AF 447 Thread No. 11
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Devonshire
Age: 96
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bonin as PF might be expected to scan his instruments.
Robert as PNF may have had the opportunity to look around. According to one earlier thread, the THS which had been around 3 degrees NU at 2.10.50, moved steadily, reaching 13 degrees NU at 2.11.50, where it stayed. ( This would have been in response to Bonin's input, I think.)
This was not commented on by either pilot, and perhaps it was unseen. Someone said that the THS is not in ones normal scan on an AB 330.
Would the rotation of the THS be more readily noticeable from the corner of a pilot's eye if (for example) a white mark made any movement noticeable ?
I do not know the "gearing" of the wheel but a movement in just ONE direction over a period of a minute might have warranted further investigation, by either pilot.
Does PNF have PM ( Pilot Monitoring) responsibilities ?
Robert as PNF may have had the opportunity to look around. According to one earlier thread, the THS which had been around 3 degrees NU at 2.10.50, moved steadily, reaching 13 degrees NU at 2.11.50, where it stayed. ( This would have been in response to Bonin's input, I think.)
This was not commented on by either pilot, and perhaps it was unseen. Someone said that the THS is not in ones normal scan on an AB 330.
Would the rotation of the THS be more readily noticeable from the corner of a pilot's eye if (for example) a white mark made any movement noticeable ?
I do not know the "gearing" of the wheel but a movement in just ONE direction over a period of a minute might have warranted further investigation, by either pilot.
Does PNF have PM ( Pilot Monitoring) responsibilities ?
Last edited by Linktrained; 23rd Oct 2013 at 17:47. Reason: spelg
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wengen
Age: 53
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AF447
There is evidence that all three were tired.
Robert reported upon his return that he did not sleep well but only "dozed a little."
His seat remained fully back and to the left in the parked position the entire time.
Robert should have taken over at the first sign that Bonin wasn't flying as required "you're going up so go down" but that was strictly against the AF culture.
In fact, few (if any) PMs anywhere are trained to take over the airplane.
I've never heard of it being practised in the simulator or as part of actual hands-on training exercise.
In the future, it must be, for the ability of the average pilot to fly manually without any little green bars to follow is diminishing with time.
Soon, the engineers will be able to address the leading cause of accidents today - LOC - in flight due to the pilots not being able to handle the situation.
They will do this by removing the pilots and frankly we will have deserved it if we don't take action.
The alternative is for pilots to become pilots again and learn to control and recover the airplane from extreme situations.
Robert reported upon his return that he did not sleep well but only "dozed a little."
His seat remained fully back and to the left in the parked position the entire time.
Robert should have taken over at the first sign that Bonin wasn't flying as required "you're going up so go down" but that was strictly against the AF culture.
In fact, few (if any) PMs anywhere are trained to take over the airplane.
I've never heard of it being practised in the simulator or as part of actual hands-on training exercise.
In the future, it must be, for the ability of the average pilot to fly manually without any little green bars to follow is diminishing with time.
Soon, the engineers will be able to address the leading cause of accidents today - LOC - in flight due to the pilots not being able to handle the situation.
They will do this by removing the pilots and frankly we will have deserved it if we don't take action.
The alternative is for pilots to become pilots again and learn to control and recover the airplane from extreme situations.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Devonshire
Age: 96
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AF447 was hardly in an extreme situation... At least initially.
I was a totally untrained newbie 2nd Officer on a York, ordered by the Captain to hand fly at cruising level, to give the F/O a rest for an hour. ( The A/P was U/S) It was daylight, and I was told "Not to wander about". The next sector was at night, and I did "my hour" again, I assume, adequately.
I understand that a York was perhaps easier to hand fly at cruising level than many more modern aircraft ( if they were allowed - RVSM etc.) Pilots have much better training than was available then. ( Some 62 years ago.)
I was a totally untrained newbie 2nd Officer on a York, ordered by the Captain to hand fly at cruising level, to give the F/O a rest for an hour. ( The A/P was U/S) It was daylight, and I was told "Not to wander about". The next sector was at night, and I did "my hour" again, I assume, adequately.
I understand that a York was perhaps easier to hand fly at cruising level than many more modern aircraft ( if they were allowed - RVSM etc.) Pilots have much better training than was available then. ( Some 62 years ago.)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 3,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True but it didn't have to be just then and there are some oddities to the events. At least one of the pilots was anxious for his return and questioned the delay in returning and there is no mention in the released transcript of his reference to being bell'ed back or having just got his head down. Still, no need to upset Dozy
- The noise was from Bonin moving the RHS forward
- The noise was from Robert moving the LHS forward, and he may have returned it to the "storage" position to accommodate the Captain on his return
The second possibility can make sense if one takes into account that the cockpit noise had increased significantly at the onset of stall, and rendered the seat motor noise unintelligible to the Cockpit Area Microphone.
As for the position of the RHS, and its importance to Bonin's leverage on the sidestick, the report is crystal clear on that point.
Originally Posted by BEA AF447 Final Report (English) p.110
The right side seat was positioned 5.5 cm from the most forward position with a right side armrest bearing the indication of A3 adjustment. This adjustment is consistent with the piloting position of a pilot with the morphology of the PF. The pilot (PF) was attached via lap and crotch belts.
Last edited by DozyWannabe; 23rd Oct 2013 at 18:36.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wengen
Age: 53
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Conjecture
AF447 conjecture will remain unless the DCVR is released in its entirety but the BEA has instead provided inedible hashed morsels.
The juge d'instruction can force the BEA to do it.
Why has she not?
The transcript is over-edited and the flow of converstion is not linear.
Why is that?
Did Bonin use his S/S as a handle to pull himself up whilst adjsuting his seat and by doing so caused the initial pitch-up coinciding with start of this misadventure?
Was there was a PAX seated on the jumpseat which would explain Bonin's unrelinquished grip - figuratively and literally - on the S/S and as PF?
Was that PAX Mme Bonin?
In the final judicial experts' report (not BEA), there is an unidentified 4th voice on the DCVR.
This would explain as to why Dubois was not seated when he came back onto the F/D.
Then there is the licence question and yes it has been discussed.
According to the 1st BEA report, he held a "Frozen ATPL" or "Writtten ATPL" but by the 3rd report, he was mysteriously promoted to ATPL proper the same way De Gaulle promoted himself from Colonel to General whilst in exile.
The BEA must explain why this misreporting occurred.
So you want to know if Bonin really had a proper licence?
The answer is on his payslips.
AF give their crew a 6% premium on every flying hour if they hold a "full" licence.
Which neatly brings us to AF selection.
In 2008, 30 F/As were fast-tracked onto the RHS and were exempted from psychometric testing.
Why on earth did Dubois utter to Bonin: "T'as le PL, toi?"
Simply because he had a doubt himself as an ex-F/A who belatedly and reluctantly became a Captain having failed his linecheck in 2007.
The juge d'instruction can force the BEA to do it.
Why has she not?
The transcript is over-edited and the flow of converstion is not linear.
Why is that?
Did Bonin use his S/S as a handle to pull himself up whilst adjsuting his seat and by doing so caused the initial pitch-up coinciding with start of this misadventure?
Was there was a PAX seated on the jumpseat which would explain Bonin's unrelinquished grip - figuratively and literally - on the S/S and as PF?
Was that PAX Mme Bonin?
In the final judicial experts' report (not BEA), there is an unidentified 4th voice on the DCVR.
This would explain as to why Dubois was not seated when he came back onto the F/D.
Then there is the licence question and yes it has been discussed.
According to the 1st BEA report, he held a "Frozen ATPL" or "Writtten ATPL" but by the 3rd report, he was mysteriously promoted to ATPL proper the same way De Gaulle promoted himself from Colonel to General whilst in exile.
The BEA must explain why this misreporting occurred.
So you want to know if Bonin really had a proper licence?
The answer is on his payslips.
AF give their crew a 6% premium on every flying hour if they hold a "full" licence.
Which neatly brings us to AF selection.
In 2008, 30 F/As were fast-tracked onto the RHS and were exempted from psychometric testing.
Why on earth did Dubois utter to Bonin: "T'as le PL, toi?"
Simply because he had a doubt himself as an ex-F/A who belatedly and reluctantly became a Captain having failed his linecheck in 2007.
Last edited by Winnerhofer; 25th Oct 2013 at 16:49.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: France - mostly
Age: 84
Posts: 1,682
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The juge d'instruction can force the BEA to do it.
Since both the DFDR and the CVR memory modules were put under judicial seal as soon as they arrived on deck of the salvage vessel, and contain important evidence in a criminal proceeding, I guess that the judge has full access to both sets of data.
Last edited by HazelNuts39; 23rd Oct 2013 at 21:11.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wengen
Age: 53
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Experts
A second panel of "experts" has now been ordered at the behest of Airbus who although were happy with the first panel's report even though none of the panel had ever flown an Airbus.
The new panel has a Swiss Professor as well as 2 other non-French members out of a total of 5.
On the judicial front, Zimmermann will retire in 2014 and the trial is expected in 2016.
Experts: COMPAGNIE NATIONALE des EXPERTS de JUSTICE AERONAUTIQUE et ESPACE
The new panel has a Swiss Professor as well as 2 other non-French members out of a total of 5.
On the judicial front, Zimmermann will retire in 2014 and the trial is expected in 2016.
Experts: COMPAGNIE NATIONALE des EXPERTS de JUSTICE AERONAUTIQUE et ESPACE
Last edited by Winnerhofer; 24th Oct 2013 at 17:36.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FR
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by AlphaZuluRomeo; 24th Oct 2013 at 09:24. Reason: typo
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: West of Offa's dyke
Age: 88
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since both the DFDR and the CVR memory modules were put under judicial seal as soon as they arrived on deck of the salvage vessel, and contain important evidence in a criminal proceeding, I guess that the judge has full access to both sets of data.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dozy
To be honest I think it's a lot like jcjeant on this particular subject (AF447 case) but fortunately for you (because you would be tired of answering) they are not all member of PPrune or don't post their opinions and griefs
Winnerhofer sounds a lot like jcjeant, to be honest...
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Wengen
Age: 53
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEA
And to preserve the integrity of the evidence to be presented at that trial she will no doubt control what BEA are allowed to publish.
Therein lies the much politicised rub.
Don't forget pressure by Unions are extremely powerful but in the end Airbus will get off the hook because commercially AF is a light-weight compared with Airbus.
Might is right.
Remember that the BEA is not independent at all and all their reporting is wishy-washy made up of oui, mais, peut-être obsessed by not ruffling any feathers.
This "No Blame" nonsense is an antithesis to safety.
I rate the TSB the best of all hands-down and their SR111 report has yet to be surpassed.
Going off topic, Zimmermann was A320 instructor before he became an MD-11 one.
A320 procedure in case of smoke/fire is LAND ASAP and till this day I can't understand why he didn't use that as a Pavlovian fallback instead of going though an endless checklist.
Therein lies the much politicised rub.
Don't forget pressure by Unions are extremely powerful but in the end Airbus will get off the hook because commercially AF is a light-weight compared with Airbus.
Might is right.
Remember that the BEA is not independent at all and all their reporting is wishy-washy made up of oui, mais, peut-être obsessed by not ruffling any feathers.
This "No Blame" nonsense is an antithesis to safety.
I rate the TSB the best of all hands-down and their SR111 report has yet to be surpassed.
Going off topic, Zimmermann was A320 instructor before he became an MD-11 one.
A320 procedure in case of smoke/fire is LAND ASAP and till this day I can't understand why he didn't use that as a Pavlovian fallback instead of going though an endless checklist.
Last edited by Winnerhofer; 24th Oct 2013 at 20:16.
Oh look! A zombie thread!
Originally Posted by IcePack
Sometimes a small excursion outside the safe limits may be required Mother Nature doesn't know the limits. Boeing recognise this airbus doesn't
Originally Posted by Uplinker
Yes, but we are not monitoring computers per se, we are monitoring the flight path.
Originally Posted by RexBanner
The A330 stall warner is suppressed below 60 knots because the computers believe the aircraft to be on the ground below that speed.
Originally Posted by SwissCheese
The Coroner reviewed the full accident report, the relevant medical and pathological evidence, then called the AAIB as expert witnesses to explain the sequence of events and the findings of the BEA report.
Originally Posted by DozyWannabe
When the Captain arrived, even he couldn't make head or tail of what was going on until it was too late.
Originally Posted by CapnBloggs
Not "couldn't", "didn't". Poor design.
Originally Posted by Capn Bloggs
I don't need to, Dozy, nor did I ever say there was one. Some bright spark thought that aeroplanes couldn't fly below 60KIAS so decided that they'd turn the stall warning off below that. Bad decision. If the aeroplane's in the air and below stall speed/above stall AoA, keep the stall warning on! Why is that concept so hard for you to grasp?
Originally Posted by 172510
Is it possible to train a crew so that in case of another failure of the same equipment in the same weather conditions etc. the aircrew would not crash?
Originally Posted by Flyingmole
Anyone who wants a more informed view on this aspect of it should just (...) listen to David Learmount's very persuasive case. His view is that it is not - as he puts it - a loss of flying skills but a loss of situation awareness and cognition.
Originally Posted by jimjim1
As it happened the LHS pilot declined to accept the (very good) advice coming from a less (perhaps inadequately) assertive but far more experienced pilot who's role was Pilot Monitoring. Quite simply I suspect that his (the pilot flying's) head was too big for his boots.
I think that this was the Captains crucial error. (Well apart from leaving the flight deck at all given the proximity of the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone and the associated radar visible thunderstorms, which were a mere 10 minutes ahead).
Originally Posted by bubbers44
No pilot I have ever met would ever do that because they know how to fly.
Basically, your statements boils down to: "I have no idea about human factors but I'll keep myself opinionated around here".
Originally Posted by PJ2
IIRC, his training for the UAS event was right after takeoff. The memorized pitch attitude is 15° and TOGA for those circumstances
Originally Posted by PJ2
in my view is the root cause of the accident because, by following SOPs, (ECAM drills, paper drills, status, etc etc) and using correct CRM procedures to maintain discipline and sort out the problem before independently leaping into (unknown) individual actions, the accident could have been prevented
Originally Posted by PJ2
Again as I have pointed out numerous times, a UAS event is NOT an emergency and does not require instant, un-coordinated, undisciplined action. It is not an engine fire, a depressurization, an hydraulic failure etc. The airplane itself does not 'care' what the airspeed indication is.
Originally Posted by Chris Scott
As I've said before, I also wonder if the APPARENT sudden loss of about 300 ft of altitude (due to the removal of correction for airspeed when the IAS went AWOL) might have provoked a knee-jerk (of the wrist) response.
Originally Posted by Machinbird
The aircraft was in roll direct. He apparently he had no prior experience in flying in Alt2b Law in the simulator at altitude and likely, no experience in flying in Direct law at altitude. As a result, his mental model of the aircraft response was out of calibration and his control inputs were well beyond appropriate for roll.
Originally Posted by Machinbird
It is very likely that Bonin's nose up efforts were initially inadvertent as he struggled with the roll, then later, deliberate as he either reverted to seat of the pants flying or started flying the flight director.
Originally Posted by Machinbird
The lack of experience in direct law at altitude was a key contributing factor that allowed a roll PIO to develop, and from there, it all snowballed downhill.
Originally Posted by rudderrudderrat
The crew seem to have simply continued to follow those erroneous commands.
Originally Posted by Winnerhoffer
In fact, few (if any) PMs anywhere are trained to take over the airplane.
I've never heard of it being practised in the simulator or as part of actual hands-on training exercise.
I've never heard of it being practised in the simulator or as part of actual hands-on training exercise.
Originally Posted by Winnerhoffer
AF447 conjecture will remain unless the DCVR is released in its entirety but the BEA has instead provided inedible hashed morsels.
Originally Posted by Winnerhoffer
The juge d'instruction can force the BEA to do it.
Originally Posted by Winnerhoffer
Why has she not?
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Devonshire
Age: 96
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AZR
Thank you for the photos of the THS. (I can put my paints away !)
But it STILL leaves the THS moving for a whole minute going fully NU. Surely this should be unusual in (what was nominally) cruising flight.
Some smaller movements could be expected to be due to the routine automatic transfer of fuel or even passengers moving.
Both F/Os ought to have been alert and looking. Some of this is recorded on the CVR.
Thank you for the photos of the THS. (I can put my paints away !)
But it STILL leaves the THS moving for a whole minute going fully NU. Surely this should be unusual in (what was nominally) cruising flight.
Some smaller movements could be expected to be due to the routine automatic transfer of fuel or even passengers moving.
Both F/Os ought to have been alert and looking. Some of this is recorded on the CVR.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 82
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clandestino,
You are being a naughty boy. You are trying to spin this thread up to max RPM by using poorly researched and poorly supported comments.
FYI, the AOA probe on my F-4 would be alive with normal wind over the deck on the ship and was also good for over 750 knots worth of Q. I don't think anyone is going to make serious money re-inventing that item.
AF447 IAS if it could have been accurately read never got below 150 KT after the departure from controlled flight, so I do not understand this fascination with an AOA able to operate at 5 knots. The only way an airborne jet is going to do that is by climbing vertically, and then only briefly, and most guys flying heavy iron know that is a really bad idea. The AOA probes were functioning, but there was no way to present that information to the crew in AF447.
Bloggs is right when he says
Even BEA thought that EASA should review that concept.
Sure, several times, but we also knew how to regain control.
Quote:
I think that this was the Captains crucial error. (Well apart from leaving the flight deck at all given the proximity of the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone and the associated radar visible thunderstorms, which were a mere 10 minutes ahead).
Well, it seems that someone finally had a problem with it, didn't they?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinbird
The aircraft was in roll direct. He apparently he had no prior experience in flying in Alt2b Law in the simulator at altitude and likely, no experience in flying in Direct law at altitude. As a result, his mental model of the aircraft response was out of calibration and his control inputs were well beyond appropriate for roll.
So 30 seconds worth of beating snakes with a side stick is your definition of efficiently gaining control? Wow!
You are being a naughty boy. You are trying to spin this thread up to max RPM by using poorly researched and poorly supported comments.
FYI, the AOA probe on my F-4 would be alive with normal wind over the deck on the ship and was also good for over 750 knots worth of Q. I don't think anyone is going to make serious money re-inventing that item.
AF447 IAS if it could have been accurately read never got below 150 KT after the departure from controlled flight, so I do not understand this fascination with an AOA able to operate at 5 knots. The only way an airborne jet is going to do that is by climbing vertically, and then only briefly, and most guys flying heavy iron know that is a really bad idea. The AOA probes were functioning, but there was no way to present that information to the crew in AF447.
Bloggs is right when he says
Some bright spark thought that aeroplanes couldn't fly below 60KIAS so decided that they'd turn the stall warning off below that. Bad decision. If the aeroplane's in the air and below stall speed/above stall AoA, keep the stall warning on!
Originally Posted by Clandestino
pilots of yesteryear occasionally lost control too.
Quote:
I think that this was the Captains crucial error. (Well apart from leaving the flight deck at all given the proximity of the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone and the associated radar visible thunderstorms, which were a mere 10 minutes ahead).
Originally Posted by Clandestino
It was done this way millions times before and hundred of thousand times after without any adverse consequence so what is the problem with it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinbird
The aircraft was in roll direct. He apparently he had no prior experience in flying in Alt2b Law in the simulator at altitude and likely, no experience in flying in Direct law at altitude. As a result, his mental model of the aircraft response was out of calibration and his control inputs were well beyond appropriate for roll.
Originally Posted by Clandestino
No they were not. He put roll under control pretty efficiently and way before stall warning went off third and the longest time.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MB, good for you, you finally beat him at his best repetitive game, nailing all of us like he is the ace of the base. Thanks. We have grown tired of hearing his constant I am smarter than you crap.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to remind everybody where this came from AF447 crashed in the Atlantic Ocean RIO to PAR flight because two copilots with captain taking required rest was in back sleeping. They encountered precipitation and pitot tubes froze up causing no airspeed indication so autopilot disconnected so PF pulled up 15 degrees at 35,000 ft and of course stalled. The FO assisting did nothing but request the captain to return to cockpit. By then they were in a deep stall and when the captain arrived it was too late so they crashed and everybody died. All that was necessary was one pilot who could hand fly but he was sleeping. I think this our next generation of pilots.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We haven't hired a pilot since 9/11 so our guys are still seasoned and capable but some foreign airlines hire pilots right out of flight school to fly with another almost equally incompetent pilot while the captain takes his required break. Is this the wave of the future??