Originally Posted by
jcjeant
The problem is that along the life of the Concorde .. one of his main problem was the tires (many events) and so the design has to be reconsidered seriously (certainly after the important accident of Washington concerning tires and F.O tanks)
BA made an alteration to the MLG deflection guard - AF did not.
Another flaw design was the position of the tires relative to the engines ducts .. (this one was pratically impossible to correct .. lol)
True - nowhere else to put them.
But it was a possible solution for the dangerous tandem tires-F.O tanks ... and the solution was put in force .... after Gonesse ... unfortunately again too late for some people ...
Well, BA altered the MLG setup, so one solution to that particular problem was in place on half the fleet years before Gonesse. However after Gonesse both operators did everything possible - and then some - to make sure the problem was completely resolved.
But there were only a dozen or so serviceable Concordes - it's a very different proposition compared to a type where the aircraft in service number in the hundreds or thousands.
But the point is that we're talking a catastrophic failure in which there is nothing any pilot could do to resolve the situation. This is very different from a UAS incident which is trained for even when there is no problem known on the type.
Originally Posted by
Lyman
Be careful not to extrapolate from guesswork. Initially, the Airline reported "turbulence fortes". We were not there, and the accelerations on the airframe leave some important data out. Why would the airline make such a statement? Who knows, and we do not know if there is data that is available, from the line, that is not released. Met based on satellite IR? Hmm......
All data was released. The Airline reported "fortes" to the press, which makes sense if you bear in mind that most passengers - even frequent fliers - rarely encounter anything more than what is considered "light" turbulence to pilots
...and consider that an airliner can climb whilst essentially level. Rapid climb...
This one didn't though - the pitch change preceded the climb according to the FDR.
I am suggesting the discrepancy in AoA and Pitch suggest such a thing. A thirty second bonus of climb, that paid out, and left the a/c hanging on her Fans, basically, all the way down.
If the PF had kept her on a relatively level pitch angle then I'd be happy to entertain your theory, but this is not the case. He pulled up and continued to pull up throughout the sequence. As I've said, this climb was commanded.
This isn't about bashing the crew. Sure, they made mistakes - but even if they did, the fact that at least two of them were placed in a position beyond their knowledge and experience is not their fault.