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

TOM stall?

Old 15th Nov 2007, 19:13
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: MAN
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You gotta love this forum!

The Grim EPR - You have to be a Microsoft Flight Sim kinda guy?

"Apparently the crew experienced an auto throttle problem (uncommanded thrust reduction). They tried unsuccessfully to increase thrust, but were unable until the auto pilot and auto throttle were switched off"

You clearly have zero concept of how basic this aircraft is - Both the flight controls and the thrust levers are mechanically linked, directly to the actuators. ie - Push the throttles forward and the MEC fuel valves on the engine will command more fuel into the cans.

Perhaps we need a closed forum for Pro-pilots.
Dogma is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 20:15
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northwest England
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Dogma
With reference to the "Perhaps we should have a closed forum for Pro -Pilots"
Whilst i have nothing to do with aviation industry as far as employment goes, i read the opinions of all people on these boards with interest(some with far more knowledge of aviation than i will ever have! ), and whilst some forums have to be closed (understandable in some circumstances).making it closed to the likes of me is in my opinion a little unfair.
I find it interesting to read what the aviation fraternity think about things that are happening or have happened to increase my overall knowledge of this industry and to make my travelling experience as pleasurable as possible.
I am not one for commenting on things normally on PPRune but feel it would be a shame for people like me who are not in the industry but are interested in it all the same not being able to read the wealth of knowledge and experience that appear on these boards.


HLXPAX
HLXPAX is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 20:43
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Difficult to assess what actually happend from these post's but one thing is for sure - the basics weren't happening, i.e no-one was flying the aeroplane!!!
Sean Dillon is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 21:19
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Not meaning to be awkward here, but it was previously mentioned that the a/c was configured with flap 30 at the time, thus making it likely that it was during the last 1200 feet of the approach. Wouldn't that make a full stall recovery a bit unlikely?

Much more probable (if true at all) that the speed got low for whatever reason and the stick-shaker triggered. This in itself isn't that uncommon - my Company used to operate the B737-300 and I can remember at least three occasions when reports were filed for stick-shaker activation: twice due loss of situational awareness when dispatching with A/T u/s, and once due to the A/T being disconnected when a/c was high on glideslope.

Also, this would not be noticeable to the pax... however, a full stall recovery losing so much height, with 45 degrees NU pitch, at 90 knots with overboosted CFM's... I'd say that the pax would find that mildly uneasing. It's not like they would just get off the plane thinking "well that wasn't weird at all, was it?"... I had a pax phone a newspaper once just to report that we had stopped the a/c on the runway, and he'd never noticed that before (?!)...
Mr Good Cat is offline  
Old 15th Nov 2007, 21:27
  #25 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am not one for commenting on things normally on PPRune but feel it would be a shame for people like me who are not in the industry but are interested in it all the same not being able to read the wealth of knowledge and experience that appear on these boards.
Fine if people like you in these sections stuck to 'reading' but far too many people with limited knowledge are involving themselves in discourse way beyond their comprehension or knowledge, without letting on. It makes a mockery of any serious discussion by industry people. We've even had aviation armchair hobbyists announcing here how they would have handled a recent emergency (differently to the pilots involved)!

Dogma raised a very valid point, and was quite correct in criticising the post. It is an absurd statement for anyone that knows the 737-300. Perhaps until more information is released, we can refrain from postulating or stabbing in the dark? A lot of what has been written is evidently junk.
Rainboe is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 07:37
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here, here.

Too many are not open about who they are. Fewer fantacist armchair enthusiast comments would be fabulous.
Re-Heat is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 07:57
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There must be more to this than the 'rumours' reported. I really cannot believe a qualified crew from a major european company have actually stalled a servicable 737?

I too say leave this one to rest for the full picture to emerge.
NineForks is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 08:09
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I used to fly for TFly and remember we always disconnected A/T to land. At BA we ARM Speed mode by presseing the SPEED button and thus A/T stays in, this gives alpha floor protection. I think that this is a better method in light of this conversation. Doesn't help my landings though!
FlyingTom is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 08:19
  #29 (permalink)  
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FlyingTom - you need to re-read your manuals! It does NOT provide 'alpha-floor protection' - it merely applies power if the speed gets too low. Someone in BA has always thought this was 'apha-floor'.

IF you mishandle a low-engined a/c and get the speed too low, with full power you get a lot of nose-up. Have a re-read also of your 'unusual attitude' notes or whatever BA call them.

BA themselves nearly lost a 747 recently at LHR at an extreme attitude and low speed, and I think with stick-shake. It is somewhere on here.
BOAC is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 08:26
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
OK, minimum speed reversion is the proper name (with an A symbol in the window, hence it is incorrectly named by people like me).

Power is applied if you let the speed get to low, which is a good thing in my book.
FlyingTom is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 08:31
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PS. the 747 was TOGA' itus.
FlyingTom is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 11:10
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
unbelievable

NineForks Said
There must be more to this than the 'rumours' reported. I really cannot believe a qualified crew from a major european company have actually stalled a servicable 737?
Don't read any accident/incident reports, or you might get overwhelmed with what some fully qualified crews can do with perfectly serviceable aircraft...
dkaarma is offline  
Old 16th Nov 2007, 19:25
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Grand Com f'Ort
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

The Invisible Man wrote:

The final part of the investigation takes place tomorrow
...absolute rubbish.

Still, it's nice to see so many experts here who have already got the whole thing worked out.

Then we had:

Fewer fantacist armchair enthusiast comments would be fabulous
Whilst the grammar and syntax here are unforgiveable, the sentiment is laudable.

Last edited by Kit d'Rection KG; 16th Nov 2007 at 19:54.
Kit d'Rection KG is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2007, 02:22
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't read any accident/incident reports, or you might get overwhelmed with what some fully qualified crews can do with perfectly serviceable aircraft...

...especially when they rely on automatics day in, day out.
411A is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2007, 13:45
  #35 (permalink)  
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm afraid we rely on auto thrust so much now it is actually becoming a serious problem whenever you fly with an aeroplane where it is unserviceable. I don't know if that is a factor with this incident. The level of relying on automatics is such now that Airbuses are banned without autothrust in various places now, aren't they? I know when I have flown without A/T, sooner or later it is inevitable the speed does something unexpected through you relying on it so throroughly.
Rainboe is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2007, 15:15
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Europa
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flight story:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...stigation.html
angelorange is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2007, 15:26
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Flight story.
but witnesses report that the nose-up attitude during recovery exceeded 40 and the airspeed reduced to approximately 90kt at its lowest point
Who needs FDRs..........
forget is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2007, 21:06
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FOK

Along with the details I picked up I gather it's been tried a few times in the sim as part of the investigation - outcome wasn't good! Which is why the AAIB are considering it an accident.
Honiley is offline  
Old 17th Nov 2007, 22:17
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It never fails to amaze me how ridiculously trusting people are of the results of using a TRAINING simulator to investigate the behaviour of an aircraft operated outside of the training envelope.
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 18th Nov 2007, 08:47
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Mad

Correct.

@FlyingOfficerkite

If you want to know how an A310 with 88 pitch up and 30 kts reacts, check this:

http://aviation-safety.net/database/...?id=19910211-0
hetfield 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.