Airbus crash/training flight
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and at the maintenance shop they installed the wrong plug and the cables were switched too I think.
1 twisted pair colours "opposite" to the rest of the connector an a batch of aircraft that the drawing update never got to on the production line..........
They changed a whole connector insert for a bent pin on large multi pin rack connector, most leckys I know would have quizzed that one straight away due to the amount of disturbance even one for one...
1 twisted pair colours "opposite" to the rest of the connector an a batch of aircraft that the drawing update never got to on the production line..........
They changed a whole connector insert for a bent pin on large multi pin rack connector, most leckys I know would have quizzed that one straight away due to the amount of disturbance even one for one...
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 556
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine3firehandle....
As long ago as 1992 it was SOP on the Airbus family to carry out full/free control movement and visually check that the control surfaces were moving in the correct sense on the FCTRL system page. Additionally on reaching each extreme of movement you waited 2 seconds for an ECAM warning of control malfunction. This was (and still is) carried out by both pilots in turn.
As the handling pilot's sidestick was cross wired no ECAM warning would have sounded because data to the SDAC indicated that control movement was as commanded. The non-handling pilot in the Lufthansa incident could not possibly have monitored the control check properly as otherwise he would have seen the ailerons move in the incorrect sense.
OK we are all human.... but increasingly now we are the last line of defence. If we get it wrong then we all die.
As long ago as 1992 it was SOP on the Airbus family to carry out full/free control movement and visually check that the control surfaces were moving in the correct sense on the FCTRL system page. Additionally on reaching each extreme of movement you waited 2 seconds for an ECAM warning of control malfunction. This was (and still is) carried out by both pilots in turn.
As the handling pilot's sidestick was cross wired no ECAM warning would have sounded because data to the SDAC indicated that control movement was as commanded. The non-handling pilot in the Lufthansa incident could not possibly have monitored the control check properly as otherwise he would have seen the ailerons move in the incorrect sense.
OK we are all human.... but increasingly now we are the last line of defence. If we get it wrong then we all die.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Additionally on reaching each extreme of movement you waited 2 seconds for an ECAM warning of control malfunction
I do not believe the 2s is required any more - we certainly don't emphaise it although I do it - change in software or something...
NoD
There was indeed a flight warning computer software change that sped up the system's ability to sense a control malfunction during the control check.
And before anyone lays it on the LH F/O, who was indeed the last line of defense in a system where many errors led up to the incident, you might want to ask yourself if you have ever looked at something and saw you expected to see, only to later realize that what you saw and what was really there were two different things. It's called "expectation bias", and it's been cited as a factor in several incidents and accidents. Prior to the LH incident, none of us who flew Airbus FBW aircraft were aware that any such problem was possible, but our senses were certainly piqued once we learned what had happened that day.
And before anyone lays it on the LH F/O, who was indeed the last line of defense in a system where many errors led up to the incident, you might want to ask yourself if you have ever looked at something and saw you expected to see, only to later realize that what you saw and what was really there were two different things. It's called "expectation bias", and it's been cited as a factor in several incidents and accidents. Prior to the LH incident, none of us who flew Airbus FBW aircraft were aware that any such problem was possible, but our senses were certainly piqued once we learned what had happened that day.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEA press release
Bienvenue sur le site du Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses
summary " data from CVR and FDR have been recovered at Honeywell in Seattle in presence of BEA and NTSB people. BEA is now going to exploit these data"
Hope we will soon have news now.
summary " data from CVR and FDR have been recovered at Honeywell in Seattle in presence of BEA and NTSB people. BEA is now going to exploit these data"
Hope we will soon have news now.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEA indicates this day, that the FDR datas have been retrieved by honeywell, and will now be analyzed. We should have some sort of answer very soon, and be able to stop all this speculation.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Belgique wasn't far out when he said at this link:
Looking good for undetected/unrecognized flap asymmetry upon extension for the approach?
.
How does the A320's systems cope with that (or for that matter, with asymm spoiler extension - upon spoilers being armed?)
.
How does the A320's systems cope with that (or for that matter, with asymm spoiler extension - upon spoilers being armed?)
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From RTFM link on "A320 handling difficulties following flap replacement"
... Tells how much information is LOST on fbw Airbus flight deck …
At first the FO attributed the undemanded roll to crosswind and applied left sidestick but the aircraft continued to roll to the right and he had to apply full left sidestick to contain the undemanded roll.
Meanwhile the commander uttered words to the effect that the FO should take action to correct the situation
Meanwhile the commander uttered words to the effect that the FO should take action to correct the situation
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere out there...
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brace yourselves for a FACTUAL post:
"In agreement with the Perpignan State Prosecutor, the BEA is releasing
the following information on the accident that occurred on 27 November
2008 to the Airbus A320 registered D-AXLA.
After the recovery of the flight recorders, it appeared that the data
that could have been recorded could be downloaded only by using the
facilities available at Honeywell, the manufacturer of these recorders,
in Seattle (United States).
The work undertaken in the recorder manufacturer's laboratories, with
the participation of specialized investigators from the BEA and the
NTSB, did in fact make it possible to recover the data from memory
cards of the two recorders, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and the
Flight Data Recorder (FDR). All the work was undertaken in the presence
of a senior French Police officer, in the context of an International
Judicial Commission.
The BEA will now begin analyzing this data, in parallel with the
operations undertaken within the framework of the judicial inquiry."
"In agreement with the Perpignan State Prosecutor, the BEA is releasing
the following information on the accident that occurred on 27 November
2008 to the Airbus A320 registered D-AXLA.
After the recovery of the flight recorders, it appeared that the data
that could have been recorded could be downloaded only by using the
facilities available at Honeywell, the manufacturer of these recorders,
in Seattle (United States).
The work undertaken in the recorder manufacturer's laboratories, with
the participation of specialized investigators from the BEA and the
NTSB, did in fact make it possible to recover the data from memory
cards of the two recorders, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and the
Flight Data Recorder (FDR). All the work was undertaken in the presence
of a senior French Police officer, in the context of an International
Judicial Commission.
The BEA will now begin analyzing this data, in parallel with the
operations undertaken within the framework of the judicial inquiry."
"In agreement with the Perpignan State Prosecutor, the BEA is releasing
the following information on the accident that occurred on 27 November
2008 to the Airbus A320 registered D-AXLA.
After the recovery of the flight recorders, it appeared that the data
that could have been recorded could be downloaded only by using the
facilities available at Honeywell, the manufacturer of these recorders,
in Seattle (United States).
The work undertaken in the recorder manufacturer's laboratories, with
the participation of specialized investigators from the BEA and the
NTSB, did in fact make it possible to recover the data from memory
cards of the two recorders, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and the
Flight Data Recorder (FDR). All the work was undertaken in the presence
of a senior French Police officer, in the context of an International
Judicial Commission.
The BEA will now begin analyzing this data, in parallel with the
operations undertaken within the framework of the judicial inquiry."
"In agreement with the Perpignan State Prosecutor, the BEA is releasing
the following information on the accident that occurred on 27 November
2008 to the Airbus A320 registered D-AXLA.
After the recovery of the flight recorders, it appeared that the data
that could have been recorded could be downloaded only by using the
facilities available at Honeywell, the manufacturer of these recorders,
in Seattle (United States).
The work undertaken in the recorder manufacturer's laboratories, with
the participation of specialized investigators from the BEA and the
NTSB, did in fact make it possible to recover the data from memory
cards of the two recorders, the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and the
Flight Data Recorder (FDR). All the work was undertaken in the presence
of a senior French Police officer, in the context of an International
Judicial Commission.
The BEA will now begin analyzing this data, in parallel with the
operations undertaken within the framework of the judicial inquiry."
Werner,
I have PM`d you with a much fuller explaination of my position. The ECAM warning you talk about came from the Excalibar post maintenance spoiler incident where the spoilers on one wing were de-activated full up. Again, I say that a conscientious comfirmation of the actual displayed flight control surface deflection related to the sidestick movement will always correctly detect any faults. (indeed I once taxyied back in on a B747 when an outboard aileron failed to unlock - as displayed by the SPI)
The faulty CM1 sidestick could only have displayed a) fully correct deflection b) full/partial incorrect deflection or c) no deflection.
In other words a two in three chance of detecting the fault. These check must be done slowly and methodically to avoid `seeing what we expect to see`!!
However you try to `spin` it - the essential control check was not satisfactorily carried out.
I have PM`d you with a much fuller explaination of my position. The ECAM warning you talk about came from the Excalibar post maintenance spoiler incident where the spoilers on one wing were de-activated full up. Again, I say that a conscientious comfirmation of the actual displayed flight control surface deflection related to the sidestick movement will always correctly detect any faults. (indeed I once taxyied back in on a B747 when an outboard aileron failed to unlock - as displayed by the SPI)
The faulty CM1 sidestick could only have displayed a) fully correct deflection b) full/partial incorrect deflection or c) no deflection.
In other words a two in three chance of detecting the fault. These check must be done slowly and methodically to avoid `seeing what we expect to see`!!
However you try to `spin` it - the essential control check was not satisfactorily carried out.
After the recovery of the flight recorders, it appeared that the data
that could have been recorded could be downloaded only by using the
facilities available at Honeywell, the manufacturer of these recorders,
in Seattle (United States)
that could have been recorded could be downloaded only by using the
facilities available at Honeywell, the manufacturer of these recorders,
in Seattle (United States)
Physical damage ? Data corruption ?
Really mysterious...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by atakacs
Interesting info but doesn't tell why the admittedly well equipped BEA could not read those recorders from a fairly modern Airbus...
Physical damage ? Data corruption ?
Really mysterious...
Physical damage ? Data corruption ?
Really mysterious...
Trust me, there's nothing mysterious about it.
Once you have to go into the innards, you really go on tiptoe.
The BEA press release said they had to read the memory boards. Sounds already as if they were lucky and did not have to try and read each chip....
Now, one) reading a memory board from a specific manufacturer needs a fair amount of hardware and software,which BEA would not necessarily have in place, and two) the bits and bytes from the memories are meaningless, until you have the full decoding software to translate them to the actual parameters being recorded, which can also vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.
CJ
ChristiaanJ
Can you really believe that the BEA doesn't have the necessary equipment to read the recorders of an A320, whoever being the hardware manufacturer (and Honeywell is certainly not the most exotic supplier of such devices...) ?! If it's really the case they can very well close shop and subcontract all their investigations to the NTSB....
Something fairly unusual happened here. I guess it will be reported eventually but in the meantime I'm still bemused.
Can you really believe that the BEA doesn't have the necessary equipment to read the recorders of an A320, whoever being the hardware manufacturer (and Honeywell is certainly not the most exotic supplier of such devices...) ?! If it's really the case they can very well close shop and subcontract all their investigations to the NTSB....
Something fairly unusual happened here. I guess it will be reported eventually but in the meantime I'm still bemused.
Does anyone have an idea about how much the necessary hardware and software to read every possible manufacturer´s black boxes would cost? Why would the French board invest in something which will most likely be needed once in, say, 20 years when they know the manufacturer has the equipment in place and also people who have been trained to use it? Furthermore, depending on the extent of damage to the boxes, it may be safer to send them to the manufacturer anyway?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
atakacs,
Are you an avionics/electronics engineer?
If you are, I can't see your point.
It's not the BEAs job to keep a huge store of breakout boxes, schematic diagrams, test specifications, ATE software, etc. etc. for every single board used in every single FDR in every single aircraft flying in French airspace....
If you are not, Finn47 already has answered most of your question.
CJ
Are you an avionics/electronics engineer?
If you are, I can't see your point.
It's not the BEAs job to keep a huge store of breakout boxes, schematic diagrams, test specifications, ATE software, etc. etc. for every single board used in every single FDR in every single aircraft flying in French airspace....
If you are not, Finn47 already has answered most of your question.
CJ
Does anyone have an idea about how much the necessary hardware and software to read every possible manufacturer´s black boxes would cost?
So how many manufacturers are actually supplying Airbus for the A320 FDR ? I might be wrong (I am an electronic engineer but not in that field) but I would be very surprised that there would be more than half a dozen. Would it be a Tupolev or some exotic airframe the story would be obviously different, but the A320 ?!
Why would the French board invest in something which will most likely be needed once in, say, 20 years when they know the manufacturer has the equipment in place and also people who have been trained to use it?
Anyway we should hear more factual information shortly.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX USA
Age: 62
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This device reads all Honeywell solid state recorders. I would bet other manufacturers offer similar data access devices for airlines to use.
Recorder Test and Ground Support Equipment (GSE) - Honeywell Aerospace
Recorder Test and Ground Support Equipment (GSE) - Honeywell Aerospace
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys... there's a lot of difference between reading a FDR / CVR in "normal circs", and one (as here) apparently damaged / not readable.
The manufacturer will no doubt have tools to dismantle / read the memory chips way beyond the average "reader" which seems, in this case, not to have worked.
Unless of course, for post maint / non public transport / whatever reasons they were not functioning at all on this flight
NoD
The manufacturer will no doubt have tools to dismantle / read the memory chips way beyond the average "reader" which seems, in this case, not to have worked.
Unless of course, for post maint / non public transport / whatever reasons they were not functioning at all on this flight
NoD
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nigel,
It would seem it was working, since they now have downloaded the basic contents at Honeywell's.
But otherwise you're right. Once you're dealing with an FDR that has been through a water impact and picked up from 40m under water, it's somewhat rare to be able to just plug it in and read it out....
The BEA is highly competent.... but they're not feckin' magicians.
CJ
It would seem it was working, since they now have downloaded the basic contents at Honeywell's.
But otherwise you're right. Once you're dealing with an FDR that has been through a water impact and picked up from 40m under water, it's somewhat rare to be able to just plug it in and read it out....
The BEA is highly competent.... but they're not feckin' magicians.
CJ