Voyager Plummets (Merged)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Erehwon
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's the nice thing about Prune - it always seems to bring the best out of people.
Leaves me wondering how many posters have actually sat and worked on a flight deck let alone made a mistake in their office.
A mistake was made and had serious consequences, however it appears the aircraft ACTUALLY had a clean bill of health.
I would have thought more folks would have appreciated that considering the comments that preceded the interim report.
Yellow & black
Leaves me wondering how many posters have actually sat and worked on a flight deck let alone made a mistake in their office.
A mistake was made and had serious consequences, however it appears the aircraft ACTUALLY had a clean bill of health.
I would have thought more folks would have appreciated that considering the comments that preceded the interim report.
Yellow & black
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mid-central South of England
Posts: 201
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly not required....
ah yes, DD.
Sadly the anonymity allows any Walt with an opinion, a soap box to stand on or ego to thrust forth the chance to pass comment. Still, free speech, an open forum and all.....
I think, to be fair, you get to know who has an agenda, who an axe to grind, he/ she who talks complete hoop and who actually is worth listening to...
Bottom line is of course, you don't even need to have been on an aircraft to post here.....
Sadly the anonymity allows any Walt with an opinion, a soap box to stand on or ego to thrust forth the chance to pass comment. Still, free speech, an open forum and all.....
I think, to be fair, you get to know who has an agenda, who an axe to grind, he/ she who talks complete hoop and who actually is worth listening to...
Bottom line is of course, you don't even need to have been on an aircraft to post here.....
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your point about walts with axes to grind is totally valid, axel flo...so why didn't you make it during the many pages of vitriolic and unfounded Airbus bashing??
There are three distinct phases of this event; initially placing a camera in that spot, while a big mistake, was far from the worst aspect. The attempts at recovery showed major deviations from Airbus procedures and demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of the aircraft. But by far the most serious issue is the failure to come clean afterwards. The captain MUST have realised exactly what had happened soon after. It is this refusal to own up which caused such massive operational issues and trashed the RAF's reputation.
There are three distinct phases of this event; initially placing a camera in that spot, while a big mistake, was far from the worst aspect. The attempts at recovery showed major deviations from Airbus procedures and demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of the aircraft. But by far the most serious issue is the failure to come clean afterwards. The captain MUST have realised exactly what had happened soon after. It is this refusal to own up which caused such massive operational issues and trashed the RAF's reputation.
I'm sure that the ongoing SI will take a thorough look at the simulator training given to the RAF's Voyager pilots, particularly concerning AP disconnect, jammed sidestick and control priority procedures. Plus the associated aural warnings; for example the different nature of the AP disconnect aural warning when anything other than the AP disconnect button is used.
Perhaps there will be additional safety procedures introduced regarding temporary 'one pilot only' flight deck procedures and the importance of keeping the area around the sidestick base clear of any potential loose articles.
One point which must be made to the ignorant 'hang him high' people posting here, is that the Captain's integrity is most certainly NOT in any doubt.
Perhaps there will be additional safety procedures introduced regarding temporary 'one pilot only' flight deck procedures and the importance of keeping the area around the sidestick base clear of any potential loose articles.
One point which must be made to the ignorant 'hang him high' people posting here, is that the Captain's integrity is most certainly NOT in any doubt.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
?? How come the fleet was grounded for two weeks? It is surely inconceivable that such huge dislocation and financial cost would have been incurred had it been known the aircraft was not the issue.
Last edited by ShotOne; 23rd Mar 2014 at 09:38.
for example the different nature of the AP disconnect aural warning when anything other than the AP disconnect button is used
I would hope that the SI would look carefully at the whole training package. If your reporting from your contacts in the unit is correct then there seems to be an unsubstantiated underlying lack of confidence in the aircraft and it's technologies. Training is but one method of establishing that confidence.
BEagle I admire your loyalty to your friend and that you have no doubts about him. I have never met him. Your reporting of events seem to have left some gaps in the narrative that were filled in by the interim report. I take it those gaps didn't come from him.
I don't believe that it has been said anywhere that he did not admit the position of the camera. Nor has it been said that he did, specifically it is missing from the interim report. He may not have realised the implication of where he subsequently found it, nor that it was, in part, the cause of the incident.
It does seem rather extreme to trawl through his data card for timings in order to match those from the FDM and then forensically examine the camera body simply to confirm a story.
It does seem rather extreme to trawl through his data card for timings in order to match those from the FDM and then forensically examine the camera body simply to confirm a story.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of curiosity what are the written down (RAF) rules regarding taking cameras into the cockpit (whether it be ME, RE or FJ)?
Pretty sure some rules will be following shortly, which as usual will be of the lowest common denominator variety, affecting those, the vast majority, who are sensible, as well as the numpties*.
*That's probably a little harsh, I've witnessed a very experienced, reliable, capable and trustworthy pilot have a 'momentary lapse' and bust a descent altitude because he was taking a photograph during an arrival procedure.
It seems important at this stage to have an open mind about the captains actions as the full sequence of events does not appear to be public. It is certainly unfair to denigrate on the basis that no-one ever should make a mistake. On the one hand you could draw comparisons to ensuring the absence of control movement restrictions as a fundamental rule, and even with an everyday scenario such as letting a coke can roll under the brake pedal in a car - clearly driver error as it is a well known risk. On the other hand the flat surfaces in an airbus cockpit do seem rather innocent places to put things, ignoring hindsight etc., so perhaps this mistake is fundamentally forgivable - the first time etc.
There remain some questions though about how obvious it was the camera was the cause. As the ac started to pitch down, surely the first instinct would be to reach for the stick, at which stage its forward displaced or jammed(?) state would become apparent or obvious? Was the seat motored back immediately afterwards?
Was this crew a classic 'always in the RAF' RAF crew or one of the hybrid ex-civ A330 crews (if I understood correctly that they were recruited and exist flying voyager, and if they are still around on the programme?)
There remain some questions though about how obvious it was the camera was the cause. As the ac started to pitch down, surely the first instinct would be to reach for the stick, at which stage its forward displaced or jammed(?) state would become apparent or obvious? Was the seat motored back immediately afterwards?
Was this crew a classic 'always in the RAF' RAF crew or one of the hybrid ex-civ A330 crews (if I understood correctly that they were recruited and exist flying voyager, and if they are still around on the programme?)
beardy wrote:
I strongly suspect that the Captain had absolutely no idea that his camera had caused the problem and that the damage to the camera was initially suspected to have been caused by it having been thrown about during the manoeuvre and recovery. I'm also pretty sure that he would have been entirely happy to volunteer his camera for forensic analysis, as he was as mystified as everyone elase about the cause of the incident.
I do agree that the whole training package should be carefully examined - and I agree with beardy that the significance of the continuous 'cavalry charge', plus the FMA indication should have provided an obvious clue. Out of curiosity, is the break-out force to disconnect the AP through side-stick override particularly high? Is this something shown to new Airbus pilots in the simulator during Type Rating training in the civil world?
One wonders what the effect of a jammed control column in an aircraft without Airbus' excellent flight envelope protection would have been....
It does seem rather extreme to trawl through his data card for timings in order to match those from the FDM and then forensically examine the camera body simply to confirm a story.
I do agree that the whole training package should be carefully examined - and I agree with beardy that the significance of the continuous 'cavalry charge', plus the FMA indication should have provided an obvious clue. Out of curiosity, is the break-out force to disconnect the AP through side-stick override particularly high? Is this something shown to new Airbus pilots in the simulator during Type Rating training in the civil world?
One wonders what the effect of a jammed control column in an aircraft without Airbus' excellent flight envelope protection would have been....
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Chedburgh, Bury St.Edmunds
Age: 81
Posts: 1,175
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
5 Posts
BEAgle. Seem to recall the loss of an R.A.F Phantom shortly after take-off when the back seater had dropped a clipboard or similar, pilot pulling into the climb, jammed the stick, both ejected unharmed.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEagle
"Out of curiosity, is the break-out force to disconnect the AP through side-stick override particularly high?"
No, happens quite regularly when you bump it with your knee/elbow
"Out of curiosity, is the break-out force to disconnect the AP through side-stick override particularly high?"
No, happens quite regularly when you bump it with your knee/elbow
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beagle your loyalty to your friend does you credit but the camera would have been an inch or so from his wrist and in his line of sight. It's a big stretch to believe he didn't realise, even afterwards.
I'm not an advocate of "hang em high" but "Just" culture isn't the same as "no-blame" culture.
I'm not an advocate of "hang em high" but "Just" culture isn't the same as "no-blame" culture.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Peter G-W
the fact that the Captain was not sitting at the controls whilst alone on the flight deck
-RP