Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Air France 447 - On topic only!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I think the final report allocated a significant and appropriate amount of responsibility for this accident on lack of training.

    The recommendations for Airbus seemed to be more along the lines of "In an ideal situation, had this contingency been in place, the accident may have been prevented."

    The analogy I look to is this. If someone backs up in their driveway and inadvertently hits a young child behind the car, that is the driver's responsibility. As a driver, you should always know what's behind you before you back up. But as a recommendation, to avoid similar future occurrences, one might recommend a rear view camera, without actually making such an improvement mandatory for all vehicles.

    At the end of the day, a rear view camera should not be necessary for a driver who does what he or she is supposed to. In the case of this accident, had these pilots done what they were supposed to - in fact, had they just not done what they were not supposed to - then the additional recommendations pertaining to Airbus would never have come into play. Indeed, had the pilots done absolutely nothing but sit there and gape, they might well have come out of the situation unscathed.

    The factor that does not get addressed in the report is that of pitot tubes, and the fact that they are the one critical system that lacks redundancy. Probably there is no way to include this in the report, but for aviation in general, I think we have now had enough crashes related to pitot tube malfunctions to insist on a redundant backup system.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Fear_of_Flying View Post
      ...........
      The factor that does not get addressed in the report is that of pitot tubes, and the fact that they are the one critical system that lacks redundancy. Probably there is no way to include this in the report, but for aviation in general, I think we have now had enough crashes related to pitot tube malfunctions to insist on a redundant backup system.
      The pitot tubes are dual or triple redundant - it is unusual to have all of them freeze up. It was known that the pitot tubes were prone to problems and were being replaced fleet wide.

      And as mentioned in previous posts there is a back-up procedure to follow if airspeed indication is lost thus adding another measure of redundancy.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Fear_of_Flying View Post
        The factor that does not get addressed in the report is that of pitot tubes, and the fact that they are the one critical system that lacks redundancy. Probably there is no way to include this in the report, but for aviation in general, I think we have now had enough crashes related to pitot tube malfunctions to insist on a redundant backup system.
        Cessna 172's have one pitot tube.

        They also have heat to prevent icing.

        (Ok, so does Air Bus, but it's interesting that they aren't more infallable)
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Peter Kesternich View Post
          Interesting that the last sentence is:

          In that manner, this crash resembles the loss of Air France Flight 447 on June 1, 2009, where the pilots were warned of unreliable airspeed, but failed to perform the necessary procedures.

          I do work for a domestic US airline, and it should be noted that I do not represent such airline, or any airline. My opinions are mine alone, and aren't reflective of anything but my own knowledge, or what I am trying to learn. At no time will I discuss my specific airline, internal policies, or any such info.

          Comment


          • here's an interesting tidbit: was discussing this whole af447 deal with my buddy that flies the challenger 300. he is currently in dallas doing training on the sim. guess what is and has been part of his standard training? you guessed it! high altitude upset recovery INCLUDING STALLS.

            so much for big airline training programs.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
              ...standard training? you guessed it! high altitude upset recovery INCLUDING STALLS...
              I can't figure out why the recurrent training doesn't include a quick verbal review? (No expensive sim time, and it would not take all that long!)

              Here's a good start:

              1) Do you remember stalls from your initial training? (tell me about it?)
              2) What causes a stall?, Flying too slow?
              3) What attitudes and airspeeds can an airplane be stalled at?
              4) That being said, what attitudes and airspeeds and situations are particularly good for stalling?
              5) What's a good procedure for recovering from a near stall with minimal altitude loss?
              6) What's a good procedure for recovering from a fully-developed stall?
              7) What's the best way to avoid stalling?
              If the speed is slow and the nose is high and the stall warning is going off, what might that mean, and what corrective actions might you consider?
              9) Quickly review what happened in these crashes: Pinnacle, Colgan, Air France?
              10) Please promise that you won't do stuff like that.

              Then they can spend the rest of the day doing engine cuts at V1 +/- 1 knot, review weather minimums, deal with extreme cross winds and practice lots of memory checklists.
              Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

              Comment


              • expensive sim time? yeah, it's expensive. but if my friend's boss can afford it, the airlines should be able to. if they can't, well, then maybe they shouldn't be in business.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 3WE View Post
                  9) Quickly review what happened in these crashes: Pinnacle, Colgan, Air France?
                  10) Please promise that you won't do stuff like that.
                  love it!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                    here's an interesting tidbit: was discussing this whole af447 deal with my buddy that flies the challenger 300. he is currently in dallas doing training on the sim. guess what is and has been part of his standard training? you guessed it! high altitude upset recovery INCLUDING STALLS.

                    so much for big airline training programs.
                    After several accidents and incidents where a stall was mismanaged, there was a new birth of stall training. The manufacturers, the authorities and even the airlines made a group to study the problem, named crap the procedures that were current up to then (and they were crap, they even blamed them for confusing the pilots to produce a stall while attempting to minimize altitud loss, as mandated byt the procedures, in place of managinf AoA, which was not even mentioned and is what it takes to minimize altitude loss) and made a new one, and recomended training training training.

                    Air France was before this. I bet that, by 2009, you could find several pilots of several airlines that had not practiced high altitude stalls.

                    By the way, a good thing of the new procedure is that it is the same at any altitude. So, by all means do practice high altitude stalls, but practicing stalls at any altitudes will help at high altitudes too.

                    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
                      After several accidents and incidents where a stall was mismanaged, there was a new birth of stall training. The manufacturers, the authorities and even the airlines made a group to study the problem, named crap the procedures that were current up to then (and they were crap, they even blamed them for confusing the pilots to produce a stall while attempting to minimize altitud loss, as mandated byt the procedures, in place of managinf AoA, which was not even mentioned and is what it takes to minimize altitude loss) and made a new one, and recomended training training training.
                      They have also recommended AoA instrumentation. The 737NG currently offer this as an option. 767? 777? 787? 748? A320NEO? A380? A350?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TeeVee View Post
                        here's an interesting tidbit: was discussing this whole af447 deal with my buddy that flies the challenger 300. he is currently in dallas doing training on the sim. guess what is and has been part of his standard training? you guessed it! high altitude upset recovery INCLUDING STALLS.

                        so much for big airline training programs.
                        One of the first Challengers was lost during a stall test*. Perhaps the test pilots insisted on including stall recovery during training.
                        * http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites...air-CGCGRX.htm

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
                          One of the first Challengers was lost during a stall test*. Perhaps the test pilots insisted on including stall recovery during training.
                          * http://www.check-six.com/Crash_Sites...air-CGCGRX.htm
                          different aircraft entirely. the 300 was developed from scratch. but either way. bombardier includes this training, so kudos for them

                          Comment


                          • Apparently there is a new documentary about AF447

                            Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.


                            It seems to have many errors and omissions. Did they really get imprecise altitude and a malfunctioned vertical speed indication? I also think Robert and Dubois never realized with full assurance they were in a stall.
                            Anyway, this is the first recreation after the black boxes were found. I don't speak french, but was hoping to eventually hear the CVR tape. Anyone know if BEA is planning to release it?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Black Ram View Post
                              I don't speak french, but was hoping to eventually hear the CVR tape. Anyone know if BEA is planning to release it?
                              There's a big part of the CVR transcribed in the third preliminary report, starting page 85, appendix 1

                              Comment


                              • I just watched the documentary, I think it's pretty good. They dumb it down, as you have to for the general audience, but the main focus is on facts.
                                Personally, I think it would have been worth to mention the preoccupation the youngest FO was showing with the weather, because I think it explains his constant desire to pull on the stick and his initial reaction to climb when the warnings start and the AP disconnects, but it's really just speculation.
                                It would also have been worth mentioning that there are very precise SOPs for UAS situations, the crew just didnt follow them. At 41:15 this John Mahon guy says "You have 3 experienced pilots and between them, they cant figure out what's going on, that's not pilot error, it's a system failure."
                                No it's not. They didnt call for UAS procedures and instead pulled up until they stalled and fell out of the sky. And how a captain of 11.000 flying hours doesnt recognise a stall when the airplane is falling at a rate of 10.000ft/min is absolutely beyond me.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X