Originally Posted by
RetiredF4
Letīs say, if the pullup wouldnīt have occurred, we would have no reason to talk about it. But when !!!! happens, you should be able to recognize it and get the appropriate action going to save the day.
Absolutely, but these guys were behind the curve from the outset - they never even recognised that they were stalled, and to me that's far more worrying than the minutae of autotrim operation.
To recognize an stall when you dont expect it is a very challenging task. See the amount of LOC-events and then tell me otherwise.
I'm not denying it at all, but would it not be fair to say that rapid descent despite full power and nose-up attitude would be enough of a clue no matter what you're flying?
Thatīs a oversimplified version of cure.
Really? I'd have thought that ensuring stability and keeping control inputs gentle until getting a feel for the situation would be fundamental to flight management.
As i assume, that you drive a car, it would equal an advice to stay on the street to avoid hitting a tree along the road. Not very helpful despite being absolutely true.
Obviously "stay within the flight envelope" doesn't cover everything, but following that advice and using it as a baseline surely increases your chances of coming out of things in one piece?
Just stop the blaming thing, i didnīt blame anybody or anything and i do not intend to. I have no axe to grind over Ab or to favour B.
I wasn't necessarily referring to you there. Also note that I didn't bring up A vs. B at all!
As i was involved in training and evaluation of aircrews as well as contributing in accident investigations for the greatest part of my military career my interest lies in developping an understanding of the happenings, which led to this tragic accident.
For which I salute you - military investigation has a reputation for suffering political pressure over and above the civilian equivalent. As I said, I wasn't referring to you in particular.
At the same time, I think that the crux of the "happenings" was a poorly-trained crew with significant CRM problems being startled into making some very poor decisions without first properly assessing the situation. It's a matter of a fraction of a second between the onset of what should have been a relatively harmless UAS anomaly (which over thirty crews had successfully resolved prior to this incident) and the PF deciding that consistent NU input is the solution to the problem:
- Published UAS procedure? Disregarded.
- Transient Stall Warning? Disregarded.
- Maximum altitude (which had been agreed with PNF only a few minutes prior)? Disregarded.
All this at the point where the aircraft has barely begun the zoom climb. They're already in danger and autotrim hasn't even come into it.
The reason I find all this back-and-forth about autotrim (specifically the suggestion that it hindered recovery) frustrating is that it ignores the salient point that
autotrim only worked against the PF because he was doing the wrong thing. If the PF had recognised the stall and started a recovery with full nose-down on the sidestick, autotrim would actually have *assisted* in the recovery.
I agree, and it would be bad if it would be otherwise. The more i wonder, how little knowledge is present by the averageAB pilot (might also be the B pilot) concerning the basic stuff, we had to know in our times.
I think it's present at the start of an airline career regardless of type - what bothers me is the development of complacency over time.
But those had been attacked as AB haters the same like those without or with limited AB expierience.
I think that's a little strong - as you said, there are several posters who do reflexively bash Airbus, and (certainly coming from me) it's only those with a track record of doing so that have been called on it.
The AB haters spelling is a defense line against any discussion sensible to the matter
Not at all - in fact what tends to happen is that a post will be hijacked by one of the known agenda-holders, for which they will be pulled up. To the best of my knowledge I don't think anyone neutral on the matter has been singled out.
and is brought up not by the people attacking AB (there are a few), but by the self declared defendents of any system built into an AB aircraft.
I don't think there's a single all-encompassing defender of Airbus systems on these boards at all (myself included). I'll point out if someone's repeating falsehoods or being less than honest, but never any more than that.
[EDIT : And it cuts both ways - if any of you encounter, either in training or on the line, someone who states that it's impossible to stall a FBW Airbus under any circumstances - frickin' report them! What they're saying is not merely wrong, it's dangerously wrong!
One last thing - as an experienced techie, I'll get asked for advice from time to time. If the subject of Apple comes up, then I'll automatically preface any response I give with the fact that I utterly loathe the Apple Corporation and its products for personal and professional reasons - and that as such my advice will be coloured by that fact. I do this because as someone whose advice is considered worth listening to in that field, I have a responsibility to be honest, and were I to dissuade a non-techie - who would nevertheless be a good fit for Apple - based on that prejudice alone, I'd be doing both them and my own reputation a disservice.]