PPRuNe Forums


Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:41   #501 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Universe
Posts: 70
On the "Window replacement" speculation: Windows are plug-fit - so unlikely they are lost suddenly.

Leaves NWD speculation re. structural damage... Hope facts surface soon (and specifically the FDR in readable shape).
dicks-airbus is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:41   #502 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: btw SAMAR and TOSPA
Posts: 516
At the high rate of descent and with the many mountains around it is likely that the GPWS alarm went off around FL100.
What would it do?
Disengage autopilot?
Pullup?
threemiles is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:44   #503 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: planet earth
Age: 51
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by HubertWilkins
Well that is just wrong. Unsafe and illogical.
Mmmh, not really

There are some interesting arguments in this article.
Cagedh is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:45   #504 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: n.ireland
Posts: 42
Some similarities noted with LAM Mozambique Airlines Flight 470 with the a/c in a dive but not quite a vertical dive. I hope not. You don't expect that sort of thing in Europe.
bille1319 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:48   #505 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: El Paso, Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 10
A320 windscreens

Have heard story of Boeing windshield failure of both inner and outer panel. Windshield was bulging outward against air stream, pushed out by cabin differential pressure. there is a plastic layer between the inner and outer panel and this was deforming but windshield held. do not know the particulars but windshield was held in by the very strong structure surrounding it. In the past that structure has been aluminum.

is the structure surrounding Airbus A320 windshields metal or composite?
abdunbar is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:49   #506 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,958
Reading todays papers or rather between the lines of todays papers This would appear to be a depressurisation or un commanded severe pitch down which could not be controlled or some sort of structural failure which lead to an inability to stop the aircraft descending.

there are two things which would indicate incapacitation of the Pilot/pilots
Firstly the track of the aircraft was fairly straight which indicates it was under some control (autopilot) with no pilot intervention and secondly the lack of communication with ATC from the crew.

Had this been a structural or uncommanded rapid descent with alert crew there would have been plenty of time for the crew to have relayed their problem and the track would have unlikely been straight as the crew tried to regain control.
As the authorities have discounted foul play this has to be incapacitation which I hope is the case as those poor people would have known little about their impending fate I hope (( and that fact may give their poor relatives a small crumb of comfort.

Why the aircraft failed to level at 10K is another matter

Last edited by Pace; 25th Mar 2015 at 11:10.
Pace is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:50   #507 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 15
Once all the furore has settled i think the aviation industry should be looking at a solution for all the scrabbling around looking for CVR's FDR's amongst wreckage and start looking at a permament 'uplink' via ACARS .Its not going to be a perfect 'fix' but it would certainly be a step in right direction.Our MOC can inform us before the aircraft lands what is wrong even down to a valve taking too long to open close etc . I know cost is a factor but but if legislated then they would have no choice.Dont flame me i'm an engineer and would just like to see certain aspects sped up, even down to pin pointing the actual crash sight.
fflyingdog is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 10:51   #508 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: London
Age: 49
Posts: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by threemiles View Post
At the high rate of descent and with the many mountains around it is likely that the GPWS alarm went off around FL100.
What would it do?
Disengage autopilot?
Pullup?
It would issue an alert and then a hard warning in all probability. The exact mode of warning would depend in circumstances. Doesn't do anything else at all. That's left to the pilots.
busTRE is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:01   #509 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 8
Quote:
There are some interesting arguments in this article.
Quote:
Only 21 percent of Part 91 respondents “indicated they always use oxygen when one crewmember leaves his duty station above 35,000 feet,” according to the survey; 10 percent reported occasional use; 25 percent rarely; and 33 percent never.
Thank you. The articles states that many pilots, unfortunately, do not follow the rule. Which is very worrying indeed. This does not make the rule a bad rule. It just points to how many pilots disrespectful of the rule we have out there. And that is not a nice thought.
HubertWilkins is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:09   #510 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 420
It will also be a testament to the quality of the windshield.
fox niner is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:10   #511 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Posts: 390
Here is what the book says for emergency descent:

PNF PF
1. ST BELT ON 1. TURN ALT, PULL ALT
2. ENG MODE SEL IGN 2. TURN HDG, PULL HDG
3.ATC CODE 7700 3. PULL SPEED
4.ATC MAYDAY 4. SPEED BRAKE EXTENDED
5. PAX SYZ ON

Only action would appear to have been PF 1, suggesting rapid crew inacapacition. An event such as wind shield loss at 38,000feet would certainly be the most significant factor.
My question is whether the chance of recovery would have been greater in a non-fully automated cockpit environment.
Chronus is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:12   #512 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 48
Posts: 1,503
Quote:
You don't set a rate of descent. You basically close thrust ( open descent on the Bus ) and then the Elevators control the speed that you have selected. Therefore the rate of descent will vary.
Agreed but there is no normal operational reason for an oscillation in the resulting V path.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:15   #513 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Universe
Posts: 70
From avherald

Quote:
According to Finnish CAA in Finnish newpaper Helsingin Sanomat, the CVR has revealed crew was unconscious in the start of descent. So looks like Helios 2.
dicks-airbus is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:15   #514 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: El Paso, Texas
Age: 65
Posts: 10
interesting article. Yes , aware of the complaints about sanitary issue. We were given wipes to clean the mask, first flight. Many did not like. I was a Captain and I expected compliance so I know that FO's had the mask on at least until I left the cockpit. Also even non-compliance forces a mental review by most? I am not going to wear the mask but lets see.... there it is, if i need it... then put it on, Altitude- spin down, FLCH, throttles close, speed brakes, turn, talk.

As for oxygen poisoning. Interesting, who knew. I had several years of military tactical jet flying. we had a rule, 100% O2 required from takeoff to landing. This one did get violated a little. Biggest issue was that on a long flight you used a lot of LOX, liquid oxygen. Not every base could recharge it, if there was lightning in the area they wouldn't. So, there was some mask dangling flying at medium altitudes that would give a cabin pressure around 10k, checking fingernail bed color, monitoring cabin altitude gage often. Also, 100% oxygen dries you out. But oxygen poisoning? We knew about hyperventilation and that risk is higher when using 100% oxygen. perhaps this is the poisoning?
abdunbar is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:16   #515 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: here and there
Posts: 149
Whatever happened at FL380 it was extreme. So extreme that prevented the pilots from doing anything else but descending. If that was done with their intervention.
Aircraft couldn't be controlled otherwise they would have attempted an emergency landing somewhere away from that extreme terrain where it ended up.
They couldn't navigate or communicate. Only an initial reaction to aviate when the problem occured. I can only assume that they were both incapacitated or the aircraft was uncontrolable as soon as it started to descend.
This is what I make out of what is known so far. I wouldn't venture to speculate about the reason. That is yet to be established. I'm pretty sure the authorities have an ideea already.
skytrax is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:16   #516 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,958
Quote:
PNF PF
1. ST BELT ON 1. TURN ALT, PULL ALT
2. ENG MODE SEL IGN 2. TURN HDG, PULL HDG
3.ATC CODE 7700 3. PULL SPEED
4.ATC MAYDAY 4. SPEED BRAKE EXTENDED
5. PAX SYZ ON
Aviate navigate communicate. There are items in there which appear to be the wrong way around?
Pace is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:18   #517 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,047
Quote:
Agreed but there is no normal operational reason for an oscillation in the resulting V path.
Have you ever heard of wind?

In a normal decent from cruise alt using OP DES the V/S will vary much as seen - if the HW drops off the V/S can increase beyond what one might deem acceptable and use a different mode (V/S, DES etc.)
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:22   #518 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,047
Quote:
Aviate navigate communicate. There are items in there which appear to be the wrong way around?
At a first glance, maybe so. But now split to PF/PNF and you'll see PF is prioritising flying,

For reason an Airbus pilot, and only an Airbus pilot will understand the Speed Brake is well down the list, and for good reason. It needs to be extended slowly and carefully (watching PFD) else life will get interesting and counter-productive
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:25   #519 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: England
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by vapilot2004
Agreed but there is no normal operational reason for an oscillation of the resulting V path
Yes there is. As already stated in open descent it doesn't maintain a V/S, it maintains a speed.

As an example, with a sudden headwind increase (and subsequent IAS increase), the aircraft will raise the nose to adhere to the selected speed target, reducing the V/S in the process.

In a normal open descent, especially in varying wind conditions (as would be completely expected around mountainous terrain) then the V/S will change significantly. It's not unusual for variations between 1000fpm and 4000fpm.
Skittles is offline  
Old 25th Mar 2015, 11:26   #520 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: CGN, EDDK
Posts: 91
Quote:
Wirbelsturm:
The BAC 1-11 failure was caused by the incorrect nuts being fitted into a window which was fitted to a pressurised hull from the outside!

The Airbus has interference fit windshields that are fitted from the inside and then sealed from the outside for exactly that reason if I recall correctly.
Not the A320s where I changed windscreens. They are fitted from the outside, same as the B747, B757 and B767. The only aircraft I worked on with windscreens fitted from the inside is the Boeing 737,but changing a windscreen there is a lot of work and takes time because one has to dismantle half the cockpit (liners and glareshield) to get access.

Last edited by MD11Engineer; 25th Mar 2015 at 11:31. Reason: Typo
MD11Engineer is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 22:22.


© 1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1