The mire gets deeper for Boeing

They found the black box"which is orange", so some answers may be coming soon.
 
Capt. Steve on the tube thinks that the pilot flying may have called for gear up and the co-pilot accidentally retracted the flaps decreasing lift and not reducing the drag of the gear.
He said that once the pilot throttles up for takeoff the 787 will throw all kinds of warnings if the aircraft's settings aren't properly set for takeoff.
I know nothing about flying but I like his videos
OMG. I'd rather see a malfunction than have a person kill that many people with a boneheaded mistake. What I have seen on a lot of 'Mayday' episodes is that the plane flies its own way if it gets some bad info. Just watched one where the pilots were diving to get to the glide slope into the airport and one bad altimeter (out of three) made the plane think that it was already on the ground and auto throttled the engines back with the pilots being too busy to notice and when they expected to have power, they didn't and they were too low to see it and correct it in time.
 
OMG. I'd rather see a malfunction than have a person kill that many people with a boneheaded mistake. What I have seen on a lot of 'Mayday' episodes is that the plane flies its own way if it gets some bad info. Just watched one where the pilots were diving to get to the glide slope into the airport and one bad altimeter (out of three) made the plane think that it was already on the ground and auto throttled the engines back with the pilots being too busy to notice and when they expected to have power, they didn't and they were too low to see it and correct it in time.
There is this condition we look for called the "Stabilized Approach". Diving to get on the GS is not stabilized and the approach should be abandoned. Compounding a bad situation by doing stupid stuff can result in a real mess. That holds true in every day life, but when a couple hundred souls are depending on your action so they can wake up the next morning you need to get it right.

I would rather not speculate but one thing keeps coming to mind, and that is the human factor, whether it's pilot error, faulty maintenance or shoddy risk assessment (to avoid a massive bird strike, etc.). Take offs are optional...landings are not.
 
There is this condition we look for called the "Stabilized Approach". Diving to get on the GS is not stabilized and the approach should be abandoned. Compounding a bad situation by doing stupid stuff can result in a real mess. That holds true in every day life, but when a couple hundred souls are depending on your action so they can wake up the next morning you need to get it right.

I would rather not speculate but one thing keeps coming to mind, and that is the human factor, whether it's pilot error, faulty maintenance or shoddy risk assessment (to avoid a massive bird strike, etc.). Take offs are optional...landings are not.
Yes, it was chancy way to approach, but everybody did it and some pilots had even experienced throttling back but were able to compensate. This conditions in this case were such that the throttling back happened at a very critical time that wasn't picked up by the pilots.
 
Saw the latest from Captain Steve today and the video we've been seeing. The original was a COPY video of a video. It's much clearer and he pointed out that it appears that the RAT deployed underneath the plane, meaning there was a major failure of electric, engines or hydraulics. This is a telling detail.
 
Talked with my son last night (767 pilot) and he confirmed to me that the RAT deploys automatically to run the electric that in turn runs many other systems. after a dual engine failure, the cause of which to be determined.
 
Gear down...flaps up fyll load fuel and people 100 degree temps...sink rate was catastrophic...Probably pilot error. Gear goes up before the flaps
 
Gear down...flaps up fyll load fuel and people 100 degree temps...sink rate was catastrophic...Probably pilot error. Gear goes up before the flaps
Photos of the wreckage show the flaps deployed in takeoff position (Partial extension). When and how they were deployed TBD, but the "expert" said they were highly unlikely to have extended in the impact..
 
Saw the latest from Captain Steve today and the video we've been seeing. The original was a COPY video of a video. It's much clearer and he pointed out that it appears that the RAT deployed underneath the plane, meaning there was a major failure of electric, engines or hydraulics. This is a telling detail.
The RAT was plain to hear on the cellphone video posted by the BBC. I didn't know what the noise was. I thought maybe it was the noise of a bird strike damage turbofan.

 
Photos of the wreckage show the flaps deployed in takeoff position (Partial extension). When and how they were deployed TBD, but the "expert" said they were highly unlikely to have extended in the impact..
Flaps are usually operated using a screw jack setup. From the air disaster shows I've watched, it is easy to tell if the flaps were in a position set by the crew, or ended up where they are due to impact.
 
Anyone saw the Boeing Documentary on Netflix?

When they went out of their way to make shareholders richer they lost their focus. The Boeing of today is just a shadow of what it was.
 
We will know what happened in a few months. Boeing may or may not be at fault here, but they have sure lost their mojo from the Apollo days. Perhaps it is a universal problem of too many bean counters telling too many engineers what to do and how to do it.
 
This issue translates to all forms of transportation. Shipping, aircraft, I've seen it on the railroad, even trucking.
Not just new hires either.
Pull your head out of the screen and fly, drive, pilot the darn vehicle!!!!!!!!
 
Anyone saw the Boeing Documentary on Netflix?

When they went out of their way to make shareholders richer they lost their focus. The Boeing of today is just a shadow of what it was.
Back when the 737 Max debacle began, my financial advisor recommended Boeing stock. I flat-out told him no and not because of the recent crashes. I had experience with Boein, both in working on its "once-great" aircraft and knowing guys who worked at Boeing then. None of them had much good to say. The 737 Max was the tip of a sinking Titanic.
 
It's odd that the topic of Boeing should come up here, because I was just discussing investing with my best friend the other day and I told him this story. I made some stock purchases when the market crashed during the pandemic and Boeing was a major one. They were dealing with the 737 Max-8/9 crashes and other issues, air travel had bottomed out and airlines were cancelling new plane purchases left and right so naturally their stock had sunk bigly. I bought a bunch because I was certain that the pandemic would end and air travel would pick back up (with a corresponding increase in new plane sales), and they would handle the 737 mess easily because it was their biggest seller. Plus they are a major defense contractor and also had a new crew capsule in testing for NASA so things were looking up, up and away! (y)

However...

Without exception, Boeing managed to bungle EVERY. SINGLE. THING. - including their contract negotiations. And their stock made a tepid recovery at best. It was possibly one of my worst picks. I made enough on other stock purchases at that time to pay cash for my 2024 Chevy Silverado 2500HD - but Boeing wasn't any help at all! :mad: I sold every share I had last year and never looked back.
 
Jack Boeing is spinning in his grave.

This is the company that made the world beater jet airliner (707) from the jet tanker (KC-135) that was made to keep the war hammer (B-52) flying 24/7/365 against any Soviet threat in the 1950's

How the mighty have fallen.
 
Let me offer something I've not heard anywhere. I am a pilot of nearly 30 years but don't fly jets but have quite a few good friends that have a massive amount of turbine time.

One of my very good friends has flown since Vietnam and for the past 45 years been a chief pilot or operations director for several hospitals helicopter services.

It was probably in the 80's my friend had an unbelievable crash in a Bell 222. The hospital had just purchased 2 used 222's and my friend who was the pilot, the head of the program, a nurse and a paramedic were on board. It was a beautiful fall Saturday and the state university had just finished a football game. Over 70,000 fans were in the street and my friend and crew were scouting emergency landing sights in and around the University.

To shorten the story, they were about 75ft in altitude over an intersection when both turbines shut down. It's a twin jet and can fly on one engine but both failed. My friend had thousands of hours experience flying Cobras in the army and quickly responded. His comment to me is all he could do was glide 45 degrees to his crash site. With both turbines out at that altitude there virtually no chance of autorotation. Fortunately he maintained enough control to guide it to a crash in the middle of an intersection.

The aircraft skidded across the top of 3 cars with the fuel tank drain getting knocked offered by the third car. It hit in the intersection and sparks ignited the fuel. It was absolute a miracle, all the crew walked away with my friend sustaining a minor shoulder injury and the nurse had a 2nd degree burn on her leg due to her stocking melting to her leg due to the intense heat.

Another miracle, no one on the ground even got a scratch but the 223 became a pile of twisted metal that was hardly recognizable as a helicopter.

Now the answer of how this happened. Jet engines must be governed somehow. The engines on the 222 used a singular computer that controlled turbine speed, torque, temp and etc. the computer had been replaced but was not calibrated to factory spec as there was no field procedure to do so. I had to be factory calibrated. The computer had been replaced just before the hospital purchased both aircraft.

The computer sensed over speed and torque and tried to shut them down to a safe level although the signals were false in error. No over speed or torque had occurred.

I would propose a theory that the governing computer or sensor, module failed causing a shut down of the engines. Just a theory based on one man's experience.
 
Last edited:
However...

Without exception, Boeing managed to bungle EVERY. SINGLE. THING. - including their contract negotiations. And their stock made a tepid recovery at best. It was possibly one of my worst picks. I made enough on other stock purchases at that time to pay cash for my 2024 Chevy Silverado 2500HD - but Boeing wasn't any help at all! :mad: I sold every share I had last year and never looked back.
This is what happens when you let your company (Boeing) be taken over by the management of the failing company (McDonnell/Douglas) you are supposedly buying. One pundit described it as "McD took over Boeing using Boeing's money".
 
Back
Top