Air France Safety report
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Had this been a B737 the whole pprune community would have slammed the pilots for their stupidity.
Because it is an A320 it appears people blame the plane for not saving the pilots in their moment of stupidity.
The report should note that Asseline planned his low fly by using the main runway...when he approached, he was advised the air show display was using the cross runway. He had not briefed nor prepared for that, yet he went ahead. The runway was far shorter than the main runway and had high trees at the end of it. He approached too fast and to make sure he lost altitude, the aeroplane was in land mode...he advanced the throttles but did not select the toga switch. He assumed that by putting the throttles in the gate the response would be instantaneous.
The manufacturer advised the response of the engines was actually better than specs. Asseline realised too late that he would have issues with the height of the trees. PPPPPP.....Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance....
Because it is an A320 it appears people blame the plane for not saving the pilots in their moment of stupidity.
The report should note that Asseline planned his low fly by using the main runway...when he approached, he was advised the air show display was using the cross runway. He had not briefed nor prepared for that, yet he went ahead. The runway was far shorter than the main runway and had high trees at the end of it. He approached too fast and to make sure he lost altitude, the aeroplane was in land mode...he advanced the throttles but did not select the toga switch. He assumed that by putting the throttles in the gate the response would be instantaneous.
The manufacturer advised the response of the engines was actually better than specs. Asseline realised too late that he would have issues with the height of the trees. PPPPPP.....Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance....
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ready ? OK. What I see in those vids is an increase in power (noise and exhaust) and a concomitant pitch up. Great? Right? alas, the a/c pitches nosedown and settles into the lumber. I don't think the flying pilot decided to lower the nose because of fear of a Stall, he wanted altitude, and I think he was starting to get it. Pray tell, why did the nose drop ?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WILL
This has already been done to death on another thread, don't try and use it again to show your bias. If the aircraft was at alpha max pulling back on the stick would not have achieved anything the pitch up from the thrust increasing may have been endangering a stall so the alpha was reduced. What you do not see from the video is that he was also flying into rising terrain. The pitch done could also have been assisted by contact with the trees, the video is not clear enough to rule that out.
So give it a rest it WAS pilot error NOT an airbus fault.
This has already been done to death on another thread, don't try and use it again to show your bias. If the aircraft was at alpha max pulling back on the stick would not have achieved anything the pitch up from the thrust increasing may have been endangering a stall so the alpha was reduced. What you do not see from the video is that he was also flying into rising terrain. The pitch done could also have been assisted by contact with the trees, the video is not clear enough to rule that out.
So give it a rest it WAS pilot error NOT an airbus fault.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: In one of the two main circles
Age: 65
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Replaying that old battle again ?????
So after more than 21 years, after all the authority reports, after all the judicial system decisions, you have decided to play the A320 Habsheim story all over again on a post related to the AF safety culture ?
Come on ! We are on PPRuNe and not on the usual Airbus-bashing, BEA-bashing and AF-bashing French forums (crash aerien, radio coco, eurocokpit, etc.). So please be kind enough to go there if you want to vent your misconceptions and bias on the inherent safety of the A320 and let's stick with the subject of this thread.
AF pilot unions had for a long time been a very powerful force within this company. Consequently, the management (either in the past public time or in the current private one) has never dared to clash with the pilots even when they were as black as coal. At the time of the privatization, management even played pilots again other categories of staff ...
Come on ! We are on PPRuNe and not on the usual Airbus-bashing, BEA-bashing and AF-bashing French forums (crash aerien, radio coco, eurocokpit, etc.). So please be kind enough to go there if you want to vent your misconceptions and bias on the inherent safety of the A320 and let's stick with the subject of this thread.
AF pilot unions had for a long time been a very powerful force within this company. Consequently, the management (either in the past public time or in the current private one) has never dared to clash with the pilots even when they were as black as coal. At the time of the privatization, management even played pilots again other categories of staff ...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: EU
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, hashing up the detail of an old accident is useless. But I would like to point out that in the last 25 years Air France has written off 8 aircraft. Damaged two substantially (a 747-400, and a 747-200, both off the runway). Add Air Inter and UTA (both merged into Air France) and you can add two more aircraft written off. The details can all be checked on the Aviation Safety Network website. These are Korean Airlines kind of numbers. Many of the hull losses did not result in fatalities. But as a reference BA, Lufthansa, and KLM each suffered one hull loss in the same time span. Could be bad luck. But I have wonder if the German or British authorities would not be right in there, making sure there isn’t a systemic problem, if their flag carrier was putting in these kind of numbers.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to derail the thread and I can't believe we're rehashing Habsheim again...
Willoz269:
You're right in most respects, but
No, no, no, no, no.
There's not really any such thing as "landing mode", that was a press invention*. The important factor was that by going below 100ft RA on the low flypast, the captain effectively disabled all the aircraft's protections, as well as permanently disabling autothrottle manually (by pressing and holding two buttons) at the beginning of his run. Couple this with the standard high-bypass slow response from idle (a setting the engines should never have been at anyway) and you have the cause of the accident.
Regardless of culture, AF seems to have had some spectacularly bad luck of late. I for one hope it improves soon.
* - There is a flare mode, but it's not really related to approach phase.
Willoz269:
You're right in most respects, but
the aeroplane was in land mode...
There's not really any such thing as "landing mode", that was a press invention*. The important factor was that by going below 100ft RA on the low flypast, the captain effectively disabled all the aircraft's protections, as well as permanently disabling autothrottle manually (by pressing and holding two buttons) at the beginning of his run. Couple this with the standard high-bypass slow response from idle (a setting the engines should never have been at anyway) and you have the cause of the accident.
Regardless of culture, AF seems to have had some spectacularly bad luck of late. I for one hope it improves soon.
* - There is a flare mode, but it's not really related to approach phase.
Superb post, Will Fraser 
Habsheim accident happened exactly four months after the first A320 was delivered to AF - and that was first A320 delivery ever. With 130 hrs, capt Asseline was probably among the most experienced A320 line pilots in the world, at the time.
And if Q400 had that option too, Colgan 3407 would be just another flightnumber.
Originally Posted by Vovachan
What I cannot believe is how someone would perform a tricky low-pass maneouver on an ac loaded with passengers, with 2 low-hour pilots, with a forrest growing right at the end of the runway
(...)
According to the official crash report Asseline had 130 hrs on the A320 and the copilote 40 hrs. That's pretty damn low.
(...)
According to the official crash report Asseline had 130 hrs on the A320 and the copilote 40 hrs. That's pretty damn low.
Originally Posted by CONFiture
the flight controls didn't follow the pilot inputs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,124
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
7 Posts
He was inexperienced on type with only 130 hours, and probably in a position where there were few other pilots to talk to and pass on their own own lessons learned, therefore having to learn more stuff on his own than would be likely for a 130 hour A-320 pilot today.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: In one of the two main circles
Age: 65
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's even worse than that !
Clandestino,
A320 MSN 9 was delivered to Air France on 23 June 1988 and crashed on 26 June 1988.
However, M. Asseline has participated to the A320 certification flight test program as an Air France pilot representative and that explains the 138 A320 flight hours mentionned in the BEA report (section 1.1.5).
A320 MSN 9 was delivered to Air France on 23 June 1988 and crashed on 26 June 1988.
However, M. Asseline has participated to the A320 certification flight test program as an Air France pilot representative and that explains the 138 A320 flight hours mentionned in the BEA report (section 1.1.5).
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot understand why people is still talking about the A320 in Habsheim.
That topic has been discussed in various threads here. This thread is about AF safety.
I found disturbing that a major European Airline has 8 hull losses in 25 years, compared to 1 of BA or LH on the same period. Why?
Is because AF has more AB than Boeing? Luck? Training?
Those figures cannot be discounted easily, they have the same track record of KE or CI, which went under major review for they safety standards. 8 hull losses because of bad luck is hard to believe!
FSLF
That topic has been discussed in various threads here. This thread is about AF safety.
I found disturbing that a major European Airline has 8 hull losses in 25 years, compared to 1 of BA or LH on the same period. Why?
Is because AF has more AB than Boeing? Luck? Training?
Those figures cannot be discounted easily, they have the same track record of KE or CI, which went under major review for they safety standards. 8 hull losses because of bad luck is hard to believe!
FSLF
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@hetfield
Your right, however my point is that we should look not at the single case. Such accident has been debated all over for years, and nothing new will be added on this thread. it might fit on a wider analysis of AF safety policy. But such accident or AF447 itself taken individually will not help in understanding why AF did have so many hull losses.
FSLF
Your right, however my point is that we should look not at the single case. Such accident has been debated all over for years, and nothing new will be added on this thread. it might fit on a wider analysis of AF safety policy. But such accident or AF447 itself taken individually will not help in understanding why AF did have so many hull losses.
FSLF
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Petaluma
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FrequentSLF
With respect, I couldn't possibly disagree more, I hope the reasons are obvious. Tenerife isn't done, it better still smolder in the minds of anyone presuming to take control of an airliner, or almost 600 people died in vain.
I don't care if its Waldo Pepper's cousin's failed inside loop, what you forget is just in front of you.
With respect, I couldn't possibly disagree more, I hope the reasons are obvious. Tenerife isn't done, it better still smolder in the minds of anyone presuming to take control of an airliner, or almost 600 people died in vain.
I don't care if its Waldo Pepper's cousin's failed inside loop, what you forget is just in front of you.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alabama
Age: 58
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Will Fraser,
Yes I do agree with you, however we should respect the topic of the thread, which in this case is not why AF crashed in Habsheim, it is why AF has a such poor safety record.
Talking only about Habsheim is avoiding the underlining problem of an major airline with a very poor safety record.
Tenerife was a very sad day for the industry but the two airlines involved since then have a much better safety record than AF.
FSLF
Yes I do agree with you, however we should respect the topic of the thread, which in this case is not why AF crashed in Habsheim, it is why AF has a such poor safety record.
Talking only about Habsheim is avoiding the underlining problem of an major airline with a very poor safety record.
Tenerife was a very sad day for the industry but the two airlines involved since then have a much better safety record than AF.
FSLF
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Much Ado about everything
Talking only about Habsheim is avoiding the underlining problem of an major airline with a very poor safety record.
- 1. Organizational Safety culture : Push an aircraft to the limit of its performance envelope with passengers!
- 2. Ignore red flags: (Damn this chick has a hairy arm!, damn she sure does live in a bad part of town!...damn, she has an Adam's apple???*)
- 3. Dissemination of information: Airbus had transmitted performance behavior warnings to AF *months* before the accident- these had not been sent out to the pilots
* this is in no way related to any personal experience of mine, but may have been related anecdotally by a 'friend of a friend'
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ignore red flags: (Damn this chick has a hairy arm!, damn she sure does live in a bad part of town!...damn, she has an Adam's apple???
Guten Abend
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do you mean?
If you mean total number of accidents , ever - then the answer would be yes If you mean the total number of accidents divided by miles/cycles... I would guess no, or gone down, primarily because air travel has gotten mathematically safer ? If you mean safety rate compared against similar carriers, routes and airbus equipment.. I dunno.. we'd have to find who else is flying airbus along similar routes, then add up their incident/miles ratio and see the difference
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by iceman50
If the aircraft was at alpha max pulling back on the stick would not have achieved anything the pitch up from the thrust increasing may have been endangering a stall so the alpha was reduced
Please, quote it from the report ...
Originally Posted by FrequentSLF
I cannot understand why people is still talking about the A320 in Habsheim