A320 and the Miracle on the Hudson
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I assumed the first time I saw the Ditching that Flight path was in control, and selected. I thought a bit fast, but have rethought that as well. No one wants to Flare into the water, the resulting Nose drop onto the surface gives one the shivers. Better to skip than to plant.
Until I found out the R/E was lost, I assumed the "Ground Loop" was also "selected".
Until I found out the R/E was lost, I assumed the "Ground Loop" was also "selected".
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ashling
You should know that you can raise the nose more to no effect.
...
You need to appreciate that more backstick does not always mean less rate of descent or a gentler touchdown.
...
You need to appreciate that more backstick does not always mean less rate of descent or a gentler touchdown.
3.5 more degrees before reaching Alpha Max (P98), and probably another 3 additional degrees to reach Alpha Stall … Raise the nose is effective : Less rate of descent + gentler touchdown … That’s a flare.
But if Aircraft knows better …
Anyway, thanks for the exchange. I did appreciate.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surprising comments from someone with your experience as aircraft was NOT stalled :
3.5 more degrees before reaching Alpha Max (P98), and probably another 3 additional degrees to reach Alpha Stall … Raise the nose is effective : Less rate of descent + gentler touchdown … That’s a flare
3.5 more degrees before reaching Alpha Max (P98), and probably another 3 additional degrees to reach Alpha Stall … Raise the nose is effective : Less rate of descent + gentler touchdown … That’s a flare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_curve_(aviation)
The report says..
however, the airplane did provide maximum performance for the weight and configuration at that time.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cwatters
I don't know about this aircraft but flying as close as possible to the stall doesn't allways produce the lowest rate of descent. For many gliders the lowest rate of descent occurs at a slightly lower AOA/higher speed. Pull up, slow down and you sink faster.
But for the period AoA is increasing as long as not stalled, the 320 will behave like the glider : rate of descent will diminish.
That’s the desirable effect of a very temporary situation known as the flare. I believe you, me, or any pilot on this world use more or less happily that very technique for every landing.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps not every landing. Deck angle is the key to a survivable Ditching.
And there was no thrust to arrest sink.
Flare is a trap, here, you will find yourself with high deck angle and no energy, any further pull causes an immediate STALL, and the NOSE contents will spill out the fractures in the forward Hull on impact.
And there was no thrust to arrest sink.
Flare is a trap, here, you will find yourself with high deck angle and no energy, any further pull causes an immediate STALL, and the NOSE contents will spill out the fractures in the forward Hull on impact.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Lyman
Flare is a trap, here, you will find yourself with high deck angle and no energy, any further pull causes an immediate STALL, and the NOSE contents will spill out the fractures in the forward Hull on impact.
For the occasion, the recommended deck angle has been refused by the system.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Yellow Brick Road
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how and when to pull for the best
QRH just says "MIN APPR SPEED ... 150 kts".
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sully could have probably used another few degrees of flare that Airbus denied him but he didn't need it if you look at the video. More flare might have caused the tail to hit earlier and not let the nose come down as gently. He didn't need Airbus technology to ditch it but ground effect took care of any descent rate he had approaching the Hudson. The results speak for them self.
Originally Posted by National Transportation Safety Board
the airplane did provide maximum performance for the weight and configuration at that time.
Originally Posted by CONF iture
3.5 more degrees before reaching Alpha Max (P98), and probably another 3 additional degrees to reach Alpha Stall … Raise the nose is effective : Less rate of descent + gentler touchdown … That’s a flare.
(...)
But for the period AoA is increasing as long as not stalled, the 320 will behave like the glider : rate of descent will diminish.
That’s the desirable effect of a very temporary situation known as the flare. I believe you, me, or any pilot on this world use more or less happily that very technique for every landing.
(...)
But for the period AoA is increasing as long as not stalled, the 320 will behave like the glider : rate of descent will diminish.
That’s the desirable effect of a very temporary situation known as the flare. I believe you, me, or any pilot on this world use more or less happily that very technique for every landing.
Still I wonder whether people expressing their dismay about the performance of various accident investigation boards take themselves seriously enough to make their views clear to those who appoint such boards or are they just pulling our legs. Transport safety boards and governments don't read PPRuNe.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Clandestino
Now, if I knew nothing about aerodynamics and especially about drag curves, I would have a difficult time when deciding which version to believe; the one written and signed by the government appointed panel of experts or the one by the anonymous PPRuNe contributor. Tough one, eh?
NTSB P98
The Airbus simulation indicated that the captain’s aft sidestick inputs in the last 50 feet of the flight were attenuated, limiting the ANU response of the airplane even though about 3.5° of margin existed between the airplane’s AOA at touchdown (between 13° and 14°) and the maximum AOA for this airplane weight and configuration (17.5°).
The Airbus simulation indicated that the captain’s aft sidestick inputs in the last 50 feet of the flight were attenuated, limiting the ANU response of the airplane even though about 3.5° of margin existed between the airplane’s AOA at touchdown (between 13° and 14°) and the maximum AOA for this airplane weight and configuration (17.5°).
Originally Posted by cwatters
But does it explain what "maximium performance" means in this context? Lowest rate of descent? (Who said minimum fuel consumption )
Last edited by CONF iture; 17th Sep 2011 at 02:38.
Beau_Peep
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: India
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how come the airplane was in normal law after dual engine failure? FCOM says that if flight control computers detect G+Y hyd failure, it goes into alternate law. isn't it?
were the engines windmilling enough to keep the hydraulics system pressure above 1450psi?
or did the flight crew selected yellow pump on after turning the APU on?
NTSB report is not clear about it..
were the engines windmilling enough to keep the hydraulics system pressure above 1450psi?
or did the flight crew selected yellow pump on after turning the APU on?
NTSB report is not clear about it..
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Yellow Brick Road
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NTSB report is not clear about it..
Beau_Peep
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: India
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
that is just one condition of 'flight control law reconfiguration'.. kindly refer to the FCOM again... there are several conditions which may lead to flight control law reconfiguration. dual hydraulic failure is one of them. my question pertains to the condition of dual hydraulic failure leading to law reconfiguration.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Yellow Brick Road
Posts: 1,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my question pertains to the condition of dual hydraulic failure leading to law reconfiguration.
FDR data indicated that, during the accident event, all three (green, blue, and yellow) hydraulic systems were available ...
Beau_Peep
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: India
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In case if we lose both the engines and EDP is not generating sufficient pressure, we can turn on the APU and then yellow pump. yellow system would come alive and with that PTU would also function to bring green system alive.. airplane may go into normal law again.. is it possible for the airplane in alternate law to move back into normal law once the failure is gone?
ENTREPPRUNEUR
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 60s
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did Airbus save the day?
He didn't need Airbus technology to ditch it but ground effect took care of any descent rate he had approaching the Hudson. The results speak for them self.
However the fact is Sully flew the plane slower than he should and slower than he meant to - that's what the report says.
The results were ... damage to the rear of the plane that might have been avoided if he had been at a higher speed into the flare, and thus with more energy to arrest the rate of descent.
His actions in the final moments were being mediated by envelope protection. It's not entirely clear whether that was benign or counter-productive but I still think there is an argument that a comparable B737 could have led to a more serious outcome. You can't say it wouldn't have made any difference because there clearly was computer intervention.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't say it wouldn't have made any difference because there clearly was computer intervention.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rudderrudderrat
One flew to Alpha Max using FBW
Originally Posted by twistedenginestarter
The results were ... damage to the rear of the plane that might have been avoided if he had been at a higher speed into the flare
His actions in the final moments were being mediated by envelope protection.
We could say so only if the aircraft had first delivered Alpha Max.
Last edited by CONF iture; 30th Sep 2011 at 00:11.