|
Originally Posted by Meester proach
(Post 10455073)
Of course.
I find that hard to believe, and so am quite keen to read the report when it comes out. (My last areas of professional concentration before leaving aviation for other jobs was training, crew training, human performance, CRM, and human factors). (Airbubba: I am in no way impugning your cred as a source - I've found your input to be generally solid over the years ... ) |
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
(Post 10455148)
Thank you for that. Your response leaves me looking at the "leaked" info and more puzzled than before. The implication of that reported sequence is that once a mistaken hit of that switch, TOGA, the Left Seat pilot became inert, both physically and mentally.
I find that hard to believe, and so am quite keen to read the report when it comes out. (My last areas of professional concentration before leaving aviation for other jobs was training, crew training, human performance, CRM, and human factors). (Airbubba: I am in no way impugning your cred as a source - I've found your input to be generally solid over the years ... ) what would be more illuminating , if this is the scenario, the training and suitability background of the person that made this control inputs . |
Originally Posted by Meester proach
(Post 10455259)
I’m interested as well from the psychology point of view - startle effect etc. There’s very few situations where you have to react immediately .....especially not shoving the nose way down. I’d initially run with the TOGA , once we’d got a grip on the mistake , disconnect AP, AT, select FLCH return to cleared altititude and reengage both. Easy to say though from my couch.You going to have to take an altitude bust , but I’d rather get a kicking for that than overreact. what would be more illuminating , if this is the scenario, the training and suitability background of the person that made this control inputs . |
CI crashed two A306s during go around. I never read the report on the crash in Taipei but in the Nagoya crash the FO definitely pushed the TOGA levers and engaged the AP shortly afterwards. They tried to continue the approach but didn’t realized the AP was engaged. The fight went on for a while until they finally disengaged the AP. However the stab had moved to full nose up and we all know what happened next. Out of curiosity, it was exactly 25 years ago... |
Originally Posted by GBV
(Post 10455471)
CI crashed two A306s during go around. I never read the report on the crash in Taipei but in the Nagoya crash the FO definitely pushed the TOGA levers and engaged the AP shortly afterwards. They tried to continue the approach but didn’t realized the AP was engaged. The fight went on for a while until they finally disengaged the AP. However the stab had moved to full nose up and we all know what happened next. Out of curiosity, it was exactly 25 years ago... |
Originally Posted by Euclideanplane
(Post 10455548)
Noteworthy perhaps that in the Nagoya crash, the actions of the PF were entirely reasonable based on his training and previous experience on B747. Unfortunately the sim that he had trained on for the A300 was programmed with a different TOGA behavior than the actual plane in question. An Airbus precursor to Boeing's MCAS phenomenon?
|
Originally Posted by ironbutt57
(Post 10455973)
more than one airplane will trim against manual inputs when the autopilot is engaged..
When push came to shove in the actual flight, that did not happen. It wasn't the primary cause of the crash, but it contributed. |
Originally Posted by Euclideanplane
(Post 10456004)
Indeed. The point is that in simulator training, moving the yoke forward in GA mode would disconnect the autopilot.
When push came to shove in the actual flight, that did not happen. It wasn't the primary cause of the crash, but it contributed. can't see how it relates the MCAS... |
Originally Posted by ironbutt57
(Post 10456799)
can't see how it relates the MCAS...
|
No report yet? |
Originally Posted by AviatorDave
(Post 10461270)
No report yet? |
Originally Posted by atakacs
(Post 10461324)
Well I would not expect it before next year |
Q
Originally Posted by SamYeager
(Post 10461360)
Presumably AviatorDave is talking about the initial factual report rather than the final report?
No way they would have a final version by now. |
Originally Posted by extreme P
(Post 10452392)
What do you recommend for a "go round" at 6000' when flying a STAR?
|
Unexpected TOGA
I must agree with Lonewolf50 (post 881) about actions subsequent to TOGA selection.
During my time on the 76 I twice experienced inadvertent TOGA selection, once by myself as PF and the other time by the F/O as PF. Both occurred in very turbulent conditions on finals, at Tenerife and Las Vegas. It is some years ago now, but I cannot recall any drama. The aircraft left the G/S and went up like a lift and all we had to do was fly the machine, just as if it were an aeroplane. Flap 20, Gear UP, Levelled off and went round for another go. There is no doubt that it was the turbulence which caused both incidents – the palm switches were knocked by our hands being shaken by the hard rocking and rolling. In this case, there must be more to it than that. Prober |
Originally Posted by GBV
(Post 10455471)
CI crashed two A306s during go around. I never read the report on the crash in Taipei but in the Nagoya crash the FO definitely pushed the TOGA levers and engaged the AP shortly afterwards. They tried to continue the approach but didn’t realized the AP was engaged. The fight went on for a while until they finally disengaged the AP. However the stab had moved to full nose up and we all know what happened next. Out of curiosity, it was exactly 25 years ago... CI140 had the AP engaged in the GA 13 seconds after the inadvertent TOGA selection, but the pilot was not aware of that fact, and was forcing the yoke against the AP resulting in the excessive backtrim case. The TOGA engagement was accidental by the handling pilot. The Nagoya flight was off a stable approach, but had the anomaly of the accidental TOGA triggering, and the subsequent engagement of the AP which the pilot fought against. The Taipei A300-622R accident, CI676 was slightly different. It came off an unstable approach where the aircraft was high, 7,000' @ 16nm, which would have been manageable, but increased the workload. The crew disconnected the AP and shortly thereafter did a GA manually flown. The pitch up with full thrust ended up at 41 degrees nose up before any nose down elevator was applied, and trim was applied nose down 6 seconds later. At the top of the zoom climb, the crew achieved 42.5 degrees nose up, roll excursions laterally of 48.5 degrees right, a minimum recorded speed of 43KCAS at 2751'. Thrust was slightly reduced, and the nose lowered finally going to 45 degrees nose down, following a 79 degree left roll excursion. Last data was at 136RA (uncorrected for pitch) 599'PA, 237KCAS, 18 degrees nose down, pulling 2.2g and near wings level. In the 90's there was a spate of wild rides on the 300-600 and the 310 with spectacular displays put on in Moscow and in Paris by visiting aircraft. Boeing's partial thrust GA (targeted rate of climb) is less likely to get the drivers out of sorts, and some bus users implemented a soft GA procedure which led to the wild ride GA at Melbourne of an A320 of an AUS carrier where the guys essentially did a downwards going GA, and missed planet earth by not much. At low weights, the application of full thrust on underslung engines will get the attention of the crew, with a considerable trim change requirement to be managed, or not. The or not gets mentions in the funny pages. Getting out of trim is not a Max8 issue alone, it is an issue with all of these aircraft, and it is a part of the cyclic matrix that is deficient in its practice. The SLF's prefer we don't practice en route, so there are limited occasions for the crew to practice AP and manually flown GA's. CI140 more or less vertically parked adjacent to the runway at RJBB. it was nowhere near a recovery in the time and space available, the wreckage distribution was more or less within the planform of the aircraft. |
Good post, fdr.
|
Originally Posted by fdr
(Post 10461655)
CI140 more or less vertically parked adjacent to the runway at RJBB.
After the A300 crashes the Dynasty Airbus fleet was made almost all expat and the planes were subsequently retired according to a friend who flew the B-744 at China Air during that deadly period. I've done the dreaded two-engine missed approach in the A306, A310 and B-767 in years past. I'd say the A310 is the most challenging with the pitchup, the B-767 the most docile. Obviously, if you fight the autopilot on the go-around bad things can happen in any aircraft. |
every 2-engine go-around I ever did in a jet, my body was telling me excessive pitch up, however, the automatics, in fact, put the pitch exactly where it was supposed to be...look before you touch...
|
Actually, CI140 crashed at Nagoya Airfield, RJNA. RJBB is KIX, Osaka Kansai. |
This accident was almost 3 months ago and nothing from the NTSB since the initial press reports. I know, they may take years, but as stated previously here, they usually have something out in 30 days.
Anyone know anyone on the "inside" for info? |
Originally Posted by Old Boeing Driver
(Post 10470511)
This accident was almost 3 months ago and nothing from the NTSB since the initial press reports. I know, they may take years, but as stated previously here, they usually have something out in 30 days.
Anyone know anyone on the "inside" for info? |
Originally Posted by Old Boeing Driver
(Post 10470511)
This accident was almost 3 months ago and nothing from the NTSB since the initial press reports. I know, they may take years, but as stated previously here, they usually have something out in 30 days.
Anyone know anyone on the "inside" for info? |
Scroll to 3:00 to get to the Atlas Air info |
Amazon's 1-Day Shipping Has an Alarming Downside That No One Is Talking About (Including Jeff Bezos) Jeff Bezos made a surprise appearance this week at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky airport to break ground on a new Amazon Air hub, a three million-square-foot facility that will help the company make good on its recent promise of free one-day package delivery for its Prime members. The Amazon chief showed a video of what the facility will look like, ceremoniously moved dirt himself (displaying skills as a heavy equipment operator), and proudly chirped that the Hub would soon be populated with "Prime Air" emblazoned airplanes. What's not to like? More jobs, faster package delivery, advancement, and growth. But there's another side to the coin, hinted at by the fact that the pomp and circumstance took place in a closed ceremony with carefully controlled messaging, blocking out representation of one important group in particular and one particularly important issue: pilot safety. Pilots were not a part of the fanfare, and were literally being interviewed off to the side of the sideshow. Robert Kirchner, a 42-year pilot and chair of the executive council of Atlas Air (a cargo-shipping airline), pointed out in an onsite interview that the fact that the ceremony is a closed one is telling. His fear is that safety is being compromised as exhausted pilots ferry an increasing amount of packages increasingly fast, while attrition of burned-out pilots is thinning the ranks of people qualified to fly the planes that enable one-day shipping in the first place. "There's a large uptick in fatigue calls, sick calls. Pilots are just being worn out," noted Kirchner in an interview with local Cincinnati TV station WLWT. "There are a lot of canceled flights, a lot of delayed flights, due to the pilot shortage and the staffing stressed operation, and that doesn't bode well for the future of this enterprise that Amazon is breaking ground on today." Also this week, Amazon addressed head-on how to find people to drive vehicles to deliver more packages, faster. The company offered current employees three-months' salary and $10,000 in startup funding to quit their current Amazon post and start a ground delivery business. Obviously, they can't offer the same program for employees to quit and fly cargo planes. So how will they address the needs of getting enough pilots and giving the current cargo flight operators a reasonable schedule that won't compromise their health and safety? The increased workload generated by shuttling packages around one day after being ordered adds on to the issue of an already well-documented pilot shortage (not to mention the intense trucking shortage). And it adds to the mounting problem of industrywide pilot fatigue. It's the dark downside of the home shopping boom. Ever more packages delivered ever faster to our homes means more ground and air congestion, and more opportunities for safety disasters if not carefully thought through and planned for. I like getting my loofahs the next day as much as the next person, but at what cost? I'm not saying one-day shipping can't be a boon for everyone, and I certainly hope it is. But let's have open conversations and open planning to safely enable it, not hide the warts under the shadowed tents of shiny, closed ceremonies. PUBLISHED ON: MAY 16, 2019 |
Sadly, this is America now. As long as Wall Street is happy with the stock performance, everything else is immaterial. Planes full of loofahs crashing? Who cares. Earnings dividends are being paid. |
Originally Posted by 413X3
(Post 10473159)
Things are only bad these days says a country that used to enslave others as property and employ children to help profit ratios
Robert Kirchner, a 42-year pilot and chair of the executive council of Atlas Air (a cargo-shipping airline), pointed out in an onsite interview that the fact that the ceremony is a closed one is telling. |
Originally Posted by FIRESYSOK
(Post 10473147)
Planes full of loofahs crashing? Who cares. Earnings dividends are being paid.
|
Originally Posted by FIRESYSOK
(Post 10473147)
Sadly, this is America now. As long as Wall Street is happy with the stock performance, everything else is immaterial. Planes full of loofahs crashing? Who cares. Earnings dividends are being paid. |
Funny you should mention that, they have a long thread discussing that exact topic at CCRUNE.ORG (closet communist rumor network) and I'm sure they'd love to hear your input.
|
Isn't that the big flaw in capitalism? |
If UPS6 crashed into the middle of Dubai, instead of into the desert outside the city, there would be no "cargo carveout" on crew rest rules. |
Originally Posted by Intruder
(Post 10473687)
Exactly! If UPS6 crashed into the middle of Dubai, instead of into the desert outside the city, there would be no "cargo carveout" on crew rest rules.
(edit - I see Small Cog beat me to it). |
Originally Posted by Old Boeing Driver
(Post 10470511)
Anyone know anyone on the "inside" for info?
|
Originally Posted by TRF4EVR
(Post 10473931)
.........what safety bulletins would follow? "Hey, don't freak out and crash the plane"?
|
I don’t understand the reference to ‘cargo carve out on crew rest’ ?? |
Originally Posted by SquintyMagoo
(Post 10473775)
Isn't that the big flaw in capitalism? Everything done for the stockholders and owners. Fire people, close plants, cheat salaries of rank and file, skirt safety as long as they can, etc., etc.,
|
It's bigger than that
Originally Posted by porkflyer
(Post 10474139)
Yes it is.
|
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 10473818)
What the :mad: does UPS6 have to do with crew rest?
Planes full of loofahs crashing? Who cares. Earnings dividends are being paid. |
Originally Posted by Intruder
(Post 10474278)
The tendency is that nobody pays attention to an airplane crash where nobody is hurt except the pilots. Hence, a large segment of the industry is saddled with a lesser level of safety and regulatory scrutiny than the passenger carriers.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:48. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.