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, 01:22
  #1961 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Midpines, CA
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Iain_W
These approaches will reduce the clutter in the returned signal but they do not change the attenuation of the radar outbound or reflected signal as it passes through rain. If the rain is heavy enough the radar signal will literally not get through. There are things that can be played with like changing the polarization of the radar signal but they don't solve the attenuation problem. An analogy is dense fog - To radar rain is like dense fog you can play with yellow headlights or blue headlights but if the fog is dense enough you will not be able to increase the visibility by a lot.

The approaches suggested in research are variants of multisensor tracking where a complete 4D picture is built up using ground radars. See NSSL Projects: Multi-Radar/Multi-Sensor System (MRMS). These pictures may then be sent to the flight deck through Aircraft Access to SWIM (System Wide Information Management). This is in the Continental United States. It may be that other areas could do the same but it is expensive.
Other approaches have looked at taking all the aircraft radars and mosaicing them into a 4D picture. But again someone has to do it and then find someone willing to pay for it. Guess what the beancounters won't hear of it.
Earned a bookmark for the next time we get weather here. Another promising option would be space based RADAR eliminating the need for additional RADAR equipment on the planes.

http://cup.aos.wisc.edu/will/im_and_durden2005.pdf

Every new technology faces the cost vs benefit decision, but if accidents prove to have been avoidable the cost has a way of becoming affordable.
ACLS65 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 02:10
  #1962 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
let's keep something in perspective, if a pilot does not know you push the stick forward to get out of a stall, he shouldn't be flying a plane.
That's an excessively simplistic and inaccurate explanation of what has happened in many recent aircraft crashes. Yes, there have been some glaring piloting skill deficiencies exposed, but to reduce them to your description is not correct.
There have been failures in instrumentation, quite often information processing overload, and turbulent weather initiation of disastrous events. All of this usually happening in IMC with no references.
There appears to be a need to improve pilot training as regards loss of important instrumentation, and for them to be able to handle degradation of automation. However, to place blame simplistically as in your description, is unreasonable and misleading.
The training areas obviously needing upgrading, is to try and remove any confusion over what the aircraft is actually doing, when the pilots have little reference in severe turbulence, plus a loss of important instrumentation.
I'll wager Captain and FO confusion will be found to be important factors in the crash of QZ8501.
onetrack is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 02:17
  #1963 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Schiphol
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To HarryMan - irks and life in the office

this idea that every single step anyone takes or nut & bolt wasting away in astore always needs costing and charging (to someone or some budget or other) irks me.
During the design process you also have budgets of weight. You start with cutting kilo's and end with trying to cut grams. Just another type of beans :-). Designers have to irk quite a lot before they get it right :-).

really, not exactly proactive forward thinking govt.
You can operate pro-actively and count beans at the same time. To survive in business you need to do both. Reminds me of Sir John Harvey-Jones... he would have loved talking to you.

And what better exercises and real life experience & training is there than being out there and doing stuff.. rather than twiddling fingers in offices ...
It is hard to design and manufacture aircraft out in the open :-). Engineers can be quite jealous of pilots :-). That's why quite a few fly outside office hours.

... it could have been many years for the full facts of metal fatigue's random scatter to be fully accounted for in design.
There was quite a lot of knowledge on metal fatique already. Alas, in ship design. You can take a look at Liberty ship hatch design and compare that to Comet window design. Interesting parallels, and of course also a number of differences (thin vs fat plate, riveting vs welding(funny the Liberties were an early change from riveting into welding)).
A0283 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 03:17
  #1964 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AirAsia SAR Operations to End

After 17-days, news today that the principal Search and Rescue operation will be terminated soon. Gen. Bambang Soelistyo, head of the National SAR agency (BASARNAS), declined to answer when exactly SAR operations will wind down, but it is expected to be in the next 3 or 4 days.

National SAR may continue more limited "day to day" operations out of respect and consideration for the victims' families.

Once the SAR phase ends, any further searches will focus solely on recovery. It is unclear whether the Indonesian Army (TNI) will take over the search effort from BASARNAS, or if it will be conducted under the jurisdiction of Indonesia's National Transportation Safety Committee.

Until now, the joint SAR team has located only 48 remains (out of the 162 souls on board). Of those, 36 remains have been identified and released to the families. Meanwhile, 12 other remains are still awaiting the identification process.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 04:02
  #1965 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Pasir Ris
Posts: 57
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
We all know how easy it is to recover from a stall. All pilots learn that before they are released for their first solo. You learn stall recovery in the first 10 hours of your PPL flight training.

What pilots are now experiencing with complex aircraft is a new situation where, due to the complex design nature of their aircraft, they instantly don't know what the aircraft itself is doing. So in an abnormal situation, as in the one which lead to AF447, we have the situation where 3 qualified pilots were baffled with what was happening to the aircraft. You have about 3 to 4 minutes to work out what's going on, and then to deal with it, or else it's game over.

Would I be right in saying, AF447 was the first instance, of a deep stall ever experienced by a FBW Airbus aircraft? No-one has ever been in a similar position before? If the aircraft had been a non FBW A300 or A310, would the outcome have been different?
WSSS is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 04:43
  #1966 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WSSS

I really think the captain on AF447 DID KNOW what was going on, he just wasn't in one of the chairs .

I would not call AF447 a deep stall. Deep Stall has been sort of reserved for T tail planes...though some may have other thoughts.
glendalegoon is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 05:11
  #1967 (permalink)  
ekw
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WSSS

My understanding of a deep stall is to describe a state where the elevators become inoperable due to insufficient airflow and the aircraft cannot pitch out of the stall. This happens more in T tails because the disturbed air from the wings catches the tail at a certain angle, but I suppose if any heavy aircraft is below a certain speed then elevator deflection may not be sufficient to move the AOA - you need to roll as well.
ekw is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 05:13
  #1968 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Rainsville
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Ian W

The accountants (aka beancounters) will then look around for savings and an easy area is training.
Regulators create the standards (including for training). If pilots or airlines fail to meet those standards and don't face sanctions for such breaches, well... I blame the regulators (and, ultimately, the political climate that equates free markets with unregulated markets).
oblivia is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 05:21
  #1969 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: middle of nowhere
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Unstalling a wing is very simple, decrease the AOA to less than the stall AOA.
How right you are! But .......

1. Too late
You need enough aerodynamics on your elevator. You might not have it when in a deep stall, or when you are way too slow already.

2. Too little
You need the authority by the FBW. Its action computers might not have enough travel to cope.

3. Too 'magentised'
You need the authority of the protections. They might be fooled by sensors and not allow unloading, and/or they might be too complicated to override ......

4. Too inexperienced
You need the guy at the stick realise that he's in a stall! Even with 20k hours he might have been told this can't happen, or he might have never experienced such a situation, just read in the OM what to do in case the thing happens that can't happen per superior design ......

Pick your numbers, they pretty much apply for many of the latest accidents.
Gretchenfrage is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 05:27
  #1970 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,546
Received 73 Likes on 42 Posts
if any heavy aircraft is below a certain speed then elevator deflection may not be sufficient to move the AOA - you need to roll as well.
elevator deflection with full nose up on the stab may not be sufficient to move the AOA, you mean...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 05:30
  #1971 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: usa
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
WSSS: I truly doubt that FBW had anything to do with this incident.

"We all know how easy it is to recover from a stall. All pilots learn that before they are released for their first solo. You learn stall recovery in the first 10 hours of your PPL flight training."

Many argue that "true flying skills" are no longer present in today's younger pilots due to FBW and the video game mindset.

I believe that the problem is more the fact that since the days of the 727, the concept of the "coffin corner" is no longer taught. You can't just climb as aggressively in the thin air as you can at a lower altitude without stalling.

A stall in PPL training with a fat wing, in fat air is an easy fix. Max power, lower the nose some. And you are never trained in full stalls again.

I was trained in the jet only the "approach to stall recovery",

It wasn't till several of our company aircraft entered moderate stalls at high altitude that that they trained us in the proper recovery.

I was shocked at the altitude loss and pitch attitude required for recovery.

And still, few airlines teach this in the sim.
bloom is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 05:45
  #1972 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cabin positions of victims recovered thus far:

https://mobile.twitter.com/TheNewOce...904448/photo/1
Blake777 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 06:00
  #1973 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Frankfurt
Age: 74
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It wasn't till several of our company aircraft entered moderate stalls at high altitude that that they trained us in the proper recovery.I was shocked at the altitude loss and pitch attitude required for recovery.
And still, few airlines teach this in the sim.
So you were trained for stall recovery in the sim? Who put your aircraft into the stalls required, and recovered from them, to provide the data for the sim?

Is this not the basis for Airbus reluctance to do sims on real stalls, that they do not have the data required to make the training meaningful/realistic and that they prefer to train to avoid the stalls in the first place.

Did the pilot-engineered stall on AF447 provide any useful data for an Airbus sim? The problem possibly being that there was no recovery and that at some stage a "recovery" might have "torn the wings off" anyway?
DrPhillipa is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 06:05
  #1974 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Singapore
Age: 66
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Crash position indicators are a solved problem.

Crash position indicators a the result of research into ejectable radio beacons that would deploy in a crash. The problem was solved 60 years ago and implemented first in military aircraft five decades ago. I'm not sure what this forum's policy is on Wikipedia, but this is worth a look.

Crash position indicator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
AmuDarya is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 06:53
  #1975 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls Žold EuropeŽ
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If not push, just release the backpressure

I truly doubt that FBW had anything to do with this incident
As most modern FBW aircraft do also have some sort of auto trim logic in their control system, there is no more backpressure. You really have to push to tell the computers that you want to go back to the condition you were in before you pulled. You can release the backpressure and your control system still remembers your pull command and delivers what you asked for.
Because of this, FBW has quite a lot to do with any incident/accident involving the flight controls, as it is always more than just replacing control cables with electric wires. It is a different control system requiring different flying technique. Quite similar to the difference between powered flight controls and pure mechanic ones. Backpressure on a DC-3 is quite different from backpressure on a 747...

And still, few airlines teach this in the sim.
I would not trust the sim in those situations anyway, it is far outside the range it has been developed for. For most aircraft the numbers in the sim computers will simply be extrapolated, and not resulting from flight test data.
they prefer to train to avoid the stalls in the first place.
It does however not do any harm to also train how to recover from it. First priority should of course always be avoidance. Just like CBs, terrain, traffic...
We should also remember that the regulation is not asking for spin recovery of multi engine aircraft or stall recovery of large transport aircraft. All that is required is recovery from the situation when the warning is triggered. It is not required to fly full stalls in flight testing. And matter of fact, several prototypes were lost during stall testing in the past, so it is probably wiser to avoid it altogether.
Volume is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 08:52
  #1976 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
To say "Pilots were trained" for Stall Recoveries in their PPL phase, and expect that to have any relevance years later, when both time has passed, and flying very different aircraft, is not valid IMHO

In my RAF days, exercises such as stall recoveries were required to be practiced, IIRC, every 28 days. Along with UP recoveries etc.

From my experience, the 3 yearly "training cycle" of such items in typical airline Sims, and also the "canned" / tame nature of the exercises, renders them nigh on useless I reckon the "benefits" of being refreshed last for maybe 2-3 months, then I think I am back where I was prior the sim.

There is little point in practicing "stall recoveries" unless and until we are proficient in recovering at the approach to the stall. And of course if we are proficient at the recovery at the warning stage, there is less merit in practicing the full stall & recovery.

Does anyone seriously believe the AF447 pilots had any chance of recovering once they got to <60KIAS / 40 AoA? Yes - the aircraft was theoretically recoverable, but given how they got to that point, I think the chance was almost nil. They had so seriously lost SA that the very bold control inputs and attitudes required I do not see happening?

The solution, if we wish to reduce LoC accidents (which are very rare), is to ensure pilots are genuinely competent in attitude flying, stalls even spins, UP recoveries - and keep current 2-3 times a year minimum. That is an awful lot of aerobatic aircraft hire, and will kill a lot of pilots in accidents. It won't happen, and I suspect we will just continue to see a small number of LoC accidents...
NigelOnDraft is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 08:56
  #1977 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Deep stalls are not reserved for T tails only. I have trained deep stall in the 737 sim several times, both before and after AF 447. Deep stalls are way different than regular stall, and can take thousands of feet to recover from.
ManaAdaSystem is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 09:03
  #1978 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 1 Post




According to Twitter: Singapore vessel MV Swift Rescue locates fuselage
Dopsonj is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 09:03
  #1979 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Singapore vessel MV Swift is saying it has located the fuselage of QZ 8501. An ROV has been sent down to photograph fuselage plus wings. (Jackson Board for Channel News Asia who seems to be fairly on the ball with this.)

Edit: a good job as conditions in the crash area are difficult today.
Blake777 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2015, 09:03
  #1980 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: A place in the sun
Age: 82
Posts: 1,260
Received 44 Likes on 17 Posts
Volume is correct about the inability of flight simulators to accurately replicate the real aircraft's post stall behaviour. Test pilots do not take commercial aircraft that far into the stall regime, and certainly not at high altitudes, it is simply far too dangerous. Therefore all the models used in simulators for post stall behaviour are based on extrapolated data and wind tunnel experiments.

Pilots should not assume that what they see in the simulator post stall is correct. In fact it is positively dangerous to do so.

I would be very interested to hear from 'those in the know' what the industry is doing about the conclusions of the work done by the IPTC. Why are the regulators dragging their heels over requiring improved training? Are airlines implementing the recommended improvements despite a lack of response by the regulators?


See:- ANALYSIS: Modernising global airline pilot training - 1/12/2015 - Flight Global
Bergerie1 is online now  

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.