Atlas Air 767 down/Texas
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
WASHINGTON (March 12, 2019) — The descent of Atlas Air flight 3591 and the communication between air traffic control and the aircraft pilots on Feb. 23, 2019, is depicted in this graphic. Atlas Air flight 3591, carrying cargo for Amazon and the U.S. Postal Service, crashed about 40 miles from Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental Airport. Three people died in the crash. (NTSB Graphic)
This is in agreement with DaveReidUK's ADS-B data analysis posted here the day after the mishap:
The FR24 data, as usual, contains numerous artifacts and synchronisation issues.
That said, once cleaned up it appears to show a slight but unmistakeable climb interrupting the descent just before reaching 6000', starting about 10 seconds before the beginning of the final dive.
It's exaggerated, obviously, in this foreshortened view (apologies for the skewed verticals):
That said, once cleaned up it appears to show a slight but unmistakeable climb interrupting the descent just before reaching 6000', starting about 10 seconds before the beginning of the final dive.
It's exaggerated, obviously, in this foreshortened view (apologies for the skewed verticals):
Also, about this time, the FDR data indicated that some small vertical accelerations consistent with the airplane entering turbulence. Shortly after, when the airplane’s indicated airspeed was steady about 230 knots, the engines increased to maximum thrust, and the airplane pitch increased to about 4° nose up and then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input. The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.
FDR, radar, and ADS-B data indicated that the airplane entered a rapid descent on a heading of 270°, reaching an airspeed of about 430 knots. A security camera video captured the airplane in a steep, generally wings-level attitude until impact with the swamp. FDR data indicated that the airplane gradually pitched up to about 20 degrees nose down during the descent.
FDR, radar, and ADS-B data indicated that the airplane entered a rapid descent on a heading of 270°, reaching an airspeed of about 430 knots. A security camera video captured the airplane in a steep, generally wings-level attitude until impact with the swamp. FDR data indicated that the airplane gradually pitched up to about 20 degrees nose down during the descent.
Yeah, I am reaching, but that seems really weird to me.
This is not even speculation, just a "scenario" that might fit that reported throttle and control-input reading.
Massive incapacitation of PF (bird through the windscreen, medical, other), body pitches forward onto both column and (hand) throttle levers. Nose-over forces make it impossible for the other pilot and jumpseater to clear the controls until too late (that possible last-second attempt to get the nose up).
EDIT: I see I'm not alone - but it would certainly require a "Black Swan" event.
Massive incapacitation of PF (bird through the windscreen, medical, other), body pitches forward onto both column and (hand) throttle levers. Nose-over forces make it impossible for the other pilot and jumpseater to clear the controls until too late (that possible last-second attempt to get the nose up).
EDIT: I see I'm not alone - but it would certainly require a "Black Swan" event.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has it been stated that the CVR cannot provide additional information? As I read the release from the NTSB issued on 7th March it suggests that with filtering it may be possible to determine more elements of FD communications and environmental noise. Today's information offered by 9gmax, although I can't see it on the NTSB website, seems only to include ATC communications which are likely to have come from ground recordings. The earlier release talks about crew communications being consistent with a loss control of the aircraft....but this is not really consistent with FD actions. As with the ET accident, I find the wording of the information that is being issued by key agencies to be interesting - the text from NTSB refers to 'engines increased to maximum thrust', but does not mention TL movement. But, perhaps I am reading too much into this.
Hopefully there is enough information available or ultimately accessible to enable some of the present questions to be answered.
Hopefully there is enough information available or ultimately accessible to enable some of the present questions to be answered.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Vienna
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The excerpt of what NTSB is sharing is interesting and basically is saying „not Beoing‘s fault“ - important due to ET crash. However, it offers no explanation to what initiated the maneuver, which could be very unfair to the crew. Fly Dubai was also not a „black swan”.
Sadly there aren't too many other realistic scenarios. Still the Questions is: Germanwings or hefty spatial disorientation. The fact that they were IMC, entering turbulence and have stopped the descent very shortly before (which will create somatogravic illusions of climbing) plus the fact that they started to try and recover once visual with the ground makes me tend more to the latter scenario. Still a very sobering scenario.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: NV USA
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wait for the answers
There's still a lot of information to come out. This guy is a respected former investigator whom most likely is talking with former colleagues.
Gregory Allen "Greg" Feith is an American former Senior Air Safety Investigator with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Today on Denver News Channel 9, while commenting on the 737 Max crashes, Greg Feith said this, verbatim:
“...and a lot of carriers overseas, they are so automation dependent that they don’t know, based on their training, when to intervene, and if there is a problem they continue to try to use the automation. We’ve seen that now in three accidents. Lion Air, Ethiopian, and in fact, Atlas Air, the one that crashed in Houston. The automation was still coupled, the pilots didn’t hand fly the airplane when they lost control and even through the recovery they were fighting the automation.”
Gregory Allen "Greg" Feith is an American former Senior Air Safety Investigator with the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Today on Denver News Channel 9, while commenting on the 737 Max crashes, Greg Feith said this, verbatim:
“...and a lot of carriers overseas, they are so automation dependent that they don’t know, based on their training, when to intervene, and if there is a problem they continue to try to use the automation. We’ve seen that now in three accidents. Lion Air, Ethiopian, and in fact, Atlas Air, the one that crashed in Houston. The automation was still coupled, the pilots didn’t hand fly the airplane when they lost control and even through the recovery they were fighting the automation.”
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PNW
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Belgium
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has it been stated that the CVR cannot provide additional information? As I read the release from the NTSB issued on 7th March it suggests that with filtering it may be possible to determine more elements of FD communications and environmental noise. Today's information offered by 9gmax, although I can't see it on the NTSB website, seems only to include ATC communications which are likely to have come from ground recordings. The earlier release talks about crew communications being consistent with a loss control of the aircraft....but this is not really consistent with FD actions. As with the ET accident, I find the wording of the information that is being issued by key agencies to be interesting - the text from NTSB refers to 'engines increased to maximum thrust', but does not mention TL movement. But, perhaps I am reading too much into this.
Hopefully there is enough information available or ultimately accessible to enable some of the present questions to be answered.
Hopefully there is enough information available or ultimately accessible to enable some of the present questions to be answered.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 81
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atlas Air, the one that crashed in Houston. The automation was still coupled, the pilots didn’t hand fly the airplane when they lost control and even through the recovery they were fighting the automation.”
The airplane then pitched nose down over the next 18 seconds to about 49° in response to nose-down elevator deflection. The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input.
