B-738 Crash in Russia Rostov-on-Don
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amongst other things, LNAV won't arm with the FD off. Ask me how I know ......
But that can be fixed.
The only problem is you risk being flayed alive at some airlines if you dare to switch off the flight director for whatever reason.
That's because those air;liens never bothered to train their crews in raw piloting skills, and when some enthusiastic adventurous pilots try it on the line and make G/A's due to unstable approaches the bean counters and nervous CP's step in and ban it. As trainers we are always taught to find the root cause of a problem and start the treatment/cure there. Here he root cause is lack of skill & training. Treatment? a sticky plaster = FD + AT. Root cause still exists and is a latent ticking volcano. Every few years it spews out some ash & fumes. Once in a while it barks and shoots some dragon's fire; one day it really lets go. The same is true with minor incidents, major incidents, and a crash. The signs have been there all along.
But that can be fixed.
The only problem is you risk being flayed alive at some airlines if you dare to switch off the flight director for whatever reason.
That's because those air;liens never bothered to train their crews in raw piloting skills, and when some enthusiastic adventurous pilots try it on the line and make G/A's due to unstable approaches the bean counters and nervous CP's step in and ban it. As trainers we are always taught to find the root cause of a problem and start the treatment/cure there. Here he root cause is lack of skill & training. Treatment? a sticky plaster = FD + AT. Root cause still exists and is a latent ticking volcano. Every few years it spews out some ash & fumes. Once in a while it barks and shoots some dragon's fire; one day it really lets go. The same is true with minor incidents, major incidents, and a crash. The signs have been there all along.
Thanks for the notes on HUDs. What sort of display is available in unusual attitudes or upsets? I imagine they decluttering like a PFD?
I recall from my ill-spent youth playing Jane's F-15 that the attitude bars angled to point up to the horizon at extreme attitudes - is there any publicly available stuff on these presentations or is it all in FCOMs and proprietary info?
I recall from my ill-spent youth playing Jane's F-15 that the attitude bars angled to point up to the horizon at extreme attitudes - is there any publicly available stuff on these presentations or is it all in FCOMs and proprietary info?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The unusual attitude display changes completely to a central circle representing the AI. Contained within is the artificial horizon, sky pointer and pitch scale. There is a kind of truncated chevron on the ground side of the horizon that narrows to the horizon which is meant to indicate the direction to the horizon. There are symbols at +90 and -90 pitch which I can never retain an image of in my memory. The altitude and speed tapes are present. There are no flight path indicators, cues or pointers other than the sky pointer. No wind drift is shown, no tracks nor headings nor any other navigation, FMC or FMA information. The change of display would have been visible to the FZ captain as it kicks in with -20 pitch.
Wasted too many hours on Janes F15 and Longbow
Wasted too many hours on Janes F15 and Longbow
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Airport
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amongst other things, LNAV won't arm with the FD off. Ask me how I know ......
But that can be fixed.
The only problem is you risk being flayed alive at some airlines if you dare to switch off the flight director for whatever reason.
That's because those air;liens never bothered to train their crews in raw piloting skills, and when some enthusiastic adventurous pilots try it on the line and make G/A's due to unstable approaches the bean counters and nervous CP's step in and ban it. As trainers we are always taught to find the root cause of a problem and start the treatment/cure there. Here he root cause is lack of skill & training. Treatment? a sticky plaster = FD + AT. Root cause still exists and is a latent ticking volcano. Every few years it spews out some ash & fumes. Once in a while it barks and shoots some dragon's fire; one day it really lets go. The same is true with minor incidents, major incidents, and a crash. The signs have been there all along.
But that can be fixed.
The only problem is you risk being flayed alive at some airlines if you dare to switch off the flight director for whatever reason.
That's because those air;liens never bothered to train their crews in raw piloting skills, and when some enthusiastic adventurous pilots try it on the line and make G/A's due to unstable approaches the bean counters and nervous CP's step in and ban it. As trainers we are always taught to find the root cause of a problem and start the treatment/cure there. Here he root cause is lack of skill & training. Treatment? a sticky plaster = FD + AT. Root cause still exists and is a latent ticking volcano. Every few years it spews out some ash & fumes. Once in a while it barks and shoots some dragon's fire; one day it really lets go. The same is true with minor incidents, major incidents, and a crash. The signs have been there all along.
RIP
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: St. Petersburg
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems there was a recent letter from the Russian Ministry of Transport sent to civil aviation companies advising (not directing. advising) to include into their FFS trainings cases of 1. the loss of the spatial orientation 2. GA initiated due to windshear in the condition of the jammed elevator. Apparently, to be on the safe side while MAK continues with the search of the cause of the accident. That must be full list of the Ministry of Transport own ideas re the accident, for the time being.
It's not that they told what to do in such a case o: but themselves as a state body they, likely, feel better having "taken measures" and warned ab all things possible.
It's not that they told what to do in such a case o: but themselves as a state body they, likely, feel better having "taken measures" and warned ab all things possible.
maggot, re:
If I understand the point you're making, (mutually-exclusive circumstances), there was no "MAN PITCH TRIM"* ECAM message for AF447.
*Specifically, the ECAM message is USE MAN PITCH TRIM, (amber message when in Direct Law or loss of RA in Flare Law), or MAN PITCH TRIM ONLY, (red message should loss of both elevators occur).
FD bars and MAN PITCH TRIM at the same time?
*Specifically, the ECAM message is USE MAN PITCH TRIM, (amber message when in Direct Law or loss of RA in Flare Law), or MAN PITCH TRIM ONLY, (red message should loss of both elevators occur).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Around the corner
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are right, Safelife. Because when I flew in China, I was constantly practising FDs off and letting the copilot FDs off. And we never triggered any QARs, even though
we were aparently not supposed to fly FDs off. I always did it with the FOs I could trust and who wanted to become aviators. And even in China, there is people eager to become aviators.
As RAT5 said it. awe need to become aviators again. And it needs skill and a courage to stand up to the incompetence of the training departments. But it needs to be done, if we do not want to see more people killed. I am not saying, that people should fly FDs off if they are not comfortable with it. I am just saying that competent pilots should not be stopped by the training departments from properly training other people how to scan.
And if people in training departments are not competent enough, they should hire somebody competent, who could help them improve.
I am very encouraged by this thread to see that I am not alone who seems to think there is a HUGE problem in the airlines worldwide what concerns lack of basic flying skills.
we were aparently not supposed to fly FDs off. I always did it with the FOs I could trust and who wanted to become aviators. And even in China, there is people eager to become aviators.
As RAT5 said it. awe need to become aviators again. And it needs skill and a courage to stand up to the incompetence of the training departments. But it needs to be done, if we do not want to see more people killed. I am not saying, that people should fly FDs off if they are not comfortable with it. I am just saying that competent pilots should not be stopped by the training departments from properly training other people how to scan.
And if people in training departments are not competent enough, they should hire somebody competent, who could help them improve.
I am very encouraged by this thread to see that I am not alone who seems to think there is a HUGE problem in the airlines worldwide what concerns lack of basic flying skills.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Around the corner
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And few thoughts about the HUDs display. I have no experience with it. But as an A320 guy I can confirm, that airbus stopped using a bird (flight path vector) in a goaround.
If I understand it correctly tha HUD system has the bird displayed during go around.
The major problem with that is, if we forget it clutters the display, that a bird is "performance" part of the equation "attitude +power = performance"
Soit is the same as if you flew a goaround by looking at the vertical speed as supposed to paying attention to attitude. That is the reason why bird is not good indicator when performance parameters are changing rapidly like in a go-around. Setting 15 degree pitch is on the other hand the life saving initial action (of course with power). But trying to watch a changing parameter in such a critical beginning of a go-around while not being aware of pitch can prove fatal. I don't blame the guys using a HUD that they prefer to look at unluttered AI as opposed to watching the cluttered and possibly highly enetertaining HUD display.
If I understand it correctly tha HUD system has the bird displayed during go around.
The major problem with that is, if we forget it clutters the display, that a bird is "performance" part of the equation "attitude +power = performance"
Soit is the same as if you flew a goaround by looking at the vertical speed as supposed to paying attention to attitude. That is the reason why bird is not good indicator when performance parameters are changing rapidly like in a go-around. Setting 15 degree pitch is on the other hand the life saving initial action (of course with power). But trying to watch a changing parameter in such a critical beginning of a go-around while not being aware of pitch can prove fatal. I don't blame the guys using a HUD that they prefer to look at unluttered AI as opposed to watching the cluttered and possibly highly enetertaining HUD display.
What PBY said! What's amazing to me is the industry has known about this problem for 20 years and they give it lip service in manuals but then have procedures as ridiculous as making it a no-no to turn off a FD. One step forward and two steps back.
Best 25 minutes one can spend on this subject....a 20 year old video that unfortunately isn't outdated (like it should be by now):
http://youtu.be/pN41LvuSz10
Best 25 minutes one can spend on this subject....a 20 year old video that unfortunately isn't outdated (like it should be by now):
http://youtu.be/pN41LvuSz10
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PBY,
The HGS system will display your speed deviation and current energy state based on selected thrust. It is therefore possible to instantly assess your performance (pitch vs power) at any time in any phase of flight (except UAs).
I personally find the HGS system highly intuitive (except for the UA mode) and I would be interested to know how pilots got into a mess performing manoeuvres using the HGS.
The HGS system will display your speed deviation and current energy state based on selected thrust. It is therefore possible to instantly assess your performance (pitch vs power) at any time in any phase of flight (except UAs).
I personally find the HGS system highly intuitive (except for the UA mode) and I would be interested to know how pilots got into a mess performing manoeuvres using the HGS.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: up in Hills
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going through the above posts, the pilots of Jet Airways who made 5 perfect GAs and landed on sixth on two different airfields of South India in bad weather need to be actually commended
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Global
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...o-nose-423927/
"Russian investigators have disclosed that the horizontal stabiliser of the crashed Flydubai Boeing 737-800 transitioned to nose-down pitch at a height of 900m (2,950ft) as the crew attempted a second go-around."
Preliminary report to be out by April 19, looks like they are stressing the importance of GA procedures....
"Russian investigators have disclosed that the horizontal stabiliser of the crashed Flydubai Boeing 737-800 transitioned to nose-down pitch at a height of 900m (2,950ft) as the crew attempted a second go-around."
Preliminary report to be out by April 19, looks like they are stressing the importance of GA procedures....
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...o-nose-423927/
"Russian investigators have disclosed that the horizontal stabiliser of the crashed Flydubai Boeing 737-800 transitioned to nose-down pitch at a height of 900m (2,950ft) as the crew attempted a second go-around."
Preliminary report to be out by April 19, looks like they are stressing the importance of GA procedures....
"Russian investigators have disclosed that the horizontal stabiliser of the crashed Flydubai Boeing 737-800 transitioned to nose-down pitch at a height of 900m (2,950ft) as the crew attempted a second go-around."
Preliminary report to be out by April 19, looks like they are stressing the importance of GA procedures....
Have a look at post no 407. That`s where I said nothing but the stab could possibly make it go from nose up to nose down, before you can say wibble.
Now remains the question who or what made it do it.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Around the corner
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what thre Russians are saying in Chronus post, it really looks that they were still on the autopilot at 3000 feet, as the trim automatically nosed down abruptly to catch the altitude. As I said in previous posts, they indicated to tower that they want to level out at level 80 and probably forgot altitude select at 900m, which is 3000 feet. Than came the surprise of violent level out, as the power was still quite high. As the autopilot had no other choice than to pitch violently down, to keep altitude, it has probably overdone a parameter in pitch and automatically disconnected itself with quite a pitch down. And "told" the pilots: "you have control". Airbus can do this trick on pilots too. And it ended up fatel even with testpilots on board. Not sure if I can find the actual accident report, but I remember we talked about this as airbus guys around 2008. We even trained how not to do a "high energy goaround"
PBY, re:
Hmmm, not sure I see this scenario. Of course, the elevators pitch the aircraft over to capture altitude not the pitch trim, with the (slower) pitch-trim/horizontal stabilizer following up after, trimming out any elevator control forces, as per usual? Also, it seems to me that normally-operating autoflight systems don't do anything "violently". They capture "as certified", which would permit 'brisk' but not "violent" manoeuvres, (depends upon the meaning of 'violent', and how 'brisk' is perceived by a tired crew at night). So if it did move, how did the horizontal stab get to the position that is claimed it got to while on autopilot - that's the question.
it really looks that they were still on the autopilot at 3000 feet, as the trim automatically nosed down abruptly to catch the altitude.
Last edited by PJ2; 8th Apr 2016 at 04:04.