3 ms·

> That has not been my experience. You can hear the pilots trying to work the problem until the last minute and hearing how they made decisions is important. Yo

> That has not been my experience. You can hear the pilots trying to work the problem until the last minute and hearing how they made decisions is important. You can also hear the engines, the wind noise, cockpit warning horns, and possible sources of pilot interference. Knowing the pilots were trying to prevent the inevitable crash right up until the end is a nice thing to know but now relevant for flight safety. The point of the investigation is to determine what went wrong before the crash became a certainty. Which for Jeju was the moment they lost both engines. > You forgot the _most_ important data. The position of the flight controls set by the crew. While manual flight controls are a thing, without hydraulic assistance they are really only useful if you're trying to maintain straight and level flight while you start backup power. W1ith compounding problems it gives you a little more control of which direction you will be crashing in. I won't deny that more data in an investigation is always useful, but the cost of ensuring that data is available has to be weighed against the potential value of that data. With this crash the data after the loss of both engines won't have much bearing on preventing the similar incidents in the future. To put it another way, should your commercial air liner lose both engines at 1000' in a descent the outcome will be crash, the objective is to prevent that scenario.

phoronixrly 2y ago
Some sources would be beneficial here.
- MadnessASAP 2y ago
  Certainly, for a more authoritative discussion on "manual reversion" on a 737 see here (https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/77693/are-737-pilots-required-to-train-in-manual-reversion-flight https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/77693/are-737-p...), your favorite search engine can also provide a decent body of technical and anecdotal data. As far as survivability of suddenly losing all engines at low altitude, I relied on my own knowledge and experience, however I can refer you to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airline_flights_that_required_gliding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airline_flights_that_r...). Specifically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1572 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1572 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549. Those 2 are just about (IMO) the complete body of cases where there was something to learn from the aircrews actions following the loss of power. That being said, there actions were very specific to their circumstances, would be very difficult to train for, and the pilots survived to provide first hand accounts instead of relying on the CVR.
  - phoronixrly 2y ago
    My guy, it's on you to provide your sources, not on me to look for them with my favourite search engine. Thank you for the concrete links apart from that advice.
    - MadnessASAP 2y ago
      My bro, It's not on me to provide anything, it's a message board it's everything here is implicitly freely offered opinion. However, I did provide a link, I also noted that in addition to that link, should you or anybody else want to know more, searching 737-800 manual reversion does in fact return a variety of useful information.
robocat 2y ago
> is a nice thing to know but [not] relevant for flight safety [edited to what I think you meant] If the pilots made mistakes you want to know what mistakes they made so you can make changes to prevent future pilots from making the same mistakes. The voice recorder is extremely important to understand what mistakes (if any) were made. Even if they did everything correctly, reducing uncertainty is also important.
timewizard 2y ago
> The point of the investigation is to determine what went wrong before the crash became a certainty. That's the reason for starting the investigation. It is not the exclusive goal for it. Increasing safety for all future flights is a big part of why and how this is done. Bird strikes are inevitable. > Which for Jeju was the moment they lost both engines. It seems like you do not require any investigation at all. > should your commercial air liner lose both engines at 1000' in a descent the outcome will be crash The outcome will be a descent. You do see that the concern here is related to the fact that this failure happened very close to approach and even given this the pilots managed to successfully navigate it to the runway. With the gear up. I mean, if you touch down with the gear up, technically, I'll give you, that's a crash. If the gear was down it would look very much like a regular _landing_. What precisely went wrong considering the gear _had_ been down previously? So.. it's not hard to imagine how a working CVR and FDR here would help us answer that very question. Although, your investigation may have been this thorough, do you have the answer?
- MadnessASAP 2y ago
  The biggest question for me, is what happened between the bird strikes and both engines shutting down? Why was the decision made to go around instead of continuing the approach? How quickly did both engines fail? > managed to successfully navigate it to the runway. With the gear up. Sadly they did not, well technically yes, they did physically locate the runway, however they were also traveling too high, too fast, and crashed. > If the gear was down it would look very much like a regular _landing_ It would have still been a very unstable landing half way down the runway with limited braking, no reversers, no spoilers, no flaps. It's very likely they would have still ended up off the end of the runway. > What precisely went wrong considering the gear _had_ been down previously? They chose to do a go-around, selected gear up, then with both engines failed the only way to lower the gear is manually, the handles are on the floor aft of the first officers seat. Their would not have been time to access them between when they had lost both engines and were on the ground while also flying the aircraft. I'm not saying I know what happened, I'm saying that the key to preventing future accidents like this will be in the moments before they lost both engines. After they lost both engines it's clear they aircrew tried to very quickly turn the plane around and land the runway, I have pretty serious doubts that there was any actions that could've made that a successful landing, and if there was, they'll be found in a simulator not on the FDR of the aircraft that DIDN'T make the successful landing.
kermatt 2y ago
> The point of the investigation is to determine what went wrong before the crash became a certainty. Data about recovery efforts after system failures is also valuable. It can help improve procedures for similar future events.

phoronixrly 2y ago

Some sources would be beneficial here.

MadnessASAP 2y ago
Certainly, for a more authoritative discussion on "manual reversion" on a 737 see here (https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/77693/are-737-pilots-required-to-train-in-manual-reversion-flight https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/77693/are-737-p...), your favorite search engine can also provide a decent body of technical and anecdotal data. As far as survivability of suddenly losing all engines at low altitude, I relied on my own knowledge and experience, however I can refer you to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airline_flights_that_required_gliding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_airline_flights_that_r...). Specifically https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1572 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_1572 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Airways_Flight_1549. Those 2 are just about (IMO) the complete body of cases where there was something to learn from the aircrews actions following the loss of power. That being said, there actions were very specific to their circumstances, would be very difficult to train for, and the pilots survived to provide first hand accounts instead of relying on the CVR.
- phoronixrly 2y ago
  My guy, it's on you to provide your sources, not on me to look for them with my favourite search engine. Thank you for the concrete links apart from that advice.
  - MadnessASAP 2y ago
    My bro, It's not on me to provide anything, it's a message board it's everything here is implicitly freely offered opinion. However, I did provide a link, I also noted that in addition to that link, should you or anybody else want to know more, searching 737-800 manual reversion does in fact return a variety of useful information.

robocat 2y ago

> is a nice thing to know but [not] relevant for flight safety [edited to what I think you meant] If the pilots made mistakes you want to know what mistakes they made so you can make changes to prevent future pilots from making the same mistakes. The voice recorder is extremely important to understand what mistakes (if any) were made. Even if they did everything correctly, reducing uncertainty is also important.

timewizard 2y ago

> The point of the investigation is to determine what went wrong before the crash became a certainty. That's the reason for starting the investigation. It is not the exclusive goal for it. Increasing safety for all future flights is a big part of why and how this is done. Bird strikes are inevitable. > Which for Jeju was the moment they lost both engines. It seems like you do not require any investigation at all. > should your commercial air liner lose both engines at 1000' in a descent the outcome will be crash The outcome will be a descent. You do see that the concern here is related to the fact that this failure happened very close to approach and even given this the pilots managed to successfully navigate it to the runway. With the gear up. I mean, if you touch down with the gear up, technically, I'll give you, that's a crash. If the gear was down it would look very much like a regular _landing_. What precisely went wrong considering the gear _had_ been down previously? So.. it's not hard to imagine how a working CVR and FDR here would help us answer that very question. Although, your investigation may have been this thorough, do you have the answer?

MadnessASAP 2y ago
The biggest question for me, is what happened between the bird strikes and both engines shutting down? Why was the decision made to go around instead of continuing the approach? How quickly did both engines fail? > managed to successfully navigate it to the runway. With the gear up. Sadly they did not, well technically yes, they did physically locate the runway, however they were also traveling too high, too fast, and crashed. > If the gear was down it would look very much like a regular _landing_ It would have still been a very unstable landing half way down the runway with limited braking, no reversers, no spoilers, no flaps. It's very likely they would have still ended up off the end of the runway. > What precisely went wrong considering the gear _had_ been down previously? They chose to do a go-around, selected gear up, then with both engines failed the only way to lower the gear is manually, the handles are on the floor aft of the first officers seat. Their would not have been time to access them between when they had lost both engines and were on the ground while also flying the aircraft. I'm not saying I know what happened, I'm saying that the key to preventing future accidents like this will be in the moments before they lost both engines. After they lost both engines it's clear they aircrew tried to very quickly turn the plane around and land the runway, I have pretty serious doubts that there was any actions that could've made that a successful landing, and if there was, they'll be found in a simulator not on the FDR of the aircraft that DIDN'T make the successful landing.

kermatt 2y ago

> The point of the investigation is to determine what went wrong before the crash became a certainty. Data about recovery efforts after system failures is also valuable. It can help improve procedures for similar future events.