Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

TAM A320 crash at Congonhas, Brazil

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

TAM A320 crash at Congonhas, Brazil

Old 23rd Sep 2007, 22:07
  #2401 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is all getting a bit silly!

They wouldve stopped on Congonhas with its LDA 1880 meter IF both T/L were at idle because autobrake and spoilers would be working as they should be.

Again, what am I missing here?
+
These are distances required not runway length right?
1) LDR is normally quoted from 50' ie from over threshold. This crew in fact appear to have had several hundred mts 'extra' by landing short as well.

2) You are missing mightve instead of wouldve

Can we just accept that the runway was not 2400mts

We SUSPECT the crew left a T/L in the climb position

I do not think we will ever know for sure unless there is some chip somewhere that survived with the information.

AB have taken the only possible step to 'plug the hole' where it appears that a crew may, unbelievably, have forgotten to close both T/Ls for landing. No admission of 'error' by AB, no accident investigation 'result', just a safe - and apparently necessary warning.
BOAC is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 01:21
  #2402 (permalink)  
I support PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Proofs and agendas

Do you have concrete proof of this (the assertions in the first three sentences) which you can share?
PBL
PBL, my first impulse was to run after proofs to pacify you. But I decided not to do this because it is too late, and besides, what I said is common knowledge here after the President and Maintenace Men from TAM as well as Representative from Airbus were interviewed at the CPI of the House of Representatives. I saw them in TV. What they said is what I stated, believe me. Here just one news at the time (in portuguese):

http://portalamazonia.globo.com/noti...316&idLingua=1

It says in a clear way what we have been discussing here, the pilots not pulling the right TL, etc, etc. In the end it talks about the new software being produced by Airbus after Taipei to warn better the pilots about the TL remaning on Climb. And Tam answering that it did not know about it. Later Tam said that it did know but it was not mandatory, and they didn´t not buy it. Now, they did.

Lemurian says that they are no good and cause more problems than solve...

Yes Lemurian, let me reassure you that I trust your technical expertise, and that I am convinced that most likely the six pilots (three disasters)involved "forgot" one TL on Climb, while pushing the other to Rev. I am not trying to defend them to the point of denying technical evidence. But on the other hand nobody was there to tell the story and there was that dialogue: "Descelerate, descelerate, descerelate" and the answer "I can´t, I can´t, I can´t".

I am impressed by the fact that while I am open to find the pilots responsible for the disaster, and I am convinced that training and more training will be important to prevent another disaster like this one, you and some others are not willing to admit that perhaps, even in a very remote way, the Airbus could have done better or could do better to prevent this from happening again. Or that even in a very, very remote, almost impossibe way something could have gone wrong with the A320 computers. Do you have an agenda?... Do you work for Airbus?

The fact remains that at this time, until a final report is issued, nobody knows for sure what happened. Otherwise we would not be here waisting each others time...

Regards and good night

Last edited by marciovp; 24th Sep 2007 at 01:41. Reason: Typo and adding
marciovp is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 06:24
  #2403 (permalink)  
RWA
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by marciovp
and there was that dialogue: "Descelerate, descelerate, descerelate" and the answer "I can´t, I can´t, I can´t".
marciovp, can you help about that choice of wording? I don't know a word of Portuguese, but in English 'decelerate' tends to be something of a technical term; broadly meaning 'reduce speed by lifting the accelerator/reducing throttle.' In English usage, especially in an emergency, if you just meant 'slow down' you'd be likely to say just that - or even just say 'brake!'

Is the usage similar in Portuguese? In other words, could the PNF, by using that word, possibly have meant 'throttle back' rather than just 'slow down'?

PS - Good match yesterday. I have to say that the best all-round team on the night (Brazil) won. But I was pleased that the Aussie girls played so well, and stayed in contention to the very end.
RWA is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 06:38
  #2404 (permalink)  
RWA
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PBL
AI respond to customer requests. They presumably responded to one from TAM. Why might they have done it? Because they were asked to do so.

I do not see what is so insidious about responding to customer requests.
PBL, Airbus developed the modification not in response to customer requests, but in compliance with the Safety Recommendation made by the Taiwanese Board in 2004 after the Taipei crash. All documented in my earlier posts, e.g. Post 2198.

Last edited by RWA; 24th Sep 2007 at 06:51.
RWA is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 08:04
  #2405 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Marciovp, RWA,

thank you. The short answer to my question appears to be: no, no one here has proof.

Proof would be, say, an SB number and date with the mod. Note that I have SB A320-31-1267 Revision 2, which talks about H2F3. It is not in that release.

I have asked a number of correspondents at airlines with large numbers of A320s in their fleet. No one has seen an SB with this mod in it.

I am quite sure there will be one. I am almost equally sure by now that there isn't one yet.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 15:03
  #2406 (permalink)  
I support PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
We are indeed working together, in a civil way...

marciovp, can you help about that choice of wording? I don't know a word of Portuguese, but in English 'decelerate' tends to be something of a technical term; broadly meaning 'reduce speed by lifting the accelerator/reducing throttle.' In English usage, especially in an emergency, if you just meant 'slow down' you'd be likely to say just that - or even just say 'brake!'
The same in Portuguese Brazilian. That is it as I have said before.. the way he said the chances are that he was asking the other to reduce speed by reducing throttle. Other wise if it was only for the other to slown down the speed he would say "Freie" (brake) or "va devagar" (slow down).

Is the usage similar in Portuguese? In other words, could the PNF, by using that word, possibly have meant 'throttle back' rather than just 'slow down'?
That how I understand. But let´s take in consideration that the tape was of course originally in portuguese brazilian and at the NTSB is was translated into english... I wish I could listen myself to the original tape in my language.

PS - Good match yesterday. I have to say that the best all-round team on the night (Brazil) won. But I was pleased that the Aussie girls played so well, and stayed in contention to the very end.
Yes, I was very impressed how the Australian came back to tie the game. Well done. Now the Brazilians will face the USA... Just can´t wait...

PBL I am quite sure there will be one. I am almost equally sure by now that there isn't one yet.
Well PBL you will make me do a lot of work to find out the numbers you are trying to find. All I can tell you is that I saw in TV the President of TAM and the representative of Airbus talking about these things. Yes, it was a recommendation after the Taipei accident as RWA said. But, this impresses me, you seem to have an agenda too because of your resistance and denial (with all due respect).

Why is so important for you that:

1. Airbus did not develop the software... and didn~t say it was not mandatory?... Why this systematic defense of Airbus?...Mind you I am not so defensive when it comes to the pilots and I am more than willing to accept that maybe they indeed made a mistake...
marciovp is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 15:20
  #2407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Age: 71
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
RWA, Marciovp
Yes, decelerate and desacelera means the same in Portuguese and English.
Reduce acceleration, or quit accelerating, etc...
If the "request" is related to speed, we say "freia!" (Brake!), or "Breca" (old fashioned).

Many posts ago I said this, and it continues to puzzle me. "Desacelera" is related to accelerator. It is a quick way of saying "reduza o acelerador". Even in English the spelling is similar. "Decelerate" is a quick way of saying "reduce the accelerator".

The pilots were in a very bad situation already, do someone here thinks they would spend precious seconds with phrases, like "reduce engine number two throttle", when there is a single word that can be used?

So "desacelera" (decelerate), followed by the reply "não dá" still intrigues me. "Não dá" is not very easy to translate (and who did the first CVR translation didn't do a good job). "It can't" is wrong (bad English), and "I can't" is not correct either. "Não consigo" would be the correct translation to "I can't". "Não dá" is almost a slang, it is related to a task being impossible to execute. If someone tells you to place a round object in a square hole, you say "não dá", meaning is not possible. If you are drowning and someone throws you a rope, but a bit too far, you say "não consigo", or "I can't".

So, again, IMHO "desacelera" replied by a "não dá" is an indication that something wrong happened with the right TL, not a simple "forgotten TL" thing...
Marciovp, sorry if I jumped into answering the question directed to you by RWA...

And PBL, no more "green men" jokes, if you please...

Last edited by Rob21; 24th Sep 2007 at 16:02.
Rob21 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 15:55
  #2408 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Marcio,

you are reading far too much into my question. If there is a piece of new FCW SW, then there is an SB, and I want to know what it is. If there isn't an SB, then there isn't the piece of SW.

Look for ulterior motives all you like. Let me know which ones you find and I'll give them to my partner so she can use them to berate me when she gets mad. But please give me an SB number as well.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 15:57
  #2409 (permalink)  
RWA
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rob21
"Não dá" is almost a slang, it is related to a task being impossible to execute.
Thanks, marciovp, Rob21. There's a similar usage in English (well, originally North American ) - if someone tells you to do something that is impossible you say "No way!"

Food for thought. We may never know the answer, given that that conversation virtually amounted to the poor guys' last words.
RWA is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 16:08
  #2410 (permalink)  
RWA
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PBL
Look for ulterior motives all you like. Let me know which ones you find and I'll give them to my partner so she can use them to berate me when she gets mad. But please give me an SB number as well.
PBL, with respect (I mean that sincerely, I've often admired your meticulous and penetrating reports on air accidents) you seem to be wandering off on a path of your own.

The factual situation is that:-

1. The Taipei investigators made a Safety Recommendation.

2. Airbus officially responded, 'on the record,' by saying that they had developed a suitable modification and that an SB would be issued shortly.

3. No SB appears to have eventuated, nor was any AD issued.
RWA is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 16:42
  #2411 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RWA
1. The Taipei investigators made a Safety Recommendation.

2. Airbus officially responded, 'on the record,' by saying that they had developed a suitable modification and that an SB would be issued shortly.

3. No SB appears to have eventuated, nor was any AD issued.
That's what I understand also. The Taipei report said that the warning will be in H2F3. It isn't.

I want to know the story on this warning. That's all.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 17:13
  #2412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If this is indeed true that no SB or Software was incorporated in any A320 series in spite of a promise by Airbus to do so, then once again fingers need to be pointed at Airbus.
armchairpilot94116 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 18:25
  #2413 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by airchairpilot94116
If this is indeed true that no SB or Software was incorporated in any A320 series in spite of a promise by Airbus to do so, then once again fingers need to be pointed at Airbus.
We have been over this ground many times before. The short answer is: no, they don't.

PBL
PBL is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 18:32
  #2414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agreed - it is the responsibility of the regulating authorities to mandate ADs, *not* the manufacturers.
DozyWannabe is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 18:36
  #2415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I might have missed something, but didnt PBL state he couldnt find any evidence this software revision even exists? And that no SB to that effect actually exists? Then its the "fault" of Airbus , rather then regulatory agencies because of the fact that the software is not there to be distributed or mandated?
armchairpilot94116 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 20:06
  #2416 (permalink)  
I support PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks and more...

Thanks Rob21, we are both Brazilians and we agree as to the meanings of the words. This ought to carry some weight...


Now PBL, here was in the news with names and all. Go and ask Mr. Yannick Malinge from Airbus...Perhaps he can help you... I hope.



Castro confirmou ainda que, em alguns meses, todos os aviões da TAM estarão equipados com o software FW3, que serve para avisar os pilotos quando a manete (equipamento que controla a velocidade da aeronave) está fora do lugar. "Dentro de pouco tempo teremos esse software em todas as nossas aeronaves, vai ser um instrumento a mais de segurança."
Em depoimento à CPI, na quinta-feira passada, o vice-presidente de segurança de vôo da Airbus, Yannick Malinge, disse que o software FW3 era recomendável, mas não necessário.
Oh my...I am tire of translating from the Portuguese buy... let´s try again. Rob21, please help. I am doing this of course knowing that PBL will not accept it. I have no idea why he is so adamant to deny this...

Castro (from TAM) confirmed that in a few months, all TAM airplanes will have the software FW3 that warns the pilots when the TL (equipment that controls the plane´s speed) is not in the proper place. "Within a short time we will have this software in all our planes, it is going to be an instrument to increase security", Talking with the CPI, last thursday, the vice president for flight security at Airbus, Yannick Malinge, said that the software FW3 was recommended, not mandatory."

Well PBL, I also appreciate your posters since you are much more of an expert than I am. But why don´t you trust what I say? Have I lied to you before?...

Regards.
marciovp is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 20:26
  #2417 (permalink)  
PBL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Bielefeld, Germany
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
armchairpilot,

that is all just sophistry. If you want to "blame" someone, go ahead. I don't.

Marcio,

Originally Posted by marciovp
Go and ask Mr. Yannick Malinge
You may assume that my queries have gone to the right people.

You also appear to have forgotten both that I read Portuguese and that you have quoted/repeated/paraphrased this passage many times before in this thread.

Originally Posted by marciovp
Well PBL, ..........why don´t you trust what I say?
I trust what you say. It just doesn't answer my question.

PBL

Last edited by PBL; 24th Sep 2007 at 20:40.
PBL is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 21:13
  #2418 (permalink)  

Sun worshipper
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...o software FW3 era recomendável, mas não necessário. ...
..."the software FW3 was recommended, not mandatory..."
Portuguese is not my native language but shouldn't your translation be thus :

"...the FW3 software was advisable, but not necessary. (wasn't considered necessary) ?

the word *recomendàvel* has the suffix *avel* which is the equivalent of *able* in English, therefore *recomendàvel* becomes *recommendable* or *advisable*
*necessàrio* has never meant *mandatory*.

Translating to suit your arguments, aren't you ?

Last edited by Lemurian; 24th Sep 2007 at 21:17. Reason: I may be in error ; in this case, blame my Angolan colleagues !
Lemurian is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 21:25
  #2419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Age: 71
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Marciovp,

Your translation is fine. I also read the same statements from TAM and Airbus (rep. in Brasil) and I also saw a TV enterview with TAM's president confirming he is going to install this "FW3" (software?) in all his airplanes, as soon he get's it from Airbus.

PBL,
I know you are very well informed, and that it is part of your profession to stay up to date on the latest upgrades regarding aviation safety.
If you don't know about this "FW3", so the only conclusion I can take from this is that Airbus MAYBE authorized Mr. Malinge to "offer" this software upgrade to TAM in order to calm things down.
For me, this is the same that calling me stupid as a passenger, calling pilots also stupid and laughing on the face of serious researchers like you.

To create a fake "FW3" is very serious. I hope this "FW3" device really exists, but you are not aware of it yet.
Rob21 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2007, 21:37
  #2420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sophistry :1.a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally fallacious method of reasoning. 2.a false argument; sophism. [Origin: 1300–50; ME sophistrie <


Actually until you mentioned it, I was under the impression that after the Transasia accident Airbus was to come up with a software revision and SB to that effect to help prevent a recurrence. If in fact this SB and software revision was never produced and made available to 320 series operators, then I dont think its a false argument to say that its the airframe manufacturer's responsibility to ensure that it is available.

Last edited by armchairpilot94116; 24th Sep 2007 at 21:43. Reason: language
armchairpilot94116 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.