[AdityaDeane]

A harrowing account of the Lion Air plane crash says the pilot wrestled with the controls to the last second.

The pilot of the doomed Lion Air plane wrestled with the controls until the last second to try and avoid the crash into the sea that killed 189 people. A composite image of a ticket issued for the Lion Air flight that crashed and a WhatsApp video of passengers boarding the plane.

The pilot of the doomed Lion Air plane "continued to fight until the end of the flight" to control the plane, an official said.

Data retrieved from the plane's flight recorder showed that the plane started to nosedive and the pilot was unable to control it manually.

Misleading data from one of the plane's sensors caused the plane to stall midair and nosedive, the Indonesian government heard.

All 189 people on the flight died when the plane crashed into the sea.

The pilot of the doomed Lion Air plane wrestled with the controls until the last second to try and avoid the crash into the sea that killed 189 people.

Nurcahyo Utomo, the aviation head of Indonesia's transportation safety committee, told the Indonesian parliament that the data retrieved from the plane's flight controller showed the pilot "continued to fight until the end of the flight" to control the plane, The Australian newspaper reported on Friday.

The pilot tried to control the Boeing 737 Max airplane as it started to nosedive, but it became "increasingly difficult to control the airplane," Nurcahyo said. The plane had been almost brand new.

The aircraft crashed into the sea at a speed of more than 400 mph in what was the worst airliner accident of 2018.

Erroneous readings on the plane's indicators may have caused the crash, the Indonesian government said. Nurcahyo said that the pilot and co-pilot were receiving different airspeed readings.

The pilot was previously named as Indian national Bhavye Suneja, and his co-pilot was an Indonesian named Harvino. It is common for Indonesians to use only one name.

Misleading data from one of the plane's Angle of Attack (AOA) sensors caused the plane to stall midair and nosedive, Nurcahyo said. The pilot wrestled with the steering wheel, but it became too heavy.

The AOA system pushes down the nose of the aircraft when sensors feel that the aircraft is facing up too much.

It can then force the plane downwards to avoid a stall, but at such a degree that pilots can't pull the aircraft back to level.

Boeing, which made the Lion Air plane, issued a warning for its 737 MAX 8 and 737 MAX 9 airliners and the US Government issued an emergency airworthiness directive.

Utomo also confirmed reports that the plane had experienced similar, out-of-control conditions on its previous flight. Lion Air had acknowledged a fault with the plane but said it was fixed it before fatal Flight 610.

US aviation groups, including the Federal Aviation Authority, say Boeing didn't tell them about the new AOA sensors added to their 737 MAX aircraft.

Investigators are still searching for the cockpit voice recorder, which may offer more clues as to how the plane crashed.

Source


Part of the recovered Black Box


The wheels


Boarding Pass and still from WhatsApp video of people boarding the doomed flight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsB7TekAGEY

Video

[balenoed_]

Originally Posted by AdityaDeane

The pilot of the doomed Lion Air plane "continued to fight until the end of the flight" to control the plane, an official said.

What else would someone expect a pilot to do? Sit back and relax while the plane nose dives? Why is this a news!

Is this a new report. All what is told in it has been known for a while.

[vharihar]

Originally Posted by extreme_torque

No its a new implementation of a system which was not discussed in the manual not a faulty implementation. A shocking lapse as far as Boeing is concerned. If it was America and American citizen's were killed, you would have a big fat lawsuit coming in no time.

I am still puzzled as to how Boeing is being let go so softly. I'd have expected a slew of lawsuits.

Or is it too early for that?

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by vharihar

I am still puzzled as to how Boeing is being let go so softly. I'd have expected a slew of lawsuits.



Or is it too early for that?

It is way too early. But I can guarantee they must have received many already. Happens all the time. Whenever a Boeing crashes, sometimes before it is mentioned on main stream news the lawsuits will be pouring into their HQ. Americans sue first, then, maybe ask questions.

Silly, pathetic if you ask me, but it in their DNA

Jeroen

[AdityaDeane]

Found closure after body was identified, says mother of Indian pilot killed in Lion Air crash (source)

[balenoed_]

The preliminary report is out: http://knkt.dephub.go.id/knkt/ntsc_a...y%20Report.pdf

The download is quite slow though.

SYNOPSIS
On 28 October 2018, a Boeing 737-8 (MAX) aircraft registered PK-LQP was being operated by PT. Lion Mentari Airlines (Lion Air) as a scheduled passenger flight from I Gusti Ngurah Rai International Airport (WADD), Denpasar to Jakarta as LNI043. During pre-flight check, the PIC discussed with the engineer of the maintenance actions that had been performed including replacement of the AoA sensor and had been tested accordingly.
The aircraft departed at 1420 UTC (2220 LT) at night time, the DFDR showed the stick shaker activated during the rotation and remained active throughout the flight. About 400 feet, the PIC noticed on the PFD the IAS DISAGREE warning appeared. The PIC handed over control to the SIC and cross checked the PFDs with the standby instrument and determined that the left PFD had the problem. The PIC noticed the aircraft was automatically trimming AND. The PIC moved the STAB TRIM switches to CUT OUT and the SIC continued the flight with manual trim without auto-pilot until the end of the flight.
The PIC declared “PAN PAN” to the Denpasar Approach controller due to instrument failure and requested to maintain runway heading. The PIC performed three Non-Normal Checklists and none contained the instruction “Plan to land at the nearest suitable airport”.
The remainder of the flight was uneventful and the aircraft landed Jakarta about 1556 UTC. After parking, the PIC informed the engineer about the aircraft problem and entered IAS and ALT Disagree and FEEL DIFF PRESS problem on the AFML.
The engineer performed flushing the left Pitot Air Data Module (ADM) and static ADM to rectify the IAS and ALT disagree followed by operation test on ground and found satisfied. The Feel Differential Pressure was rectified by performed cleaned electrical connector plug of elevator feel computer. The test on ground found the problem had been solved.
At 2320 UTC, (0620 on 29 October 2018 LT), the aircraft departed from Jakarta with intended destination of Pangkal Pinang. The DFDR recorded a difference between left and right AoA of about 20° and continued until the end of recording. During rotation the left control column stick shaker activated and continued for most of the flight.
During the flight the SIC asked the controller to confirm the altitude of the aircraft and later also asked the speed as shown on the controller radar display. The SIC reported experienced „flight control problem‟.
After the flaps retracted, the DFDR recorded automatic AND trim active followed by flight crew commanded ANU trim. The automatic AND trim stopped when the flaps extended. When the flaps retracted to 0, the automatic AND trim and flight crew commanded ANU trim began again and continued for the remainder of the flight. At 23:31:54 UTC, the DFDR stopped recording.
Until the publishing of this Preliminary Report, the CVR has not been recovered, the search for CVR is continuing. The investigation will perform several tests including the test of the AoA sensor and the aircraft simulator exercises in the Boeing engineering simulator. The investigation has received the QAR data for flight for analysis.
The investigation involved the NTSB of the United States of America as State of design and State of manufacturer, the TSIB of Singapore and the ATSB of Australia as State provide assistant that assigned accredited representatives according to ICAO Annex 13.

[RM Motorsports]

Lion Air jet was not airworthy on flight before crash, Indonesia investigators say

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...estigators-say

[balenoed_]

Originally Posted by RM Motorsports

Lion Air jet was not airworthy on flight before crash, Indonesia investigators say
[/url]

Yes, but this aircraft was not supposed to crash.
If we can go by the speculations and available data, all the crew had to do was to cut off the two switches that controls the trim electrically and then fly the plane manually like what the previous crews did. And log the issue clearly so that it is fixed and the same doesn't happen to the next flight.

[V.Narayan]

Originally Posted by balenoed_

Yes, but this aircraft was not supposed to crash.
If we can go by the speculations and available data, all the crew had to do was to cut off the two switches that controls the trim electrically and then fly the plane manually like what the previous crews did. And log the issue clearly so that it is fixed and the same doesn't happen to the next flight.

in all fairness you or the other experts know this only by hind sight 20/20. The pilots had only a few minutes, even less to figure which out of a hundred plus possibilities and combinations could be going wrong. The world alas is full of arm chair experts on flying and all things aviation.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by RM Motorsports

Lion Air jet was not airworthy on flight before crash, Indonesia investigators say
]

The day before this ill fated flight, the same aircraft experienced the same problems. The crew did manage to deal with it and landed the plane uneventful.

However, they continued the flight with the stick shaker going continuously which is considered as un-airworthy. The stick shaker is a warning signal for the pilot that the plane is about to enter into a stall. In this particular case, that wasn't true, it was a wonky sensor that cause the stick shaker to kick in.

As far as I can tell I do get the impression that Boeing did provide the appropriate non-normal checklist for a runaway stabilizer scenario.

In fact, the crew that flew this aircraft the day before the incident, experienced similar problem, ran through the various checklist and got the situation under control. Apperently, none of these checklist or NNC< or non normal checklist called for an immediate landing at the nearest suitable airport. So this crew flew onwards to their destination with an activated stick shaker.

You can argue whether they made a good decision. Yes, pilots work by very detailed processes, routines, check lists etc. But at the end of the day a captain has the final authority and can and should do anything in his/her ability to ensure the safety of the flight. Not sure if continuing a flight with a stick shaker going continuously is considered "good airmanship". Even there is no formal check list that says you should.

I don't have the insights to make that call, but would be interested to see and hear what the industry says on this one.

This is just a preliminary report. And it doesn't say to much yet about the ill fated flight and it doesn't come to a final conclusion. They have yet to recover the voice recorder as that will give the necessary insights on what the pilots did, thought, how they interacted etc.

Jeroen

[balenoed_]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

The pilots had only a few minutes, even less to figure which out of a hundred plus possibilities and combinations could be going wrong.

Probably less time/low altitude, yes, but well, still they tried the manual trim at least 21 times as recorded in the FDR to counter the equal number trim down commands from the MCAS. I am not even close to an average here - forget expert, so cannot really comment if they should have given up that after few tries and moved on to the next option in the check list (Non Normal Check list).

[airbus]

May not be a cause for this accident, but there was a problem highlighted after Air France 447 crash and later after Air Asia 8501 crash is the lack of adequate exposure to manual flying due to computerization/automation, as a result when there was a need for manual intervention/flying there seem to be some confusions.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by airbus

May not be a cause for this accident, but there was a problem highlighted after Air France 447 crash and later after Air Asia 8501 crash is the lack of adequate exposure to manual flying due to computerization/automation, as a result when there was a need for manual intervention/flying there seem to be some confusions.

I think there are two somewhat different things. Although there is some overlap too.

There have been a number of incidents /accidents that have suggested some crews are not very proficient in hand flying the aircraft. They rely too much on automation. When they take manual control they make mistakes, do not interpret the instruments correctly etc.

This was more a case where inadvertently the crew could not figure out what the automation was doing and could not adequately disable it. Simply put, the automation through some fault kept interfering with their desire and intent to fly manually.

Had they been able to properly disable the automated system they would have been fine. The crew the day before did and landed with no problems.

This is a case of pilots not understanding how the automated systems work.

Jeroen

[BoneCollector]

It appears that the DGCA is closely monitoring the 737 Maxs flying in Indian skies.

https://www.zeebiz.com/india/news-dg...ly-basis-74486

[norhog]

The reason of lion air crash was..
1. Faulty sensor giving wrong reading about the AOA.
2. There was no mention of automation system interfering with manual inputs by pilots and ways to switch it off.
Had the point 2 been known the computer could have been switched off and the plane could have landed by the pilots normally.