weezydrvr wrote:Jamie514 wrote:morrisond wrote:
Did you even read the report on ET 409? Remember that the ET 302 Pilot went through the ET system for Initial 737 Type rating not that long after ET409.
From the ET409 report you will also see that ET's policy at the time was to engage AP after 400'AGL(Just like ET302 tried to do but was expressly forbidden by the Unreliable airspeed checklist they should have been following). This would also suggest a heavy reliance on Autothrottle even in Manual flight. - (ET409 left TOGA engaged the whole time as well).
I have no doubt ET training is excellent at teaching efficient normal operation of the 737 and when is the time to properly push the buttons.
However there is a lot of doubt that the Pilots had the necessary jet hand flying skills they should have had to save both flights. That is the downside of not practising manual flight in modern airliners and simulators without all the nannies - you just don't have the experience or comfort level to be confident of taking over when things go wrong.
I know that my suggestion that we should legislate multiple additional hours of sim time yearly to practise non-normal procedures will never come to pass - but I hope worldwide airlines spend a lot more time on Manual flight during recurrent training - that would seem to have helped a lot on most of the loss of life incidents in the past 10 years.
Another way of looking at it more rationally is that ET had one mishandling related crash in 30 years, so their record is very good. Southwest has had several landing incidents in the last decade alone. You never called out a training issue there.
l will not entertain agendas that grasp at flimsy straws and jump to illogical conclusions about ET's MAX crash which would never have happened the inexcusable bad practices had not prevailed at Boeing.
What’s your beef with Southwest?
I think you've totally missed my point in this example. My beef isn't with any airline. My beef is this thread (MAX grounding) being overrun with a personal opinion of a couple posters whos personal belief is that because this particular plane with severe design flaws crashed twice and got grounded due to those flaws, there now exists a worldwide pilot training problem, or more aptly, a reason to call persistently for better training as a way to shift MAX design blame back to the pilots.
They point to Ethiopian's record of just the one crash that was due to a loss of control in a 30 year period before ET302. They include ET302 even knowing that the plane crashed not due to training but due to design flaw. They throw the pilot under the bus for failing to follow a checklist when they have not read a final report of various conditions in the cockpit nor seen a complete voice transcript.
At this point, I have to ask why it is that these same people who are capable of recognizing "training issues" after the recent crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia, have never voiced any similar concerns about the state of training worldwide after any of the nasty slip-ups at home. Unlike a crash on a flawed design with a system that was not fully disclosed or revised, Southwest has had obvious hard landings resulting in write-off, and runway excursions resulting in death. Delta too wrote off an LGA destined MD88 four years ago, that one came down to pilot error too.
It is telling of these posters specific agenda, that they can be on the forum for 9 years but have shown no passion for voicing pilot training concerns after incidents in the US had clear piloting errors and were discussed on here at length, but have made it their business to make every second post on this thread about a plane grounded due to design flaw be shifting blame back to pilot error.
Last edited by
Jamie514 on Fri May 17, 2019 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
