3 ms·

> experienced the same problem, and simply restored trim and turned off the stab trim system, and landed safely As far as I remember it was far from "simply."

by acqq 7y ago

> experienced the same problem, and simply restored trim and turned off the stab trim system, and landed safely As far as I remember it was far from "simply." Apparently they had luck of having a third pilot in the cabin present, who didn't have to maintain anything else in the cabin and had the luxury and time to observe and think about what is going on. The pilots in charge were overwhelmed by the killer plane then too, which is completely expected -- note the "10 seconds" admitted in my quotations. So, no, as far as I remember, the previous LA flight actually doesn't support your claims.

WalterBright 7y ago
> they had luck of having a third pilot in the cabin present They did indeed, one who remembered that the solution to runaway trim is to turn off the trim system. This is something that is supposed to be a "memory item". Note that all three sets of flight crews successfully countered the runaway trim using the electric trim switches. They were not overwhelmed to the point of not understanding that the trim system was the problem, as they were countering it. This was so underwhelming to the first LA crew that they didn't even bother to inform the next crew about it, or even have the plane taken out of service and fixed.
- acqq 7y ago
  > This was so underwhelming to the first LA crew that they didn't even bother to inform the next crew about it, or even have the plane taken out of service and fixed. The pilots were from the cultures where deference to authority, specifically, failure to even talk about the problem to those "above in the hierarchy" provably previously caused other airplane accidents. The crews since learned to function in the cockpit. But this required such an attitude outside of the cockpit for those who managed respond, "sticking their necks out" from their point of view, so they avoided it. Again, nothing to use as the proof that the plane was not utterly dangerous.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    > Again, nothing to use as the proof that the plane was not utterly dangerous. I don't believe that a crew that thought they had narrowly escaped death from a "killer plane" with some horrific defect would fail to notify the next flight crew, and not have the plane grounded until it was fixed. It's their job to do that, and not doing it should bring them up on charges of dereliction. It's much more credible that they didn't think it was a big deal. I don't have any more facts about that flight - nothing is ever reported about it. I sure hope the NTSB includes it in their investigation, as finding out what went on in that flight and what the crew did afterwards is crucial.

by acqq 7y ago

WalterBright 7y ago

> they had luck of having a third pilot in the cabin present They did indeed, one who remembered that the solution to runaway trim is to turn off the trim system. This is something that is supposed to be a "memory item". Note that all three sets of flight crews successfully countered the runaway trim using the electric trim switches. They were not overwhelmed to the point of not understanding that the trim system was the problem, as they were countering it. This was so underwhelming to the first LA crew that they didn't even bother to inform the next crew about it, or even have the plane taken out of service and fixed.

acqq 7y ago
> This was so underwhelming to the first LA crew that they didn't even bother to inform the next crew about it, or even have the plane taken out of service and fixed. The pilots were from the cultures where deference to authority, specifically, failure to even talk about the problem to those "above in the hierarchy" provably previously caused other airplane accidents. The crews since learned to function in the cockpit. But this required such an attitude outside of the cockpit for those who managed respond, "sticking their necks out" from their point of view, so they avoided it. Again, nothing to use as the proof that the plane was not utterly dangerous.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  > Again, nothing to use as the proof that the plane was not utterly dangerous. I don't believe that a crew that thought they had narrowly escaped death from a "killer plane" with some horrific defect would fail to notify the next flight crew, and not have the plane grounded until it was fixed. It's their job to do that, and not doing it should bring them up on charges of dereliction. It's much more credible that they didn't think it was a big deal. I don't have any more facts about that flight - nothing is ever reported about it. I sure hope the NTSB includes it in their investigation, as finding out what went on in that flight and what the crew did afterwards is crucial.