13.10.17 UT588 KRR-VKO
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a rudder hard-over issue, and has hopefully been solved with a couple of mods and a change in procedures.
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
underfire. I wasn't making any comment on this event, but responding to your query about the historical ones. There were aircraft lost due to the rudder hardover, but Boeing's fix has, we hope, sorted it.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@kulverstukas
could you or someone else tell me what the lines are?
i would presume from top to bottom:
altitude in m (edit: actually in feet)
bank angle?
pitch angle ??
power setting ?? (edit: actually heading)
Calibrated Airspeed (as in the label)
v2
vref
flap setting ?
could you or someone else tell me what the lines are?
i would presume from top to bottom:
altitude in m (edit: actually in feet)
bank angle?
pitch angle ??
power setting ?? (edit: actually heading)
Calibrated Airspeed (as in the label)
v2
vref
flap setting ?
Last edited by wiedehopf; 26th Oct 2017 at 05:17.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alt AGL ft
Bank °
Pitch °
Direction °
CAS kt
v2 kt
vref kt
Left flp °
Shaker
AP
Bank °
Pitch °
Direction °
CAS kt
v2 kt
vref kt
Left flp °
Shaker
AP
Last edited by Kulverstukas; 26th Oct 2017 at 05:11. Reason: Grammar and units
Altitude in meters or feet?
Aviation Herald says feet MSL, which is more consistent with 5.3 miles from threshold - but I won't argue with a Russian about an FDR readout in Russian! Just asking.
Referring to the mechanical stall warning device, in English that is the "Stick shaker." "Shacker" means - something else.
Aviation Herald says feet MSL, which is more consistent with 5.3 miles from threshold - but I won't argue with a Russian about an FDR readout in Russian! Just asking.
Referring to the mechanical stall warning device, in English that is the "Stick shaker." "Shacker" means - something else.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's feet, i just assumed because it's Russia 
the time code fits with the flightradar24 trace.
0617 with the upset quite some speed change can be seen. that's at about 1000m, the altitude dip doesn't show well on the granularity of flightradar24, but it's enough to see it's feet not meters in the FDR readout.
the time code fits with the flightradar24 trace.
0617 with the upset quite some speed change can be seen. that's at about 1000m, the altitude dip doesn't show well on the granularity of flightradar24, but it's enough to see it's feet not meters in the FDR readout.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone have any thoughts about what the spike to 650 knots really means? It would seem physically impossible to accelerate and decelerate that quickly (keeping the aircraft intact at least).
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Degradation of skills
And the captain was "busy" punching the runway change into the FMC.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pN41LvuSz10
From min 3:30 to 9:30 basically sums up this scary incident.
Unbelieveable...
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great instructional video, F-16GUY.
Back to the incident (incidents?) in question, is it worth noting that none of the visible fun started until coming off a 40 minute hold? One might wonder what stresses the crew may have carried forward with them from that.
So the upset in the FDR readout shown occurred immediately after the GA was "initiated" on the first approach, but what happened thirteen minutes later on the second approach?
That's when FR24 showed a momentary reported GS of just 41kts at 2400 feet and then two minutes later the unexplained momentary reported 637kts at 2300 feet (that last plot coincident with momentary VS+17536fpm)? Have we got the FDR readouts and/or more detailed ADSB data for those too?
Back to the incident (incidents?) in question, is it worth noting that none of the visible fun started until coming off a 40 minute hold? One might wonder what stresses the crew may have carried forward with them from that.
So the upset in the FDR readout shown occurred immediately after the GA was "initiated" on the first approach, but what happened thirteen minutes later on the second approach?
That's when FR24 showed a momentary reported GS of just 41kts at 2400 feet and then two minutes later the unexplained momentary reported 637kts at 2300 feet (that last plot coincident with momentary VS+17536fpm)? Have we got the FDR readouts and/or more detailed ADSB data for those too?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: .
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm amazed that people are still trying to use FR24 data to analyse these types of incidents. the most simple explanation for an anomalous value in FR24 speed/altitude graphs is that FR24 has it wrong. We see this in pretty much every thread on here.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not amazed, just curious. The underlying FR24 data is, as I know you know, just data broadcast from the aircraft. That data isn't "wrong" - if it is reported accurately by the aircraft systems, broadcast to anyone who cares to receive it, and if it is faithfully recorded with known context and margin for error and shared, it just exists as valid public domain data and in cases like this it feeds healthy curiosity.
Obviously interpreting it in the wrong context, and blindly ignoring how errors may occur can lead to completely wrong conclusions. So it is sometimes (often?) misleading to rely on simply joining all the ADSB dots and getting the wrong lines of course, and to that extent FR24 graphs which do join dots however anomalous, do need to be taken with a pinch of salt!
Yours is of course fair amazement if you think many reading this thread still labour under the notion that the crazy-looking 637kts number was associated with the apparent stall recorded fifteen minutes earlier in the FDR
Obviously interpreting it in the wrong context, and blindly ignoring how errors may occur can lead to completely wrong conclusions. So it is sometimes (often?) misleading to rely on simply joining all the ADSB dots and getting the wrong lines of course, and to that extent FR24 graphs which do join dots however anomalous, do need to be taken with a pinch of salt!
Yours is of course fair amazement if you think many reading this thread still labour under the notion that the crazy-looking 637kts number was associated with the apparent stall recorded fifteen minutes earlier in the FDR
Yes, the relevant caveats in this case are:
a) Like most surviving B735s, the aircraft in question has non-GPS ADS-B, and so lateral positions are automatically suspect
b) Reported altitudes may or may not be corrected for QNH (you can't tell from FR24)
c) Timestamps come from FR24 and may not match those in the FDR readout that was posted.
That said, here's the FR24 track that corresponds to the two-and-a-half minutes of the FDR trace:
The heading/track appears to match the FDR values.
The lateral positions are clearly offset, as can be seen from the final approach and landing.
The altitudes differ from the FDR readout by about 1000', but appear to be broadly in step.
Obviously none of the other FDR parameters appear on FR24.
a) Like most surviving B735s, the aircraft in question has non-GPS ADS-B, and so lateral positions are automatically suspect
b) Reported altitudes may or may not be corrected for QNH (you can't tell from FR24)
c) Timestamps come from FR24 and may not match those in the FDR readout that was posted.
That said, here's the FR24 track that corresponds to the two-and-a-half minutes of the FDR trace:
The heading/track appears to match the FDR values.
The lateral positions are clearly offset, as can be seen from the final approach and landing.
The altitudes differ from the FDR readout by about 1000', but appear to be broadly in step.
Obviously none of the other FDR parameters appear on FR24.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice one Mr Reid.
As an aside, ADSB data, including a complete lack of it in recent days, indicates that the aircraft flew pretty much daily until 13th October, but appears not to have moved since!
As an aside, ADSB data, including a complete lack of it in recent days, indicates that the aircraft flew pretty much daily until 13th October, but appears not to have moved since!
) it was flying yesterday and today...
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In my head
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My goodness Nemrytter, that'll teach me not to rely on getting my gaps in ADSB data from an unreliable source - remind me to rely on your preferred FR24 for that from now on 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 1,011
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm.
I'd be sceptical about the ability of even a full OEM simulator to replicate the extreme flight regime that the aircraft appears to have encountered, let alone the capability of a PC simmer enthusiasts' app.
I'd be sceptical about the ability of even a full OEM simulator to replicate the extreme flight regime that the aircraft appears to have encountered, let alone the capability of a PC simmer enthusiasts' app.