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

AF 447 Thread No. 5

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

AF 447 Thread No. 5

Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:18
  #1561 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
overthewing, that's correct. Although I don't know if the FO who was PF at 0200 had been PF since Rio.

welsh wingman, the crew apparently flew together from Paris to Rio. There was a long layover scheduled, and it was also Pentecost Sunday weekend, so the wife of the junior FO traveled to Rio for a short holiday.
SaturnV is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:25
  #1562 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 63
Posts: 1,809
Cool

Hi,

takata
2. Air France longhaul crews are composed of the "commandant de bord" (captain) and two fully qualified co-pilots (F/Os) having the exact same rank (whatever their age).
Sorry to return on the work bench .. but ...
Seem's the "commandant de bord" (captain) was not aware of the Air France rules concerning the longhaul crews .. as it's written in the BEA report interim N°3 that the captain asked to the F/O Mr NoName 32 years old if he was a "fully qualified co-pilot"
Again I repeat .. it's a odd question coming from an AF captain.

Last edited by jcjeant; 4th Aug 2011 at 22:39.
jcjeant is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:26
  #1563 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,939
Originally Posted by PJ2
I fought very hard when active, to retain the authority to hand-fly the aircraft but lost the fight when the FCOM was revised to require engagement of the autoflight system "from just after takeoff to touchdown".
You must be talking about the SOP part of the FCOM which is adapted to the need and will of each Airline.
But thanks GOD, most still apply commun sense.



A33Zab : Can anyone explain this?



Very bizarre - Not a word on it in the last interim report ... !?

For the last minute (and probably much more ?) before and up to the UAS, there seemed to have continuous and repetitive 'automatic' switching between V/S mode and some other vertical mode (?) Was it a kind of reversion transparant to the crew ?

Selected v/s was nothing else than -5000 ft/min ...

What is the consequence on the initial climb ?
What is the consequence on the LOC ?

That thing is not minor, and must be addressed - Anything to do with the WRG message ?
CONF iture is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:31
  #1564 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Retired down by the sea in Pembrokeshire
Age: 83
Posts: 54
SaturnV

Thanks for clarification re: the long layover (long enough for F/O 32's wife to holiday). Don't like using (deceased) pilots names, but sometimes it just causes less confusion in the end.
Welsh Wingman is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:41
  #1565 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Kent
Age: 61
Posts: 215
Although I don't know if the FO who was PF at 0200 had been PF since Rio.
Think I'm inferring from the following:

Towards 22 h 10, the crew was cleared to start up engines and leave the stand. Takeoff occurred at 22 h 29. The Captain was PNF, one of the copilots was PF.
(BEA Interim Report)

The Captain proposed that the copilot take a rest due to the length of his shift. The latter answered that he didn’t feel like sleeping.
(BEA Synthesis note)

Therefore I'm assuming that the pilot who went to rest was the one who was called back around 2am, ie F/O 37, and F/O 32 had been flying since Rio.
overthewing is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:44
  #1566 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 691
Hi Old Engineer,
Originally Posted by Old Engineer
Q: My final question... Am I missing something here? Is this meaningless speculation?
Yes! but you really did such a great job at missing close to everything!

A33Zab did ask about the meaning of Vertical speed selected graph... (I suppose, did you Zab?). Which graph depicts something unrelated with... (I don't know what your post was talking about - seems imput logic?).

Vertical speed selected is a manual setting for: vertical speed ! (surprisingly)
This function is used by autopilot only.
This graph is showing the VSS value after reseting to current flight level due to intermintent returns of flight directors (as they were never turned off).
takata is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:50
  #1567 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Retired down by the sea in Pembrokeshire
Age: 83
Posts: 54
overthewing

Affirmative. It also explains why F/O 32 was the obvious choice to carry on as the PF and become the relief pilot (given the pre-AF447 position as set out by takata).
Welsh Wingman is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 22:53
  #1568 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia, USA
Age: 82
Posts: 77

MW

Thanks for your comments. In addition to that, I realize now that I completely misinterpreted this graph as representing the actions of the aircraft. After a lot of careful reading, I see that the graph indicates, intermittantly, the settings within certain of the computers. These settings continued to have effect continuously, as I now understand it.

So I think my post will not be useful to the discussion and am going to delete it. I'll plead to being my own French translator.

Although, above @ #1556 CONF iture has posted this graph again, with the comment "Selected v/s was nothing else than -5000 ft/min ...". And he closes with "That thing is not minor, and must be addressed - Anything to do with the WRG message ?".

I'm noting that this -5000 fpm appears to be without flight deck input, so I'd say the graph is saying something critical to us.
Old Engineer is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:01
  #1569 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Age: 51
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Old Engineer
I'll plead to being my own French translator.
The english report is out.
Link can be found a few pages back.
xcitation is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:04
  #1570 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: us
Posts: 694
How did the crew get to where they were at 0208?

0 h 30 mn The crew received information from the [AF] OCC on the presence of a convective zone linked to the ITCZ between SALPU and TASIL

1 h 35 mn 46 No response from AF 447 to ATLANTICO's request for the estimated time at TASIL

1 h 35 mn 49 Copilot’s ND scale changes from 320 NM to 160 NM.

[Between 1 h 35 mn 53 and 1 h 36 mn 14, ATLANTICO asked again three times for the estimated time at TASIL with no response from the crew.]

1 hr 50 mn 35 The radar display mode changes from WXR ONLY to WXR+TURB. The Captain’s ND scale changes from 160 NM to 40 NM.

[A little later [after changing the scale] he [the Captain] mentioned the appearance of Saint-Elmo’s fire and said that “it’s going to be turbulent” when he went to take a rest.]

2 hr 00 mn 17 Copilot’s ND scale changes from 160 NM to 80 NM.

2 hr 01 mn 46 Captain leaves the cockpit

2 hr 08 mn (approximately) The copilot in the left seat moved the weather radar gain control to maximum, after noticing that he was in calibrated mode.

2 hr 09 mn 53 Copilot’s ND scale changes from 80 NM to 40 NM.

"The signal corresponding to the “fasten seat belts” information was not heard on the recording."
_____________________________

The following English translation appears to be an extract or summary of AF procedures on use of weather radar.

1.17.3.2.2 Instructions for use of weather radar
In cruise mode above 20,000 feet, a slight downwards adjustment of tilt, depending on the scale selected, is recommended so that the ground echoes only appear on the ND at the edge of the furthest distance circles. This method enables the simple and practical application of the height/tilt rule of equivalence providing the optimum tilt adjustment.

When pilots monitor the weather situation, gain can remain in CAL position. In the confirmed presence of storms and during their avoidance, a manual adjustment can be used for comparison with the CAL image.

A scale of 160 NM enables the change in the weather situation to be assessed and anticipate route changes. A scale of 80 NM is used for avoidance. Short scales must be periodically discontinued in order to observe distant weather conditions and to avoid an impasse amid the disturbances.

The shape of the echoes may alert the crew to the possible presence of hail. Zones of turbulence may be presented above a detected zone of precipitation.

Red or magenta zones as well as fringe-shape echoes must in this way be by-passed from windward by regularly adjusting the tilt and the range. The avoidance decision must be taken before the echoes are at 40 NM.

The operator recommends avoiding flying less than 5,000 ft above or below a storm cell. It provides a formula for pilots to estimate the separation height between the top of a detected cell and the airplane. This formula uses the distance and the tilt points from which the zone echo disappears. Above 23,000 ft, it is recommended to fly more than 20 NM from these zones. (Compensated by 50%, that is 30 NM for U- or finger-shape echoes or with scalloped edges (storms, presence of hail).
In CAL mode without adjusting tilt, the BEA report notes that ice crystals will be hard to detect. The report also notes that "An oceanic cumulonimbus reflects radar waves less than a continental cumulonimbus cloud of the same size and height."

The change in gain from CAL to MAX on the PNF display was not made until 0208. There was apparently no change in tilt over this period.
SaturnV is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:06
  #1571 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia, USA
Age: 82
Posts: 77
The Graph, totally misinterpreted

takata,

Saw your comment in the "reply" window on recent comments. It's gone, but it made me smile. I'll never be a French speaker until I understand that they omit all information that would make themselves clear to outsiders.

Sorry to add to your workload of keeping things straight.

excitation,

Yes, I knew that; just thought the French would be closer in meaning.
Old Engineer is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:12
  #1572 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,939
Originally Posted by takata
This graph is showing the VSS value after reseting to current flight level due to intermintent returns of flight directors (as they were never turned off).
No takata, we're not talking after but before !

What was the issue on the FDs before ... ?
CONF iture is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:35
  #1573 (permalink)  
bearfoil
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Let me see if I can confuse the issue further. The Vs 'Zipper' coincides with the THS Zipper I noted earlier. Roughly one second control inputted POSITIONS, of VARYING value, approximating 1.5 degrees deflection, EACH WAY. Yes CONFiture, this is in autopilot, nine secs continuous prior disconnect.

Tell me it's in the FCS, and I'll be on my way. For you must know, just because bear notices something does NOT mean he 'gets' it. Also, I don't believe the ship is this.....erm, AGILE. Let's ask gums.
 
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:39
  #1574 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: florida
Age: 77
Posts: 1,218
control stick feedback

Since the late 60's the only feedback to the control stick/yoke has been artificial. Exceptions were the planes with mechanical linkage to the control surface actuators, and even those had little "direct" feedback. We called it "boost". We also saw yaw and pitch dampers that the clever engineers provided us to "help" keep the pointy end forward and reduce pilot-induced-oscillations, etc. The VooDoo and Phantom and others had bellows that used pneumatic pressure from an "orifice" someplace to stiffen the stick. We also had bobweights to provide a gee indication on the stick. Real easy, and kept us from commanding more gee than we wanted using only a direct hydraulic valve. OTOH, roll was usually a simple spring mechanism that made it harder to command left or right the further you deflected the stick/yoke. No dynamic pressure feedback, just a spring doofer.

For the non-pinball wizard pilots, some type of force feedback for the stick/yoke would be nice. Unfortunately, airframe vibration or buffet is different. You have to have "touch", and you cannot teach "touch". Helped many young pilots learn to fly a new jet ( three of them), but I could never "teach" "touch".

"Can't you feel that?"

"No sir."

"lemme do it and follow me thru"

etc.

Many of we old dinosaurs would like an electronic system that "feels" like the old planes. This is possible, maybe even preferred. But in the end the pilot has to trust the instruments ( unreliable and confusing as they were with AF447) and somteimes rely upon some "touch" as to how much should I pull/push, and is it a mach buffet or stall onset, or a big piece just fell off ( the 'bus incident when tail came off due to excessive commands by pilot)?

There is no substitute for airmanship, dammit. If the public wishes to ride in an airplane with no human up front, then let's try it for a few months. We could program the jet to takeoff, cruise and land, while avoiding bad weather and making radio calls to appropriate agencies, etc. And when a situation arises that the cosmic engineers had not thought of, then......
gums is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2011, 23:41
  #1575 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 691
Hi overthewing,
Originally Posted by overthewing
I get more and more confused. Could we agree whether the following was true?
1. The officer who was resting prior to 2am was F/O 37.
2. The officer who 'wasn't sleepy' was F/O 32, who has also been PF from Rio.
3. The Captain woke F/O 37 and said (to F/O 32) that the older officer was to 'take my place'. By this he meant F/O 37 was to sit in the LHS, not to be PIC.
4. The Captain asked F/O 32 if he was certified, presumably to be PIC from the RHS. Presumably this question had not arisen on the outward leg.
Yes, everything looks right, except for take-off from Rio: I don't know if the F/O was the same PF.
takata is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2011, 00:17
  #1576 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Devonshire
Age: 93
Posts: 300
The first fully automatic trans Atlantic flight was from Newfoundland to Brize Norton, UK, in September 1947 by a C54.

The idea has not caught on yet ! The flight was from runway to runway, only. Humans were still required on the ground, from and to the terminals.
Linktrained is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2011, 04:25
  #1577 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tranquility Base
Age: 65
Posts: 52
English interim report location:

FLIGHT AF 447
Lazerdog is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2011, 07:42
  #1578 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Under the Long Grey Cloud
Age: 72
Posts: 97
Liberté, égalité, fraternité

takata


2. Air France longhaul crews are composed of the "commandant de bord" (captain) and two fully qualified co-pilots (F/Os) having the exact same rank (whatever their age).

3. When captain is leaving the deck, he should decide whilch one of his two F/Os will be the pilot in charge (PIC) during his rest.
This is where I believe the Air France way of doing things is fundamentally flawed. Most other airlines have a distinct chain of command, Captain > Senior First Officer > Junior First Officer. In this case the older, more experienced first officer should have been "In Charge" while the Captain was resting. [This would not prevent the Junior FO controlling the flight and making tactical decisions but may have encouraged the Senior FO to be more assertive when things were not going so well.]

This may have resulted in a better outcome !

Last edited by ZimmerFly; 5th Aug 2011 at 08:58.
ZimmerFly is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2011, 07:44
  #1579 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,975
This is where I believe the Air France way of doing things is fundamentally flawed. Most other airlines have a distinct chain of command, Captain > Senior First Officer > Junior First Officer.
Indeed.....
hetfield is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2011, 08:20
  #1580 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 80
Posts: 1,689
Airspeed from groundspeed

Originally Posted by takata #1468
Hence, airspeed is twice affected (did you try to derivate aircraft actual airspeed from ground speed and other parameters to see at which estimated (true) value airspeed was reading under 60 kt ?). And V/S is also affected (obvious from graph)... and somewhat baro altitude...
Hi takata,
Airspeed from groundspeed, V/S, windspeed and temperature is shown on this graph: CASfromGS, It is based on wind 45 kt @125 deg, ISA +11 deg C, DFDR data for v/s, altitude and HDG.

The blue dots are Mach from ADR, pink is Mach from GS, wind and v/s, and the green dots show the corresponding CAS.

Last edited by HazelNuts39; 5th Aug 2011 at 08:53.
HazelNuts39 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.