Upset Recovery
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: manchester
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upset Recovery
Can anyone tell me why the A330 doesnt return to normal law after an upset recovery? is it to give more direct control to the pilot? many thanks, Pudd.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know....
Don't know about the 330, but the 320 series goes into Abnormal law. Once recovered, it reverts to Alternate Law.....and stays there for the rest of the flight....even after gear extension for landing. (As far as I know, this is the only exception of Alternate Law NOT going into Direct Law with gear extension.)
I assume the 330 is the same....but, I have no idea.
Fly Safe,
PantLoad
I assume the 330 is the same....but, I have no idea.
Fly Safe,
PantLoad
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Around the world.
Age: 42
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good question, I would like to know the same myself as to why...
To add another question (sorry), the FI article about upset recovery training in a jet transport got me thinking, are there any good resources on unusual attitude recovery in large jets. This is an area I have had zero training on(certainly in the sim) since becoming an airline pilot both with a European flag carrier and a UK major, perhaps I slipped through the cracks or perhaps none was in the syllabus. I doubt light aircraft techniques transfer over that well to large jets.
My personal plan at altitude was to roll to the nearest horizon using no rudder then pitch to 2.5 degrees and thrust as required.
Cheers
To add another question (sorry), the FI article about upset recovery training in a jet transport got me thinking, are there any good resources on unusual attitude recovery in large jets. This is an area I have had zero training on(certainly in the sim) since becoming an airline pilot both with a European flag carrier and a UK major, perhaps I slipped through the cracks or perhaps none was in the syllabus. I doubt light aircraft techniques transfer over that well to large jets.
My personal plan at altitude was to roll to the nearest horizon using no rudder then pitch to 2.5 degrees and thrust as required.
Cheers
Exceptionally good series of video lectures by American Airlines training covering this. Provokes lots of discussion and the last segment covers crossover handling - fascinating stuff.
Sun worshipper
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is an area I have had zero training on(certainly in the sim) since becoming an airline pilot both with a European flag carrier and a UK major, perhaps I slipped through the cracks or perhaps none was in the syllabus. I doubt light aircraft techniques transfer over that well to large jets.
My personal plan at altitude was to roll to the nearest horizon using no rudder then pitch to 2.5 degrees and thrust as required.
My personal plan at altitude was to roll to the nearest horizon using no rudder then pitch to 2.5 degrees and thrust as required.
When I was young, aerobatics were part of the training and later, we had loads of "unusual attitudes" exercises in the air ( not the sim, which cannot demonstrate these out-of-smooth flights).
But here is a nice paper published some time ago by flight Safety and available on "Smart Cockpit".
It's called "LOSS OF CONTROL : RETURNING FROM BEYOND THE ENVELOPE"
You'll see that aircraft techniques are quite universal
The article is
here
Cheers
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just started an A320 rating and came across this today incidently. My take on the subject is that there would've been an unprecedented amount of turbulence or similar for the a/c to be forced out of pitch/bank/speed limits and thus the a/c would very quickly find itself in a situation which Normal Law should've protected against, i.e. Abnormal Law. It would've been sensed that flight controls were not responsible for the upset and therefore it would be wise to assume that the general area in which the a/c is flying in could result in the same thing happening again. Therefore Airbus made the decision to not afford any protections in this situation as these protections against external forces could overstress the aircraft.
That's my understanding. The philosophy is that something must have happened to put you in that situation and reverting to alternate law gives you some protection if the cause of the upset is not fully determined.
Lemurian. Thanks for that link. I knew the article existed but didn't know where. It is an area of training which is neglected. It's something we used to practice in the RAF a lot, but we had the aircraft and the resources and it was something we used to drum into the students. The upset recovery was and needed to be automatic and swift in it's application. However, it's quite possible these days for someone to go through the training system and not be exposed to the techniques required. I did a simulator not long ago where an upset was introduced. I was quite suprised at the response of the PF. His recovery was far from effective and would have put us in an unviable position if it had been for real. Having said that, the Airbus reconfiguration control laws give you a lot of portection.
Jack. Hi again, how's it going? Those videos are good, but the one regarding crossover has lost a bit of favour since the American A300 accident at JFK in early 2002. The pilot in the AA advocates agressive use of the rudder to achive crossover control, but it seems that's what the A300 crew were trying to do when they overloaded the fin and broke it off.
Lemurian. Thanks for that link. I knew the article existed but didn't know where. It is an area of training which is neglected. It's something we used to practice in the RAF a lot, but we had the aircraft and the resources and it was something we used to drum into the students. The upset recovery was and needed to be automatic and swift in it's application. However, it's quite possible these days for someone to go through the training system and not be exposed to the techniques required. I did a simulator not long ago where an upset was introduced. I was quite suprised at the response of the PF. His recovery was far from effective and would have put us in an unviable position if it had been for real. Having said that, the Airbus reconfiguration control laws give you a lot of portection.
Jack. Hi again, how's it going? Those videos are good, but the one regarding crossover has lost a bit of favour since the American A300 accident at JFK in early 2002. The pilot in the AA advocates agressive use of the rudder to achive crossover control, but it seems that's what the A300 crew were trying to do when they overloaded the fin and broke it off.
are there any good resources on unusual attitude recovery in large jets.
you may take a look at the training material available here.
An aviation industry working group — headed by representatives of Airbus, The Boeing Co. and Flight Safety Foundation — in November 2008 introduced the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid, Revision 2, which includes a new supplement called “High Altitude Operations: Supplement #1 to the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid.” The first version of the training aid was published in 1998, and Revision 1 was published in August 2004.
aerolearner
Dan W - Hi to you, nicely retired and literally on the beach, thank you!!
Re. the crossover video, and, indeed, the others in that series, My INITIAL impression was that 'Van' was advocating 'aggressive' rudder inputs but the more times I watched it, the more I noted the caveats about inputs being conditional. It seems to me that not being aware of common and standard structural limitations vis-a-vis control inputs would lead to problems anyway. Although the crossover segment was part of the package, it's worth noting that the sequences were provided by the Boeing Test Flight people.
I still rate the series as one of the best teaching videos I came across in my time in aviation.
Re. the crossover video, and, indeed, the others in that series, My INITIAL impression was that 'Van' was advocating 'aggressive' rudder inputs but the more times I watched it, the more I noted the caveats about inputs being conditional. It seems to me that not being aware of common and standard structural limitations vis-a-vis control inputs would lead to problems anyway. Although the crossover segment was part of the package, it's worth noting that the sequences were provided by the Boeing Test Flight people.
I still rate the series as one of the best teaching videos I came across in my time in aviation.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 1973 copy of D.P.Davies' "Handling The Big Jets" has six pages of excellent advice on recovery from upsets - including spins and inverted dives! It is general and not type-specific, and I assume later editions will be just as useful.
