Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 317 posts

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#121

Post by snuxoll »

totally wrote: post #112
dahart wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the attempt to be diplomatic, and I agree that using average pilots is sensible. But, with respect, I could not disagree more with the rest of that. > Blame is a loaded word. Boeing’s response to the accidents was to blame the pilots, there is precedent for this word in this situation. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/business/american-airlines-bo... > Boeing assumed that pilots could be relied upon No, Bo…

It sounds like you're advocating for blame-ful post mortems. Is that the case and what's your reasoning?

Not playing the blame game is what you do when you have a development team figuring out what went wrong when something went down for a couple hours.

This is a corporation putting a product on the market with a critical safety system that lacked redundancy and poor training given to pilots. Yes, there is blame to be placed here. Individuals who worked on the system aren’t the issue here, a greedy corporation is and I feel no sympathy for the company itself.

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#123

Post by tomekn »

totally wrote: post #112
dahart wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the attempt to be diplomatic, and I agree that using average pilots is sensible. But, with respect, I could not disagree more with the rest of that. > Blame is a loaded word. Boeing’s response to the accidents was to blame the pilots, there is precedent for this word in this situation. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/business/american-airlines-bo... > Boeing assumed that pilots could be relied upon No, Bo…

It sounds like you're advocating for blame-ful post mortems. Is that the case and what's your reasoning?

There is a difference between what we in tech consider a post-mortem, and a more literal one.

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#124

Post by bennylope »

totally wrote: post #112
dahart wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the attempt to be diplomatic, and I agree that using average pilots is sensible. But, with respect, I could not disagree more with the rest of that. > Blame is a loaded word. Boeing’s response to the accidents was to blame the pilots, there is precedent for this word in this situation. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/business/american-airlines-bo... > Boeing assumed that pilots could be relied upon No, Bo…

It sounds like you're advocating for blame-ful post mortems. Is that the case and what's your reasoning?

This wasn't a web service that was unavailable for a couple hours; planes crashed and people died.

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#126

Post by wsy »

totally wrote: post #112
dahart wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the attempt to be diplomatic, and I agree that using average pilots is sensible. But, with respect, I could not disagree more with the rest of that. > Blame is a loaded word. Boeing’s response to the accidents was to blame the pilots, there is precedent for this word in this situation. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/business/american-airlines-bo... > Boeing assumed that pilots could be relied upon No, Bo…

It sounds like you're advocating for blame-ful post mortems. Is that the case and what's your reasoning?

The essence of successful post mortems is getting the fact collection right, before discussing how to prevent the issue. The grandparent's summary omitted essential facts.

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#127

Post by pdonis »

kayfox wrote: post #115
pdonis wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there are many reported incidents from US pilots of stability trim incidents in the FAA's database which, in hindsight, were due to MCAS. The pilots couldn't identify them as such at the time because, of course, they didn't know MCAS existed. But they were able to figure out the corrective action in time to maintain safe flight. (The reports also criticize the flight manual for being inadequate.) https://www.goo…

Most of those reports involved the autopilot or were while flaps were extended, which disables MCAS. The ones that did not were complaining about not being informed about MCAS and not about it actuating. There were even incidents reported as being MCAS that did not involve stabilizer trim or a 737 MAX.

Reports like the one where the plane started descending when autopilot was engaged are still relevant because they indicate issues with the angle of attack sensor, which is also what MCAS relies on.

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#128

Post by [deleted] »

sudhirj wrote: post #95
rowanG077 wrote: post #81

Actually they must use the worst pilots. If they use average pilots that means 50% of the pilots might be out of their depth flying that plane. What kind of insanity is this?

This assumes the skill variance among pilots is pretty low. Average not in skill (I don’t think there’s a way to rate or rank pilots) but in specialised Boeing plane specific training. The problem with Boeing’s assumption was that pilots would have specialised training on that model, and the regulators seem to be trying to remediate that.

[deleted]

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#129

Post by wtvanhest »

totally wrote: post #112
dahart wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the attempt to be diplomatic, and I agree that using average pilots is sensible. But, with respect, I could not disagree more with the rest of that. > Blame is a loaded word. Boeing’s response to the accidents was to blame the pilots, there is precedent for this word in this situation. https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/23/business/american-airlines-bo... > Boeing assumed that pilots could be relied upon No, Bo…

It sounds like you're advocating for blame-ful post mortems. Is that the case and what's your reasoning?

There is a nuance to his/her comments that may be being lost.

When an airliner goes down, the airline, the pilots union and the airline manufacturer all point fingers.

That is what happens. When Boeing says we should use "average pilots" there is subtly in the statement that assigns blame.

Boeing should have said, "we should use pilots who are trained through normal training procedures, rather than over trained test pilots."

That statement would not have assigned blame and OP is probably correct that the statement choice was intentionally designed to shift blame back to the pilots.

Re: Plane Tests Must Use Average Pilots, NTSB Says After 737 Max Crashes

#130

Post by davinic »

pdonis wrote: post #111
jfim wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has there been a documented occurrence of a US pilot encountering an MCAS failure in the US and correctly dealing with it?

Yes, there are many reported incidents from US pilots of stability trim incidents in the FAA's database which, in hindsight, were due to MCAS. The pilots couldn't identify them as such at the time because, of course, they didn't know MCAS existed. But they were able to figure out the corrective action in time to maintain safe flight. (The reports also criticize the flight manual for being inadequate.) https://www.goo…

Also all of the US-based MAXs had the optional AoA Sensor Disagree indicator, which would instantly show the source of the issue. The international pilots were in the dark because Boeing turned a critical safety feature into a revenue stream.
Post reply on HN