It was apparently smoking and gaining altitude just before it hit, and making bad noises. There must be some mountains as it took off at 7000' above sea level. Climbed to 1500 or so agl, then had a few highly erratic climbs and dives, then climbed again before crashing.
On Sun, Mar 10, 2019, 9:06 PM Peter Frederick via Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > So far the only indication is that the plane had altitude problems and hit > the ground at high speed in a dive -- that crater was NOT dug by heavy > equipment and there was no significant post-crash fire, which means the > fuel pretty much completely atomized on impact. > > In other words, just about exactly what the Lion Air one did, with much > less warning for the pilots, one of which was a trainee with 200 hours of > flight time. > > I suspect there is something seriously wrong with the new programming, and > probably also with the sensors. This is a new problem with the 737 -- the > new engines greatly increase the tendency for the nose to rise when power > is applied, and the 737 is a "weirdo" airplane in that the undercarriage is > very short and the engines are very high on the wing. This was initially > done to allow much easier access in small airports, and I suspect the 727 > is similar. > > The combination of engines very close to the wing and much more powerful > than the original ones results in poor pitch control on climbing, and > Boeing decided to add computer control of the pitch to prevent stalls at > low speed, similar to the system used on the 727 and DC-9/MD11 to prevent > deep stalls. Sadly, it appears that a simple failure in the pitch sensor > allows the computer to shove the nose WAY down without warning. > > My personal feeling is that the 737 should have been retired and a > completely new aircraft designed for that market niche -- the fuselage > design dates to 1956 as it's derived from the original 707, the short > undercarriage was to meet a mid 1960's service requirement (airports > without jet equipment support) and the whole aircraft is seriously under > strength for modern equipment. Until the last edition, the skin was still > 0.020", for instance. Pretty much standard for the late 1950's and 8,000 > lb static thrust engines, but way too light for modern usage. This was the > major cause for Hawaiian cabin blowout a couple decades ago, as the > fuselage was prone to stress corrosion from being very thin. > > We shall see -- I'm thinking once the flight data recorder and cockpit > voice recorders are read will will have a major fix if the computer system > is indeed the issue, most likely grounding the fleet until it's rectified. > > There is also some talk that there is a problem with the attitude and air > speed sensors -- a single failure crashing an airplane isn't acceptable, > and hasn't been for 70 years, someone may have screwed up pretty bad on > this one. > > And there is always the possibility of sabatoge or a bomb or some other > out of the blue sort of thing. Going to be hard to pinpoint on this one, I > don't think there is much left of the plane. Most obvious would be parts > blowing or falling off, as they would be found along the flight path well > away from the impact, we shall see as the investigation continues. > _______________________________________ > http://www.okiebenz.com > > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ > > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: > http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com > > _______________________________________ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
