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

Air Asia Indonesia Lost Contact from Surabaya to Singapore

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

Air Asia Indonesia Lost Contact from Surabaya to Singapore

Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:15
  #1981 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 42
Posts: 135
It looks more like the flaps have broken off. What you see are the spoilers.
procede is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:18
  #1982 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 81
zzuf is right.
Most comments on stalling are by those who have never stalled a swept wing jet at high altitude except once or twice in a simulator and even then not in a massive Cb at night. Certification is not an absolute safety measure; merely a best practice, commercial option that meet statistical requirements.






a
RifRaf3 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:27
  #1983 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Aberdeen
Age: 51
Posts: 2
Could the scorch marks in the photo on post 1970 be due to a lightning strike?

Kerwin is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:30
  #1984 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 173
Owain,
JT will also confirm that I was CTP for a regulatory authority. As this is about A320 I must add that I spent plenty of time with the late Nick Warner during various evaluations including stalling.
Cheers
zzuf is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:32
  #1985 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: England
Posts: 255
Blimey that is a far more intact fuselage than I was expecting. Does look like a scorch mark on the tail section....
LadyL2013 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:38
  #1986 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 541
Does anyone know what is the speed of response time of the THS ?

Mechanically it is adjusted by a Jackscrew that is wound in or out by motors... Looking at a previous FDR graph of a/p control input, to actual movement, it seems as if it takes in the order of 15 seconds to travel.


In other words the elevator control is not as responsive as on an aerobatic airplane.
phiggsbroadband is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:47
  #1987 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: EGMH
Posts: 207
The scorch marks were not present in earlier images therefore can one assume they are part of the dismantling process?
susier is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:48
  #1988 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Frankfurt
Age: 70
Posts: 36
It looks like someone has taken a welding torch to it. One wonders also what exactly the guy with the huge crowbar is hoping to achieve.
DrPhillipa is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 11:50
  #1989 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 541
Scorch mark on the tail section....

No sir, the Engineer is cutting it up with an angle grinder.
See previous picture...




phiggsbroadband is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:05
  #1990 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: In thin air
Posts: 186
Originally Posted by zzuf
JT will also confirm that I was CTP for a regulatory authority. As this is about A320 I must add that I spent plenty of time with the late Nick Warner during various evaluations including stalling.
I take it you were not referring to my post. Otherwise please indicate what you disagree with.
Gysbreght is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:06
  #1991 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Hell
Age: 43
Posts: 14
From the BEA report on AF 447:

"When there are no protections left, the aeroplane no longer possesses positive longitudinal static stability even on approach to stall. This absence specifically results in the fact that it is not necessary to make or increase a nose-up input to compensate for a loss of speed while maintaining aeroplane altitude. This behaviour, even if it may appear contrary to some provisions in the basic regulations, was judged to be acceptable by the certification authorities by taking into account special conditions and interpretation material. Indeed, the presence of flight envelope protections makes neutral longitudinal static stability acceptable.
However, positive longitudinal static stability on an aeroplane can be useful since it allows the pilot to have a sensory return (via the position of the stick) on the situation of his aeroplane in terms of speed in relation to its point of equilibrium (trim) at constant thrust. Specifically, the approach to stall on a classic aeroplane is always associated with a more or less pronounced nose-up input. This is not the case on the A330 in alternate law. The specific consequence is that in this control law the aeroplane, placed in a configuration where the thrust is not sufficient to maintain speed on the flight path, would end up by stalling without any inputs on the sidestick. It appears that this absence of positive static stability could have contributed to the PF not identifying the approach to stall."
Almostfamous is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:10
  #1992 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: london
Posts: 33
Work together

Sorry but even as a non pilot, all this talk about 'push the stick forward and you're saved' is bit insensitive on this thread without knowing what happened.

It certainly didn't help 2 very respectable pilots on D-AXLA A320-232 over Perpignan when THS stayed nose up, with the combination of the AOA sensors freezing and normal law dropping out they were unable to save it with the above aforementioned method. After reading the report, i was worried by the lack of notification to the pilots, in that moment id expect 'USE MAN PITCH TRIM' to be slapping me round the face.
Or a clear indication:

Warning - Normal law FAIL
STATUS NOW MANUAL
Cause - AOA/ADIR mismatch(or the like)

Result - USE MAN PITCH TRIM
(?(perhaps added flashing if stick forward/backward exceeds Xseconds)) or AUTO PITCH TRIM DISABLED!

Would of been even nicer. (In this instance above i believe the PITCH TRIM warning dropped off the display shortly after ie changing flight law.) i stand to be corrected.

Then again what if the warning is wrong and all of it is sending you up the garden path?

If something similar had happened here im not sure id want to be on-board with ANY pilot at FL25(risky i know) or FL370, in that moment attempting to recover a stall. IMHO the transition from 'automated' to 'manual' and not in 'neutral trim' in the wrong moment without any clear reason is a worry, using any automated transportation.
As we have learnt even the most simple things in that moment to react can go undetected (flaps not extended on takeoff due to FB pulled on warning circuit muting the reminder to pilots they're not extended). Whilst not automated, had there been a clear warning, reaction should/could of saved the day.

I'm also shocked to read about lack of stall training due to lack of capability to do so for some aircraft. And still we have not put more pressure on all airlines to enforce real time streaming on capable aircraft with the rest to follow. MH370 whilst is rare, it needs to be answered it cannot be swiped aside as a statistic as some have mentioned here.

On the plus, I salute the many informative posters on here who clearly are outstanding professionals in their field and appreciate their fascinating analysis and input. I hope all of this debate can be focused on making our airways safer, negating the swiss cheese effect ever happening. Hoping no more families suffer this loss of professionals doing their job and PAX in this way, once we have the ACTUAL cause from the experts.

Anyway what do i know, i can barely fly a quadcopter!
captains_log is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:11
  #1993 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 91
Are they cutting the wreckage up so it can be transported by road? Wouldn't it have been better to sail it, intact, to Jakarta?
AirScotia is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:18
  #1994 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by Gysbreght View Post
I take it you were not referring to my post. Otherwise please indicate what you disagree with.
No disagreement at all. An interesting discussion would be how deep into the stall one ends up during power on, 3kts/per second, approaches.
zzuf is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:24
  #1995 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,045
capt log

NB for Perpignan, the BEA said:
This absence de
reference to the use of the trim is also mentioned in AAIB report into a serious
incident to a Boeing 737 on 23 September 2007(59).
In short, any pilot, with full power, full forward stick yet nose high and getting higher should not need (and will not notice) a small "Use Man Pitch Trim" message. They should be trained to know that Pitch Trim may be needed, but in both cases, IIRC, the Pitch Trim was not the whole issue, but the high power as well?

It certainly didn't help 2 very respectable pilots on D-AXLA A320-232 over Perpignan when THS stayed nose up, with the combination of the AOA sensors freezing and normal law dropping out they were unable to save it with the above aforementioned method. After reading the report, i was worried by the lack of notification to the pilots, in that moment id expect 'USE MAN PITCH TRIM' to be slapping me round the face.
We do need to remember they ignored numerous signs that the AoAs were incorrect, they failed to follow every safety procedure in the test they were doing. I am afraid there gets a point when the crew have to be "accountable" (even if it their training or management the ultimate cause), rather than just blaming the systems / manufacturers because their aircraft are not "uncrashable"
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:30
  #1996 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: West of Offa's dyke
Age: 84
Posts: 474
@zzuf


OK, I guess I misread your intent. You obviously meant others than Gysbreght!. I spent some time with Nick also.
Owain Glyndwr is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:38
  #1997 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 786
Nigel, that flight amongst other incidents and accidents (the upset to G-EZJK comes to mind) was why the procedures, discipline and training requirements for post-maintenance check flights have been substantially changed.
Jwscud is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:40
  #1998 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 338
Scorch marks ...

It looks like someone has taken a welding torch to it. One wonders also what exactly the guy with the huge crowbar is hoping to achieve.
After the fuselage was lifted from Crest Onyx to shore, at some stage, there was a guy using a torch. He was cutting at at least two places.

Have not seen that before. Will be clear though during reassembly that it was not from the crash.



Picture 1 -Torch is handled by a man with a medium dark blue shirt with logo “ST” on it. He is closely observed by another man in civvies (@ I found later that this man is from KNKT). Cutting is vertical on the side of the first frame between the last window and the lavatory section, on the'inside' of the lavatory section.

Picture 2 –Cutting itself not observed. But ashore, 10 guys putting the structure up, you can see a very long horizontal scorch mark. Running from the door to the fuselage painted word “Fly”. Part that was cut away was a strip with 5 windows and PK-AXC registration letters. That part was still there in daylight when Crest Onyx was already in Kumai port in daylight. That same (lefthand aft part of fuselage – watch out, it is lying upside down) strip was hinged about 135 degrees outside when still on deck.

Picture 3 –The man with the long crowbar. You can see torch marks on the longitudinal stiffener just below his torso.

Picture 4 –The man making the vertical cut, view from outside, ... have seen the picture.. (@ later -same torch operator as in Picture 1)

Last edited by A0283; 19th Jan 2015 at 14:41. Reason: Clear identification of people Pic 1 and Pic 4
A0283 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:46
  #1999 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 338
CVR type

I found one good picture of the QZ8501 CVR after recovery.

Cockpit Voice Recorder = Model FA2100, L3communications
CVR carried Emergency Locating Beacon = TELEDYNE BENTHOS

Other CVR configuration information like serial, manufacturing number, and HW and SW config nrs were clear for parts. I wait till I get a better picture before posting that.

Last edited by A0283; 14th Jan 2015 at 12:54. Reason: add word
A0283 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 12:51
  #2000 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,045
Nigel, that flight amongst other incidents and accidents (the upset to G-EZJK comes to mind) was why the procedures, discipline and training requirements for post-maintenance check flights have been substantially changed
Appreciated, but I do not understand the point?

Any pilot conducting any test flight should be aware of some basic principles, well documented well before this accident, and probably before WW2. There is no point in testing something if you are betting your life on the test succeeding? Surely you test "High AoA protection" on the assumption it might not work?

As the BEA report stated, another crew had done a similar profile and:
During take-off, a series of messages appeared on the ECAM and the aeroplane switched to alternate law. The CHECK GW message appeared on the MCDU. The crew decided not to continue the flight, which had lasted thirty-six minutes.
and next flight:
The programme available to the crew indicated, for this weight and in clean configuration, a V alpha prot of 171 kt (+/- 4 kt) and a V alpha max of 152 kt (+/- 4 kt). The PF placed the thrust controls in the IDLE position while keeping one hand on the trim wheel. The crew noted the absence of autotrim shut-off and decided to continue verification. The alpha floor function was not activated. The PF noticed that the speed was ten knots less than expected V alpha max. The crew felt the aeroplane sinking and the Captain decided to stop the check. The PF carried out a manoeuvre similar to a stall recovery. There was no stall warning.
Somewhat nearer ideal
NigelOnDraft is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.