Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Airbus crash/training flight

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Airbus crash/training flight

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th January 2009 | 19:19
  #441 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
From: UK
Smilin Ed

Quite possible. Only commenting on info I have from friends I have who have been AB trained Just a thought!

Rgds

CL747
Centreline747 is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 19:28
  #442 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 420
Likes: 3
From: In the Old Folks' Home
Elevator Authority

It's hard to understand why there would insufficient elevator authority to counter pitching moments caused by a power increase/decrease.

In any case we still need to know which came first, the pitch up or the power increase. Until we do, we cannot speculate further on the cause.
Smilin_Ed is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 21:35
  #443 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
Unless the aircraft was already being flown in direct law there's no reason the FBW shouldn't have coped with any rapid increase in thrust. In normal operation it's quite feasible to apply TOGA thrust rapidly and have the aircraft continue down the ILS path unperturbed. Were the aircraft deliberately placed in direct law then the actions taken would most probably have been verbalised and recorded on the CVR, along with the associated ECAM warning chimes. Even if the aircraft ended up in the unusual attitude variation of normal law the crew should still have had full control authority to move the surfaces, even if they had insufficient airspeed to execute a manouevre. The comparisons with the well documented A300/A310 stall events don't tell us anything about this mystifying incident.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 21:37
  #444 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 202
Likes: 50
From: UK
QAR?

As ANZ want a full recovery of the debris, would there be any chance of retrieving the QAR (if fitted)? Is it possible for QAR data to survive an accident like this one?
John Marsh is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 22:44
  #445 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
From: Not here
Talking to 320 drivers it seems like the planes like making very random decisions. Can anyone else verify that they have had over 50 incidents of computer brain fart?
Scissorlink is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 23:14
  #446 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,246
Likes: 202
From: Here and there
Would 50 incidents of computer brain fart be at all significant over however many millions of hours they've flown?
AerocatS2A is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 23:20
  #447 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: Strategic hamlet
I'm surprised that no one here suggested faulty maintenance in Perpignan may have caused the crash, I remembered a few years ago LH Technik screwed up and reversed the roll channel of the captain's sidestick, and the copilot had to take over.
Massey1Bravo is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 23:27
  #448 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,246
Likes: 202
From: Here and there
I'm betting you haven't read all 23 pages of this thread right? The control reversal incident has been mentioned.
AerocatS2A is offline  
Reply
Old 18th January 2009 | 23:54
  #449 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 420
Likes: 3
From: In the Old Folks' Home
It Only Takes One

Would 50 incidents of computer brain fart be at all significant over however many millions of hours they've flown?

It only takes one to cause a crash.
Smilin_Ed is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 00:20
  #450 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,246
Likes: 202
From: Here and there
It only takes one to cause a crash.
True, but can you deduce from 50 computer incidents over the current life of the model to indicate that A320s "like making very random decisions"?
AerocatS2A is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 03:13
  #451 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
From: Not here
The most common words said in an Airbus cockpit

"Whats it doing now????"
Scissorlink is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 05:30
  #452 (permalink)  

Metrosexual
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
From: Enroute
The most common words said in an Airbus cockpit

"Whats it doing now????"
You mean the most often used cliche about Airbus.
Jet_A_Knight is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 07:16
  #453 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 556
Likes: 1
From: Germany
Originally Posted by Scissorlink
The most common words said in an Airbus cockpit

"Whats it doing now????"
Mode confusion is indeed one of the most common problems in human/machine-interaction in modern glass-cockpit airliners, but it is common to all types and manufacturers.

I've never heard of the side-stick-driven FBW system unique to airbus to be a cause for confusion.


Bernd
bsieker is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 07:50
  #454 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 575
Likes: 7
This point may well have been made earlier & I have never operated any type of Airbus aircraft, so apologies here.
However as I understand, it is being fairly strongly sugested in some quarters, that in this incident there was a sudden & very excessive pitch up. Was this not exactly what happened a few months ago to the Airbus over North West Australia? Not making any point at all, but might this be food for thought?
Nice to see that the Crew Members who were recovered, have been released & will shortly return home for the last time. I do hope also, that at some stage in the near future, the final two Crew presently unaccounted for, will also be able to make the same journey. RIP
kaikohe76 is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 08:02
  #455 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
From: southwest
There is only one body still missing.
Dysag is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 08:27
  #456 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Auckland
I'll put my neck on the block and suggest the crew switched from auto pilot to manual control and the dramas started from there.. I won't have to wait long to see if I lose my head....
Pedroski is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 08:54
  #457 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
The autopilot is never in control of an Airbus, it just does what you tell it (rightly or wrongly) to do. Disconnecting the autopilot should never lead to an extreme out-of-trim condition.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 09:34
  #458 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
From: Choroni, sometimes
Mode confusion is indeed one of the most common problems in human/machine-interaction in modern glass-cockpit airliners, but it is common to all types and manufacturers.
It's not only mode confusion. It's also known or unknown software bugs.

Can you imagine the speed tape (VLS) is going down instead of up if you bank the aircraft (known software-bug on A300) or the FMS guided Autothrust pulls suddenly the speed back in cruise flight to achieve Vapp, but stops at green dot (protection), nobody knows why.....
hetfield is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 09:35
  #459 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Auckland
seamless...right... I've had 747-400's go-around on more than one ocassion on short final because of auto-pilot issues.. I'm not anti Airbus.
I do have hold some scepticism on the human v computer handshake thing..
Pedroski is offline  
Reply
Old 19th January 2009 | 09:52
  #460 (permalink)  
ZbV
 
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
From: Samsonite
I've flown the 727, 737, 747 and 767. Some 4 months ago I converted to the narrowbody Airbus fleet. I am a convert in more ways than one. The A318, A319, A320, A321 are excellent aircraft. Much misunderstood by those that do not have training on these or have not flown them. I had a lot of prejudice myself for the systems. But the training, both ground, simulator and FAM (Line Training) flights have alleviated most of my concerns. There are still a few things that I don't like such as the lack of tactile feedback from thrust levers as these don't move with thrust changes nor does the side stick when the other pilot makes inputs.

The aircraft requires a different type of scan from "Conventional" aircraft with FMA (Flight Mode Annunciation) being extrmely important and not reading it after selections on the FCU (Boeing MCP) is a sure way to get into trouble. Another way to get into problems is to forget to think and rely solely on the FMCG (FMS) functions for descent calculations as well as optimum altitudes. I still think to myself and wont stop doing it. The aircraft systems are as good as the info they are provided. Remember BS in BS out.

Other than that the aircraft is a delight to hand fly and performs exceedingly well.

I am yet to ask the question "Whats it doing now" but I am sure it will come I was told that someone telling me that they know Airbus in and out are either mad or lie or both. There is no doubt about the aircraft providing tons of information. It is up to the pilot to disseminate it.
JJflyer is offline  
Reply


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.