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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Fatal Flight 447 - Channel 4 8pm Tonight Sunday 16th

2»

Comments

  • #52
    lomb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,017 ✭✭✭lomb


    adamski8 wrote: »
    i dont think that was the moral of the story at all!

    Well it should be then!


  • #53
    adamski8
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,503 ✭✭✭adamski8


    lomb wrote: »
    Well it should be then!

    Is that the homer simpson blanket excuse for everything that goes wrong? 'thats why pencils have erasers'


  • #54
    lomb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,017 ✭✭✭lomb


    One of my instructors told me that " its easy to make mistakes" and these days humans just monitor passenger planes rather than fly it. The manufacturers , airlines and insurers would rather that computers just fly the aircraft and still pay pilots anyway ie no real financial saving and more technology, why?? Remember Air France had employed 3 pilots to do the job= quite a bit of money and human as well as machine factors meant that they screwed it up for one reason or another. The captain who knew what was wrong at the end but sat down in the wrong seat after an ill timed sleep for a start.

    Having said that I dont think Airbus have a good design at all. The sticks should have alot more movement and should most definately be coupled. The aircraft should also be stallable if desired by the pilots. Why create a confusing situation of being unstallable most of the time and when the **** hits the fan be stallable?Alot of confusion possible there.


  • #55
    Phil.x
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭Phil.x


    Just watched this programme but even before the conclusion i said to myself what sort of training did these guys get and what sort of calibre are these co pilots, they were totally clueless.

    Me as a civilian knew that when the computer gives you a false speed reading ignore it, go by the sound of the engines, the feel of the plane and the position of the throttle, nobody touched it, just keep on doing what was done during the last few hours.

    They were totally all out of ideas at the end, cursing and even say we're going to crash,.. fcuk sake all those lives lost due to them not being fully aware and comfortable (due to poor training) in a real crisis.

    I see this in the electrical game, sparkes running around like headless chickens when high voltage or important equipment goes down, the training and lack of it goes out the window and they just chase their tails until they run out of all options and go back to the start after they calmed down.


  • #56
    Gringo180
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,205 ✭✭✭Gringo180


    Extraordinary that he kept pulling the stick back in a stall. Didnt help with the design of the aircraft that his stick was hidden from the rest of the crew.


  • #57
    plodder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,402 ✭✭✭plodder


    Gringo180 wrote: »
    Extraordinary that he kept pulling the stick back in a stall.
    It seems, despite all the aural warnings, they didn't believe they were in a stall. It didn't help that there was a very counter-intuitive interaction between air speed, angle of attack and the stall warning system.
    Didnt help with the design of the aircraft that his stick was hidden from the rest of the crew.
    and that dual-input issue with the side sticks, with its complicated system of priority buttons, warning lights and the "split the difference" algorithm for determining control. Maybe, there's something to be said for the old fashioned linked control columns. As I saw one pilot put it. If the PNF could see that the control column was "buried in his crotch" maybe he would have recognised sooner what was causing the stall.


  • #58
    robbie1876
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,766 ✭✭✭robbie1876


    plodder wrote: »
    and that dual-input issue with the side sticks, with its complicated system of priority buttons, warning lights and the "split the difference" algorithm for determining control. Maybe, there's something to be said for the old fashioned linked control columns. As I saw one pilot put it. If the PNF could see that the control column was "buried in his crotch" maybe he would have recognised sooner what was causing the stall.

    It's quite possible that a linked control column could have helped to increase situational awareness, but there have been other similar crashes with dual linked control columns in similar circumstances, for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407

    The sidesticks didn't cause the crash, nor did automation or algorithms or the Airbus laws of control. Pilot error caused the crash.


  • #59
    plodder
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,402 ✭✭✭plodder


    robbie1876 wrote: »
    It's quite possible that a linked control column could have helped to increase situational awareness, but there have been other similar crashes with dual linked control columns in similar circumstances, for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colgan_Air_Flight_3407

    The sidesticks didn't cause the crash, nor did automation or algorithms or the Airbus laws of control. Pilot error caused the crash.
    Pilot error might have been the single biggest factor, but it wasn't the sole cause. There are usually a confluence of factors, any one of which might have prevented the crash, including possibly a different control column design. That's obviously not easy to change now, which maybe why there was such a focus on the (easier to fix) factors like pilot error, in the official investigation.


  • #60
    PukkaStukka
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,181 ✭✭✭PukkaStukka


    At an Irish Meteorological Society Seminar on Aviation Weather in 2015, retired captain Fintan Ryan discussed this accident at length, particularly from a meteorological point of view. I got the sense from his excellent presentation that this whole terrible event was an omni-shambles.

    As someone correctly pointed out previously, these things are usually caused by a confluence of factors and that most definitely was the case here. There were severe thunderstorms and icing. There was equipment failure caused by that which affected instrumentation. There was a complete mishandling of subsequent events by the crew. The was a comment made then - and I'm unsure by whom - that had the crew not reacted to the first warnings and just continued to fly the plane as normal, the situation would've passed in under a minute. A truly dreadful and eminently avoidable tragedy.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement