Asiana flight crash at San Francisco
I don't understand that either.
normal manual steam driven driving - thrust change - change in stick force - trim
autotrim - thrust change - keep poling the same because computer fixes
How is that more demanding?
normal manual steam driven driving - thrust change - change in stick force - trim
autotrim - thrust change - keep poling the same because computer fixes
How is that more demanding?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trim system on the 777 compensates for thrust changes, configuration changes (gear, flap & speedbrake) and turns. It won't trim for speed changes.
So it doesn't matter if the auto throttle is in or out, if you're flying it manually it'll help you by compensating for all except speed changes.
So it doesn't matter if the auto throttle is in or out, if you're flying it manually it'll help you by compensating for all except speed changes.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: planet earth
Age: 59
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it doesn't matter if the auto throttle is in or out, if you're flying it manually it'll help you by compensating for all except speed changes.
Should be basic stuff for ANY airline pilot!
They're all big Cessna's!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: farmm intersection, our ranch
Age: 57
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
today, with 3-400 Pax on board, levelling to fine tune to a correct approach below 800', they should be sacked NOT applauded
Exactly, they should have done nothing and crashed short of the runway.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"If you leave the autothrottle off in a 777, it is sort of "more demanding" to manually fly the airplane, because you have to compensate for the autotrim system in a way that you have never done on another a/c type before. It is "an annoying way of flying". It can be done though. But you have to be aware of the little details."
What? More demanding? The 777 flies fine, and usually better, with the A/T's off.
What? More demanding? The 777 flies fine, and usually better, with the A/T's off.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Norway
Age: 56
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do we know yet whether the autothrottles were engaged and do we know what the MCP Altitude was set at?
Even if they were not stable on final, they would probably be saved (landed safely or able to go around) if the A/T had woke up, or they had applied sufficient thrust to maintain Vref+. I believe the primary cause of this accident is a carbon copy of Turkish Airlines Flight 1951. The interesting part is WHY…
bobcat4;
I think the accident also has elements of the Air India A320 accident at Bangalore. The report, (here), makes very interesting remarks regarding speed awareness and the inability to assess energy until it was too late. Around page 254 is interesting reading. Remarkably, the speeds in the Air India accident are similar to the Asiana speeds immediately prior to the accident - 132kts Vref (Vls +5), speed permitted to deteriorate to 106kts, no attempt to push the thrust levers into the kitchen and beyond. Alphaprot engaged at 110ft but the engines were at idle.
We have cars that now park themselves. How long do we think it will be before a new generation of drivers won't actually be able park their car without incident?
I think the accident also has elements of the Air India A320 accident at Bangalore. The report, (here), makes very interesting remarks regarding speed awareness and the inability to assess energy until it was too late. Around page 254 is interesting reading. Remarkably, the speeds in the Air India accident are similar to the Asiana speeds immediately prior to the accident - 132kts Vref (Vls +5), speed permitted to deteriorate to 106kts, no attempt to push the thrust levers into the kitchen and beyond. Alphaprot engaged at 110ft but the engines were at idle.
We have cars that now park themselves. How long do we think it will be before a new generation of drivers won't actually be able park their car without incident?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Another Planet.
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The interesting part is WHY…
AF447 THY @ AMS LIONAIR ASIANA @ SFO.
Reams of speculation about autopilots, autothrottles, PFDs, speed tapes, AoA probes, deck angles, alpha-floor protections and all the other widgets and bells and whistles which help to make the machine safer have filled these pages.
Then the discussion of full automatics versus part automatics versus clickety click "I have control" but somehow the pilot(s) involved manage to foul up bigtime.
My copy of the UKs CHIRP still regularly features flight crews, cabin crews and engineers and ATC operators complaining about the adverse effects of the modern thrusting dynamic push for productivity and stretching and sweating the assets.
I then have to watch the arrival of the EASA FTLs which are even more corporate-friendly than their predecessors whilst having observed the abuse of CAP371 by numerous UK airlines. Not a single pilot apparently on the bunch of Eurocrat
s who've dreamt up this recipe for disaster.
How wonderful it would be to have the contributory cause of these apparently inexplicable accidents shouted from the rooftops as F A T I G U E.
But that will never happen, will it? The elephant in the room will be shuffled out to the yard and those higher in the food chain responsible for such a supervisory regime will retire and sleep easy without the prospect of a corporate manslaughter charge, prison sentence and the confiscation of all their assets disturbing their corporate psychotic sleep!
So carry on discussing trivia like HOW to perform an iexplicable CFIT but on no account give these unfortunate crews the excuse of dog-tiredness where ALL of us have been during our careers.
Reams of speculation about autopilots, autothrottles, PFDs, speed tapes, AoA probes, deck angles, alpha-floor protections and all the other widgets and bells and whistles which help to make the machine safer have filled these pages.
Then the discussion of full automatics versus part automatics versus clickety click "I have control" but somehow the pilot(s) involved manage to foul up bigtime.
My copy of the UKs CHIRP still regularly features flight crews, cabin crews and engineers and ATC operators complaining about the adverse effects of the modern thrusting dynamic push for productivity and stretching and sweating the assets.
I then have to watch the arrival of the EASA FTLs which are even more corporate-friendly than their predecessors whilst having observed the abuse of CAP371 by numerous UK airlines. Not a single pilot apparently on the bunch of Eurocrat
s who've dreamt up this recipe for disaster.How wonderful it would be to have the contributory cause of these apparently inexplicable accidents shouted from the rooftops as F A T I G U E.
But that will never happen, will it? The elephant in the room will be shuffled out to the yard and those higher in the food chain responsible for such a supervisory regime will retire and sleep easy without the prospect of a corporate manslaughter charge, prison sentence and the confiscation of all their assets disturbing their corporate psychotic sleep!
So carry on discussing trivia like HOW to perform an iexplicable CFIT but on no account give these unfortunate crews the excuse of dog-tiredness where ALL of us have been during our careers.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: planet earth
Age: 59
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ratarsedagain
Never disputed taking the automatics out and putting it where you want it......I was just telling you how the trim system worked on the 777
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who cares if the AT is armed or not if you just fly the airplane and not wait for automation to make it work. Monitor what automation is doing and if you don't like it shut it all off, simple and always works. That is what we always did and never once got slow or low.
Automation was designed to reduce your work load, not fly your airplane because you can't.
Automation was designed to reduce your work load, not fly your airplane because you can't.
There have been some very narrow views on the possible contributions to this accident, predominantly blame the human.
For a different and refreshing alternative, consider the remarks in - Some Speculation.
For a different and refreshing alternative, consider the remarks in - Some Speculation.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX USA
Age: 62
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a different and refreshing alternative,
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STP that is all BS and you know it. They could not fly a visual approach and had all the data they needed looking out the window to do what 99.9% of pilots can do easily. Ground prox, stick shaker, 4 pilots and looking out the window didn't work for them but you think their performance crashing was acceptable? I guess for some reason lack of an airspeed scan for quite some time might have contributed to it.
The United flight waiting for take off could have been easily wiped out so why are we letting these pilots land here? We make our pilots fly properly so why let pilots from other countries with poor skills risk our airliners safety? I might be a bigot but I am asking a question about US airport safety and why we compromise safety because other countries don't have our standards. Shut them down into the US, we did before.
The United flight waiting for take off could have been easily wiped out so why are we letting these pilots land here? We make our pilots fly properly so why let pilots from other countries with poor skills risk our airliners safety? I might be a bigot but I am asking a question about US airport safety and why we compromise safety because other countries don't have our standards. Shut them down into the US, we did before.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: SEA
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one bubbers! Yes and no on that one...was american shut down from latin america when they drove a 757 into a mountain in Cali? Or eastern in La Paz?...that's a pretty cocky statement......then again why so much speculation on automatics, magentas etc? The writing has been on the wall for ages, these guys could not fly a proper visual approach....period, just look at the KAL thread in this forum, the report, if not political, will focus on company culture, skills and training, just don't want to sound racist but Koreans are better at making cars and flat screen tv's, others are better at flying...my apologies if someone feels offended, been in Asia long enough to back my comment.
Last edited by richard III; 22nd Jul 2013 at 03:10.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: America
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So... As the AA guy says in the "magenta line movie": if the automation does not perform as expected... Click, click (A/P off) and click, click (A/T off) and fly the plane in the direction and way you won't it to go!
Should be basic stuff for ANY airline pilot!
They're all big Cessna's!
Should be basic stuff for ANY airline pilot!
They're all big Cessna's!
These pilots are trained right into automation instead of learning the basic skills of airmanship.
For a different and refreshing alternative, consider the remarks in - Some Speculation.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: the lake!
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
these guys could not fly a proper visual approach....period
It seems to me that the main issue was that the crew expected the auto throttle to be working. I bet the crew could land just fine on a visual approach if the automatics were completely off and they completely understood the mode they were in. The problem was mode confusion not the inability to fly a visual approach.
Brilliant video in this post:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post7951776