Originally Posted by bubbers44
The captain had no time to deal with the upset.
He never realized what is going on in the first place. He had leaft flightdeck in order, nothing indicating this crossing of the ICTZ would be extra-ordinary and returned after first officers managed to stall the (allegedly, legendarily) unstallable.
Originally Posted by bubbers44
He wouldn't have done what they did but came in too late to help.
Just a guess but it might be a good one. Or not. Unlike NTSB that goes to great length to make a coherent picture of pilot's performance since first lessons by, BEA's info on pilots is remarkably scarce.
Originally Posted by Lyman
You instantly grok the attitude, ten degrees NU, and you proclaim, "Mon dieu mon petit chou, you have STALLED our cherie"....
Hindsight is always 20/20.
Originally Posted by Lyman
you sense an immediate lessening of the chaotic airstream
Description befitting a paperback novel but bearing no resemblance to anything recorded on CVR or DFDR. Unlike Stearman, all A330 currently in use are fitted with closed cockpit, therefore somewhat isolating the pilots from the elements. Airstream at high alpha and low speed would definitively sound different than it's usual in cruise but it takes quite a stretch of imagination to believe crew would recognize airstream as chaotic solely by listening to it. Especially as we're discussing the crews that didn't find warning computer shouting STALLSTALLSTALLSTALLSTALL worthy of comment.
Originally Posted by bubbers44
They need to build experience, not just pushing buttons, but flying the aircraft.
TT shows they were not inexperienced. All the other crews involved also had zero experience in manual handling of A330 in alternate law at high latitude yet none even dented their steeds. Experienced pilot also: stalled their aeroplanes fatally, lost controls, hit the ground they didn't know was there, ran out of fuel &c.
Originally Posted by Lyman
The general conclusion is that Captain cannot see the Stick, and assumes Bonin has Nose Down, input....
That is very particular conclusion based on nothing but PPRuNe misinformation that stick positions are ueber-relevant.
Originally Posted by Lyman
These are two desperate pilots attempting to figure out INOP or problematic controls.
Desperate -yes. Attempting to figure out anything and failing -yes. INOP or problematic controls - not at all. They worked as designed and obliged pilot's inputs dutifully into self-destruction.
Originally Posted by Lyman
BONIN has tried both NU AND ND,
ND very briefly with rapid reversal back to NU as nose went down.
Originally Posted by Lyman
He is satisfied the controls are NOT WORKING.
If so he was dead wrong, soon to be just dead.
Originally Posted by Lyman
It is IMPOSSIBLE that these two are on different pages,
It is possible, it happens every day but seldom results in catastrophe.
Originally Posted by Lyman
they both know there is a problem, both have tried conformed, and reverse control positions....
What happened when stick went forward?
Originally Posted by Lyman
Is Bonin referring to loss of control BEFORE THE CLIMB?
There was no loss of control before the climb. At least not in this local universe. Continuity of the controls and that aeroplane reacted to elevator movement up to splashdown is established beyond doubt.
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
I realize there are two related elements to the rate of response of nose position inputs: elevator command and THS trim both being part of the package in smoothly changing pitch attitude, and holding it.
True but irrelevant. Do classic controls always produce the same aeroplane response for the same yoke displacement or it depends on weight, C.G., speed, altitude? Proper way to fly passenger transport aeroplane is by attitude indicator, not by feel. Who checks THS position on classics after take-off anyway? When required attitude and performance is achieved, residual trim force is trimmed out but notice taken of trim position after trimming - naaaaaaay.
Originally Posted by CONFiture
As said earlier, when the captain enters the flight deck, he has clearly eared that the STALL warning has just stopped, so for him the worst is behind as the appropriate corrective actions have obviously been taken by the crew in place.
Let the fact that unstalled aeroplanes don't fall from the sky at RoD in excess of 10 kilofeet per minute with nose held up high do not detract us from pursuing this interesting line of thought.
Originally Posted by CONFiture
To the point that they will voluntary switch off 2 FCC in an attempt to regain control ...
if indeed was so, their failing at that is unsurprising because controls worked all the time. They just could control themselves and eventually lost the control of the aeroplane.
Originally Posted by CONFiture
The Airbus sidestick concept made their life miserable as no PNF(s) is able to directly witness what kind of inputs are applied on the sidestick(s), which contributes to this elusive loss of faith in the overall flight control system.
By Jove, if this litany of yours ever becomes self-fulfilling prophecy by affecting someone so feebly-minded to believe it, you will have nothing to be proud about!
Originally Posted by Lyman
It is not believable, and why I believe the accounts are "managed"
It is not believable to you.
Originally Posted by jcjeant
But .. for observe what ?
The investigation.
Originally Posted by jcjeant
What were their powers?
Power of objecting to investigation methods and results, which was not exercised. I must admit that this power is nothing compared to some posters' here special powers of pulling stunningly unrealistic hypotheses out of thin air.
Originally Posted by jcjeant
Representative of French families have asked for an observer .. this was refused
If French families signed The Convention on International Civil Aviation, there would be no reason to deny them the representative. Do you have a slightest idea what was the purpose and the legal status of the BEA investigation or are you just expressing amazement that the real world's arrangement is somewhat at odds with your notion of how it ought to be?
Originally Posted by Lyman
There is no record of most of the record of the CVR, transcript or audio form.
Are you accusing BEA of falsifying the CVR transcript?
Originally Posted by Lyman
My question is a simple one, who has the record, is it available?
BEA has original, anyone interested has transcript. If you have internet, you can download it too.
Originally Posted by Lyman
My claim is not of conspiracy whatsoever. Someone has not released the data.
Data is released. too bad it was not to your liking. It just wasn't its purpose to satisfy anyone, it had to do something with improving the flight safety.