737 max groundings.

[Colonel]

Incredible that someone can get an ATP
and not know about runaway trim.

[Trey Kule]

When automation fails.....according to the heroes, they  take over and save the day.....

.....or not,

Seems both may have failed here.  Now lets talk about higher salaries for pilots.

[Colonel]

Hey, if you don't think you can turn all that crap off
and hand-fly as well as the four bar of Asiana 214,
well, I guess it's time to build another berm at SFO.

[quote]higher salaries for pilots[/quote]

Not sure about that.  When people finally figure out
that pilots can't take over after the automation fails,
well, it's time for single-pilot.  Then, no-pilot.

[BusDriver]

Trump is spot on: “I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot” 

[Trey Kule]

Higher salaries for pilots.....I think the sarcasm was lost on you CS.

The airlines have convinced the regulators, that minuimum experience and basic training is enough.  This kind of accident is just the start.  As the old school retires , they will become more and more prevalent. “Pilot error” will become the root cause of an even higher percentage of accidents.

Airliners are very complex pieces of machinery. Turning things off does sound like a simple solution,  but after thousands of hours droning through the sky, even the best pilots have their skills deteriorate.  The worst never had the skills ingrained in them to start. 

[David MacRay]

Maybe I am miss understanding everything about this but I'm going to type away here.

Seems from my rudimentary knowledge of the situation gained by skimming the article linked, a combination of design change in the thrust/drag couple trying to cause a high angle of attack, and the automation fighting that, trying to force the nose down, caused the plane to get in trouble.

I confess complete ignorance regarding what the pilots did or did not do. Whatever it was, they were unable to get the plane to fly to the destination and safely land.

[quote]
When people finally figure out
that pilots can't take over after the automation fails,
well, it's time for single-pilot.  Then, no-pilot.
[/quote]

Wouldn't the plane in this case still have done almost the exact same thing without anyone in the computer management area up front? Or did it require someone there to make things worse?

I am absolutely certain there will be pilotless drones flying cargo as soon as possible. By that I mean minutes after some companies can get permission and acquire the equipment.

In addition I bet well over 50% of the general public would buy a ticket, even on experimental pilotless flights today, for $25 dollars off the fare or larger allowable carry ons.

I can hear them say, "$25 fee to fly with a pilot? Forget that noise, Flights are already too expensive."

[Colonel]

[quote]The airlines have convinced the regulators, that minuimum experience and basic training is enough[/quote]

In most parts of the world, yes.  However you will note that the FAA
(admittedly for the strangest of reasons) mandated an ATPL for FAR
Part 121, right and left seat.  And coincidentally, the USA was the last
country to ground the 737 Max (I know, politics).


[quote]Turning things off does sound like a simple solution, 
but after thousands of hours droning through the sky,
even the best pilots have their skills deteriorate. 

The worst never had the skills ingrained in them to start. [/quote]

I have to remember that - it's the best description of the
"automation problem" that we have been talking about for
years, and that the rest of the world is finally waking up to.

I know I'm a cranky old guy in a leather jacket flying an obsolete
biplane, but there is no substitute for basic stick & rudder skills
and systems knowledge.

[Tailwind W10]

I'm certainly about the least qualified to comment on flying an airliner.  Having read quite a bit about the MCAS system back during the Lion Air aftermath I gather the system is essentially part of the autopilot, but operates to push the nose down specifically when the pilots are hand flying, with the autopilot turned off, and a high AOA condition is detected.  That first crash is suspected to revolve around a failed AOA sensor.

Honestly I get the disconnect.  The pilots are flying with the autopilot disabled, the airplane starts pushing nose down, they pull back.  The airplane pushes nose down harder, lather, rinse, repeat.  No one has told them about this system, Boeing says your standard 737 type rating will work with this airplane.  It requires them to pull the autopilot breakers to fix it, but the autopilot is turned off.  I understand why they'll be slow to put the dots together, if ever.

I do believe Boeing has screwed the pooch on this one.

Gerry

[Four Bars]

We might be overlooking a couple of things here.
This system apparently doesn’t compare information received from both left and right sides of the aircraft, so one failing AoA or pitot can cause it to activate and trim the aircraft nose down. The pilot noticing that big trim wheel with the white stripe rubbing against their leg can override it for a few seconds before it will reactivate and add even more trim. This might explain the roller-coaster rides. The reason the excursions got more divergent might be due to the pitching authority of the horizontal stabilizer versus the elevators. With the elevators being much smaller than the stabilizer, it doesn’t take much of a mismatch before the stabilizer decides where the airplane is going, no matter how hard the crews push or pull.
While this is happening, imagine trying to hand fly this thing with the stick shaker doing its job, shaking the hell out of your upper body( and eyes and brain) and good luck trying to run the thumb switches while scanning all that wonderful EFIS information in pretty colours with multiple aural warnings assaulting one of your other senses, too.
The crews that have survived this event recognized and reacted early enough to de power the stabilizer and sort out the good from the bad displays and aural information.
Like The Colonel and any decent instructor says, “Attitude plus power equals performance.”
With the right combination, the airplane HAS to perform, it doesn’t have any choice unless it’s in a downburst, a mountain wave or windshear.
Knowing what those combinations are for your particular bird only comes with experience and it takes conviction to set the pitch and power and ignore the plethora of misinformation while sorting things out.

[Liquid Charlie]

Reading the so of what has been said I think that part of the issue, as pointed out, is the experience and training. They set minimum training requirements and most airline train to this standard and not to a level of a standard it should be. I have witnessed flying hands and feet in the flight deck and it seems that has now become the standard. The new generation of pilot seems to always want to react at the speed of light and not sit back and take that extra second to make sure what they are seeing is what the reality actually is. Looking at the Boeing directive it seems you have lots of time to trouble shoot the issue. Quiet hands and feet are a must and now even the feet have been removed. Most of the heavy jets flying today over reaction will kill you before under reaction will.

Aircraft are fast approaching a level where pilot intervention in the extreme will hurt you. They are designed to fly themselves. This means adding to the complexity of training because of the necessity to deprogram muscle memory when switching types because airbus logic could conflict with boeing logic.