Lionair 610 crash

[Quickstatus]

How much of the checklists do you memorise

 

[juddles]

How much of the checklists do you memorise

I suspect that in something as complex as an aircraft not even a savant could memorize much of it. Plus, the purpose of a checklist is to make you go through everything, specifically not relying on memory. Apart from absolutely time-crucial stuff, I suspect also that it is hard enough to even commit to memory the titles of the checklists

 

[AviatorInsight]

How much of the checklists do you memorise

There are 14 checklists (on the 737) which require memory items. Some of those checklists require the first 6 items to be completed by memory, others just one. Only then you can move onto the checklist to make sure they’ve been done.

But in every case the first thing is fly the plane.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Apart from absolutely time-crucial stuff, I suspect also that it is hard enough to even commit to memory the titles of the checklists

This is the best thing on an EICAS driven aircraft, it’ll tell you what the name of the checklist is to run and in order of priority.

On an ancient 737 it’s as simple as a master caution/warning light on a panel that doesn’t always light up, followed by a light somewhere in the flight deck that you need to search for. But...the beauty is, the name of that light is also the name of the checklist. So if a master caution light HYD illuminates on the panel and then you look up and the LOW PRESS light on. You’d call for the hydraulic low pressure checklist....you get used to it.

 

[moa999]

Balanced article I thought

Christine Negroni » The Hidden Message in Boeing’s Lion Air Service Bulletin

 

[RooFlyer]

There are 14 checklists (on the 737) which require memory items. Some of those checklists require the first 6 items to be completed by memory, others just one. Only then you can move onto the checklist to make sure they’ve been done.

That really surprises me, if I'm reading it correctly. I though the whole idea of check-lists is that it made you do every step, in order, reading it out, so things wouldn't be skipped, by for example, forgetting. If items 1-6 are done from memory, and you skip 3 and 4, but do 5 and 6, will it let you progress? What sort of things (in layman's terms) are done checked off by memory?

 

[AviatorInsight]

That really surprises me, if I'm reading it correctly. I though the whole idea of check-lists is that it made you do every step, in order, reading it out, so things wouldn't be skipped, by for example, forgetting. If items 1-6 are done from memory, and you skip 3 and 4, but do 5 and 6, will it let you progress? What sort of things (in layman's terms) are done checked off by memory?

That’s the whole point of them being memory items. We’re trained to do certain tasks by memory. We can’t always go to the checklist first pull it out, find the page, confirm we have the right checklist, meanwhile an engine is on fire burning a hole in the wing. For example, if an engine is on fire we’ll do the memory items up to and including firing the bottles. From there we consult the checklist and it’ll lead us to secure that engine now as it won’t be relit and we prepare for a single engine landing. Or, if you’re out of bottles and the fire is still going? Don’t even bother with the checklist (because it’ll now be of no use to you) and just get the aircraft on the ground asap.

 

[The man with no name]

I get that in something as complex as an aircraft there will always be bugs, and I am very appreciative that there is such a huge safety-focus that such checklists get prepared, so very professionally. Somewhere here something went ultimately, fatally wrong. I am not casting mud on boeing, but if they reached a point where an aircraft's glitches could not be managed by users, there is a problem somewhere in the line. I do not mean this in the verbatim, strict sense, but if there are known glitches that require perfect pilots to overcome, then there is a problem with the basic aircraft/systems. There are a gazillion 737's out there. Obviously many will be being used by possibly "second-rate" airlines/pilots.

Nobody would expect a pilot to be perfect however all of us would expect them to be competent,

 

[RooFlyer]

That’s the whole point of them being memory items. We’re trained to do certain tasks by memory.

Ah, I geddit, thanks.

 

[Berlin]

Balanced article I thought
Christine Negroni » The Hidden Message in Boeing’s Lion Air Service Bulletin

Sounds fair to me, thanks for sharing! And after reading this, I even more can't help but think that a Qantas or AA crew would have had no issue flying this plane to safety.

 

[AviatorInsight]

Sounds fair to me, thanks for sharing! And after reading this, I even more can't help but think that a Qantas or AA crew would have had no issue flying this plane to safety.

Or VA!

 

[Berlin]

Or VA!

Sure. Or probably BA, NZ and so many others.

 

[Saab34]

Checklists are not usually referred to when one is in a inverted position facing the sea floor in clear daylight. There is only one thing to do in that situation with such speed, and that’s pull back.

But they didn’t (not even the slightest movement) and that’s the big mystery.

 

[Deleted member 29185]

Checklists are not usually referred to when one is in a inverted position facing the sea floor in clear daylight.

I think this is why we mere mortal pax are so concerned. From a layman's perspective, Boeing's attitude of "the pilot can fix" is not particularly comforting. We trust our flight crews unreservedly (we have to), but when I hear of pilots having to deal with issues (potentially dangerous issues) and then have to deal with a Boeing avionics induced dive (which the FAA sweetly labeled as having the potential to contact the terrain), I personally don't find that an acceptable position from Boeing. We also realise that all the great pilots in the world, haven't generally popped out of the womb as great pilots. They learn, and pilots all around the world are in various stages of learning and experience gaining. It's simply unrealistic to expect all pilots are great.

Further, we have really only written about the A/P isolation whereas Boeing have stated there are other situations which can result in this same situation. Are all pilots across all of these situations (rhetorical question as we surmise they are not all even across the A/P isolation)? Poor form from Boeing IMHO. I have many years experience in electrical/electronic design within the various manifestations of the transport industry (including a short stint many years ago in avionics) and these revelations from Boeing simply astound me. IMHO, they fail the most fundamental of FMEA's (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) and yet people are jumping to support them and ... believe it or not ... decades old technology still being rolled out on the pretext that it's a major client requirement. Rubbish. It's a cost saving exercise, pure and simple.

Once more, I'm speaking holistically and not in direct response to this tragic event.

 

[Daver6]

Pilot friend pointed me to this

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10156846958343910

 

[Daver6]

And another video he shared with me

 

[Quickstatus]

Yes we know it crashed...

 

[Quickstatus]

Commentary in the second video suggests that there are differences in some aspects of control authority between the MAX and NG and possibly the classic.

If true, I wonder if the airline had incorporated this into the MAX familiarisation training. If no training, it matters little if there are existing pilot override mechanisms. The hidden message behind the Boeing bulletin is directed at Lionair saying that their training is insufficient/ pilots are inexperienced. However LionAir just followed approved familiarisation training which is only a few hours.

In this age of pilot shortage and a rapidly expanding airline industry, is it possible to replace experience with training especially if the training is limited by sim time or management edicts to get the pilots flying ASAP.

6000,7000hrs each. In Australia would these pilots even qualify for the FO ladder?

 

[Quickstatus]

It's simply unrealistic to expect all pilots are great.

That manufacturer logic surprises me. If the assumption is that all pilots are competent at all times and especially in a stressful emergency, why introduce a measure that takes away control authority from the pilot in an emergency whether real or otherwise. There is suggestion that the automated response occured during manual control. It would be very confusing and startling to pilots that such occurence could occur when the autopilot was off. There is an element of QF72 here - who has control of everything?.

I suspect it’s to sell aircraft to airlines. What better way than to tout the “safety” capabilities of the aircraft. Less pilot training and sim time required plus able to hire lower hour pilots = more pilot uptime, lower costs, better able to expand a fleet = more aircraft sold.

The A3xx series was rumoured to have been marketed as being impossible to stall and they did demonstrate it - in normal law. Did anyone ask for Stall protection to be demonstrated in degraded law. Unfortunately it was then demonstrated in real time with real passengers in degraded law...

I’ve been to lots of high fidelity simulator sessions (non aviation) and it is a reproducible and consistent fact that in an emergency and especially an unexpected one, that cognitive abilities often degrade rapidly and severely. That is why checklists exists - like “ABC” when you do First aid training. However the problem remain that checklists only solve part of that emergency. The other aspect of an emergency - contracted (shortened) time to solution- is not solved by checklists. Only rapid instinctive actions/reactions solve the problem of contracted time to solution in an emergency. The two have to go together - checklists, and rapid memorised/instinctive actions. And the two can only be effectively integrated by repetitive training

Liability and solutions are likely and often multifactorial. I don’t think it’s Boeing or pilots or airline or regulators in isolation. How many of the 4 or all 4 we will have to wait and see the outcome of the investigation.

 

[jb747]

Checklists are not usually referred to when one is in a inverted position facing the sea floor in clear daylight. There is only one thing to do in that situation with such speed, and that’s pull back.

Without wanting to be too pedantic, but if you are inverted, then your pitch attitude is less than -90º, in which case the first action is to roll to the nearest horizon.