Manual Overrides in Aviation

I’m curious about the aircraft you are referring to?

Does the model number start with a 7?

No, a new 737 problem.

Edit. Not 737, just Boeing in general.

I was curious because I fly the Max and very glad it’s back in service. What’s the new 73 problem?

A United 777 made an emergency landing after an engine explosion resulting in United grounding all 777's with P&W 4000 engines. Another engine exploded in the Netherlands. A 757 made an emergency landing in Salt Lake City. Those were all within three days.

Now a 777 has made an emergency landing in Moscow.

This has been an ongoing theme with the P&Ws. That and they say things come in threes.

But that was 3 + 1 = 4

Engine failures occur periodically. The interesting thing about the 777 incident is the failure was not contained by the cowling. Bad juju. An Airbus 380 had a similar incident a couple years ago. Not supposed to happen. The Turquoise incident report is going to be illuminating. Uh...will there be a report? If so, by whom?

Back to the 737 Max crashes?
The humans forgot to hit the Stab Cutout Switches.
Every Boeing machine I have flown has 2 guarded Cutout Switches, just in the case the Stabilizer has a run-away: It takes 2 seconds to hit the switches and stop the stab.

Precisely. It was not a Boeing issue. It was two pilots who had no business being in the pointy end of an airliner issue.

This is the Great Undiscussed Issue in aviation. The unsuitability of many non Western crews. The unwillingness to challenge the Captain’s authority or think outside the box.

Commercial aviation is full of pilots who could have never written a book like Highest Duty.
But assuming that because of this there was no issue with a Company that over the years, strictly for greed reasons, drifted to having their products designed by clowns and supervised by monkeys, well, that's either biased or naive.
And call me cynic if you wish, but I smell the former.

Not trying to hijack or cause thread creep.
I’m curious about maritime accidents reports and how they compare to aviation accident reviews. Aviation reports will always assign partial fault to the pilots because the aircraft crashed or was damaged. There is some twisted logic in this. Even in Sully and Stiles case they faulted them for not choosing to return to La Guardia. Is it the same in maritime accident event reviews? If a report came out on the Go event and it’s strictly mechanical failure would they still fault the CA for not doing more to prevent an impact?
Obviously I’ve not read any maritime reports but I’m sure some of the pros here have.

FWIW, there have been PLENTY of NTSB reports on fatal accidents that assigned zero blame to the flight crew. Sometimes there are simply catastrophic, non-recoverable mechanical failures that doom the plane. TWA 800, AA FL261 & AA FL587 all come to mind immediately.

Please reread the AA 587 accident reports to include the FAA’s conclusions and you’ll find you are inaccurate. A complete rewrite of transport aircraft handling was published as a result of that accident. Specifically rudder pedal usage. In those reports the pilots “incorrect” rapid rudder pedal reversals caused the vertical stabilizer to depart the airframe. I say incorrect because before that day what CA States and FO Molin who was flying did was correct procedure in attempt to recover from wake turbulence. As for TWA 800 way to much speculation as to what really happened there. However incorrect usage of center tank fuel pumps was a contributing factor according to the conclusions. Also causing a procedural change in fuel pump switchology.