AF447 wreckage found
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Colorado
Age: 74
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The common thread throughout is that 'even an ab-initio PPL should have been able to recognize and recover this stall'.
In my flight testing I have had the experience of recovering from a fully developed stall on partial panel when the b$tard sitting next to me has applied full aft trim. Easy, if you know what the aircraft is doing.
It is a different kettle of fish if the the manual tells you, that for no speed info, you apply nose-up and power. At altitude this is going to take you to a stall, then, with (hidden) full aft trim, no stall warning and a TOGA power pitch-up couple you are probably flying an unrecoverable aircraft.
These pilots weren't stupid, there but for the grace ....
In my flight testing I have had the experience of recovering from a fully developed stall on partial panel when the b$tard sitting next to me has applied full aft trim. Easy, if you know what the aircraft is doing.
It is a different kettle of fish if the the manual tells you, that for no speed info, you apply nose-up and power. At altitude this is going to take you to a stall, then, with (hidden) full aft trim, no stall warning and a TOGA power pitch-up couple you are probably flying an unrecoverable aircraft.
These pilots weren't stupid, there but for the grace ....
Join Date: May 2011
Location: PARIS
Age: 62
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the b$tard sitting next to you
EGMA : In my flight testing I have had the experience of recovering from a fully developed stall on partial panel when the b$tard sitting next to me has applied full aft trim
My last employer mandated a second Captain for an augmented crew, and we also had a Flt. Eng., someone with aviation experience on the flight deck who might just be thinking outside the box relative to a pilots' thoughts, and also wasn't physically involved in handling the hardware in the same manner as the pilot, so could look at a problem from a different angle.
But that costs money, and we must always genufluct to Progress.( and profit )
The last words recorded from another accident where the pilot was confused as to the information he was receiving was - look at the standby ( which was giving the correct info. ) shouted by the F/Eng. Too late unfortunately, which of course raises issues of P.C. culture and CRM as well.
But that costs money, and we must always genufluct to Progress.( and profit )
The last words recorded from another accident where the pilot was confused as to the information he was receiving was - look at the standby ( which was giving the correct info. ) shouted by the F/Eng. Too late unfortunately, which of course raises issues of P.C. culture and CRM as well.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiggy, a 744 on UN873, the same airway as AF447, and preceding it by about 20 minutes deviated around the heaviest weather. A 340 following AF447 by 12 minutes also deviated. The next flight following the 340 was AF459, which deviated to both the left and right to fly around the MCC. AF459 deviated by 70 NM to the right of the track.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..........Is there any way of trimming the stabiliser really "manually" ?
Look, if you haven't read much of the thread you shouldn't be posting and wasting more time & space having your repeat questions re-answered
It was explained barely a dozen pages back (for about the 5th time!!)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Age: 54
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nose Up
What would cause PF to keep the A/C in what I would summarize as a flared landing stall from FL380 to impact.
There is surely a missing piece here. Clearly the BEA statement is an extreme simplification of the facts. It implies that the pilots did everything professionally i.e. handled the a/c correctly given their training. Logically the cause must lie somewhere other than the pilots?
Presumably they did not ignore/neglect the flight instruments?
Were the flight instruments degraded more than just losing the Airspeed that the BEA is yet to release.
Did significant ice build up degrade the handling character of the airframe.
One thing is clear. A continuous tone stall warning would have helped as the plane had effectively "flat lined". The stall warning should not disable as the speed decays, if anything it should get loader.
IMHO the missing piece of why they sticked back is the largest hole in the swiss cheese. I was hoping for some resolution from BEA or the forum. However the statement has raised more questions than it has answered.
The other holes in the swiss cheese are a grey area and open to argument.
There is surely a missing piece here. Clearly the BEA statement is an extreme simplification of the facts. It implies that the pilots did everything professionally i.e. handled the a/c correctly given their training. Logically the cause must lie somewhere other than the pilots?
Presumably they did not ignore/neglect the flight instruments?
Were the flight instruments degraded more than just losing the Airspeed that the BEA is yet to release.
Did significant ice build up degrade the handling character of the airframe.
One thing is clear. A continuous tone stall warning would have helped as the plane had effectively "flat lined". The stall warning should not disable as the speed decays, if anything it should get loader.
IMHO the missing piece of why they sticked back is the largest hole in the swiss cheese. I was hoping for some resolution from BEA or the forum. However the statement has raised more questions than it has answered.
The other holes in the swiss cheese are a grey area and open to argument.
- AF chose to not update pitots aggresively as some other airlines.
- Prior to departure the Captain chose a flight path directly through the storm whereas the subsequent flights (Iberia and Lufthansa) took on extra fuel and significantly deviated.
- Captain chose to take bunk rest during the more challenging part of the flight.
- Airbus training in excursions outside the normal flight envelope and outside normal law are under represented.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Someday I will find a place to stop
Posts: 1,021
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
6 Posts
I presume all data from all sensors gets recorded on the Flight Data Recorder, so there will be information saying they were in a stall and AoA when in fact due to frozen probes they, at the start at least, were not in a stall and the AoA is incorrect. The only correct information being pitch and power the same as what the pilots would have?
Why this has been released to the media in the way it has seems very poor management.
I have sat here reading as many posts as possible, it is a shame the pilot concerned has been referred to as a Baby and its been jumped on by all and sundry. I wonder how you would cope given the situation of long haul and in the frame of being in a routine. Unreliable airspeed is hard enough to cope with, but in a storm cell, never mind later on when your tail rips off -which the latter I haven't seen anyone make reference to yet.
Re 2 previous post, I seem to recall something about this specific route being tight on fuel in order to be achieved, and this is the reason they did not deviate around the storm, they simply couldn't spare the gas??
Or much simpler, they missed it in the departure brief and missed the trick of turning up the brightness on the weather radar so saw nothing! (latter been done before)
Why this has been released to the media in the way it has seems very poor management.
I have sat here reading as many posts as possible, it is a shame the pilot concerned has been referred to as a Baby and its been jumped on by all and sundry. I wonder how you would cope given the situation of long haul and in the frame of being in a routine. Unreliable airspeed is hard enough to cope with, but in a storm cell, never mind later on when your tail rips off -which the latter I haven't seen anyone make reference to yet.
Re 2 previous post, I seem to recall something about this specific route being tight on fuel in order to be achieved, and this is the reason they did not deviate around the storm, they simply couldn't spare the gas??
Or much simpler, they missed it in the departure brief and missed the trick of turning up the brightness on the weather radar so saw nothing! (latter been done before)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pretty far away
Posts: 316
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
never mind later on when your tail rips off -which the latter I haven't seen anyone make reference to yet.
Short of fuel ? Pressure ?
All I can say is this : in all the years I have been flying for AF, not once have I been given the " frown " for taking whatever quantity of fuel I deemed necessary.
We have figures as to the cost, that's all. The rest is entirely left up to you, your experience and judgement.
If I ever felt pressure......it was the one I was puting myself under.
AF chose to not update pitots aggresively as some other airlines.
Prior to departure the Captain chose a flight path directly through the storm whereas the subsequent flights (Iberia and Lufthansa) took on extra fuel and significantly deviated.
Captain chose to take bunk rest during the more challenging part of the flight.
Airbus training in excursions outside the normal flight envelope and outside normal law are under represented.
Prior to departure the Captain chose a flight path directly through the storm whereas the subsequent flights (Iberia and Lufthansa) took on extra fuel and significantly deviated.
Captain chose to take bunk rest during the more challenging part of the flight.
Airbus training in excursions outside the normal flight envelope and outside normal law are under represented.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once enroute you can always get deviations for weather so I am sure all the other airliners on the same route did that. It still looks like the final report will be the repeated Airbus pitot/static problems that were slow in being corrected. The copilots should have been able to handle unreliable airspeed with no problem. Everybody wonders why the PF pulled back and zoomed to FL380 and entered a deep stall.
No airliner I have flown says to pull back, it says to hold appropriate pitch and power for weight and altitude. I know the Airbus has no feedback of what the other pilot is doing so complicates things.
Also the interim report leaves out so much information they have for some reason so even though I am sure they know what happened, we don't with the lack of information. The CVR will tell a lot of the story and the FDR will tell the rest when they release it.
No airliner I have flown says to pull back, it says to hold appropriate pitch and power for weight and altitude. I know the Airbus has no feedback of what the other pilot is doing so complicates things.
Also the interim report leaves out so much information they have for some reason so even though I am sure they know what happened, we don't with the lack of information. The CVR will tell a lot of the story and the FDR will tell the rest when they release it.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Undercarriage Microswitch
Late but hopefully useful
This thread is galloping forwards so fast that I'm replying to something three pages ago, but it was only a few hours ago, and it needs answered because it is another daft blind alley.
Someone said:
Quote:
I can't believe anybody would certify an airliner that is stalled but the stall warning mutes because the pitot static system senses less than 60 knots. That is nuts.
I think you will find that is completely normal, and even a microsecond of thought will tell you why. Think "parked on the taxiway". There's a strong chance the wing is fully stalled, but we'll supress the stall warning until we've got some speed up, thank-you.
This thread is galloping forwards so fast that I'm replying to something three pages ago, but it was only a few hours ago, and it needs answered because it is another daft blind alley.
Someone said:
Quote:
I can't believe anybody would certify an airliner that is stalled but the stall warning mutes because the pitot static system senses less than 60 knots. That is nuts.
I think you will find that is completely normal, and even a microsecond of thought will tell you why. Think "parked on the taxiway". There's a strong chance the wing is fully stalled, but we'll supress the stall warning until we've got some speed up, thank-you.
That was an incorrect assumption which in this case may have been one of the series of errors that ended with a destroyed aircraft.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: God's Country
Age: 73
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
75 additional bodies recovered from Air France crash after 2 years
Unless I skipped a page somewhere, I've not seen this posted. Apologies if it has been.
75 additional bodies recovered from Air France crash after 2 years - CNN.com
This is contrary to decisions I thought were made weeks ago.
75 additional bodies recovered from Air France crash after 2 years - CNN.com
This is contrary to decisions I thought were made weeks ago.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: SoCalif
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stall Whining
I wish somebody intimate with AOA vanes would come on here and explain authoritatively why stall warning shuts off below 60. It's a physical limitation. Maybe one of you whiners could come up with a design that's better than the present one, which is nearly as universal as the pitot tube. How often has the present design even been criticized in an accident investigation, let alone blamed?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bangkok,Thailand
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A question for all the experts....
There has been no discussion of the lack of a distress call from AF447. Does this indicate the lack of situational awareness on the flight deck as they where struggling with the jet? Is it SOP to put out a distress signal when the
is hitting the fan, regardless of where you are? Where the pilots to busy to put out a call, or too confused?
There has been no discussion of the lack of a distress call from AF447. Does this indicate the lack of situational awareness on the flight deck as they where struggling with the jet? Is it SOP to put out a distress signal when the
is hitting the fan, regardless of where you are? Where the pilots to busy to put out a call, or too confused?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Extra Fuel
Delta T,
if you have to deviate around a large storm system and by doing so you run short of fuel, then you make an en route stop for fuel. It's that simple. They could have stopped in the Canaries or Lisbon for fuel, but now they will never have the chance of taking fuel ever again. Please pay attention to the fact that other flights took extra fuel, deviated and arrived safely. Flying is serious business.
if you have to deviate around a large storm system and by doing so you run short of fuel, then you make an en route stop for fuel. It's that simple. They could have stopped in the Canaries or Lisbon for fuel, but now they will never have the chance of taking fuel ever again. Please pay attention to the fact that other flights took extra fuel, deviated and arrived safely. Flying is serious business.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Colorado
Age: 74
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
I think most of us figured it out a long time ago.
Who designed this (to create a page nobody can read and wonders why) ?
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been no discussion of the lack of a distress call from AF447.
Aviate, navigate, communicate. They hadn't got past the first which is why you see no discussion of the third.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
Fuel ?
The BEA report:
Do you know the extra fuel quantity take on board by Iberia and Lufthansa ?
The AF447 flight had enough fuel for change his route.
Read also the two BEA preliminary reports.
Bodies recovered
Those decisions were nullified by another .. one week ago when the results of ADN research on the two firsts bodies recovered were positive
Distress call
You answered yourself ....
Fuel ?
Prior to departure the Captain chose a flight path directly through the storm whereas the subsequent flights (Iberia and Lufthansa) took on extra fuel and significantly deviated.
Delta T,
if you have to deviate around a large storm system and by doing so you run short of fuel, then you make an en route stop for fuel. It's that simple. They could have stopped in the Canaries or Lisbon for fuel, but now they will never have the chance of taking fuel ever again. Please pay attention to the fact that other flights took extra fuel, deviated and arrived safely. Flying is serious business.
if you have to deviate around a large storm system and by doing so you run short of fuel, then you make an en route stop for fuel. It's that simple. They could have stopped in the Canaries or Lisbon for fuel, but now they will never have the chance of taking fuel ever again. Please pay attention to the fact that other flights took extra fuel, deviated and arrived safely. Flying is serious business.
The take-off weight was 232.8 t (for a MTOW of 233t), including 70.4 t of fuel.
The AF447 flight had enough fuel for change his route.
Read also the two BEA preliminary reports.
Bodies recovered
This is contrary to decisions I thought were made weeks ago.
Distress call
Where the pilots to busy to put out a call, or too confused?
Last edited by jcjeant; 1st Jun 2011 at 04:51.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: venice, ca
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zoom climb
"Everybody wonders why the PF pulled back and zoomed to FL380 and entered a deep stall."
I never read it that way. My read is that they were unable to climb because the temperature did not fall. Never any indication that they "planned" a climb.
I read NOT that they climbed, but they ascended, or, they were pushed, or, caught a severe updraft, and then wound up at 38,000 in a nose up condition, at below 60kts and thus literally out of control because at that time the controls would be inneffective.
Which is consistant with being in a thunderstorm.
I never read it that way. My read is that they were unable to climb because the temperature did not fall. Never any indication that they "planned" a climb.
I read NOT that they climbed, but they ascended, or, they were pushed, or, caught a severe updraft, and then wound up at 38,000 in a nose up condition, at below 60kts and thus literally out of control because at that time the controls would be inneffective.
Which is consistant with being in a thunderstorm.