PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF447 wreckage found
View Single Post
Old 26th Jul 2011, 17:19
  #2177 (permalink)  
RetiredF4
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 776
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
There seem to be a lot of different stall recovery procedures on the market from the time before AF447.

@takata and Iceman

I think, the revised stall recovery procedure, implemented due to some LOC´s without successfull recovery by A+B aircraft made a lot of sense, so it seems to be short sighted to assume the old procedures had nothing to do with the training before AF447 and therefore the applied procedures of AF447. The emphasis of the old procedures was placed on speed increase and maintaining altitude, whereas the revised procedures aim on reducing AOA firsthand and deal with altitude when AOA and speed allows further maneuvering. There are a lot of differences to the new procedures and the procedures as coppied from FCTM A330/A340 (think it´s from Cathay Pacific) from 2006. I admit, i dont know wether those procedures underwent a further change between 2006 and AF447 loss.

Bolding by me
FCTM A330/A340
Non-normal Operations 8.20.15
Operating Techniques REV 2 (25 JUL 06)

STALL RECOVERY
In alternate and direct laws, an aural stall warning “STALL, STALL, STALL” sounds at low speeds. Recovery is conventional. Apply the following actions simultaneously:

· Set TOGA thrust
· Reduce pitch attitude to 10° below FL200 or 5° at or above FL200
· Roll wings level
· Check that the speedbrake is retracted
Below FL200 and in the clean configuration, select Flaps 1. If ground contact is possible, reduce pitch attitude no more than necessary to allow airspeed to
increase. After the initial recovery, maintain speed close to VSW until it is safe to accelerate. When out of the stall condition and no threat of ground contact exists, select the landing gear up. Recover to normal speeds and select flaps as required. In case of one engine inoperative use thrust and rudder with care.

The aural stall warning may also sound at high altitude, where it warns that the aircraft is approaching the angle of attack for the onset of buffet. To recover, relax the back pressure on the sidestick and if necessary reduce bank angle. Once the stall warning stops, back pressure may be increased again, if necessary, to get back on the planned trajectory.

Again bolding by me to highlight some points.
First the old procedure is not named stall approach recovery, but stall recovery. It deals with the situation AF447 was in, alternate law. The actions should be applied simultaneously. Set TOGA thrust. Reduce pitch to 5° above FL200.

That is quite a difference to the new wording

– Apply nose down pitch order on the side-stick
If needed, reduce thrust in case of lack of pitch down authority
– Ensure wings are level

because a reduction of pitch can be achieved by a reduction in NU force or, if pitch would be less than 5° and PF is focused on the number 5° pitch, he may be motivated to increase pitch to 5°.

The last para is interesting too. It disqualifies the stall warning at high altitude to being just the point of buffet onset (not being stalled already, which might well happened). Again here "relax pressure on SS, no word of ND input. And further on ..... "once stall warning stops, back pressure may be increased again....... not reapplied again.


And the summary of the new procedure says it all (bolding by me)

• Spirit of what is the new procedure
 One single procedure to cover ALL stall conditions
 Get rid of TOGA as first action
 Focus on AoA reduction

If the PF judged the first spurios stall warning at the beginning of the climb as not valid, but the second one at FL375 as valid, then he acted in accordance with the old stall recovery procedure described above by
-applying TOGA and simultaneously reduce backpressure on SS, which for sure was not enough, because a full ND input would have been appropriate. But where do you find a ND input in the procedure of 2009?

By the way, it has to be emphasized that those procedures (the old and the new one) are derived from thinktanks originating from A+B.

I dont think i would have followed this old procedure if trapped in this situation, because my expierience would have hopefully overridden this "nonsense procedure. But did the PF ever expierienced a real stall in a jet?

Last edited by RetiredF4; 26th Jul 2011 at 18:49.
RetiredF4 is offline