Air France A320 at Marseille on Mar 11th 2013
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe they will be handled better as this end up in the BEA investigation work !
No extra points for that.
As for the incident, Alpha Prot activated - the aircraft didn't stall (it won't!)and no one was hurt.
The Airbus family are aeroplanes, they WILL stall just like any other aeroplane. The laws of physics are not suspended just because it says Airbus on the side.
As for the incident, Alpha Prot activated - the aircraft didn't stall (it won't!)and no one was hurt.
Fly the darn airplane, from the moment you push back to the time the chocks are in place.
Latest I heard is that Airbus A/C should be flown without making use of protections
Last edited by Clandestino; 28th Mar 2013 at 21:20.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Up north
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ACCP, chill out... "Sounds like", never claimed Piltdown worked for AF. But if he knows how FDM systems work and how the data is processed and reported then his comments are even more of a surprise.
"....not afraid to say that something strange has happened". Nothing strange here, just disconnect the A/THR, forget that you disconnected it, and then continue the approach. That's the only "strange" thing that happened here. Either that exact scenario, or in combination with abrupt pitch up when realising that they were a bit low on profile or had reached a level off altitude.
Lets see what comes out of the investigation and then we'll talk more about it.
"....not afraid to say that something strange has happened". Nothing strange here, just disconnect the A/THR, forget that you disconnected it, and then continue the approach. That's the only "strange" thing that happened here. Either that exact scenario, or in combination with abrupt pitch up when realising that they were a bit low on profile or had reached a level off altitude.
Lets see what comes out of the investigation and then we'll talk more about it.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why Air France should be banned from non-EU skies | Plane Talking
Air France blacklisted outside Europe is that possible?
Google*Traduction
For an account of appalling flight safety standards in a major airline, a French air safety agency (BEA) report into a seriously botched approach to Paris Charles de Gaulle airport by an Air France A340 a year ago today is hard to beat.
Google*Traduction
The lack of reaction of the crew is particularly shocking, especially since it was to prepare an automatic approach with
Auto Land CAT III, because the visibility was less than 400 m (LVP in force). However, this approach must always be a stabilized approach at 10 Nm and 3000 '(Easy 10x3) ie gear released, FULL configuration (flaps and slats) and approach speed gained. This last point is part of the CAT III qualification
Auto Land CAT III, because the visibility was less than 400 m (LVP in force). However, this approach must always be a stabilized approach at 10 Nm and 3000 '(Easy 10x3) ie gear released, FULL configuration (flaps and slats) and approach speed gained. This last point is part of the CAT III qualification
Last edited by jcjeant; 30th Mar 2013 at 14:48.
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why Air France should be banned from non-EU skies | Plane Talking
Why stop at 'non-EU' skies? We need to ask seriously if they are fit to operate at all. I bet KLM are pleased........................
Why stop at 'non-EU' skies? We need to ask seriously if they are fit to operate at all. I bet KLM are pleased........................
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BOAC
I bet KLM are pleased.......................
KLM made a big mistake in ever getting together with AF, and still runs the risk of being dragged down as a result of the lack of professionalism that AF continue to demonstrate in comparison, no doubt not helped by the usual gallic arrogance of considering themselves better than anyone else.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mercer Island WA
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another apparent approach and landing event, if not even a near accident?? When will operators, Authorities, ANSPs, and OEMs finally realize this is completely unnecessary,now with RNP and GLS potentially available for every runway end on which jettransports operate. To continue this "non-precision" or even "visual approach" madness, or even sustained use of flawed and unnecessarily expensive ILS, as in the A340 "event" at LFPG on March 13, 2012 (see Flight International19-25 March 2013, page 15) with air transport jet aircraft, is not only unnecessary, ... it now borders on being irresponsible. We can do much better,much safer, much more efficiently, AT LOWER fully allocated cost. We should even do it for use in visual conditions, as for preventing the fatal A300 crash in good weather at Nagoya years ago. It is long past time to fully implement having RNP and GLS based paths available globally, for use 100% of the time, except perhaps for some basic skills training, in simulators.
Since we're in "hang 'em high" mode, we might consider banning the airline whose pilots took off in their T7 from the intersection from which no takeoff was to be attempted.
Fortunately, aeronautical powers that be won't listen to us even as we indignantly accuse them of being ignorant/ineffective/corrupt. I do expect comprehensive report on the problematic culture of certain airline in next 12-18 months so rest of us may avoid falling into same trap but outright banning - nay.
Fortunately, aeronautical powers that be won't listen to us even as we indignantly accuse them of being ignorant/ineffective/corrupt. I do expect comprehensive report on the problematic culture of certain airline in next 12-18 months so rest of us may avoid falling into same trap but outright banning - nay.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Northampton
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is long past time to fully implement having RNP and GLS based paths available globally, for use 100% of the time, except perhaps for some basic skills training, in simulators.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another apparent approach and landing event, if not even a near accident?? When will operators, Authorities, ANSPs, and OEMs finally realize this is completely unnecessary,now with RNP and GLS potentially available for every runway end on which jettransports operate. To continue this "non-precision" or even "visual approach" madness, or even sustained use of flawed and unnecessarily expensive ILS, as in the A340 "event" at LFPG on March 13, 2012 (see Flight International19-25 March 2013, page 15) with air transport jet aircraft, is not only unnecessary, ... it now borders on being irresponsible. We can do much better,much safer, much more efficiently, AT LOWER fully allocated cost. We should even do it for use in visual conditions, as for preventing the fatal A300 crash in good weather at Nagoya years ago. It is long past time to fully implement having RNP and GLS based paths available globally, for use 100% of the time, except perhaps for some basic skills training, in simulators.
What is irresponsible is the level of competence on a flight deck is constantly been eroded by airline management and in many cases a toxic culture of arrogance.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airbus sucks
its quite simple...airbus sucks....its a flawed aircraft and constantly has faults with it.
its a flying laptop that needs to be reset all the time
i've flown both and there isnt a single person i know who has flown the boeing before that actually enjoys the bus.
its a flying laptop that needs to be reset all the time
i've flown both and there isnt a single person i know who has flown the boeing before that actually enjoys the bus.
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Thanks for that indepth insight Karam 
I've flown the Bus for 15 years and to say it "needs resetting all the time" and "constantly has faults" is, in my experience, hogwash. Sure, resets are required from time to time - it is a highly automated aircraft but no more than a 777 or 787 (which is perfect.......
)
As for saying it's flawed - I disagree. It's operated with a different philosophy but, like ANY aircraft, it is encumbent upon the crew to UNDERSTAND how to operate it in NORMAL and ABNORMAL scenarios. If you know what you're doing then the Airbus is no different to a Boeing, MD, Embraer....... if you're not up to the task you shouldn't be up the front. simple.
As for previous Boeing drivers saying they don't enjoy the Airbus, in my experience the VAST MAJORITY say that for a working environment in terms of noise, comfort, ergonomics and somewhere to sit for 10+ hours the Airbus absolutely destroys the B737 by comparison.
Just my experience / views.
I've flown the Bus for 15 years and to say it "needs resetting all the time" and "constantly has faults" is, in my experience, hogwash. Sure, resets are required from time to time - it is a highly automated aircraft but no more than a 777 or 787 (which is perfect....... )As for saying it's flawed - I disagree. It's operated with a different philosophy but, like ANY aircraft, it is encumbent upon the crew to UNDERSTAND how to operate it in NORMAL and ABNORMAL scenarios. If you know what you're doing then the Airbus is no different to a Boeing, MD, Embraer....... if you're not up to the task you shouldn't be up the front. simple.
As for previous Boeing drivers saying they don't enjoy the Airbus, in my experience the VAST MAJORITY say that for a working environment in terms of noise, comfort, ergonomics and somewhere to sit for 10+ hours the Airbus absolutely destroys the B737 by comparison.
Just my experience / views.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Mercer Island WA
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RNP is here now... not later.
Contrary to the assertion that RNP is far away,... it isn't. Aircraft involved in many if not even most of these recent troubling approach events (e.g., A320s) are ALREADY equipped well enough to start using RNP. The issue is the obsolete and faulty and bureaucratic and excessively complicated authority RNP criteria typically still being applied, ...NOT the need for additional aircraft equippage, just to get started using RNP. Yes, RNP capability will evolve with time, and with future generations of autoflight systems (as are now being delivered by ALL Toulouse and Seattle built aircraft), ...but RNP could even be used RIGHT NOW for these aircraft involved in these troubling events. It could be done just as we did Eagle CO back in 1991 for the B757. Hence, there is no more need for using NPAs today any more than there is for going back to train the use of the "4-course LF range" or airway light beacon code sequences. For any jets built after about the mid '80s, these air transport events and accidents are completely unnecessary in an era of RNP.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...an event like this would have been picked up by the FDM system and sent off to the airline the second the aircraft touches down.
My dear friends,
You can fly a Visual Approach using the FMGSs creating a CF at 1,500 ft AGL.
The glide presentation at the PFD is a red DOT, it is very similar to an ILS glide slope.
So the problem is not the type of the approach...the real problem is what a pilot do after disconnecting the Autopilot...
You can fly a Visual Approach using the FMGSs creating a CF at 1,500 ft AGL.
The glide presentation at the PFD is a red DOT, it is very similar to an ILS glide slope.
So the problem is not the type of the approach...the real problem is what a pilot do after disconnecting the Autopilot...
Last edited by cosmiccomet; 1st Apr 2013 at 23:35.
PMFJI, PM, but you're right, that isn't a correct statement regarding FDM. Each airline and even each fleet type potentially has their own FDM arrangements. I know airlines that are satisfied with sampling and accepting the data statistically, (averages, I guess), and I know more enlightened airlines which examine their data daily from all fleet types. "WGL", Wireless Ground Link is cell-phone technology that does indeed transmit flight data the moment the aircraft docks at the gate. Other programs must either remove the optical disc or a PCMCIA card or download the data from a mini-QAR. The time between FDM downloads can be as little as minutes after the flight to two weeks depending upon which of the airline's destinations has equipment that can read the cards or discs and who's trained by the airline to do the job at those destinations. So you're right - it's not as simple as one may believe it to be.
