• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Doomed Lion Air Flight Had Dangerous System That Boeing Didn’t Tell Pilots About

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
40,804
Reaction score
31,024
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
https://www.thedailybeast.com/doomed-lion-air-flight-had-dangerous-system-that-boeing-didnt-tell-pilots-about?via=FB_Page&source=TDB

This really isn't good for Boeing. We flew on a Southwest 737 MAX 800 last month, nice plane. Lion Air is a terrible airline, but the crash may not be their fault.

I'm more of an Airbus guy...better planes.

Doomed Lion Air Flight Had Dangerous System That Boeing Didn’t Tell Pilots About

One erroneous signal could have triggered fatal dive according to expert reporting—in a system introduced to the new 737 MAX without the knowledge of any pilots.
Clive Irving

11.13.18 2:05 PM ET

Pilots flying more than 200 of the new Boeing 737 MAX-8 jets were unaware of a potentially deadly flaw in the flight controls – including the pilots of Lion Air Flight 610 that crashed in the Java Sea killing 189 people.

Aviation Week in a story by three of its most expert correspondents reveals that a system unique to the latest model 737 could, without any input from the pilots, force the jet’s nose to suddenly dip, potentially triggering a steep dive – exactly what happened in the Lion Air crash.

Responding to the report, Boeing told the Seattle Times: “We are taking every measure to fully understand all aspects of this incident, working closely with the investigation team and all the regulatory authorities involved. We are confident of the safety of the 737 MAX. Safety remains our top priority.”

The system, called Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) does not appear in the flight operations manual that pilots use to become familiar with a new model – nor, according to the Aviation Week report, was it revealed to pilots as they underwent training to convert from older model 737s, which began service in the 1960s.

MCAS is unique to the MAX versions of the 737. It is unheard of for pilots who move from one generation of a jet to another not to be alerted to any change that has critical bearing on controlling the jet.

The sequence of events that could have been responsible for the death dive of the Lion Air 737 is clearly suggested by the Aviation Week reporters.
 
Last edited:

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,720
Reaction score
6,276
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
https://www.thedailybeast.com/doomed-lion-air-flight-had-dangerous-system-that-boeing-didnt-tell-pilots-about?via=FB_Page&source=TDB

This really isn't good for Boeing. We flew on a Southwest 737 MAX 800 last month. Lion Air is a terrible airline, but the crash may not be their fault.

I'm more of an Airbus guy...better planes.

Wait... they engineered a feature into the 737 max that causes the plane to dip downwards...... and no one bothered to include this feature in pilot training!?
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I don’t know enough about the subject to properly gauge how upset I should be about this.
 

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
40,804
Reaction score
31,024
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I don’t know enough about the subject to properly gauge how upset I should be about this.

It is a feature in the software that Boeing didn't put in the pilot's manual. And one plane has crashed already.

Not good.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
It is a feature in the software that Boeing didn't put in the pilot's manual. And one plane has crashed already.

Not good.

On top of other major problems for Boeing, for instance finding out that they sent I think it is over 100 planes out with wiring so bad that it needs to be replaced if I recall the story right.

And that they will likely never make money on the Dreamliner because they did things wrong.

Space services is a wreck.

Yadda yadda yadda
 

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
40,804
Reaction score
31,024
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
On top of other major problems for Boeing, for instance finding out that they sent I think it is over 100 planes out with wiring so bad that it needs to be replaced if I recall the story right.

And that they will likely never make money on the Dreamliner because they did things wrong.

Space services is a wreck.

Yadda yadda yadda

787's are good now. A350's are better
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,720
Reaction score
6,276
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
It is a feature in the software that Boeing didn't put in the pilot's manual. And one plane has crashed already.

Not good.

Well this isn’t the first time the 737 encountered a hidden design flaw that brought down the plane. The longest investigation in the history of the National transportation safety board was the mystery involving 3 737 jets that suffered uncontrolled rudder hard overs.
 

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
40,804
Reaction score
31,024
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Well this isn’t the first time the 737 encountered a hidden design flaw that brought down the plane. The longest investigation in the history of the National transportation safety board was the mystery involving 3 737 jets that suffered uncontrolled rudder hard overs.

This is a completely different 737 though, the software and systems, etc are all new. The one you are talking about was a rudder issue on the old 737-300. This is two generations (next gen and MAX) apart from that. This is a different issue, its more of a software control issue that was not disclosed in the pilot manual.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,595
Reaction score
6,704
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
This is a completely different 737 though, the software and systems, etc are all new. The one you are talking about was a rudder issue on the old 737-300. This is two generations (next gen and MAX) apart from that. This is a different issue, its more of a software control issue that was not disclosed in the pilot manual.

Why the hell would they not put that in the pilot manual?
 

Beaudreaux

Preserve Protect Defend
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
18,233
Reaction score
15,860
Location
veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
https://www.thedailybeast.com/doomed-lion-air-flight-had-dangerous-system-that-boeing-didnt-tell-pilots-about?via=FB_Page&source=TDB

This really isn't good for Boeing. We flew on a Southwest 737 MAX 800 last month, nice plane. Lion Air is a terrible airline, but the crash may not be their fault.

I'm more of an Airbus guy...better planes.

The US military has these systems in most of the nextgen aircraft, such as the stealth aircraft that the pilots actually cannot react quickly enough to control the aircraft without a computer assisting them to do so.

The military doesn't call it a MCAS though, because MCAS in the US military means Marine Corps Air Station, so they call it a fly-by-wire (FBW) stability augmentation system (SAS) which the most rudimentary type systems are sometimes inaccurately referred to as an autopilot which is similar in function, but not similar in capability.

Airbus had a similar problem with their system which as an example has found to have software "bugs" in their FBW SAS systems that has crashed a number of aircraft in the early 2000's, and most recently in 2015 caused a crash of a new A400M military transport plane during a test flight in Seville, in which four Spanish air force crew members died.
 

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
40,804
Reaction score
31,024
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The US military has these systems in most of the nextgen aircraft, such as the stealth aircraft that the pilots actually cannot react quickly enough to control the aircraft without a computer assisting them to do so.

The military doesn't call it a MCAS though, because MCAS in the US military means Marine Corps Air Station, so they call it a fly-by-wire (FBW) stability augmentation system (SAS) which the most rudimentary type systems are sometimes inaccurately referred to as an autopilot which is similar in function, but not similar in capability.

Airbus had a similar problem with their system which as an example has found to have software "bugs" in their FBW SAS systems that has crashed a number of aircraft in the early 2000's, and most recently in 2015 caused a crash of a new A400M military transport plane during a test flight in Seville, in which four Spanish air force crew members died.

Fly by wire has been in all new airliners for the last 20 years. All the airbus from A318 to A350 have it, and all the boeings from 737 next gen and Max and the 777, 787 and 747-400 and 747-800 have it as well.
 
Top Bottom