Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BEA: Total Data Extraction From AF447 Boxes - Part 4  
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 25
Posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33418 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

This is a continuation thread of part 3, which can be found here: BEA: Total Data Extraction From AF447 Boxes - Part 3

Feel free to join the discussion should you wish to do so, posting within the parameters of the forum rules.

Thank you,

SA7700


When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
254 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinenwafflyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1050 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33433 times:

how do I manage to find the pieces I'm missing? I cannot log on here for some 12-14 hours per day

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9105 posts, RR: 75
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33509 times:

For those wanting to get a look at the BEA reports to date, their website address is http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.af.447/flight.af.447.php

The previous 2 reports go into the search location, and ACARS messages received,
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp...90601e1.en/pdf/f-cp090601e1.en.pdf
http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp...90601e2.en/pdf/f-cp090601e2.en.pdf

The most recent report looks at the data recovered in a very brief way from the DFDR and CVR.

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol....int.enquete.af447.27mai2011.en.pdf

When looking for a source of information these are the most accurate, and should be used as the primary reference regarding the incident.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinegarpd From UK - Scotland, joined Aug 2005, 2660 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33388 times:

Coming to an immediate stop from 168MPH is going to kill you instantly. Regardless of what is around you.
People die at 70MPH sudden stops in car accidents due to internal injuries. Though it takes a little while.
But at 168MPH, the g-forces would be utterly devastating. I think we can safely say it is unlikely anyone survived the impact for more than a few seconds.

[Edited 2011-05-27 09:41:21]


arpdesign.wordpress.com
User currently offlineTrin From United States of America, joined May 2011, 145 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33280 times:

Quoting robertm46 (Reply 302):
That is how you get to 38,000 ft even it you don't intend to.



Incorrect. I will be another to ask - did you read the BEA report?

"Around fifteen seconds later, the speed displayed on the ISIS increased sharply towards 185 kt; it was then consistent with the other recorded speed. ***The PF continued to make nose-up inputs.*** The airplane’s altitude reached its maximum of about 38,000 ft, its pitch attitude and angle of attack being 16 degrees. "

There is absolutely no question of the aircraft "getting to FL380 without intending to".......the PF was continuing to make nose-up commands on the aircraft. For whatever reason.

..Trin..

[Edited 2011-05-27 09:44:49]


"I'd always thought you were a guy." .... "Most guys do." ~The Matrix.
User currently offlineRalphski From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 33226 times:

Could the high vertical descent rate have aggravated their hopes of recovery?

Maybe they were in a high speed stall situation for the entire descent (not a dive, but the recovery from a dive). With little forward speed relative to the high rate of vertical fall, the critical angle would remain small and they would need that much more thrust or pitch to overcome the stall. Would you need to be MORE aggresive in the stall recovery in this situation?

From Wikipedia:
"For example, an aircraft may go into a steep dive. At the bottom of the dive the pilot may pull back on the stick to make the aircraft flatten out and then climb. If done too quickly, or because of poor aircraft design, the wings can be pointing up but momentum i.e. gravity, continues to make the aircraft go down. If the wings are pointing up but the direction of travel is down the critical angle is exceeded and a high speed stall occurs."

What strikes me most is the high rate of descent.

[Edited 2011-05-27 09:53:51]

[Edited 2011-05-27 09:56:47]

User currently offlineairtechy From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 502 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 33000 times:

I don't think more pilot training is going to solve these type of accidents. And regards the Peruvian and the Birgenair accidents......although the exact details are different the accidents themselves are similar....nighttime and not knowing which gauges are reliable with multiple alarms going off. The laws of physics have not changed since these accidents.

The procedure to recover from a stall should never....at any altitude....require you to reference anything other than your brain. This accident...even at high altitude....shows you don't have time to do so. Doesn't the 330 even have the equivalent of a stick pusher? Are the stall recognition and recovery procedures all that different from those for a Cessna 150?

I suspect lots of "procedures" will be rethought after this accident. Probably the result will be yet another alarm bell or 20 more pages in the flight manual.


User currently offlinewingnutmn From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 643 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 33019 times:

If the airplanr never spun, the angle of attack was almost always nose up, and a vertical decent of 10 to 11000 ft/min. could they have tail stalled the airplane? i know some planes are unrecoverable once they enter a tail stall. any ideas on that?

Wingnut



Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing! It's a bonus if you can fly the plane again!!
User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32811 times:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110527/...re_eu/eu_france_brazil_plane_crash

I guess the report in French is more detailed, because a lot of this info is not in the English report.

[Edited 2011-05-27 10:00:01]

User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 41
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32755 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 4):

Yes, however I suspect what robertm46 was referring to was just prior to that, on the way up to FL375...

"The airplane%u2019s angle of attack increased progressively beyond 10 degrees and the plane started
to climb. The PF made nose-down control inputs and alternately left and right roll inputs. The
vertical speed, which had reached 7,000 ft/min, dropped to 700 ft/min and the roll varied
between 12 degrees right and 10 degrees left. The speed displayed on the left side increased
sharply to 215 kt (Mach 0.68). The airplane was then at an altitude of about 37,500 ft and the
recorded angle of attack was around 4 degrees."


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32688 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 8):
I guess the report in French is more detailed, because a lot of this info is not in the English report.

That's because what you quoted is not the report, that is an article on the report.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineliquidair From United Kingdom, joined May 2011, 181 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32696 times:

has anyone considered why the crew attempted to turn around?

User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 41
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32654 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 8):
I guess the report in French is more detailed, because a lot of this info is not in the English report

I'd say there's more information in the English version of the BEA report than there is in that Yahoo article... unless I've missed something, of course.


User currently offlineLTC8K6 From United States of America, joined Jun 2009, 1210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32598 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 10):
That's because what you quoted is not the report, that is an article on the report.


Really? I thought Yahoo was the crash investigation authority...

Why in the world would you think that I thought a news article was the actual report?

I compared the article to the BEA report English translation. The English report does not seem to say which pilot was at the controls, for example. I was wondering how the media knew. Simple, they read the French original, while I had to make do with the less detailed English translation.

[Edited 2011-05-27 10:07:46]

[Edited 2011-05-27 10:10:09]

User currently offlinePanAm1971 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 397 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32527 times:

I'm a little troubled that the aircraft was unrecoverable from a stall all the way up at FL380. That should have been plenty of time to get some lift under those wings. I'd love to know why the crew were unable to achieve that. Very sad.

User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 41
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32448 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 13):
The English report does not say which pilot was at the controls, for example

Ah, fair enough. However, a lot of the technical details are absent from the Yahoo article.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32134 times:

From the previous thread:

Quoting zeke (Reply 298):
I would be interested to see what the mach number was indicating during the event, as that is taken from the TAT, it appears that the static information was also available. They may have had a valid mach number displayed all the time.

You'd still need some sort of valid airspeed indication in order to get a valid mach number, wouldn't you?

Quoting garpd (Reply 306):
The higher you are, the faster the stall speed becomes due to the thinner air.

Depends on what sort of airspeed you're talking about. Indicated airspeed will be pretty much the same, which is what the crew sees and really cares about.


Unfortunately, there's not a lot we can really glean from the report. It would appear that the first stall warnings were erroneous, and driven by the unreliable airspeed and/or AoA indications. After that, I'm not really sure. It would appear that the airspeed returned to its correct values, but then later the crew said that they didn't have any valid indications. So it's hard to really figure out what was going on. The waiting continues....

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32101 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 13):
I compared the article to the BEA report English translation. The English report does not seem to say which pilot was at the controls, for example. I was wondering how the media knew. Simple, they read the French original, while I had to make do with the less detailed English translation.

From the article.

The Captain was PNF, one of the co-pilots was PF.

From various sources. but wiki speciically hear.

There were three pilots: 58-year-old flight captain Marc Dubois had joined Air France in 1988 and had approximately 11,000 flight hours, including 1,700 hours on the Airbus A330; the two first officers, 37-year-old David Robert and 32-year-old Pierre-Cedric Bonin, had over 9,000 flight hours between them




At 1 h 55, the Captain woke the second co-pilot and said "[…] he’s going to take my place".

At 2 h 06 min 04, the PF called the cabin crew, telling them that "in two minutes we should enter
an area where it’ll move about a bit more than at the moment, you should watch out" and he
added "I’ll call you back as soon as we’re out of it".

At 2 h 08 min 07 , the PNF said "you can maybe go a little to the left […]".

At 2 h 10 min 16, the PNF said "so, we’ve lost the speeds" then "alternate law […]".


...

...
....

The writer just inferred data that was not in either report.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinepilotaydin From Turkey, joined Sep 2004, 2539 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 32015 times:

I must fly SIN-CGK now from IST, I will try to log on in Jakarta and follow up on the 15 hours of goodies I will miss on here!

Take care



The only time there is too much fuel onboard, is when you're on fire!
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 41
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 31935 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 17):
The writer just inferred data that was not in either report

   No sign of the PF's name in the French version of the report either. They seem to be pretty much identical, their caveat about translation notwithstanding.


User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5471 posts, RR: 30
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 31789 times:

Quoting pilotaydin (Reply 18):

Put it away for a while and give the folks in back a nice flight.



What the...?
User currently offlinegoblin211 From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 1209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 31655 times:

Quoting Trin (Reply 4):
There is absolutely no question of the aircraft "getting to FL380 without intending to".......the PF was continuing to make nose-up commands on the aircraft. For whatever reason.

Exactly the opposite of what they tell you in flight school. Based on this alone, it doesn't look good for the AF pilots. I just hope they uncover more to not put all the negativity on the pilots.



From the airport with love
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2179 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 31657 times:

Quoting LTC8K6 (Reply 13):
The English report does not seem to say which pilot was at the controls, for example.

fyi, both copilots were. the captain had just left his seat and went to rest when the aircraft entered that nasty turbulence zone. They recalled him when the autopilot went off, which took several calls (hardly surprising imo if he had just fallen asleep) ,but he did not sit at the controls, just was in the cockpit supervising and trying to assist the pilots, presumably.

Quoting airtechy (Reply 6):
I suspect lots of "procedures" will be rethought after this accident.

Probably, I was reading the readers' comments on Le Monde website about the report.
article: http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/articl...r]-20110527-[zonea]&ens_id=1513709
comments: http://www.lemonde.fr/societe/reacti...reur-de-pilotage_1528483_3224.html
None are A330 pilots, but many are small plane pilots, or have some experience about flying aircraft, which is a lot more than what I personally have (none). All are unanimous that the pilots should have put the A330 nose down to regain speed, lift and control... Yet, the pilots essentially followed Airbus' recommendations to go nose up.
So, when a manufacturer recommends a procedure that goes against some principles of physics, they'd better be 110% sure of what they are doing. That day, this procedure did not seem to have worked out, so it's almost certain that, as you say, "lots of procedures will be rethought".
Also, one poster mentions without any source that out of 9 pilots who tested that configuration in a simulator, only 2 were successful at taking the aircraft out of trouble. Anybody has any source on this?



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 31437 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 17):
The Captain was PNF, one of the co-pilots was PF.

If the captain wasn't in the cockpit, then he wouldn't have been either PF or PNF - the two FOs would have been acting in those roles.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinesshd From Spain, joined May 2011, 74 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 31375 times:

Hello everyone,

First off, this is my first post in the site, even though I have been reading it for years. Thank to all the great contributors in here (Pihero, Zeke, Pilotaydin...).

After reading the BEA´s report, I don´t know whether they omitted some conversations from the CVR. To me, it´s interesting that when the Captain joined the cockpit, neither the PF nor the PNF mentioned anything to him, apart from "we have no valid indicators".
They clearly didn´t know they were stalling, that´s granted. According to BEA´s report, the Captain joined at 2 h 11 min 40 and the last data happened at 2 h 14 min 28, that´s almost 3 minutes. None of them (including the Captain) mentioned "stall", isn´t that strange? Do you guys think they didn´t even think about it?

Cheers!


25 AirlineCritic : Some observations from the report. Conclusion: At least the PNF was aware that the speed information was invalid. Unclear if the PF or the captain rea
26 ANITIX87 : I'm not a pilot. So take my questions and suggestions with a grain of salt (and be nice about bashing them to the ground, please!). I'm just curious.
27 BEG2IAH : This is just an excerpt, not the whole transcript by any means. BEG2IAH
28 666wizard : I'm not an expert at all, though I have crossed the pond many times, although not via the Atlantic equator (I have done SYD-LAX and back - that was fu
29 sshd : I guess PF got the stick-shaker but maybe in such a chaos+turbulenc he didn´t really pay attention to it...
30 giopan1975 : I think cruising altitudes should be the same regardless of the region. From what is known so far, it appears that turbulence should not have exceede
31 Speedbird741 : There is no such single set of "values" that describes "the" coffin corner. On any given airliner and in any given situation, it depends on a number
32 David L : As I see it, there were two major issues: unreliable airspeed and a stall. Perhaps they were focusing on the former rather than the latter at that po
33 AirlineCritic : There is a small margin of error in flying aircraft at high altitude. However, I'd like to point out first that this is a normal mode of operations i
34 Kaiarahi : Conflicting responses to incipient stall / unreliable speed indications?[Edited 2011-05-27 11:13:46]
35 giopan1975 : 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
36 Slinky09 : Can we please recall what are the known facts - there is no evidence they were in 'massive turbulence' - as the BEA puts it ""in two minutes we shoul
37 David L : If it got "too close" to coffin corner, I propose that it was pushed by circumstances and was certainly not deliberate. In a word, no. As has often b
38 dfambro : I think what's being read as "missing information" about other instruments is in fact an indication that there was nothing wrong with the other instr
39 giopan1975 : Very much doubt the passengers did not "go through hell" before impact.
40 David L : Well, yes, but I can't help wondering what apparently changed the PF's mind as they passed through 37,500 ft. Perhaps it was simply a switch from one
41 Post contains images Trin : I have a hypothesis to run by everyone. It's my first one, too - so please, be gentle. BEA's report this morning was designed to "describe in a factua
42 rohanghosh : Lost among all the technical aspects of the crash that I have been reading all along, no one ever mentions what I just noticed. Why would the Captain
43 DLdiamondboy : I agree here. From the very begining of pilot training poiting the nose down is stall recovery 101. FL38 left lots of altititude to recover. Sounds l
44 hmelawyer : I am not a pilot, so maybe those on here can explain this question that I have: The new BEA note indicates that at 2 hr, 10 min., 51 s. the trimmable
45 AirlineCritic : The pilots were perhaps not expecting anything unusual. The experienced copilots were expected to be able to deal with everything. Business as usual
46 LTC8K6 : Thanks for clearing that up.
47 sshd : Sure sure - but I guess that if they did indeed considered that during a quick brainstorm...BEA should've mentioned it. What I'm saying is that if th
48 dk1967 : Given the last recorded ground and vertical speeds, what would have been the minimum altitude required for an airframe configured like AF447 to succes
49 robertm46 : Trin, Wasn't talking about the report, I never read it. Only point is that the critical issue is angle of attack...and airplane stalls when it exceed
50 Asturias : That is the most insightful post I've read in the threads on the AF447, in the sense that it encaptures the essential problem that most certainly has
51 Post contains links 777fan : To the contrary, I think the layperson can glean that the final 3-4 minutes of the flight were nothing short of horrifying for all onboard. I can onl
52 LTC8K6 : If they knew their descent rate, then they knew they had about 1 minute of life left. if not, then they may have simply thought they had 10K feet to
53 666wizard : Thank you for all of your kind replies to my earlier post. This continues to be a very worrying incident, and a lot of people died who entrusted Air F
54 Kaiarahi : Me too.
55 AAExecPlat : Are you, or were you a commercial pilot? I don't think you'll convince anyone that a A332 loaded to the gills with payload and fuel cruising at FL350
56 LTC8K6 : What else gets you from 35K to 10K that quickly? Did they think they dove down there?
57 something : I never really got an answer to my previous question so to bring it up again.. Why did the pilots lose altitude indications? I just can't seem to unde
58 Mir : There have been a lot of posts on this and I'll admit that I haven't read through them all, but where was it established that Airbus guidance is to b
59 LTC8K6 : How is the bus climbing at 7Kfpm while the PF is making nose down inputs?
60 Trin : No, but do we have any indications that they were actively monitoring their altitude with everything else that was going on (not to mention the 40deg
61 LTC8K6 : The altimeter was likely working the whole time. They knew their altitude. The knew they were descending through FL100. They called it out. It's in t
62 LTC8K6 : No indication until they mention FL100...
63 Speedbird741 : Why on earth are so many members assuming the pilots at the controls did not realize the plane was stalling? The control inputs may seem illogical fo
64 Kaiarahi : There's no suggestion they did. There was a call-out at FL100.
65 BEG2IAH : I doubt the whole discussion in the cockpit was represented in this preliminary report. BEA selected only what they thought was enough before the fin
66 Trin : Precisely. See my post #41 in this thread. ..Trin..
67 Post contains images David L : I think you'll find it's been mentioned more than a few times. Basically, they changed course by 12o and apparently didn't think they would be enteri
68 LTC8K6 : Do you think they did not believe/trust the altimeter? Thought it was also giving false info?
69 WingedMigrator : The BEA report says: That vertical speed and ground speed are each 55 m/s respectively, implying a flight path angle of 45 degrees. Add 16.2 degrees o
70 Trin : I have absolutely no idea. Nobody on this board knows less about this stuff than I do. But why would FL100 be the *first* and *only* altitude callout
71 Kaiarahi : And this one, later: 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 mo
72 Kaiarahi : We don't know that. Clearly the information note does not include all cockpit comms.
73 David L : I agree. I have no desire whatsoever to discuss what the victims experienced, especially if there's any possibility that friends and relatives might
74 Trin : I understand that - this is not a complete CVR transcript at all. But why include *one* flight level callout and not others (if those others occurred
75 BEG2IAH : Because chief investigator didn't think more should be published at this point. Plain and simple. BEG2IAH
76 qualitydr : Quoting AM744 (Reply 214, Part 3): If AoA stands for 'Angle of Attack', in which case it could be different from the pitch angle? AM744, AoA and Pitch
77 RobK : Surely dropping at 11k per min you'd be close to prising your face off the ceiling from the gravitational forces ????? How could they have NOT known t
78 giopan1975 : There is no mentioning in the report that ALL of the CVR conversations during the reported minutes are on this update. It could be that BEA has "made
79 Kaiarahi : It's just you. G forces are generated by acceleration, not velocity. Ever noticed how you're pushed back in your seat during take-off acceleration, b
80 BEG2IAH : It's just you. This is an excerpt released by chief investigator. Those three pilots were trying to save their and lives of their crew and passengers
81 Post contains links aerologan : An interesting article from smartcockpit from an Airbus Test pilot about airplane upset recovery (Note it is from 12 years ago, so upset recovery trai
82 qualitydr : It's not the rate that causes big issues. After all, at 500 kt horizontal flight, you're flying at ca. 8.3 * 6,000 = 49,800 ft/min already. There are
83 Kaiarahi : Do you have ANY evidence that BEA is conspiring with Airbus? Not to mention that the French judicial authorities have the same data?
84 Post contains links 777fan : I didn't think your comment was that big of a deal, I just merely pointed out that if it was true, that the combination of uncommanded movements conc
85 noelg : But if the pilots had no idea they had stalled and were plummeting to the earth, how would the passengers know any different (bearing in mind most wo
86 LTC8K6 : And why call it out if you believe it's false? I don't know...
87 Post contains images David L : No! G-forces = acceleration, not speed. Sorry but it's been mentioned a few times. After all, people managed to fly at Mach 2 on Concorde and astrona
88 LTC8K6 : Well, we are speaking about what's in the report. There's no indication in the report until the mention of FL100.
89 flood : "The PF made nose-down control inputs and alternately left and right roll inputs. The vertical speed, which had reached 7,000 ft/min, dropped to 700 f
90 Mir : It's entirely possible that nobody in the back of the airplane had any idea that anything was wrong. -Mir
91 LTC8K6 : You have interpreted that differently than prior posters, though.
92 BEG2IAH : With 40 degree roll? I doubt it was a smooth ride. BEG2IAH
93 western727 : This is truly perplexing. While the airspeed indicators were out of whack, they still had a functioning altimeter as I understand it. Along with the a
94 giopan1975 : I would say entirely impossible,,,, With 40 dgrs of oscilations and 38000 ft down in about 3 minutes, this would have been my worst nightmare as a pa
95 Post contains images David L : Ah, OK. However, if they were being rocked around a bit, combined with the large variations in bank, it''s possible that successive "drops" were disg
96 Mir : I did miss that in the report. Yeah, that would have been nasty. -Mir
97 slarty : I think you can infer from the graphic on the last page of the BEA report "3D view of the last 5 minutes of the flight" that the change in altitude f
98 aerologan : right. as has been said. G-forces is all about accelerations 11000ft/min is around 55m/s, gravity is 9.81m/s^2 So imagine it took them 10seconds to g
99 giopan1975 : Something else that is going unnoticed: the plane made a 180 degree NOT steep turn. How is this turn explained?
100 HNL2BOS : Excuse my ignorance, but it seems like there was very little conversation of what was going on in the cockpit. Are there parts of the voice recordings
101 Trin : Yup......I don't either. In my original post in this thread, I was just putting my hypothesis out there to bring some kind of attention to their alti
102 777fan : Not sure exactly which turn you're referring to, but yes, the released information indicates the aircraft impacted with a heading of 270 degrees magn
103 ADent : At 15 deg pitch angle, 100% thrust, no stall warning, instruments out of order, and total darkness - doesn't seem that far out of mind to keep it ther
104 Post contains links raaadek : Some interesting input from guardian article: According to the BEA, the French air accident investigation agency, one of the pilots called the cabin c
105 LTC8K6 : Yeah, except for that 40 degrees of roll and that 180 degree turn...
106 WingedMigrator : When you're flying at AoA between 35 and 60 degrees in a machine designed for much less, with roll oscillations of up to 40 degrees, a lot of strange
107 flood : Snippets from the report: The airplane began to roll to the right and the PF made a left nose-up input. The airplane’s pitch attitude increased pro
108 imiakhtar : Hello folks Could someone please email the report .pdf to me. My email is: ixa724@bham.ac.uk Thanks
109 slarty : Well, once again referring to that graphic on the last page of the BEA report "3D view of the last 5 minutes of the flight", it looks like two turns
110 flood : Done.
111 comorin : 1. Could the THS have jammed into the nose-up position? 2. We can assume that the at no time, due to IMC at all altitudes, was there any visual refere
112 canoecarrier : Not all of the discussion was likely released because this was likely intended to give us a general understanding of why the plane crashed. Since, af
113 giopan1975 : And the VERY unusual AoA, AND the unusual changes in thrust. I am quite sure that descending 38000 ft in 3 minutes will not make your ears just pop,
114 Kaiarahi : Not unnoticed. When you're trying to recover from an unusual attitude, heading is the least of your concerns (unless there's terrain, which wasn't th
115 Navigator : According to the report, by the way very depressing reading, the pilot flying continued to pull the nose up in spite of an highly unusual nose up ang
116 Kaiarahi : And how on earth would pax be aware of the AOA?
117 Post contains links Chamonix : http://www.liberation.fr/economie/01...-crash-toujours-dans-le-brouillard
118 Kaiarahi : I don't know if you read the whole BEA note, or just the summary, but there WERE pitch-down inputs.
119 canoecarrier : You coming into this thread and posting a news article, in French, nothing more, doesn't contribute anything to the discussion.
120 Post contains images Pihero : Yhis is probably one of the most active threads on A.net ever, which proves that the result of the investigation is so lmportant to everybody related
121 katekebo : I have exactly the same question. It's pure speculation, but my opinion is that the got fixated on the inconsistent airspeed indications and lost sig
122 Post contains links Chamonix : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN6yzAQxgd4&feature=youtu.be
123 giopan1975 : The worst approach to the accident I have ever heard of.
124 Navigator : Pihero: You analysis i very detailed and correct. I think however the main question here is how they entered the stall in the first place. I think tha
125 giopan1975 : At 2 h 08 min 07 , the PNF said "you can maybe go a little to the left […]". The airplane began a slight turn to the left, the change in relatio
126 Rabenschlag : But they managed to climb to 37.500 ft after the autopilot disconnection at 7000 ft/min. Is that even possible when stalled?
127 Kaiarahi : That was my thought too, although everyone else seems to think the PF caused the stall. My read is that following the AP/AT disengagement, the plane
128 Post contains links raaadek : from the same guardian article - Anonymous A330 pilot A pilot's analysis You look at this as an A330 pilot and it's a case of there but for the grace
129 aerobalance : Agreed, but earlier they noticed that they had invalid speed readings. Right then and there, the IFR pilot that I am would only trust the Altimeter,
130 sandyb123 : Out of interest this is being covered on the BBC 10 oclock news tonight. Sandyb123
131 WingedMigrator : Stalled airplanes don't climb, so if it was stalled at autopilot disconnection it had to have been recovered until at least 2:10:51 UTC (marker numbe
132 Navigator : There were mainly upwards commands Im trying to understand why he did not do a stall recovery[Edited 2011-05-27 14:14:42]
133 Mir : It's possible, but difficult to determine from the information given. Should be. Normal cruise for a 330 is in the range of Mach .82, and reducing sp
134 canoecarrier : Tom's addressed this before. "You can stall while climbing. A stalled wing still generates considerable lift, it just generates tremendous quantities
135 Post contains images rcair1 : No. Speed is not acceleration. No - professional, confused, unsure of what is happening. Yes - they knew they were falling. Apparently, they did not
136 Navigator : Yes and he knew that of course. Why didnt he sit still with the controls? Nobody knows of course...
137 Mir : You can, but unless your engines are capable of overpowering your weight (i.e. you're a rocket), you won't be climbing for very long. -Mir
138 Aesma : So many posts to read ! I'll just say this, if it has already been reported then dismiss it. On the evening news on France 2, the director of the BEA
139 ULMFlyer : Just caught up with the thread and don't have much to add. Just would like to acknowledge the accuracy of 2 pieces of preliminary analysis, given our
140 Kaiarahi : How about this (from the BEA report)?
141 Navigator : From the report I read it seems the PF had manual control of the plane before the climb. The autopilot had disconnected before that. For some reason h
142 sandyb123 : The BBC just said that the pilots were not trained to get the plane out of an aerodynamic stall!? I assume / hope this is bad reporting! Also, I hadn
143 giopan1975 : They are giving us just the hard evidence. Of course BEA are aware of many many more details but they need to cross check before making any intermedi
144 WingedMigrator : I stand corrected... I guess that makes sense, since the coefficient of lift doesn't collapse to zero when the wing stalls. Thanks, and Pihero, I wit
145 Kaiarahi : Opinions differ, including Pihero - see posts 120/127. I'm quoting from the BEA report, page 3 para 2.
146 giopan1975 : yes but can a stalled plane still climb all that 3000 ft? And at that high thin air altitude.[Edited 2011-05-27 14:30:10]
147 ferpe : I have a bit different feeling than Phiero who was flying and what happened, as said just my take, try to motivate why (have read BEA document back an
148 fca767 : Just looking at the ACARS on BEA and the New Notes PDF This TCAS fault says they would have lost altitude information, that 2h10 is the same time the
149 Navigator : I go back and read it again. It is pretty interesting if the autopilot pitched up or if the pilot did.
150 Post contains images AirlineCritic : Great analysis in your post. Thank you. I do have one question about your last conclusion though. Why do you believe they were already in a stalled c
151 mffoda : Can someone with knowledge of this A/C's systems provide a list of all the speed sensor equipment... Beyond the pitot tubes... I mean are there GPS or
152 Navigator : If you read this you see that the pilot did the pull up!! From the report: "From 2 h 10 min 05 , the autopilot then auto-thrust disengaged and the
153 Kaiarahi : Obviously the ongoing analysis of the FDR will tell the story, but I'm wondering given that the AOA ranged from 35 degrees to 40+ degrees, if it's pos
154 Kaiarahi : Not necessarily.
155 AirlineCritic : Makes sense. That is very interesting. It might be that during those 50 seconds the indicated speed was a crazy value because the sensor had gone bad
156 fca767 : Also at 2h10 (the bank that doesn't say the pilot did this) The PF continued to make nose-up inputs. The airplane’s altitude reached its maximum of
157 Navigator : I read the report now It was not stalled when the A/P disconnected. It made a slight right turn that the pilot corrected. BUT the PF also for some re
158 Post contains images Navigator : He took manual control... What do you mean? In manual control the pilot controls the airplane. I agree that turbulence could have caused upsets but a
159 imiakhtar : Perhaps before you totally discount this guy, you could employ some critical thinking? i.e Reputation, Ability to see, Vested Interest, Expertise and
160 ferpe : As said the mistery is how an experienced pilot (wether FO or 3rd P they were all experienced) could fly the AC into stall past a funtioning and trig
161 Pihero : I don't think that this note by the BEA is a complete picture of the last moments of Flight 447. But read this in a pilot-logical way : "From 2 h 10
162 Navigator : Yes I suppose this is what surprises everyone here. There is no question, reading the report, that they did it but why did they do it?? This is what
163 garpd : What about the ACARS messages pertaining the Cabin Alt?
164 giopan1975 : we’re in the cloud layer unfortunately we can’t climb much for the moment because the temperature is falling more slowly than forecast" One expla
165 Navigator : I think if you read the report in sequence you start understanding what happened. All airplane movements departing from stable flight started after A
166 imiakhtar : In alternate law, is the auto-trim still available or would the pilots have had to use manual pitch trim? Thanks
167 Navigator : I think many here have gotten into detailed discussions when we do not have enough information yet. However if we read the report we at least have the
168 ba286 : I think it may be time for a part 5 continuation of this thread. I am having trouble loading the page!
169 prebennorholm : The BEA report says that the balance was 29%. It contains no further comments to that, so I assume that it is within operating limits. To me - as a de
170 Pihero : No, please read the note again. Lets call the oldest/ more experienced copilot F1 and the third pilot F2. Your sentence should read : As captain goes
171 Pihero : Yes For a normal cruise, that's a rather low CoG. At 205 t, it should have been -if automatic transfer is operating - at 37.8 %, I presume the crew d
172 JoeCanuck : I am interested in spin/stall recover training in airliners. Obviously, it isn't done in flight on these aircraft. In fact, I'm not sure it is done at
173 Group51 : Could I ask an ignorant question? Do we know what caused the plane to leave Normal law? Was it the speed sensor malfunction? If this came back as it d
174 comorin : Andy Pasztor of the Wall Street Journal (wsj.com) says "Even a weekend pilot would know to push the nose down.." and wonders why the pilot would keep
175 Kaiarahi : Where does it say that? You're missing my point. If it was already stalled, as Pihero suggests, then it may also have pitched down in search of longi
176 comorin : Agreed, and could we please update the thread title? Thanks Mods. Maybe "AF447: Preliminary Report" or just "AF447: Crash Investigation - Part 5" ?
177 Gonzalo : I'm trying my best to read all the posts but it is nearly impossible to follow the cascade of posts, so I apologize if this has been already noted or
178 Rara : Question I asked in the old thread, maybe someone with A330 knowledge can answer it: Assuming a stall at high altitude and a very high sinkrate such a
179 travelavnut : A previous post mentioned that, IIRC, the head of the BEA stated they lost speed indications for 50 seconds. Although I do seem to remember the Bus r
180 scbriml : Well, they clearly knew they were passing 10,000ft, because it was called out. So they were acutely aware of the loss of altitude.
181 borism : Well, weather certainly was a contributing factor in some way, wasn't it? We don't know exact atmospheric conditions during those last 5 minutes (don
182 JoeCanuck : ...and if that's the first they were aware of it, they had less than one minute to encapsulize the past 2 minutes, categorize and prioritize the conf
183 Kaiarahi : Agree completely. I don't think Pihero, as a very experienced pilot on type, needs any lessons on how to interpret the sequence of events. What's you
184 imiakhtar : Sorry Pihero, one last question before bed. With the THS "stuck" at 13 degrees nose up, how much pitch down authority would the PF have when he final
185 Kaiarahi : How would auto-trim behave if the tail were stalled?
186 JBirdAV8r : The simple answer is yes, that's true, if the crew had all the information that a weekend pilot has in front of him. Like blue sky filling the windsc
187 UALWN : I don't quite understand why some very knowledgable people here are debating again the reason for the A/P disconnection. To me it's clear: there were
188 Post contains links borism : I don't think auto-trim would even be available: http://www.airbusdriver.net/airbus_fltlaws.htm That's also indicated by the fact that THS was in the
189 Post contains images rcair1 : The AoA was high (later), but the pitch angle was not that high. Furthermore, I think we can conclude they did not have an external horizon due to we
190 huxrules : My hypothesis is the sudden shock of the autopilot disengaging lead the pilot to reach for the stick and to command a bit of nose up. This bit of nos
191 JoeCanuck : More specifically, the answer is true...probably. Not only have these pilots never taken a plane through a 40000' stall before and recovered...nobody
192 rwessel : No, the aircraft was clearly stalled after the autopilot disconnect. From the BEA report (English version): - The A/P disconnect was at 2:10:05. The
193 Post contains images rcair1 : For me - it was a 152.... Yes. I believe that once in alternate, you stay in alternate till landing.
194 tdscanuck : Very much so. It's to the middle/back-ish...lots of room to go either direction. The farther forward you put the CG, the more load you put on the tai
195 VC10er : Could the cabin crew or pax feel all this?
196 Chese : I am curious if anyone familiar with the A330 or other similar aircraft is it normal to not have an AOA indicator of some sort? A note in the report t
197 weizenjaeger : I am a newbie, I am not in your industry, and I have read all posts in this chain of threads. I have read the BEA report in English and tried to read
198 Ralphski : PF = pilot flying PNF = pilot not flying
199 Mir : The way I see it, the reason the A/P disconnected is because of the unreliable airspeed indications. The report seems to suggest that they were coinc
200 canoecarrier : Would make sense, wouldn't it? One pilot had more experience than the other and was qualified to be the relief captain. I think this shows good opera
201 WingedMigrator : Can any sim replicate the aerodynamics of an A330 at an AoA of 60 degrees? I doubt it...
202 canoecarrier : The fact this configuration may not be possible to be replicated in a sim only illustrates that not only was the crew presented with something unique
203 B2707SST : A lot of us are wondering how the flight crew could have let the aircraft remain in a stalled situation for four minutes and 38,000 vertical feet with
204 Tangowhisky : Here is what we don't know: 1) We do not know the indicated airspeed on the copilot side (we only know the captain and the ISIS) as the right side is
205 Mir : We don't, and it seems to me that not recording that data as well in the FDR is an oversight that should be corrected (but that's neither here nor th
206 canoecarrier : There are three pitot tubes on a A330. Two provide airspeed indications to the pilot and copilot, the other is the backup for the ISIS (pilots correc
207 UALWN : Well, we know for sure that there were disagreements in airspeed information( "so, we’ve lost the speeds"), and that those disagreements do lead to
208 Tangowhisky : why? Here is something to think about. The captain and standby (ISIS) pitots are located on the left side of the nose The copilot's pitot is on the r
209 Tangowhisky : Are you sure? Where does it say that in the report? The report clearly says the FDR does not record the copilot's (right side) indicated airspeed. It
210 Post contains images Mir : In addition to the ISIS, the third set of probes (one pitot, two static, and an AoA vane) provide information to a third ADR that can act as a backup
211 AAExecPlat : Based on the BEA report that we have read, I find that highly improbable. I have great respect for you and your knowledge given that you are an Airbu
212 Tangowhisky : Thanks.
213 474218 : That information was in the report: The airplane approached the ORARO point. It was flying at flight level 350 and at Mach 0.82 and the pitch attitud
214 rwessel : Assuming the reading is accurate, it's a pretty absolute indication that the wing is *not* stalled. And I add the qualifier only because its theoreti
215 ferpe : As said in my post before I wonder why the F1 (thanks Phiero) flies like he does. If one analyses what he does peculiarily and then tries to find a ra
216 rfields5421 : After a very unpleasant morning at the doctor's office, and a while to recover, and finally a very disappointing baseball game for my grandson - I ope
217 rfields5421 : The ACARS messages clearly state the FO (right hand seat) PFD displayed the same warnings as the Captain PFD about bad air speed data and other speed
218 ULMFlyer : Hope all goes well with your appointment! I've been catching up with the TechOps thread on PPRuNe and the consensus (up to where I got to) seems to be
219 LTC8K6 : We don't know if they put the THS at 13 degrees or it went there by itself, right?
220 ULMFlyer : We don't. But given the way the BEA worded the event: "The trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS) passed from 3 to 13 degrees nose-up in about 1 minut
221 B2707SST : You're right, I overstated the finding and should have qualified that sentence. My point is that persistent nose-up control inputs seem to have perpe
222 WingedMigrator : Who do you believe?
223 asteriskceo : I just hope that "Air Crash Investigation" eventually makes an episode of this crash, because this forum makes no sense at all. Too much. I can't unde
224 ULMFlyer : I deeply repect Tom's opinions and I'm just being the messenger here. For instance, what Golf_Sierra posted over there about a a F/CTL STAB CTL FAULT
225 LTC8K6 : Well, 13 degrees of THS has got to make the job harder...
226 Post contains links Wingscrubber : What commands pitch trim to run when autopilot is disengaged? There's a chance that an electronic trim switch was stuck, but the fact that the trim r
227 LTC8K6 : I read that 1 minute as being how long it took for the THS to change position from 3 to 13.
228 Post contains images Navigator : Being a pilot or not is completely irrelevant in this case. Reading is something more than pilots can do. I think you should see what is said rather
229 LTC8K6 : Of course, if you keep commanding nose up, the THS is going to stay that way...
230 giopan1975 : Agree 100%. It looks as if they intentionally stalled the plane......But after reading the report and being THAT SURPRISED at the degree of the appea
231 tdscanuck : Only if the accelerations were large, which there's no particular reason they had to be. Absolute velocities are invisible to the passengers...if you
232 Navigator : Of course he did not stall the plane intentionally, who would do that? It could very well have been the relief pilot that flew the plane and he could
233 giopan1975 : Why did they leave the plane climb 3000 feet?
234 astuteman : Is there any way that a rapid reversal in airflow direction within a storm cell could have contributed to the erroneous airspeed indication (e.g. pas
235 Osiris30 : It could change your airspeed reading.... but it would also change your airspeed, hence the reading would be accurate. You would feel that shift too
236 fotoflyer71 : I think you have fallen into your own trap Navigator - we do not have enough information yet to be making "crystal clear" statements like you just di
237 slinky09 : As has been said repeatedly here, with unreliable speed indications, and AP disengage, why not fly in stead state with pitch and thrust until the sit
238 astuteman : That was my point I think. Could something like that have contributed to a stall? Rgds
239 spacecadet : I would echo what some others have said about it sounding like they probably had no idea what was going on. If the pilots could not even feel that th
240 giopan1975 : There was a bit of concern that they were about to fly into unstable air... At 2 h 06 min 04, the PF called the cabin crew, telling them that "in two
241 mila : Is this a stupid question but some of you say that maybe the pilots and passangers did maybe not even knew they where is a stall and in danger, could
242 giopan1975 : Right. There is no mention of a Mayday call on the report.
243 Osiris30 : I suppose yes it would be possible.. but if you had a 120 kt swing in wind speed from nose to tail you'd probably certainly feel it and it's likely i
244 Navigator : I agree with you 100%! In my view this is the only plausible explanation given what we know right now. (That Colganair accident comes to mind also...
245 Osiris30 : Except that this happened at FL350 and not on approach, with another (and then two) pilots in the cockpit and plenty of time to interject/take over.
246 Navigator : Im not falling into traps, I am discussing in a friendly manner I hope, what are you doing? Traps?? Lets say "nothing in the report indicates the pla
247 fca767 : I was reading the ACARS along side this report and at that time the co-pilot said you have controls, something else happened with the ACARS about Pri
248 Navigator : You are very right. But if you combine the Flash Airlines accident with Colgan and their action in stall maybe we have something interesting. But the
249 Post contains images fotoflyer71 : Much better, thank you
250 rwessel : There's an old saying in aviation that in an emergency, the least useful thing in the cockpit is the radio. They were busy trying to figure out how t
251 Navigator : Thank you so much! You know that if the flight had not been stable they would have said that in the report. So if you read the report you can easily
252 Post contains images AirlineCritic : As others have noted, having an outside-the-envelope speed or differing speed readings from the different sensors would also disconnect A/P. Again, w
253 Navigator : Agree 100% This is a mystery to me to. Why did he depart an apparent stable flight without consulting that horizon...?
254 Post contains links SA7700 : This thread will be locked for further contributions. Should you wish to do so, feel free to continue in part 5, which can be found here: BEA: Total D
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
BEA: Total Data Extraction From AF447 Boxes - Part 2 posted Sun May 22 2011 06:41:32 by SA7700
BEA: Total Data Extraction From AF447 Boxes - Part 1 posted Mon May 16 2011 03:32:51 by Pihero
Hub Scenes From A Bygone Era (Part II) posted Mon Sep 11 2006 00:23:40 by Matt D
Black Box Data Intact From Toronto Jet Crash posted Sat Aug 6 2005 02:28:06 by TACAA320
Flight Data Recorders From Yesterday? posted Wed Sep 12 2001 15:14:56 by Citation501sp
AF447 Wreckage Found, Part 4 posted Mon May 9 2011 14:13:49 by srbmod
Russia's S7 Airlines To Be Part Of Oneworld From 1 posted Fri Sep 24 2010 11:46:33 by AA767400
AF447 - New Interim Report By BEA posted Mon Dec 7 2009 16:05:35 by Breiz
Airplane Part Falls From Sky Over Long Island, NY posted Fri Nov 6 2009 04:36:53 by PlateMan
9E Registrations From BTS Data posted Mon Jan 5 2009 13:40:36 by Cubsrule
Collecting Personal Data From Pax On Board. posted Tue Dec 20 2011 00:22:58 by lmml 14/32
IAG Buys BMI From Lufthansa Part 2 posted Wed Nov 9 2011 09:50:26 by SA7700
IAG Buys BMI From Lufthansa Part 1 posted Fri Nov 4 2011 00:17:46 by overloaduk