Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Air France 447 wreckage found in Atlantic

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    loldog
    Registered Users Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    This bit puzzles me
    the inputs made by the PF were mainly nose-up

    If the nose is already up, why keep pushing it up further? I assume the attitude indicator was working?

    .


  • Options
    #93
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    loldog wrote: »
    This bit puzzles me



    If the nose is already up, why keep pushing it up further? I assume the attitude indicator was working?

    .

    I may have read it incorrectly but it appears to me that they regained the sensor platform after a minute and a half.

    It's what I was referring to earlier about the situational awareness, and what manic referred to when he mentioned about the pilots thinking they were in a nose down attitude and that they didn't trust the sensor readings.

    It's possible that they just didn't realize what was going on.

    10K feet per minute rate of descent in nose high attitude suggests the plane got away from them.


  • Options
    #94
    robertxxx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,163 ✭✭✭robertxxx


    Right, first off, i know nothing about flying bar sitting in the cattle section.:D


    But when poo happens and the autopilot turns off because "it" cant make sense of the readings its getting due to icing/faulty sensors etc..and the pilot is starting panicking due to these false readings, why don't pilots with vast experience go back to basics and try not to fix a problem with a problem.
    EG; they can see the "throttle" is at a certain position and they can hear the engines then they should roughly know the speed they are going, and as for the pitch is there not some sort of basic physical spirit level so when all else fails and it black outside they have some basic way to make judgments a bit better?

    But what do i know:D


  • Options
    #95
    cml387
    Registered Users Posts: 8,382 ✭✭✭cml387


    robertxxx wrote: »
    Right, first off, i know nothing about flying bar sitting in the cattle section.:D


    But when poo happens and the autopilot turns off because "it" cant make sense of the readings its getting due to icing/faulty sensors etc..and the pilot is starting panicking due to these false readings, why don't pilots with vast experience go back to basics and try not to fix a problem with a problem.
    EG; they can see the "throttle" is at a certain position and they can hear the engines then they should roughly know the speed they are going, and as for the pitch is there not some sort of basic physical spirit level so when all else fails and it black outside they have some basic way to make judgments a bit better?

    But what do i know:D

    I think your question goes right to the centre of what will be the outcome of the investigation.

    If you automate aircraft to the point where pilots become observers of the computers that fly the plane,what happens if things go suddenly t!ts up with the system and you're left to fly the plane yourself.


  • Options
    #96
    loldog
    Registered Users Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    According to this documentary, there's a procedure to follow when you can't find out your airspeed.

    Set throttle to 85%, pitch nose up at an angle of 5 degrees.

    Watch a few minutes of this, to see them doing it in the simulator.

    http://youtu.be/SJMhX_IQP7A#t=38m34s

    What complicated matters in this incident though was that one wing stalled before the other, so the plane turned sharply to the right.

    .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    FOGOFUNK
    Closed Accounts Posts: 332 ✭✭FOGOFUNK


    robertxxx wrote: »
    Right, first off, i know nothing about flying bar sitting in the cattle section.:D


    But when poo happens and the autopilot turns off because "it" cant make sense of the readings its getting due to icing/faulty sensors etc..and the pilot is starting panicking due to these false readings, why don't pilots with vast experience go back to basics and try not to fix a problem with a problem.
    EG; they can see the "throttle" is at a certain position and they can hear the engines then they should roughly know the speed they are going, and as for the pitch is there not some sort of basic physical spirit level so when all else fails and it black outside they have some basic way to make judgments a bit better?

    But what do i know:D

    The engine power is not directly proportional to the airflow over the wings.


  • Options
    #98
    cml387
    Registered Users Posts: 8,382 ✭✭✭cml387


    I note they couldn't climb because it was "too cold".

    I wonder were they in "coffin corner",although 38,000 feet wouldn't be that high.


  • Options
    #99
    pclancy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,939 ✭✭✭pclancy


    Hard to read that report without being amazed. What on earth made them distrust the artificial horizon and not point the nose down to recover from the stall? It just seems weird to stall that high up and not have time to recover before striking the ocean, even if the main displays were displaying false information could they not read the standby instrumentation? It points to a very confusing final few minutes for the pilots.

    Imagine what falling at 10,000fpm felt like to the passengers :(


  • Options
    #100
    JonathanAnon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭JonathanAnon


    Here's a CBS report, which shows a computer simulation of how the flight ended..

    Air France Flight 447's harrowing end

    Youtube wont allow me to embed cos they have ads attached to it..

    Sorry, just a small addition.. Here's an analysis from CNN's Andy Gray type analyst Richard Quest.. He poses the question "Why the cockpit crew continued to keep the nose up, when every pilot from Cesna to jumbo jet... understands and is taught.. that when the plane stalls you have to lose height ... to gain speed... to save the aircraft"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRAwIcIxJ_4


    ..


  • Options
    #101
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,737 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    I can remember the feeling of cold dread I got when I first saw the list of ACARS messages sent from this aircraft.

    Watching that CBS recreation all I can saw was that at least it was only 4 minutes for the pax and crew onboard.

    RIP


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    A320
    Registered Users Posts: 708 ✭✭✭A320


    cml387 wrote: »
    I note they couldn't climb because it was "too cold".

    I wonder were they in "coffin corner",although 38,000 feet wouldn't be that high.

    It could be possible the Aircraft was too heavy at that time in flight to go above FL380,ive seen on the FMGC's PERF page the crz alt selected,the economic altitude and max altitude,i think this all related to performance,so the heavier you are the lower you CRZ ALT will be

    As the aircraft burns fuel it becomes lighter obviously and can climb higher,if you ever listen to ATC shannon and most of the flights coming in off the atlantic requesting level change to climb to a more economical height for fuel saving and performance,im sure theres people on here who will tell you a lot more about this than me.


    Stall indication comes from Angle of Attack sensors located on the side of the aircraft,also called Alpha vanes,these sensors pivot in a nose up and down action and this angle is fed to a stall management computer and other sources for different aircraft,speed/weight also has a lot to do with computing it as the critical angle of attack is approached,speed will be lowered,however i'm no A330 expert


  • Options
    #103
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    The altitude was then about 35,000 ft, the angle of attack exceeded 40 degrees and the vertical
    speed was about -10,000 ft/min. The airplane’s pitch attitude did not exceed 15 degrees
    and the engines’ N1’s were close to 100%. The airplane was subject to roll oscillations that
    sometimes reached 40 degrees. The PF made an input on the sidestick to the left and nose-up
    stops, which lasted about 30 seconds.
    At 2 h 12 min 02, the PF said "I don’t have any more indications", and the PNF said "we have
    no valid indications". At that moment, the thrust levers were in the IDLE detent and the
    engines’ N1’s were at 55%. Around fifteen seconds later, the PF made pitch-down inputs. In
    the following moments, the angle of attack decreased, the speeds became valid again and the
    stall warning sounded again.
    At 2 h 13 min 32, the PF said "we’re going to arrive at level one hundred". About fifteen seconds
    later, simultaneous inputs by both pilots on the sidesticks were recorded and the PF said "go
    ahead you have the controls".
    The angle of attack, when it was valid, always remained above 35 degrees.
    The recordings stopped at 2 h 14 min 28. The last recorded values were a vertical speed of
    -10,912 ft/min, a ground speed of 107 kt, pitch attitude of 16.2 degrees nose-up, roll angle of
    5.3 degrees left and a magnetic heading of 270 degrees.

    My God... that is the stuff of nightmares.


  • Options
    #104
    cml387
    Registered Users Posts: 8,382 ✭✭✭cml387


    There is a theory:
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,765764-2,00.html

    that a software fault may have locked the horizontal stabilser to full
    "nose up" position and that the pilots were essentially fighting the software which had suffered,for want of a better word,a nervous breakdown.

    Remember the Airbus controls are all electronically linked to the control surfaces,there is no physical conection.


  • Options
    #105
    A320
    Registered Users Posts: 708 ✭✭✭A320


    cml387 wrote: »
    There is a theory:
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,765764-2,00.html

    that a software fault may have locked the horizontal stabilser to full
    "nose up" position and that the pilots were essentially fighting the software which had suffered,for want of a better word,a nervous breakdown.

    Remember the Airbus controls are all electronically linked to the control surfaces,there is no physical conection.

    The rudder isn't just electrically linked and neither is the THS,they have primarily mechanical inputs

    THS full leading edge up is about 13 degrees which moves the aircraft nose down.

    A theory is all it is,software failure,Thats a bit speculative as the trim input to the THS is mechanical via i think the blue and yellow hydraulic system,the electrical input from the PRIM is for auto trimming and assist and the mechanical trim wheel has priority over the electrical input,now if this had a software failure everything would of went ape,and would the next PRIM computer take over???? questions questions questions,will we ever get the truth or will the blame game continue???

    I shall consult the AIRNAV tomorrow!!!


  • Options
    #106
    pclancy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,939 ✭✭✭pclancy


    Are they saying that the trim was in full nose up position as well as the elevators themselves?


  • Options
    #107
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    cml387 wrote: »
    There is a theory:
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,765764-2,00.html

    that a software fault may have locked the horizontal stabilser to full
    "nose up" position and that the pilots were essentially fighting the software which had suffered,for want of a better word,a nervous breakdown.

    Remember the Airbus controls are all electronically linked to the control surfaces,there is no physical conection.

    Bit of a dumb ass question, but why would the software have locked the horizontal stabiliser to full 'nose up' and yet the FDR be recording nose up inputs from the pilots?

    I know that the B737 had an issue with the Rudder PCU, but in those cases the rudder was going into full opposite lock. Are you (or Der Spiegel) saying that this is also a possible cause?


  • Options
    #108
    BrianD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,221 ✭✭✭BrianD


    Anybody see the article in one of the sundays written by a correspondent in LA.

    Disgraceful. The headline was about the aircraft being flown by "baby pilots". The senior pilot in the cockpit was 32 and had 1 years experience flying this type of aircraft. He then suggested that the pilot was "napping" the inference being that he was sleeping on the job.

    The article went on to elaborate how it wouldn't happen with US pilots as the majority come from military or naval backgrounds and are therefore experienced. Flys in the face of reality where many crashes involving US flagged aircraft have been as a result of pilots responding to the situation presented by their controls/instruments.

    As a general observation - there is a lot of articles and press releases put out there to the media with agendas. I couldn't help wonder if this was one of them


  • Options
    #109
    loldog
    Registered Users Posts: 634 ✭✭✭loldog


    BrianD wrote: »
    The article went on to elaborate how it wouldn't happen with US pilots as the majority come from military or naval backgrounds and are therefore experienced.

    Ha ha yeah, like these geniuses who flew 150 miles past the airport they were supposed to land at?

    Back to AF447, the terrifying thing is that this plane went from 35,000 feet to impact in the sea in a matter of three minutes or so. That's really scary. :eek:

    .


  • Options
    #110
    ellieh1
    Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭ellieh1


    Thinking of my cousin, her two friends and all the passengers and crew who died two years ago today on flight AF447.


  • Options
    #111
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/0601/breaking33.html

    75 bodies recovered so far. i don't mean to sound morbid ellieh1, but i sincerely hope your cousin is among these people.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    JonathanAnon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,718 ✭✭✭✭JonathanAnon


    Some interesting transcripts from the CVR in this article...

    http://www.herald.ie/news/cockpit-terror-of-jets-38000ft-death-plunge-2835832.html
    "What do you think? What do you think? What should we do?" The 37-year-old Air France co-pilot with over 6,000 flying hours was running out of ideas as a stall alarm bellowed through the Airbus cockpit for the sixth time in exactly two minutes.

    His junior colleague with two years on the job was already in despair as he battled to control the jet's speed and prevent it rocking left to right in pitch darkness over the Atlantic, on only his second Rio de Janeiro-Paris trip as an A330 pilot. "I don't have control of the plane. I don't have control of the plane at all," the younger pilot (32) said.


  • Options
    #113
    pclancy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,939 ✭✭✭pclancy


    Sad reading. Especially the calm acceptance of the captain just before he died. "Ten degrees pitch". It reads like they never actually realised they were in a stall. I know its easy for me to say but why didnt it occour to pitch down and recover :(

    I've never come across the term "gasped for air" in relation to a wing before. Interesting Journalism as usual.

    GASPED

    "Hey what are you --," he said on entering the cockpit.

    "What's happening? I don't know, I don't know what's happening," replied the senior co-pilot, sitting on the left.

    With the benefit of black boxes hauled up 4,000m (13,000ft) from the ocean floor just two months ago, investigators now say the aircraft had stopped flying properly and entered a hazardous stall, as its 362 sqm (3,900 sqft) of wings gasped for air.


  • Options
    #114
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    It reads to me as if they had no idea that they were stalling all throughout the four minute plummet.


  • Options
    #115
    cuterob
    Registered Users Posts: 1,156 ✭✭✭cuterob


    the Captain seemed to know what was going on.. don't know why he didnt take over


  • Options
    #116
    transylman
    Registered Users Posts: 599 ✭✭✭transylman


    Dropping the nose in response to a loss of vertical speed indicators should have been a reflex action seared into their brains during basic training. I can't understand how their response was so wrong.


  • Options
    #117
    AlekSmart
    Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    It's a real puzzler alright.

    The actions or lack of same and the apparently slow comprehension levels of the Flight Crew appear to bear at least some of the indications of Hypoxia.

    Was the resting Captains belated return rendered less effective due to him finding the active crew had responded incorrectly to the situation and perhaps worsened it ?

    That Helios Air B737 loss some years back had some similar signs of inexplicable crew delays in response and recognition,plus the belated attempt by two oxygen breathing Cabin Crew to regain control?

    However,what is even more worrying is the drawing of battle lines between EADS/Airbus and Air France as the probability of a lengthy Legal battle now looks most likely ?


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Options
    #118
    handsomecake
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,783 ✭✭✭handsomecake


    ellieh1 wrote: »
    Thinking of my cousin, her two friends and all the passengers and crew who died two years ago today on flight AF447.
    condolences again.i got banned from after hours permanently that day for lambasting people who took the piss,even after you intimated you were related to the deceased.


  • Options
    #119
    scudzilla
    Registered Users Posts: 11,911 ✭✭✭✭scudzilla


    handsomecake wrote: »
    condolences again.i got banned from after hours permanently that day for lambasting people who took the piss,even after you intimated you were related to the deceased.

    Don't worry about it too much, that place is a law unto itself


  • Options
    #120
    A320
    Registered Users Posts: 708 ✭✭✭A320


    transylman wrote: »
    Dropping the nose in response to a loss of vertical speed indicators should have been a reflex action seared into their brains during basic training. I can't understand how their response was so wrong.

    I see what you mean but on a nightime flight,in a storm and the sh1t hits the fan a lot can go wrong especially decision making!!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Tenger
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 9,737 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tenger


    A320 wrote: »
    I see what you mean but on a nightime flight,in a storm and the sh1t hits the fan a lot can go wrong especially decision making!!!

    In addition, having read the ACARS log from the last 10 minutes of AF447, I would guess that the sheer number of alarms prevented the crew from realising the stall situation.


Advertisement