4 ms·

The report does a masterful job of obscuring the fact that flying a 737 Max at low altitude and full throttle will create an overspeed condition. The overspeed

The report does a masterful job of obscuring the fact that flying a 737 Max at low altitude and full throttle will create an overspeed condition. The overspeed condition was the proximate cause of the accident because it increased aerodynamic forces on the horizontal stabilizer that prevented the crew from manually overcoming the AND (aircraft nose-down) trim applied by the MCAS and also resulted in a terminal dive. Turns out that it's hard to build an aircraft that is resistant to abuse by pilots with grossly inadequate flying skills. Maybe Boeing should have taken the Airbus approach and have three independent flight computers vote on whether the pilot is an idiot. Oh, no, wait! They keep managing to crash those as well.

rumanator 7y ago
> Turns out that it's hard to build an aircraft that is resistant to abuse by pilots with grossly inadequate flying skills. This red herring has been thoroughly refuted and discredited. It saddens me how some people keep parroting this nonsense hoping to brush off Boeing's gross negligence, specially when they resort to thinly veiled racism.
- zelienople 7y ago
  Facts, not nonsense. Buried in the final report, but there for all to see if you read it carefully. Not racism. Air France 447 came to grief by the exact same process. It wasn't a Boeing and it was flown by equally incompetent white men. Likely Russian assets discrediting the second largest US defence contractor by fostering the torches-and-pitchforks motif among the ignorant. There is no room for opinion here. If you do not understand the aerodynamics of this accident, you have no right or proper place in commenting. And if anything, it's sexism, not racism. Men designed a system that values money over all else. That system put ill-trained male pilots in the cockpit without the flying skills to manage a simple runaway trim situation. It actively excluded women for the same reason: it was built to entrench male wealth.
  - salawat 7y ago
    This reads like some GPT-2 generated monstrosity to be quite honest, and can't even stick with a cohesive message throughout its entirety. There's also more than a few contradictory sections. If you're trying to send a message, it's not succeeding. >There is no room for opinion here. If you do not understand the aerodynamics of this accident, you have no right or proper place in commenting. Furthermore, stow the elitism. No one got to a place of expertise without first being able to participate in the fundamental exchange of ideas. Something you're currently having some difficulty in doing.
campfireveteran 7y ago
Have a look at blancolirio and MentourPilot (a 737 instructor pilot) channels.
- zelienople 7y ago
  Yay! Mansplaining! All I need to look at is page 27 of the final report (where an overspeed condition is clearly indicated) or figure 29 showing the FDR data and then compare and contrast with the total absense of the phrase "the pilots failed to retard the throttles from take-off power resulting in a dangerous overspeed condition" in the "Contributing Factors" section. No matter what you may think Boeing did wrong, or what Boeing actually did wrong, failing to list the overspeed condition as a contributing factor makes this an unreliable whitewash. This is no surprise coming from a corrupt country like Indonesia where women are treated as chattels.
  - salawat 7y ago
    >All I need to look at is page 27 of the final report (where an overspeed condition is clearly indicated)... There is no mention of an overspeed condition, or any airspeed values in the linked PDF of the report, be it on page 27 of the PDF itself, or the page explicitly numbered 27 in the report. >figure 29 showing the FDR data and then compare and contrast with the total absence of the phrase "the pilots failed to retard the throttles from take-off power resulting in a dangerous overspeed condition" in the "Contributing Factors" section. An overspeed in this particular case may have occurred, but was not material to the plane itself going down. It didn't tear itself apart, and the electronic trim was able to actuate until the very end. Trying to cherry pick on the airspeed (which weren't even reliable due to the borked AoA sensor) is rather daft. Furthermore, even if you cross reference timestamps between the pages 27(PDF or explicitly numbered), no overspend is illustrated based off either airspeed measurement. Mind, overspeed for a 737 in clean configuration (no flaps/no gear) is still north of 340 knots, which is barely brushed up against until the plane goes down in it's final plunge. Given the unreliable nature of the airspeed indicators, if you double check for sanity sake against the ground speed, you still don't end up anywhere near an overspeed. Are you going to try to pass that off as mansplaining too? Or Russian disinfo? Or sexist/racism? I just looked at the report. I've brought up none of those beyond pointing out your use of them, and still managed to poke holes in your assertions, which by the way, read like output from some sort of Markov chain. No offense meant, but you may want to work on the topical cohesion of your composition.

rumanator 7y ago

> Turns out that it's hard to build an aircraft that is resistant to abuse by pilots with grossly inadequate flying skills. This red herring has been thoroughly refuted and discredited. It saddens me how some people keep parroting this nonsense hoping to brush off Boeing's gross negligence, specially when they resort to thinly veiled racism.

zelienople 7y ago
Facts, not nonsense. Buried in the final report, but there for all to see if you read it carefully. Not racism. Air France 447 came to grief by the exact same process. It wasn't a Boeing and it was flown by equally incompetent white men. Likely Russian assets discrediting the second largest US defence contractor by fostering the torches-and-pitchforks motif among the ignorant. There is no room for opinion here. If you do not understand the aerodynamics of this accident, you have no right or proper place in commenting. And if anything, it's sexism, not racism. Men designed a system that values money over all else. That system put ill-trained male pilots in the cockpit without the flying skills to manage a simple runaway trim situation. It actively excluded women for the same reason: it was built to entrench male wealth.
- salawat 7y ago
  This reads like some GPT-2 generated monstrosity to be quite honest, and can't even stick with a cohesive message throughout its entirety. There's also more than a few contradictory sections. If you're trying to send a message, it's not succeeding. >There is no room for opinion here. If you do not understand the aerodynamics of this accident, you have no right or proper place in commenting. Furthermore, stow the elitism. No one got to a place of expertise without first being able to participate in the fundamental exchange of ideas. Something you're currently having some difficulty in doing.

campfireveteran 7y ago

Have a look at blancolirio and MentourPilot (a 737 instructor pilot) channels.

zelienople 7y ago
Yay! Mansplaining! All I need to look at is page 27 of the final report (where an overspeed condition is clearly indicated) or figure 29 showing the FDR data and then compare and contrast with the total absense of the phrase "the pilots failed to retard the throttles from take-off power resulting in a dangerous overspeed condition" in the "Contributing Factors" section. No matter what you may think Boeing did wrong, or what Boeing actually did wrong, failing to list the overspeed condition as a contributing factor makes this an unreliable whitewash. This is no surprise coming from a corrupt country like Indonesia where women are treated as chattels.
- salawat 7y ago
  >All I need to look at is page 27 of the final report (where an overspeed condition is clearly indicated)... There is no mention of an overspeed condition, or any airspeed values in the linked PDF of the report, be it on page 27 of the PDF itself, or the page explicitly numbered 27 in the report. >figure 29 showing the FDR data and then compare and contrast with the total absence of the phrase "the pilots failed to retard the throttles from take-off power resulting in a dangerous overspeed condition" in the "Contributing Factors" section. An overspeed in this particular case may have occurred, but was not material to the plane itself going down. It didn't tear itself apart, and the electronic trim was able to actuate until the very end. Trying to cherry pick on the airspeed (which weren't even reliable due to the borked AoA sensor) is rather daft. Furthermore, even if you cross reference timestamps between the pages 27(PDF or explicitly numbered), no overspend is illustrated based off either airspeed measurement. Mind, overspeed for a 737 in clean configuration (no flaps/no gear) is still north of 340 knots, which is barely brushed up against until the plane goes down in it's final plunge. Given the unreliable nature of the airspeed indicators, if you double check for sanity sake against the ground speed, you still don't end up anywhere near an overspeed. Are you going to try to pass that off as mansplaining too? Or Russian disinfo? Or sexist/racism? I just looked at the report. I've brought up none of those beyond pointing out your use of them, and still managed to poke holes in your assertions, which by the way, read like output from some sort of Markov chain. No offense meant, but you may want to work on the topical cohesion of your composition.