Cockpit mishap seen as likely cause of plunge on Latam Boeing 787 | Hacker News Reader

Cockpit mishap seen as likely cause of plunge on Latam Boeing 787

wsj.com

43 pointsgnicholas58 comments

Here is a video of that switch in operation:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vvlDYAPs3X0

To me, this seems entirely plausible, even if the movement is relatively slow. Do pilots have their lunch tray on their lap (between the stomach and the controls) when they eat? Maybe the pilot asked the flight attendant to move the seat back so that they could eat comfortably (as they obviously cannot reach that control themselves), and it was moved in the wrong direction accidentally?

Not commenting on this specific case, but it is possible for things held (or not) by pilots to affect the controls. An RAF Voyager (strategic lift aircraft based on the A330) dived 4000ft because the pilot was using a personal camera throughout the flight and it got stuck between his seat and the joystick, and his failure to admit it caused an accident investigation that temporarily grounded the entire fleet [0], [1].

[0] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-raf...

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39153163

It's also happened to me once that something was dropped and got wedged behind the rudder pedal, blocking its movement. Tiny GA aircraft and we noticed it during the start-up check (when you check the full range of the flight controls). The checklist did its job. But if it had dropped during flight it could have been really dangerous.

I can imagine it can happen even in more professional circles.

I wonder if the controls could be designed to resist this kind of thing. Only becoming more common with everyone having bulky phones etc in pockets.

Maybe they could design rudder pedals without "pinch points" for objects to fall into, and yoke/stick without any potential pinch points nearby.

True, good point. But it's very very hard to do that on an aircraft because space is at a huge premium. You simply don't have infinite space around the pedals. Or other controls for that matter. For example a clipboard could fall on the center pedestal and flip one of the gazillion switches. Luckily most important ones have barriers around them, or other safeguards like the need to lift up the lever before moving it.

A firefighting helo and crew was lost due to an iPad: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P0N15ihORHA

> Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) have demonstrated that an Apple iPad likely jammed against the co-pilot’s left pedal prior to the fatal crash of a Rotak Helicopter Services Chinook in Idaho last year.

* https://verticalmag.com/news/dropped-ipad-implicated-in-fata...

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36724736

That switch almost seems to be made for being pressed accidentally - pretty big and seemingly easy to accidentally run into. I guess the big part behind the headrest is the mentioned cover and should be down with a pilot in the seat making the switch inaccessible? And I guess this button is required to get in and out of the seat and that is why they made it so big and easy to access?

EDIT: Better video [1], that switch is not easy to press, I completely misinterpreted the video.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9VkV9RS-PI&t=45s

What you're looking at in the video isn't actually the switch, it's the switch cover.

Behind the cover is a rocker switch that moves the seat, but it's not visible in this video.

It's extremely unlikely just "running into it" was the issue, but accidentally moving the seat in the wrong direction is somewhat plausible, especially if the cover is obscuring the switch.

You are right, just found a better video [1]. I did not realize that the person was moving their fingers under the cover.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9VkV9RS-PI&t=45s

Reminds me of the far size "Wings fall off" cartoon.

I don't understand what the purpose of a switch that someone else, but not the person sitting in the seat can operate is?

I would guess that it might be necessary to move the empty seat forward to access things that would otherwise be blocked by the retracted seat. That also means you have to be able to get it back later and this might also be needed if you have to pull an incapacitated pilot out of his seat. There probably has to be another switch for the pilot to move the seat forward, it would seem quite cumbersome to use that one for getting into and out of the seat.

Maybe, I don't know what controls you'd want someone to be accessing without being in the seat. For retraction, definitely, but that sounds like a "pull this seat all the way back" switch would be better, rather than one that controls the precise position.

The seat probably uses the exact same mechanism for both the seat back switch and the operate when seated switch. This type of mechanism is probably also considered safer. A mechanism where you momentary push a button and then it "pulls back all the way" would probably warrant extra consideration for having something stuck in the rails or bumping into someone. I could see these two factors weighing into someone's decision to just use this design.

There's probably a second switch you can operate while seated.

Blancolirio, a YouTube airline pilot, talked about this on his channel.

If you're the pilot trying to get into the seat, you'd normally have to reach for the regular seat controls which are farther forward and kind of awkward to reach from behind. But with this switch you can draw the seat all the way back so that you can climb into it easily.

Blancolirio, a YouTube Boeing pilot, said that yes, they ate with their food tray on their lap. He added, somewhat enviously it seemed to me, that Airbus pilots get a tray table due to their controls being off to the side.

https://archive.is/uxPdY

Interesting to see that the passenger in the video contradicts that explanation with his testimony of the pilot saying the instruments went blank for a few seconds.

The pilot might not have given the true reason to passengers.

I find the dark screen report persuasive because there's an air worthiness directive against that 787 which will cause the reset of flight control l computers. That would be consistent with both the dark screens story and the loss of control, if true.

Except that the expected loss of control would not have suddenly changed the direction of the plane, but instead kept the direction from being suddenly changed.

Now there's word from Boeing that seat switch can be inadvertantly tripped by touching the cover.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRF1YTVJ1Q4

Would they actually lie though? That's not very professional.

AFAIK, the primary objective of pilots when talking to passengers in situations like this is not to be 100% honest, but to avoid a panic. In this particular instance, he might also have tried to protect the flight attendant or avoid personal/company embarrassment. Although as a passenger, "I was accidentally pushed against the controls" would comfort me much, much more than "the controls of the entire aircraft suddenly went black and we have no idea why".

Guess the real reason may also provoke anger in some passengers. You can argue with attendants if you know that crew did it, you can't really argue with a plane or forces of nature. For those passengers providing fake reason would ensure a safe flight.

Because "oops, we almost just accidentally killed all of you" isn't a nice thing to hear mid-flight.

That the first port of call is to blame the people on board is completely expected. This one is interesting because the explanation is "our flagship aircraft has a kill-everyone-onboard switch on the pilot chair that someone pushed".

That's not totally reassuring from Boeing. I guess it adds to the accumulating reasons to never get on one of their aeroplanes.

>This one is interesting because the explanation is "our flagship aircraft has a kill-everyone-onboard switch on the pilot chair that someone pushed".

Wait till you hear about the yoke, or any of the other flight controls.

I suppose opinion is divided on whether the pilot should be able to crash at will. There's a copilot involved partly on those grounds.

Somewhere there's a flow chart missing an exclusive or on adjusting the seat position and putting the plane into a dive. And another one that failed to put the control out of the way of people walking around.

>Somewhere there's a flow chart missing an exclusive or on adjusting the seat position and putting the plane into a dive

"Plane crashed because the seat adjustment button got jammed and locked the pilot out of his controls, and he didn't this until it was too late"

>And another one that failed to put the control out of the way of people walking around.

Other comments in this thread has linked to videos that show the button is behind a cover.

It's a necessary switch in the right location and protected by a cover. Of all the controls on the flight deck, this is pretty low on my list of concerns. I bet nearly all similar large aircraft have something pretty much equivalent, given the obvious use case.

> this is pretty low on my list of concerns.

It’s probably quite far up the list for those who ended up smashing into the ceiling. Assuming this was the cause, it’s a problem, though maybe less so than other shite Boeing systems in play at the moment (eg, the de-ice situation).

Maybe the switch isn't the problem, maybe it's the pilot, or the person who reached under that cover and pushed the button?

It sounds like you're on the Boeing Hate Train, though, so I doubt I can convince you. That's alright. Have a nice weekend.

> Maybe the switch isn't the problem

Boeing appears to think it might be. Posted elsewhere here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cRF1YTVJ1Q4

Reply on news.ycombinator.com