PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - AF 447 Thread No. 6
View Single Post
Old 22nd Oct 2011, 19:22
  #1361 (permalink)  
gums
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 81
Posts: 1,611
Received 56 Likes on 17 Posts
AoA and side stick

Been lurking for a bit and finally had to comment about the AoA issue.

Flew only three jets with an AoA indicator - first had a big round steam gauge and we never looked at it unless we were maneuvering close to the "pitch up" boundary ( VooDoo), although we should have used it a lot more for approaches versus the 175 knots and 5 knots for each thousand pounds of gas above 3,000 pounds.

Second two had HUD's, and both had the AoA bracket once gear was down for approaches. The SLUF had it full time, but we only saw it when pulling a lot on dive recovery or a turning defensive maneuver. Viper only showed the "bracket" once gear was down, as we had the "protections" like the 'bus for AoA with gear up, heh heh.

As Smilin' and Retired and 'bird and OK have said, the AoA indication is really neat for approaches, as you can verify the T.O. approach speeds without lottsa calculations about weight and such. Simple crosscheck between the HUD speed and the AoA to ensure your configuration was correct, and I learned the hard way. Bumped flap lever before trailing flaps down, but leading edge flaps already down. So had correct stall protection AoA, but actual speed was higher than it should have been and I almost overshot the RWY.

Where the AoA indicator helps is close to a stall and on approaches, where you are - close to a stall!! Normal cruise or even moderate maneuvering doesn't require an AoA indication.

Looking at the 'bus displays, I don't know how you could put an AoA indication on the screens that would be easy to interpret/use. If there was a HUD, then no problem - use the "bracket" as we see in the Viper, Hornet, Eagle, Lightning, Jaguar, Space Shuttle, et al.

I have a hard time with commercial jets that don't have a HUD. Flying an approach in poor weather is so much safer and easier that I would demand it. A manual ILS is really neat with a HUD, and the Space Shuttle videos of their landings show how it works for their landing, so find some. Cross check with the steam gauges/ glass cockpit displays is real easy. You also have some neat things like actual inertial flight path vector, speed/altitude/vertical velocity right there on the sides of the display. So the AF447 crew could have seen the alt unwinding real easy, and the speed bouncing about from whatever to 107 knots.

Our dinosaur FBW ( father of the 'bus system) used the fixed stick and pressure sensors versus actual movement. This was because we routinely maneuvered at high body rates and gees. So having a moveable stick could have inadvertant inputs due to the forces on your arm. Despite concerns by the wimpy USAF HQ, it took us maybe 2 or 3 seconds to adapt to that stick once you rotated for your first takeoff.

Unless the AF crew was in severe turbulence involving high roll and pitch rates, there's no excuse for inadvertant stick inputs. The crew held back stick and could not fathom a stall that was so benign. No nose slice, no high roll to one side or the other, no extreme buffeting, etc. Of course, stall warnings and maybe overspeed warnings. Couldn't find the overspeed warnings in the BEA reports, but maybe that was a concern to the crew.
gums is offline