Forum menu
The stall warnings stopped. Are you guys blaming the pilots reading stuff from before the black boxes were found in 2011?
There was a documentary on Air France 447 only last week. Well worth watch
[url= http://www.channel4.com/programmes/fatal-flight-447-chaos-in-the-cockpit ]Chaos in the cockpit[/url]
It was a glaring pilot error, basically. Schoolboy stuff. The pilot stalled the plane, all the instruments were telling him he'd stalled the plane. He ignored them, and the plane dropped into the sea
The link I posted has the full transcript of the black box recordings.
The pitot tubes were out for a minute or so. Then:
The Airbus's stall alarm is designed to be impossible to ignore. Yet for the duration of the flight, none of the pilots will mention it, or acknowledge the possibility that the plane has indeed stalled—even though the word "Stall!" will blare through the cockpit 75 times. Throughout, Bonin will keep pulling back on the stick, the exact opposite of what he must do to recover from the stall.
Air France 447 was completly out of comms range though if I recall correctly
No such thing. Aircraft have HF radio which provides global coverage - the reason no distress call was received is because they didn't make one.
[quote=LHS said]Air France 447 was completly out of comms range though if I recall correctly, Malaysian MH370 was in comms range, so why silence?
Air France were having comms problems apparently rather than being out of range.
777's have multiple radios (3 I believe) on different bands + a satellite phone.
The stall warnings stopped. Are you guys blaming the pilots reading stuff from before the black boxes were found in 2011?
I thought the stall warning stopped because the plane went into alternate law because the computer went "you're, like, 30 degrees nose-up at 40 000 feet doing 160 knots*? Something's not right here."
EDIT - Furthermore, I understand that every time the nose dropped to something approaching a flyable angle, the stall warning started again until matey-boy in the righthand seat yanked it back up again.
He ignored them, and the plane dropped into the sea
So either he willfully went against everything that any pilot even at the lowest levels knows (you don't pull back while in a stall) or there's more to it.
I would suggest that the issue I mentioned above where the pilots didn't understand that alternate law meant that the plane would let them do things outside the correct envelope is likely the root cause.
The stall warnings were largely continuous other than the brief moments when they did regain control.
Wouldn't mind betting Putin had something to do with it, just to detract world attention from the Ukraine for a couple of days.
The stall warnings stopped. Are you guys blaming the pilots reading stuff from before the black boxes were found in 2011?
The stall warnings stopped because they'd flown the aircraft into such a deep stall that the computer no longer trusted the information. Plenty of time to correct when the stall warning first went off - I'm not a professional airline pilot, but I'd think my first instinct when a stall warning sounds would be to check the airspeed and rate of ascent and push the stick forwards a bit, none of which seem to have happened. I note that all problems with the pitots were over by the time it stalled. I'm not even really sure you can blame it on lack of training, it was such a basic error - I'm assuming they did at least receive a significant amount of training on what a stall is, why and how to avoid it.
Oh, and all based on information from the black boxes - before those became available I think it was assumed there was a more fundamental technical problem.
I would suggest that the issue I mentioned above where the pilots didn't understand that alternate law meant that the plane would let them do things outside the correct envelope is likely the root cause.
You're probably right about that as a cause, but it doesn't detract from it being a pilot error - no excuse.
it was such a basic error
Again, yes, it is which suggests that it's not as simple as it looks.
Bear in mind that these guys do a large amount of training, what explanation could there be for such a basic mistake?
Its worth watching that documentary clubber. Its really interesting. It seems incomprehensible that 3 experienced pilots would sit scratching their heads, while allowing that to happen. All the time with the plane telling them what the problem was. But that appears to be exactly what happened.
They also ignored procedures regarding handing over the aircrafts controls, so one pilot was pulling the stick up to climb the whole time, while the others thought they had control, and were unaware he was doing it
Yeah, it's a complete mess, no doubt and I guess that really it's the lack of procedures that would have stopped it happening at several points that's the issue I guess. It'd be interesting/scary to know how consistently procedures are followed though, particularly in non-normal scenarios.
It's fun, simple and easy to blame the pilot. It saves the documentary channels from having to go into too much detail because everyone understands 'pilot error'. And It gets everyone else off they hook, the manufacturer, the authority and he company.
It's not that simple. The FO in question didn't go to work to crash the aircraft. Multiple issues combined over many years to culminate in the AF disaster. It is naive and simplistic to say it was 'matey-boy what yanked it into a stall'.
I am not saying that there were not mistakes made on that flight deck, there were plenty especially in the route choice through the thunderstorms and then the initial diagnosis of the issue. It's hard to think straight when you're in the tops of thunderstorms in the ITCZ - I've been there! But it's so much much more complicated than that. The manufacturer and the training department of the airline are equally culpable in my opinion.
Rest assured that those of us who fly an Airbus have learnt from this tragic incident.
Again, yes, it is which suggests that it's not as simple as it looks.
There is a lot to that, I think - might seem pretty obvious from here, but we are all benefiting from a massive amount of hindsight.
Your edit has the crux of it, Pondo. The stall warning came on when the the pilot did the right thing and went off when he did the wrong thing.
The pilots lost speed information, found themselves on manual and with contradictory information. Critcally, even though Air France was aware the problems with the pitot tubes and spurious computer messages they had not retrained all the pilots to cope with the situation.
The suggestion seems to be that they were ignoring the instruments as they didn't trust them (despite them all working perfectly by the time things went wrong) and trying to fly by the seat of their pants - or at least that is the case for one of them, who seems to have been totally confused. Not only that, but he didn't tell anybody what he was doing and ignored instructions. Would have been interesting to have carried out a tox test on him...
The stall warning came on when the the pilot did the right thing and went off when he did the wrong thing.
Only after the situation had been happening for some time - the warning went off because the plane went into an even deeper stall. Had the stick been pushed forwards when the alarm first sounded (at which point the aircraft hadn't actually stalled yet), which seems like the obvious thing to do in pretty much any circumstances, there would have been no problem.
...actually checking the transcript again, the stall warning first went off because they did the right thing, and went back on again when he did the wrong thing again.
we are all benefiting from a massive amount of hindsight.
I'm benefiting from basic knowledge of flight. When the stall warning sounds, the instruments show that your airspeed is low and falling and your altitude is high and rising, you push the stick forwards. As much as you might distrust the instruments, surely you give them a chance of being right first?
if you dont know what you are talking about, talk about something you do?
What happened to the Vietnam Navy report of debris, or the early sightings of two large oil slicks?
be it malfunction or terrorism, its under water somewhere.
Just read that article about AF. Clearly Pilot error, not helped by bad weather...thunderstorm. No reported bad weather this time I think?
It's fun, simple and easy to blame the pilot. It saves the documentary channels from having to go into too much detail because everyone understands 'pilot error'. And It gets everyone else off they hook, the manufacturer, the authority and he company.It's not that simple. The FO in question didn't go to work to crash the aircraft. Multiple issues combined over many years to culminate in the AF disaster. It is naive and simplistic to say it was 'matey-boy what yanked it into a stall'.
Absolutely.
However, AF447 does serve to illustrate that human behaviours are generally a factor in air disasters. Rather than wings falling off, terrorists or alien abduction.
I'm benefiting from basic knowledge of flight. When the stall warning sounds, the instruments show that your airspeed is low and falling and your altitude is high and rising, you push the stick forwards. As much as you might distrust the instruments, surely you give them a chance of being right first?
Sitting here and now, I would and you would - but some chap sitting in that right hand chair who has vastly more experience and training and knowledge than me, he didn't. So when you look at the bare bones, yeah it's easy to say that guy screwed up on the simplest of things, but if he was an idiot, or didn't know what he was doing, he wouldn't have been sitting where he was at the time. Something made him do what he did.
OP in theory it'sossibke but the hijackers would have to turn off the tracking systems on the plane and I'm not sure that's even possible.
The Vietnamese didn't reprt debris just oil on the water and that could have come from anywhere most liley a ship focusing tanks.
The aircraft manufacturers always spin events after such crashes to shift blame/speculation onto pilots etc and away from their product the aircraft.
Sad times for the relatives not having confirmation but it seems inevitable the plane has crashed into the sea.
Would have been interesting to have carried out a tox test on him...
Negative no doubt.
However if he'd been able to benefit from the experience of two other Air France pilots who'd come close to disaster in similar circumstances he'd have known what to do even if he were having difficulty walking straight.
Rest assured that those of us who fly an Airbus have learnt from this tragic incident.
I can imagine it's a frequent test scenario on the simulator.
Klunk - yes exactly
However if he'd been able to benefit from the experience of two other Air France pilots who'd come close to disaster in similar circumstances he'd have known what to do even if he were having difficulty walking straight.
Let me guess - push the stick forwards?
Malaysian MH370 was in comms range, so why silence?
I forget the figures but there was a survey of pilots where a percentage admitted to falling asleep mid-flight, and within that there was a number who reported having woken up mid-flight to find their colleague also asleep.
Edit - infact I've found it - [url= http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/27/us-britain-pilots-sleep-idUSBRE98Q0L820130927 ]half admit to falling asleep, a third of those being asleep while their co-pilot was also asleep[/url]
The pilots can only report what they are aware of, but its also not inconceivable that whatever problem caused the plane to loose control also could have caused a loss of communication
Re the AF plane, yes absolutely a whole series of errors from the aircraft programming which isn't perfect, training from the manufacturer and training from the airline which had holes, weather related problems, lack of adequate rest etc etc. Ultimately every problem apart from the weather is due to humans and they all stack up.
But what I got from my own interpretation of the black box data and CVR (ignoring any documentaries etc) is that ultimately if the pilots had gone back to basic flight training and communicated they could have recovered that aircraft and what should have been a very quick and recoverable event was turned into a completely hopeless situation.
It is of course very easy for us to say that from the safety of our armchairs looking at all the evidence and it is is also hard to stay emotionally detached from making harsh comments in the face of such a glaring error when you think about the poor souls that lost their lives in such a stupid way.
I know it's unlikely but this could be an extra terrestrial grab.
Nobody can say it's not possible.
I know it's unlikely but this could be an extra terrestrial grab.Nobody can say it's not possible.
It's not possible.
I'd also suggest it's unlikely to have been the actions of some kind of terrorist organisation. Firstly, as the culprits would have claimed responsibility for it very soon after the event. Secondly as they'd have done it in such a way to generate media coverage for their cause (ie. not out at sea, where no one can see it).
I reckon it's been hijacked, shot down by China perhaps? With the last known position being shifter somewhat, just like on that Bond film so that nobody would know it was shot down.
It may never have taken off in the first place and may be some kind of massive insurance scam. Whilst we're all speculating, right? 😉
200+ people missing and the folk on here are winking and smiling! well done.
My money is on the aircraft being highjacked, all comms turned of, then the aircraft dived down to 100ft of so - under the radar and then flown to a disused airbase - which would easily take a B777
My money is on the Chinese - look what some lunatics with the knives done last week, butchering 30 odd people in a city centre
That or there is going to be one strange Malayan/Chinese version of Lost with a token European couple who can't conceive
I'm afraid mashiehood that even when catastrophic disasters occur involving massive loss of life, life does go on and sometimes without even the slightest acknowledgement of an incident if there is no personal involvement. At least the incident has been acknowledged here and is being discussed albeit with a few light-hearted throwaways.
I'd also suggest it's unlikely to have been the actions of some kind of terrorist organisation. Firstly, as the culprits would have claimed responsibility for it very soon after the event.
No one claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks for several months, nor did the hijackers leave any note whatsoever explaining their actions.
I do wonder if there was someone important on the plane.
But more than likely it is just an accident 🙁
It has already been speculated in the news that there were two false passport holders on the flight.
(Equally, on the French flight there was a passenger noted for his campaigning against the South American drug lords/trade who was speculated to be a target at the time).
Steady on people.
Maybe this might help:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/9811495/I-can-t-give-up-hope-says-wife-of-missing-passenger
200+ people missing and the folk on here are winking and smiling! well done.
It's interesting what hits the top of the news agenda, isn't it? (and that we take our cues from that - this is top of the headlines so it must be a "significant tragedy"), meanwhile in other world news:
[url= http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/03/09/3687302/iraq-suicide-car-bomb-kills-at.html ]More people blown to bits, this time in less headline-grabbing fashion[/url]
For those who can't be arsed with the link (and why should you?), I was struck by this little summary
Iraq has seen a spike in violence since last April, with the death toll climbing to its highest levels since the worst of the country's sectarian bloodletting in 2006-2008. The U.N. says 8,868 people were killed in 2013, and more than 1,400 people were killed in January and February of this year.
Oh yes, and in 2012, in the UK, 1,754 people were killed on the UK's roads, just not in one, big, headline grabbing incident, so we don't feel the need to be so subdued when discussing it.
My money is on the Chinese
You mean Islamic Uighurs as opposed to the Chinese? Because China is a big ass country with a lot of different ethnic groups within it's borders.
I know it's unlikely but this could be an extra terrestrial grab.Nobody can say it's not possible.
It's not possible.
It is actually possible.
Oh yes, and in 2012, in the UK, 1,754 people were killed on the UK's roads, just not in one, big, headline grabbing incident, so we don't feel the need to be so subdued when discussing it.
I can't remember people coming on here and making light of RTAs however so not sure what your point is?
Yes bad things happen all the time, and some are reported more than others, but making light of it 48hrs after its happened is a bit misplaced, IMO.
Massive sonic boom just occurred over west Wales...
^^^ That was me on a new Bronson C - Big air near Lampeter
Also, I have to laugh at the Chinese attacking the Malaysians for lax seruity....having flown through China, they are by far the most incompetent country I have been through when it comes to this. They make Manila Ninoy seem like the height of competence.