NationStates

See people, this is why we should ban airplanes and use blimps once more, they have a far greater track record, they're much cheaper to use and you can go longer distances with them.

Digital Planets wrote:See people, this is why we should ban airplanes and use blimps once more, they have a far greater track record, they're much cheaper to use and you can go longer distances with them.

There is some sense in your suggestion but just think about the dangers of such a craft. Just think back to the Hindenburg Disaster in 1937. Also we need to think back to MH-370 and how that crashed and how the wreckage was not found and only small parts have recently been found. I have mixed emotions about air travel, if I am being honest.

The New California Republic wrote:

Andsed wrote:
Uhh no. While some may call for better air safety people are not going to just stop using air travel as it is one of the fastest means of transportation.

I mean, it certainly was the case for airships because of Hindenberg etc, but it would take something truly cataclysmic to actually have any discernible effect on people's willingness to fly in planes, because we are quite dependent on it now.

tfw instead of dying instantly you burn to death in a fire.

Digital Planets wrote:See people, this is why we should ban airplanes and use blimps once more, they have a far greater track record, they're much cheaper to use and you can go longer distances with them.

You do realise that Helium is an incredibly finite resource, right?

Costa Fierro wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:I mean, it certainly was the case for airships because of Hindenberg etc, but it would take something truly cataclysmic to actually have any discernible effect on people's willingness to fly in planes, because we are quite dependent on it now.

tfw instead of dying instantly you burn to death in a fire.

I mean, either of those things can happen in a plane or an airship crash, depending on the circumstances of the crash.

Vassenor wrote:

Digital Planets wrote:See people, this is why we should ban airplanes and use blimps once more, they have a far greater track record, they're much cheaper to use and you can go longer distances with them.

You do realise that Helium is an incredibly finite resource, right?

I mean, our sun produces more of it all the time.

This is eerily similar to the LionAir crash... I actually hope it was the MCAS that caused the crash and not just pure coincidence (which, going by the similarities, it likely was the MCAS) so Boeing steps up and does something to rectify it soon. I'm not so certain on how it works but if it doesn't have some type of activation restriction based on altitude it's the stupidest oversight I've ever seen.

Galloism wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
You do realise that Helium is an incredibly finite resource, right?

I mean, our sun produces more of it all the time.

I would've thought it would be obvious that I was talking about human accessible helium.

But if you have a mechanism for harvesting helium from the core of the Sun, let's hear it.

The New California Republic wrote:

Costa Fierro wrote:
tfw instead of dying instantly you burn to death in a fire.

I mean, either of those things can happen in a plane or an airship crash, depending on the circumstances of the crash.

In the instances where aircraft have caught fire, the smoke from all the flammable crap in the cabin incapacitated people before they were burned. See Saudia Flight 301.

Vassenor wrote:

Galloism wrote:I mean, our sun produces more of it all the time.

I would've thought it would be obvious that I was talking about human accessible helium.

Where's the fun in that?

But if you have a mechanism for harvesting helium from the core of the Sun, let's hear it.

I'm sure Elon Musk can figure it out.

Lanorth wrote:Slovak MP Anton Hrnko later confirmed via Facebook that his wife and two children were on the plane.

Good Lord.

Galloism wrote:

Vassenor wrote:
I would've thought it would be obvious that I was talking about human accessible helium.

Where's the fun in that?

But if you have a mechanism for harvesting helium from the core of the Sun, let's hear it.

I'm sure Elon Musk can figure it out.

We'd be better off just firing Elon into the sun.

Neu Leonstein wrote:Aside from this obviously being a tragedy, it's also particularly sad that this happened to Ethiopian Air. Because it looks increasingly like the problem is with this particular new line of aircraft rather than with the airline. But because it's from Africa, and people don't bother distinguishing African airlines, you just know that at kitchen tables around the world this will just be a) dismissed and/or b) used to reinforce stereotypes of Africa and Africans stuck in incapacitated anarchy.

Which is to say that I quite like Ethiopian Air.

Ethiopian is one of the best, if not the best airline in Africa. It's a shame that that they'll be blamed for this (by uninformed people) when the blame clearly lies with Boeing.

They just bought a number of Dreamliners from Boeing a few years ago, too... I hope those don't turn out to be faulty next.

This is a good article about these new Boeings, written after the Lion Air crash: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/03/worl ... ilots.html

Short summary: trying to rush out a competing model to a new Airbus plane with more fuel efficiency, Boeing put bigger engines on the plane which lower the centre of gravity and require this new altitude stabilisation system MCAS to keep everything on the level in a crisis situation. Which also means that what the pilot needs to do in case of trouble in a 737 MAX is very different to what they need to do in a regular 737. If the pilot doesn't receive training on the new system, and they're used to the older plane, then there's a risk of trouble.

But Boeing didn't want to require airlines to spend more on training to fly the new plane, so they submitted to the FAA that there differences weren't significant. And the FAA (being good buddies with Boeing when it comes to competing with those mean foreigners) waved it through without a requirement to train pilots on the new system.

Which leaves it up to the airlines to do the research and do the new training despite there not being an official requirement to do so.

Neu Leonstein wrote:This is a good article about these new Boeings, written after the Lion Air crash: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/03/worl ... ilots.html

Short summary: trying to rush out a competing model to a new Airbus plane with more fuel efficiency, Boeing put bigger engines on the plane which lower the centre of gravity and require this new altitude stabilisation system MCAS to keep everything on the level in a crisis situation. Which also means that what the pilot needs to do in case of trouble in a 737 MAX is very different to what they need to do in a regular 737. If the pilot doesn't receive training on the new system, and they're used to the older plane, then there's a risk of trouble.

But Boeing didn't want to require airlines to spend more on training to fly the new plane, so they submitted to the FAA that there differences weren't significant. And the FAA (being good buddies with Boeing when it comes to competing with those mean foreigners) waved it through without a requirement to train pilots on the new system.

Which leaves it up to the airlines to do the research and do the new training despite there not being an official requirement to do so.

So 737's will keep falling out of the sky because Boeing couldn't be arsed requiring pilots to have proper training?

Costa Fierro wrote:

Neu Leonstein wrote:This is a good article about these new Boeings, written after the Lion Air crash: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/03/worl ... ilots.html

Short summary: trying to rush out a competing model to a new Airbus plane with more fuel efficiency, Boeing put bigger engines on the plane which lower the centre of gravity and require this new altitude stabilisation system MCAS to keep everything on the level in a crisis situation. Which also means that what the pilot needs to do in case of trouble in a 737 MAX is very different to what they need to do in a regular 737. If the pilot doesn't receive training on the new system, and they're used to the older plane, then there's a risk of trouble.

But Boeing didn't want to require airlines to spend more on training to fly the new plane, so they submitted to the FAA that there differences weren't significant. And the FAA (being good buddies with Boeing when it comes to competing with those mean foreigners) waved it through without a requirement to train pilots on the new system.

Which leaves it up to the airlines to do the research and do the new training despite there not being an official requirement to do so.

So 737's will keep falling out of the sky because Boeing couldn't be arsed requiring pilots to have proper training?

In short, yeah. MCAS, similar to the older but known envelope protection system on the Airbus, takes full control of the aircraft, if it believes something bad is happening.

Problem is that if you have a set of faulty airspeed indicators, bank, angle of attack, you name it, the aircraft could purposely bring the aircraft down, believing that it is solving a dangerous situation.

The Airbuses have always had such a system, and you are trained to disengage it with a click of a button. But the 737 has never had such a system until the MAX. And seems like nobody is telling the pilots. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-15/third-pilots-union-raises-concern-about-boeing-s-737-max-jet

Great Eldaria wrote:

Costa Fierro wrote:
So 737's will keep falling out of the sky because Boeing couldn't be arsed requiring pilots to have proper training?

In short, yeah. MCAS, similar to the older but known envelope protection system on the Airbus, takes full control of the aircraft, if it believes something bad is happening.

Problem is that if you have a set of faulty airspeed indicators, bank, angle of attack, you name it, the aircraft could purposely bring the aircraft down, believing that it is solving a dangerous situation.

The Airbuses have always had such a system, and you are trained to disengage it with a click of a button. But the 737 has never had such a system until the MAX. And seems like nobody is telling the pilots. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-15/third-pilots-union-raises-concern-about-boeing-s-737-max-jet

It doesn't seem like it, Boeing basically said "don't worry about it" so it could rush planes out of the factory to customers.

If these are true, there should be grounds for a massive lawsuit to be levied against Boeing.

a Greek man has said that he was due to board the flight but arrived at the gate two minutes late.

In a Facebook post, Antonis Mavropoulos shared an image of his ticket and said it was his "lucky day".

"I was angry because nobody helped me to reach the gate on time," he wrote. "I'm grateful to be alive."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-47519467

Don't rub people's faces in it too much mate, for fuck's sake.

Aeritai wrote:What's with all of these plane crashes? If this keeps up people will never use air travel ever again.

Vastly reducing the amount of air travel would be a positive outcome. Though there have been aircrashes ever since we started passenger flights, so it is seems to have little effect as a deterrent.

Costa Fierro wrote:It doesn't seem like it, Boeing basically said "don't worry about it" so it could rush planes out of the factory to customers.

If these are true, there should be grounds for a massive lawsuit to be levied against Boeing.

Yep, that was what I was trying to imply, bad wording from me. It was at least the case with the Lion Air crash. After that crash FAA (and Boeing) had issued Airworthiness Directive to remind operators of how to deal with the runaway stabilizer, i.e. how to fix the problem. But it is not like that really helped though. How to solve the problem is burried deep in the operating manual, labeled as runaway stabilizer problem, that could happen to any aircraft, and not linked to the MCAS. It took the Lion air accident, for US pilot unions to realize what was happening. In the US at least, pilots are now fully aware on how to deal with the issue, but only thanks to the awarness of what the MCAS is, and how it is able to controll the stabilizer. I personaly at least, don't know what kind of follow-up other operators have had with their pilots.

On 20 November, Boeing was to hold a conference call with 737 Max operators to detail the new MCAS not present in the Next Generation models. But the conference call was cancelled later, to be replaced by a series of regional calls to "allow more questions".

So at least for the Lion Air crash, Boeing is pushing stuff under the carpet, bit terrifying... Regarding the Ethiopian accident, we don't know if it has anything with the MCAS to do yet. We can only speculate.

---

(You guys know that Boeing was possibly involved in cover up of the Boeing 737 rudder issues. "Walz, of Parker Bertea, was assigned to hand-carry the servo valve to Irvine. John Calvin, the quality-control engineer from Boeing, instructed an assistant to pack up the parts. According to court records, the assistant left the room and returned with a taped package, which he handed to Walz, who carried it on a flight to Southern California. When Walz opened the package that afternoon at the Parker Bertea plant, he discovered that three servo-valve parts were missing: a spring, spring guide and end cap. Boeing, citing ongoing litigation, has never explained why those three parts were left out of the package forwarded to Irvine.")

The New California Republic wrote:

a Greek man has said that he was due to board the flight but arrived at the gate two minutes late.

In a Facebook post, Antonis Mavropoulos shared an image of his ticket and said it was his "lucky day".

"I was angry because nobody helped me to reach the gate on time," he wrote. "I'm grateful to be alive."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-47519467

Don't rub people's faces in it too much mate, for fuck's sake.

It's only natural if one's way to cope with such a life-changing incidence is to share it to others. The guy was - and probably still is - in an emotional rollercoaster while he wrote this.

I've just discovered that one of our colleagues from the Norwegian Red Cross was on the plane.

https://twitter.com/rodekorsnorge/statu ... 7012136961

Wow Boeing, you killed my Aviation and Defense stock

The Archregimancy wrote:I've just discovered that one of our colleagues from the Norwegian Red Cross was on the plane.

https://twitter.com/rodekorsnorge/statu ... 7012136961

Condolences.

Oh well, Rest in Peace to all the passengers on board.