are you arguing to.
Maybe a playlist would be helpful/informative enough?
You are such an inspirational 👨✈️. I have written so many useful notes that I will use in the future as an Airline Pilot
Thank you! I hope you found the video interesting.
I sure did !!!
Thanks for the update! We've got a 737 Max 7 - it's at the completion center getting the interior done so appreciate the info
Thank you for sharing your vast expertise and helping aspiring pilots across the world. God bless!!!
Today we mourn the Ethiopian Airlines 302 :(
My condolences to all families and friends of the victims of Ethiopian Airline incident that just happened.
Unstable vertical speed reported explains everything you said in this video.
Thank you Mentour Pilot. Please keep enlightening us.
My friend's boyfriend, his father is in this airplane, poor them ..
A first class explanation of the characteristics and training shortfalls that were likely to have caused this and the ET crash. Brilliant and thank you!
Some excellent perspective here, thanks!
Great explanation. Makes one wonder if Boeing had done the right thing and redesigned the aircraft in total vs just an electronic fix for the larger engines people would not have died. Greed. Kills. Now I am just a lay observer, if Boeing went this route there ought to be a redundant sensor system that would cut the MCAS if different readings were being experienced.
One thing that never should have happened in Aircraft design is having the plane not want to fly by itself. They seem to want to put bricks in the air and then make the brick fly, forgetting all about aerodynamics, then having to design a computer system as an afterthought. The people running these companies today care only about the bottom line.
Very informative! You also have one cool dog 🐕 🐾
I know this was interim information, and not final. But I wish to say, I learn a great deal from you and I appreciate your work on RUclips. Your presentations seem to me to be fair, thoughtful and balanced. Thank you very much.
That was an AMAZING explanation! Thank you...
Honestly, today's story was more scary than Mentours Halloween Special.😥
I know. Reality can be scary sometimes.
@@MentourPilot Please tell me that AMERICAN/EURO/CANADIAN pilots are better informed than those in MALAYSIA/INDONESIA!!
@@MentourPilot
How close are training regiments of the North American carriers and European carriers? I think Elke is asking a question along the same line. How involved are EASA and NTSB is this investigation and are findings from an agency outside these two continents treated with the same amount of weight? I mean no disrespect to countries, carriers, and regions outside NA and Europe.
It still amazes me that Boeing designed and built in an automated trim system and yet never highlighted this design change to its customers and ensure that this change was communicated to all 737 Max pilots.
Scary to think that, since this was previously an unknown system to the pilots, this could've happened to anyone. Even the best pilots would've been clueless to what was wrong with their aircraft as it got nose heavy and dived in to the ground...
Bra video 👍👌nu har en till 737max olika Etiopien alla omkom. Planet tillverkad samtidigt som den här planet en tidig modell 737 max -8
Thanks for the clarity around these systems. Here in the US pilots have complained about some of these aspects of the 737 Max.
WOW. Thanks for this explanation. You are awesome. It make sens and you present it understandable. Very informative and interesting facts. Many thumb ups.
🙌"Hey Sir Pilot be always alert and safe flight take off and landings in your journey Godbless."🙌
According to Flight Radar data, there were some initial altitude fluctuations before the final nose dive, which sort of indicates the pilots have had managed to recover from the earlier dips but possibly could not pull back from final trim runaway. To me, it appears like badly thought out MCAS feature for 737 Max.
That's stalling right
The MCAS system was introduced because they had to move the big engines so far ahead and up of the leading edge of the wing to get them to "fit". They also had to lengthen the nose landing gear. All of this moved the Centre of Gravity forward and because the engine doesn't normally generate lift (but does at very high angles of attack), they had to design a system that kicks the nose down automatically at high AoA to maintain the aircraft's stability. The problem is that the system is NOT counteracted by the pilots pulling back on the yoke - it is from them trimming but not when they just pull back on the yoke. If the pilot continues to just pull back on the yoke to counteract the nose down push over (induced by the faulty sensor saying they were at an unusually high AoA), then there comes a point at which no matter how hard the pilot pulls back on the yoke, they can't pull up which looks like what happened here. It cycles every 10 seconds for 2 seconds or so and therefore every 10 seconds, the pilot would get more and more nose down pressure and he's fighting a losing battle. Normally, the pilot would use the trim button to ease the pressures which could have saved them but they were close to the ground and in a fairly high stress environment and didn't know about this system (although they would have had to have noticed the trim being "automatically" activated every 10 seconds so you'd think they'd have tried to back it off using the trim as well. It's very easy to second guess someone from the safety of your armchair so I won't try here. The net is that it sure looks like Boeing totally messed up by not providing information on this during differences training and didn't anticipate that a faulty AoA gauge could cause this scenario which runs counter to the pilots emergency training.
Here is some code for boeing....
If (trimadjustment > X) and (MCAS is Enabled) then
Disable MCAS System
Warn Pilot to do manual adjustments
End If
Love your videos mate, very insightful
Hi Mentour Pilot!! Your videos are very informative. Thanks! :)
THE BOEING guideline that gave absolute priority to the software CMAS by lowering the power of the pilots to command the aircraft is THE MOST SERIOUS TRANSGRESSION TO ANY HUMANITY CONCEPT !!!
The dog never miss
No, Patxi never misses a shoot if he can avoid it.
@@MentourPilot Does Patxi mean something? Almost looks Chinese.
@@terryboyer1342 Patxi is a very common basque name. Its equivalent in English is "Frank" or "Francis". Originally it meant "Inhabitant of France", or "Frenchman". Makes sense, since Mentour Pilot lives in Catalonia, which is relatively near to the basque country (and to France).
Fantastic update, keep up the great work!
Best technical explanation on this issue i have heard!
Very well explained !! I'm an aeronautic technician !! I feel like a ''deja vu'' with those safety f.c. electronic systems snags when pilots can't get full control of flight controls ... like you said it is still too soon to give a correct diagnostic for these incidents/accidents. Just wondering if the mods they made to the engine fuc**** up the weight and balance of the plane which might cause the MCAS system to react in a dangerous manner. You add this with bad environmental factors and not enough training for pilots to react quickly and there you go you have a very dangerous situation ... Only time will tell.
The young MCAS's OOP java developers did not care for the things the pilot is used to. They just still "improve" the software: "to set the break on the place of the accelerator, and the accelerator on place of the break must have be a really good idea, musn't it?" But what about Pilots? - "Pilots should re-learn".
I like your dog. Kind of funny how many different positions u can relax in, isn't it? :p
Yeah, he knows them all!
I love your explanations this makes it much clearer. Looking forward to your updates on the 787 Max grounding and investigation.
787 MAX? That Never Existed.
Yet again. Another great video..! PS: love that your dog regularly features in your videos mate. :)
now the story is back in the headlines. Please update in relationship with Ethopian Air.
Khosbayar Purevjav he said he doesnt speculate on anything until official information is released
@Mentour Pilot
I can imagine it is really hard for pilots to be in a situation like this, overwhelmed by warnings. But as I understand, Boeing's rationale for not teaching pilots about MCAS is that that both the symptoms and the procedure to solve it are identical to the already existing emergency - stabilizer trim runaway. I believe the main difference is that there are a few additional warnings, like IAS disagree, which makes sense, because apparently the angle of attack is used to calculate the airspeed. Or are there more differences?
If there indeed aren't, Boeing may have a point, because adding additional memory items and procedures can actually increase the confusion in the cockpit when something unexpected happens and contributing to the very situation you are describing in the video. I don't say I agree with Boeing's reasoning, but I'm just trying to understand it from their point of view.
Also how commonly is stabilizer trim runaway practised in the simulator?
Very good explanation. Maybe one of your best videos to date. Well done!
Great video. And I love your dog trying to body language a total stall. 😂
Hahaha
Very well explanations about the new feature of 737 Max AOA. But regarding what happened with Lion JT-610, it was all too late when MCAS bulletin had came out after those disaster. I'm sure all Boeing 737 pilots would be alarmed if they got proper procedure when it comes to flying with those new feature before they airborne. And for further evidence which is part of black box (CVR) that are not found yet, because it located on muddy bed sea, that will be more accurate and helpful evidence to know before people just speculating basic on raw conclusion.
Pray for all the victims of JT-610 disaster and hope Local Authorities find those CVR soon.
R.I.P for the victims
Thank you for this very informative video. I agree with not placing blame so early. But I find it very difficult (and inexcusable really) to understand why this was not part of the training for Max pilots. Especially since this seems to be new to the 737 family. Also I don’t understand why Lion Air did not take the aircraft out of service and alert Boeing after numerous flights prior to the crash exhibiting the same problems. Or perform a test flight. Or the pilots not refusing to take the aircraft upon seeing numerous similar entries in the logbook. I know pilots with the airline I used to work for would be suspicious. I also wonder with a rapidly growing airline could a culture of “get there-itis” be a factor?
Great explanation. Concise, focused and very informative.
Great explanations! Thanks!
Excellent explanation. Thanks 😎👍
Now, it just happened again in Ethiopia, and seems eerily similar.
I think the shit is going to hit the fan on this issue..............
It seems odd that Boeing does not compare the data from the angle of attack vane with the data from the gyros before trimming the aircraft. It does not seem to be consistent with a redundancy mindset.
Thank you for giving us all both qualitative and quantitative facts from a pilots perspective. Your perception and insights are appreciated, noteworthy and a breath of fresh air from the network white noise.
Hello there, thanks a lot. I love the way you speak and the way you convey the information...
Ethiopian airlines crushed just today RIP🙏 Thanks for very informative explanation!
Much thanks Mentour
My brother is now flying the Max 800 ... I'm concerned
Make sure your brother watches this video. All the best to him.
I will not fly on the max.
Thank You! For presenting just the facts, in a manner that most can follow along.
You are a true professional. Thank gawd we have people like you at the controls.
The position of the engine on the 737 Max is faulty too.
Whatever boeing says, a faulty sensor should never ever lead to an aircraft loss. Major design flaw. RIP passengers
Nope. If u watch aircrash investigation, sensor failures due cause crash.
Chronos Time _due cause_ doesn't mean _should cause._ SnawCat never claimed that a sensor failure was not ascribable to that aircraft. He simply said such a cause should never happen if Boeing designed the software better. And that, of course, is a major design flaw.
@@GyacoYuwe r probably on the same page but let me clarify. I mean "do" not "due".
We do not know for sure what is the exact cause of the 2 crashes yet. But let's say the sensor failed, the software too failed to compensate the wrong input from sensor. So it's 2 failures. Now the pilot have the option to turn that thing off(in this 2 cases) and take manual control but they were not informed or trained to. So it's a failure on many levels. But it started with the sensor. That's what I mean by sensor failure cause crash.
Now with the "Major design flaws" we should accept that we are not expert on this subject to classify which flaws are major or minor. A very small hardware or software flaw can also bring a plane Down.
Faulty sensor and software was one ingredient. Faulty pilots were another. There seems plenty of blame to go around but, IMO, Lion Air must accept the lion's share. It does not matter WHY the stab-trim is running haywire, the solution is extremely simple - flip the 'kill switch.' Problem solve. Why the pilots failed to perform this simple, obvious, 'memory item' procedure is a real mystery.
Sensor failures DO Cause CRASHES!
Very helpful video thank you
What a fantastic and comprehensive explanation of what this issue could be. And I did want to understand what was happening. Thank you for this.
Seems like the obvious short term fix is to disable MCAS until the plane reaches some reasonable altitude, say, for example, 20,000 feet then allow the MCAS system to take over. Sounds like MCAS is interacting with the autopilot software. If there is a sensor problem then at 20,000 feet there is enough time to switch the system off with the two manually switches under pilot control. When the plane descends on a normal flight reaching the threshold altitude of 20,000 the MCAS system would again disable itself. Both the recent accidents have occurred at low altitudes and the pilots have too little time to analyze their situation. I suspect that pilots go to autopilot too soon in all cases. President Trump in my opinion is correct about the complexity and reliance on autonomous control systems. For example, the Air France flight from Brazil to Paris that plunged their AirBus from cruising altitude into the mid Atlantic Ocean must have been confused by the automated systems. They were in a stall condition and did not realize it. Had they be able to ignore and suppress automated controls and fly the aircraft manually the fix for a stall is easy, nose down and pick up airspeed. They had altitude and time to make good decisions and did not in this case. Perhaps too much faulty information?
MCAS only operates when the autopilot is off, the flaps are retracted and at low airspeed/high bank angle.... so there was no autopilot interaction. By the time the aircraft gets to 20,000ft it will be doing 300+knots and MCAS would not be needed. It is there to assist pilots in averting low speed stalls, in itself a highly desirable feature, however, all flight crew need to be aware of the system, what it does, and how to switch it off
It seems that some of these technologies are going too far, Airbus had a few incidents early on with some of the new technologies that took the flying away from the pilots. Do you have any trepidation about flying the Max when your company receives them?
The best explanation of lion air 737 max crash. Ur the best, and also ur puppy. 😊
Thanks you verbalized your knowledge so well. It makes it easy to understand
12:08 I have a feeling it not going to take a year as these planes are currently dropping like flies.
They re now virtually all grounded (I am only concerned about Canada, whether they have joind the bandwagon as well by grounding their fleet). Everywhere else (yes the States or FAA was initially hesitant) that country has also grounded all their B.737 Max 8s as well. This is either unprecidented or extremely rare to have TWO accidents identically the same with new aircraft only nearly half a year apart! Perhaps automation has not necessarily been as perfected as it should be. Too much profit on the competetion race to get things in total order first! I have not seen this sort of mess with Airbus Industries! (Unlike Boeing, Airbus has already built and flown two versions of an ELECTRIC plane! The E-Fan 2.0 1nd the four place 4.0 E-fFan! WHERE is Boeing on this path to ELECTRIC commercial aviation? Shocking and unacceptable!
"A system they didn't know existed"
That... is _terrifying_
There are some very frightening statements in this video.
great video, I learned a few things, good work.
Great informative video! Love your dog!