Lionair 610 crash

[jb747]

Question about the tech log.

Is it a book/folder kept on the aircraft (which makes sense normally)?

Is there a copy/digital version kept elsewhere in the tragic event of a hull loss and the on-board log is lost in the wreckage as well?

On aircraft that constantly return to base (i.e. the military), the log was left on the ground at the base. Airliners have to carry the book, but the engineers remove coupons for every job that is done. These coupons are then stored electronically.

There was an attempt to move to a digital log back when we got the 380, but it was a disaster. Took far too much time to do anything. Of course it didn't need anything to be reentered, as the coupon system does, but it transferred that work to the pilots and LAMEs, neither of whom actually had the time available to do it.

I'd expect there are better attempts around by now.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Likely of no relationship, but there was another max 8 that recently dropped out of a clear day sky. That PX flight, supposedly landing short of a runway. Pilot error?

EDIT: Sorry, I don't think the PX was a Max.

 

[Quickstatus]

I thought that was a PX 737-800 that was short of runway when it “landed” in the water. Rather than dropped out of the sky, there was an approach to land but unfortunately ended up short...

The aircraft was largely intact with wings attached - so wings level when it contacted the water and remained floating to enable a proper evacuation. 1 passenger died???. Some say due to no seatbelt.?? I am unsure on this bit.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

I thought that was a PX 737-800 that was short of runway when it “landed” in the water

Yes, i just corrected. It wasn't a max.

 

[Quickstatus]

Though not a lot of difference between the 737-xx_ and MAX.

Max just has larger diameter engines, longer undercarriage to account for larger engines, aerodynamic wingtips, and apparently some modifications to the fuselage skin. Essentially a re-engined 737

 

[Quickstatus]

When is VA getting their batch of -MAX8?

 

[jb747]

This is extremely unlikely to be a fault of the Max.

 

[Quickstatus]

450kts = 830kmh = 700feet/s approx?

Is there enough altitude to execute a rescue manoeuvre out of a dive when there is 5000 ft altitude and the aircraft is vertical nose down at that speed and likely accelerating?

 

[AviatorInsight]

When is VA getting their batch of -MAX8?

Nov 2019 rings a bell for me.

Though not a lot of difference between the 737-xx_ and MAX.

Max just has larger diameter engines, longer undercarriage to account for larger engines, aerodynamic wingtips, and apparently some modifications to the fuselage skin. Essentially a re-engined 737

The Max is designed to feel like the NG. There are new fly by wire spoilers and a couple of differences inside the flight deck that have changed. A couple of gauges that we never use have been removed and a few new ones put in. But essentially, everything else is the same. The Max-10 will have a higher engine rating than our current fleet.

450kts = 830kmh = 700feet/s approx?

Is there enough altitude to execute a rescue manoeuvre out of a dive when there is 5000 ft altitude and the aircraft is vertical nose down at that speed and likely accelerating?

I wouldn’t have thought so. Not at 5000ft without you ripping the elevators and/or wings off.

 

[Quickstatus]

Generally what are the scenarios that results in a aircraft departing normal flight into an uncontrollable dive:

Catastrophic structural failure as @Saab34 has suggested?

Fixation on something in the flight deck, autopilot off, roll not recognised, invert, dive and inadequate altitude to perform a rescue manoeuvre? (Sort of like China Airlines 006 inverted dive and Eastern Airlines 401 fixation on a broken light)

Death spiral due to overwhelming sensation that you are rolling opposite to instrument indication?

Stall?

 

[Saab34]

Generally what are the scenarios that results in a aircraft departing normal flight into an uncontrollable dive:

Catastrophic structural failure as @Saab34 has suggested?

Fixation on something in the flight deck, autopilot off, roll not recognised, invert, dive and inadequate altitude to perform a rescue manoeuvre? (Sort of like China Airlines 006 inverted dive and Eastern Airlines 401 fixation on a broken light)

Death spiral due to overwhelming sensation that you are rolling opposite to instrument indication?

Stall?

They were well above stall speed so shouldn’t be a factor.

In terms of structural failure this could be a number of things.
-Engineering not completing work correctly
-Severe damage caused to components on poorly executed takeoff/landing.

On the topic of being disoriented, well they were sort of trying to maintain 5000, it wasn’t out of control, whilst not overly stable they were managing to maintain some form of level flight. Then they dropped like a rock.

To fall in the state they have, at the speed, so instantly, and in VMC, only speculating here, but it’s like components at the rear have either fallen off or stopped functioning.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Generally what are the scenarios that results in a aircraft departing normal flight into an uncontrollable dive:

Catastrophic structural failure as @Saab34 has suggested?

Fixation on something in the flight deck, autopilot off, roll not recognised, invert, dive and inadequate altitude to perform a rescue manoeuvre? (Sort of like China Airlines 006 inverted dive and Eastern Airlines 401 fixation on a broken light)

Death spiral due to overwhelming sensation that you are rolling opposite to instrument indication?

Stall?

Stalling has got to do with AoA. Not necessarily airspeed alone. On recovery from a stall in the Sim, pilots still get that secondary stall with full thrust and an accelerating airspeed well above stall speed. The 737 (like most jets) have underslung engines. When full thrust is applied, it creates a pitch up moment. A LOT of forward pressure is needed to counteract.

I sincerely hope it’s also not a rudder hard over. (UA585)

 

[Quickstatus]

Are there any other scenarios that could duplicate that flight path?

Though we don’t know what the headings were during the descent

 

[Quickstatus]

I sincerely hope it’s also not a rudder hard over. (UA585)

Wasnt this addressed a long time ago ??20yrs ago. There was the UA585, and another 737?.

 

[jb747]

Wasnt this addressed a long time ago ??20yrs ago. There was the UA585, and another 737?.

If I recall correctly, there were three rudder events. They could not work out what had happened with the first two, but in the last case, the crew managed to get it back under control. It turned out to be a cunning bit of engineering, that had a hidden flaw. Realistically, it’s unlikely to be a revisit of this scenario.

It’s not stalled. You simply won’t generate that descent rate. In any event, as the speed was in the order of 300 kias, and I’d guess the stall speed of a 737 would be around 170 kias clean, then you’d need to pull over 3G to stall it. The heading information would give us an idea of whether a spiral dive had developed at the end. Increasing g and sink rate fit in with that...

This is like the Rostov event in another way too. None of us could understand how such a massive sink rate was developed so close in during a go around. Nobody expected the fatigued pilot to push minus 1G, that’s just outside the realm of expectations.

Notwithstanding conjecture about major failures, I expect it will turn out to be a minor failure, mishandled. Sadly.

 

[flyer89]

Notwithstanding conjecture about major failures, I expect it will turn out to be a minor failure, mishandled. Sadly.

Is it conceivable that they had decided it ‘optional’ to train for UAS?

 

[Quickstatus]

Nobody expected the fatigued pilot to push minus 1G, that’s just outside the realm of....

Because if you really need to input -1G (as in steep nose down) you would want lots of altitude first ?

And if not enough altitude, you get the altitude first?

 

[jb747]

Because if you really need to input -1G (as in steep nose down) you would want lots of altitude first ?

And if not enough altitude, you get the altitude first?

There’s no reason to ever push to -1G (or anything less than about .6G) in an airliner.

You need to dissociate G loading and attitude. The two are not the same thing. Whilst -1G from straight and level will quickly give you a steep dive, it would also allow you to fly straight and level...if you happened to roll inverted first.

 

[Quickstatus]

Yes understand. G loading (acceleration) would result from a change in attitude (position) whatever that original attitude is.

 

[Saab34]

Notwithstanding conjecture about major failures, I expect it will turn out to be a minor failure, mishandled. Sadly.

It really would be a sad state of affairs if true. It’s an embarrassment how one could end up in the drink in such clear conditions.

Which is why I’m looking at other factors, I’m struggling to even comprehend how you lack such basic skills in mis managing airspeed in VMC. There has got to be something else, but jb is probably on the money, don’t need to dig far to see the trend with this mob.