Safe Landing despite Loss of Controls
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed I have just re-read the last posting on the first page and it's not so miraculous after all - still a bit scary though!
If it happens in a computer 'controlled' aircraft - just re-boot the computer!
If it happens in a computer 'controlled' aircraft - just re-boot the computer!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry guys...but what a load of cr*p! So.... the PH landed with all engines running and with all controls working normally!
This story - as originally posted - had all the credibility of a tabloid "exclusive"..... and with about as much technical accuracy too.
My worry is that so many Ppruners should accept the story on face-value without stopping for a moment and thinking it through. bm
This story - as originally posted - had all the credibility of a tabloid "exclusive"..... and with about as much technical accuracy too.
My worry is that so many Ppruners should accept the story on face-value without stopping for a moment and thinking it through. bm
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was a recent AAIB bulletin including a 146 and this "break out" feature. I'd never heard of it before the Egypt Air accident, where it was used in the "fight" for control. And I was on the 767 at the time - just alluded to in the Tech Manual...
NoD
NoD
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Salzburg
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigbirg and BoeingMel,
>>why all this stupid speculation about total loss of flight
>>controls, from ill imformed people with no knowlage of the
>>aircraft or its systems.
>>This story - as originally posted - had all the credibility of a
>>tabloid "exclusive"..... and with about as much technical
>>accuracy too.
The only problem here is, that this first story was released by Lufthansa themselves. Tabloids as well as press did not carry the incident - despite the huge preparation for the landing in Graz - until Lufthansa came out with that explanation, only revoked in the afternoon. I too would not have bothered with just press reports ...
Simon
>>why all this stupid speculation about total loss of flight
>>controls, from ill imformed people with no knowlage of the
>>aircraft or its systems.
>>This story - as originally posted - had all the credibility of a
>>tabloid "exclusive"..... and with about as much technical
>>accuracy too.
The only problem here is, that this first story was released by Lufthansa themselves. Tabloids as well as press did not carry the incident - despite the huge preparation for the landing in Graz - until Lufthansa came out with that explanation, only revoked in the afternoon. I too would not have bothered with just press reports ...
Simon
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Mahlangeni
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all wait for the F-A-C-T-S
Secondly the Avro Rj 85 can be flown with "split" controls. In other words if the Capt's or F/O's controls block, they can be disconnected and be used independently.
Thirdly, not all the Avro's controls are mechanical. ELEV and AIL yes, but the RUD is hydraulically actuated (yes you can still force it to move with brute leg force).
And last but not least, if the ailerons block and you've only got rudder and elevator, you can consider slitting the elevator and using both surfaces independently to roll the A/C (works in the sim). This needs a co-ord kid or a great team.
Left column forward/right column backwards = RIGHT turn and vv.
And really last but not least: The crew did a GREAT job, irrespective of what happened. Typical LH
Secondly the Avro Rj 85 can be flown with "split" controls. In other words if the Capt's or F/O's controls block, they can be disconnected and be used independently.
Thirdly, not all the Avro's controls are mechanical. ELEV and AIL yes, but the RUD is hydraulically actuated (yes you can still force it to move with brute leg force).
And last but not least, if the ailerons block and you've only got rudder and elevator, you can consider slitting the elevator and using both surfaces independently to roll the A/C (works in the sim). This needs a co-ord kid or a great team.
Left column forward/right column backwards = RIGHT turn and vv.
And really last but not least: The crew did a GREAT job, irrespective of what happened. Typical LH
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying with the controls split is no big deal, not quite sure why so many are so quick to believe this nonsense. Armchair pilots and PPLs, I suppose. The only way they could have suffered a "total loss of flight controls" would be if somebody had gone down into the avionics bay (accessible from the cockpit) with a large pair of boltcutters, and cut all the control cables.
Zlin246
For your information, no 146/RJ has ever crashed as a result of mechanical failure of any kind. Whatever you think you may have heard from your third cousin twice removed about the 146/RJ, it is probably apocryphal nonsense.
All aircraft have defects. Some more than others. The 146/RJ is remarkably clean in that regard. Being British, it can tolerate a lot of problems before it becomes unflyable.
I'm not British, BTW, but I recognise a bit of quality engineering when I see it...
Zlin246
For your information, no 146/RJ has ever crashed as a result of mechanical failure of any kind. Whatever you think you may have heard from your third cousin twice removed about the 146/RJ, it is probably apocryphal nonsense.
All aircraft have defects. Some more than others. The 146/RJ is remarkably clean in that regard. Being British, it can tolerate a lot of problems before it becomes unflyable.
I'm not British, BTW, but I recognise a bit of quality engineering when I see it...
For all those who knew before it was all cr*p... .
If an airline releases a statement, I think one can hardly fault a poster here to bring it to the forum. If the airline itself does not know what happens to their own airplanes, then they have to carry the consequences. Slamming those who post such things is way out of order IMHO.
Yes, it is embarrassing for all of us who believed the official LH statement and reported it in different forums. However, even after the downgrade, or particularly after it, it is still a "nice to know" item, as I for one have learnt a bit of something on how the flight controls are designed in the RJ's.
However, what I see in this forum is also a bit disturbing in another way.
I agree that with todays press, appearing to be the enemy no 1 to many here, there is a distinct problem in overdramatizing often trivial events (which I do not consider this one to be, despite the "downgrade"). However, if we want to reduce this place to posting the official reports 2 years after an incident, then why bother.
As I take it from the title of this section or even the forum name, there is a space here for rumours and incident reporting that is in our interest as participants of the aviation industry. Occasionally, that will mean that wrongly transmitted stuff gets here, albeit in good faith, like this one.
If the consensus here (if such a thing exists) is, that incidents may only be posted after the official reports are out, then of course a lot of threads here are indeed amiss and of no use. Then again, there are other places where professionals from the industry meet and exchange information.
Best regards
AN2 Driver.
If an airline releases a statement, I think one can hardly fault a poster here to bring it to the forum. If the airline itself does not know what happens to their own airplanes, then they have to carry the consequences. Slamming those who post such things is way out of order IMHO.
Yes, it is embarrassing for all of us who believed the official LH statement and reported it in different forums. However, even after the downgrade, or particularly after it, it is still a "nice to know" item, as I for one have learnt a bit of something on how the flight controls are designed in the RJ's.
However, what I see in this forum is also a bit disturbing in another way.
I agree that with todays press, appearing to be the enemy no 1 to many here, there is a distinct problem in overdramatizing often trivial events (which I do not consider this one to be, despite the "downgrade"). However, if we want to reduce this place to posting the official reports 2 years after an incident, then why bother.
As I take it from the title of this section or even the forum name, there is a space here for rumours and incident reporting that is in our interest as participants of the aviation industry. Occasionally, that will mean that wrongly transmitted stuff gets here, albeit in good faith, like this one.
If the consensus here (if such a thing exists) is, that incidents may only be posted after the official reports are out, then of course a lot of threads here are indeed amiss and of no use. Then again, there are other places where professionals from the industry meet and exchange information.
Best regards
AN2 Driver.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with most posters that the crew has done a terrific job.
However, on the RJ you can split the Ailerons and/or Elevator in a second and I would therefore not qualify this incident as a landing with complete loss of controls.
I would however state that the BA 146 / RJ is a piece of crap not only in the way it was designed and performes but most efinitely in the way the AOM / QRH are written.
I can hardly imagine how this thin ever got certified, but then again it was a political project to create jobs at all cost.
However, on the RJ you can split the Ailerons and/or Elevator in a second and I would therefore not qualify this incident as a landing with complete loss of controls.
I would however state that the BA 146 / RJ is a piece of crap not only in the way it was designed and performes but most efinitely in the way the AOM / QRH are written.
I can hardly imagine how this thin ever got certified, but then again it was a political project to create jobs at all cost.
CAP56,
if you read the last few messages, you'll find out that the controls were only lost temporarily, until they were separated, most probably as by the QRH or memory items out of the same of which you don't seem to be so fond of.
Apart from that, I guess an aircraft with the safety record of the RJ/146 series must have some things going for them. So far, as I recall, the only hull losses were induced either by flying into terrain or in one case by an in flight shootout, not really the airplanes fault.
For what it was designed, I always found it a pretty good machine and performer, such as operation into short fields, over short distances e.t.c. Lots of redundancy on these 4 engines and as was shown on the controls as well.
Best regards
AN2 Driver.
if you read the last few messages, you'll find out that the controls were only lost temporarily, until they were separated, most probably as by the QRH or memory items out of the same of which you don't seem to be so fond of.
Apart from that, I guess an aircraft with the safety record of the RJ/146 series must have some things going for them. So far, as I recall, the only hull losses were induced either by flying into terrain or in one case by an in flight shootout, not really the airplanes fault.
For what it was designed, I always found it a pretty good machine and performer, such as operation into short fields, over short distances e.t.c. Lots of redundancy on these 4 engines and as was shown on the controls as well.
Best regards
AN2 Driver.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
40 minutes
According to one of the Monday local rags. The crew landed the aircraft after 40 minutes and a "technically complicated" manoeuver.
What ever.
When I fly as a passenger, which happens occasionally ..... then I would say that, the crew did what they had to do and are, lets face it paid to do. Thats why they are there, not only to get the aircraft from A to B just like any high street bus driver, but also to get it back on the ground in the event of something like this.
What ever, they did their job correctly and full marks to them for that.
The 146/RJ is a good aircraft.
If it was an airbus, say an a320 etc, I am not so sure what the computers would have done, and I am also not sure if the pilots would have known what the computers would have done either! I am not an airbus driver, I tend to aviate the more traditional types.
Maybe someone who knows what they are talking about can tell us all what would happen if this happened in an airbus? Oh and please no airbus sales people who only say "the software is perfect and that is the pilots fault if anything goes wrong"
Yes, in general, we need pilots in the cockpit and a full over ride for automated systems.
What ever.
When I fly as a passenger, which happens occasionally ..... then I would say that, the crew did what they had to do and are, lets face it paid to do. Thats why they are there, not only to get the aircraft from A to B just like any high street bus driver, but also to get it back on the ground in the event of something like this.
What ever, they did their job correctly and full marks to them for that.
The 146/RJ is a good aircraft.
If it was an airbus, say an a320 etc, I am not so sure what the computers would have done, and I am also not sure if the pilots would have known what the computers would have done either! I am not an airbus driver, I tend to aviate the more traditional types.
Maybe someone who knows what they are talking about can tell us all what would happen if this happened in an airbus? Oh and please no airbus sales people who only say "the software is perfect and that is the pilots fault if anything goes wrong"
Yes, in general, we need pilots in the cockpit and a full over ride for automated systems.
UkEng
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: England
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the 320's anyway total loss of the electronic flight control systems leaves you with just the rudder and the horizontal stabilizer for control.
Have seen it flown and land like this in the sim but no sure if it's part of the normal sim training (anyone?)
Highly unlikely scenario unless you've lost both engines and your RAT though....
Apologies in advance for taking this thread a little off course
Have seen it flown and land like this in the sim but no sure if it's part of the normal sim training (anyone?)
Highly unlikely scenario unless you've lost both engines and your RAT though....
Apologies in advance for taking this thread a little off course
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Switzerland, Singapore
Posts: 1,309
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Complete loss of controls is not only a problem for FBW (fly by wire) aircraft (like Airbus, B777 etc), but generally for all modern big jets. They all do not have a direct connection of the control surfaces and the cockpit, like the DC-10/MD-11, all Boeings, old A300/310. Remember that all lost-of-control-accidents happened to non-FBW so far (was the A300 in Bagdad a 600er?). When you loose all hydraulics, you also loose control. A tube full of oil is much more vulnerable than a branch of small cables, which you can route anywhere through the fuselage.
On the Airbus we train this "complete loss of control" to a certain extend. You still need the emergency generator for electricity and one hydraulic system. You can steer then with rudders, elevator trim and asymetrical trust. It can work with good team work. We managed it on try number one.
When all electricity is lost, then it is not possible to continue. I sometimes think about NEMPs (nuclear electro-magnetic impulses). Those would be the end for a FBW aircraft. But also for the rest of the world...
Dani
On the Airbus we train this "complete loss of control" to a certain extend. You still need the emergency generator for electricity and one hydraulic system. You can steer then with rudders, elevator trim and asymetrical trust. It can work with good team work. We managed it on try number one.
When all electricity is lost, then it is not possible to continue. I sometimes think about NEMPs (nuclear electro-magnetic impulses). Those would be the end for a FBW aircraft. But also for the rest of the world...
Dani
CRAP56 Your view of drills and checklists reflects a common mistake that there will be an SOP for all situations. The BAe146/Avro RJ QRH has been revised several times during the last 20 years to incorporate lessons learned.
The Avro RJ control system is a very well designed and robust system, but even for an apparently simple system, it is impossible to provide a drill for every method of failure, particularly where human interaction is required. The crew has to first detect the failure and take initial action; fortunately, in the Avro the instinctive control break-out usually suffices. However, crew analysis is required to determine what control remains (which aileron, trim, roll spoiler is active if at all), what options are available, and what consequences may ensue (e.g. control regained below freezing level). Little of this activity can be captured in a QRH, thus the need for intelligent crew, exercising good airmanship to ensure continued safe flight. We should celebrate successes as shown by this incident and, as humans, learn lessons as necessary.
Yes, the QRH is being rewritten again to keep pace with modern training, crew experience levels, and human abilities and attitudes.
No, I have not detected any change in human error, or the human ability to criticise without first seeking the facts.
The Avro RJ control system is a very well designed and robust system, but even for an apparently simple system, it is impossible to provide a drill for every method of failure, particularly where human interaction is required. The crew has to first detect the failure and take initial action; fortunately, in the Avro the instinctive control break-out usually suffices. However, crew analysis is required to determine what control remains (which aileron, trim, roll spoiler is active if at all), what options are available, and what consequences may ensue (e.g. control regained below freezing level). Little of this activity can be captured in a QRH, thus the need for intelligent crew, exercising good airmanship to ensure continued safe flight. We should celebrate successes as shown by this incident and, as humans, learn lessons as necessary.
Yes, the QRH is being rewritten again to keep pace with modern training, crew experience levels, and human abilities and attitudes.
No, I have not detected any change in human error, or the human ability to criticise without first seeking the facts.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dani
If I recall correctly and it has been a while, the B 777 has cables directly linked to spoiler N° 4 and 11 and one cable directly to the elev.
Croqueteer
I have had a rating on the RJ and must say that it was a pleasant thing to fly, however as far as ergonomics is concerned it was a real nightmare. As many others, I got used to playing the piano.
As far as manuals and QRH is concerned is it obvious, to any pilot that has ever flown this aircraft, that the documents were not written or checked by a pilot but written by an engineer with his head in the clouds. The Boeing and Airbus manuals are by any standard far better organized and clear.
Anyway, BAe has chosen to do things their way and as such they made the transition to this Aircraft not as straightforward. All those who have gone trough the process will have build an experience that they would never have acquired otherwise.
I do not think that an aircraft that requires you to depressurize for landing in case of icing conditions when the APU is U/s can be called a great performer. And landing with V ref -7 kts feels a bit strange but that’s the way it is.
Not to mention the fact that you have to be carefull when doing the control checks in gusty winds to avoid the controls from disconnecting as per AOM.
Safetypee
If you have read any of my postings on SOP the you will know that I have stated "SOP are Standard Ops Procedures" and only that , they do not cover all situations.
Good job done by the crew but do not like the aircraft.
Safetypee
If you have read any of my postings on SOP the you will know that I have stated "SOP are Standard Ops Procedures" and only that , they do not cover all situations.
Good job done by the crew but do not like the aircraft.
If I recall correctly and it has been a while, the B 777 has cables directly linked to spoiler N° 4 and 11 and one cable directly to the elev.
Croqueteer
I have had a rating on the RJ and must say that it was a pleasant thing to fly, however as far as ergonomics is concerned it was a real nightmare. As many others, I got used to playing the piano.
As far as manuals and QRH is concerned is it obvious, to any pilot that has ever flown this aircraft, that the documents were not written or checked by a pilot but written by an engineer with his head in the clouds. The Boeing and Airbus manuals are by any standard far better organized and clear.
Anyway, BAe has chosen to do things their way and as such they made the transition to this Aircraft not as straightforward. All those who have gone trough the process will have build an experience that they would never have acquired otherwise.
I do not think that an aircraft that requires you to depressurize for landing in case of icing conditions when the APU is U/s can be called a great performer. And landing with V ref -7 kts feels a bit strange but that’s the way it is.
Not to mention the fact that you have to be carefull when doing the control checks in gusty winds to avoid the controls from disconnecting as per AOM.
Safetypee
Your view of drills and checklists reflects a common mistake that there will be an SOP for all situations. The BAe146/Avro RJ QRH has been revised several times during the last 20 years to incorporate lessons learned.
Good job done by the crew but do not like the aircraft.
Safetypee
Your view of drills and checklists reflects a common mistake that there will be an SOP for all situations. The BAe146/Avro RJ QRH has been revised several times during the last 20 years to incorporate lessons learned.
Good job done by the crew but do not like the aircraft.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and more cr*p....
I have had to read and re-read these postings several times to believe them..... and truly believe that the various responses to the original posting are depressing in the extreme.
Why are so many calling the crew heroes?
How can you possibly know that they did a superb job (other than getting down in one piece?)
They had a technical problem which seems to have been promptly resolved, resulting in an approach and landing with all engines and full control authority.
Dear God, there'll be suggestions for medals soon for those heroes who experience an invertor failure soon.
"Hero pilot struggled to control aircraft after 5 second loss of AC power!"
bm
Why are so many calling the crew heroes?
How can you possibly know that they did a superb job (other than getting down in one piece?)
They had a technical problem which seems to have been promptly resolved, resulting in an approach and landing with all engines and full control authority.
Dear God, there'll be suggestions for medals soon for those heroes who experience an invertor failure soon.
"Hero pilot struggled to control aircraft after 5 second loss of AC power!"
bm
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: london
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The split controls systems reminds me of the VC10.
In that case the control surfaces (although hydraulically powered) are actually linked to the control column by cables with the Captain's yoke controlling the ailerons and the FO's the spoilers (or vice versa - it was a while back, you know!). Then the two yokes are mechanically linked so that each driver can operate both controls.
Then if one set of cables stick, you separate the two yokes and whoever has roll authority gets to land the aeroplane. It's happened at least once, if not twice, withing the RAF fleet.
In that case the control surfaces (although hydraulically powered) are actually linked to the control column by cables with the Captain's yoke controlling the ailerons and the FO's the spoilers (or vice versa - it was a while back, you know!). Then the two yokes are mechanically linked so that each driver can operate both controls.
Then if one set of cables stick, you separate the two yokes and whoever has roll authority gets to land the aeroplane. It's happened at least once, if not twice, withing the RAF fleet.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BoeingMEL,
I, amongst others, did not have the benefit of hind-sight as you did when we made our initial laudatory responses following the initial post. The initial news item originated from Lufthansa's own press release, and airline spokespersons typically understate the significance of incidents and accidents. In that context, we, the initial posters, offered laudatory comments to the crew's heroic efforts. If the airline's own press release had been correct, then the crew DID a superb job, I would consider any crew capable of safely landing an aircraft with ALL flight controls inoperative as having accomplished a superlative job. Many have died in similar circumstances.
Later wisdom in hindsight comes in the knowledge that control reversion / control split enabled the crew to make a relatively normal landing following correct Abnormal / Emergency procedures.
I therefore 'downgrade' my comments to the crew to "Well Done!", and my comments to those pontificating with the benefit of hindsight to "Bad Show!"
I, amongst others, did not have the benefit of hind-sight as you did when we made our initial laudatory responses following the initial post. The initial news item originated from Lufthansa's own press release, and airline spokespersons typically understate the significance of incidents and accidents. In that context, we, the initial posters, offered laudatory comments to the crew's heroic efforts. If the airline's own press release had been correct, then the crew DID a superb job, I would consider any crew capable of safely landing an aircraft with ALL flight controls inoperative as having accomplished a superlative job. Many have died in similar circumstances.
Later wisdom in hindsight comes in the knowledge that control reversion / control split enabled the crew to make a relatively normal landing following correct Abnormal / Emergency procedures.
I therefore 'downgrade' my comments to the crew to "Well Done!", and my comments to those pontificating with the benefit of hindsight to "Bad Show!"
