Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
So you are saying, that adding power had no noticable effect, reduction had a big one?
Clandestino
Yes! I'll qualify that in a second.
Im waiting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
The G-load change however started already at 02:11:52 from 0.7 g to 1 g at 02:12:00 to 1.1 g at 02:12:10. The pitchdown had resulted in an decrease of AOA, thus wing and THS and elevators got more effective again.
Clandestino
Yes, but that pitch down was concurrent with thrust reduction! Next two were concurrent with elevators merely moving away from full nose-up! This aeroplane wanted to fly! Combined effort of engines, THS and elevator were needed to keep her stalled - as her attempts to pitch down into flying envelope have attested.
Just read my post again. I was referring to an increase in g load beginning at 02:11:52 until 02:12:30 from 0.7G to 1.1 G, when power was in idle and elevators had been and stayed full down. No power change there, that started later. And yes, it wanted to fly, did i tell anything different? Did i tell it wanted to stall?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
The SS graph does not indicate, what the reason for the overall pulling was.
Agreed. They don't show why, just what.
Iīm interested in the "why", and as anybody can have a reason to do something or to donīt do something, the answer might be in the interactions of PF input and AC reaction as felt and understood by the crew.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
For that we have to look deeper and take the reaction of the airframe into account.
Penetrating as deep as it was possible with my limited means, I could find no fault in BEA's statement that aeroplane performed as designed & certified. Technical path has been well explored and not many pieces of puzzle found there.
I didnīt tell anything about a faulty A/C, i try to get a grip on what happened, what the crew saw and felt, what the FDR schows in regard to SS input against elevator and THS reaction, and how the aircraft reacted to those. You see my motive in looking for something wrong with the aircraft, i can assure you this is not the case. I try to understand at the moment and iīm not content with your explanation that 3 pilots just f*ed up badly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
It is obvious, that any pilot flying with passengers unstrapped in the back tries to avoid g loads less then 1g.
Clandestino
Eeerm... not quite. It's impossible to avoid loads below 1G when leveling off or going into descent. I try to be as smooth as my George and he's limited to 0.7G
Now you are also selective quoting and answer to those selective quotes. Here is my complete sentence, in bold, what you left out.
It is obvious, that any pilot flying with passengers unstrapped in the back tries to avoid g loads less then 1g,
and when they are unavoidable when initiating a descent, to do it as sensible as possible.
A bit unfair, isnīt it? Or was it because i didnīt mention the level off? Picky?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
look up the area of loadfactor protection in ALT2, what inputs (speed, aoa, or whatever) are being used, at what values this protections kick in and how it changes with different speeds, and how this protection would work out.
Clandestino
It uses no air data whatsoever. It's what it says on the box: load factor protection and you just need vertical accelerometer for it to work. Airframe referenced vertical, that is.
On which box? Which values?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
We have to open up our mind to grasp the unpossible and the unthinkable and have to put aside for a moment the obvious.
Clandestino
Moderation is keyword. No use in opening mind so wide that the brains fall out.
Getting personal now. Out of arguments? Or just tired? then dont answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retired F4
We have to think about every aspect of possibilities regardless who invented and designed it.
Clandestino
...and discard impossible, implausible, improbable and just plane goofy ones.
What is so unbelievable about the picture of pilot pulling and pulling until the earth catches up with his stalled aeroplane and smites him?
It might be normal for you that such things happen, and they may actually happen. I lost friends who rejoined into the mirror picture of a lake in Labrador, everything might happen. Case closed.
First, I'm interested in why does it happen at all. When we solve that, then it's the question how did it manage to rise its ugly head in AF447's cockpit.
You wont find that answer, because you found the culprit already. And when you are not willing to look how it happened and thereby find out what caused the pilots to act like they did (like i and some others try to do), then you wont find out why it happend and you can can close the case.