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


Old 7th Jun 2009, 07:37
  #421 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 51
Posts: 1,687
@Windsheer: As I have just been schooled on this....

The current A330 models have an electronic system that uses independent sensors for altitude and airpseed via the pressure pipes (assuming #2 or #3) already brought into the aircraft. Sharing pipes is a common practice.

The ADI or artificial horizon is a self-contained l a s e r ring gyro.

Previous A330's (and A320 series) used the classic arrangement of the altitude & airspeed provided by actual needle pointing pressure actuated gauges, while still using the shared piping arrangement and the ADI being an electric gyro.

In both cases, we also have a compass, lit by electricity internally or flashlight if need be...
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 07:43
  #422 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 399 this starting to sound more and more like the Perpignan A320 accident back in Nov...?
slamer. is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 07:54
  #423 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: southwest
Age: 74
Posts: 287

The ETOPs minimum fuel requirements you describe are mainly to ensure sufficient fuel is carried to divert to the en-route alternate at 10000ft and with one engine inop. This calculation is compared to the normal fuel needed to see if extra has to be loaded.

The ETOPs minimum fuel calc normally only requires extra fuel if the distance to the en-route alternate is very long: consistent with a 180-minutes from alternate rule.

While AF447 was an ETOPs flight, it was not planned to ever be more than 120 mins from an alternate and it's highly unlikely that extra fuel was needed to satisfy ETOPS requirements.

I don't believe for a moment that the failure to deviate around the wx was fuel related.

Last edited by Dysag; 7th Jun 2009 at 08:23.
Dysag is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:02
  #424 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Member of the 32% club.
Posts: 1,843

The Airbus family are easy to fly because.....the computers fly them. As pilots we simply point them where we want to go a then can literally let go of the stick as the computers auto trim out thrust changes, config changes and speed changes. I have no doubt my manual flying skills have declined since conversion on to type, we even leave the auto throttle in until it tells us to "Retard" no thinking required.

Airbus automatics make hamfisted pilots look good. If Airbus developed a Cessna 152 that had auto trim and auto thrust the PPL could be reduced to a 5 hour course because no pilot would actually have to know how to fly an aeroplane.

Modern automation on the flight deck severely erodes basic flying skills. I truly hope this wasn't a factor in the loss of the AF A330.
Airbrake is online now  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:03
  #425 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: California
Age: 57
Posts: 255
Airbus takes control away from the pilots.
Yet pilots are still the number one cause of aircraft accidents.

To all things, a balancing act.
TonyWilliams is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:10
  #426 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 49
ETOPS fuel is often required when the ETOPS zone is at the end of your flight, no need to develop further as it will be anyway deleted. I canít imagine that fuel saving was an issue for AF447ícaptain.
Celestar is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:24
  #427 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: madrid
Age: 40
Posts: 23
well said Tony.

The automatics make life easier but the failure states on a BUS are far more complicated and less intuitive than on a Boeing.

Going back to stick and rudded as the 'cure all' is naive at best.

better training (not the cheapest) more redundancy (not necessarily the most modern systems) and mandatory loft training for pilots based on ACTUAL fatal event like this and how to cope should be the minimum going forward.

having flown most of the big manufacturers I'd still prefer the BUS for failures like EFATO and approach failures and day to day ops - but the Boeing for crosswinds, turbulence and 'significant multiple failures.

At 2 in the morning at that altitude, in that weather faced with a rapid sequence of failures (if thats what happened) i'm not sure how any aircraft would have come out of it better. luck aswell as skill has a disproportionate influence.
cartmans lovechild is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:34
  #428 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Around the corner
Posts: 172
Hi guys, I am an airbus captain with about 3000 hours on type. I have never been tought unusual attitude recovery in the sim. I was told, that you don't have to have this training, because the airbus has so many protections, that you don't need this skill (sounds very similar about the reasoning behind Titanic, but lets forget about this).
Are you, Boeing guys, tought unusual attitude recovery from upsets in the sims?
PBY is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:40
  #429 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Morten Harkett, Dorset
Age: 96
Posts: 53
I agree.

In a lot of respects a more "hands on" type of plane is better, not least that the pilot actually has to fly the thing!

However, you can't stand in the way of progress and increased automation is the way it will go..

Whilst it's conceivable that "fly by wire" automation *may* have contributed to this accident, how many crashes has it prevented in the past? How many planes would have crashed were it not for the 'puter saying "You ca n't do that, mate"..?
barrymung is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:46
  #430 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: France
Posts: 90
Quote from the head of the French met office -

"If you look at the three or four days surrounding the accident, there was more intense development before and after than on the night of the flight itself," he says, adding that at 02:15UTC the growth phase of the local cumulonimbus had already passed and the clouds were in the "lower end" of their cycle.

"We cannot conclude that this situation was exceptional," he says. "There was no unusual intensity or strength."

Bye, Barry
barrymah is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:52
  #431 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: MC in three
Posts: 10

Are you, Boeing guys, tought unusual attitude recovery from upsets in the sims?
1sloth is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:53
  #432 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 142

On all the Boeing type rating courses I did, we went through unusual attitudes and recovery. This was not part of the Airbus Toulouse curriculum as I recall, but the instructor I had offered a good set of unusual attitudes in direct law.
747JJ is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 08:58
  #433 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: east of 10į west
Age: 58
Posts: 104
France Meteo..

"we can't say there was anything exceptional".. ( in regards to weather)

empty & stupid statement..

You do not need any "exceptional convective activity" for any CB to be a danger to any airplane..
falconer1 is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:07
  #434 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: France
Posts: 90
'empty and stupid' - if taken out of context; he said -

"We cannot conclude that this situation was exceptional," he says. "There was no unusual intensity or strength."

As the head of a met offcie one has to assume he knows about usual and unusual in the context of weather.

OTOH, he is only looking at the data after the event; it is always probable that the momentary situation was different.

As has been said many times on this thread and other related threads, we are in a low/no information zone; the comment on the met situation is at least based on an analysis of the situation at the time and place.

Bye, Barry
barrymah is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:07
  #435 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 12
It seems more and more likely that the AF crew on that fateful night were routinely picking their way around CB cells in the ITCZ, like all airline pilots do on a regular basis, when they unknowingly flew through an air mass that contained enough ice particles to disable all pitot probes.
The resulting effects of such failure at high altitude, as documented earlier in the thread, are quite dramatic on the flight instruments and may have led to a rapid loss of control of the aeroplane.
Since the crew primary task then, is to try to regain control before anything else gets done, it is not surprising that distress calls were never made.
Wytnucls is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:11
  #436 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: below the clouds
Posts: 6
4PW's - spot on.

Slammer - good point but I would caution a no to that. Maybe the only similarity is airbus?
setandcontact is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:25
  #437 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 94
What happens if the weight (ZFW) entered in the FMC is lower than the actual weight of the airplane? Wouldn't there be a difference then between real and calculated "coffin corner"? (I'm not a pilot)

Last edited by Interflug; 7th Jun 2009 at 09:38.
Interflug is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:40
  #438 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Home
Posts: 101
bodies found

Two bodies and more debris found by searchers:

Brazil's air force recovered two bodies and debris from an Air France jetliner that came down over the Atlantic on June 1 with 228 people on board, a spokesman said.

"We confirm the recovery from the water debris and bodies from the Air France plane," Colonel Jorge Amaral told reporters in the northeastern city of Recife.

He said the two bodies, the first recovered from the downed flight, were those of men.

A plane seat, a nylon backpack containing a computer and a leather briefcase with an Air France ticket inside were the first objects plucked from the sea, he said.

The discovery took place 450km northeast of Brazil's Atlantic archipelago of Fernando de Noronha, itself 370km from the mainland.

Amaral said the blue plane seat has a serial number on it and Air France is checking to confirm that it came from its downed flight 447, which was travelling from Rio de Janeiro to Paris last Monday.

Amaral said the seat was the first item recovered.

The first body was then sighted by a navy vessel and was recovered 20 minuted later by the ship's crew.

The last item recovered so far was the backpack, he said.
YoDawg is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:42
  #439 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Dodoland
Age: 58
Posts: 69
ZFW mistake

You will end up immediately with a big discrepancy in the fuel required on INIT2 page and dest fuel on FLT PLAN page compared to your SITA figures.
dessas is offline  
Old 7th Jun 2009, 09:53
  #440 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 72
Posts: 1,016
@Safety Concerns
Once again 23 of the 24 messages can be traced back to air data.
I must be a bit slow - can you please explain how air data disagreement can lead to the IR portion of the ADIRU failing? The ADR can be switched off leaving the IR running - but not vice versa.
Thanks, TP
TyroPicard is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.