AF 447 Thread No. 10
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus Test Pilot Says Air France Crash Defeats Simulators
Evidently Airbus is complaining that no one has been able to design a simulator to
-- and that this means that more non-simulator training needs to take place.
http://http://www.bloomberg.com/news...tml?cmpid=yhoo
accurately replicate the conditions after an aircraft loses lift, or stalls
http://http://www.bloomberg.com/news...tml?cmpid=yhoo
Last edited by SeenItAll; 15th Mar 2013 at 14:16. Reason: corrected text
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good link to Bloomberg news !
Airbus Test Pilot Says Air France Crash Defeats Simulators - Bloomberg
I can be wrong .. but I think that the Boeing F/A-18 Hornet have such automatism (Auto spin or stall recovery)
Maybe Gums can tell us more about ...
Airbus Test Pilot Says Air France Crash Defeats Simulators - Bloomberg
Engineers are also exploring whether a plane could be better protected after a stall by expanding the use of computer- generated responses even when control reverts to its pilots following the receipt of conflicting information, as happened in the Air France crash.
Maybe Gums can tell us more about ...
Last edited by jcjeant; 15th Mar 2013 at 14:41.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding of the F/A18 is that at low speed, (0, on the catapult) and "departed" the hand must be off the stick....
The Pilot must "Let go", the aircraft recovers (launches) itself.....
gums?
The Pilot must "Let go", the aircraft recovers (launches) itself.....
gums?
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the BEA's analysis not achieve the "good enough" standard in this investigation?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vapilot
What I can say is there are a multitude of unpublished areas, both temporal and in selected data channel
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lyman,
How can one say "there are a multitude of unpublished areas" if one has not seen anything? Speaking in generalities is useless, specific 'omissions' can be discussed.
" what the aircraft was doing, what the automatics were doing, and what the pilots saw on their instrument displays" is all extensively discussed in the report, with all the relevant data as recorded. I really am at a loss what data could possibly be added to better understand those topics. "What the pilots saw" is asking what went on in their minds, and that was not recorded.
How can one say "there are a multitude of unpublished areas" if one has not seen anything? Speaking in generalities is useless, specific 'omissions' can be discussed.
" what the aircraft was doing, what the automatics were doing, and what the pilots saw on their instrument displays" is all extensively discussed in the report, with all the relevant data as recorded. I really am at a loss what data could possibly be added to better understand those topics. "What the pilots saw" is asking what went on in their minds, and that was not recorded.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only hope of knowing what has "not been made public" so far is that it will probably be made public during the trial
Indeed, the judge may require all documents he deems necessary to establish the judicial truth .. it is in his power
Indeed, the judge may require all documents he deems necessary to establish the judicial truth .. it is in his power
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HazelNuts39
I cannot believe we are having this discussion. Early: "Here, and Here, you go up, so go down..." "You climb, so go down..." 'Eh, what are you doing..."
Either you believe there is nothing of value in the CVR, and BEA have divulged what they have, without comment. Or you think and trust that BEA should be the be all and end all, of inflection, tone, vocabulary, etc. I do not trust anyone to interpret evidence for me. If I am privy to knowledge of dangerous behaviour by an airline, crew, or equipment, it is my RIGHT to make an informed conclusion, after assessing the evidence, for myself.
I have my reasons, as do others, for not being so trusting. I do not for one thing believe in a "sole source", when it comes to Public safety. I have seen enough of that that backfired on the investigation, and even led to prosecution for serious "errors" of "judgment"...
It is a fundamental of Western society that an accused be allowed to face his accusers, and testify on his behalf in any proceeding. The CVR is the last eyewitness account of an accident that has value for all of us regarding furthering the cause of safety, not to mention the reputations and state of mind of the crew....
What is it about the Truth that you do not feel obliged to seek? Do you believe the report is scrupulously complete, and without bias? It is impossible, without knowing the evidence, in my opinion, to know these things.
For one reason or another, this crash is charged as a crime, manslaughter. With holding evidence is a crime in and of itself, imo.
I have no idea the reputation of this source... But the MAIL ONLINE claims DuBois was heard claiming he had but one hour rest the night before the flight....
I cannot believe we are having this discussion. Early: "Here, and Here, you go up, so go down..." "You climb, so go down..." 'Eh, what are you doing..."
Either you believe there is nothing of value in the CVR, and BEA have divulged what they have, without comment. Or you think and trust that BEA should be the be all and end all, of inflection, tone, vocabulary, etc. I do not trust anyone to interpret evidence for me. If I am privy to knowledge of dangerous behaviour by an airline, crew, or equipment, it is my RIGHT to make an informed conclusion, after assessing the evidence, for myself.
I have my reasons, as do others, for not being so trusting. I do not for one thing believe in a "sole source", when it comes to Public safety. I have seen enough of that that backfired on the investigation, and even led to prosecution for serious "errors" of "judgment"...
It is a fundamental of Western society that an accused be allowed to face his accusers, and testify on his behalf in any proceeding. The CVR is the last eyewitness account of an accident that has value for all of us regarding furthering the cause of safety, not to mention the reputations and state of mind of the crew....
What is it about the Truth that you do not feel obliged to seek? Do you believe the report is scrupulously complete, and without bias? It is impossible, without knowing the evidence, in my opinion, to know these things.
For one reason or another, this crash is charged as a crime, manslaughter. With holding evidence is a crime in and of itself, imo.
I have no idea the reputation of this source... But the MAIL ONLINE claims DuBois was heard claiming he had but one hour rest the night before the flight....
Last edited by Lyman; 15th Mar 2013 at 21:53.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lyman,
There are three recorded 'data channels' - the ACARS messages, the DFDR data, and the CVR. The DFDR tells us what the pilot did with the controls, and what the airplane did in response. The two have been correlated, and there is no open question about those. The DFDR data, together with the information gathered by BEA, tells us what the automatics were doing. It was extensively discussed on this forum. I'm not aware of any open questions in that area, except the behavior of the flight directors, but that was not recorded. The DFDR also tells us most of the information available to the pilots on their displays and BEA has reconstructed as far as possible the missing parts. Where that was not possible, the information was not recorded.
We do not know what the pilots saw because it was not recorded what they were looking at, nor how their brains processed what they saw. The CVR tells us what they told each other, and what other sounds there were in the cockpit. True, that information is too scarce to enable us to fully understand their mental processes, why they acted the way they did. If they had said more, maybe we would better understand what they did. But, if they said more, how could it be in anybody's interest to hide that?
There are three recorded 'data channels' - the ACARS messages, the DFDR data, and the CVR. The DFDR tells us what the pilot did with the controls, and what the airplane did in response. The two have been correlated, and there is no open question about those. The DFDR data, together with the information gathered by BEA, tells us what the automatics were doing. It was extensively discussed on this forum. I'm not aware of any open questions in that area, except the behavior of the flight directors, but that was not recorded. The DFDR also tells us most of the information available to the pilots on their displays and BEA has reconstructed as far as possible the missing parts. Where that was not possible, the information was not recorded.
We do not know what the pilots saw because it was not recorded what they were looking at, nor how their brains processed what they saw. The CVR tells us what they told each other, and what other sounds there were in the cockpit. True, that information is too scarce to enable us to fully understand their mental processes, why they acted the way they did. If they had said more, maybe we would better understand what they did. But, if they said more, how could it be in anybody's interest to hide that?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They did say more. You will say they did not. BEA have said nothing either way...
You are satisfied with that. My experience instructs me to ask for proof...
A graph of any kind can be erratic, inexplicit, and misinterpreted. Raw data, all of it....thank you.
You are satisfied with that. My experience instructs me to ask for proof...
A graph of any kind can be erratic, inexplicit, and misinterpreted. Raw data, all of it....thank you.
Originally Posted by jcjeant
I think that the Boeing F/A-18 Hornet have such automatism (Auto spin or stall recovery)
Originally Posted by seenItAll
Evidently Airbus is complaining that no one has been able to design a simulator to accurately replicate the conditions after an aircraft loses lift, or stalls
Originally Posted by HazelNuts39
True, that information is too scarce to enable us to fully understand their mental processes
Originally Posted by Hazelnut39
How can one say "there are a multitude of unpublished areas" if one has not seen anything?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They did say more.
Some of what they said has been deemed irrelevant to the investigation, while on the otherhand, the speech tone and/or intonation imparted may in itself provide some additional clues. The BEA have in IMO avoided making those calls, as to do so would create further dispute over the rights or wrongs of such judgements.
Patience is a virtue, and the criminal trial programed for sometime in the future may eventually establish a little more about the situation in the cockpit that night, not that it will ever change the substance of the BEA's Final Report.
Last edited by mm43; 16th Mar 2013 at 00:50. Reason: 'do' for 'to'
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Based on what?
(…) Word or group of words with no bearing on the flight
(!) Curse
(*) Words or groups of words not understood
I have read the CVR transcript - just like you, and the reasons I gave for my statement followed the piece you quoted.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From A320Driver, on the RN thread (447)
I also found that in the Daily Mail, from Ben's site.
If that is from the CVR, (how?) Then BEA should be removed from any role in the further investigation of the flight, and another impartial entity be appointed.
And they should relinquish all evidence. Criminal prosecution should ensue.
According to a report on the Italian Corriere della Sera, at some point before he went for in flight rest, the Commander had said something to the effect hat he had not slept enough the previous night and that one hour sleep is not enough.
If that is from the CVR, (how?) Then BEA should be removed from any role in the further investigation of the flight, and another impartial entity be appointed.
And they should relinquish all evidence. Criminal prosecution should ensue.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About fatigue .. this what all I find in the BEA final report:
Note:
Bold added by me
Seems the judicial experts have more infos about fatigue in their report ..
Note:
Bold added by me
1.16.7 Aspects relating to fatigue
The professional timetable of the three crew members during the month that
preceded the accident flight shows that the limitations on flight and duty times, as
well as rest times, were in accordance with the provisions of European Regulation
(EC) n°859/2008 of the European Commission (sub-section Q of Annex III).
The investigation was not able to determine exactly the activities of the flight crew
members during the stopover in Rio, where the crew had arrived three days earlier. It was not possible to obtain data on their sleep during this stopover.
This lack of precise information on their activity during the stopover, in particular in
relation to sleep, makes it impossible to evaluate the level of fatigue associated to
the flight crew’s duty time.
The CVR recording does, however, make it possible to show that the crew showed no
signs of objective fatigue, as the following elements indicate:
ˆ The level of activity and implication of the augmented crew in the first part of
the flight, with the Captain and the copilot seated in the right seat, then in the
second part of the flight with the two copilots, are in accordance with what is
expected from a crew in the cruise phase. No signs of drowsiness or sleepiness
are noticeable;
ˆ At 0 h 58 min 07, the Captain was concerned with the state of fatigue of the
copilot in the right seat. («try maybe to sleep twenty minutes when he comes
back or before if you want ») who answered that he didn’t want to sleep;
ˆ Questioned on his return to the cockpit, the copilot who took the Captain’s place
answered that he had “dozed”.
The professional timetable of the three crew members during the month that
preceded the accident flight shows that the limitations on flight and duty times, as
well as rest times, were in accordance with the provisions of European Regulation
(EC) n°859/2008 of the European Commission (sub-section Q of Annex III).
The investigation was not able to determine exactly the activities of the flight crew
members during the stopover in Rio, where the crew had arrived three days earlier. It was not possible to obtain data on their sleep during this stopover.
This lack of precise information on their activity during the stopover, in particular in
relation to sleep, makes it impossible to evaluate the level of fatigue associated to
the flight crew’s duty time.
The CVR recording does, however, make it possible to show that the crew showed no
signs of objective fatigue, as the following elements indicate:
ˆ The level of activity and implication of the augmented crew in the first part of
the flight, with the Captain and the copilot seated in the right seat, then in the
second part of the flight with the two copilots, are in accordance with what is
expected from a crew in the cruise phase. No signs of drowsiness or sleepiness
are noticeable;
ˆ At 0 h 58 min 07, the Captain was concerned with the state of fatigue of the
copilot in the right seat. («try maybe to sleep twenty minutes when he comes
back or before if you want ») who answered that he didn’t want to sleep;
ˆ Questioned on his return to the cockpit, the copilot who took the Captain’s place
answered that he had “dozed”.
Last edited by jcjeant; 16th Mar 2013 at 17:59.
The only inference I can draw from this current discussion is that a few forumites are in effect demanding that the BEA should release the CVR sound track in its entirety, so that it can be broadcast on the www for public judgement and therefore, inevitably, prurient entertainment. Unlike the investigators, they seem to care little of the human consequences, and would carry no responsibilty for them.
They represent the school of the blame and shame culture - the modern equivalent of those who relished the spectacle of the guillotine, or pelted with rotten eggs the petty criminal in the stocks. To them an investigation is a tool for litigation; not for learning. Finally recovered from the trauma of realising that their crazy assertions about the demise of AF447, and the conduct of the search, were discredited, they employ weasel words to imply that the BEA is conspiring to pervert the cause of justice for the deceased.
Those who constantly protest for the truth, but deny it even when it is staring them in the face, include the usual suspects. They know who they are. They have never worked in an airliner cockpit, nor on the bridge of a ship, and appear to have no experience or even understanding of the balance between authority and responsibility in a safety-critical operation. Just as well, for their cavalier indifference to rational thought, combined with obsessive attention seeking, would be a lethal combination. Their constant carping has slowly betrayed their agenda, which even they no longer believe to be compatible with the established facts.
The truth is that no degree of revelation would silence their accusations of tampering of the data and other evidence, and it is impossible to prove a negative. Releasing the CVR audio channels for public consumption would be an immoral act. It would also persuade most flight crew that installing cockpit videos would be an intolerable step. Their arguments are not worthy of consideration.
They represent the school of the blame and shame culture - the modern equivalent of those who relished the spectacle of the guillotine, or pelted with rotten eggs the petty criminal in the stocks. To them an investigation is a tool for litigation; not for learning. Finally recovered from the trauma of realising that their crazy assertions about the demise of AF447, and the conduct of the search, were discredited, they employ weasel words to imply that the BEA is conspiring to pervert the cause of justice for the deceased.
Those who constantly protest for the truth, but deny it even when it is staring them in the face, include the usual suspects. They know who they are. They have never worked in an airliner cockpit, nor on the bridge of a ship, and appear to have no experience or even understanding of the balance between authority and responsibility in a safety-critical operation. Just as well, for their cavalier indifference to rational thought, combined with obsessive attention seeking, would be a lethal combination. Their constant carping has slowly betrayed their agenda, which even they no longer believe to be compatible with the established facts.
The truth is that no degree of revelation would silence their accusations of tampering of the data and other evidence, and it is impossible to prove a negative. Releasing the CVR audio channels for public consumption would be an immoral act. It would also persuade most flight crew that installing cockpit videos would be an intolerable step. Their arguments are not worthy of consideration.
