AF447 wreckage found
infrequentlflyer789;
No, you are not.
It has been almost three decades now, under a neoliberal political economy that the profession of "airline pilot" has been under serious attack by a de-regulated industry characterized by cash-strapped or bankrupt airlines which think that pilots are paid too much and should be paid what "the market" thinks they should be paid. Like the Colgan First Officer who was living at home with Mom and Dad in Seattle on US$16,000/year and commuting to Newark.
A veteran pilot acting as F/O on a commuter aircraft with a major Canadian carrier makes under CAD$40,000/year. A first year nurse makes more. An entire generation of potential pilots has taken a look at how expensive it is to get into the business, how shaky and hostile the business is, how pilots are viewed by just about everyone but especially airline managements (can anyone say "Crandall"?) who, because these airplanes now fly themselves through the automation that managements spent a lot of money on, don't need to pay well and don't need to hire keen young people and don't need talent. Along with the rest of us, their retirements have been destroyed, (long before October, 2008).
So in exchange for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in personal investment to get the university degree, the licenses, the instrument and multi-engine endorsements and the time-building as well as risking one's life in the bush while hauling or lifting just about everything, budding pilots looking for a career, essentially buy a lottery ticket which offers a slim chance to get hired by a connector and later maybe get on with a major carrier. The odds and the rewards these days are both tiny, in comparison to other professions and careers, and wildly changed since I began in the early '70's.
Of course life is constantly filled with disappointments and mature adults deal with them quietly on a daily basis, aviation has turned itself into such an enormous disappointment for those who used to have stars in their eyes and a fire in their belly about flying for an airline, that those with the intelligence, the ability, the self-discipline, the resources, the patience and the luck have gone elsewhere for their life's work because aviation is as never before, a harsh mistress.
There are many reasons why more than a dozen airline crews have stalled their aircraft but the "headwaters" of all these streams which collect in one thematic "river" lie, to some degree, in the way this industry has gone. It was always a tough industry, but the rewards for those who stuck it out were always there. No longer. A lot of guys my age have said the industry has changed and they're glad to be out of it. They say they miss the people, miss the layovers, miss the airplanes, miss the beautiful nights over the Pacific or the Atlantic but don't miss the business. Young people are very savvy and expect to be treated better than corporations have treated their parents.
Paying more doesn't make a better pilot. But those who would have made fine aviators have gone into medicine, law, education, engineering, (but not politics, economics, sales or the corporate ladder.)
Some here will ask what the hell has all that got to do with AF447? But there are a lot of others here who know, only too well.
Aviation's lessons are not altered by technology; they are merely displaced, delayed or hidden until a combination of factors come together and this time there is no intervening error-trap which prevents an accident. Automation has made aviation far safer, and that includes the automation we rarely think about such as ATC, weather forecasting, communications, navigation and tracking which all support a heavily-automated aircraft.
In my view, the industry long ago passed that point where being a pilot meant something... a pilot was someone who had "address", who was always just slightly cranky if things weren't just so, who bristled when his skill and his thinking were called into question and who knew his airplane, the air that kept his aircraft aloft and the weather, all expressed in a kind of sixth sense that can only be pointed to when it happens. it can't be written about so that someone in an MCPL classroom "gets it"; its catalyst is adrenaline which teaches an abiding respect borne of a nurtured but mature fear of what an airplane is capable of.
This isn't romanticizing aviation or a pilot's life. This is describing attitudes and beliefs that are proven to keep aviation safe while the beancounting MBAs and senior managements, who know the cost of everything but not the value of their employees, have long forgotten about the business they are in, viewing aviation from afar at a desk in front of a monitor. They expect pilots to "manage" their airplane as they "manage" budgets. I laughed the first time I ever read that description of what I did for a living. But I remained just cranky enough all the same.
Stalling one's airplane? Unconscionable for a pilot. It is the worst failure one can visit upon oneself and one's passengers. What we are wrestling with is, Where did the stall begin?
This is a human factors and organization question; it is not a technical question. What and where are the antecedents? Training? Hiring? Standards? Expectations? Licensing? Ego? One thing is certain in human factors. The stall did not begin with the pitch-up. Perhaps a few are going to understand the thread running through all these notions which I have described. There are those here, including myself, who have been around aviation long enough to not to have to prove these statements to anyone because we know, to a greater or lesser extent, they're true. We knew in the mid-80's that automation was going to be a problem not because humans don't play well with autoflight systems, but because of the way managements saw how automation could reduce training costs, hiring costs, and salaries because "anyone could fly these aircraft". That is the way it was marketed and many here knew then what was coming.
So, no, you are not the only one, infrequentflyer789. It is not accidents per se that is disconcerting. It is the nature and the "quality" of accidents that is disturbing, and one does not fix such things by legislation, more automation or more training alone.
I find it more than slightly scary. Am I the only one ?
It has been almost three decades now, under a neoliberal political economy that the profession of "airline pilot" has been under serious attack by a de-regulated industry characterized by cash-strapped or bankrupt airlines which think that pilots are paid too much and should be paid what "the market" thinks they should be paid. Like the Colgan First Officer who was living at home with Mom and Dad in Seattle on US$16,000/year and commuting to Newark.
A veteran pilot acting as F/O on a commuter aircraft with a major Canadian carrier makes under CAD$40,000/year. A first year nurse makes more. An entire generation of potential pilots has taken a look at how expensive it is to get into the business, how shaky and hostile the business is, how pilots are viewed by just about everyone but especially airline managements (can anyone say "Crandall"?) who, because these airplanes now fly themselves through the automation that managements spent a lot of money on, don't need to pay well and don't need to hire keen young people and don't need talent. Along with the rest of us, their retirements have been destroyed, (long before October, 2008).
So in exchange for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in personal investment to get the university degree, the licenses, the instrument and multi-engine endorsements and the time-building as well as risking one's life in the bush while hauling or lifting just about everything, budding pilots looking for a career, essentially buy a lottery ticket which offers a slim chance to get hired by a connector and later maybe get on with a major carrier. The odds and the rewards these days are both tiny, in comparison to other professions and careers, and wildly changed since I began in the early '70's.
Of course life is constantly filled with disappointments and mature adults deal with them quietly on a daily basis, aviation has turned itself into such an enormous disappointment for those who used to have stars in their eyes and a fire in their belly about flying for an airline, that those with the intelligence, the ability, the self-discipline, the resources, the patience and the luck have gone elsewhere for their life's work because aviation is as never before, a harsh mistress.
There are many reasons why more than a dozen airline crews have stalled their aircraft but the "headwaters" of all these streams which collect in one thematic "river" lie, to some degree, in the way this industry has gone. It was always a tough industry, but the rewards for those who stuck it out were always there. No longer. A lot of guys my age have said the industry has changed and they're glad to be out of it. They say they miss the people, miss the layovers, miss the airplanes, miss the beautiful nights over the Pacific or the Atlantic but don't miss the business. Young people are very savvy and expect to be treated better than corporations have treated their parents.
Paying more doesn't make a better pilot. But those who would have made fine aviators have gone into medicine, law, education, engineering, (but not politics, economics, sales or the corporate ladder.)
Some here will ask what the hell has all that got to do with AF447? But there are a lot of others here who know, only too well.
Aviation's lessons are not altered by technology; they are merely displaced, delayed or hidden until a combination of factors come together and this time there is no intervening error-trap which prevents an accident. Automation has made aviation far safer, and that includes the automation we rarely think about such as ATC, weather forecasting, communications, navigation and tracking which all support a heavily-automated aircraft.
In my view, the industry long ago passed that point where being a pilot meant something... a pilot was someone who had "address", who was always just slightly cranky if things weren't just so, who bristled when his skill and his thinking were called into question and who knew his airplane, the air that kept his aircraft aloft and the weather, all expressed in a kind of sixth sense that can only be pointed to when it happens. it can't be written about so that someone in an MCPL classroom "gets it"; its catalyst is adrenaline which teaches an abiding respect borne of a nurtured but mature fear of what an airplane is capable of.
This isn't romanticizing aviation or a pilot's life. This is describing attitudes and beliefs that are proven to keep aviation safe while the beancounting MBAs and senior managements, who know the cost of everything but not the value of their employees, have long forgotten about the business they are in, viewing aviation from afar at a desk in front of a monitor. They expect pilots to "manage" their airplane as they "manage" budgets. I laughed the first time I ever read that description of what I did for a living. But I remained just cranky enough all the same.
Stalling one's airplane? Unconscionable for a pilot. It is the worst failure one can visit upon oneself and one's passengers. What we are wrestling with is, Where did the stall begin?
This is a human factors and organization question; it is not a technical question. What and where are the antecedents? Training? Hiring? Standards? Expectations? Licensing? Ego? One thing is certain in human factors. The stall did not begin with the pitch-up. Perhaps a few are going to understand the thread running through all these notions which I have described. There are those here, including myself, who have been around aviation long enough to not to have to prove these statements to anyone because we know, to a greater or lesser extent, they're true. We knew in the mid-80's that automation was going to be a problem not because humans don't play well with autoflight systems, but because of the way managements saw how automation could reduce training costs, hiring costs, and salaries because "anyone could fly these aircraft". That is the way it was marketed and many here knew then what was coming.
So, no, you are not the only one, infrequentflyer789. It is not accidents per se that is disconcerting. It is the nature and the "quality" of accidents that is disturbing, and one does not fix such things by legislation, more automation or more training alone.
In a nutshell
PJ2:
Thank you for summarizing so well.
My own rant on the general subject of the incredible aircraft mishandling blunders seen over the last few years has become somewhat less eloquently stated as time goes on. It's all too easy to adopt the attitude that making well reasoned arguments supporting carefully thought out and logical conclusions is like shoveling sand against the tides. But I appreciate insightful commentary and recognize that a few others do too. Perhaps the effort might not be futile after all.
Thank you for summarizing so well.
My own rant on the general subject of the incredible aircraft mishandling blunders seen over the last few years has become somewhat less eloquently stated as time goes on. It's all too easy to adopt the attitude that making well reasoned arguments supporting carefully thought out and logical conclusions is like shoveling sand against the tides. But I appreciate insightful commentary and recognize that a few others do too. Perhaps the effort might not be futile after all.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA USA
Age: 60
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet-setter days
I long for the jet-setter days! Flying used to be like going to a high class party. Now it's like going to the bus station.
Not as good to be a pilot or a passenger anymore
.
I'm with you PJ2. Great post.
Not as good to be a pilot or a passenger anymore
.I'm with you PJ2. Great post.
ventus45;
This isn't a significant departure from stabilized flight. It is a straightforward matter to stabilize the aircraft which means dealing with the slight variations in altitude, setting the power and get the aircraft in more-or-less level condition in which things are known so you know where you're at and can get on with the next steps. This is what being an aviator is all about.
PJ2
Agree, but, it only works in still air. In 447's case, they were in light turb, A/P and A/T had thrust down a bit, and pitch attitude was down a bit when they disconnected, so they were not in a "stable" condition either dynamically or from a trim and power point of view. Hence, they did not have the preconditions required for the use of the UAS procedure anyway.
PJ2
Last edited by PJ2; 21st Aug 2011 at 23:07. Reason: Edited for bluntness
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For heaven's sake man, are they not pilots?! Do we actually have to tell them how to keep an aircraft level? Are they truly automatons? Those variations are non-events - child's play. Does the point your making not illustrate the very problem at hand? Fly, do your job, for goodness sake! Stabilize the aircraft in level flight, take command, which means dealing with the variations in altitude, set the damn power and get the aircraft in more-or-less level condition in which things are known so you know where you're at and can get on with the next steps. Are we that far from being aviators?!
There are many elements to AF447 that appear obvious in hindsight but it's wise to remember that the crew was faced with a host of unknowns that we, today, are not faced with. Anyone who says that this accident should just have been a logbook entry is either tremendously arrogant and feeding their pride off the bodies of the dead or living in a fantasy world so divorced from reality that they are flying high, and not in a good way. Yes, the pilots should have handled this better. But lets not get carried away and pretend that iced up tubes happen every day. The crew of AF447 is not the first group of pilots to crash because of UAS issues. Responding to what happened to AF447 with an Internet tough guy attitude doesn't serve anyone well.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: In one of the two main circles
Age: 65
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MBAs and bean counters
PJ2
Great post to give us the pilot's point of view on the sorry state of our industry today.
Your perception is also totally relevant today in the design and manufacturing side of the aviation business.
Great post to give us the pilot's point of view on the sorry state of our industry today.
... while the beancounting MBAs and senior managements, who know the cost of everything but not the value of their employees, have long forgotten about the business they are in, viewing aviation from afar at a desk in front of a monitor.
The best summary ever!
@ PJ2
Thank you for this excellent analysis and summary.
It makes one thing clear:
Those things have to be adressed by all means. It makes no sense to say, it wont change anything.
At least it puts responsibility to those, who are not willing to change anything.
Thank you for this excellent analysis and summary.
It makes one thing clear:
Those things have to be adressed by all means. It makes no sense to say, it wont change anything.
At least it puts responsibility to those, who are not willing to change anything.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The value of a pilot
As a humble member of the SLF community, PJ2 has reiterated an absolutely important point in my view.
I have 4 children, at least one of which had harboured ambitions of becoming a pilot, until he realised the rewards available.
He is now training as a doctor, and of his friends, medicine and law are the career leaders.
I had truly not realised how a pilot's rewards had dropped, let alone the rest of the cabin crew. Not to say there are not still excellent pilots coming through, but the pool of talent they are being drawn from I would suggest must be shrinking.
I have no answers of course, and continue to read these highly educational forums with admiration for the jobs you perform. And indeed for the insights into the computer / human being interface that also apply away from the flight deck for sure.
I have 4 children, at least one of which had harboured ambitions of becoming a pilot, until he realised the rewards available.
He is now training as a doctor, and of his friends, medicine and law are the career leaders.
I had truly not realised how a pilot's rewards had dropped, let alone the rest of the cabin crew. Not to say there are not still excellent pilots coming through, but the pool of talent they are being drawn from I would suggest must be shrinking.
I have no answers of course, and continue to read these highly educational forums with admiration for the jobs you perform. And indeed for the insights into the computer / human being interface that also apply away from the flight deck for sure.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[LURK MODE OFF]
PJ2, just wanted to add to the chorus of "cracking post" that seems to be the order of the day.
One thing I wanted to add though was that it's not just happening in aviation, it's happening in almost every industry you care to name. The financial industry has basically reigned supreme in the West since the '80s, and as such it becomes the ambition of all MBAs to work there. As a result, business courses tend to focus on finance and profit above all else, and so what we're finding is that senior management and executives have no connection to the industry they end up working in, other than a superficial knowledge of how to cut costs - I believe (and I hope you agree) that this is one of the root causes of the "cost of everything and the value of nothing" syndrome that you so rightly point out.
In aviation, it has led to a top-down edict that automation is to be used wherever possible, pilots and cabin crew's interests become a distant second to that of the shareholders, and a seeming failure to understand that while airline safety has consistently improved over the years due in part to technical advances, a disturbing rise in the number of accidents caused in whole or in part by loss of situational awareness (whether that be due to poor training, overreliance on automation or fatigue) is insidiously eroding those advances.
But it is definitely happening in other industries too. For example, healthcare in the US is among the best in the world if you happen to be rich and a complete joke if you are not, because of the incestuous relationship it has with the insurance industry. Even the banking industry has not been unscathed at the high street level, because no-one in the high street divisions wanted to believe that the investment divisions were building a house of cards with their money. The big one in my industry was the tech crash of 2001, where the MBAs and executives figured that the Y2K problem was over, and at the same time decided that seeing as programmers only work to a design spec anyway, why pay 5 people here when they could get 15 people for the same money in India or the Far East? They found out about that one the hard way (though I hasten to add that this is not a slur on the abilities of the people in those countries, the main problems were poor communication and a lack of accountability in some of the offshore firms), although tellingly a lot of my peers who graduated CompSci and Software Engineering believing it would make them rich moved into management, and it was largely those of us who had it in our blood who remained.
In our case it was much the same as yours - what management didn't realise was that while we did code to specifications and design, the unwritten part of what we did was work amongst ourselves to correct shortcomings in the design, or realise when part of the spec was unclear and confusing and work with the designers to clarify and resolve the issue. Of course, we have the advantage over the outsourced folks that it's a matter of crossing an office floor or maybe going up a flight of stairs to raise an issue, whereas they would have to plan a conference call with all parties present, which could take days.
In short, we were the last line of defence when things didn't go to plan and relied on our experience and problem-solving abilities to make it work and get things back on track - much the same as you are.
Anyways, that's my ramble - again, brilliant post!
[/LURK MODE ON]
PJ2, just wanted to add to the chorus of "cracking post" that seems to be the order of the day.
One thing I wanted to add though was that it's not just happening in aviation, it's happening in almost every industry you care to name. The financial industry has basically reigned supreme in the West since the '80s, and as such it becomes the ambition of all MBAs to work there. As a result, business courses tend to focus on finance and profit above all else, and so what we're finding is that senior management and executives have no connection to the industry they end up working in, other than a superficial knowledge of how to cut costs - I believe (and I hope you agree) that this is one of the root causes of the "cost of everything and the value of nothing" syndrome that you so rightly point out.
In aviation, it has led to a top-down edict that automation is to be used wherever possible, pilots and cabin crew's interests become a distant second to that of the shareholders, and a seeming failure to understand that while airline safety has consistently improved over the years due in part to technical advances, a disturbing rise in the number of accidents caused in whole or in part by loss of situational awareness (whether that be due to poor training, overreliance on automation or fatigue) is insidiously eroding those advances.
But it is definitely happening in other industries too. For example, healthcare in the US is among the best in the world if you happen to be rich and a complete joke if you are not, because of the incestuous relationship it has with the insurance industry. Even the banking industry has not been unscathed at the high street level, because no-one in the high street divisions wanted to believe that the investment divisions were building a house of cards with their money. The big one in my industry was the tech crash of 2001, where the MBAs and executives figured that the Y2K problem was over, and at the same time decided that seeing as programmers only work to a design spec anyway, why pay 5 people here when they could get 15 people for the same money in India or the Far East? They found out about that one the hard way (though I hasten to add that this is not a slur on the abilities of the people in those countries, the main problems were poor communication and a lack of accountability in some of the offshore firms), although tellingly a lot of my peers who graduated CompSci and Software Engineering believing it would make them rich moved into management, and it was largely those of us who had it in our blood who remained.
In our case it was much the same as yours - what management didn't realise was that while we did code to specifications and design, the unwritten part of what we did was work amongst ourselves to correct shortcomings in the design, or realise when part of the spec was unclear and confusing and work with the designers to clarify and resolve the issue. Of course, we have the advantage over the outsourced folks that it's a matter of crossing an office floor or maybe going up a flight of stairs to raise an issue, whereas they would have to plan a conference call with all parties present, which could take days.
In short, we were the last line of defence when things didn't go to plan and relied on our experience and problem-solving abilities to make it work and get things back on track - much the same as you are.
Anyways, that's my ramble - again, brilliant post!
[/LURK MODE ON]
Last edited by DozyWannabe; 19th Aug 2011 at 13:48.
Originally Posted by OK465
Low Earth orbit?
Excellent posts, PJ2 and DozyWannabe
I'd wholeheartedly agree that powers that be today strive to become living example of the Oscar Wilde's definition of cynic: "One who knows price of everything and value of nothing". However, the rest of of us seem to be content with emulating them rather than resisting the depravity. When they started telling us we're not pilots but mere system managers, drivers, autopilot programmers, etc. did we rebel and tell them to go stuff themselves? Did we explained them that they are not paying us for hours on autopilot but to be prepared for minutes that may came once in a lifetime, when our knowledge of air and aeroplane, our quick and correct thinking and our dexterity with controls will save them millions in increased insurance premiums and damage to reputation? Or did we meekly say "Yes, you are probably true, we don't deserve our pays and pension plans. Go cut them!"? Did we get so demoralized as to be happy with knowing as little about flying as we believe we can safely get away with? Just what satisfies the Feds/EASA/company and that's it? Are we, pilots, left with any self-esteem at all? Are we so effed up that we are strangers to the air, letting FMS/AP/ATHR lead us along the narrow path of properly controlled flight and not knowing how to return to it when our guides suddenly decide to call it a day?
Not all of us are so, but I suspect many are. Look no further then TechLog to see some discussions there and check yourself whether my opinion is justified.
Regarding the AF447, I think William R. Voss, president and CEO of Flight Safety Foundation is on the right track
Originally Posted by William R. Voss
Did they think they were at risk of high-speed stall? Was this a real risk or was it mythology? Test pilots will tell you it is very hard to get into a high-speed stall in a modern aircraft. Do crews understand this or they get their high-altitude aerodynamics lessons from dog-fighting shows on Discovery Channel or old textbooks written about Boeing 707?
Originally Posted by David Pettit Davies
In other words, just as piston-engined aircraft were limited by performance so is the modern civil jet aircraft. The old days of coffin corner went out with the over-powered, low Mach number limited designs.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I wonder what would have made the AF447 pilots at FL350 (same flight conditions as Rio-Paris)... if one of the engines would stop
And what is the training that Air France has given its pilots for this event?
Did we explained them that they are not paying us for hours on autopilot but to be prepared for minutes that may came once in a lifetime, when our knowledge of air and aeroplane, our quick and correct thinking and our dexterity with controls will save them millions in increased insurance premiums and damage to reputation?
And what is the training that Air France has given its pilots for this event?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christalmighty.
The players are in the field, the cheerleaders are on the sidelines.
Cheerleaders/Sidelines.
Players/Field.
447/Unknown.
MountainBear, one of the best.
PJ2's post was a crackerjack. Unfortunately he bases it on things outside the present body of evidence for this accident. Extrapolation, smoothed edges, and generic appeal to the need for "closure". Otherwise, a great piece.
A fine essay on things other than 447. Off Thread, aisi.
HazelNuts has a fine opinion on the excursion possibilities 447 was making at a/p drop. Rush to judgment? BEA themselves have no opinion on the matter. Odd though, how all the released data points in a certain, umm....direction. Toward the Graveyard, where opinions cannot be challenged.
This is, as I have said interminably, and at no small risk to my tender feelings, bs.
No one's agenda and bias should be "protected" by propaganda. "Baby Pilot kills ALL". That is an agenda. "Pilots are sadly, badly trained". THAT TOO IS AN AGENDA. Any conclusion prior to the end is Propaganda, likely.
Recall the Airbus directive post 447? "Pilots, please review your skills".
AGENDA.
Air France, "The pilots were unfortunate in their uses of the RADARS".
AGENDA
Still then, the Truth will be held captive by "Witheld" data, "Need to Know" considerations, and a well paid program to keep the ball rolling, and control the "damage".
See, sometimes the Truth is hazardous.
The greatest conceit? Proprietary data.
To pre-empt some retort re: the AGENDA evident here, NOTED.
Clandestino, a guess. One will attain an aspect in which:
Cannot Climb further, or one will STALL
Cannot TURN, or one will SPIN
Cannot descend, one will overspeed.
The players are in the field, the cheerleaders are on the sidelines.
Cheerleaders/Sidelines.
Players/Field.
447/Unknown.
MountainBear, one of the best.
PJ2's post was a crackerjack. Unfortunately he bases it on things outside the present body of evidence for this accident. Extrapolation, smoothed edges, and generic appeal to the need for "closure". Otherwise, a great piece.
A fine essay on things other than 447. Off Thread, aisi.
HazelNuts has a fine opinion on the excursion possibilities 447 was making at a/p drop. Rush to judgment? BEA themselves have no opinion on the matter. Odd though, how all the released data points in a certain, umm....direction. Toward the Graveyard, where opinions cannot be challenged.
This is, as I have said interminably, and at no small risk to my tender feelings, bs.
No one's agenda and bias should be "protected" by propaganda. "Baby Pilot kills ALL". That is an agenda. "Pilots are sadly, badly trained". THAT TOO IS AN AGENDA. Any conclusion prior to the end is Propaganda, likely.
Recall the Airbus directive post 447? "Pilots, please review your skills".
AGENDA.
Air France, "The pilots were unfortunate in their uses of the RADARS".
AGENDA
Still then, the Truth will be held captive by "Witheld" data, "Need to Know" considerations, and a well paid program to keep the ball rolling, and control the "damage".
See, sometimes the Truth is hazardous.
The greatest conceit? Proprietary data.
To pre-empt some retort re: the AGENDA evident here, NOTED.
Clandestino, a guess. One will attain an aspect in which:
Cannot Climb further, or one will STALL
Cannot TURN, or one will SPIN
Cannot descend, one will overspeed.
Completely wrong. Question was intended to demonstrate in the simplest aerodynamic terms why THR CLB/5° pitch procedure is safe yet it somehow didn't go according to a plan.
EDIT: I meant that question didn't go according to my plan, not procedure. With information available so far I don't think that any meaningful procedure was initiated during last few minutes of AF447 flight.
EDIT: I meant that question didn't go according to my plan, not procedure. With information available so far I don't think that any meaningful procedure was initiated during last few minutes of AF447 flight.
Last edited by Clandestino; 19th Aug 2011 at 18:11. Reason: Cerebral flatulence
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Carmarthen
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question from a non pilot...
I remember reading various accounts of pilot training in days of yore, all of which featured the student, often in a Tiger Moth, having to deliberately induce a stall (and a spin, I remember), and then recover from it, before they were allowed to solo, in order to obtain a PPL...
I had always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that if you needed to be able to do that for a PPL, an airline pilot would have definitely needed to do it! I get the impression from the subtext of some of the comments in this thread that there are people out there flying commercial passenger jets who have never recovered any aircraft, not even a tiddler, nor even a flight simulator, from a proper developed stall, let alone a spin, because they are never ever supposed to get themselves into that situation in the first place and thus recover from it isn't part of training any more...
Is that really the case?
I remember reading various accounts of pilot training in days of yore, all of which featured the student, often in a Tiger Moth, having to deliberately induce a stall (and a spin, I remember), and then recover from it, before they were allowed to solo, in order to obtain a PPL...
I had always assumed, rightly or wrongly, that if you needed to be able to do that for a PPL, an airline pilot would have definitely needed to do it! I get the impression from the subtext of some of the comments in this thread that there are people out there flying commercial passenger jets who have never recovered any aircraft, not even a tiddler, nor even a flight simulator, from a proper developed stall, let alone a spin, because they are never ever supposed to get themselves into that situation in the first place and thus recover from it isn't part of training any more...
Is that really the case?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA USA
Age: 60
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bingo!
Be great if someone investigated the various modern ways of licensing commercial pilots around the world. I think the public would be shocked to see how the beancounters (erbsenzahler- sorry keyboard not set up for umlauts) have caused standards to atrophy, in some cases, to an unbelievible level.
Be great if someone investigated the various modern ways of licensing commercial pilots around the world. I think the public would be shocked to see how the beancounters (erbsenzahler- sorry keyboard not set up for umlauts) have caused standards to atrophy, in some cases, to an unbelievible level.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please don't shoot the messenger
I have been told that Air France are the only airline to have crashed three Airbus aircraft and a Concorde.
Correct?
Correct?