American 587 question
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack, you DO NOT use rudder for upset recoveries unless you have run out of aileron authority, have an aileron jam or need to yaw the nose down in a high nose, low speed recovery where you have already rolled the aircraft over past 60 deg AOB deliberately.
I did the Boeing Advanced Maneouver Programme some time around 2000 that was designed to teach recovery from rudder hard-overs. We ended the training with flap-40 approaches with full rudder deflection kicking in at 1500', and would recover with the rudder still jammed from a 135 deg AOB to climbing away with less than 1000' loss, and that was done for training purposes with the PF having to lower their head to be "momentarily disorientated" as to which way the aircraft had departed.
Any time you are going to use the rudder in flight, you do so gingerly and reluctantly, and only as a last resort. Your comments about stomping on the pedals or using full rudder as a procedure show a complete lack of understanding of swept wing flight, and your numerous references to TV programmes, which are often misleading and inaccurate, including ACI, suggests you are not a commercial pilot. To that end, I think you owe some of the other respondents on this thread an apology for being argumentative and dismissing their posts.
I did the Boeing Advanced Maneouver Programme some time around 2000 that was designed to teach recovery from rudder hard-overs. We ended the training with flap-40 approaches with full rudder deflection kicking in at 1500', and would recover with the rudder still jammed from a 135 deg AOB to climbing away with less than 1000' loss, and that was done for training purposes with the PF having to lower their head to be "momentarily disorientated" as to which way the aircraft had departed.
Any time you are going to use the rudder in flight, you do so gingerly and reluctantly, and only as a last resort. Your comments about stomping on the pedals or using full rudder as a procedure show a complete lack of understanding of swept wing flight, and your numerous references to TV programmes, which are often misleading and inaccurate, including ACI, suggests you are not a commercial pilot. To that end, I think you owe some of the other respondents on this thread an apology for being argumentative and dismissing their posts.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any time you are going to use the rudder in flight, you do so gingerly and reluctantly, and only as a last resort. Your comments about stomping on the pedals or using full rudder as a procedure show a complete lack of understanding of swept wing flight, and your numerous references to TV programmes, which are often misleading and inaccurate, including ACI, suggests you are not a commercial pilot. To that end, I think you owe some of the other respondents on this thread an apology for being argumentative and dismissing their posts.
I am not a commercial pilot where did I say I was?
Hmm apology for what, being truthful and asking a question with all facts provided?
Thanks for input.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: very close to STN!!
Posts: 523
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack1985
With over 8600 hours in B738, +1700 in B732, +2800 in B733 and +2700 in B734, one might say i "are" a pilot.
After reading the report and noticing it was a 734, the first question to arise in my head was, "was it really 70 degrees bank?" There was no info as to whether this was verified from the flight data recorder or a QAR or simply a statement from the pilots. In the book about the USAir flight, it was shown that a report from another pilot about a bank event at altitude on another 732, was not that much of a bank, yet still a significant amount. Pg 208, Flight 427, Gerry Byrne, 2002.
(Pilot said aircraft rolled 30 degrees right. FLT data recorder showed only 10 degrees) "pilots...have a tendency to either exaggerate or underestimate the effect of an in-flight emergency." So, i honestly must wait for more information.
Then you ask if we could avoid using the rudder in a 70 degree bank: i have only had it in sim training where they are telling us to use the rudder, so i did then. But both hands up, if it happens when next in the 738, i will use aileron and unload the elevator before using the rudder. Rudder will be a last resort. And even when using the rudder, I would never "kick" it back and forth, which did the vertical stabilizer in on the AA flight.
We must remember though that in most sim sessions, we are usually pre-warned about what will happen or at least which systems will be addressed. (At least here in the UK, which i honestly think is ridiculous) and our reactions are suspect as to whether they are truly honest.
After reading the report and noticing it was a 734, the first question to arise in my head was, "was it really 70 degrees bank?" There was no info as to whether this was verified from the flight data recorder or a QAR or simply a statement from the pilots. In the book about the USAir flight, it was shown that a report from another pilot about a bank event at altitude on another 732, was not that much of a bank, yet still a significant amount. Pg 208, Flight 427, Gerry Byrne, 2002.
(Pilot said aircraft rolled 30 degrees right. FLT data recorder showed only 10 degrees) "pilots...have a tendency to either exaggerate or underestimate the effect of an in-flight emergency." So, i honestly must wait for more information.
Then you ask if we could avoid using the rudder in a 70 degree bank: i have only had it in sim training where they are telling us to use the rudder, so i did then. But both hands up, if it happens when next in the 738, i will use aileron and unload the elevator before using the rudder. Rudder will be a last resort. And even when using the rudder, I would never "kick" it back and forth, which did the vertical stabilizer in on the AA flight.
We must remember though that in most sim sessions, we are usually pre-warned about what will happen or at least which systems will be addressed. (At least here in the UK, which i honestly think is ridiculous) and our reactions are suspect as to whether they are truly honest.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With over 8600 hours in B738, +1700 in B732, +2800 in B733 and +2700 in B734, one might say i "are" a pilot.
After reading the report and noticing it was a 734, the first question to arise in my head was, "was it really 70 degrees bank?" There was no info as to whether this was verified from the flight data recorder or a QAR or simply a statement from the pilots. In the book about the USAir flight, it was shown that a report from another pilot about a bank event at altitude on another 732, was not that much of a bank, yet still a significant amount. Pg 208, Flight 427, Gerry Byrne, 2002.
(Pilot said aircraft rolled 30 degrees right. FLT data recorder showed only 10 degrees) "pilots...have a tendency to either exaggerate or underestimate the effect of an in-flight emergency." So, i honestly must wait for more information.
Then you ask if we could avoid using the rudder in a 70 degree bank: i have only had it in sim training where they are telling us to use the rudder, so i did then. But both hands up, if it happens when next in the 738, i will use aileron and unload the elevator before using the rudder. Rudder will be a last resort. And even when using the rudder, I would never "kick" it back and forth, which did the vertical stabilizer in on the AA flight.
We must remember though that in most sim sessions, we are usually pre-warned about what will happen or at least which systems will be addressed. (At least here in the UK, which i honestly think is ridiculous) and our reactions are suspect as to whether they are truly honest.
After reading the report and noticing it was a 734, the first question to arise in my head was, "was it really 70 degrees bank?" There was no info as to whether this was verified from the flight data recorder or a QAR or simply a statement from the pilots. In the book about the USAir flight, it was shown that a report from another pilot about a bank event at altitude on another 732, was not that much of a bank, yet still a significant amount. Pg 208, Flight 427, Gerry Byrne, 2002.
(Pilot said aircraft rolled 30 degrees right. FLT data recorder showed only 10 degrees) "pilots...have a tendency to either exaggerate or underestimate the effect of an in-flight emergency." So, i honestly must wait for more information.
Then you ask if we could avoid using the rudder in a 70 degree bank: i have only had it in sim training where they are telling us to use the rudder, so i did then. But both hands up, if it happens when next in the 738, i will use aileron and unload the elevator before using the rudder. Rudder will be a last resort. And even when using the rudder, I would never "kick" it back and forth, which did the vertical stabilizer in on the AA flight.
We must remember though that in most sim sessions, we are usually pre-warned about what will happen or at least which systems will be addressed. (At least here in the UK, which i honestly think is ridiculous) and our reactions are suspect as to whether they are truly honest.
I really don't get why they do the pre-warnings, isn't the true performance from someone going to come out when they get the unexpected that is the ultimate test, its what most sim sessions are for the unexpected.
The 70 degrees I keep banging on about was a one event and yet to be confirmed, but its those one off events aviation has come to scrutinise so they don't happen.
I hope everyone understands I'm simply seeking pilots thoughts on what I've said, it's very beneficial for everyone especially when talking about the unexpected.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avionista & Jack1985
Hmm, as I recall it was the bolts that failed on AA587 but I might very well remember wrong. It was a while ago I read the report, please excuse my mistake.
It was long since I saw a more confusing thread, blabbering over (overly misunderstood) details, than this so I really appreciate stator vane for the nice and informational response. Thank you!
It was long since I saw a more confusing thread, blabbering over (overly misunderstood) details, than this so I really appreciate stator vane for the nice and informational response. Thank you!
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To get rudder reversal you need to have an extremely high AOA. It was a phenomenon that the F4 Phantom could suffer on heavy take-offs. It is only likely to happen to an airliner in a deep stall, and is only happening because the wings are so heavily stalled that the yaw from the rudder and the subsequent change in airflow over each wing (in terms of effective AOA allowing for dihedral, and effective chord, span and sweep changes due to side slip) are insufficient to overpower the roll effect of the rudder, acting like a vertical aileron. It is not a useful consideration, and rudder should be applied opposite to roll when aileron authority is exceeded as the above scenario is so unlikely.
How this applies to the AA accident I can't fathom...
How this applies to the AA accident I can't fathom...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To get rudder reversal
I only brought that up in a response to a point made by MrSnuggles on page 1, has absolutely nothing to do with 587.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To everyone it may concern.
Rudder reversal was brought into the thread by my initial reaction to the stated 70 degree bank angle. I admitted to be waay off course but wondered, tounge-in-cheek, if the airplane in question had the same rudder design as f.ex. the USAir 427.
It was concluded that USAir 427 and at least two more planes suffered fatal rudder jams, even rudder reversals as on USAir 427. Here is a link to the Summary from NTSB:
Accident Investigations - NTSB - National Transportation Safety Board
On the same page you can download the accident report. Click PDF.
Rudder reversal was brought into the thread by my initial reaction to the stated 70 degree bank angle. I admitted to be waay off course but wondered, tounge-in-cheek, if the airplane in question had the same rudder design as f.ex. the USAir 427.
It was concluded that USAir 427 and at least two more planes suffered fatal rudder jams, even rudder reversals as on USAir 427. Here is a link to the Summary from NTSB:
Accident Investigations - NTSB - National Transportation Safety Board
On the same page you can download the accident report. Click PDF.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 January 2014 - An Alaska 737-400 encountered two sudden 70 degree bank angles (both different directions) landing in Vancouver caused by an Air Canada A330, but continued for a safe landing.
