Silverstrata, the very very scary example you have posted of a stall experienced on a real flight with pax on board, is impressive and how. Am I reading it correctly? is it actually rather low in altitude? and was the first response of the pilot to shut down the stall warning noise?
The stick shaker seems a bit late to arrive to get their attention....

This printout of all these happenings should be enough to wake up any airman who flies expecting the computers to do his job. I wonder if the passengers noted anything amiss? and if they were on approach, did ATC have any comments? can we read the report anywhere, please?

This is a great post with an eye-popping set of graphs, but the bean counters will win every time on issues like this, sad to say. Training costs money and unless there is a strong financial or regulatory incentive to shore up training in areas like this, it just won't happen. The pressure on management is accountability to shareholders, not accountability to the traveling public or the pride that should come from running as responsible and safe operation as one can. So the MBAs in the Executive Offices run their cost-benefit analyses on this kind of stuff and decide it isn't worth the impact to the bottom line. Pilots are not an asset, they are a cost to be mitigated with things like P2F.

Can we read the report
 

Could somebody please explain why airbus
can't fit their aircraft with pitot static probes with
enough 'oomph' so that they don't ice up in a CB when
you really need them to be working?

And the full (64pp) report here: http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...9%20G-THOF.pdf

tAgreed. There is only one way to fight bean-counters, by making their business model unprofitable. :8

You could start with this...

Pilots involved in P2F should not be called professional pilots, because the definition of professional is being paid to do a job (in your profession)..."not paying to do your job"!

During in-flight introductions they should be introduced as such. ie... cadet pilot, amateur pilot, or pilot in training.

I think the PAX have a right to know, and just maybe, just maybe it might raise some eyebrows. Or make some feel uneasy, and choose another airline next time.

About the captains military experience.
It's difficult for western pilots to understand how some air force fighter pilots from some South East Asian countries can leave the service with very limited flying skills.

Speaking in general terms, not saying that was the case with this AirAsia captain.
Any information on his age?

Bud Leon #1088 and others: ICAO has a handy tool for comparing air safety capabilities of different states at http://www.icao.int/safety/Pages/USOAP-Results.aspx. It’s based on very thorough, independent audits.

Before making sweeping comparisons between Asian and “Western” safety regimes just note that Singapore is one of the few States with a near perfect score and China is almost as good. Malaysia is much on a par with Australia and well above the international norm. Sadly Indonesia lags badly and theirs is very recent audit. So I fly on AirAsia’s Malaysian registered planes but not on those of its associates.

Interestingly AirAsia X Indonesia was due to start direct flights between Melbourne and Bali on 26 December but postponed the service at very short notice. Does anyone know if there were problems with the airline’s technical readiness?

@mary meagher

In dangly engined jets at low airspeed, and therefore low aero forces, extreme pitch up with high power has happened many times. Not all were so fortunate as in the example illustrated.

Other events:-

http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/2314.pdf
Report about go arounds

Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
power up, pitch excursion, CFIT

AeroUnion Flight 302 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Can't find much detail.

via the Wall Street Journal

just to confirm autopsies have been performed

53 IIRC.

@chefrp I wish it were that simple. The flying public has shown time and time again that it will do anything to save $5. Even if saving that $5 costs them $50 in fees. What you're proposing by implication is an education campaign by pilots that has a steep hill to climb in convincing people that safety is worth a little extra. People will cram themselves into 28 inch pitch seats over a few dollars. If they won't pay a bit extra for their own comfort, the statistical unlikelihood of an accident makes it unlikely that they will pay for an extra safety margin.

Times Strait reports:
 

PANGKALAN BUN/JAKARTA – Indonesia’s transport ministry will investigate all Indonesia AirAsia flight schedules from Monday as part of a government probe into Flight QZ8501 that went missing almost a week ago.

This comes as the ministry said flight QZ8501 was on an unauthorised flight schedule because the airline was only permitted to fly the Surabaya-Singapore route on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday. Flight QZ8501 took off last Sunday and the airline had not sought permission to change its schedule prior to the flight.

“We are going to investigate all AirAsia flight schedules,” said Djoko Muratmodjo, acting general-director for air navigation in the transport ministry. “Hopefully we can start on next Monday. We won’t focus on licences, just schedules.”

“It might be possible to revoke AirAsia’s licence in Indonesia,” Muratmodjo added.

The transport ministry suspended AirAsia's Surabaya-Singapore route on Friday. "AirAsia's permit for the route has been frozen because it violated the route permit given," he said.

The airline said it would cooperate fully with the investigation and would not comment on the matter till the investigation is completed.

The ministry said "customers who have booked AirAsia's Surabaya-Singapore tickets should be compensated with other airline tickets as per the existing regulation."

Just to second that it seems autopsies are being done, just not on every body. Which is understandable given the circumstances and in some cases pointless.

AirAsia flight QZ8501: Another 12 bodies sent to Surabaya hospital for identification - South-east Asia News & Top Stories - The Straits Times

that will save a lot of time on tedious investigations.

Thank you, Dave Reid, for that very useful link to the full UK AAIB report on the Boeing 737 stall - a full stall, NOT just the approach to the stall - that took place on approach to Bournemouth on a flight from Faro on 23 Sept. 2007.

As nobody got hurt and it was early in the day at a quiet airport, the details of the incident got lost in the bureaucracy, and only a sharp eyed chap in the back office flagged up the true significance. By that time the airliner and the pilots involved had been flying as usual, for several weeks, without sharing the experience with the authorities....which means the Black Boxes had gone on to other things. However the pilot did talk to the company engineer, who assured him the data had been saved on the OFDM, or operational flight detail mentoring, which was sent to the company by mobile phone. And THAT's how the scary charts and details were saved and then studied by the AAIB.

Quite simply, they didn't monitor the airspeed. The auto throttle had disconnected and the warning light wasn't noticed.

And as Jimjim has posted here, if you intuitively apply FULL power, underslung engines can tip up the aircraft so that the elevator is not so effective. A balance has to be achieved, by using trim, power, AND elevator to recover from a full stall. Airline pilots reading this, please have a good look at that AAIB full report referred to by DaveReid. It was not an Airbus, it was an elderly Boeing. and it was not an Asian Airline, nor overly deferential Asian pilots, they were both British, well trained and fully experienced.

They probably overlooked the inconspicuous warning light on the Boeing panel that the autothrottle had disconnected. With everything hanging down, the engines, the flaps, the spoilers, here goes the STALL STALL STALL noise, and what do you do 800 feet from the runway at a speed of 82 knots? Well, it pitched up 33 degrees, they did very well to go around.

All in a day's work. But what is different about having everything go pearshaped in a Cunimb at 38,000 feet? Should have plenty of time to sort things out, and those who fly in these latitudes are experienced in interesting conditions.

mary_meagher

An eerily similar event took place by Iceland Air in Oslo, Norway, a few years ago. They came in for landing and messed up big time. Many passengers had brown pants... Capt didn't report it as he should have, it was only by reading out the FDR due to some other trouble that the incident was discovered (as I recall it...). I have the report on my computer somewhere but can't seem to find it right now on the Internet. You can look for it here:

Avgitte rapporter - luftfart | sht

From one Monkey to another.

" Is there anyone on this thread who actually wants to discuss about AIR ASIA QZ 8501??"

My gut tells me we are. I hope I am wrong but time will tell.

Coincidentally a very interesting discussion on BBC R4 this morning from the author of "The Glass Cage" concerning man's interaction with automation - listen to the end to hear quite a lot about aviation.

Here is the link - start listening at 1.20.55:-

The Glass Cage

Presumably the reports that they had no authority to fly that route are just a red herring, or is there a suggestion that as the paperwork for the flight schedule is not correct there may be other issues with paperwork?

Equally how did the Indonesians allow the flight to be booked, and depart etc as after they must have known it was happening.

Looks like they are getting close to the main wreckage field