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

TransAsia in the water?

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

TransAsia in the water?

Old 8th Feb 2015, 21:09
  #521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,329
Received 104 Likes on 51 Posts
Originally Posted by TheInquisitor
I would aim for the most open space I could see vaguely in front of me, and fly at whatever margin I could achieve without the stall warner going off.... easing off on the back pressure a little every time I heard it.
This is exactly the technique I had some objections with.
If you want to get anywhere, don't fly close to stall. Gliding faster (at best L/D) will get you further and leave you more Options where to put it down.

There is absolutely no benefit I could conceive in gliding down close to stall speed when having lost all engine power.
Ask the sail plane guys. They are flying with engine failure all the time...
And they would never, ever try to slow close to stall speed when trying to glide as far as possible.

Last edited by henra; 8th Feb 2015 at 21:30.
henra is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2015, 21:37
  #522 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: UK
Age: 67
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you want to get anywhere, don't fly close to stall. Gliding faster (at best L/D) will get you further and leave you more Options where zo put it down.
It's quite possible that they didn't want those options. It seems that there was only one optimal touchdown point; beyond the field lay more buildings. What's the use in gliding at best L/D to end up overflying the landing field and smacking into a building? They had what appears to be the only possible field in front of them (and a short field at that), with power lines in the way. Over, or under? If over, how to lose the excess height & energy?

It seems to me that looking through their windshield the crew might have thought it quite possible that their flight path would have landed them where they wanted to be, after passing under the power lines, and perhaps with a final pull on the stick (having read Think Like A Bird I assume an ATR's flaps don't travel as quickly as a Beaver's).

Then #2 decided to intervene.
Iron Duck is offline  
Old 8th Feb 2015, 21:58
  #523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Paso Robles
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's quite possible that they didn't want those options.
Then they were really bad, bad flyers. Perhaps as bad as some of the armchair pilots on this forum.
River was everywhere along their path and that's a perfect landing opportunity. And the bridges were sparse enough. Had they executed a controlled landing on the river everyone could have walked away.

Looking for a place to land was the last thing on their minds.
You got this one right.
porterhouse is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 02:24
  #524 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Actually, it appears that they were both feathered after about 02:53:31 ...

I await a correlation of the CVR with the FDR. Hopefully someone will post a link when it appears in the wild.
noalign is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 06:19
  #525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: equatorial side of the Polar Jet
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
to shut down or not to

Clearly the #2 engine was what started this whole fendengo. That was the culprit engin...whether by analogous indications, unwanted autofeather, or just plane flameout.So that engine should have been shut down.reducing ITT is the easiest indication of an engine flameout.

If in their muddle they shut down engine one and left the shutting down of eng 2 incomplete..that was what gave them all that unwanted drag and lost speed control in the process whilst panicking where to terminate the flight.The river and its easuaries gave them plenty of ditching options and that rever bed being shallow would have been advantageous in terms of evacuation.

Perhaps having shut the wrong engine(had they realised it) better to have moved CL2 to FSO.Then dry motor eng #1. Before starting it to purge any fuel and insure against a hung start.With engine one started and eng 2 shut down..they woukld have been able to climb away to their single engine ceiling whilst sorting the problem with 2 or simply return and land in controllable condition.

I also wonder if PL2 was retarded out of the TO notch..because that hard roll over would have been caused by sudden excess power from eng2 if it it unfeathered itself and the PL was in the notch...especially if climb sequence wasn't yet performed and hence TO torque kicked in with the PMS selector on TO.
It was the drag mess they got themselves in that betrayed helpless state..

Last edited by Trackdiamond; 9th Feb 2015 at 06:33.
Trackdiamond is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 06:28
  #526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nevada
Age: 57
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A few questions if you folks dont mind...
1. Are the torque spikes recorded due to the feathered props still slowly spinning in the air?
2. Am I seeing the correct indication of a gradual yaw to the right from 1100 feet to 1350 feet, and does that prove #2 feathered as normal flight path is 114-116 degrees through 2250 feet?
3. Could this be masked by an automatic rudder input after the feather of #2?
4. Does anybody else think they were headed for Sun Yat-sen Freeway till they got near it and realized it was unsuitable for landing as it is boardered on either side by elevated freeway and its too narrow to accommodate the wingspan?
(I believe that may have been where the real panic would set in)


Thanks in advance. I am also curious if there is more on the CVR than what has been released so far.
xmh53wrench is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 06:41
  #527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: equatorial side of the Polar Jet
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
xmh53wrench

To your 3rd point.

Could this be masked by an automatic rudder input after the feather of #2?
The yaw damper(auto rudder as you put it) might have been at it.It is normal practce to have it on even with the AP disengaged till short finals to countermand strong crosswinds.In this case I don't know if it remained on if the AP was on at that stage or if disconnected by any assymetric yaw due to Eng 1 shut down.


We are taught early not to attempt forced landing on a busy freeway..especially with a wide wing span and electric poles and other obstacles.The rivers away from bridges offered a more sensible landing site option.I think they were planning that r they wouldn't have been that close to it.

Last edited by Trackdiamond; 9th Feb 2015 at 07:01.
Trackdiamond is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 07:07
  #528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This entire catastrophe could have been caused by a decision in aviation in general to follow manufacturer's aged logic and not implement changes based on operating experience.
Not entirely true, in fact even worse...
If operating experience shows 1% too high fuel burn or .5% too low dispatch reliability, something is changed.
If operating feedback from pilots identifies weak points of the aircraft or built in traps, maybe the pilot training is improved, but nobody would improve the aircraft until some serious incident results in according official safety recommendations.
Same applies for feedback from maintenance.
Aviation has always relied on in-service feedback, but this element is quickly fading away as nobody listens to pilots or mechanics any more, and management only worries about economic aspects.
Volume is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 07:26
  #529 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CYUL
Posts: 880
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Doesn't anyone find this strange...

The authorities were really quick to release some DFDR information (day after the crash) which at the moment is incomplete and lead us to think the pilots shut down the wrong engine, yet no English version/transcript of the CVR is available.

Before making a judgement, I would like to see more and explained DFDR information and certainly an English version from the CVR of what was said in the cockpit.

Last edited by Jet Jockey A4; 9th Feb 2015 at 09:03.
Jet Jockey A4 is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 07:32
  #530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: equatorial side of the Polar Jet
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
i smell a rat!

Yes we need an explained CVR full transcript corelating to the DFDR

It is also a wonder that even the world media have shut up on this news.What has ATR themselves got to account for in all this?
Trackdiamond is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 08:22
  #531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,836
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
From what we have been told, that they shut down the wrong engine, got to the edge of stalling five times then spun it in, it doesn’t look like there was much spare capacity left to navigate around obstacles and/or pick somewhere for a forced landing. At the speeds they were flying at, there will have been very little manoeuvre margin, so any determined attempt at turning would have ended in a rapid departure, like the one in the final few seconds. The crash site was likely selected by the aircraft rather than the pilots, although the CVR should provide some enlightenment.

The crew makeup is another classic: two captains and a F/O. Loads of potential CRM, authority gradient and simple unfamiliarity issues. In my (Western) airline, we don’t allow this kind of crew composition unless the capt. in the RHS is a trainer and checked/current for the RHS. It’s also only rostered for training duties.

A few questions to those who are qualified on the 72-600:

I understand it has auto feather in TO mode, as well as uptrim for power and rudder auto-trim for any asymmetry. Is the auto-trim always engaged? Also, would you consider use of the autopilot in a non-normal situation like this or is that non-SOP?
FullWings is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 09:52
  #532 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Austria
Age: 74
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If operating experience shows 1% too high fuel burn or .5% too low dispatch reliability, something is changed.
If operating feedback from pilots identifies weak points of the aircraft or built in traps, maybe the pilot training is improved, but nobody would improve the aircraft until some serious incident results in according official safety recommendations.
Same applies for feedback from maintenance.
Aviation has always relied on in-service feedback, but this element is quickly fading away as nobody listens to pilots or mechanics any more, and management only worries about economic aspects.

True words nowadays - I 100% agree! Thank you, Volume!
Old Gilb is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 10:23
  #533 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...I doubt there is much difference in distance with this configuration
between minsink and max glide speed.
it was all about getting some power back into the equation.

Wing drops on high aspect ratio aircraft can be as much about
drag as loss of lift. that is.. the wing is dragged back slowing it
even more.
HarryMann is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 10:29
  #534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Missing the point?

This weeks Flight has an article on TransAsia (page 7) which points out that since 1995 this airline has suffered 7 significant safety incidents including the loss of 3 other ATRs and 1 Airbus A321.

The most severe prior incident was the crash of an ATR 72-500 in Magong on 23 July 2014 which resulted in 48 deaths.

By all means discuss the technical aspects of this incident but the real question for me is why was the Airline permitted to keep flying when it has such a poor safety record?
Bigpants is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 10:53
  #535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Asia
Age: 62
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Kaboy:

Read my posts....I am not blaming the crew, I am apportioning blame on a culture that is prevalent in Asia! It starts with the regulator and works itself down to the operators. Incompetence has developed through lack of proficiency and oversight.

I work in Asia.......culture has a lot to answer for.

Air Safety...... look at this operators history!!
Asia: 4.4 billion people in 49 countries. Generalisation much? I also work in Asia, and it's my opinion that anyone who talks about "Asian culture" talks about human culture but hasn't worked out that not looking caucasian does not automatically equate to incompetence, lack of proficiency and foresight. Tell me how it is that Asia is the fastest growing economic region in the world. Is it through culturally embedded incompetence?

Maybe Air Asia has a safety problem. I don't specifically know. I certainly would want more than raw incident data to draw a conclusion. The United States has the largest prison population in the world, and the second-highest per-capita incarceration rate. Going by your mode of assessment, Americans are a bunch of criminals.

I post this because I think all the predominantly western criticism of Asian aviation safety on this forum, often based on a bunch of premature conclusions, needs to be rebutted.
bud leon is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 11:12
  #536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cloud 9
Posts: 2,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I live in the Philippines, here many of the regional airports are little more than landing strips, taking my local airport for example, something like a 1,400m runway, no navigational aids, no runway or airfield lighting, no fuel, lots of high ground around, and the local airline, weather permitting, put ATR72's in and out up to 7 days a week and, fingers crossed, they do it safely.

And isn't Cathay Pacific an Asian airline? ... How many of you lot would like to fly the approach in to the old Kai Tak airport each and every time you were returning to home base?
Phileas Fogg is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 11:14
  #537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Possible answer to your post is that Eastern WORK culture is similer in some ways to Europe was is the Industrial Revolution. The attitude is to make money quick and hang the consequences.Health & Safety naaa, Slave Labour pay yeeeess! Industrial Relations and Unionisation naaaa! Safety Culture was that then? Command Gradient, Alpine Black Run!
The East will inevitably change and modernise, but in the meantime we can expect more industrial accidents, which sadly includes aviation. Just my opinion, of course.

This might not sit very comfortably with the many professional aviators in the East, but the accident stats published speak volumes.
macdo is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 11:17
  #538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: In the mountains of Switzerland
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@bud leon

Thanks for your post - if there were a "like-button" I would definitely push it. Operating for decades into Asia I agree with you!
DouglasFlyer is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 11:28
  #539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Age: 85
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's culture not intelligence that seems to be the problem.
funfly is offline  
Old 9th Feb 2015, 12:31
  #540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: equatorial side of the Polar Jet
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Asian Culture

Now that this subject has been opened for discussion can we begin by defining what this "Asian culture" being referred to in here means? There is still a high proportion of non Asian western and other pilots serving the carriers in Near East and Far eastern Asian countries so let us be absolutely sure what we are projecting in bashing this Asian Culture.Let us be specific so we can arhue it out and be more learned shall we?
Trackdiamond is offline  

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.