PDA

View Full Version : Southern Air 777 stall and recovery after takeoff, Nov 15th


QNH1013
20th Nov 2020, 09:05
YouTube Audio

flightradar24 (https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/9s947#260da09f)

Departure out of JFK, audio reveals airspeed low warning and also the config warning (overspeed?) likely during recovery.

DaveReidUK
20th Nov 2020, 09:57
Avherald quotes about 200' height loss during the event; ADS-B (via FR24) suggests more like 750'.

RoyHudd
20th Nov 2020, 12:20
Hand-flying?

DaveReidUK
20th Nov 2020, 12:38
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/557x464/soo947_2__f8468756cc39a210359dd4bb411165621f2c76db.jpg

3wheels
20th Nov 2020, 13:05
First Officer handling?

RoyHudd
20th Nov 2020, 13:15
Strange response. Many FO's handle manually better than CP's.

I was thinking that the a/c was not being flown using automatics. Employing automation relatively quickly is good practice in a busy TMA like that of JFK. It reduces the workload on the non-handling pilot. And at night, it removes the risk of somatogravic illusions and the like, which have caused accidents on jets not so long back.(Gulf Air 320, Flash B737, etc)

Broomstick Flier
20th Nov 2020, 13:24
Hand-flying should have no influence, it is expected that both sides of the flight deck are competent in hand-flying at this point in their careers.
Maybe inadvertently retracting from flaps 5 to flaps up, instead of flaps 1?

Less Hair
20th Nov 2020, 13:29
Why would they request a fast climb afterwards then?

Broomstick Flier
20th Nov 2020, 13:40
To increase the margin on low-speed buffer due to high gross weight? Vref+80 on the Boeing type I currently fly is over 250kt at Max TOW.
Take a turbulent departure and keep normal speed (250 below 10000), you are in for a nasty surprise.

Whas the load and balance sheet accurate, is the first question here.

Less Hair
20th Nov 2020, 14:03
That's the point.

Speed_Alive_V1
20th Nov 2020, 14:52
Yikes - not a nice thing to hear on frequency. Handled well.

I wonder was it a sudden tail wind mixed with heavy laden aircraft? 250kias could be surprisingly close to the buffer zone I imagine

deltahotel
20th Nov 2020, 15:38
If min speed (Vref+80) is greater than 250kts, you can fly at the higher speed. Max TOW, our 763 has +80 of 256kts, so that’s what we’d fly.

8driver
20th Nov 2020, 15:52
The Kennedy 5 departure doesn't contain a published 250 knot restriction. Therefore only the FAR is applicable, and that states you can go to clean speed. I don't know why anyone wouldn't. Possibly an increasing tailwind, but 22s are generally in use with southerly or westerly wind. Wouldn't expect it until the turn.

White Knight
20th Nov 2020, 17:14
Couple of things stand out:

Firstly that the stall warning sounds like it worked like it says on the tin. And the recovery was initiated.
Secondly there was a radio frequency distraction possibly increasing the PM's time head down.

Glad the piloting came back to save the situation!

nike
20th Nov 2020, 20:25
Possible early ALT capture with the autopilot engaged...need to watch your speed as the autopilot will fly the capture profile without speed protection. Heavy weight and/or wind shift are equally possible but even low level if you have a high rate of climb as it goes into ALT or VNAV ALT watch out for the speed decay.

Capt Fathom
20th Nov 2020, 20:55
The PM sounded sleepy on the radio. Then the stall woke him up! :eek:

Contact Approach
20th Nov 2020, 21:37
So much utter nonsense being written here. Those that currently fly heavy Boeing types here have probably answered the question. Had it not been caught on the RT no one would have been any of the wiser. Well handled but nothing any competent crew couldn’t handle.

Capt Scribble
20th Nov 2020, 22:01
"No one would have been the wiser", maybe not, until the operational data dump flagged up a stall on climb out. Not exactly an everyday event.

wheels_down
20th Nov 2020, 23:02
Contact Approach

Regardless, still earns them tea and biscuits with the CP soon thereafter. Not normally pleasant conversations.

Dropp the Pilot
21st Nov 2020, 00:21
All utter nonsense indeed.

Except nike.

Who is 100% correct.

krismiler
21st Nov 2020, 03:43
It might show up on the flight data monitor so best to own up rather than get pulled in by the safety department. Recovering with a 750’ height loss isn’t too bad but obviously being close to the ground they couldn’t afford a massive drop. An early recognition and prompt recovery action probably helped.

Simulator stall training often involves the fully developed case at higher altitudes where the height loss is significant and the time involved lengthy before the aircraft unstalls. More emphasis on recovery from low altitude events minimising height loss may be called for.

George Glass
21st Nov 2020, 04:00
Alway be really careful in ALT ACQ mode with autopilot engaged.

allaru
21st Nov 2020, 04:09
Nike is correct if the AC captures early, speed can decay rapidly after early ALT capture ,only solution is to hit ALT HOLD wait for the nose to drop then engage VS when a more sensible ROC is indicated. It’s a particular issues on freighters at light weight with low initial departure altitude. Or they have entered an incorrect ZFW in the FMC.

CW247
21st Nov 2020, 07:30
The autopilot and authothrottle on Boeing aircraft has always been a dog and not worthy of being trusted. Even on the latest machines. That's why Boeing pilots are a more vigilant and twitchy bunch.

Micky
21st Nov 2020, 07:46
allaru

Why not klick klick, klick klick??? Drop down a level of automation or all? fly it stabilise it and then try again...

alf5071h
21st Nov 2020, 08:06
This thread, this incident, wether accurate or not, together with similar discussions based on 'open information', challenge fundamental aspects of our profession and flight safety.
Many countries protect the rights of crews with confidentiality of data, FDR / CVR which enables professional investigation and review. Yet with advancing technology and communication, accidents and incidents are now exposed to extremes of human behaviour with biased, inaccurate, and possibly deliberate misleading discussions of unvalidated data.

What hope for a just culture, reasoned judgement, peer review.

These are a fact of modern life, but safety still requires thoughtful and considered behaviour in commenting on what at best in unsubstantiated information - incident data or posts.
Irrespective of wether posters are from the industry, travelling public, or just spotters, … professionalism demands thoughtful responses.

"… information may want to be free, but it also wants to kill us."

future G-V driver
21st Nov 2020, 08:40
Lots of conjecture here. I shall just wait for the Report, as no one really knows what happened, possibly not even the Pilots, sometimes :mad: happens, you deal with it and find out all the facts later during an investigation.

Lets be careful out there

oldchina
21st Nov 2020, 09:18
"I shall just wait for the Report"

Will there be a report, publicly available?

Alex Whittingham
21st Nov 2020, 09:58
Why reference the minimum speed to Vref rather than V2? Is it a Boeing thing that I have missed?

Uplinker
21st Nov 2020, 10:06
Of course if the aircraft is not behaving as it should, take control.

But this is a modern 777 right? Why would modern design allow this sort of thing to happen? (notwithstanding a possible ZFM error). Also the comments about Vref+80: it seems odd to me that a (heavy) aircraft can not keep to 250kts?

deltahotel
21st Nov 2020, 10:07
Alex. The min manoeuvring speeds for various flap settings are based on Vref. So min clean in Vref+80, min speed Flap 1 is +60, F5 is +40. etc.

deltahotel
21st Nov 2020, 10:09
We could fly at 250, but not clean. If my MTOW 763 needed to fly at 250 I’d need to keep F1 (min clean at this weight is 256).

ps. I have no idea what the equivalent speeds would be for a 777 but I’m guessing somewhat higher.

allaru
21st Nov 2020, 12:40
Why not klick klicken.....because coming out of automation usually results in a huge F'Up....especially in a busy traffic environment with a high rate of climb. The ALT hold VS method works well but it pays to brief it before hand, the trick is to wait for the nose to drop and the VS to come down, otherwise if you try to engage VS too early it will just recapture again. Freighters also have a higher flat rating compared to the pax aircraft so there can be huge amount of excess power even at max derate. Min clean can be above 250 at heavy weights, but they may have been empty.

Dropp the Pilot
21st Nov 2020, 13:13
"Absence of attitude (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_control_(fixed-wing_aircraft)) protection in the autopilot's altitude capture mode"

A different type but same issue, aircraft flown by test pilots but still fatal......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_Industrie_Flight_129

Micky
21st Nov 2020, 13:34
allaru

I disagree. If automation has caused the tits up then the only way is to hand fly it. And I thought by now this is Industrie standard. Especially in the last few years were we have seen accidents through undesired aircraft states. This is basically were UPRT training comes in. Recover from the stall stabilise the flight path, then rebuild the autoflight system. Trying to fix a bad situation by fiddling with the FGS is not the way to go.
And I am not saying that this happend here. I was just replying to a nother comment.

Check Airman
21st Nov 2020, 16:11
allaru


I don’t fly a 777, but I disagree with this. If the automation is trying to kill me, the solution isn’t more automation. Especially in a potential stall.

(Bearing in mind that we really have no idea what caused the low energy situation. Everything here is speculation.)

oldchina
21st Nov 2020, 16:16
A different type but same issue, aircraft flown by test pilots but still fatal......

Dropp: it didn't help that there was only one Airbus test pilot on board.

Spooky 2
21st Nov 2020, 18:55
This doesn't seem so hard to imagine. I recall from personal experience that when doing an ICAO B Noise Abatement departure that any premature restraction of the flaps would almost immediately cause the stall warning to activate. The PM had to pay attention to the flap retraction schedule before moving the flap handle to the next retracted position, and if by chnce he went through the gate to the next flap setting you could expect that shaker to activate almost immediately. Moving the flap lever to the correct position would correct the problem along with lowering the nose at the same time. Attention getter for sure!

havick
21st Nov 2020, 19:08
allaru

Sounds like you’re scared of hand flying.

FullWings
21st Nov 2020, 19:19
Stall or stall warning? I would be 99% sure it was the latter.

Once you are in ALT, it follows a trajectory based on the rate-of-climb when it acquired. If you’ve flown through a positive shear/gradient and maintained airspeed, the instantaneous climb rate at capture might be above what the aircraft can sustain without trading speed for height. If the A/P is in, you have to disconnect or accept a loss of airspeed during the capture.

zerograv
21st Nov 2020, 22:56
Hand-flying?

or (maybe)

Thinking that the AutoPilot was engaged when it was not the case

flightleader
22nd Nov 2020, 00:16
Most likely so

Rie
22nd Nov 2020, 02:13
Spoke to a couple of current SO guys. 400ft AP on is SOP. Time will tell if it was on or off though.

SaulGoodman
22nd Nov 2020, 05:16
if true this is extremely sad...

Clandestino
22nd Nov 2020, 05:23
"Absence of attitude (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_control_(fixed-wing_aircraft)) protection in the autopilot's altitude capture mode"

A different type but same issue, aircraft flown by test pilots but still fatal......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_Industrie_Flight_129

The reason behınd having test pilot in LHS was... it was development test flight.

AFCS software fault, whıch was so tragically discovered by Nick Warner's crew, was corrected before 330 went into production.

safetypee
22nd Nov 2020, 09:07
I wonder - if the system could inadvertently get into 'balked landing and a go-around' situation' - TOGA / IDLE after take-off ?

'… the auto-throttle remained engaged in the IDLE mode when the flight crew advanced the thrust levers to conduct a balked landing (a go-around initiated after touchdown, but before the thrust lever selection). Once airborne, the thrust levers moved back to idle.'

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/dc7bd4f27e5f107486257221005f069d/b250f3003abca8a7862586220083a35a/$FILE/AIR-20-19.pdf

SAIB AIR-20-19

https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSAIB.nsf/(LookupSAIBs)/AIR-20-19?OpenDocument

srjumbo747
22nd Nov 2020, 09:20
SaylGoodman

Why? Busiest airspace I’ve ever encountered along with not great ATC.
If a colleague informs me they’ll be hand flying it I don’t say anything but do think to myself WHY?

SaulGoodman
22nd Nov 2020, 11:19
400’ AP on as SOP is sad. Busy could be an excuse, but during this pandemic hardly any movement at all. And in busy airspace one could hand-fly easily. Myself and most of the colleagues do it all the time if the situation permits.

Dropp the Pilot
22nd Nov 2020, 12:54
400 A/P in JFK or LHR is prudent.

Thinking you are 'handflying' a 777 when following the FD with ATHR engaged is sad.

srjumbo747
22nd Nov 2020, 13:07
Totally agree and there speaks another professional pilot. The guys who think they’re ‘part’ of the aeroplane and want to ‘feel’ it are only increasing the workload for their colleague.
Leave the machoism to the film set.
PS and two weeks ago JFK seemed as busy as ever for departures.

SaulGoodman
22nd Nov 2020, 13:16
I was there a couple of days ago. Not busy at all. By all means putt it on at 400’ if you want. But having that as a “Standard Operating Procedure” is sad. If my colleague wants to fly manual in JFK airspace I’m usually ok with that. Turning the heading bug and pushing a few buttons doesn’t usually overload me. That is if the situation permits. Las month I flew raw data into HKG. Its a miracle I am still alive ;)

tcasblue
22nd Nov 2020, 14:41
Departure out of JFK, audio reveals airspeed low warning and also the config warning (overspeed?) likely during recovery.

Modified from my earlier post......

Airspeed Low warning? It has been a while since I flew the triple but don't you only get a quadruple chime for the airspeed low caution(along with some visual indications such as FPV which disappeared when the flaps were retracted) followed by stickshaker.

When I turn the volume up on the video, it sounds to me like the autopilot disconnect warning(siren). It is rarely heard because the pilot usually clicks the autopilot disconnect button twice. But the second click may not happen on occasion such as stressful situations.

Overspeed warning? I suppose you get a siren for an overspeed as well, but the pilot on the radio was saying stall repeatedly, so excess speed was probably not the issue.

Disconnecting the autopilot is a plausible scenario in a low speed situation.

Our company had a similar event when the slats were retracted accidentally at too low an airspeed by the F/O.

Javicomet
22nd Nov 2020, 16:50
early flaps 1 retraction by PM that triggers “airspeed low” caution, PF pitches down to gain speed, PM freaks out and selects flaps 5 (placard speed 245kts) and exceeds Flaps Speed triggering the siren.. 🤷🏻‍♂️

The Fat Controller
22nd Nov 2020, 17:21
This is a good explanation of what may have happened, the presenter is a current 777 pilot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-siCbCA_yE

Check Airman
22nd Nov 2020, 17:44
SaylGoodman

Why? Busiest airspace I’ve ever encountered along with not great ATC.
If a colleague informs me they’ll be hand flying it I don’t say anything but do think to myself WHY?

Not in a 777, but I used to hand fly to and from JFK all the time. Especially fun with the Breezy point and Canarsie climbs, and of course the VOR 13L/R.

Flying Fred
22nd Nov 2020, 18:34
Alex. The min manoeuvring speeds for various flap settings are based on Vref. So min clean in Vref+80, min speed Flap 1 is +60, F5 is +40. etc.

DH, very nearly correct but I'd like to correct some of your terminology. The speeds you mention that are referenced to Vref are the FLAP maneuvering (US spelling) speeds, not the minimum maneuvering speeds which are generally about 20kt+ lower than the equivalent FLAP maneuvering speed.

The minimum maneuvering speed for the current flap setting is shown on the PFD speed tape as the top of the top of the amber band and the flap maneuvering speed is shown as the number of the current flap setting e.g. for Flap 5, a green number 5 on the speed tape. Source: 777 FCOM 10-10 > Controls and indications > Primary Flight Display (PFD) > PFD indications

The Vref +20, 40, 60 & 80 speeds are the FLAP maneuvering speeds for F20, F5, F1 and Flap UP respectively and are the speeds we would normally fly as a minimum with those flaps settings but they aren't the minimum maneuvering speeds, which are always lower. Confusing isn't it?

Finally Vref+80 is normally referred to as 'minimum clean speed' but, as above it isn't the minimum maneuvering speed clean.

it's a bit like explaining the laws of cricket.

Spooky 2
22nd Nov 2020, 18:53
I believe 400" is Boeing SOP for the 777 and 787. Pretty sure SO is still using Boeing as its training vendor but that may have changed.

VThokie2
23rd Nov 2020, 01:22
Contact Approach

Regardless, still earns them tea and biscuits with the CP soon thereafter. Not normally pleasant conversations.

Nothing could be further from the truth...Other than a meeting with the safety folks facilitated through the union and perhaps some retraining (unless someone lies) there won’t be any “tea and biscuits” with the CP! As long as you fess up to your screw ups it’s pretty non punitive over here. Most 90% of screw ups over here In the US that would land you a letter of warning when I was an expat in the gulf would be deidentified and used solely for trend analysis and highlighted by the training department in the next recurrent, you wouldn’t even so much as get a phonecall.

4runner
23rd Nov 2020, 02:48
Spooky 2;

i don’t think it’s SOP, but rather the minimum. That’s when I engage it in the sim. I’m pretty sure most airlines and authorities recommend using automation to reduce workload in high workload environments.

tcasblue
23rd Nov 2020, 11:22
early flaps 1 retraction by PM that triggers “airspeed low” caution, PF pitches down to gain speed, PM freaks out and selects flaps 5 (placard speed 245kts) and exceeds Flaps Speed triggering the siren.. 🤷🏻‍♂️

That is plausible. There is a gate to prevent(or at least slow down) rapid, inadvertent flap 5 selection from the up position making it less likely to be selected inadvertently.

But as I like to say when it comes to aviation incidents.....If it can somehow happen, it has happened.

Spooky 2
23rd Nov 2020, 13:52
4runner

I see where you are coming from but I do believe 400' is what is shown in the lesson profiles. Train as you fly, fly as you train.

VThokie2
23rd Nov 2020, 14:14
Not in the Boeing FCTM at my old shop..... most operators and Boeing are now encouraging more handflying. This verywell could have been caused by said automation as previously discussed the little 777 potential trap of decaying airspeed in it’s alt capture profile coupled with cleaning up on a heavy weight takeoff..... most “pilots” would keep it simple and disconnect the autopilot and lower the nose.... or you could be a “manager” and futz around with the alt hold button!

Spooky 2
23rd Nov 2020, 18:27
Your old shop? My recollection comes from instructing for almost years 10 on the B777 at The Boeing Company. Suggest you take a deep breath and wait and see if there is a formal report. Do agree there is more emphasis on hand flying proficiency these days than in the past. At first blush it appears the crew did a good job of recovery regardless of how the stall warning was encountered.

VThokie2
23rd Nov 2020, 19:14
Reread my post and realize I in no way was I trying to be snarky or condescending as you just did. My point is I still have my 777 Boeing FCTM and FCOM in my hands, and yes I was trained by Boeing instructors in Kent/Tukwilla, nowhere does it say engaging the AP at 400ft was SOP, however at heavy weights it would be very wise to do so. I agree with everything else you said, crew most likely did a good job.

allaru
23rd Nov 2020, 19:18
Of course we have no idea of the cause of this particular incident however in relation to early capture you are all missing the point. If the ( 2 button press) method I mentioned had been implemented the AC would never have entered an "undesired state" in the first place. And no I am not scared to hand fly, I just fly the aircraft the easiest and safest way I know how based on what I have picked up over the past 2 decades on 777s. I figure that 2 button presses is easier that disconnecting and "rebuilding the automation" ....but what would I know !. Oh and BTW its 200ft AGL minimum engagement altitude for the AP on departure unless your company has a different rule.

The most common thing heard from the RHS of a modern flight deck "I know that"...some of you lot should just stick to maintaining the bar kitty on the layover.

VThokie2
23rd Nov 2020, 19:30
Different ways to skin a cat, as long as the outcome is not in doubt, keeping the automatics in if you are quick with your recognition and button pushing definitely keeps it tidy, especially at high weights. However if this crew was not familiar/trained on the gotchas of early capture and were subsequently startled by it I doubt they’d be ready on the Alt hold switch doubletap. Going back to the general theme of appropriate levels of automation I would always cringe at my “old shop” reading the weekly safety reports where crews were skiddish turning off the automation (for fear of punishment) leading to unforgivable cascading snafus. Whenever both pilots are saying “what’s it doing?” (Regardless of if that stems from lack of knowledge or a true malfunction) It’s time to turn off some levels automation without fear of punitive action.... I’m sure I’m preaching to the choir, and we shall see if any of this has any bearing on this particular event.

CDRW
24th Nov 2020, 03:00
VThokie2

If getting a 777 into a stall situation on climb out doesn't get you tea and biscuits with the CP - what the hell does?

hans brinker
24th Nov 2020, 05:54
If doing something wrong gets you T&B with the CP you are more likely to hide errors. This will lead to the the same error probably being repeated, probably leading to more accidents. I haven't done the math myself, because I am a line pilot, but the fact that there is a very positive correlation between just culture and safety makes me think the CP should stay in his office by himself. The safety department will look at what happened, and if the pilots made errors, they wil be retrained, and if procedures were wrong every pilot will be retrained. Naming and shaming does not prevent the stall that already happened, and will definitely not prevent future stalls....

ORAC
24th Nov 2020, 05:57
If getting a 777 into a stall situation on climb out doesn't get you tea and biscuits with the CP - what the hell does?
Broadcasting it over the airwaves?

Check Airman
24th Nov 2020, 07:17
Lying about it.

ManaAdaSystem
24th Nov 2020, 07:54
The FBW on the 777 doesn’t give any stall protection?

oldchina
24th Nov 2020, 08:43
for MAS:

"The 777 design utilizes envelope protection in all of its functionality rather than envelope limiting.
Envelope protection deters pilot inputs from exceeding certain predefined limits but does not prohibit it"

Gregg Bartley, Boeing

VThokie2
24th Nov 2020, 09:40
“If getting a 777 into a stall situation on climb out doesn't get you tea and biscuits with the CP - what the hell does?”

Like others have posted.... lying about it or covering it up! We have transitioned to a very non punitive system over here and it works fairly well. Most screw ups, potential screw ups, concerns... are voluntary disclosed to create millions of datapoints to enhance the overall safety systems, it’s non jeopardy unless you are intentionally disregarding a regulation. It took years for the FAA to adopt the concept, but when they did they quickly started seeing results with massive pilot buy in when they initiated the program with NASA under a non punitive framework at the urging of the NTSB. Consequently under a similar framework the previously skeptical FAA started pushing an almost identical concept extending it to the Airlines. It all makes for a far less stressful job.

The aftermath of this event will involve the safety department and perhaps the training department with the CP staying out of it, what is the point of the CP beating them over the head and threatening them? It serves little purpose.

CDRW
24th Nov 2020, 10:53
VT
Well written post - especially last paragraph- and just contrasts the difference between an aviation developed culture and one that is not.
Without doubt - if this happened in certain parts of the world the crew would be packing their bags regardless of the causes or the final investigation. And I say this without sarcasm.

VThokie2
24th Nov 2020, 11:22
CDRW

Oh without a doubt, I spent 5 yrs in the sandbox as an expat.... they would have had their resignation letters already printed out for them to sign upon return to base in that part of the world.

wiggy
24th Nov 2020, 12:03
ManaAdaSystem

Basically wot "oldchina" says: the FBW and associated systems will give you lots of hints of an approach to the stall but if you really want to come up with an imaginative way of beating the system it will let you do it....

Twiglet1
24th Nov 2020, 13:20
CDRW

I might suggest tea and no biscuits is more likely.

VThokie2
24th Nov 2020, 13:31
Again highly unlikely they will ever have to meet with a CP for a “carpet dance” (as we say here) over this.

Uplinker
24th Nov 2020, 14:12
..........the little 777 potential trap of decaying airspeed in it’s alt capture profile coupled with cleaning up on a heavy weight takeoff..... most “pilots” would keep it simple and disconnect the autopilot and lower the nose.... or you could be a “manager” and futz around with the alt hold button!


I only flew Boeing for one season - the 737-300/400 (tel:737-300/400), so don't know how the 777 works.

Could someone please explain how the system allows speed to decay during Alt capture? What is the auto-thrust doing while this is happening, and why doesn't it push up the levers to maintain speed, or the FBW flatten off the pitch if the speed drops during capture?

I am surprised that a modern 777 requires intervention - either via button presses or by dropping out the AP - on such a basic, day-to-day manoeuvre as Alt capture? But if it does happen often, then a few deft button pushes are preferrable to suddenly dropping out the autopilot.

PS Nothing wrong with being a so-called 'manager' while flying big, modern jets, as long as it is appropriate to do so.

Spooky 2
24th Nov 2020, 14:27
Reread my post and realize I in no way was I trying to be snarky or condescending as you just did. My point is I still have my 777 Boeing FCTM and FCOM in my hands, and yes I was trained by Boeing instructors in Kent/Tukwilla, nowhere does it say engaging the AP at 400ft was SOP, however at heavy weights it would be very wise to do so. I agree with everything else you said, crew most likely did a good job.

My apologies as I did not mean to offend:)

MarkerInbound
24th Nov 2020, 14:56
Don’t know which departure they were flying. Some airlines require quick engagement of the autopilot on RNAV departures.

FIRESYSOK
25th Nov 2020, 03:02
Again highly unlikely they will ever have to meet with a CP for a “carpet dance” (as we say here) over this.

That's right. The armchair puddles here relish the thought of some crew getting clobbered over tea and stale British cookies, but that hasn't been the norm in a modern company (which this is), for many years. Back to flight simming, guys.

CW247
25th Nov 2020, 07:03
Uplinker. A bit like you, I flew the 787 for a short while. Most of the time it was fine but I did see a few times drops of 20kts during capture.

It felt like the system was overly compensating for the impending level off with huge movements of the levers. As a pure guess, maybe Boeing have a simple power reduction logic that only looks at altitude to go vs current ROC, whereas they should be factoring in some combination of CG, winds and temperature delta.

lucille
25th Nov 2020, 07:29
777 is FBW, right?

Does it not have high alpha or stall protection?

oldchina
25th Nov 2020, 07:38
lucille: same question was asked by ManaAdaSystem and answered on here yesterday:

"The 777 design utilizes envelope protection in all of its functionality rather than envelope limiting.
Envelope protection deters pilot inputs from exceeding certain predefined limits but does not prohibit it"

Gregg Bartley, Boeing

BBK
25th Nov 2020, 11:04
I would imagine the crew would report this incident themselves. Better to own up than await a phone call from the analysts who conduct Flight Data Monitoring. Perhaps after this they might be rostered a training sim as part of finalising and debriefing the safety report. As others have said all this conducted hopefully in a non punitive way assuming it’s an “honest” mistake and not a deliberate deviation from SOP. Not saying this crew did that, benefit of the doubt etc. I suspect we won’t hear what happened.

Bergerie1
25th Nov 2020, 13:29
Any one can make a mistake. Provided it is reported or, if picked up by the FOQA system, discussed honestly with the designated representatives, there is nothing to fear and every one will learn. Depending on the nature of the mistake, some extra sim training may be appropriate for the individuals concerned or, if there are wider implications, new information disseminated, included in training routines, and/or manuals and procedures may be changed for everyone's benefit. But as Check Airman has intimated, lying about it cannot be tolerated.

Pistonprop
25th Nov 2020, 14:45
Bergerie1, you write that as if it's a global policy. It should be of course, but it's not. Unfortunately there are still too many countries who don't grasp that concept and continue to go down the blame and punish route.

lucille
25th Nov 2020, 14:54
oldchina

Thanks. Yes, I missed seeing it the first time around.

What exactly does “deter” mean in this context? Surely not stick shaker and pusher in this day and age.?

My very limited understanding of the MAX was that it was envelope limiting w.r.t. AoA. I had (incorrectly) presumed that same philosophy may have been borrowed from the 777.

wiggy
25th Nov 2020, 15:14
What exactly does “deter” mean in this context? Surely not stick shaker and pusher in this day and age.?


The T7 does have a Stick shaker as the final line of defence.

I don't have the FCOM in front of me but for example the stab trim cuts at as you approach the stall, preventing you trimming "into the stall", and providing a tactile cue that something is amiss...

Somebody with access to the FCOM will no doubt be able to provide a full list the other items designed to hint or "deter" .

Flying Clog
25th Nov 2020, 15:21
Absolutely! We are talking about the minority of countries that actually have a 'no blame' culture! The vast majority of the world, and the big ME3 would sack you immediately, and shove a pineapple up your posterior on the way out, just to prove a point!

Good for all of you above posters, but this isn't how incidents like this are treated in 75% of the world.

Bergerie1
25th Nov 2020, 16:01
Pistonprop, I agree entrely, and I write it is an ex-CP

VThokie2
25th Nov 2020, 17:57
Bergerie1, you write that as if it's a global policy. It should be of course, but it's not. Unfortunately there are still too many countries who don't grasp that concept and continue to go down the blame and punish route.

We understand that and when our brethren on here proclaim that this crew will most certainly be going in for Tea and Biscuits with the CP, those of us in this safety culture here in the US are commenting that they most likely will not (unless lying is involved). We are simply educating how this incident will be handled over here. Spending several years as an expat I was disgusted with what people convinced themselves of was a “just safety culture” with some level of punishment being an ever present integral part of said culture.

oldchina
25th Nov 2020, 18:33
This is the full Boeing bible on the 777 FBW controls, that I was copying from. It includes::

"For example, the 777 bank angle protection feature will significantly increase the wheel force a pilot encounters when attempting to roll the airplane past a predefined bank angle. This acts as a prompt to the pilot that the airplane is approaching the bank angle limit. However, if deemed necessary, the pilot may override this protection by exerting a greater force on the wheel than is being exerted by the backdrive actuator. The intent is to inform the pilot that the command being given would put the airplane outside of its normal operating envelope, but the ability to do so is not precluded. This concept is central to the design philosophy of the 777 Primary Flight Control System."

https://www.davi.ws/avionics/TheAvionicsHandbook_Cap_11.pdf

wiggy
25th Nov 2020, 21:47
FWIW f you dive into the FCOM (I'm no longer current on type and so am looking at the old paper version) there's a whole section on Stall protection which covers autothrottle response and it's limitations at low altitude, plus EICAS warnings such as "Airspeed Low"..

Spooky 2
25th Nov 2020, 23:03
I still don't see the answer to this. Did the power reduce, or were the flaps retracted prematurely? The later seems more likely as other protections are in place to cause a stall recovery. The power reduction is quite noticable and would get the crews attention rather quickly whereas a premature flap retraction would be more subtle IMO. Having experienced the latter in a MD11 once upon a time it remains etched in my memory. Either way it appears they handled it well.

flightleader
26th Nov 2020, 01:24
From 1400’ onwards, the airspeed did not decrease. The PM reconfirmed the departure frequency with tower. IMHO, it is likely that PM was focusing on the radio frequency and selected a wrong flap retraction setting. Looking at the speed, possibly he went from flap 5 to up combined with the PF not-so-positive’ acceleration, possibly with large thrust reduction at altitude capture.

Loose rivets
26th Nov 2020, 01:41
Just happen to have seen this almost generic reminder of the way big engines shield a substantial chunk of wing. It really is 'A little bit more can give a while lot less.'

https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-use-of-the-tiny-wings-on-aircraft-engines-And-why-are-they-pointing-downwards

DaveReidUK
26th Nov 2020, 06:34
From 1400’ onwards, the airspeed did not decrease.

Out of interest, where are you seeing information on airspeed?

flightleader
26th Nov 2020, 09:10
ATC radar records above

DaveReidUK
26th Nov 2020, 11:08
I believe the values shown on the ATC animation are groundspeed, not airspeed.

longisland
26th Nov 2020, 12:16
I would imagine the crew would report this incident themselves.
If Southern has an ASAP program, this would be vehicle for reporting the incident.

4runner
26th Nov 2020, 23:40
We understand that and when our brethren on here proclaim that this crew will most certainly be going in for Tea and Biscuits with the CP, those of us in this safety culture here in the US are commenting that they most likely will not (unless lying is involved). We are simply educating how this incident will be handled over here. Spending several years as an expat I was disgusted with what people convinced themselves of was a “just safety culture” with some level of punishment being an ever present integral part of said culture.

im digging what you’re saying. You must’ve been in Asia or the ME.

4runner
26th Nov 2020, 23:42
Absolutely! We are talking about the minority of countries that actually have a 'no blame' culture! The vast majority of the world, and the big ME3 would sack you immediately, and shove a pineapple up your posterior on the way out, just to prove a point!

Good for all of you above posters, but this isn't how incidents like this are treated in 75% of the world.

it’s a minority of countries but a majority of airplanes. More than half of the aircraft in the world are N registered. I indentify and relate to what you’re saying.

Pistonprop
27th Nov 2020, 10:03
4runner, we are talking about commercial airliners and not every single-engine Cessna, Piper and Beech (etc) on the N register.

flightleader
27th Nov 2020, 10:11
Well, if the ground speed didn’t change, the airspeed shouldn’t change much, not that he would have flew into a jet stream at that altitude.

misd-agin
27th Nov 2020, 11:44
A decreasing headwind/increasing tailwind, or a wind shear, is another possibility. Add that to the possible altitude capture and flap retraction retraction at the same time and automation can lag the dynamic environment we operate in. Another reason for hand flying or requiring a quick automation downgrade to manual/hand flying.

I’ve seen pilots watch to see if the automation will ‘settle down’ or ‘catch it’ in situations that I think should have been corrected, or stabilized, by using a lower level of automation with hand flying being the quickest. There’s a possibility this was a factor in this event.

cactusbusdrvr
4th Dec 2020, 07:53
I fly the triple. Most likely scenario is that they needed over 250 kts at max weight flying clean. The FMC called for 250 since it was below 10000’ and the PF called for flaps up and the jet tried to maintain 250. That will get you a great view of the “zipper”. Had an F/O try that on me out of HKG. Luckily I caught myself as I was about to move the flap handle.

BTW, we all hand fly the 777 up to cruise (or at least above FL250) and on approach. I usually do it sooner on arrival if I know the PM is good with doing a slight bit of work. It’s never an issue if briefed.

Spooky 2
5th Dec 2020, 19:24
This may be true, but recall that the slats would go from a sealed position (T.O.), to a gapped position (LNDG.), as part of the auto slat extension when the stall warning was sensed and then back again when the approaching stall went away. This would be irrespective of whenr the flap handle was placed....I think.

jmmoric
7th Dec 2020, 09:21
Well, if the ground speed didn’t change, the airspeed shouldn’t change much, not that he would have flew into a jet stream at that altitude.

It can change more with altitude than you think, and you don't need much change before you reach the limitations of certain aircraft.

And consider that your ground speed has to increase with altitude to maintain the same indicated/calibrated air speed... some 6 kts per 1000 ft is a "rule of thumb" we use for ease of use when working aircraft.

Uplinker
7th Dec 2020, 10:35
This is Airbus SOP:

PF: "flap xx"

PM: (looking at speed tape) " speed checked", (moves lever if speed appropriate) "flap xx"

4runner
10th Jan 2021, 01:28
If Southern has an ASAP program, this would be vehicle for reporting the incident.

the parent company of Southern, has a new FAA inspector. She audited their ASAP reports and tried to retroactively pursue enforcement actions against pilots. True story.

Fursty Ferret
10th Jan 2021, 16:01
BTW, we all hand fly the 777 up to cruise (or at least above FL250) and on approach.

Doesn't RVSM airspace require the autopilot to be used? Previous company used to say "no, it's just required equipment" and current operator is more along the lines of "use the ******* autopilot".

I fly the 787 - clean speed is usually above 250kts for us but the FMC picks the higher speed after flap retraction so never been caught out.

4runner
11th Jan 2021, 01:10
no. It’s required to be installed for rvsm.

Propellerhead
11th Jan 2021, 10:26
RVSM doesn't start until FL290. The autopilot should normally be engaged within RVSM airspace.

golfyankeesierra
11th Jan 2021, 16:35
Level off and level keeping should be automatic. Climbing in RVSM may be manual.