Lion Air 737MAX8 Crashed Jakarta to Pangkal Pinang

N212R · Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:58 pm

scbriml wrote:
N212R wrote:
My last hourly update said the search was continuing. Did you not sign up for hourly updates?

Fool me once in a while, my problem. Fool me every hour, your problem.

SimpleFlying · Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:50 am

N212R wrote:
scbriml wrote:
N212R wrote:
My last hourly update said the search was continuing. Did you not sign up for hourly updates?

Fool me once in a while, my problem. Fool me every hour, your problem.

This is the latest news:

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lion-air-charters-ship-to-search-for-jt610-recorder-454497/

As I have been suspecting. It took a while because of dispute on who was going to fund the new seach vessel. The NTSC didn't have the fund to pay for a new search vessel. But finally Lion Air agreed to pay for new search vessel.

PlanesNTrains · Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:51 am

N212R wrote:
scbriml wrote:
N212R wrote:
My last hourly update said the search was continuing. Did you not sign up for hourly updates?

Fool me once in a while, my problem. Fool me every hour, your problem.

The problem is you are creating a strawman. Nobody has to update you on anything. The boat is there. Let it do it’s thing.

mandala499 · Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:19 pm

zeke wrote:
This is similar to the Turkish 737 crash into AMS where the aircraft automatically brought the thrust back to idle because of a radalt fault, it thought it should land.

I wonder, did any report used the word "uncommanded" thrust lever movement? If not, then I don't think this trim movement for MCAS should be treated as "uncommanded" either... #justsayin...

StTim wrote:
Why is it that people are looking to blame a single point of failure?

They want simple answers to complex problems... this leads to... well... you know...

smartplane wrote:
Surely this is the key part of the AD, because it's correcting / reversing claims made that 737 pilots were briefed / aware of different 737 flight characteristics. If they were, it wouldn't need to be issued. And certainly not so urgently.

A lot of people tend to miss this very important point.

smartplane wrote:
The million dollar question. Is this sufficient to remove the common type rating? Do these models comply with certification requirements?

IMHO, the simple answer is NO. Just add the material in onto the training for differences... done.

ikramerica wrote:
The MECHANIC was on board and should have known it. It was in HIS manuals. And one would assume that if you put a mechanic on the flight to monitor a system, he should, I don't know, maybe, UNDERSTAND THE DAMN SYSTEM!

I can understand the pilots screwing up, but in this case, Lion had a mechanic on board to specifically monitor this and he should have been versed in the systems and how to disable them.

Incorrect. The "mechanic" onboard is not to monitor the system. He's there to release the aircraft with deferred items if needed be, or ground the aircraft, on an outstation. This is common practice in Indonesia on flights to certain outstations, especially with a new variant of an aircraft that require additional qualifications by the engineers. They are often not in the cockpit in critical phases on flight, they sit in the passenger cabin.

patplan · Mon Dec 31, 2018 2:21 pm

mandala499 wrote:
StTim wrote:
Why is it that people are looking to blame a single point of failure?

They want simple answers to complex problems... this leads to... well... you know...

They want to blame the trigger. The thing is without any other faults/weaknesses lining up at the same inopportune time, there won't be any accident to speak of.

BTW, any "leaks" or new "info" with regard to the CVR's search effort currently undertaken by that MPV Everest vessel and crews??

sgrow787 · Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:44 am

StTim wrote:
ikramerica wrote:
N212R wrote:
Any updates on the hunt for the CVR? Don't all speak up at once....

If the copilots family is already filing a lawsuit they must be confident it won’t be found.

Please explain your rationale for that statement.

There's a better than 50% chance the pilots got confused. The FDR points to that (recurring trim up input from pilots, in a repeating pattern over 24 MCAS cycles). The CVR will confirm or deny it.

stiphy · Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:11 am

Lion air ends search for CVR:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/03/lio ... g-737.html

Sean

sgrow787 · Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:28 am

stiphy wrote:
Lion air ends search for CVR:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/03/lio ... g-737.html

Sean

Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

scbriml · Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:39 am

sgrow787 wrote:
Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

Any evidence to support your "theory"? Just wondering.

StTim · Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:44 am

Why do conspiracy theories need evidence? Seems to me they do best with no evidence. As they did not find the CVR then there is no evidence to produce.

FrenchPotatoEye · Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:15 am

sgrow787 wrote:
stiphy wrote:
Lion air ends search for CVR:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/03/lio ... g-737.html

Sean

Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

Agreed.

That they cannot locate this device in less than 40m water after 2 months suggests more then sheer incompetence.

Coupled with the recent Wall Street Journal piece highlighting the Lion Air failure to properly calibrate the AoA sensors, it's very clear that the MAX was not the problem.

FredrikHAD · Thu Jan 03, 2019 11:47 am

Isn’t finding the CVR the responsibility of the local ”AIB”, aided by rescue services and the police?

neutronstar73 · Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:34 pm

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
sgrow787 wrote:
stiphy wrote:
Lion air ends search for CVR:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/03/lio ... g-737.html

Sean

Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

Agreed.

That they cannot locate this device in less than 40m water after 2 months suggests more then sheer incompetence.

Coupled with the recent Wall Street Journal piece highlighting the Lion Air failure to properly calibrate the AoA sensors, it's very clear that the MAX was not the problem.

Ahhh...but that would not fit the wild theory of some here that it HAS TO BE BOEING'S FAULT, not due to incompetent pilots or insufficient maintenance procedures. I mean, if it were errors in pilots or errors in Lion Air's maintenance procedures, then some people on A.net will lose their credibility because they have BANKED everything on the fact that the MAX is crappy and Boeing is garbage.

FrenchPotatoEye · Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:43 pm

neutronstar73 wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
sgrow787 wrote:

Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

Agreed.

That they cannot locate this device in less than 40m water after 2 months suggests more then sheer incompetence.

Coupled with the recent Wall Street Journal piece highlighting the Lion Air failure to properly calibrate the AoA sensors, it's very clear that the MAX was not the problem.

Ahhh...but that would not fit the wild theory of some here that it HAS TO BE BOEING'S FAULT, not due to incompetent pilots or insufficient maintenance procedures. I mean, if it were errors in pilots or errors in Lion Air's maintenance procedures, then some people on A.net will lose their credibility because they have BANKED everything on the fact that the MAX is crappy and Boeing is garbage.

Well, disappointment comes in many forms! :bouncy:

Hopefully though, the CVR is recovered asap so the jigsaw pieces can be put together for the benefit of the industry.

5427247845 · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:00 pm

neutronstar73 wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
sgrow787 wrote:

Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

Agreed.

That they cannot locate this device in less than 40m water after 2 months suggests more then sheer incompetence.

Coupled with the recent Wall Street Journal piece highlighting the Lion Air failure to properly calibrate the AoA sensors, it's very clear that the MAX was not the problem.

Ahhh...but that would not fit the wild theory of some here that it HAS TO BE BOEING'S FAULT, not due to incompetent pilots or insufficient maintenance procedures. I mean, if it were errors in pilots or errors in Lion Air's maintenance procedures, then some people on A.net will lose their credibility because they have BANKED everything on the fact that the MAX is crappy and Boeing is garbage.

IMHO both Lion Air and Boeing are to blame.

ErichHartmann · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:02 pm

The search for the CVR is not over, yet.

https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1OX0B8

StTim · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:04 pm

marcelh wrote:
neutronstar73 wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Agreed.

That they cannot locate this device in less than 40m water after 2 months suggests more then sheer incompetence.

Coupled with the recent Wall Street Journal piece highlighting the Lion Air failure to properly calibrate the AoA sensors, it's very clear that the MAX was not the problem.

Ahhh...but that would not fit the wild theory of some here that it HAS TO BE BOEING'S FAULT, not due to incompetent pilots or insufficient maintenance procedures. I mean, if it were errors in pilots or errors in Lion Air's maintenance procedures, then some people on A.net will lose their credibility because they have BANKED everything on the fact that the MAX is crappy and Boeing is garbage.

IMHO both Lion Air and Boeing are to blame.

You also missed out the FAA who must share at least some element of blame. As I have said all along no one thing is normally the cause of such events. As someone else note the Swiss cheese holes need to align.

scbriml · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:11 pm

neutronstar73 wrote:
Ahhh...but that would not fit the wild theory of some here that it HAS TO BE BOEING'S FAULT, not due to incompetent pilots or insufficient maintenance procedures. I mean, if it were errors in pilots or errors in Lion Air's maintenance procedures, then some people on A.net will lose their credibility because they have BANKED everything on the fact that the MAX is crappy and Boeing is garbage.

So pretty much the same as AF447, but with the shoe on the other foot?

MSPNWA · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:12 pm

sgrow787 wrote:
Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

The result I was expecting from this search. Or should we say "search"?

scbriml wrote:
Any evidence to support your "theory"? Just wondering.

The fact that it hasn't been made available for investigation yet is evidence enough that something wrong may be up.

SimpleFlying · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:19 pm

sgrow787 wrote:
stiphy wrote:
Lion air ends search for CVR:

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2019/01/03/lio ... g-737.html

Sean

Well there you go. Afraid of what they might find. Or perhaps worse, they found it and found a place for it, so no longer a need to pretend to search.

https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN1OX0B8

A paragraph from the above news said:

"Indonesian investigators previously said that bureaucratic wrangling and funding problems had hampered the search for the Lion Air CVR and they had turned to the airline for help."

If Boeing is very sure that it is absolutely not their fault, why didn't Boeing fund the search? The issue with Indonesian government is about funding.

Could it be that Boeing is also not wanting the CVR to be found?

scbriml · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:19 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
The fact that it hasn't been made available for investigation yet is evidence enough that something wrong may be up.

"made available"? You think the CVR has been found?

People said exactly the same thing about the AF447 black boxes, except it was Airbus and Air France trying to "hide the truth". The fact the search continued for the best part of two years didn't matter to those folk.

SimpleFlying wrote:
Could it be that Boeing is also not wanting the CVR to be found?

But, but, but... that would mean nobody wants it found! :spin:

FrenchPotatoEye · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:23 pm

marcelh wrote:

IMHO both Lion Air and Boeing are to blame.

As of now, Boeing's 'fault' is selling/delivering a jet to Lion Air. Beyond that, Boeing is thus far not culpable until proven beyond doubt.

The same parameters however do no extend to Lion Air.

The WSJ article is pretty damning. Sorry, don't have a link to hand but is easy to locate. Very recent.

Bradin · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:45 pm

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
marcelh wrote:

IMHO both Lion Air and Boeing are to blame.

As of now, Boeing's 'fault' is selling/delivering a jet to Lion Air. Beyond that, Boeing is thus far not culpable until proven beyond doubt.

The same parameters however do no extend to Lion Air.

The WSJ article is pretty damning. Sorry, don't have a link to hand but is easy to locate. Very recent.

Was the WSJ article: "Lion Air Crash Investigators Are Focused on Maintenance Problems" ?

SimpleFlying · Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:59 pm

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
marcelh wrote:

IMHO both Lion Air and Boeing are to blame.

As of now, Boeing's 'fault' is selling/delivering a jet to Lion Air. Beyond that, Boeing is thus far not culpable until proven beyond doubt.

The same parameters however do no extend to Lion Air.

The WSJ article is pretty damning. Sorry, don't have a link to hand but is easy to locate. Very recent.

Naah. Selling to Lion Air is not a fault. $22 billion still alot of money. Boeing 2017 full year revenue is $93.4 billion. So $22 billion is about 24% of Boeing's 2017 revenue - it is a big chunk.

I guess that is the reason Boeing is very quite in the sense of not throwing a jab/punch at Lion.

SimpleFlying · Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:09 pm

scbriml wrote:
MSPNWA wrote:
The fact that it hasn't been made available for investigation yet is evidence enough that something wrong may be up.

"made available"? You think the CVR has been found?

People said exactly the same thing about the AF447 black boxes, except it was Airbus and Air France trying to "hide the truth". The fact the search continued for the best part of two years didn't matter to those folk.

SimpleFlying wrote:
Could it be that Boeing is also not wanting the CVR to be found?

But, but, but... that would mean nobody wants it found!

Hahaha... this CVR story can be twisted to fit any conspiracy theory.

Rusdi Kirana is the founder / owner of Lion Air and he is also Indonesian ambassador to Malaysia. He is a member of a political party who is part of the coalition supporting the current government.

:stirthepot:

asdf · Thu Jan 03, 2019 7:18 pm

scbriml wrote:
But, but, but... that would mean nobody wants it found!

sounds crazy, but if one is straighten out his tinfoil hat on the second look its not that crazy at all

boeing has implemented something into the MAX without proper explanation and pilot training
but no one can tell for shure that this was the cause of the crash

lion air has a questionable maintainance and there has gone something wrong in that troubleshooting
but no one can tell for shure that this was the cause of the crash

this lion air flightdeck crew had probably a questionable capability to troubleshoot suddenly occured problems
but no one can tell for shure that this was the cause of the crash

if no one can tell for shure what exactly was the cause of the crash everyone is to blame but noone can be sued and no one is liable
insurenace will pay

all involved keep their white vest ....

asdf · Thu Jan 03, 2019 7:26 pm

SimpleFlying wrote:
Naah. Selling to Lion Air is not a fault. $22 billion still alot of money. Boeing 2017 full year revenue is $93.4 billion. So $22 billion is about 24% of Boeing's 2017 revenue - it is a big chunk.
I guess that is the reason Boeing is very quite in the sense of not throwing a jab/punch at Lion.

Naah. Buying from Boeing is not a fault. 218 of 376 lion air aircrafts are boeings. thats still alot of aircrafts. How can an airline explain to its customers that the majority of their fleet is a type which has a serious safety problem?
I guess that is the reason Lion Air is very quite in the sense of not throwing a jab/punch at Boeing.

asdf · Thu Jan 03, 2019 7:29 pm

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
...Boeing is thus far not culpable until proven beyond doubt......

whatfor the easiest proof would be the CVR, wouldnt it?

sealevel · Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:13 am

Ok,initial seqence search ended, is the ship remaining on station?

5427247845 · Fri Jan 04, 2019 7:21 am

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:
marcelh wrote:

IMHO both Lion Air and Boeing are to blame.

As of now, Boeing's 'fault' is selling/delivering a jet to Lion Air. Beyond that, Boeing is thus far not culpable until proven beyond doubt.

The same parameters however do no extend to Lion Air.

The WSJ article is pretty damning. Sorry, don't have a link to hand but is easy to locate. Very recent.

There have been “some questions” of other MAX-users about MCAS after the crash because they didn’t knew about it.

ryanov · Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:06 am

Someone already posted the “calibration” of AoA sensors is not a thing. Do folks read these posts or just come to make the occasional speech?

FrenchPotatoEye · Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:00 am

ryanov wrote:
Someone already posted the “calibration” of AoA sensors is not a thing. Do folks read these posts or just come to make the occasional speech?

Pray tell - why is the WSJ highlighting it then?

Like it or not - it's critical to the crash, the cause and eventual remedies/future lessons.

gia777 · Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:03 am

despite anything that occured, I still blame Lion Air for faulty crew resource management and safety training and safety maintenance.

SomebodyInTLS · Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:30 am

gia777 wrote:
despite anything that occured, I still blame Lion Air for faulty crew resource management and safety training and safety maintenance.

What's wrong with current society in a nutshell.

Actually proud of being bloody minded and judgemental, while confessing ignorance of any facts. Great...

kalvado · Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:13 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
gia777 wrote:
despite anything that occured, I still blame Lion Air for faulty crew resource management and safety training and safety maintenance.

What's wrong with current society in a nutshell.

Actually proud of being bloody minded and judgemental, while confessing ignorance of any facts. Great...

I know what you meanbut try to see the glass half full. It is psychologically difficult to see multiple causes to converge to a single effect; single cause-single effect model is much more comfortable. Probably reinforced by litigation driven society, where court rulings have to be black and white. I wonder if swiss cheese model was ever brought up in court hearings.
BUT
Blame goes to the party having at least something to do with the problem as maintenance did their part. It wouldn't be that long ago a random party - e.g. single ethnicity - would be blamed by many people. So modern society actually went a long way....

SomebodyInTLS · Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:30 pm

kalvado wrote:
Blame goes to the party having at least something to do with the problem as maintenance did their part. It wouldn't be that long ago a random party - e.g. single ethnicity - would be blamed by many people. So modern society actually went a long way....

"Despite anything that occurred" means "I have decided to blame Lion Air from my own prejudice". Maybe maintenance played a role - but if not, if they did everything by the book, that poster will still lay all the blame on them. How is that any different from racism?

Furthermore, it wouldn't surprise me if the country of origin of the poster and the airline actually point to some latent prejudice...

zeke · Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:56 pm

FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Pray tell - why is the WSJ highlighting it then?

Like it or not - it's critical to the crash, the cause and eventual remedies/future lessons.

If you read the WSJ article neither the manufacturer or the investigators made any comment about it being related to calibration. Those comments came from someone not involved in the investigation process at all.

Theses AOA sensors are not calibrated when installed, they are calibrated by the manufacturer or an approved overhaul facility.

When installed they undergo an electronic finctionsl test, it either passes of fails that test. If it fails another unit is installed.

They have fixed screw holes so they only fit in one orientation, the mounting base cannot be rotated.

kalvado · Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:11 pm

SomebodyInTLS wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Blame goes to the party having at least something to do with the problem as maintenance did their part. It wouldn't be that long ago a random party - e.g. single ethnicity - would be blamed by many people. So modern society actually went a long way....

"Despite anything that occurred" means "I have decided to blame Lion Air from my own prejudice". Maybe maintenance played a role - but if not, if they did everything by the book, that poster will still lay all the blame on them. How is that any different from racism?

Furthermore, it wouldn't surprise me if the country of origin of the poster and the airline actually point to some latent prejudice...

That is all most likely correct - but my message is different: it is hard to digest for most people that there is no single answer to complex problems, nothing new here. We actually made a huge step forward from 100 years ago when, say, ethnicity of pilots would be seen as the sole root cause. There was a small hint of that thinking somewhere upstream. We're making progress as a society! Glass is half full!

SomebodyInTLS · Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:21 pm

kalvado wrote:
We're making progress as a society! Glass is half full!

The last couple of years don't seem to support that, but here's to hope and optimism... :champagne:

sgbroimp · Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:56 pm

gia777 wrote:
despite anything that occured, I still blame Lion Air for faulty crew resource management and safety training and safety maintenance.

So now that you have completed a thorough investigation, please be sure to share with the authorities as this will save them bundles of time and money. Oh, and please be sure to include the CVR you obviously have in your posession.

gia777 · Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:15 pm

Lion air in my country has a big and repeat history of being major delay in flight schedule and involved in many incidents and accidents. They even fly with damaged airplane from DPS - CGK the night before and dare to use the same damaged plane for the next route until it crashed. So yeah.... Australia was right, they ban all of their staff in Indonesia to fly with Lion. Myself too...I will never ever step into that airline even for free!

FrenchPotatoEye · Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:19 pm

zeke wrote:
FrenchPotatoEye wrote:

Pray tell - why is the WSJ highlighting it then?

Like it or not - it's critical to the crash, the cause and eventual remedies/future lessons.

If you read the WSJ article neither the manufacturer or the investigators made any comment about it being related to calibration. Those comments came from someone not involved in the investigation process at all.

Reading, is clearly not your strongest attribute.

Fair use:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/maintenanc ... 1545739204

By

Andy Pasztor in Los Angeles and

Ben Otto in Jakarta, Indonesia

Dec. 25, 2018 7:00 a.m. ET

"Crash investigators have concluded preliminarily that improper calibration of an airspeed sensor during maintenance touched off the sequence of events that led to October’s fatal Lion Air jetliner crash in Indonesia, according to people familiar with the details.

The conclusion is subject to further analysis, these people said, but it is the firmest indication so far that a suspected maintenance lapse was the initial misstep that ended with the months-old Boeing Co. 737 MAX aircraft plunging into the Java Sea, killing all 189 people on board. Investigators also continue to delve into shortcomings discovered in the design of a new safety system on the plane."

There you go.

Thanks.

zeke · Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:41 pm

Read the full article and you will see that no one involved with the investigation said any of that.

From further down in the same article

“A spokesman for the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board, which is participating in the Indonesia-led investigation, declined to comment about maintenance issues. Soerjanto Tjahjono, head of Indonesia's crash investigation agency, declined to comment on the calibration issue, as did a Boeing spokesman.”

That articles states the source is a person following the situation. That person is not familiar is the maintenance procedure to change an AOA as they have the details wrong in the article.

What Boeing said was in the preliminary report did not "include records as to the installation or calibration of the new sensor.".

Having the information missing from a preliminary report I am sure you would agree is a big leap then to suggest as it has been done in the WSJ article to say it was not done. The investigators may have just chosen not to include that data in the preliminary report at that time.

timh4000 · Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:58 pm

I wouldn't either. Simply for the fact that z plane with a major issue was not tested or thoroughly worked on. Faulty sensors and a plane that is commanding itself nose down just after take off at low altitude is a very serious situation. There wasnt proper communication to the next crew as to what had occurred and how the previous crew remedied it. Those things with all the major airlines get the proper communication, a d are given a quick test flight to make sure the problem had been fixed. It had been an issue on more than just the previous flight. It's a guarantee that with any of the u.s. big 3 not to mention about a dozen others at least that plane would not be up carrying pax without far more thorough maintenance work and a probable test flight.

salttee · Sat Jan 05, 2019 9:44 pm

Cancelling the search for the voice recorder (hence the cause of the accident) is in the same league as dispatching the plane after not conclusively identifying the previous problem(s). Their maintenance crew blew off fixing the plane because it was too complex or difficult for them and now the bosses are blowing off the search for the recorder because it has become too complex for them.

And the Indonesian government sees no reason to get involved.

WoW!

zeke · Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:12 pm

timh4000 wrote:
Faulty sensors and a plane that is commanding itself nose down just after take off at low altitude is a very serious situation.

There is nothing at this stage to suggest the sensor itself was faulty. It is entirely possible for the problem to have been downstream of the sensor.

I suspect when they have completed their tests on the sensor that was removed and look at the full 60 hrs of previous flights it will suggest a problem was elsewhere.

The way the work done on the aircraft was written into the aircraft log is normal practice, the procedure number is referred to. That procedure typically is several pages long, by saying the procedure was done they are saying all steps in that procedure itself were completed.

That is industry standard practice.

The AMM task will not include calibration of the sensor, the sensor will have come with a certificate of release. Part of the conditions on the shop that issued the certificate of release would be to have followed their maintenance instructions which includes the calibration of the sensor.

The investigators will have the certificate of release, which in turn will enable them to get the maintence card for the work done on the sensor in the avionics shop.

wingman · Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:59 pm

salttee wrote:
Cancelling the search for the voice recorder (hence the cause of the accident) is in the same league as dispatching the plane after not conclusively identifying the previous problem(s). Their maintenance crew blew off fixing the plane because it was too complex or difficult for them and now the bosses are blowing off the search for the recorder because it has become too complex for them.

And the Indonesian government sees no reason to get involved.

WoW!

Someone else will step in at some point and I'd expect Boeing or one of its insurers to pony up next. Based on everything we know up to this point I think Boeing has the most to lose by a wide margin, so they or their insurers will likely see the value in spending 10, 20 or even 50 million dollars to find that CVR.

FTMCPIUS · Sun Jan 06, 2019 1:56 am

Good chance it has already been found and results not to Lion and authorities liking.

MSPNWA · Sun Jan 06, 2019 3:52 am

zeke wrote:
Read the full article and you will see that no one involved with the investigation said any of that.

How can you come to that conclusion?

PlanesNTrains · Sun Jan 06, 2019 4:08 am

FTMCPIUS wrote:
Good chance it has already been found and results not to Lion and authorities liking.

Really? If that’s the case, why’d they bother finding the FDR? And what is so magical about the CVR that it could turn the entire investigation upside down?

I get that they might not come out smelling like roses, but I don’t personally believe that they are sitting on it.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net