Downfall-The Case Against Boeing (Netflix)
- Thread starter SeanD
- Start date
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
No. But turning the AP on (and assuming it stays on because it was properly in trim and the autopilot can be engaged) would disable the firing of MCAS. MCAS only fires in manual flight.
That said, this was not their goal of trying to put the AP on. It looks like it was a scripted move to put the AP on.
Maximilian_Jenius
Super User
Isn't the 400 the same size as the 800? The 900 and the 10 are the super stretches of the family I believe.
dustoff17
Still trying to reach the Top Shelf
Ahh, OK. Thank you
I misunderstood the sequence. I understood that the AP was on, they started having problem, took over manually and retrained while fighting the controls, then turned it back on. When they did this, the plane nosed over.
(This all from prelim so it’s probably old news)
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Well, no. The takeoff is manual. At some point, you can ask for the AP to be on (1,000 AGL min at our shop). In their case, with a sheared off AOA due to the bird strike, the CA side stick shaker went off the entire time from liftoff. They also suffered airspeed/altitude disagree messages. With the shaker and disagree messages, he asked for the AP on, I think it was 3 times. This doesn't hint they were trying to disable MCAS, rather, just a scripted routine response - AP On "like we always do." Frankly, I find it disturbing that the AP on was requested not just once but several times.
It's the stab trim cutout switches which they cutout (correctly) but then never pulled the power back from TO power. The stab trim was nearly impossible to trim manually at that high speed. But to be fair, the prelim report does seem to indicate the FO actually trimmed nose DOWN with the manual handle. Then reported to the CA he couldn't get the nose up. In their desperation, they re-engaged the stab trim cutout switches and MCAS activated again. If only they had used and held the stab trim electric switch on the yoke (like normal trimming) it would stop MCAS every time for 5 seconds. They re-engaged the trim motor switches, but then never trimmed nose up - just continued pulling the nose back. = Doomed.
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
Sorry for the multi-user quote (but not enough to not 
). I just watch the film and wanted to comment that the production/pacing were good. It's definitely directed to the "general public" and not pilat nerds or engineers, which is fine. I also wanted to compliment that they didn't use the "technique"of repeating the same thing multiple times to effectively stretch-out 15-minutes of content into an hour. It was steady progress through a story
The earliest MAX deliveries were to airlines outside the US, there were probably a lot more opportunities for an incident where there were more aircraft.
Good catch. If it were me, after being unable to manually trim up, I would probably manually attempt a small move of the trim wheel in the opposite direction to see if there would be any movement at all.
On the 737, trim units correspond directly to degrees of stabilizer movement (+4 TU = 0 deg), so the difference between 2.3 and 2.1 is a small deflection, and approaches the minimum sensitivity of what gets captured by the crash recorder.
This was news to me from the documentary. On the Ethiopian accident they depict the trim cutoff switches being flipped around 340 knots and the crew discovered the forces on the stabilizer at that speed made made manually moving the trim wheel impossible and they continued to accelerate downward. In the CGI recreation they also showed the throttles off-idle,but I don't know if that was accurate (hope not) which you indicate above!. Out of curiosity, what would happen if you went to Flaps 1 at 340 knots?
). I just watch the film and wanted to comment that the production/pacing were good. It's definitely directed to the "general public" and not pilat nerds or engineers, which is fine. I also wanted to compliment that they didn't use the "technique"of repeating the same thing multiple times to effectively stretch-out 15-minutes of content into an hour. It was steady progress through a storyThe earliest MAX deliveries were to airlines outside the US, there were probably a lot more opportunities for an incident where there were more aircraft.
Good catch. If it were me, after being unable to manually trim up, I would probably manually attempt a small move of the trim wheel in the opposite direction to see if there would be any movement at all.
On the 737, trim units correspond directly to degrees of stabilizer movement (+4 TU = 0 deg), so the difference between 2.3 and 2.1 is a small deflection, and approaches the minimum sensitivity of what gets captured by the crash recorder.
This was news to me from the documentary. On the Ethiopian accident they depict the trim cutoff switches being flipped around 340 knots and the crew discovered the forces on the stabilizer at that speed made made manually moving the trim wheel impossible and they continued to accelerate downward. In the CGI recreation they also showed the throttles off-idle,
jynxyjoe
Queso King
No, the kid got it right quote was cut off. Right after that, in my head cannon, he said "but the captain? Jesus!" Editor had a bunch of people talking at once after him and they rejoined with his words at the end. Watch the docu-drama again. One narrator references the aoa as an engine instrument. They drop the audio some and they erased reference to it in the captions, but that was a fairly bad job done.
Swa and aa had issues with inadvertant trim runways according to early reports, i never verified them. But their mechanics didnt find a way to (incorrectly change and halfass install) put that probe in backwards. Ethopian got some space between him and terra-firma but apparently made the choice to overspeed the airplane to its conclusion.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
Oh, some of you may be wondering whats the solution. Right now nothing happens without congress, BUT, what will they propose.
we're probably going to have to embrace the European way of paying engineering reps from now on. How it'd work over here: The company tells the FAA who they want to hire, the FAA gives approval if they like the candidate, can't be a company man. Then the Boeings of the worlds pay the FAA and the FAA pays the engineering rep. That way, the rep can't be influenced, the company can't fire him or threaten his pay. Doesn't fix a simulator • pilot bucking for a manager position lying, but it is the most likely fix.
we're probably going to have to embrace the European way of paying engineering reps from now on. How it'd work over here: The company tells the FAA who they want to hire, the FAA gives approval if they like the candidate, can't be a company man. Then the Boeings of the worlds pay the FAA and the FAA pays the engineering rep. That way, the rep can't be influenced, the company can't fire him or threaten his pay. Doesn't fix a simulator • pilot bucking for a manager position lying, but it is the most likely fix.
Minuteman
I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
"U.S. jury finds former Boeing 737 MAX pilot not guilty in fraud case
By David Shepardson
March 23 (Reuters) - A jury in Texas on Wednesday found a former chief technical pilot for Boeing (BA.N) accused of deceiving federal regulators evaluating the company's 737 MAX jet not guilty, court records showed.
Former Boeing pilot Mark Forkner was indicted in October on charges of scheming to defraud Boeing's U.S.-based airline customers to obtain tens of millions of dollars for Boeing.
The government alleged Forkner deceived the Federal Aviation Administration during its evaluation and certification of Boeing’s 737 MAX airplane.
Court records and a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Northern Texas confirmed Forkner was found not guilty on all counts.
David Gerger, a lawyer for Forkner, in a statement praised the "independent, smart, fair judge and jury." The FAA and Boeing declined to comment.
Forkner, who had faced up to 20 years in prison on each count, maintained his innocence.
The government had alleged Forkner provided the FAA Aircraft Evaluation Group with "materially false, inaccurate, and incomplete information" about a new part of the flight controls for the Boeing 737 MAX, called the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS).
MCAS was tied to two fatal 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people but the government noted it did not charge Forkner "with causing the crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 or Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302" and did not argue he caused them.
Prosecutors pointed to one message Forkner sent to a colleague in which he said he "basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)" about MCAS.
A judge dismissed two fraud counts in February related to MCAS saying the two charges could not proceed because they must involve a tangible airplane part.
Boeing in January 2021 agreed to pay more than $2.5 billion in fines and compensation after reaching a settlement with the U.S. Justice Department over the 737 MAX. The deferred prosecution agreement included a fine of $243.6 million and a $500 million crash-victim fund over fraud conspiracy charges related to the plane’s flawed design.
The two crashes cost Boeing more than $20 billion and led to the plane's 20-month grounding that was lifted in November 2020.
The Justice Department said the crashes "exposed fraudulent and deceptive conduct by employees of one of the world’s leading commercial airplane manufacturers."
U.S. House Transportation Committee Chair Peter DeFazio said in October that Forkner's indictment "should not be the end of the accountability for this colossal and tragic failure" and argued "senior leaders throughout Boeing are responsible for the culture of concealment that ultimately led to the 737 MAX crashes."
Forkner is the only person criminally charged to date in connection with the MAX."
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/KELV4GENFBJUJB6L4R3KWT2TJY.jpg)
www.reuters.com.
By David Shepardson
March 23 (Reuters) - A jury in Texas on Wednesday found a former chief technical pilot for Boeing (BA.N) accused of deceiving federal regulators evaluating the company's 737 MAX jet not guilty, court records showed.
Former Boeing pilot Mark Forkner was indicted in October on charges of scheming to defraud Boeing's U.S.-based airline customers to obtain tens of millions of dollars for Boeing.
The government alleged Forkner deceived the Federal Aviation Administration during its evaluation and certification of Boeing’s 737 MAX airplane.
Court records and a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Northern Texas confirmed Forkner was found not guilty on all counts.
David Gerger, a lawyer for Forkner, in a statement praised the "independent, smart, fair judge and jury." The FAA and Boeing declined to comment.
Forkner, who had faced up to 20 years in prison on each count, maintained his innocence.
The government had alleged Forkner provided the FAA Aircraft Evaluation Group with "materially false, inaccurate, and incomplete information" about a new part of the flight controls for the Boeing 737 MAX, called the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS).
MCAS was tied to two fatal 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people but the government noted it did not charge Forkner "with causing the crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 or Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302" and did not argue he caused them.
Prosecutors pointed to one message Forkner sent to a colleague in which he said he "basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)" about MCAS.
A judge dismissed two fraud counts in February related to MCAS saying the two charges could not proceed because they must involve a tangible airplane part.
Boeing in January 2021 agreed to pay more than $2.5 billion in fines and compensation after reaching a settlement with the U.S. Justice Department over the 737 MAX. The deferred prosecution agreement included a fine of $243.6 million and a $500 million crash-victim fund over fraud conspiracy charges related to the plane’s flawed design.
The two crashes cost Boeing more than $20 billion and led to the plane's 20-month grounding that was lifted in November 2020.
The Justice Department said the crashes "exposed fraudulent and deceptive conduct by employees of one of the world’s leading commercial airplane manufacturers."
U.S. House Transportation Committee Chair Peter DeFazio said in October that Forkner's indictment "should not be the end of the accountability for this colossal and tragic failure" and argued "senior leaders throughout Boeing are responsible for the culture of concealment that ultimately led to the 737 MAX crashes."
Forkner is the only person criminally charged to date in connection with the MAX."
U.S. jury finds former Boeing 737 MAX pilot not guilty in fraud case
A Texas jury on Wednesday found a former chief technical pilot for Boeing not guilty of deceiving federal regulators who approved the company's 737 MAX jet which later was involved in two crashes that killed 346 people.
www.reuters.com.
Murdoughnut
Well sized member
"U.S. jury finds former Boeing 737 MAX pilot not guilty in fraud case
By David Shepardson
March 23 (Reuters) - A jury in Texas on Wednesday found a former chief technical pilot for Boeing (BA.N) accused of deceiving federal regulators evaluating the company's 737 MAX jet not guilty, court records showed.
Former Boeing pilot Mark Forkner was indicted in October on charges of scheming to defraud Boeing's U.S.-based airline customers to obtain tens of millions of dollars for Boeing.
The government alleged Forkner deceived the Federal Aviation Administration during its evaluation and certification of Boeing’s 737 MAX airplane.
Court records and a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Northern Texas confirmed Forkner was found not guilty on all counts.
David Gerger, a lawyer for Forkner, in a statement praised the "independent, smart, fair judge and jury." The FAA and Boeing declined to comment.
Forkner, who had faced up to 20 years in prison on each count, maintained his innocence.
The government had alleged Forkner provided the FAA Aircraft Evaluation Group with "materially false, inaccurate, and incomplete information" about a new part of the flight controls for the Boeing 737 MAX, called the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS).
MCAS was tied to two fatal 737 MAX crashes that killed 346 people but the government noted it did not charge Forkner "with causing the crashes of Lion Air Flight 610 or Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302" and did not argue he caused them.
Prosecutors pointed to one message Forkner sent to a colleague in which he said he "basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly)" about MCAS.
A judge dismissed two fraud counts in February related to MCAS saying the two charges could not proceed because they must involve a tangible airplane part.
Boeing in January 2021 agreed to pay more than $2.5 billion in fines and compensation after reaching a settlement with the U.S. Justice Department over the 737 MAX. The deferred prosecution agreement included a fine of $243.6 million and a $500 million crash-victim fund over fraud conspiracy charges related to the plane’s flawed design.
The two crashes cost Boeing more than $20 billion and led to the plane's 20-month grounding that was lifted in November 2020.
The Justice Department said the crashes "exposed fraudulent and deceptive conduct by employees of one of the world’s leading commercial airplane manufacturers."
U.S. House Transportation Committee Chair Peter DeFazio said in October that Forkner's indictment "should not be the end of the accountability for this colossal and tragic failure" and argued "senior leaders throughout Boeing are responsible for the culture of concealment that ultimately led to the 737 MAX crashes."
Forkner is the only person criminally charged to date in connection with the MAX."
U.S. jury finds former Boeing 737 MAX pilot not guilty in fraud case
A Texas jury on Wednesday found a former chief technical pilot for Boeing not guilty of deceiving federal regulators who approved the company's 737 MAX jet which later was involved in two crashes that killed 346 people.
Another case of white collar crime going unpunished.
WacoFan
Bigly
I'm not sure if this guy was a scumbag or not. Even if he was unreformed scum, I got the distinct whiff of Boeing and the FAA putting out the "We got us a scapegoat and then it'll all get better" scent in the air. That he was the only one prosecuted out of an enormous pool of humans at Boeing. FAA, etc - it's like when the Manhattan DA indicted the one small Chinese-American bank for the 2008 meltdown and that is the only financial institution indicted.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
The fact the jury took only 2 hrs to deliberate and come back with not guilty is telling. I’ve maintained that everything Forkner wrote in his emails and demanded from those below him were basically direct orders from those above him. Nothing but a scapegoat here.
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
"Hey babe, I know weve both been busy for awhile, whatd ya say we hire a sitter, and just have a nite to ourselves, make a little dinner, some popcorn and watch a netflix documentary on how the airplane I fly could potentially turn against me and try to kill" ....You ladies man you!
knot4u
Repeat Offender
Do apostrophes work on whatever device you posted that from? Or were you just in such a hurry to post some line you think is funny and gave up on punctuation?"Hey babe, I know weve both been busy for awhile, whatd ya say we hire a sitter, and just have a nite to ourselves, make a little dinner, some popcorn and watch a netflix documentary on how the airplane I fly could potentially turn against me and try to kill" ....You ladies man you!
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
B. And the phrase I have in mind for you requires no apostrophes at all!
knot4u
Repeat Offender
?. I'm confused. Say what you think about me or anyone else, what do you think you're hiding behind and, more importantly, why are you hiding what you truly feel?
zmiller4
Well-Known Member
Omg you guys agree, and it’s super cute! Maybe there is hope for the world.