Air France 447 Crash info

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/index.h...
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's so
easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is doing,
especially if in IMC conditions.

All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems, where
computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can be disabled
on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment when the pilot
thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can be fatal. I know
FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly Aerosoft's Airbus X in
the past it's made me want to stay clear of them.

Ibby

Tom P

2011-10-25 17:13:35 UTC

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/index.h...
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's so
easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is doing,
especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems, where
computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can be disabled
on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment when the pilot
thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can be fatal. I know
FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly Aerosoft's Airbus X in
the past it's made me want to stay clear of them.
Ibby

quote: In one extract, a co-pilot says: "Climb, climb, climb." But his
colleague answers: "But I've been pulling back on the stick for a while
now."

It's tragic, but they apparently didn't understand that the worst
possible thing you can do in a stall is pull on the stick. Nothing to do
with fly-by-wire. It seems that nowadays pilots are drilled to do
everything to avoid an altitude bust, and forget basic the flying skills
needed to keep the plane in the air. There are endless discussions at
pprune about this.

Mad Mike

2011-10-25 17:49:18 UTC

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/index.h...
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's so
easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is doing,
especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems, where
computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can be disabled
on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment when the pilot
thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can be fatal. I know
FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly Aerosoft's Airbus X in
the past it's made me want to stay clear of them.
Ibby

quote: In one extract, a co-pilot says: "Climb, climb, climb." But his
colleague answers: "But I've been pulling back on the stick for a while
now."
It's tragic, but they apparently didn't understand that the worst
possible thing you can do in a stall is pull on the stick. Nothing to do
with fly-by-wire. It seems that nowadays pilots are drilled to do
everything to avoid an altitude bust, and forget basic the flying skills
needed to keep the plane in the air. There are endless discussions at
pprune about this.

Shows just how disoriented one can get...... and the real complicating
factor...PANIC!
MM

Ibby

2011-10-26 16:19:07 UTC

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/index.h...
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's so
easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is doing,
especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems, where
computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can be disabled
on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment when the pilot
thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can be fatal. I know
FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly Aerosoft's Airbus X in
the past it's made me want to stay clear of them.
Ibby

quote: In one extract, a co-pilot says: "Climb, climb, climb." But his
colleague answers: "But I've been pulling back on the stick for a while
now."
It's tragic, but they apparently didn't understand that the worst
possible thing you can do in a stall is pull on the stick. Nothing to do
with fly-by-wire. It seems that nowadays pilots are drilled to do
everything to avoid an altitude bust, and forget basic the flying skills
needed to keep the plane in the air. There are endless discussions at
pprune about this.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Apologies Tom, I thought I read once that the aircrafts systems
weren't doing as the pilot was commanding. I've read of other issues
of FBW dangerously overriding the pilots inputs even in an emergency.
The whole thing doesnt make sense, surely you would know you are
falling and not climbing even if your nose was up, you can feel it in
your stomach, did they even have any engine power or would a complete
stall in a jet engine cause them to shut off and spool down, I'll
have to try in in the NGX tonight though I'm sure the engines continue
to run. Flip even I learnt about stalling on my very first lesson in
a C152.

Ibby

scott s.

2011-10-26 21:35:04 UTC

Post by Mad Mike
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/inde
x.h..

Post by Mad Mike
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's
so easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is
doing, especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems,
where computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can
be disabled on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment
when the pilot thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can
be fatal. I know FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly
Aerosoft's Airbus X in the past it's made me want to stay clear
of them.
Ibby

quote: In one extract, a co-pilot says: "Climb, climb, climb." But
his colleague answers: "But I've been pulling back on the stick for
a while now."
It's tragic, but they apparently didn't understand that the worst
possible thing you can do in a stall is pull on the stick. Nothing
to do with fly-by-wire. It seems that nowadays pilots are drilled
to do everything to avoid an altitude bust, and forget basic the
flying skills needed to keep the plane in the air. There are
endless discussions at pprune about this.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Apologies Tom, I thought I read once that the aircrafts systems
weren't doing as the pilot was commanding. I've read of other
issues of FBW dangerously overriding the pilots inputs even in an
emergency. The whole thing doesnt make sense, surely you would know
you are falling and not climbing even if your nose was up, you can
feel it in your stomach, did they even have any engine power or
would a complete stall in a jet engine cause them to shut off and
spool down, I'll have to try in in the NGX tonight though I'm sure
the engines continue to run. Flip even I learnt about stalling on
my very first lesson in a C152.

Usually when you hear about "overriding pilots inputs" that is a
reference to envelope protection in normal law. Normal law will
prevent the pilot from stalling the aircraft. In AF447 due to
"unreliable airspeed" (caused by blocked pitot), the system reverted
to alternate law 1. In alternative law there is no envelope
protection, and a pilot CAN stall the aircraft. In alternate law
there is no direct control of pitch, just like in normal law moving
the sidestick creates a load demand. Also, the stab trim system will
auto-trim to maintain pilot commanded load demand. Load demand is
calculated a couple ways depending on speed and altitude, but in the
AF447 case it was determined by the g load the aircraft experiences.
Pulling back on the sidestick causes the system to deflect the
elevators until g load increases proportional to stick position.

Some folks point to the Mulhouse-Habsheim AB 320 AF296 crash as
proof of "overriding pilots inputs" but that is disputed, others
claim "pilot error".

Also there is "aerodynamic stall" determined by the angle of attack
exceeding the critical AoA on lift surfaces (wings/tail) which is
different from compressor stall which can occur in jet turbine engine.
In AF447 they placed the engines in TOGA 0:53 secs into the event
and then MCT (max continuous thrust) at 1:38. At that point the aircraft
was descending at 10,000 fpm with a 15 degree nose-up attitude. Per
BEA Interim Report 3 Appendix 4 (Flight Data Recorder traces) No 1 and 2
engines maintained 100 percent N1 through the event except for 2
intervals. Engine parameters seem to me consistent with full power
operation.

scott s.
.

Tom P

2011-10-27 17:38:49 UTC

Post by Mad Mike
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/inde
x.h..

Post by Mad Mike
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's
so easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is
doing, especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems,
where computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can
be disabled on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment
when the pilot thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can
be fatal. I know FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly
Aerosoft's Airbus X in the past it's made me want to stay clear
of them.
Ibby

quote: In one extract, a co-pilot says: "Climb, climb, climb." But
his colleague answers: "But I've been pulling back on the stick for
a while now."
It's tragic, but they apparently didn't understand that the worst
possible thing you can do in a stall is pull on the stick. Nothing
to do with fly-by-wire. It seems that nowadays pilots are drilled
to do everything to avoid an altitude bust, and forget basic the
flying skills needed to keep the plane in the air. There are
endless discussions at pprune about this.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Apologies Tom, I thought I read once that the aircrafts systems
weren't doing as the pilot was commanding. I've read of other
issues of FBW dangerously overriding the pilots inputs even in an
emergency. The whole thing doesnt make sense, surely you would know
you are falling and not climbing even if your nose was up, you can
feel it in your stomach, did they even have any engine power or
would a complete stall in a jet engine cause them to shut off and
spool down, I'll have to try in in the NGX tonight though I'm sure
the engines continue to run. Flip even I learnt about stalling on
my very first lesson in a C152.

Thanks Scott, you put that much better than I ever could.
I didn't know that auto trim operated in alternate law as well - in that
case, once the pilot pulls the nose up, it must be almost impossible
later to get the nose back down fast enough to recover the stall.

There was an Air China crash in an Airbus several years ago where the
pilot accidentally put the plane into go-around, then tried to force the
plane to land by pushing the stick forward. The auto trim screw jack
wound all the way to maintain the G/A climb, and when the pilot let go
of the stick, the nose flipped up and the plane stalled.

Post by scott s.
Some folks point to the Mulhouse-Habsheim AB 320 AF296 crash as
proof of "overriding pilots inputs" but that is disputed, others
claim "pilot error".
Also there is "aerodynamic stall" determined by the angle of attack
exceeding the critical AoA on lift surfaces (wings/tail) which is
different from compressor stall which can occur in jet turbine engine.
In AF447 they placed the engines in TOGA 0:53 secs into the event
and then MCT (max continuous thrust) at 1:38. At that point the aircraft
was descending at 10,000 fpm with a 15 degree nose-up attitude. Per
BEA Interim Report 3 Appendix 4 (Flight Data Recorder traces) No 1 and 2
engines maintained 100 percent N1 through the event except for 2
intervals. Engine parameters seem to me consistent with full power
operation.
scott s.
.

Ibby

2011-11-11 12:12:35 UTC

Post by Mad Mike
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/inde
x.h..

Post by Mad Mike
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's
so easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is
doing, especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems,
where computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can
be disabled on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment
when the pilot thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can
be fatal. I know FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly
Aerosoft's Airbus X in the past it's made me want to stay clear
of them.
Ibby

quote: In one extract, a co-pilot says: "Climb, climb, climb." But
his colleague answers: "But I've been pulling back on the stick for
a while now."
It's tragic, but they apparently didn't understand that the worst
possible thing you can do in a stall is pull on the stick. Nothing
to do with fly-by-wire. It seems that nowadays pilots are drilled
to do everything to avoid an altitude bust, and forget basic the
flying skills needed to keep the plane in the air. There are
endless discussions at pprune about this.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Apologies Tom, I thought I read once that the aircrafts systems
weren't doing as the pilot was commanding. I've read of other
issues of FBW dangerously overriding the pilots inputs even in an
emergency. The whole thing doesnt make sense, surely you would know
you are falling and not climbing even if your nose was up, you can
feel it in your stomach, did they even have any engine power or
would a complete stall in a jet engine cause them to shut off and
spool down, I'll have to try in in the NGX tonight though I'm sure
the engines continue to run. Flip even I learnt about stalling on
my very first lesson in a C152.

Thanks Scott, you put that much better than I ever could.
I didn't know that auto trim operated in alternate law as well - in that
case, once the pilot pulls the nose up, it must be almost impossible
later to get the nose back down fast enough to recover the stall.
There was an Air China crash in an Airbus several years ago where the
pilot accidentally put the plane into go-around, then tried to force the
plane to land by pushing the stick forward. The auto trim screw jack
wound all the way to maintain the G/A climb, and when the pilot let go
of the stick, the nose flipped up and the plane stalled.

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

Thanks guys for the excellent analysis. I have experienced what you
described in PMDG's 747-400X with a high angle of attack, full thrust
yet the aircraft has stalled and is dropping, very hard to recover
from and naturally pushing the nose forward may be difficult due to
the possible aerodynamic stresses on the control surfaces

Ibby

Copter_ Six

2011-10-26 23:20:48 UTC

Post by Tom P
- Show quoted text -

The whole thing doesnt make sense, surely you would know you are
falling and not climbing even if your nose was up, you can feel it in
your stomach, did they even have any engine power or would a complete
Ibby

Ibby, you can never trust your 'seat of the pants flying' or what your
stomach is telling you. With absolutely no references outside the
cockpit and conflicting references inside the last thing you can trust
is what your body is telling you.

In the Army every evaluation ride, several a year, include recovery from
unusual attitudes. The instructor has the pilot, who has a hood on and
chin bubble view blocked, lower his head so the chin rests on the chest,
neck, whatever and starts flying the helicopter through all kinds of
wild, but within the envelope, maneuvers and at some point the pilot is
told to take the controls and recover. In the OH58 series helicopters
(Bell 206), with the doors removed, the left static port is just forward
of the door frame at boot level. I could disrupt the airflow and cause
erratic indications on the altimeter and airspeed indicators so the
pilot had to disregard airspeed altogether and recover using the other
instruments. What will really test the skill is to have unreliable
airspeed indication, fluctuating altimeter and no attitude indicator. I
hated that one when it was me performing the maneuver.

That procedure shows positively that what your body is telling you is no
where near what is actually happening. You recover using only the
aircraft instruments and learn to disregard any perception you feel. We
had the basic instruments to allow IMC flight and in the OH58D we had a
basic glass cockpit with a backup analog attitude indicator, VSI, power
gauges, airspeed and altimeter so it was fairly easy to figure out which
were telling the truth if they were providing different information.

Now, if you have all those screens with all kinds of things conflicting
with each other I can absolutely see some panic in the cockpit and
unless the pilot gets himself back in control of his perceptions and
goes back to basics an accident can easily result.

--
Copter Six

*Psychopath: A Journey Through the Madness*
=================================================

MikeW

2011-10-27 19:37:39 UTC

Post by Copter_ Six

Post by Tom P
- Show quoted text -

<snip>

Thanks, Bob, that was a very detailed reply to Ibby.

I remember teaching a student how to hook up in free fall. We were closing
towards each other, about ten feet apart, when we suddenly entered cloud.
The standard drill when entering cloud is to stop all manoeuvres, and just
'sit' there until you can see the ground, keeping an eye on your altimeter
of course. When we came out of the cloud he was still there, about ten feet
away, flying perfectly stable, but was upside down!!!! Even with a 120mph
slipstream he became totally disoriented.

--
MikeW

Copter_ Six

2011-10-28 21:36:29 UTC

Post by MikeW
Thanks, Bob, that was a very detailed reply to Ibby.

It was more from experience than books. I already forgot what the books
said. :{}}

Post by MikeW
I remember teaching a student how to hook up in free fall. We were closing
towards each other, about ten feet apart, when we suddenly entered cloud.
The standard drill when entering cloud is to stop all manoeuvres, and just
'sit' there until you can see the ground, keeping an eye on your altimeter
of course. When we came out of the cloud he was still there, about ten feet
away, flying perfectly stable, but was upside down!!!! Even with a 120mph
slipstream he became totally disoriented.

That's something I've always wanted to do. It's doubtful I'll ever do it
now.

--
Copter Six

*Psychopath: A Journey Through the Madness*
=================================================

MikeW

2011-10-28 22:12:54 UTC

Post by Copter_ Six

Post by MikeW
Thanks, Bob, that was a very detailed reply to Ibby.

It was more from experience than books. I already forgot what the books
said. :{}}

That's something I've always wanted to do. It's doubtful I'll ever do it
now.

Why not? :-)

You have three main options, I would suggest a tandem jump.

https://www.texasskydiving.com/jump_comparison.php

--
MikeW

Mad Mike

2011-10-25 17:48:16 UTC

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/index.h...
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

I agree you cant beat the old 'bubble test' that divers use, it's so
easy to become disorientated and not no what your aircraft is doing,
especially if in IMC conditions.
All very sad. I'm not a fan of Airbus's Fly By Wire systems, where
computers can override the PIC's inputs. I know this can be disabled
on the overhead panel but in the heat of the moment when the pilot
thinks he's in control when indeed he isn't it can be fatal. I know
FSX is just a sim but after trying to hand fly Aerosoft's Airbus X in
the past it's made me want to stay clear of them.
Ibby

Yup, Get back to basics especially in a crisis.
:)

Ray

2011-10-26 04:59:50 UTC

Whoa gang. What we had here is a pitch black night over the Atlantic. The
aircraft was in clouds, so no visible horizon. It was a glass panel aircraft
in which the info being presented to the flight crew was all screwed up
because BOTH of the pitot tubes that sense ram air pressure, which is
translated into airspeed, had become iced over because they were
inadequately heated, a design defect that both Airbus and Air France knew
about.

The airspeed indicators were showing a high and rising airspeed, that's why
the aircrew were trying to pull up the nose. Excess airspeed is something
aircrews are trained to avoid at all costs because it's very dangerous.

It's been reported that the electronic angle of attack indicators were
working fine and the crew could and should have flown by them ("pitch plus
power equals performance"). But how were they to know that these were OK
when they were getting contradictory signals from the other instruments?
There are usually three sets of instruments on an aircraft like this,
pilot's, co-pilot's and backup. Normally, when one set fails, you can
determine which one is bad by looking to see which two sets of instruments
still agree with each other. These will be the good indications that can be
used to maintain control. That's what aircrews are trained to do. In this
case, all three sets of instruments were giving self-contradictory
indications.

If a weight hanging from a string would have helped, aircraft wouldn't need
the expensive gyros they are equipped-with, to fly when there's no horizon
visible. Such weights are subject to centripetal as well as gravimetric
forces, so they can't indicate where "down" is. Same problem with flying "by
the seat of one's pants". In my book, this flight crew was put in a very
difficult if not impossible situation, with very little time to sort things
out; meantime the aircraft was going through some wild gyrations. I expect
that, as usual, the aircrew (who are not around to defend themselves) will
at least in large part be blamed for this disaster.

Ray

Post by Mad Mike
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/14/world/americas/af447-transcript/index.html?iref=obinsite
Ya know, a simple weight hanging from a string may have helped
determine up/down/bank issues. Too bad.
MM

Iain Smith

2011-10-26 16:04:33 UTC