-hi mate! as you are sending me "back" to the sim for practice (which I always enjoy and find profitable), may I send you back to aerodynamics basic courses and common sense ?
-D-EAS curve ; position of this acft on it at 500ft ; recovery in landing configuration AFTER recovery from the TOTAL loss of sit.awareness...eventual change of PNF to PF for the LTC , planet earth coming fast to embrass you etc...Can you try to put yourself at this place and think for a moment maybe ? And just stop about thinking about your sim a bit, where you just expect the shaker with your hands ready for the perfect recovery...
-I'm sure you are just kidding me while you say that this stick shaker recovery is feasable. Well, guess what, the facts just seem to proove that it's not ! Not after this total and long loss of SA.
-Sorry to say again, but the tragic end was written well before the shaker.
-How come NOBODY was flying the plane ? That's the question but we are far from an answer I'm afraid !
Will be doing perf on monday. Oh wait I'm teaching!!!! I'm pretty familiar with drag curves power curves and stick shakers but I'll do a little revision as it never hurts.
We are actually arguing the same point but with different emphasis. Of course this incident didn't start at the shaker. In a perfect world the speed should have been noticed well before. In my last post I gave an Altitude and Distance from threshold where the aircraft went through Vref.(approximations based on ADS-B confirmed by the report)
What I do disagree with is that the aircraft could not be recovered from the stick shaker point. The reason it wasn't will come out in the first report as this press statement doesn't give details.
On a current Type Rating Course near you for an aeroplane of similar configuration but lower mass they include stall recoveries in session 1. Both clean and in the landing configuration. In the latter case they include from level deceleration and whilst following a 3 degree path. The rate of deceleration to the shaker is similar to this case. YES, you are completely correct that the students are pre-briefed and expecting it and are completely (not sure in all cases) aware of what is about to happen. The point is, It is recoverable with minimum or no height loss. The THY crew had 500' to swap for speed. They had plenty of thrust available. They must have trained this on their Type rating course.
What I'm trying to say is that an average crew on an average day should be able to recover from a shaker at 500' when configured.
This crew obviously didn't manage. For me the most important information to come out of the final report would be why they were unable to recover. That is one of the areas where some serious lessons will be learned.
Not trying to start a fight mate, there are too many of those on here already.