Ethiopian 737 Max 8 crash and Fallout

Turn business expenses into Business Class! Process $10,000 through pay.com.au to score 20,000 bonus PayRewards Points and join 30k+ savvy business owners enjoying these benefits:

- Pay suppliers who don’t take Amex
- Max out credit card rewards—even on government payments
- Earn & Transfer PayRewards Points to 8+ top airline & hotel partners

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

See my above posts about compressor stall - it’s akin to an internal combustion engine backfiring and picture above by aviatorinsight
The one thing it does mean though is that the stalling engine is now not providing its share of the thrust which in a twin is a sudden 50% power loss. If nothing else it gets the pilots pretty busy for a little while.
 
AA publicly affirming full confidence in its 737M8 fleet, and MI will continue operating its fleet.

...

I thought it would be relatively quick - they probably only had to search an area 100 x 100 metres unfortunately
Currently being reported that eye witnesses have said it did along with the very contained debris field indicating a steep dive.
CNN saying that the "crater" is the size of a "basketball court"

Edit - though some are suggesting the crater is post excavation
 
Last edited:
If you’re claiming that this is a picture of the aircraft involved then that’s wrong. ET has a white livery plus the B737Max has V shaped winglets whereas that picture is just stubby wings

I don’t think there is any claim from AI that the image is anything other than an illustration of a compressor stall without any specific claim that it is the ET flight in question
 
Unverified eyewitness account of fire from rear of ET302 prior to crash.

Can a compressor stall give this appearance?

On the news in NZ an eyewitness account said no fire in the air. I realise they can be unreliable though.

Am happy they've found the boxes although one report was one at least partially damaged. Hope they can pull all the info they need.

Edit: Just saw mannejs comment.
 
I don’t think there is any claim from AI that the image is anything other than an illustration of a compressor stall without any specific claim that it is the ET flight in question
Apologies, my reading of it (of which I was not paying 100% concentration to the post) was that it was a "previously unseen photo" of the flight, since those do seem to do the rounds after a incident of any sort
 
I don't think I can recall a single aviation crash in history without at least one person coming forward and claiming they saw it on fire.
 
Just out of interests sake, apart from jb, who on AFF is a commercial jet pilot, or aeronautical engineer? For me a very interesting, and sad thread. So much conjecture, as there always will be when a plane goes down, with the expert knowledge of jb tempering much of it. Thanks jb.
 
Just out of interests sake, apart from jb, who on AFF is a commercial jet pilot, or aeronautical engineer? For me a very interesting, and sad thread. So much conjecture, as there always will be when a plane goes down, with the expert knowledge of jb tempering much of it. Thanks jb.
I believe @AviatorInsight is a 737 pilot. (and one that will likely be flying these Max 8's in coming months)
 
What is the performance implication at that altitude, if I may ask?

Not a great deal. Even if the engine was at idle it would still be producing thrust compared to a shut down engine with high drag. The 737 can maintain altitude at 20,000 on one engine that is shut down at maximum weight.

There are 3 types of compressor stall:

1. The engine recovers itself requiring no crew action.
2. The engine recovers after crew action has been taken, i.e. slowly reducing the thrust lever until indications are within limits again then re applying the thrust. Should the surge happen again, then flight with a reduced thrust setting may be needed.
3. The unrecoverable surge. It continues even after the thrust lever is at idle. In this case it would be necessary to shut the engine down.

If you’re claiming that this is a picture of the aircraft involved then that’s wrong. ET has a white livery plus the B737Max has V shaped winglets whereas that picture is just stubby wings

Never claimed that at all. I know the difference between a 767 and a 737. ;)
 
Just out of interests sake, apart from jb, who on AFF is a commercial jet pilot, or aeronautical engineer? For me a very interesting, and sad thread. So much conjecture, as there always will be when a plane goes down, with the expert knowledge of jb tempering much of it. Thanks jb.

As Swanning_It has correctly said, I am a current 737 pilot. Questions always arise during aircraft accidents/incidents and that's not necessarily a bad thing, it gets the community talking and understanding more about these machines. I'm more than happy to answer them as best I can without introducing conjecture. What I don't like, is people saying "they should have done that and all would have been ok" without any hard evidence (which I'm happy to say doesn't happen often around here).
 
Not a great deal. Even if the engine was at idle it would still be producing thrust compared to a shut down engine with high drag. The 737 can maintain altitude at 20,000 on one engine that is shut down at maximum weight.

There are 3 types of compressor stall:

1. The engine recovers itself requiring no crew action.
2. The engine recovers after crew action has been taken, i.e. slowly reducing the thrust lever until indications are within limits again then re applying the thrust. Should the surge happen again, then flight with a reduced thrust setting may be needed.
3. The unrecoverable surge. It continues even after the thrust lever is at idle. In this case it would be necessary to shut the engine down.
Great information, thank you. I guess I was curious about the implication on the climb rate with terrain around but given your information above, I think something else has happened or at least contributed here.

Hopefully the integrity of the recorders is not compromised - one has been reported as "damaged".
 
Great information, thank you. I guess I was curious about the implication on the climb rate with terrain around but given your information above, I think something else has happened or at least contributed here.

Ah right, a normal 737NG would still do around 1000fpm at that altitude (side note I got a compressor stall out of VLI in the last sim check at 7000ft). With the Leap1B? I'm not sure. I believe they claim the thrust is more than a CFM56, but I won't know until I get the books and see it first hand.
 
Do you mind elaborating a bit more? I’m not a technical expert and wow, flames look shiny to me...

Jet engines are always on fire when they are running. It’s just that you can’t normally see the flames. But, if you disrupt the normal airflow, they can become visible.

Even a dual engine failure won’t cause the aircraft to crash out of a steep dive. It would be much more like a landing gone wrong. I don’t see anything here that says engine.
 

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top