3 ms·

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.

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.