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

TACA aircraft crashed in Honduras

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

TACA aircraft crashed in Honduras

Old 2nd Jun 2008, 21:03
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: still trying to know
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry to bother, but just so everyone knows for sure and according to the requests made, please explain how the NFP gets to see the other crewmember flight control movements (or joystick inputs).
kwick is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2008, 21:12
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Near the tannhauser gate
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the A320 you can only see it during the taxi and takeoff roll. There is a small cross that moves along the eadi in both pfd acording to the sidestick input.
DC9gti is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2008, 21:23
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: still trying to know
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks DC9gti, that was fast, and made easy to understand !!!

To give an opportunity to everyone, please confirm, if possible, if there is any other time when you get a chance to see the other guys sidestick inputs, without moving your head or eyes more than a straight- forward panel scan. Thanks in advance.
kwick is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2008, 22:26
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: still trying to know
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From Airbus ......

"The Sidestick - practical
It takes most pilots 10 minutes (i.e. one traffic pattern) to get used to it. It enables the aircraft to be flown more precisely, and requires less effort.
The lack of “through-stick” feedback is a much more minor issue in practice than might be expected. Alternative feedback cues are abundant and are quickly substituted for the traditional feel.
The automatic trim function is a delight once experienced and further improves precision flying."

"As can be seen from these notes, changing to the A319/A320/A321 or A330 from other types (other than A340) will require some change of operational philosophy. These aircraft can be flown precisely and smoothly with little effort, and can, therefore, create a sense of considerable satisfaction. However, under extreme conditions when, for example, severe weather and abnormalities combine, it is most important to be aware of the differences. Under stress, reversion to certain well-ingrained pilot instincts, such as riding the controls, is not helpful in any fly-by-wire aircraft."

Questions????????
kwick is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2008, 22:40
  #85 (permalink)  
PJ2
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: BC
Age: 76
Posts: 2,483
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
kwick;

Fully agree with all your comments re Airbus - the points raised by non-AI's are non-issues. It is all a matter of what one is used to, and there are enough design/system issues to go around for both types.
PJ2 is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2008, 23:40
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Valencia
Age: 48
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In flight is impossible to see what the other sidestick is doing.
You can only see what the control surfaces are doing if you have the Flight Controls page.

And one more hint, in the Gulf Air crash in Bahrein, do you think that the F/O was aware of the inputs of the Captain?
Was the F/O aware that was really the Captain who was pushing the plane downwards, or he was thinking that the captain was trying to recover from a pitch down?

In other plane is easy, if the Yoke goes foward and the nose down, the other pilot is driving it to the ground.
If the yoke goes aft and the nose down, the other guy is trying to recover.

It is easy right.

In the Airbus aint so easy, everything is more complicated, except the cruise, of course.
Strongresolve is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 00:00
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: An Island Province
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Has anyone been able to check the landing distance available on 02? My earlier indication (#55) of 5410ft has not been validated. A quick glance at the airport chart could easily mistake the landing distance for the higher value (6190 ft) in each direction. Any operators into this airport able to confirm what distances are used in their planning documents.

If the behavior shown in the videos is the norm then these operators are breaking the rules. The displaced threshold appears to originate from the requirements of the obstacle clearance plane (type A chart) - the terrain on short finals. Thus, operators should respect the displaced threshold crossing altitude in order to reduce the risk of encountering terrain.
If the performance calculations are correct then the aircraft should still be capable of stopping in the remaining runway distance. An important aspect of these calculations is a correct assessment of wind, meeting the requirements of approach / touchdown speed, and achieving the assumed touchdown position.
Thereafter correct application of the brakes is assumed, which is not necessarily use of autobrake if the runway very wet or technically ‘slippery when wet’. In the latter case, normal ‘wet’ landing performance might not be valid, and contaminated runway data should be checked.
alf5071h is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 03:00
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: still trying to know
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
alf5071h, here is something for you, information of Toncontin lenghts from World Aero data, really very close to the 5410 ft. you mentioned. As for runway contamination, I can bet a zillion dollars that it is full of streaks of rubber if not completely covered with it.
Also enclosed below is an article with a lot of truth for the future at that day in 2007 (no need to be a magician to think this would happen someday).

TONCONTIN INTL

Runway 02/20

6112 x 148 feet
1863 x 45 meters

Runway 02
Surface ASPHALT
True Heading 019.0
Latitude 14.052922 14° 03' 10.52" N
Longitude 87.220003 087° 13' 12.01" W
Elevation 3294.0 feet 1004 meters
Slope 1.0°
Landing Distance 5442 feet 1659 meters
Takeoff Distance 6312 feet 1924 meters
Displaced Threshold Length 670 feet 204 meters
Overrun Length 200 feet 61 meters
Overrun Surface ASPHALT
Lighting System MIRL REIL PAPI

Runway 20
Surface ASPHALT
True Heading 199.0
Latitude 14.068844 14° 04' 07.84" N
Longitude 87.214392 087° 12' 51.81" W
Elevation 3232.0 feet 985 meters
Slope 1.0°
Landing Distance 6112 feet 1863 meters
Takeoff Distance 6212 feet 1893 meters
Overrun Length 100 feet 30 meters
Overrun Surface ASPHALT
Lighting System MIRL REIL PAPI

............................................................ .................................
Landing at Toncontin International Airport
Written by Garry Conn on July 21st, 2007
The Toncontin International Airport is a crazy airport. According to Wikipedia, Ryan Bert who wrote an article about the airport in 2001 on Airliners.net and photographer named William L.B.J Dekker, the Toncontin International Airport has one of the smallest runways in the world. To make matters worse, the airport is located on a plateau within the city of Comayaguela which is orientated between tall mountains. But wait, it gets even better! The runway itself is only 6132 feet long; however, it has a “displaced threshold” leaving only 5,436 feet of actual useable landing length. Oh but wait… it gets even better! In addition to the extremely short length, it also has a slight downhill slope making it even more difficult to land and stop. Could things possibly get any worse? Yes! Here is the final stab in the heart! 100 feet past the end of the runway is a cliff. If an airplane can’t stop in time, it will plummet down the dreadful cliff and crash. That is of course, if the planes doesn’t crash into traffic traveling on a street that is separated by a rickety and old 4 foot fence.
............................................................ .....................................
kwick is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 03:13
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
one thing the 737 and the AB320 have in common is this:

the plane lands where the pilot tells it to land...unless of course doing an autoland...

a 737 will go off the end of a runway if the pilot lands long, doesn't reverse in time and is a bit unlucky

same thing for an airbus.


I recall that a commercial pilot (let alone an atp) has to demonstrate landing within 200 feet of a spot.
sevenstrokeroll is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 03:26
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 54
Posts: 2,832
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
strongresolve - easy answer re Gulf... Why didn't the F/O ASK? Or take control?
White Knight is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 03:44
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dream Land
Let's pray your not a trainer, no disrespect intended
Do not worry ... I'm not and don't pretend to be.
But the 'check airman' you are would be welcome to finally explain his words
Originally Posted by Dream Land
Originally Posted by ?
I would have to disagree about the crew being made up of 2 in an Airbus. The NFP has no idea what is going on with the controls
As a check airman on the Airbus I can tell you that your statement shows your complete lack of knowledge of the Airbus
CONF iture is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 04:16
  #92 (permalink)  
PPRuNe supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think this accident was an Airbus problem, we will see, if you want to start a discussion about the ability to monitor the FP, please start a thread.
Dream Land is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 11:28
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Valencia
Age: 48
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Probably is not an Airbus problem, but it is the 5th write off A320 that stops well behind the runway, and the 3rd that doesnt deploy a reverse.
May the aircraft doesnt have a problem, but do you know of the 19 hull losses how many have been due to technical problems?
Almost none, all losses had happen in normal operations.
Is it normal for a new generation aircraft?
19 losses in 20 years? I dont remember, but even the B737-100 didnt have such rate of crashes when were released, and that was 50 years ago or so.

I going to tell you that this aircraft really have a problem, and I´m going to tell you what it is.

The sciencetifics of Toulouse believe that is easier to adapt a human to a machine rather than a machine to a human, and 60 years ago, Chuck Yeagers discovered that was the human not de machine the essential part of the system.
We have gone backwards, and we have recovered a crash rate from the 60s.
Yeah, the plane is fine, not the stadistics and the common sense.

Last edited by Strongresolve; 3rd Jun 2008 at 13:45.
Strongresolve is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 12:25
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think this accident was an Airbus problem
Too early to tell what the story might be. But as a bystander I'm becoming increasingly uneasy about the Airbus automation, how its implemented and interfaces with the crew. In days past the man/machine relationship was much more direct ie pull this handle and X happens right now. There seem to be so many interlocks and preconditions that have to be met before anything happens these days that I find it no surprise that crews are at times caught out and wondering WTFIH. There seem to have been far too many accidents and the chant is always "Follow SOP's" or "More/better training". What if a manufacturer was to introduce a throttle set up where by you push the lever forward to reduce power and pulled it back to increase power. Think it would take off (no pun intended)? I'm sure there would be accidents but the SOP's and training mantra would still hold good. Whats it matter which direction the throttle moves?
PS Prior to WWII at least one country had the forward for idle, back for full power throttle convention - France.
Brian Abraham is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 12:50
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: I know EXACTLY where I am..
Age: 54
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In some things there isnt so much difference

As with the autobrake system. In the Boeing, you turn a switch, on the 'bus you press a button to set it.

If the pilots really did not notice that the autobrakes are not retarding until they were almost off the runway, meaning they were not activated in the first place or deactivated somehow, it wouldnt have made any difference if had been a bus or a boeing - not working is not working.

Pilots should notice these things.

That is why you have:
1.) speed trend vectors
2.) a call of decel green
3.) Your collective experience as a flight crew.
4.) a chance to go around (although I imagine this not being much fun here)

This should not be reduced to a bus or boeing problem - the causes will, as always be numerous and far more complicated.

rant over
OutOfRunWay is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 13:08
  #96 (permalink)  
airfoilmod
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
FoolProof

Brian raises valid concerns. We seem as an industry to be at a crossroads other businesses have dealt with. So far, the pressure has been to de-humanize the cockpit by adding machinery (sic) and computing power. Gone are Radioman, Navigator, Engineer; we are left with a single pilot flight deck with a second Human to Monitor the one flying. In future, will we have a single Human with electronic Monitoring? itself monitored by offsite monitoring, to be followed by offsite operation with Cabin Crew waiting to be replaced by robots? This may be speculative hyperbole. Maybe not. It may be as simple as back engineering a totally disclosive and partnered Flight Deck. This thread seems to have drifted off course, no information exists to suggest that AI/B comments pertain to this sad situation. I am saddened by this dreadful outcome. I am also in awe how pilots operate at this Runway. It is 400 feet longer than our small mountain strip which will serve Turbine S-2 A/C and the odd DC-3. 757? 320? Holy Smoke!!
 
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 17:58
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: still trying to know
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
News from El Heraldo

(NOTE: Unofficial translation)

Fatal Flight 390
Aeronautics does not rule out failures
Airbus 320 of TACA acident could have been by mechanical failure or the humidity of the runway, say the authorities of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation
By: Peter Membreño

• The climate weather conditions in Honduras have decreased visibility in the terminal air Toncontín, a phenomenon that would have caused the accident Taca.

Tegucigalpa
For the authorities of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), the crash of the Airbus-320 registered yesterday morning could have been due to a mechanical failure rather than weather generated by Hurricane Alma, which became a tropical depression. According to Boris Ferrera, deputy director of Civil Aviation, the plane landed on a routine basis at around 9:45 in the morning on the airport runway Toncontín arriving from the Comalapa airport in San Salvador.
Ferrera said that the Airbus-320 had enough space to maneuver on the runway, after ruling out that it had fallen erratically. According to the representative of Aeronautics, the control tower at Toncontin airport authorized the descent of the aircraft, as the flight progressed as usual.
"The flight was made in a normal way with over 100 passengers on board and the aircraft made his normal flight and had a perfect approach procedure to the runway, because no matter how long or short is the airport runway it has plenty runway at Toncontín to maneuver on land, but there are things that happen that are beyond the reach of humans," said Ferrera.
"The information we have from the staff at the control tower is that it made a perfect landing, but that's why we think that there could have been a mechanical fault, because it had spare runway and landed perfectly and could have made any maneuver on land, but there are things that are beyond the knowledge," he said.
Until yesterday it was handled that the accident reportedly killed at least five people, three travelling on the plane and two others who would have perished crushed. Among the dead is the chairman of the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (BCI), Harry Brautigam.
Investigation
In the afternoon, the director of Civil Aeronautics, William Seaman, said the Toncontín airport would remain closed pending the development of a an investigation process through insurance companies, Taca and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. Seaman said that it should analyze the experience of the pilot, weather conditions and status of aircraft before issuing an opinion thereon. The head of Aeronautics stated that a few weeks ago the airlines were warned about the danger represented by the runway under rainy conditions. "I took the representatives of the airlines to see the status of the runway. We do not want to say that these were the conditions, but the wet runway is a danger, it is one of the factors involved, we must see experience, weather conditions, the airplane, see if it was a human failure, a number of factors should be considered." According to reports from Honduras National Weather Service, the visibility conditions were not the best due to persistent rain generated by the passage of Alma on the national territory.
kwick is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 18:23
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: southwest
Age: 78
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Strongresolve

How short our memories are!

This is from an unverified internet source.

"There have been 130 737 hull-losses, including 4 hijackings/bombings and 7 ground accidents." For the early models:

Series: 737-1/200

Writeoff's: 100

No Built: 1144
Dysag is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 18:34
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Dream Land
I don't think this accident was an Airbus problem
I don't think either, see my first comment on post #69

But I think you flee a bit too easily after posting such comment on that very same thread:
''As a check airman on the Airbus I can tell you that your statement shows your complete lack of knowledge of the Airbus''
CONF iture is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2008, 21:23
  #100 (permalink)  
PPRuNe supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CONF iture, an experienced pilot doesn't necessarily require a moving control yoke in their hand to be ahead of a new pilot provided you don't put that student in a situation over his or her head to begin with, I feel in complete control with my hand guarding the joystick and red button as you feel with your yoke, how do I know what the control inputs are, by years of experience.

Cheers, D.L.
Dream Land 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.