Air Algerie loses contact with its plane leaving Ouagadougou [Archive]

nickmo

24th Jul 2014, 13:53

The weather could be responsible in this incident but there is a NOTAM for Mali flights as well. Surely a missile is not a plausible reason......:
!FDC 4/8415 ZZZ SECURITY MALI U.S. OPERATORS AND AIRMEN SHOULD AVOID OPERATING INTO, OUT OF, WITHIN OR OVER MALI AT OR BELOW FL240 DUE TO INSURGENT ACTIVITY. THERE IS RISK TO THE SAFETY OF U.S. CIVIL FLIGHTS OPERATING INTO, OUT OF, WITHIN OR OVER MALI FROM SMALL-ARMS, ROCKET-PROPELLED GRENADES, ROCKETS AND MORTARS, AND ANTI-AIRCRAFT FIRE, TO INCLUDE SHOULDER-FIRED, MAN-PORTABLE AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS (MANPADS). U.S. OPERATORS AND AIRMEN PLANNING TO FLY INTO, OUT OF, WITHIN, OR OVER MALI AT OR BELOW FL240 MUST OBTAIN CURRENT THREAT INFORMATION; COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE FAA REGULATIONS, OPERATIONS SPECIFICATIONS, MANAGEMENT SPECIFICATIONS AND LETTERS OF AUTHORIZATION; AND PROVIDE ADVANCE NOTICE OF PLANNED FLIGHTS TO THE FAA AT [email protected] WITH SPECIFIC FLIGHT DETAILS. ADDITIONALLY, U.S. OPERATORS MUST REPORT SECURITY INCIDENTS TO THE FAA AT +1 202-493-5833 OR +1 202-267-3333. THE SECURITY CONDITIONS IN MALI FOR U.S. OPERATORS AND AIRMEN AND THE NEED FOR THIS NOTAM WILL BE RE-EVALUATED BY 31 AUGUST 2014. THE FAA HAS PROVIDED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN THE INTERNATIONAL FLIGHT INFORMATION MANUAL AT: HTTP://WWW.FAA.GOV/AIR_TRAFFIC/PUBLICATIONS/IFIM/US_ RESTRICTIONS/. 1403192000-1408312359EST

kotakota

24th Jul 2014, 13:55

Hope his wx radar was not on the blink ?

Squawk_ident

24th Jul 2014, 13:57

Algerians authorities annnounce 51French 26 Burkinabe 5 Canadian 20 Lebanese 4 German
O/b the missing aircraft . Plane disappeared near Gao.
Anybody feeling concerned may call +33 1 43 17 56 46 emergency calll center in Paris

Pinkman

24th Jul 2014, 14:11

Hope his wx radar was not on the blink ?

I sincerely hope not. In July / August the African ITCZ is at its most northerly extent and operating without a functioning weather radar would be bonkers.

Air France did exactly that and flew straight into convective activity that resulted in such severe damage to a 744 (F-GITF) en-route from JNB-CDG that it eventually had to land in Marseille. 30 injured, 1 of those later died. The aircraft was repaired and at age 22 is still flying for AF.

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=144312

Coincidentally the event occurred about 30 miles North of Ouagadougu in Burkina Faso.

jcjeant

24th Jul 2014, 14:38

Crash site = Tilemsi
Source:
BFM
Air Algérie a perdu le contact avec un vol parti de Ouagadougou - BFMTV.com (http://www.bfmtv.com/international/air-algerie-a-perdu-contact-un-vol-parti-ouagadougou-818115.html)

skyken

24th Jul 2014, 15:47

As previously reported by 1stspotter

https://twitter.com/aeropuertoSDR/status/492246798237700096/photo/1

Weather activity great at this time in the ITCZ . Natioanalities of pax and crew List of passengers on missing Air Algerie flight includes 51 French, 27 Burkina Faso nationals, 8 Lebanese, 6 Algerians, 5 Canadians, 4 Germans, 2 Luxemburg nationals, 1 Swiss, 1 Belgium, 1 Egyptian, 1 Ukrainian, 1 Nigerian, 1 Cameroonian and 1 Malian, Burkina Faso Transport Minister Jean Bertin Ouedraogo says; 6 crew members are Spanish, according to the Spanish pilots' union - @AP

Breaking news on Air Algerie flight crashes in Mali, July 24, 2014 - breakingnews.com (http://www.breakingnews.com/topic/air-algerie-loses-contact-with-flight-july-24-2014/)

4Greens

24th Jul 2014, 15:57

Yet another plane off the radar and lost. With the number that have been lost, shot down etc its time for the industry to make a rapid advance in safety by requiring Flight Recorder data to be transmitted to the ground in real time.

The capability is available and may cost some money. Safety costs money.

My approach to flight safety investigation is to ensure that the primary purpose is to prevent the next accident, this can be achieved by this requirement.

Its time for all ppruners to get moving and badger, cajole, write, and generally pursue the achievement of this major safety breakthrough.

Its Time !

Teddy Robinson

24th Jul 2014, 16:05

in the clamour to "break news" there have already been some howling inaccuracies, first it was an Airbus, now an MD. The reports put the "aircraft on ground site" in either Niger or Mali and neither has been confirmed, so lets all be serious for a moment please, this is supposed to be a professional forum.

There are other reports are stating that the Mali site is that of an old airframe, rather than this aircraft, posting the latest breaking news link will not change the facts as and when they finally emerge. Non attributable statements by "airport officials" to persons of the media are not confirmation of anything.

fireflybob

24th Jul 2014, 16:07

Yet another plane off the radar and lost. With the number that have been lost, shot down etc its time for the industry to make a rapid advance in safety by requiring Flight Recorder data to be transmitted to the ground in real time.

In the event of shoot down or catastrophic failure that would not help as data stops when power stops to the recorders.

In the case of the one over Africa the media have been saying "..aircraft disappears from radar" - I believe this is incorrect. ATC lost communication with the aircraft so not the same thing. If the a/c had disappeared off radar they would know (roughly) where to start looking.

fireflybob

24th Jul 2014, 16:30

Suggest you take a look at this thread:-

Flight Recorders et al (http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/543955-black-box-question.html)

Also start watching this at 49.50

Development (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HlLtSfKShQ)

NHerby

24th Jul 2014, 16:34

If the a/c had disappeared off radar they would know (roughly) where to start looking.
And what if the plane is still on the radar?!?

fireflybob

24th Jul 2014, 16:39

And what if the plane is still on the radar?!?

Am not sure how much defence radar they have in that part of the world.....

SloppyJoe

24th Jul 2014, 16:53

When any plane crashes in a remote area it is missing initially. Unfortunately I expect this will be found in the desert sometime in the next 24 hours. It is the media jumping on the plane missing bandwagon to try to make money as it is more sensational that another airliner has gone missing! In 2012 there were 24 transport category aircraft crashes, 20 of them involving fatalities. Unfortunately it is not that rare of an occurrence, at the present time, people can make money as there have been a couple of high profile ones so interest is up and papers will sell.

If this was for example the Hewa Bora Airlines 727 that crashed in 2012 killing 70+ it would not sell as many papers so most are probably unaware of it, or how about the Iran Air of the same year killing 77, also a 727. Would not sell papers so not headline news.

Kubalson

24th Jul 2014, 17:51

Mali's president says wreckage of Air Algerie flight has been spotted between northern towns of Aguelhoc and Kidal.

Reuters

RWY23

24th Jul 2014, 17:56

According to the website of Ouagadougou Airport fench forces based in Mali have detected the wreck of AH5017 half way between Gao and Kidal, in a very hard to accses desert area.

Info VOL AH5017 : Le vol Air Algérie est sorti des radars (http://www.aeroport-ouagadougou.com/informations_aeroport.php?idnew=154)

MAJ (14h31 UTC) : Les forces françaises stationnées au Mali ont détecté l'épave de l'avion AH5017 à mi-chemin entre Gao et Kidal, dans une zone désertique très difficile d'accès. L'impossibilité pour les secours spartiates des équipes médicales de Gao d'accéder à la zone rendent tout secours dans la journée très hypothétique. La nécessité de sécuriser la zone et d'en empêcher l'accès à tout personnel non formé aux contingences des enquêtes aériennes laisse redouter une issue dramatique.

BigFrank

24th Jul 2014, 18:04

At 17:00 GMT/UTC, Euronews (the EU funded news channel only watched in hotel rooms) reported that a routine inspection of the plane in question had taken place in southern France only a few days ago and that everything about it had been found to be correct then.

A few posts up, someone took offence at the concept that a Spanish registered plane should be described as "from the 3rd world." Those living here and subjected to 3rd world political corruption every day of our lives with judicial probes routinely lasting for decades and so allowing brazen politicians to scorn the public who pay their outrageous salaries are not all quite so sure as to where the country should be located on any socio-geo-political scales.

Incidents like the continued complete silence regarding the Cork Airport Accident Enquiry and the 48 hour gap before anyone in Madrid reacted to the video of the Russian plane programmed to land on the Barcelona runway which an Aerolineas Argentinas jumbo was crossing, amongst many others, certainly don't inspire confidence.

peacock1

24th Jul 2014, 19:12

The safety case for the provision of live satellite data showing the position, extent, and track of major convective events such as the weather northeast of Ouagadougou, kindly illustrated by a previous poster, grows ever stronger.
In fact, it is urgent.
I said in 2009, after AF447, that the situation where passengers in the cabin, with access to wi-fi inflight, can see the "strategic" picture of these major convective systems, whereas the flight crew up front only have access to the "tactical" weather radar.
The more information one has to hand, the better the quality of the decision making.
The silence of the regulators is deafening.

Nemrytter

24th Jul 2014, 19:17

The silence of the regulators is deafening.This is being worked on. Remember that most airliners (particularly not a 20 year old MD83) don't have inflight wifi. Those that do will very soon have the option of near-live satellite data with cloud locations and altitudes.

Blind Squirrel

24th Jul 2014, 20:00

...which, if true, would put it right up against the border with Mauritania. That would seem a heck of a westward deviation.

Air Algérie flight AH5017 wreckage 'found in Mali' | World news | theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/24/air-algerie-flight-5017-wreckage-found-mali)

Kbboca

24th Jul 2014, 20:12

Blind Squirrel, I too thought the reports of wreckage in Tilemsi seemed strange (too far west).

However, it appears there are two towns or areas named Tilemsi in Mali.

One to the west, in the Tombouctou region
Tilemsi, Tombouctou - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilemsi,_Tombouctou)

Another in the north east, not too far from Gao.
Tilemsi, Gao - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilemsi,_Gao)
That seems more in line with what the Malian president stated about the wreckage being near Kidal.

Blind Squirrel

24th Jul 2014, 20:19

Ah, that makes a lot more sense. Many thanks for that.

BigFrank

24th Jul 2014, 20:29

Spanish radio station Cadena-SER in its main evening news broadcast from 20:00 onwards this evening:
i) Confirmed routine inspection by French authorities "a few days ago" in Marseille
ii) Mentioned a previous routine inspection by French authorities "recently in Paris"
iii) Further mentioned what I think was a major inspection in March of this year (though I did not quite grasp all the details. They seemed to be suggesting it was an inspection "by European authorities" but I am uncertain on this. Perhaps it meant "in accordance with European standards"?)

They discussed the nature of the company which owns the plane Swift Air, adding that of the 4 aircraft of its type which the company owns, this was the youngest and had been purchased in 2012, I think they said.

Hunter58

24th Jul 2014, 20:33

jcjeant

24th Jul 2014, 20:42

i) Confirmed routine inspection by French authorities "a few days ago" in Marseille
ii) Mentioned a previous routine inspection by French authorities "recently in Paris"
iii) Further mentioned what I think was a major inspection in March of this year (though I did not quite grasp all the details. They seemed to be suggesting it was an inspection "by European authorities" but I am uncertain on this. Perhaps it meant "in accordance with European standards"?)All this is a "walk around" by one or two inspectors of the DGAC... and paper work
If a panel is missing or it's a fluid leak or bad tires or spill coffe in the cockpit .. they will see ... nothing more ....

ATC Watcher

24th Jul 2014, 20:53

Another thing that would advance flight safety is to have working ELTs, which , this time again did not work.

For aircraft to "disappear from radar " you need to have a radar in the first place.

cockney steve

24th Jul 2014, 21:13

It's fundamentally *less safe* to fly anywhere where there is war and the combatants are armed with something more powerful than a spear or bow and arrow. an industry-wide embargo on those areas would cause them grave economic hardship and they'd settle their differences sooner. no planes = no supplies no evacuations no reinforcements no exports.....

Unfortunately, there is a lack of solidarity in the pilot profession, so someone, somewhere will always take that extra bit of risk.

LGW Vulture

24th Jul 2014, 21:32

A few posts up, someone took offence at the concept that a Spanish registered plane should be described as "from the 3rd world." Those living here and subjected to 3rd world political corruption every day of our lives with judicial probes routinely lasting for decades and so allowing brazen politicians to scorn the public who pay their outrageous salaries are not all quite so sure as to where the country should be located on any socio-geo-political scales.

Please let's not use the words "effective oversight" and Spanish DGAC in the same sentence - I've seen it very, very recently and despair at what goes on.

However, this of course could have absolutely nothing to do with today's latest tragedy.

YPPH_Dave

24th Jul 2014, 23:05

I'm tentatively putting my $10 on a failed jack screw.

PAXboy

24th Jul 2014, 23:15

i) Confirmed routine inspection by French authorities "a few days ago" in Marseille
ii) Mentioned a previous routine inspection by French authorities "recently in Paris"
iii) Further mentioned what I think was a major inspection in March of this year (though I did not quite grasp all the details. They seemed to be suggesting it was an inspection "by European authorities" but I am uncertain on this. Perhaps it meant "in accordance with European standards"?)Always best to get your statement out first irrespective of background data. :rolleyes:

glendalegoon

24th Jul 2014, 23:42

here is a link to a nice pic of where the inter tropical convergence zone is now...right over mali

Intertropical Convergence Zone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intertropical_Convergence_Zone#mediaviewer/File:ITCZ_january-july.png)

SaturnV

25th Jul 2014, 00:29

Location reported as Boulikessi, Mali, 50 km from the border of Burkina Faso; also reported as 80 km southwest of Gossi, Mali. (Gossi can be found on Google maps.)

jcjeant

25th Jul 2014, 03:35

Localisation de l'épave de l'avion d'Air Algérie #AH5017 - Présidence de la République (http://www.elysee.fr/communiques-de-presse/article/localisation-de-l-epave-de-l-avion-d-air-algerie-ah501)

"Les restes de l'avion d'Air Algérie, qui s'est écrasé le 24 juillet avec 116 personnes à bord, ont été localisés dans le nord du Mali, dans la région de Gossi. « L'appareil a été clairement identifié malgré son état désintégré », précise l’Élysée dans un communiqué diffusé dans la nuit de jeudi à vendredi."
"The remains of the Air Algeria, which crashed on July 24 with 116 people on board, were located in the north of Mali, in the region of Gossi." Aircraft has been clearly identified despite its disintegrated state, "said the Elysee in a statement released on the night of Thursday to Friday."

sitigeltfel

25th Jul 2014, 05:16

This is no sandstorm at the altitude where was flying the aircraft

They can reach 12,000 metres, over 39,000ft.

http://www.caem.wmo.int/_pdf/low_cloud_visibility/lowcloudvis_08_dust_sandstorms.pdf

crewmeal

25th Jul 2014, 05:29

In this day and age I'm surprised that the press cannot get the aircraft type correct. In this case it was stated in some that it was an A320 then a DC.9 and now an MD.83, with pictures of an Air Algerie A330 in some papers.

Whilst to the uninitiated it's still hard to tell the difference between a DC.9 and an MD.83, surely an Airbus 320 stands out with its engines under the wings.

Toc Vil

25th Jul 2014, 06:03

Newly reported location of wreckage (near Gossi), after 18 hours search, is puzzling, since Gossi is south-west of Gao, a surprisingly short distance from Ouaga after 50 mn flight. This would mean that a/c made a U-turn (unless it is deceptive info aimed at protecting remains and rescuers, or even a trap for rebels).

Volume

25th Jul 2014, 06:58

I'm tentatively putting my $10 on a failed jack screw.I think that lesson has been learned by everyone in the aviation industry. These are the accidents that only happen once, and then make it into all textbooks. (on the other hand it has been the nut, not the screw, so maybe you just give an example that not everybody has learned the lesson correctly...)
German news were reporting about heavy sandstorms in the area, how high can they possibly reach?

despegue

25th Jul 2014, 07:16

Regarding Swiftair...

They are partly a Pay-to-Fly Airline where young, inexperienced pilots PAY the Airline over 30.000 euro just for the right to work for them a couple of months. After that, they are often kicked out and replaced by new ones.
This is certainly the case on ATR42/72. I don't know if they do this on MD83 and B737.
The crews I have met however were all nice, professional but critical of the practices and work ethics of their Upper Management.

I do know that the technical status of their B737 fleet is often questionable, resulting in them seeing their DHL work reduced very recently due to reliability issues.
I do doubt though that Swiftair crews would go airborne with an not airworthy aircraft.
Swiftair also has good Africa experience, flying B737, MD83 and ATR's all over the Continent.

pasir

25th Jul 2014, 07:44

German news were reporting about heavy sandstorms in the area, how high can they possibly reach.

>>>>>

One source states sandstorms can rise to c-50 ft, others give over 20,000 ft. Maybe others can give more reliable info. Is the cruising height the a/c was on at the time of the diversion known ?

TWT

25th Jul 2014, 07:49

Sandstorms ? Go back 1 page to post 59.Can reach to 39,000 feet

thf

25th Jul 2014, 08:15

Bad weather likely cause of Air Algerie crash: French officials (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/25/us-algeria-flight-cause-idUSKBN0FU0J520140725)

Poor weather was the most likely cause of the crash of an Air Algerie flight over the West African state of Mali with 116 people on board, French officials said on Friday.

Investigators at the scene of the crash had concluded the airliner broke apart when it hit the ground, the officials said, suggesting this meant it was unlikely to have been the victim of an attack.

(...)

Separately, Transport Minister Frederic Cuvillier said the strong smell of aircraft fuel at the crash site and the fact that the debris was scattered over a relatively small area also suggested the cause of the crash was linked to weather, a technical problem or a cumulation of such factors.

"We exclude - and have done so from the start - any ground strike," Cuvillier told France 2 television.

Kbboca

25th Jul 2014, 08:44

In some of the news stories about the crash, there have been reports that the plane deviated to avoid bad weather, and also to ensure separation from the Algiers - Bamako flight.

Has anyone seen reports from other pilots in the area that night? It would be interesting to have their analysis of the weather conditions, etc.

I apologize I don't know how to check flightaware or other sites to find out what other planes might have been on a similar route at the time of the crash.

Tiennetti

25th Jul 2014, 09:39

Old King Coal

25th Jul 2014, 09:58

I've flown along that trans-Sahara route a many many times (primarily between London and Accra / Ghana, and other West African destinations, in B737-700 and B757-200) that said, there's no radar coverage over vast swathes of the Sahara Desert and therein ATC uses what's known as a 'procedural service' (i.e. using only radio position reports), and that radio position reporting was often via HF and seemingly to some bloke sitting in a tin shack in Bamako and whom sounded like he was speaking into a tin bucket (and all he ever wanted to know was your aircraft type and registration, so that they could send your airline the bill for their 'service')

Also at this time of year, the ITCZ can top out out +50 thousand feet, therein allowing Cb's to grow to huge size... and trust me when I say that Cb's over the Sahara can match anything that the mid-west USA has to offer in its tornado season.

You can be at +FL370 and yet still looking up to see the the top of those clouds as they stretch high above you, even when you're +100 Nm away from them. I've also regularly witnessed lightening jumping the gaps between those Cb's, and you can sometimes even smell the electrical ozone in the air. Those Cb's can be true monsters and well worthy of giving much respect and distance !

Accordingly it's also not uncommon to be hundreds of miles off track (as indeed will be other aircraft too) whilst dodging around lines of massive thunderstorms. However, given the difficulty of getting an ATC 'Clearance' (i.e. to diverge away from the airway), rather than dive through a Cb, you just did whatever was necessary to avoid it (just as indeed would everybody else). At those times, TCAS and 126.9 (IFBP) are invaluable aids for Situational Awareness!

TIA !

Kbboca

25th Jul 2014, 10:07

BBC is reporting on a statement by French President Hollande.

- No survivors
- French troops on site of crash
- A "flight data recorder" has been found
- Speculation that this was weather related

BBC News - Air Algerie AH5017: 'No survivors' from crash in Mali (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28479681)

Would weather reports of other pilots / flights possibly in the vicinity that night, e.g. Bamako Algiers (AH5009) or Accra Amsterdam (KLM 590)
be available online anywhere?

funfly

25th Jul 2014, 10:25

For aircraft to "disappear from radar " you need to have a radar in the first place.

I would suggest that the above phrase is a generic one used to describe an aircraft that is missing i.e. no comms.

oldoberon

25th Jul 2014, 10:47

What exactly would be the advance in flight safety by sending endless data streams from a plane in duress instead of a carefull, lengthy analysis later on?

Position reporting in a given timeframe, ok, makes sense for narrowing down SAR, but the plethora of data?

Position an absolute must, there may be survivors who die before you find it.

Plethora of data is also essential take mh370 , we would probably know what caused it as well as a very good idea where it is.

How long was it before they found payne stewart's aircraft on land.

Nemrytter

25th Jul 2014, 10:50

Also at this time of year, the ITCZ can top out out +50 thousand feet, therein allowing Cb's to grow to huge size...Indeed. As I mentioned yesterday the one near AH5017 grew to just under FL500. Not uncommon for the region.
From what I can see this one also seems to have ejected a lot of 'junk' (presumably ice and sand) into the upper atmosphere. The crash site is right in the region where all this would be slowly descending back to lower altitudes.
No matter if they were a factor in this or not: African CBs are nasty, nasty, things.

diginagain

25th Jul 2014, 11:16

How long was it before they found payne stewart's aircraft on land. Not very long, one would imagine, as it had been intercepted by a pair of F-16, one of which was with it when it eventually ran out of fuel. Or did you mean Steve Fossett?

Greenlights

25th Jul 2014, 11:20

Of course it's a weather issue..even if we have to wait for the investigation, I put hand on fire. No mistery in this crash. :rolleyes:

SLF305

25th Jul 2014, 11:24

How long was it before they found payne stewart's aircraft on land. Not sure of your point??? Stewart's jet was intercepted 3 different times when it became unresponsive and "escorted" by Air National Guard F-16s up to when the aircraft ran out of fuel and crashed. One F-16 followed it on the way down as well.
The aircraft also did not have a FDR.

jcjeant

25th Jul 2014, 11:25

Hi,

First images (video) of the crash site
INFO FRANCE 2. Les premières images des débris de l'avion d'Air Algérie (http://www.francetvinfo.fr/monde/algerie/avion-d-air-algerie-disparu/info-france-2-les-premieres-images-des-debris-de-l-avion-d-air-algerie_655303.html)

RFGN

25th Jul 2014, 11:47

Air France to avoid overflying of North Mali, management said;
Air France has ordered all its aircraft around the Mali following the crash of an Air Algeria flight Thursday, Friday Juniac Alexander, the CEO of Air France, micro Europe 1 . This decision held until further notice, pending more information on this tragic incident, said the head of the airline.

Air France décide de contourner le Mali - Europe1.fr - Economie (http://www.europe1.fr/Economie/Air-France-decide-de-contourner-le-Mali-2190251/)#

Link in French...

Squawk_ident

25th Jul 2014, 13:53

Mr Laurent Fabius Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Le Drian Minister of Defence and Mr Cuvillier Minister of Transport.
Crash site is in the Gossi area 150km SW of Gao.
A drone Riper found debris at around 20LT (2000z) in night condition.
There had been informations previously gathered from various sources, Burkinabe, Malian and Dutch military from the MINUSMA. Field of debris is secured and is a square of approximately 300m by 300m.
Malian authorities have requested assistance from France in the inquiry. A team of the BEA and forensic experts are send today and should be on scene tomorrow.
No indication given on which Black box has been found...

AlphaZuluRomeo

25th Jul 2014, 15:07

@ RFGN:

According to an (edited?) version of the article you linked, the no-fly order was only for a brief period of time, and routes flown are now "back to normal" (since noon today).

Air France a donné un temps l'ordre à tous ses avions de contourner le Mali suite à l'accident d'un vol d'Air Algérie jeudi, a annoncé vendredi Alexandre de Juniac, le Pdg d'Air France, au micro d'Europe 1. Cette décision avait été prise le temps d'en savoir plus sur cet incident dramatique, a précisé le patron de la compagnie aérienne. Depuis vendredi midi, "les survols ont repris, la situation est revenue à la normale", a précisé une porte-parole à Reuters.

Kbboca

25th Jul 2014, 16:06

Perhaps it's of particular interest today that AVHerald has just posted the final report about an incident of a temporary loss of control by AirFrance flight AF-3575 over Tanzania in February 2012, following an encounter with severe weather in the ITCZ.

Report: Air France A332 over Tanzania on Feb 12th 2012, severe turbulence and temporary loss of control (http://avherald.com/h?article=477d6182&opt=0)
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2012/f-cg120227.en/pdf/f-cg120227.en.pdf

BigFrank

25th Jul 2014, 16:40

To summarise the media coverage I have seen in Spain:

EC-LTV is the aircraft registration.

Most reports seem to come from French sources; snippets of African sources too. (Filtered through Paris?)

The “official story” is most definitely that the cause of the accident was “bad weather”; though the possibility of other factors playing a “lesser” part is not wholly discounted.

Spokesman for the Spanish ATC (union?) interviewed on radio this morning mentioned his time as a controller in Ibiza and the need to divert aircraft hundreds of kilometers off course to avoid flying through storms which could wreck a modern aircraft there as analagous to the need for similar deviations in Africa.

The concept of 2 changes of course by this aircraft both to avoid the storm and (subsequently?) to avoid another aircraft is widely reported.

Though the presence of French military units operating in Mali is mentioned everywhere, one Spanish radio station COPE highlighted the presence of Spanish troops “in that area.” Mention has been made of 2 Spanish military aircraft being deployed to help repatriate bodies.

One flight recorder found.

Pilots Union (SEPLA) spokesman on lunchtime tv news highlighted the vast experience of the crew (both pilots are reported as ex-Spanair.)

SEPLA criticism of the company in question Swiftair for commercial practices which would inevitably lead to compromises of safety margins as printed in an issue of a SEPLA magazine during 2013 are reported, though the spokesperson mentioned above did not press this as a likely cause.

The captain is described as “an old Africa hand” though the co-pilot was effectively on “her first African posting.” (I think I heard it said that she had only moved there relatively recently.)

The company in question Swiftair is not very visible at all. Lots of video of the outside of their offices near Madrid and press-release-type shots of their aircraft.

Though relatives of the crew and employees of the company are seen entering and leaving the offices, direct contact of the company with the press has been almost non-existent. The small amount of official information from them has mainly come from statements on the web, although both yesterday and today a “spokesman” for the company read prepared statements to the press on camera. I write “spokesman” because his name and his position in the company is not quoted anywhere that I have seen.

In addition, in terms of location, these briefings were both conducted on the street. From this I conclude that Swiftair are currently unwilling to allow journalists to enter their offices.

This push for anonymity is reflected on-line currently in the “Statement from the Managing Director of Swiftair” in Spanish, French and English which nowhere mentions the actual name of this person.
http://www.swiftair.com/corporativa/NOTA.pdf

I think I am correct in saying that although lunchtime tv broadcasts today identified by name all 6 deceased crew, with a photo of the 6 of them together as well as individual photos from elsewhere, especially from social media, Swiftair has not currently revealed their identities.

In a routine Friday press briefing after the regular Friday meeting of the Spanish cabinet, the Spanish Deputy PM highlighted that all the aircraft’s paperwork was in order. The aircraft had received a major inspection in January 2014 and so had a valid certificate until December 2014.

threemiles

25th Jul 2014, 17:47

Has happened before
West Caribbean Airways Flight 708 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Caribbean_Airways_Flight_708)

Chronus

25th Jul 2014, 18:24

Earlier post on this thread with reference to a French source described the main wreckage contained within a 500m crater. If the empennage or horizontal stabiliser are subsequently discovered at a separate location, chances are it was a severe weather encounter. What else could have caused caused such a steep descent. Are there any reports of comms enroute r/t tx with any station. Given the weather conditions I would expect there must have been some for level and heading changes for avoidance. It has also been speculated that the flight may have been turning back from its destination. If this was the case there would have been some ground comms.

Squawk_ident

25th Jul 2014, 18:24

The French TV media France2 is broadcasting its journal presently. In their subject they briefly filmed a quick shot of a radar screen and the DAH5017 plot is seen. The plot is at FL 293 and immediatly after FL252 before the contact is lost.
France2 news is available shortly after on their website.
I will check again when it will be available on their website

suninmyeyes

25th Jul 2014, 18:28

Or possibly like the Southern Airlines DC9 thunderstorm accident where hail broke the windshield on a flight in 1977.

Southern Airways Flight 242 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Airways_Flight_242)

DaveReidUK

25th Jul 2014, 18:42

El tripulante donostiarra, un joven alegre que soñaba con viajar | Internacional | EL PAÍS (http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2014/07/24/actualidad/1406224673_457054.html)

glendalegoon

25th Jul 2014, 18:54

sun in my eyes

I agree with you about southern airways. First thing that came to my mind. Except with southern airways there were survivors, mayday call etc.

and it was during daylight.

the air algerie flight was at night, in marginal ATC land.

i can imagine losing both engines due to hail ingestion, aerodynamic stall and bam. flying at night, on instruments with both engines dead can lead to a stall (ask air france, and their engines were running). wonder if apu was running on line?

a deadstick landing at night in a sand storm/thunderstorm in the desert would be a lot of luck. southern airways was attempting a dead stick landing on a road in daylight.

Kbboca

25th Jul 2014, 19:48

I hope it's not inappropriate to ask this question, but in several articles today, I've seen a statement that the smell of fuel at the crash site is significant in helping identify what happened:

example (emphasis mine):
French Transport Minister Frederic Cuvillier said the strong smell of aircraft fuel at the crash site and the fact that the debris was scattered over a relatively small area also suggested the cause of the crash was linked to weather, a technical problem or an accumulation of such factors.

I'd like to learn more about what the smell of fuel might mean and how it helps investigators. Thanks.

rkenyon

25th Jul 2014, 22:02

I'm guessing that the smell of fuel would rule out the 'out of fuel' scenario...

16024

25th Jul 2014, 22:53

Not really.

threemiles

26th Jul 2014, 01:07

There is no ATC radar in this part of the world and Md80s do not send ADS-B.

JanetFlight

26th Jul 2014, 01:59

This MD80 accident has some similarities with this one here:

ASN Aircraft accident McDonnell Douglas DC-9-32 LV-WEG Nuevo Berlin (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19971010-0)

MD8/DC9, CB's, Night IFR, ENR phase, Crater, etc, just my 2 cents. May all RIP.

wrecker

26th Jul 2014, 06:47

There seems to be an unseemly rush to attribute this tragic accident to weather. A/C have been flying through the ITCZ/ITF ever since transport flying started, Its not pleasant but it is do able in safety. When there is a desire to determine the cause without a proper investigation there is normally a cover up about.

Squawk_ident

26th Jul 2014, 07:51

http://fr.tinypic.com/r/2lselpl/8]View My Video

The radar screen is centred on DFFD Ouagadougou
We can see WPT TATAB N12.5096 W01.4263 and the name KAYA is a city 50NM from Ouaga

Tiennetti

26th Jul 2014, 08:08

Is it normal to have two echoes at some point?

andrasz

26th Jul 2014, 08:39

There seems to be an unseemly rush to attribute this tragic accident to weather.

There are not many scenarios that will bring down a modern jet from level cruise without any communication from the crew. After the Air Mozambique accident similarly weather was considered the main culprit until the bizarre truth emerged.

Livesinafield

26th Jul 2014, 09:21

View]dah5017 Pictures, dah5017 Images, dah5017 Photos, dah5017 Videos - Video - TinyPic - Hébergement gratuit d'images, partage de photos et hébergement de vidéos (http://fr.tinypic.com/r/2lselpl/8) My Video

The radar screen is centred on DFFD Ouagadougou
We can see WPT TATAB N12.5096 W01.4263 and the name KAYA is a city 50NM from Ouaga

What is this?

BigFrank

26th Jul 2014, 10:23

Media reports in Spain all assert that "because the Republic of Mali does not have the infrastructure to undertake the investigation it has already/ is on the point of handing over the investigation to the French Authorities."

I think it was Spanish pilots' union SEPLA who were quoted as saying "for a Spanish registered craft with a Spanish crew, Spain would be a more appropriate country to take charge of the investigation."

Common sense?

Misplaced national pride ? (Don't bother telling me that other countries don't have this defect!)

A guarantee that the report would be inconclusive (save to highlight that that the Chicos del Minsterio had done everything but everything "by the book") and that the report would not be available in the lifetime of the youngest poster on these boards?

Arma61

26th Jul 2014, 11:09

"There seems to be an unseemly rush to attribute this tragic accident to weather. A/C have been flying through the ITCZ/ITF ever since transport flying started, Its not pleasant but it is do able in safety. When there is a desire to determine the cause without a proper investigation there is normally a cover up about."

Maybe.
Air Algerie AH5017: 'Hezbollah Leader and French Troops were On Board Flight' (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/air-algerie-ah5017-hezbollah-leader-french-troops-were-board-flight-1458390)

LGW Vulture

26th Jul 2014, 11:19

I'm sad to say that your cynicism is not misplaced. :(

gmorton

26th Jul 2014, 11:41

" Last year(2013), Swiftair won a €11.9 million contract with Spain's Interior Ministry, to transport deported immigrants, in charter flights, back to their home countries." quote from WSJ 24/07/14
Swiftair Had Relatively Clean Record Before Air Algérie Flight Went Missing - WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/articles/swiftair-had-relatively-clean-record-before-air-algerie-flight-went-missing-1406229874)

sitigeltfel

26th Jul 2014, 13:17

No indication given on which Black box has been found...
A second one has now been recovered.

http://www.laprovence.com/article/actualites/2975068/crash-air-algerie-la-deuxieme-boite-noire-retrouvee.html

Squawk_ident

26th Jul 2014, 15:30

About the video showing the track of the DAH5017 on a radar screen, you may find this video - part of the news- in this link

Le 20h de France 2 : journal télévisé du 25 juillet 2014 en replay (http://www.francetvinfo.fr/replay-jt/france-2/20-heures/jt-de-20h-du-vendredi-25-juillet-2014_650621.html)

Go to + 11'10'' to have the beginning of the topic. Comments are in French of course but the most interesting is the video.
This capture could not have been filmed in France were all matters about aviation and ATC is stricly monitored and considered as a secret of State.
I think that the officials aviation authorities in Burkina Faso allowed journalists to do their jobs and shown all evidences in their possesion. This is totally unthinkable in France (and likely in other countries...)but it was done before the Malian government requested the assistance of France in the inquiry. Now all the military behaviours are in place and nothing will filter. Fortunately the Burkinabese were not told to refrain from unveiling this record.

wind check

26th Jul 2014, 15:44

Last year(2013), Swiftair won a €11.9 million contract with Spain's Interior Ministry, to transport deported immigrants, in charter flights, back to their home countries." quote from WSJ 24/07/14
Swiftair Had Relatively Clean Record Before Air Algérie Flight Went Missing - WSJ

They are probably earning even more money via their P2F scheme and low paid pilotos treated like :mad:

As for stupid french president Hollande who already tells medias that weather was the main cause of this crash, the captain had 15 000 hours on MD series and his copilot had logged around 7000 hours on type. They both flew at Spanair, and they probably know how to avoid CBs!!!!!

Kbboca

26th Jul 2014, 23:01

AV Herald now has posted a very interesting satellite image from the time of the crash...
Crash: Swiftair MD83 over Mali on Jul 24th 2014, aircraft lost altitude (http://avherald.com/h?article=477c75de&opt=0)

glendalegoon

26th Jul 2014, 23:21

CDN_ATC

26th Jul 2014, 23:27

Don't speak french

Did they mention the second target on the screen. Ghost target, it had a squawk code of 2000 as well, just a false SSR return or what?

Kbboca

26th Jul 2014, 23:53

CDN_ATC:
I speak French (though am not a pilot, so don't necessarily know lots of technical French), and watched the video.

No, they did not really discuss the radar image having two signals, the main gist was that the plane was flying at 8000 meters, changed heading, and then rapidly fell out of the sky and disappeared off radar.

CDN_ATC

27th Jul 2014, 00:30

As a controller (obviously) that's not what I would expect from a ghost target, track was slightly different... although it could simply be the way their systems function.

They were already squawking 2000, which is odd considering they were still in radar coverage, but perhaps they had been terminated prior to that, I say all this not knowing anything about their procedures.

I'd like to see that radar tape played in normal speed from departure...

glendalegoon

27th Jul 2014, 00:30

kbboca

I am a pilot, but don't speak french, (though I like the film, "The Umbrellas of Cherbourg).

You said the plane was flying at 8000 meters. Are you sure? I would have thought the plane was flying the cruise segment at around the middle 30's (thirty thousand feet plus).

8000 meters is about 24000 feet plus. just double checking.

Kbboca

27th Jul 2014, 00:50

I listened twice. They did say 8000 meters. I was surprised by that too, since I assumed the flight would be higher.

Here's a bit more of an exact translation: "Taking off in full night, the flight was flying at 8000 meters when it demanded a change of heading 20 minutes after take off. "The aircraft" [I can't quite make out the word used - it almost sounds like they say "the wings"] then fell suddenly to 4 millimeters [yes! that's really what it says] before disappearing from the screen."

Note: This is the radar image from the Ouagadougou control tower.

Note: I'm very sure about the 8000 meters ("huit mille metres") and the 20 minutes after take off ("vingt minutes apres decollage") - both facts which surprised me somewhat. The key section is from 11:20 - 11:35 of the video if anyone else wants to give this a listen to double check what is said.

glendalegoon

27th Jul 2014, 01:04

kbboca

thanks again. this doesn't make sense to me as the plane should have been higher as you indicate.

interestingly enough (though I am not a METER man) this is about the altitude included in FAA warnings for terrorist activities.

I do hope we find something out soon on the CVR.

Thanks again kbboca. 20 minutes should have easily gotten the plane into the 30's (meter =)

ps...26246.72 feet =8000 meters

(it took me awhile)

Kbboca

27th Jul 2014, 01:40

Glad to help. I'm thinking the reporter may have misspoken. I've certainly seen reports that the plane was higher (various articles I've seen say "9000 meters," "10 kilometres" or "33,000 feet")

One other note about the course change request "20 minutes after take off" - that seems to be accurate. Looking back at the early reports, e.g. this BBC story, (BBC News - Algeria airliner feared crashed on flight from Burkina Faso (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28460625)), does seem to confirm that the heading change was requested about 20 minutes into the flight.

Burkina Faso Transport Minister Jean Bertin Ouedraogo said the plane sent its last message at around 01:30 GMT, asking air traffic controllers in Niger to change its route because of bad weather.

So there were about 25 minutes between that request and loss of contact. (1:55 GMT) The TV program showing the Ouagadougou radar is misleading in that it makes it sound as if the disappearance from the radar immediately followed the change in heading.

AlphaZuluRomeo

27th Jul 2014, 02:35

"The aircraft" [I can't quite make out the word used, it almost sounds like they say "the wings"] then fell suddenly to 4 millimeters [yes! that's really what it says] before disappearing from the screen."
Well, I'm sorry but that's not quite right. They did say "4,000 m" (quatre mille mètres, not quatre millimètres) and there is nothing about wings.

The sentence following the heading change request (that you got perfectly right) is :
"... mais il chute rapidement à 4000 mètres d'altitude, avant de disparaître complètement des écrans radar."
That means: "... but it suddenly descended/fell to an altitude of 4,000 m, before completely disappearing from the radar display."

I don't know where they got their 8,000m from. The display clearly shows FL310 before the event.

Kbboca

27th Jul 2014, 02:58

"quatre mille metres" Of course. DUH, I should have figured that out! Sorry!

(Sometimes the vocalization of final e's in French words spoken by native French speakers can throw me, because those e's are largely unpronounced by the West Africans I work with.)

Just noticed an article (in French) with comments by Remi Jouty, director of the BEA. Two BEA investigators are at the scene. Jouty is basically saying it's too early to cite a probable cause of the crash.

http://www.rtl.fr/actu/societe-faits-divers/crash-air-algerie-trop-tot-pour-faire-la-moindre-hypothese-estime-le-bea-7773437558

The most notable news from the article is that the black boxes will be sent to France for analysis at the request of the Malian authorities.

B777Heavy

27th Jul 2014, 06:10

It's actually very normal to sqwak 2000 in non-radar environment.

His dudeness

27th Jul 2014, 08:01

Flew around there on the 22nd (GMMN-DXXX via GAO) and I had my thoughts about not beeing allowed to climb above 400 (as per NOTAM). My kite can go to 470 (which we use very seldom, got to burn lots of fuel) but we regularly criuse at 430. The difference is often signifcant.We were very lucky, the ITCZ had taken a day off, nothing but sunshine and haze down low....

wind check

27th Jul 2014, 08:07

wind check

when you find a plane that has crashed , and at the time it went missing there was a giant thunderstorm, guessing the wx is a factor is not really that dumb.

hours don't mean much. we don't know what happened for sure and I would like to know if the wx radar was working properly.

the effects of thunderstorms can be realized dozens of miles from the actual cloud. Hail, even severe or extreme turbulence.

We shall see

There are thousands and thousands of airliners everywhere in the world that fly around this kind of weather. When you have a 20'000+ hours experience in the cockpit, you do know how to check the flight plan route and weather report before departure and you know how to avoid the red cells on-route. Maybe there was an issue with the wx radar, you are absolutely right, and that wouldn´t be surprising from a Swiftair aircraft. However, if weather can indeed be the main cause of air disasters during the take off and landing phases, it is very unlikely to put a modern airliner down from FL300.
Now there is something that the french government is trying to hide from the beginning, there was a Hezbollah leader on board the flight plus 33 french soldiers including a couple of commanders from the french army.
There are also some parts of the wreckage more than 10 kilometers from the crash site which means the airplane would have exploded in the air.

Tiennetti

27th Jul 2014, 08:39

Sources of this?

Simplythebeast

27th Jul 2014, 08:43

Air Algerie AH5017: 'Hezbollah Leader And French Troops Were On Board Flight' (http://www.ibtimes.com/air-algerie-ah5017-hezbollah-leader-french-troops-were-board-flight-1639990)

Adds a bit of spice. I suppose.

andrasz

27th Jul 2014, 08:52

I would not take IBT reports on face value until confirmed by some more reliable source.

AlphaZuluRomeo

27th Jul 2014, 12:00

IBT source is quoted, a local (algerian) paper.
Echorouk Online - Air Algérie AH5017 crash: "Tawhid and Djihad" battalion stationed near the crash site (http://www.echoroukonline.com/ara/articles/211621.html)
It itself relies on "sources", with no name (understandable) nor qualification.

I think I too will wait a bit more, thanks :)

Squawk_ident

27th Jul 2014, 18:25

Mr Jouty was invited by the 20H TV news France2 just a few minutes ago.
The recorders are presently in the hands of the Malian authorities and should be transferred tomorrow morning to Le Bourget, the head office of the BEA, for examination and reading.
Mr Jouty said that it was an extremely high velocity impact but it could not be said now what was the attitude of the aircraft, nose down or not etc...
About the recorders external aspects:
-The FDR seems to be in a relative good state and might be exploitable.
-The CVR is very damaged.

threemiles

27th Jul 2014, 21:15

I apologize if I had underestimated the radar capabilities of the DFFD airport tower before. If the video from FranceInfo is not fake, it appears there is SSR coverage, but still I doubt it would be utilized operationally. The squawk 2000 hints to this assumption, too. However there is no mentioning of the radar installation in the AiP.

The loss of contact was reported to have happened after 48 mins flying time. This would mean that the aircraft was about 300 NM from the radar head or even further. This is below the radar horizon of any radar, so I am still sceptical what I see.

The video is very much accelerated. The SSR turning speed may be 10 or 12 secs, assuming this is not a brand new state of the art SSR only installation ( it would not need the big dome then). The video shows two or more updates per second.

The video consists of three sequences:

(video time - flight level - ground speed are the data below)

1) climb out sequences
11:19 FL116 310kts
level and GS gradually increase until
11:24 FL147 350 kts
I would say that this corresponds to a normal flight profile.
At an assumed climb rate of 2000 ft/min within 6 seconds of video the aircraft climbed 3100ft, so an assumed acceleration of 10x or 15x could well fit.

2) level flight sequence
11:25 FL310 410 or 400kts
until
11:28
This corresponds with my knowledge of an initial FL of a heavily laden MD80
If this is not fake then the ghost target could be a result of the aircraft flying well beyond the radar's nominal range

3) final sequence
11:28 FL305 330kts
This constitutes a significant drop in ground speed, maybe to the vicinity of Vs. But remember that ground speed on radars is derived by calculation of the leg distance between the past radar positions, so it may be inaccurate
11:29 FL298 310kts
11:29 FL295 300kts
11:30 FL295 280kts
11:30 FL295 270kts
11:31 FL252 270kts, aircraft starts veering left
11:31 FL252 150kts, tight left turn
11:32 FL252 140kts
11:34 the target disappears, may have fallen below the radar horizon or transponder not responding

glendalegoon

28th Jul 2014, 00:06

threemiles

thanks for the information

slowing for turbulence is about 285 knots (mach .76 or so)

this could account for some reduction in ground speed.

the altitude changes are of great interest too

further reduction in ground speed may indicate highly reduced airspeed approaching losss of control

the turn might be away from the storm.

however I don't see the original radar plots or anything else.

I can imagine loss of one or both engines, reduced speed, unable to maintain altitude etc. loss of engine due to hail

we shall see. but thanks

threemiles

28th Jul 2014, 00:24

Ground speed <> Indicated Air Speed

Youre slowing to 280kts IAS in turbulence, instead of riding the cowboys 330 kts. But this is in level flight and at FL310.

A GS of 280kts at FL310 with little to no wind should be dangerous close to Vs if not lower than it.

The turn only occurs after the airplane has lost altitude and speed and is a start of a stall spiral for me. The airplane was a little off track to the left, this is probably the track correction for weather that the media bet on.

The video is further up here in a link pointing to FranceInfo TV. There is a radar replay, likely on a PC or so, that was filmed by the TV team. It is black on white, which means it is synthesized.
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/544205-air-algerie-loses-contact-its-plane-leaving-ouagadougou-6.html#post8580965

My bet is iceing of pitot tubes, overspeed and underspeed alarms, confusion, intentional flight idle, compressor stall, aerodynamic stall, T-elevator stall, deep stall. Handling or capability of weather radar may have played its role. The world had seen it before, except that there is no evidence that the crew tried to climb above FL310 as did AFI and those here http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulkovo_Aviation_Enterprise_Flight_612

glendalegoon

28th Jul 2014, 00:38

threemile

the turbulence penetration speed is 285 kias

turbulent air penetration 285 knots or .76

it is not that close to a stall and certainly ground speed is not airspeed indicated

I would slow to turbulence penetration speed, why wouldn't you?

Nemrytter

28th Jul 2014, 01:03

The airplane was a little off track to the left, this is probably the track correction for weather that the media bet on.If the normal track runs through TATAB then they'd have flown right through the peak updraft region of the storm (tops at FL530). Based on the quick sight in the video their track would've taken them downwind of the convective core (still with tops around FL440). In that area they'd have hit some heavy down-drafts as well as probably hail and maybe crystal icing. Not where I'd like to be flying.
That said, within a few minutes of leaving Ouagadougou their radar probably would've been filled with red anyway - so not much help there.

- edit -
Also, the final position shown on the radar in the video matches very closely with the presumed crash site on avherald's satellite pic.

threemiles

28th Jul 2014, 01:54

Distance from Ouga to crash site ist 167 NM.
So radar horizon is likely not an issue.
But something is wrong with the 50 mins flYing time. You get farther away from your departure airport than just 167 NM. Maybe offblock and lift off time have been swapped.

roulishollandais

28th Jul 2014, 04:52

Not a word from the French President nor Defense French Defense Minister. Thank you AZR for that information :Among the victims of the Spanish aircraft that was leased by Air Algerie, 33 soldiers of the French army who were in Mali and Africa, and among these there are three senior officers in the French Intelligence Service, Echorouk sources said.

Lebanese Hezbollah leader who operates as a businessman who traveled from and to Senegal and Burkina Faso, was also among the victims of the crash. Lebanese Embassy in Algiers requested information on the situation of Lebanese nationals and it was found that the man in question is among the victimsShocking Silence.

AlphaZuluRomeo

28th Jul 2014, 08:18

You're welcome. As I said before, I'm quite not sure it's an information (a legit one, I mean). Could be rumor too. Wait & see.

ATC Watcher

28th Jul 2014, 09:47

33 soldiers of the French army who were in Mali and Africa, and among these there are three senior officers in the French Intelligence Service, Echorouk sources said.

That does not fit the current official communication plan, and I doulbt you can hide this fact for very long, so I am sceptical about this rumour.
But if some truth is on it , I guess ' Le canard enchaine " ( French Weelkly newspaper generally very well informed ) of tomorrow evening will surely know and mention it .

ATC Watcher

28th Jul 2014, 10:08

it appears there is SSR coverage, but still I doubt it would be utilized operationally. The squawk 2000 hints to this assumption, too. However there is no mentioning of the radar installation in the AiP.

My info os that Thales has a contract with AECNA ( the multinational ATS service provider over Burkina Fasso) to install a MSSR in Ouaga , installed but not operational yet. What we saw is maybe just a replay from an engineering control screen , not the operational one.

BigFrank

28th Jul 2014, 10:40

F24 (the inernational French tv news service available 24/7 online I believe; and in English) reported recently that there will be an official news breiefing quite shortly.

As I highlighted above, I would not really welcome a Spanish investigation into this accident.

I am however equally (or perhaps even more) suspicious of a French investigation.

One earlier poster highlighted that air-accidents are officially classed as "state secrets" which is not in my experience the right mood-music for clarification. (Obviously protecting a crash sight to allow investigators to work unhindered and also to prevent ghouls or momentarily(?) insensitive reporters from offending relatives of the deceased is a wonderful idea.) But "state secret" seems way over the top.

In addition, there are comments above about the lack of info currently available from official French sources, as well as several statements to the effect that many French service personnel were on board.

It is easy for this question to just be one of "I don't like/ trust/ rate France," but surely the question of international public confidence in the contents and impartiality of the final report is of some importance.

Time for an EU air accident body ?

fireflybob

28th Jul 2014, 11:11

Time for an EU air accident body ?

Please God NO!!

MrSnuggles

28th Jul 2014, 11:22

I listened carefully to what was said about the flightpath of AH5017 and as earlier confirmed, they actually say it was flying at 8000 metres. 20 minutes after takeoff they requested a change in directions due to weather. Then they dropped 4000 metres in altitude and disappeared from radar. My question is how high you are flying when an altitude loss of 4000 metres makes you drop radar contact. This is not the Himalayas., but described as savannah.

During this piece of information the pictures of radar screens and crash sites were shown. (Information for you who didn't see this news clip.)

What was also interesting was the "air safety expert" who commented on what could have happened. He thought that the pilots may have turned into an even worse situation and experienced spatial disorientation. This based on the fact that the aircraft took off in the middle of the night ("plein nuit" in the clip) and African nights can be black as tar.

Toc Vil

28th Jul 2014, 11:44

According to TV channel LCI (La Chaîne Info, belonging to TF1), there were four members of the French Special Forces and one member of French Military Intelligence aboard.

3forty

28th Jul 2014, 13:45

SEPLA, Spain´s airline pilots association warned about Swiftair poor standards of training. Do they know something we don´t?
Air Algerie AH 5017: Spain's Pilots' Union Warned of 'Unsafe' Charter Company Swiftair (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/air-algerie-ah-5017-spains-pilots-union-warned-unsafe-charter-company-swiftair-1458345)

jcjeant

28th Jul 2014, 16:01

Hi,

Read it for the first time in a official statement :
"Toutes les hypothèses seront examinées dans le cadre de l'enquête. Ce que nous savons d'une façon certaine, c'est que la météo était mauvaise cette nuit-là, que l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousser chemin, avant que le contact ne soit perdu", a déclaré le ministre au cours d'une conférence de presse."All hypotheses will be examined in the context of the investigation. What we know in some way, is that the weather was bad that night, that the flight crew had requested to divert and then turn back before contact is lost, "said the minister at a press conference."then turn back"
Crash Air Algérie : l'équipage avait demandé à rebrousser chemin (Fabius) | La Provence (http://www.laprovence.com/actu/politique-en-direct/2980026/crash-air-algerie-lequipage-avait-demande-a-rebrousser-chemin-fabius.html)
In all former statements it was only "request to divert"

ATC Watcher

28th Jul 2014, 16:38

The "request to turn back " was confirmed this evening by Laurent Fabius, French Foreign Minister in a press conference.

viking28

28th Jul 2014, 16:45

One question for the old flyers:

Is the MD 83 known to be tricky to recover from a stall ?

PorcoRosso

28th Jul 2014, 16:47

"Toutes les hypothèses seront examinées dans le cadre de l'enquête. Ce que nous savons d'une façon certaine, c'est que la météo était mauvaise cette nuit-là, que l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousser chemin, avant que le contact ne soit perdu", a déclaré le ministre au cours d'une conférence de presse.

I would be curious to hear or read the official statement

This one is controversial as you can also read it this way :

Ce que nous savons d'une façon certaine, c'est que la météo était mauvaise cette nuit-là, que l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis a rebroussé chemin, avant que le contact ne soit perdu"

Which means ..the crew requested to divert, then turned back (not : then TO turn back )

I suspect a journo confusion. If it´s the case, we are left with one request to divert, not two.

jcjeant

28th Jul 2014, 16:55

Hi,

I would be curious to hear or read the official statement

Hear will not make a difference
"rebrousser" or "rebroussé" ... that's no difference when you hear it
The only way for be sure is to read the official transcript of the statement
Normally the journalists have received this transcript after the conference

Kbboca

28th Jul 2014, 17:10

Is there any way at this point to see how long it took the weather to clear in the area on the route? (i.e. whether a weather delay of 1 - 2 hours would have been advisable?)

Does anyone know of links to an archived satellite or radar loop?

Nemrytter

28th Jul 2014, 17:33

The MCS persisted for many hours, the first opportunity for an semi-clear route was between 6z and 7z, depending on how brave you felt.

Kbboca

28th Jul 2014, 18:20

From one of the lastest articles in the French Press, it sounds as if the investigators have been successful in recovering flight data from the FDR. Analysis of the CVR (which I read elsewhere was much more heavily damaged) is continuing...
Lundi en fin de journée, le BEA a fait savoir que les paramètres du vol AH5017 d'Air Algérie (http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol.ah.5017/vol.ah.5017.php) (vitesse, altitude, trajectoire, etc.) ont été extraits de la boîte noire, mais la récupération des conversations dans le cockpit contenues dans la seconde boîte noire était toujours en cours.
Crash du vol d?Air Algérie*: "l'équipage avait demandé à rebrousser chemin", Tourisme - Transport (http://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/tourisme-transport/0203669640370-crash-du-vol-dair-algerie-les-boites-noires-en-route-pour-la-france-1028240.php?wyA8IOAR4sdDYD65.99)

Translation: As of the end of the day on Monday, the BEA made known that the parameters of Air Algerie flight AH 5017 (speed, altitude, course, etc.) were extracted from the black box, but the recovery of the conversations in the cockpit contained in the second black box were still continuing.

WilyB

28th Jul 2014, 19:43

From the video of Laurent Fabius in the above post, it appears quite clear he stated that the crew asked first to divert, then asked to turn back.

ZAZOO

28th Jul 2014, 20:35

There is much more to what we have heard and seen concerning the tragic end of Air Algerie AH5017.

Flight crew requesting for altitude change or rerouting due weather is a normal by professional crew members and is done every day in this part of the world due to the kind of extreme and violent weather we always encounter here....

I don't believe this aircraft crashed so violently due to weather. No way.

The quick reaction by the French president and his ministers is highly suspect.

I believe they know more and are keeping it to themselves.

Come on guys....Due weather...I don't think so...!?!?..

AlphaZuluRomeo

28th Jul 2014, 21:14

@ Kbboca: for high profile cases (read: non-GA), the BEA publishes information both in French (reference language) and in English.

Here is the English version of the Information published today:

Flight AH 5017 on 24 July 2014 (http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.ah.5017/flight.ah.5017.php)

Titania

28th Jul 2014, 21:25

Official statement (http://basedoc.diplomatie.gouv.fr/vues/Kiosque/FranceDiplomatie/kiosque.php?type=bafr#Chapitre2) by Mr. Fabius.

Grammatically, the statement does mean there were two requests, one to divert and one to turn back.

Having heard the video, I would agree too that this is the proper meaning of the sentence (I am French mother-tongue).

etudiant

28th Jul 2014, 23:54

It may also be read as: 'the crew requested a course change, then turned back'.
The transcript will of course show if there was a request to return, but I'd think it would have been highlighted if they had.

Shadoko

29th Jul 2014, 00:24

"It may also be read as: 'the crew requested a course change, then turned back'."

No, the sentence is : "l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousser chemin avant que le contact soit perdu" (Salle de presse - France-Diplomatie-Ministère des Affaires étrangères (http://basedoc.diplomatie.gouv.fr/vues/Kiosque/FranceDiplomatie/kiosque.php?type=bafr#Chapitre2)) :
the French sentence for "then turned back" would have been "puis a rebroussé chemin"...

Except if the transcript is grammatically erroneus, it translates in : the crew had asked to a course change, then [had asked] to turn back before contact was lost.

CommonI

29th Jul 2014, 00:44

Did he request to turn back to his original course, or to turn back to his point of departure?

Shadoko

29th Jul 2014, 00:51

Litteral for "rebrousser chemin" is: to take the same path in the other way.
I think it means "go back to departure point". See there: Traduction rebrousser chemin anglais | Dictionnaire français-anglais | Reverso (http://dictionnaire.reverso.net/francais-anglais/rebrousser%20chemin)

etudiant

29th Jul 2014, 01:31

It seems to me that the language could easily be read either way, first as:
"l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousser chemin avant que le contact soit perdu"

Or as:
"l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousse chemin avant que le contact soit perdu"

The two sound the same but the second means the crew began to return, perhaps on their own initiative, before the contact was lost.

Presumably there would be additional AT communications which would clarify exactly what the crew did. I've seen no report that the crew had requested a return to base.

jcjeant

29th Jul 2014, 03:53

Hi,

It seems to me that the language could easily be read either way, first as:
"l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousser chemin avant que le contact soit perdu"It is not to read either way
It's only one way to read it .. and that to read the official transcript of the french gov (link in a message above)
l'équipage de l'avion avait demandé à se dérouter, puis à rebrousser chemin avant que le contact soit perduThe crew asked first to divert and second to go back (return)to the take off airport (seems it was already to late)

ATC Watcher

29th Jul 2014, 07:13

Well, in any case this info is already known by investigators as the ATC-R/T recordings have been listened to , and frankly, unless the crew stated why they wanted to turn back, which they did not, whether it is was request or not, does not help us much .

I have heard this morning that the FDR was already looked at last night by the BEA, so if the clue is visible in tehre , e.g. , mechanical failure , loss control after turbulence , . stall ,or sudden destructive decompression , etc.. we should know pretty soon.

As stated before , it seems the CVR is badly dammaged but not unrecoverable, according the BEA it might take some " weeks"

andrasz

29th Jul 2014, 08:30

I would not put a too fine point on the semantics of the Fabius statement, not the first time it would happen that a politician makes an informed but imprecise comment fueling speculation.

With the FDR data available I would expect that a factual report will be out fairly soon.

threemiles

29th Jul 2014, 09:00

I am surprised, too, that a word of a politician or a news speaker does deserve credit in this thread. At all.

PorcoRosso

29th Jul 2014, 18:29

Hi guys, bonjour ATC ;)

Woah, I did not expect to open a can of worms about the various ways this statement from Fabius could be heard.
French being my mother tongue, I wanted to point out it coudl be understoon both ways. It seems it´s not the case and the crew made two requests.
I do not think it´s actually relevant.
Let´s wait for FDR and CVR to bring more clues.

Chronus

29th Jul 2014, 18:44

Was the wheather a factor. Quite possibly it was. For Southern Air flight 242 it most certainly was. It flew into heavy wheather, got peppered with golf ball sized hail stones, suffered compressor stall, the crew in compliance to ATC instructions increased power initiatiating a climb to a higher level and in doing so lost both engines for good. They managed to get out of the wheather but were unsuccessful in their attempts to dead stick it onto a highway. The aircraft was a DC9 and as we all know the MD83 is a second generation DC9. So could this scenario or something similar been replayed in this instance is the question.

JonnyH

29th Jul 2014, 20:11

I think you mean weather.

But weather is the most likely cause or factor of this incident. But best to reserve judgement until they've listened to the CVR.

ATC Watcher

30th Jul 2014, 04:53

Salut Porco,;) longtemps .

Good news : BEA confirmed they have successfully downloaded FDR and will be able to read CVR.
So a few more days to wait .
On the radar image, Niamey has a radar and monitor Ouga departures, but the accident itself occurred outside its radar coverage.

ironbutt57

30th Jul 2014, 05:57

Whether weather or not..one thing always surprised me was some crew members lack of weather radar fundamentals and limitations..particularly attenuation and radar shadows, which was the key reason for the loss of Southern Airways 242.

AlphaZuluRomeo

30th Jul 2014, 09:42

Good news : BEA confirmed they have successfully downloaded FDR and will be able to read CVR.
AFAIK, BEA published they were working on the CVR"in order to extract data from it". I understand there is no guarantee at this time. "Only" a good hope.

ItsMeFromEarth

30th Jul 2014, 09:56

Then they will have to translate from spanish to French and English :E

viking28

30th Jul 2014, 12:27

Hi again,

For the french reading members here is what is published in "Le Figaro" to day:
Crash Air Algérie : l'avion aurait chuté de 10.000 mètres en 3 minutes (http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2014/07/30/01003-20140730ARTFIG00189-crash-air-algerie-l-avion-pris-dans-l-orage-aurait-chute-de-10000-metres-en-3-minutes.php)

This would suggest a control loss in a CB while turning to avoid it and a little experienced crew on this very route.
All this followed by a 30.000 feet loss of altitude in 3 minutes..

Let's wait for the NTSB's report (BEA).

andrasz

30th Jul 2014, 13:27

here is what is published in "Le Figaro" to day

Reading the French original, it is pure speculation, not based on any FDR data. The 'three minutes' is based on the time between loss on transponder contact and the crash time as reported by a ground witness (based I'm sure on his certified $1.5 Chinese wrist chronometer, as recalled three days later...), so it must be accurate.:rolleyes:

Nemrytter

30th Jul 2014, 13:37

Worth pointing out that the crash site is quite a bit beyond where the CBs were at that time - they were in the CB outflow, not the CB. There was nothing to 'turn into'.

threemiles

30th Jul 2014, 15:09

The airplane was not as high as 10000 meters, so it could not lose 10000 metes in 3 minutes.

BigFrank

30th Jul 2014, 16:36

On France24 tv either this morning or yesterday evening I saw 2 Malian military officers commenting on radar images, visible on screen, and stressing the very high speed of descent.

ironbutt57

30th Jul 2014, 16:40

Crew requested to return, or crew advised they were returning..

henra

30th Jul 2014, 18:56

the turbulence penetration speed is 285 kias

turbulent air penetration 285 knots or .76

it is not that close to a stall and certainly ground speed is not airspeed indicated

The Problem is that the Radar Returns will be Ground Speed. And a Ground Speed of 280kts is close to or rather is a stall at 31kft (~170kts IAS), depending on exact weight.

DaveReidUK

30th Jul 2014, 20:38

And a Ground Speed of 280kts is close to or rather is a stall at 31kft (~170kts IAS), depending on exact weight.

Assuming still air ...

glendalegoon

30th Jul 2014, 21:58

excuse me, how is a 115 knot margin ABOVE the stall not much?

now, of course radar shows ground speed which is true airspeed (or mach) and wind adjustment

but still...turbulence penetration speed is a nice area to be, its above the stall, below the high speed buffet etc.

but again...if we compensate we might find the plane doing a different airspeed.

so, how many of YOU WOULD NOT FLY AT TURBULENCE PENETRATION SPEED? at least in this situation?

threemiles

30th Jul 2014, 22:37

I suggest you go back to school :{

Klauss

1st Aug 2014, 03:01

did anyone see the radar-track of the flight from beginning to it´s sad end ?
I only saw the beginning , until climbing out of 140, and the last seconds
at 310. Would be very interesting to see it and get an idea what weather
they went through.

Squawk_ident

2nd Aug 2014, 18:46

Rémy Jouty, Chairman of the BEA was interviewed by the French radio Europe1 on the 29JUL. Sorry to be late.

Europe1.fr - L'interview de Jean-Pierre Elkabbach (http://www.europe1.fr/MediaCenter/Emissions/L-interview-de-Jean-Pierre-Elkabbach/)

Nothing interesting except what is related to the "black boxes"
Mr Jouty:
..black boxes received yesterday morning...[28JUL]... no difficulties to extract the [FDR] parameters. Works on the [CVR] is still in progress because it's more damaged.
Mr Jouty explained after what is a FDR.
To the question "when a first scenario might be possible [according to the post treatment of the [FDR] Jouty said it should be rather quick except if an abnormality is discovered on some sensors.
The CVR.
The recorder is a magnetic tape. Very strongly compressed at the crash impact.
The final envelope (coat) has relatively well resisted. The band has been damaged a little. It is wrinkled at some places or cut. I hope it may takes some days [to be readable] or may be longer if a deeper analyse is needed.
I'm reasonably optimistic.
.../...

About the radar video, a longer one is visible here:

Vidéo Vol AH5017 : les images radars de l'avion qui disparaît - MYTF1News - Actu / Buzz (http://www.wat.tv/video/vol-ah5017-images-radars-avion-6y7n1_2exyh_.html)

It shown an extra leg while the aircraft is crossing 170 South of ARBUT.

Klauss

3rd Aug 2014, 07:24

Thanks for this link.

Don´t know - only the investigators know - but if you take the
Airport and the last climb-out Position (FL 175) and the first FL 310 Position
that follows it, it´s a +/- straight line. Given how a large storm Shows up on
aircraft Radar, a larger avoiding-turn to the west would have been expected.

Don´t think that the storm was shown correctly on radar.
Maybe Equipment-Problem, maybe something else.

Any other ideas ?

Squawk_ident

5th Aug 2014, 22:38

Accident to the McDonnell Douglas MD-83, registered EC-LTV, on 24 July 2014 in the region of Gao (Mali) (http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.ah.5017/flight.ah.5017.php)

The "media event" will take place between 1400 and 1445 (not 1500 because BEA.aero is busy working). This is 12z to 1245z.
Normally this press briefing should be live covered by French TV " iTélé" and "BFM TV"

Le direct ? i>TELE (http://www.itele.fr/direct)

BFMTV en Direct: regarder la chaine info en live - BFMTV (http://www.bfmtv.com/video/bfmtv/direct/)

threemiles

6th Aug 2014, 15:53

surprise, there are no leakages at this time....

seasexsun

6th Aug 2014, 22:59

This story about some bad Cb being the cause of the swiftair crash is a tremendous bull:mad:.

There are lots of lies on the official version, IMO.

Nemrytter

7th Aug 2014, 00:01

Seasexsun, on what do you base that opinion?

(edit) Actually, where has the 'official version' said that a Cb was the cause? That must've escaped me.

Teddy Robinson

7th Aug 2014, 00:18

Ignore, it's what it does, pop up with some claptrap and vanish.
From previous, it's a troll, with a particular dislike for airline management of any shade or nationality, that said he claimed to fly for Swiftair some years ago, so perhaps there is a new axe to grind.
Presumably the press brief will focus on the story so far from the FDR, with the CVR to come later.
Has any mention been made of the rotation from the crewing perspective: was this a double sector "day" for this crew, or the return leg after a rest period ?
It's a pertinent question from the met perspective: on a round trip the main weather brief would have been in Algiers, updated by observation on sector 1, and the briefing pack on turnaround in Burkina, alternatively on a single sector the only met brief would have been prior to departure from Burkina.

seasexsun

7th Aug 2014, 06:15

Memrytter, every medias speak about the ITCZ Cbs being the main cause of the accident, this is completely stupid, I base my point of view from my own experience and from what all my collegues think about that, some of them have long haul experience around the ITCZ and they all reckon than those CB ara avoidable as any CBs on the globe, moreover, the flight plan is studied together with the weather forcast before departure. There are lots of bull:mad: said by the french to the medias.
@teddy robinson, yes I flew for swiftair many years ago,since then, I have been flying in a skyteam spanish airline, not to name it. I still have some friends at swiftair, and I know people who personnaly knew the MD83 crew, both the FO and captain were known to be professionals and very experienced.

valvanuz

7th Aug 2014, 08:47

According to French radio Europe-1, the CVR has malfunctioned and the tape is blank.
French BEA refused to comment and referred to this afternoon press conference.

Winnerhofer

7th Aug 2014, 09:26

L?enquête sur le crash d?Air Algérie pourrait être plus compliquée que prévu, Médias (http://www.lesechos.fr/tech-medias/medias/0203690224721-lenquete-sur-le-crash-dair-algerie-pourrait-etre-plus-compliquee-que-prevu-1031166.php)

wiggy

7th Aug 2014, 11:09

FWIW one of the investigating team just been interviewed on TV (briefly) on arrival back in France this AM - pretty much all he was willing to say was that it appeared the aircraft did not break up in flight.

Nemrytter

7th Aug 2014, 11:37

some of them have long haul experience around the ITCZ and they all reckon than those CB ara avoidable as any CBs on the globe, moreover, the flight plan is studied together with the weather forcast before departure. The effects of all CBs are avoidable if you take a long enough detour. The question is: Did they? Based on the impact flash that was seen in the satellite images the answer has to be no, they crashed under the CB outflow.
Also, based on my experience the forecasts in that are are next to useless - they either show CBs absolutely everywhere or in completely the wrong place.

threemiles

7th Aug 2014, 12:56

As much I understand French:
they did not tell anything of substance.
Except a report will be out in 4 weeks from now.
And they still try to read the CVR, but it seems to be empty.
It is August in France....

Squawk_ident

7th Aug 2014, 13:50

Mr Cissé and Mr Jouty

About 2 minutes after being in cruise, the 280kt cruise speed started to decrease a little. The route was changed as a normal procedure to avoid CBs.
CB heads topped at F380 or higher.
At 01h45 LT (0145 UTC) the aircraft altitude was FL310 and speed 200kt (IAS, I believe).The altitude continued to decrease and the speed also that reached 160K. The end of record is at 01 47' 15'' at an altitude of 1600ft and an airspeed of 380kt.

http://i62.tinypic.com/20f6c5x.jpg
the last part of the track is, at least at the beginning, the one that was filmed on the radar screen, with a tight left turn initiated and a subsequent continuous left turn until the impact/end of record .

CVR
The CVR recovered is not readable yet because of the band state. The band is by itself in a rather good state but it can not be read because it is altered for an unknown reason, but the fact that the band is not exploitable is not related to the crash by itself. The band will need further and deep analyses and expertises to be readable.

FDR is recording about 80 parameters.

Radar:

The Ouaga radar is a new one. The radar recordings have been saved and should be available for the inquiry.
A question was raised about possible military radar in the crash area. Mr Cissé replied that it will be asked to all States if they have records of this flight on any military radar(s) in the crash sector.
The ASECNA has already identified other aircraft in the area that were in contact with the DAH5017.
A stage report should be published mid-September.

M68

7th Aug 2014, 13:54

I think the link to this BEA webpage was posted here earlier. Seems it has just been updated with some information.
http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.ah.5017/flight.ah.5017.php

AlphaZuluRomeo

7th Aug 2014, 14:36

Go to the source, the BEA publishes in english too, when useful.

Accident to the McDonnell Douglas MD-83, registered EC-LTV, on 24 July 2014 in the region of Gao (Mali) (http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.ah.5017/flight.ah.5017.php)

and

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.ah.5017/presentation.commission.mali.070814.en.pdf

despegue

7th Aug 2014, 15:18

Can anybody explain the warning systems on Md83 in case,of autothrottle failure?
What was the technical status of the aircraft on departure ?

What are the stall characteristics of the md83? The aircraft seems to have stalled at high altitude, followed by a loss of control, spiral dive and impact.

Swiftair is not known for its great maintenance and care of crews by the way.
They are driving conditions down in the cargo and oassenger acmi world due severe underpricing, crew exploitation ( crews who are often very experienced but also pay to fly cadets) and bare minimum maintenance.

threemiles

7th Aug 2014, 15:37

Speed reduction went unnoticed?
Crew busy with the weather radar?
Stall warning?
Large changes in pitch and bank => stall
Descent rate before impact 1.600ft/s = 96.000 ft/min

Machinbird

7th Aug 2014, 16:17

Anybody know if you can tumble the gyros on the Mad dog?

olasek

7th Aug 2014, 17:01

What are the stall characteristics of the md83? It got a stick shaker.

From the image it looks like instead of going around the storm sufficient distance they went through it. This can cause all kinds of mischief, violent upsets, sever icing, etc.

despegue

7th Aug 2014, 17:24

I also noticed the lack of seperation between the Aircraft track and the core,of the cell system.
However, I do do not know if all cells are shown on the picture, there might have been a cell West of the track too, not depicted on the shown map.

Does MD83 have a stick pusher by the way?

olasek

7th Aug 2014, 17:45

Never heard of a transport category aircraft that would have a stick shaker but no stick pusher.

despegue

7th Aug 2014, 18:08

Olasek,

B737 for example...

Stick pushers are mainly fit on tail engined aircraft and T-tail aircraft due to risks of Superstall condition.

Soursop

8th Aug 2014, 02:32

Seen on several French and Belgian media outlets:
The CVR problem is worse than expected. Nevermind that it was damaged, it now appears that it never recorded anything, although it is unclear whether this is due to a manufacturing flaw or some other malfunction.
These media reports all quote Europe1 as their original source.
Can anyone confirm?

porterhouse

8th Aug 2014, 03:55

So what?? Even if CVR is totally useless FDR is still much more important of the two for investigators.

glendalegoon

8th Aug 2014, 04:17

olaesk

I would think you would need to do more research on transport planes then.

There are a number I have flown that don't have pushers but do have shakers.

The DC9 didn't have a pusher. It seems the MD80 does have a pusher but it is needed only when slts are fully extended.

Unlikely that the slats were extended in cruise.

There are simply so many planes now a days we can't all know everything about all of them at short notice.

Funny how the Dash 8 at BUF did have a pusher.

threemiles

8th Aug 2014, 09:31

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/venezuela/summary.en.php

Summary

On 16 August 2005, flight WCW 708 took off from Tocumen (MPTO) international airport, Panama, at 05:59 UTC bound for «Le Lamentin Fort de France» (TFFF) international airport, Martinique, in instrument meteorological conditions. At half-distance, there was an area of stratocumulus type cloud formation with heavy precipitation. The aircraft was airworthy and had no mechanical defects. Once it had reached flight level 330, the aircraft’s speed began to decay until it reached stall speed. The aircraft then went into a stall and continued to lose altitude until it struck the ground, in a flat area defined with an altitude of 119 feet above sea level, near the village of Machiques, State of Zulia, Venezuela.

CONCLUSIONS (EXTRACTS)

The use of the anti-icing system caused a drop in the proportion of engine pressure ratio (EPR) that, given the performance conditions linked to the inappropriate configuration of the autothrust system in EPR Limit Cruise mode, affected the aircraft’s energy state, by causing a progressive loss of speed. Consequently, the aircraft was flying behind the power curve, which meant that the thrust required for the aircraft to maintain its speed was greater than that which it was producing.

The facts gathered show that the speed indications were not correctly monitored and, consequently, that the continuous loss of speed was not identified, at the time that the energy drop-off was occurring, leading the aircraft to flying behind the power curve with a high angle of attack.
The crew identified that a decrease in aircraft performance had been reached that required descending to flight level 310. While the aircraft was descending through flight level 317, the engines suffered a loss of thrust and at the same time the stick shaker activated one second before the stall warning.

At the moment the stall warning activated, the horizontal stabilizer trim began to increase its pitch-up action in a progressive manner until it reached the pitch-up stop.

None of the appropriate and necessary actions were taken in order to recover the aircraft’s energy state, the crew’s attention being focused on the engine instrument displays, even when the co-pilot said that he had identified the stall.

CAUSAL FACTOR:

The aerodynamic and performance conditions meant that the aircraft reached the critical condition that led to the stall situation. Subsequently, the crew’s resource management (CRM) and decision-making throughout the crisis were inappropriate. This situation was generated by the following factors:

Inadequate situational and environmental awareness, which meant that the crew were not fully aware of the situation in terms of aircraft performance and behaviour.
The lack of effective communication between the members of the flight crew which, during the decision-making process, reduced the chances of choosing appropriate and well–adapted alternatives and of setting priorities that corresponded to the actions to be taken in a critical or emergency situation (high altitude stall situation).

It must be said that the cause of the accident is linked to the absence of appropriate actions to prevent the aircraft from going into a stall situation, and, when the emergency situation occurred, and until impact with the ground, inappropriate setting of priorities in carrying out procedures. Subsequently, actions were taken that were outside the limits and parameters established in the manufacturer’s performance manual, along with inappropriate flight planning with no consideration for the meteorological aspects, in addition to the crew’s incorrect and late interpretation of the drop in the aircraft’s energy state. Thus, in terms of classification, the available facts lead to the conclusion that «human factors» were the cause of this accident.

The JIAAC Commission issued ten safety recommendations in its final report: seven to the aviation authorities, one to the aircraft manufacturer Boeing and two to the manufacturers of Flight Data Recorders.

captplaystation

8th Aug 2014, 12:27

glendalegoon,

the DC9-30 had a stick-pusher when UK registered/operated, courtesy of a demand from our CAA, as far as I know the only country to mandate it, memories of BAC 1-11 / Trident no doubt in the forefront of their thinking.

jcjeant

8th Aug 2014, 12:48

CVR
Going back to the press conference of the BEA (which was below all .. as usual!) It's fun to hear that following the setbacks encountered with the analysis of the CVR ... investigators will learn the possible communications from the accident aircraft with other aircraft !!
It should have already done .. more if such communications (containing essential things) took place .. the pilots would have already reported !!
And any ways .. all CVR that would be affected are already cleared
Too bad the BEA considers people (and especially the families of the victims) like retards !!

Lonewolf_50

8th Aug 2014, 12:56

jc, I am not sure what BEA ever did to you on a personal level, but this axe grinding (revived from the AF 447 mega threads) seems to me out of place.

They are trying to figure out what happened.

jcjeant

8th Aug 2014, 13:12

They are trying to figure out what happened. I wonder if you have seen and hear the press conference and understand all the talk taking place ..........
I have no doubt they are trying to figure out what happened .. the question is how they explained their actions to find what happened !
And why show this sat meteo map with the route of the aircraft .. ?
This is nothing to do with what the pilots seen on their radar screen ....
This is misleading the general public
The public will just retain that the aircraft was in the red zone .. so in full storm .. and that is maybe not the case ...

Nemrytter

8th Aug 2014, 13:25

Why shouldn't they show whatever data they have available? As far as I'm aware the point of an accident investigation is to find out what happened, not to show the general public what the flight crew would see.:=
The public will just retain that the aircraft was in the red zone .. so in full storm .. and that is maybe not the case ...So you're saying that the sat is wrong? Red zone is a red zone, no matter what the source of the data.

jcjeant

8th Aug 2014, 13:37

So you're saying that the sat is wrong? Red zone is a red zone, no matter what the source of the data. The red zone show in a sat map is the temperature .. no more
That's not what see the radar of the aircraft ..
MTO satellite, shows in red the coldest temperatures of the cloud tops, while the MTO airborne radar indicates the density of the ice or congestive clouds. It is more dense and the cloud is active, the more dangerous it is and of course it will be shown in red on the radar screen meaning the green opposite the only water detection.

As far as I'm aware the point of an accident investigation is to find out what happened, not to show the general public what the flight crew would see

So what the point to show what the flight crew can not seen ??

glendalegoon

8th Aug 2014, 14:00

captplaystation

that is interesting. ours didn't have the pusher.

I always thought it was funny that I didn't see too many DC9s in England!

As you know, the 9 had vortillons installed to counter certain stall situations.

IF you get to the pusher, you probably have screwed up pretty badly!

;-)

PPL Hobbyist

8th Aug 2014, 22:02

Reading the report posted earlier posted by threemiles, I came to the shocking realisation that something very similar happened not too long ago with Asiana 214. The only difference between this flight and Asiana 214 is that Asiana 214 was on finals and landing where as this flight had just entered cruise.

What astonishes me is that in both cases, neither pilot was monitoring their instruments, most importantly airspeed, without which we should all know, the plane can not fly, and it brings me to ask these 2 questions:

1. What had both pilots so occupied that neither one of them were monitoring their airspeed attitude and altitude? The weather radar?? Come on!!!! There are the 3 instruments my eyes are always on when I fly. Theirs is on one screen. It takes 1 second for me to look at, read and understand what my airspeed, attitude and altitude is, and I read them in that order, from left to right.

2. How on earth did they not notice the nose pitching up as they started loosing airspeed?

Now it has also come out that not only is the CVR unreadable, it seems to be that it never recorded anything in the first place. That brings me to question the maintenance by Air Algerie of their aircraft, who supposedly have an impeccable maintenance record, until now.

The last time I looked, an inoperative/malfunctioning CVR was a no go item on any commercial plane. Could somebody please tell us how often the CVR is checked or should be checked to see that it is working properly and recording?

I disagree with porterhouse in saying, “So what?? Even if CVR is totally useless FDR is still much more important of the two for investigators.” Sure, the FDR will tell us what the plane was doing, but I think it is just as important, if not more important to know what was happening in the cockpit and what the pilots were talking about and doing about the situation, which also also gives us an idea to what they were thinking at the time. The FDR can never tell you that.

In the absence of the CVR, at this point in time, I am beginning to think that both pilots fell asleep thinking that the automation would take care of it all and only woke up after it was too late to prevent the accident.

atakacs

8th Aug 2014, 22:40

That brings me to question the maintenance by Air Algerie of their aircraft, who supposedly have an impeccable maintenance record, until now.
I understand this was a Swiftair MD83 - don't know who does their maintenance but most definitely not Air Algérie.

Nemrytter

8th Aug 2014, 23:04

The red zone show in a sat map is the temperature .. no more Not quite, it can also show some information about the thickness of the cloud and/or the density of droplets+ice within.
while the MTO airborne radar indicates the density of the ice or congestive clouds.Airborne weather radars are not good at detecting ice, many won't detect it at all.
It is more dense and the cloud is active, the more dangerous it is and of course it will be shown in red on the radar screen meaning the green opposite the only water detection.This is simply wrong. (added: assuming I understand properly what you wrote, it's hard to follow)
So what the point to show what the flight crew can not seen ??Because we're not trying to demonstrate what the flight crew saw, we're trying to figure out what caused them to fall out the sky. If this graphic helps by showing something that could be relevant then I don't see the problem.

twochai

8th Aug 2014, 23:19

Captain Playstation:

I don't think so. The Trident at Staines had a stick pusher which performed its designed function, as the accident analysis revealed:

Directly the stick-pusher operated all
concentration was directed on the ASI, the attitude
indicator and the startling movement of the control
column. "To someone who was not expecting such an
event the combination of audio-warning and stick-push
would be overwhelming."

The truth is, the 'automatics' do not replace Situational Awareness!

jcjeant

8th Aug 2014, 23:31

If this graphic helps by showing something that could be relevant then I don't see the problem. This graphic don't help at all .. the graphic show only the temperature at the top of the clouds ... .. and the aircraft was not at this altitude !
http://i.imgur.com/70LYeFZ.jpg

It's indicated in the caption ...
Temperature of the top of the clouds by satellite mesure

What is needed or relevant is this (for the AF747) from Tim Vasquez
Air France 447 - AFR447 - A detailed meteorological analysis - Satellite and weather data (http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/af447/af447-previous.htm)
http://www.mediapart.fr/files/Probable_depiction.png
Tim Vasquez's webpage (http://www.weathergraphics.com/tim/)

Nemrytter

8th Aug 2014, 23:59

What is needed or relevant is this (for the AF747) from Tim Vasquez....which is based solely upon the cloud top temperature.:ugh:
Also bear in mind that it is usually advised to examine the shapes of the radar returns, not just their colour. The satellite data does just as good a job of showing the shapes as the radar will, quite often a better job as it doesn't suffer from attenuation. For the Vasquez radar scene to be correct you'd need quite a steep radar tilt anyway.

Nevertheless, it's the work of five minutes to come up with something similar for AH5017. When I have some time I'll do that.

JammedStab

9th Aug 2014, 02:11

Sounds like a repeat of the MD-80 in or near Venezuela. That one killed a bunch of French nationals as well from Martinique.

Let their airspeed bleed off and get too low and stall while in cruise perhaps at an altitude higher than was optimal. I think the earlier one had turned on anti-ice reducing available thrust.

Most Boeing's don't seem to have stickpusher's it seems. Not the 72, 3, or 4.

Updated:

Swiftair speed decay echoes previous MD-80 episodes

By: David Kaminski-Morrow

While investigators have yet to ascertain the reason for the loss of control of the Swiftair Boeing MD-83 over Mali, the accident shares several parallels with earlier events in which speed decay in early cruise led MD-80s into a high-altitude stall.

Boeing has previously warned that MD-80s can be vulnerable to speed decay under certain conditions – particularly those in the vicinity of convective weather in warm temperature regions, where thinner air combines with a need for anti-ice protection.

Warm air reduces the lift efficiency of the wing and the ability of aircraft to maintain higher altitudes – especially early in the cruise when the aircraft is heaviest.

Use of engine and airframe anti-ice, to defend against icing phenomena near storm cells, also carries an altitude penalty. Boeing has previously indicated that, for the MD-80's Pratt & Whitney JT8D engine, this penalty can amount to 3,000ft.

Boeing highlighted in a flight operations bulletin in 2002 that, if the selected altitude is unsuitable, the MD-80 might not be able to generate sufficient thrust to maintain the chosen height.

If the airspeed is not monitored carefully, it can bleed away to the point of a stall onset as the autopilot attempts to keep the aircraft at altitude by increasing the angle of attack.

“If the thrust required to maintain level flight is greater than the thrust available, the airplane could decelerate to stall warning before the autopilot disconnects,” says the bulletin, which points out the subtlety of the effect.

Boeing issued the bulletin in response to an incident in which an MD-80 experienced speed decay to the point of stick-shaker activation.

Several similar events have been recorded and the airframer reiterated the risk of high-altitude stall after the fatal loss of a West Caribbean Airways MD-82 over Venezuela in August 2005.

Like the Swiftair jet, the West Caribbean aircraft had been operating a night flight within the Inter-Tropical Convergence Zone, an equatorial area characterised by strong thunderstorm activity.

Venezuelan investigators found that the aircraft, which had its anti-ice protection active, fell “behind the power curve” and was not generating the thrust needed to maintain its altitude of 33,000ft. Over the course of 10min its airspeed decayed and the aircraft entered a stall, and a rapid descent, from which the crew was unable to recover.

Early stall recovery is crucial for the MD-80 because its T-tail and rear-engine design carries the risk of a deep stall, in which the turbulence over a stalled wing renders the elevator ineffective and disrupts the engine airflow.

After the crash of the West Caribbean flight Boeing’s then-chief pilot for flight operations safety, John Spencer, underlined common elements between similar incidents, including the presence of warm, moist air typical of thunderstorms, and aircraft operation at cruise altitudes close to those defined by weight limits.

Crews had not noticed any abnormality beforehand, having not recognised the slow decay of airspeed, and in some cases had mistaken a thrust roll-back, from airflow interruption, for a flame-out.

Investigators have not released the weight details of the Swiftair MD-83 but the 165-seat aircraft, operating for Air Algerie, was transporting 110 passengers and six crew, according to the carrier, and was fuelled for a 1,500nm service from Ouagadougou to Algiers.

French investigation authority BEA has confirmed that the aircraft suffered a gradual decay of airspeed over the space of about 10min, shortly after reaching its cruising altitude of 31,000ft and having skirted around a storm cell.

The inquiry has not confirmed whether the crew activated the anti-ice system, nor has it given much detail on the performance of the powerplants, although BEA chief Remi Jouty briefly mentioned “engine fluctuations”.

BEA has not stated whether the crew received a stall warning as the airspeed dropped to around 160kt, but the cockpit-voice recorder failed to function correctly and is yet to yield any readable information. None of those on board survived the 24 July accident.

Machinbird

9th Aug 2014, 04:33

The aircraft may have entered a stall at altitude, but it is not reasonable to assume it was still in a stall when it impacted. The airspeed was too high.
Something else prevented the PF from leveling the wings and pulling to the nearest horizon.

Was it an instrument problem caused by unusual attitudes, or was it a case of massive crew disorientation?
The spiral dive indicates that g was available but that the lift vector was pointed in the wrong direction.

From the BEA note on the flight recorder readout:
The aeroplane then turned left and quickly lost altitude, with large changes in pitch and bank. The rotation to the left continued until the end of the recording. The last recorded point, 1h47mn15s, corresponds to an altitude of 1,600ft, a speed of about 380 kt and an extremely high descent speed.

roulishollandais

9th Aug 2014, 04:58

with large changes in pitch and bankI hope sampling will be more acurate to understand what these changes are.:confused: Thank you Machinbird for your comment

India Four Two

9th Aug 2014, 10:06

GoS,

It's here: Swiftair speed decay echoes previous MD-80 episodes - 8/8/2014 - Flight Global (http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/swiftair-speed-decay-echoes-previous-md-80-episodes-402532/)

JammedStab quoted the whole article, without attribution :=

roulishollandais

9th Aug 2014, 10:22

"Comparaison n'est pas raison"
It is too early to apply West Caribbean conclusions to Air Algerie flight without having the full DFDR informations. Machinbird's comment for instance opened the door to another dynamic and scenario. Deepstalls build much drag.

roulishollandais

9th Aug 2014, 10:53

Before I demonstrated five times how to recover from MD83' dutch roll in less than 1000 ft, 30sec, bank<30°, the other crew lost very quickly 11000' , on the back from left and right, very high vertical speed (Finnair simulator, 1992)

LiveryMan

10th Aug 2014, 13:51

BEA has released these:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uu0k9tlcj2vlmhp/10562707_536303289829665_743997204517736080_o.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/c3i50w8vbpdjmc0/10372901_536303299829664_5382888168288975032_o.jpg

roulishollandais

10th Aug 2014, 16:34

We already had these pictures: We don't see on them the bank and pitch variations mentioned in the press release.

India Four Two

20th Sep 2014, 15:48

http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.ah.5017/flight.ah.5017.php

roulishollandais

20th Sep 2014, 17:14

No stick pusher.
Engines anomaly from 01:38 finishing around 01:41
After 01:45 typical lateral oscillations without never coming level : former wing reparation failure in turbulence ?

porterhouse

20th Sep 2014, 17:50

Investigators don't favor any theories now, there are no solid leads yet.

Machinbird

20th Sep 2014, 18:14

There is a lot of information available from the flight path graphic.
The accident appears to have developed as a loss of airspeed awareness leading to a fully developed stall and roll off departure to the port side with post stall gyrations. The nose then became planted way nose down, left wing down as the stall broke, but they never recovered from the nose down-wing down attitude.

When you plant the nose as deeply as it was in this case, you have the effect of the almost the entire aircraft weight in force acting to accelerate the aircraft (sort of like going into afterburner on steroids). It is virtually impossible to maintain a stall.

For some reason, the crew was unable to level the wings and recover to level flight. Without the CVR, unless they find some physical evidence of damage to the airframe preventing leveling of the wings, the crew will be blamed both for the departure and the failure to recover.
Using known aircraft performance data, the specific reasons for the deceleration into the stall should be understood (eg the West Caribbean Airways Flight 708 scenario).

framer

21st Sep 2014, 00:56

It is virtually impossible to maintain a stall.
Machinbird, can you please explain what you mean by the above sentence ?
Thanks.

Centaurus

21st Sep 2014, 02:57

The accident appears to have developed as a loss of airspeed awareness leading to a fully developed stall and roll off departure to the port side with post stall gyrations. The nose then became planted way nose down, left wing down as the stall broke, but they never recovered from the nose down-wing down attitude.

That is not at all surprising. Few operators train seriously for unusual attitude recoveries in the simulator. Mostly it is seen as two minute box ticking exercise instead of deadly serious dual instruction. Rarely does one see a simulator instructor take the control seat and demonstrate recovery from several types of U/A's. That is because they don't know how to, apart from reading from the book. Often when setting up an unusual attitude from the instructor station they go no further than the basic definition of unusual attitudes. For example: pitch attitude greater than 25 degrees nose up. Pitch attitude greater than 10 degrees nose down. Bank angle greater than 45 degrees. Within above parameters but flying at airspeeds inappropriate for the conditions.

Accidents involving failure to recover from inadvertent unusual attitudes have a common denominator of being in IMC or at night. For that reason the importance of training to recover on instruments needs to be emphasised during simulator sessions. While it is agreed most simulators do not have the fidelity in control forces to fully comply with the aircraft behaviour, the main point is the flight instruments will have the fidelity. It is flight instrument interpretation that is the key to safe recovery in IMC and for that reason training on extreme unusual attitude interpretation and recovery on instruments will be better than nothing at all. Simulator instructors themselves need to be fully competent to demonstrate U/A recoveries rather than at present simply sit at the instructor station and rely on the student to work it out for himself based upon book descriptions.

jcjeant

21st Sep 2014, 04:58

Machinbird
The accident appears to have developed as a loss of airspeed awareness leading to a fully developed stall Centaurus
That is not at all surprising. Few operators train seriously for unusual attitude recoveries in the simulator.Another question:
Do they train seriously to check speed under any circumstances ?

RAT 5

21st Sep 2014, 09:15

I agree that UA experience in a sim is a box-ticking exercise. Much more emphasis, with many operators, is stedfast compliance with SOP's and maximum use of automatics to steer well clear of any UA possibility. Mother nature combined with human nature strives endlessly to spoil the party. When that happens the extreme lack of basic IR scan, handling skills and knowledge of a/c capabilities is thrown to the fore and too many pilots are found wanting. Sadly the conclusion of resulting accident is often 'pilot error' rather than 'training/company culture' error.
This theme has been beaten to death on here, mote than once, motivated by an unavoidable accident. It saddens me to hear that various airlines have pilots who are considered to be highly trained and competent and thus attractive for the rapidly expanding companies to poach for themselves.One wonders if they are really highly trained flyers or highly trained operators.
I know of colleagues in the more hands on type of operation who are impressed by the strict and structured line operation and sim operation of such pilots, but significantly less impressed when they are asked to perform basic piloting handling skills.
It might be the claim that 'our trained monkeys are better than your trained monkeys, therefore we are a safer operator.' However, when the manure hits the airco I would like to sit behind the better handling pilot than the piano player wondering which button to push next to solve the problem and extricate themselves from the poo. Usually the concert musician makes it worse. The jammer improvises.

roulishollandais

21st Sep 2014, 09:22

The best way to train unusual attitudes (in French "positions inusuelles") in IMC is VMC aerobatics once again. The big difference between IMC and VMC is the size of your horizon. The wide angle of the natural horizon helps to emphasize your understanding of the relative body/plane's position, and helping your eyes to grasp the horizon to recover your level position and feeling it too. It is the best training for the pilot student to fly later in IMC with the HSI with its much smaller horizon.

Why did the speed decrease since 01:40 from 280 KT to 220 KT at 01:44:30 at the beginning of the second (last) EPR anomaly episode , A/P throttle mode OFF at 01:45:08 after MCH EPR LIM ?

That was followed by the final oscillating LOC reaching 150 KT at 01:45:45 before wing/nose diving probably without stall's AOA, as Machinbird said, toward overspeed in roll and rudder fast oscillations.

Machinbird

21st Sep 2014, 16:32

Machinbird, can you please explain what you mean by the above sentence ?
Hi framer, another aerobatic experienced guy I presume.:ok:

Yes you can stall an aircraft in any attitude, but if the nose stays well down, there is no way to keep it from accelerating out of a stall short of a fully developed spin, and even then, the nose will rise as the spin stabilizes (if it ever does).
The above is particularly true with jets starting from high altitude.

My own unusual attitude training was in the back seat of a TF-9 Cougar with the bag covering the outside world. The sadist up front would tell you to look at your lap. Then he would pitch up and roll wing down, fail the attitude indicator, then roll inverted nose down and say, "Your airplane." :} Looking back on it, it is what modern training should strive to emulate.

IcePack

21st Sep 2014, 18:47

That continuous speed loss is weird. Wonder if they were incapacitated. ?

neila83

21st Sep 2014, 19:46

Given they were in a storm system, and the engines died, then came back to life far far below (in altitude) the initial speed loss, doesn't this make a flame out likely? Seems everyone is focussing on pilots not noticing speed loss, whereas if the engines died I would say they probably noticed it but were fighting to do something?

Teddy Robinson

21st Sep 2014, 20:12

"Given they were in a storm system, and the engines died, then came back to life far far below"

A double flameout has not, to the best of my knowledge, been suggested by the investigation.

jcjeant

22nd Sep 2014, 14:07

Hi,

What are the odds they manage to extract something usable from the CVR
Multiple records (from BEA) are superimposed (because of not erasing)
Is such an analysis has already been done successfully in the past ?

AlphaZuluRomeo

22nd Sep 2014, 14:38

The accident appears to have developed as a loss of airspeed awareness leading to a fully developed stall (...)
No stick pusher.
Is this not paradoxical?

neila83

22nd Sep 2014, 14:43

:O

Oops, my mistake, thanks, mis-read some of the report on first quick read. Now I see the engines didn't spool down until later. The speed loss is very strange then.

Machinbird

22nd Sep 2014, 14:50

Is this not paradoxical? The MD-80 series was developed in an age where pilots were supposed to know how to fly and how to avoid stalls.

A stick pusher is a requirement for T-tail aircraft that can become locked into a stall if stalled too deeply. I recall reading that the DC-9 and MD-80 aircraft were apparently tweaked and demonstrated to not enter that regime, so no stick pusher was required.

The stick pusher is not there to keep you from stalling, it is there to keep you from getting stuck in a stall with no way out.

roulishollandais

23rd Sep 2014, 08:08

MD-80 has both a stick shaker and stick pusher. Is the first -without trace- triggered a bit earlier than the latter?
The control seemed to be lost very quickly after the beginning of the second EPR anomaly and the airflow distorded around the whole plane, far from the traditional shematics theorizing "stall" around a sole wing profile, or on over-simplified polar curves of aircrafts who are said "don't stalling", or not discriminating wings of different stall behaviour pitching down or not.
I agree to use that Machinbird's expression - a full develloped stall- allowed by his experience of flights in transient situations, at the limits of the flight envelop, which was the case too in that upset. Probably in the helicoidal dive the AOA on one wing or both was lower than the wind tunnel wing stall AOA with classical speed range.

roulishollandais

23rd Sep 2014, 21:44

The first Right and Left EPR anomaly [01:38, 01:41] seems to be the key of the tragedy.

Gysbreght

24th Sep 2014, 11:55

A stick pusher is a requirement for T-tail aircraft that can become locked into a stall if stalled too deeply. I recall reading that the DC-9 and MD-80 aircraft were apparently tweaked and demonstrated to not enter that regime, so no stick pusher was required.To my knowledge that is not entirely correct. The regulation calls for stall warning preceding the stall to enable the pilot to avoid stalling, and it calls for acceptable 'stall identification' and stalling characteristics during recovery, but always assumes that the pilot initiates recovery "as soon as the airplane is stalled". The regulation recognizes three acceptable indications of a stall. One of these is "a nose-down pitch that cannot be readily arrested". This is where the 'tweaking' comes in, and where interpretations may differ. I suspect that the nose-down pitch that the FAA found acceptable was too weak for the CAA.

You are correct in that lack of nose-down pitch often goes together with a tendency to develop a 'locked in' stall if recovery action is not taken promptly.

FAA AC 25-7 Flight Test Guide refers to a stick-pusher as a "stall identification device".

Machinbird

24th Sep 2014, 14:25

You are correct in that lack of nose-down pitch often goes together with a tendency to develop a 'locked in' stall if recovery action is not taken promptly.Just to be clear. This accident did not involve a locked in stall. The aircraft had recovered from its stall on the way down and accelerated to very high speed.

For some reason, the crew did not recover from the resulting spiral dive. The wings were not leveled which is the first step in recovering from this type departure.

Application of g while wing down-nose down just winds the spiral tighter.

donotdespisethesnake

24th Sep 2014, 23:53

I don't see where they recovered from the initial stall, it appears they continued to descend while the speed recovered slightly, before the speed reduced again until the final dive.

misd-agin

25th Sep 2014, 02:09

I wonder if it's time to require 5 hrs of aerobatic of training for your commercial pilot license?

As a civilian trained pilot I didn't think it was necessary. Military training made me realize how valuable the training experience was.

Centaurus

25th Sep 2014, 02:54

The best way to train unusual attitudes (in French "positions inusuelles") in IMC is VMC aerobatics once again

That may be so, except some aerobatic aircraft do not have an artificial horizon. Ideally, an instructor training a pilot on aerobatics (for the prime purpose of equipping said pilot with the skills for recovery on unusual attitudes in a future type), would demonstrate (say) a stall turn and during the entry and recovery tell the student to compare what he sees visually with what his flight instruments are displaying. That makes it easy for the student to correlate the two (visual scene and flight instrument scene). Same with a loop, barrel roll and so on.

The advantage of using a full flight simulator to teach U/A recovery techniques is that a competent simulator instructor can "freeze" the manoeuvre at any point - including fully inverted. With the scene "frozen" it allows the student the opportunity to more closely study the various flight instruments indications rather than have to work so fast to assimilate everything within a critical few seconds. The Sky Pointer is the key to getting the wings level as quickly as possible but it is quite surprising how many pilots do not know or have never heard of its use. This is an indictment on the pilots elementary instrument flying training. But it is soon rectified with appropriate simulator instruction.

roulishollandais

25th Sep 2014, 05:02

The interest of the actual sky without an artificial horizon is to refer to the sky pointer connected to the emphasised large natural horizon, and ability to teach a safe scan.
As instructor of newbees I watched that the best students had an already educated sight and body tonic posture : practising gymnastic, deltaplane and theater ! That physical knowledge of level and vertical is the clue to learn to move in 3D . But we know that doing an exercise has much more efficiency than having the demonstration by the the instructor, and doing it solo needs a total confidence in what you are doing. It is the next step after demonstration. Only then you stop hiding the artificial horizon -if one- or may start simulator training for instrument flight first with the artificial horizon -so small!- and later with partial panel (is it how you call our french "panneau partiel"? ) with the final exercise described by Machinbird in the Cougar back seat with the "sadist" managing the unusual position and being so happy when his student does that well! We cannot jump over these steps. Not everything has been bad in the new method to teach piloting but any pedagogy mistakes have been made forgetting the third dimension and body adequate education.