@ CONF
 

I lack the french language so can not comment on that one.
AFAIK BUSS activation comes with increased workload (e.g. ALT LAW and manual outflow valve control)

on ground and in early simulator experience (but could be sim issue) it is reversible by selecting any ADR to ON.

Procedural it will be difficult to revert to the normal display because one selects the BUSS when ALL ADR FAULT or in case of ADR DISAGREE.
Without displayed air data information it will be a gamble to reselect an ADR with valid information.

So part of the CVR was not included in the report? the bit where the Captain grumbles he only had one hour of sleep the night before, in Rio, and the two co-pilots had been enjoying the evening as well... that is shocking, looks like a coverup if they don't release the entire CVR.....

And how can CRM ensure that your colleagues are not short of sleep?

A33Zab
 

Thanks for the informative replies.

From the report :
After using the BUSS on simulator, the experts have realized that
- the flying request a lot of attention
- the flying is tricky during a config change
- the system is not adapted for a long flight

Yes.
That seems to be speculation around a number of unknowns. "Looks like" may or may not match "what actually happened/occurred" and thus IMO BEA can't go much further than they did in estimating the impact of fatigue. Not enough information to go on. If an investigation were to find people who were with the crew the night before, and be able to establish there being somewhere other than in the bed at a certain time before launch, you might have something there. As this evidence is not in the report, I find it a bit harsh to presume the crew were out and about the night before.
There's the question of the week. :ok:

My answer: it can't.

Company rules and the professional habits (or lack thereof) among the crew are how you make sure you get your rest before a flight.

That CVR stuff is pure diversion. The tracks over the Atlantic would be empty if only well rested pilots could fly on them. One cannot just sleep on request before a flight. Long haul guys know exactly what I'm talking about.

Full FDR data are what the families need to put their hands on.

I'm afraid that is not correct.
The person saying that was the Captain, not the PIC. The captain was resting at the beginning of the trouble. At most, his lack of rest could have impaired his ability when he finally got back to the cockpit.

But, and that's perhaps more important, I don't think the translation is correct, as already posted in the TL thread:

« Cette nuit, j'ai pas assez dormi »
« une heure, c'était pas assez tout à l'heure »

« I didn't sleep enough last night »
« one hour was not enough earlier »

The second part ("one hour") refers to a nap IMO.
The judicial report CVR transcript shows 2" between the 2 sentences, it even write them on 2 separate lines in the transcript.

AZR

AZR, thanks for that point.

Across a translation, there is ample room for doubt inhow one understands that remark.

If one's body clock was a bit off, one's rest might be disturbed.
There are other reasons for not getting a full night's sleep, none of which the Captain's remarks refer to. Nor did he amplify. I don't doubt that in his career, he'd flown a flight or two when his sleep had been interrupted the night before. See CONFiture's point ...

If I go to bed to get six or seven hours of sleep, but on a particular evening toss and turn and get interrupted or poor sleep, versus getting uninterrupted sleep, will I just throw up my hands and not make my take off time?

I doubt it.

Whether or not the Captain was alert, or if he was shaking off the effects of a tired body remains a point of speculation. I don't think we can ever know, unless someone comes up with credible evidence. Sharp or not so sharp, he entered the problem playing a game of catch up. There was a finite window of time where remedy was going to be possible, and in that amount of time he was unable to unravel the knot. The two already in the seats put him in an extremely diffucult position. Not sure how many other captains would have saved it, and others not.

We can speculate all we like, we still won't know.

This isn't a TV script, this is real life. Sometimes even hindsight is partially obscured by clouds. :suspect:

Rapoport's so called report is total bunk. The crew did not complete the Unreliable Airspeed Dril which is a memory item and instructs the crew to turn off the A/P, F/D and A/T. I wont waste my time with the other nonsense.
People who do not have an ATPL and who do not fly the Airbus should keep their petty thoughts to themselves.

Hi

Thank you for having specified this.
A nap? why not.
Therefore, beacause both sentences are separated, maybe it is possible to think that « one hour was not enough earlier » made reference to the interval of time to get ready (eyes wide open) between the alarm clock ring and the shuttle departure?

Well what do you know, an IR FPV...

To echo what CONF said, A33Zab's posts are very informative, as usual.

Otherwise you would look for the pilot in the hotel lobby wearing sunglasses and whistling '...ain't feelin' too good myself'.

60 minutes story
 

David Learmount interviewed by 60 minutes, aired Sunday 12th May.

In three parts.
Flight 447: The air safety investigation

They won't show it to me because of my location (The United States of Bloody America). :confused:

I concur, not available to Americans because Airbus, Air France and the pitot tube manufacturers have decided they are not at fault and Americans will dispute it. I am sure it is a totally unbiased report, don't you?

Or me. in the UK.

Since we can't see it here in the US my guess is they threw the crew under the bus and blamed them for not following UAS procedures. Is this true?

Well, heck, there are plenty of licensing reasons why we often can't watch content from other countries (am I right, Canada?), and MSNBC has undergone a lot of contractual changes recently, with NBC divorcing from Micro$oft. So, I really doubt that it's a content issue. :hmm:

At least one version of that "60 Minutes: Australia" 447 video is on youtube - watchable in the USA.

See for a short extract - all I could find (UK).

It'll be a Copyright issue!

I'm sure that Channel 9 Australia have plans to sell to other networks, so why not protect distribution on the web.

All 3 parts are viewable via the web in Australia and New Zealand.

The short excerpt (above) seems to be relatively even-handed, no?


:8