Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AF A320 Crash, 1988....pilot's Actions Legal?  
User currently online727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6500 posts, RR: 20
Posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7738 times:

Hi,
I was wondering if the pilot's actions were legal under French aviation law? Was it considered an acrobatic maneuver with revenue pax aboard. What was the purpose of the low pass? Did he keep his job? Would that maneuver have been legal in the USA?

Thanks.


Edit: Just saw a thread from 11 years ago that answers some questions. Apparently he was convicted of manslaughter and went to prison. AF was not allowed to do that with pax aboard again.

[Edited 2011-09-05 16:19:21]


Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
65 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejetjack74 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 7414 posts, RR: 50
Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7715 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

What Happened To The AF A320 Crash At Airshow? (by Qantas777 Aug 25 2000 in Civil Aviation)


Made from jets!
User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6357 posts, RR: 31
Reply 2, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7531 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I know that given the regulations at the time, the height at which he performed the flybys before crashing was not legal, as they were at 30ft, the minimum at the type being 100ft. About the other factors I can´t tell you.

User currently offlineDALCE From Netherlands, joined Feb 2007, 1705 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 6684 times:

it was a dirty game played between Airbus & French Government and the PIC was bashed for it.
Very unfair and a still discussable moment in recent french aviation.....



flown: F50,F70,CR1,CR2,CR9,E75,143,AR8,AR1,733,735,736,73G,738,753,744,77W,319,320,321,333,AB6.
User currently offlineNWAROOSTER From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1107 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 6350 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Back then when this A320 went down, there were two problems.
The pilots did not fully understand the electronic operation of the then "new" A320 aircraft and were not familiar with the terrain of the airfield. Secondly, the A320 was a computer controlled and operated aircraft. The aircraft's computers were always right, the pilots were always wrong. A pilot could not override the computers even if the computers were flying the aircraft upside down. At the time I went to school on the A320 in March of 1988, I was told that the pilot would be required to go through as many as 17 steps to override the computers and hand fly the aircraft. The pilot must always be able to fly the aircraft. That is the pilot's job.
"Fly the Aircraft"   


User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1630 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6157 times:

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 4):
The aircraft's computers were always right, the pilots were always wrong. A pilot could not override the computers even if the computers were flying the aircraft upside down.

This is some prime Bravo Sierra right here.

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 4):
17 steps to override the computers and hand fly the aircraft.

Nonsense, a few button pushes dis-engaging 3 or 4 flight computers on the overhead panel will force the Airbus FBW into direct law immidiatly. Not that you want too though.



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2113 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 6027 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 5):
Nonsense, a few button pushes dis-engaging 3 or 4 flight computers on the overhead panel will force the Airbus FBW into direct law immidiatly.

I was going to say... Grabbing the yoke and hitting the red button, while at the same time pushing the thrust levers forward should do the trick, right? If the Habsburg pilots had done that a bit earlier, they wouldn't have crashed into the trees. NWAROOSTER makes it sound like you have to use a programming language or something.



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlinebreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5959 times:

Quoting Rara (Reply 6):
Habsburg


Mulhouse-Habsheim would be more correct  


User currently offlineAirbusA370 From Germany, joined Dec 2008, 253 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5918 times:

The problem was the long time the engines needed to spool up. Had nothing to do with FBW, exect that alpha floor protection kicked in and saved the aircraft from a stall killing everyone one board.

User currently offlineCARST From Germany, joined Jul 2006, 822 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5888 times:

Quoting AirbusA370 (Reply 8):
The problem was the long time the engines needed to spool up. Had nothing to do with FBW, exect that alpha floor protection kicked in and saved the aircraft from a stall killing everyone one board.

Perhaps a stall at that moment would have been better. It would have been an belly landing and the aircraft would have not flown into the trees.

I am no expert, but saying the outcome was best thing in the given situation and the aircraft saved a lot of lives with its systems is just speculation, too.


User currently offlinebreiz From France, joined Mar 2005, 1917 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5684 times:

Quoting CARST (Reply 9):
I am no expert, but saying the outcome was best thing in the given situation and the aircraft saved a lot of lives with its systems is just speculation, too.


The result of a stall versus the actual thing is speculation.
The fact that the systems allowed the ac to "land" in the forest in a controlled manner is no speculation.
The Hudson A320 benefited for the same systems and Sullenberger acknowledged that.


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 11, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5425 times:

Quoting CARST (Reply 9):
Perhaps a stall at that moment would have been better. It would have been an belly landing and the aircraft would have not flown into the trees.

A stall would not have been a belly landing. It would have been a nose high, tail first crash into the trees which most likely would cartwheel in a flaming ball of burning fuel, broken fuselage and other parts.

Survivability would have been very unlikely.


User currently offlineRara From Germany, joined Jan 2007, 2113 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4994 times:

Quoting breiz (Reply 7):


Mulhouse-Habsheim would be more correct

Indeed, thanks  



Samson was a biblical tough guy, but his dad Samsonite was even more of a hard case.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6724 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4869 times:

Rules at the time were more lax, but the more important thing imho is that adherence to rules was also more lax. It wouldn't even come to the mind of a pilot or anybody with some responsibility at the airline to do this today.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently onlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6072 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4823 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 5):
Nonsense, a few button pushes dis-engaging 3 or 4 flight computers on the overhead panel will force the Airbus FBW into direct law immidiatly. Not that you want too though.

He's not talking about now. He's talking about back in 1988, when the airplane was still brand new, and the first line pilots were being trained.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 15, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4784 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 14):
Quoting travelavnut (Reply 5):
Nonsense, a few button pushes dis-engaging 3 or 4 flight computers on the overhead panel will force the Airbus FBW into direct law immidiatly. Not that you want too though.

He's not talking about now. He's talking about back in 1988, when the airplane was still brand new, and the first line pilots were being trained.

I don't think they've changed the buttons, have they? The fact remains that the FBW system had nothing to do with crashing the aircraft and probably improved the survivability (it certainly didn't decrease the survivability).

Tom.


User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1630 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4740 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 14):
Quoting travelavnut (Reply 5):
Nonsense, a few button pushes dis-engaging 3 or 4 flight computers on the overhead panel will force the Airbus FBW into direct law immidiatly. Not that you want too though.

He's not talking about now. He's talking about back in 1988, when the airplane was still brand new, and the first line pilots were being trained.

So? The setup hasn't changed AFAIK. A very robust and reliable system IMHO that has been in service for more than 25 years without major change.



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently onlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6072 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4694 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 15):

I don't think they've changed the buttons, have they? The fact remains that the FBW system had nothing to do with crashing the aircraft and probably improved the survivability (it certainly didn't decrease the survivability).
Quoting travelavnut (Reply 16):
So? The setup hasn't changed AFAIK. A very robust and reliable system IMHO that has been in service for more than 25 years without major change.

Based on just what was said in this thread alone, I'd say it has. His quote says 17 steps. You say "a few." I'd say there was a major design change in the over-ride logic based on numbers alone, most likely in response to this accident.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1630 posts, RR: 7
Reply 18, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4678 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 17):
Based on just what was said in this thread alone, I'd say it has. His quote says 17 steps. You say "a few." I'd say there was a major design change in the over-ride logic based on numbers alone, most likely in response to this accident.

Or the poster talking about 17 steps was wrong. The rest of this post was utter nonsense, so I would assume those 17 steps are BS as well. But hey, I'm always up for learning something new, if someone can show me some sources/evidence of this supposed change I'll happily stand corrected.



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 19, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4660 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 18):

  


Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 14):
He's talking about back in 1988, when the airplane was still brand new, and the first line pilots were being trained.

He wasn't a pilot.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 42
Reply 20, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4609 times:

I tend to agree with Travelavnut and Kaiarahi. Those views don't agree at all with the views put forward by people who have flown and continue to fly FBW Airbuses. In any case, disabling the computers at Habsheim-Mulhouse would have achieved what? Airbus can't override the Laws of Physics. Wouldn't a better solution be to ensure you keep some energy in reserve at all times?

User currently onlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 6072 posts, RR: 14
Reply 21, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4548 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 19):
He wasn't a pilot.

He turned wrenches. That doesn't mean he has no experience with the airplane.

I'm not going to argue over who is right or wrong here, since I myself have neither flown, or worked on the plane. However, one thing is for certain: Pilots know what something does and how it works. Mechanics know what something does and WHY it works.



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlineKaiarahi From Canada, joined Jul 2009, 3033 posts, RR: 28
Reply 22, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4457 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 21):
He turned wrenches. That doesn't mean he has no experience with the airplane.

In his own words:

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 4):
I was told that the pilot would be required to go through as many as 17 steps to override the computers and hand fly the aircraft.

There's a difference between running a checklist in response to a fault alert and shutting the system down. It's the same distinction between running an engine alert checklist and punching the fire button.

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 17):
I'd say there was a major design change in the over-ride logic based on numbers alone, most likely in response to this accident.

I highly doubt it. The overhead panel schematic for the A320-100 (AF296 Muhouse-Habsheim) and the A320-200 are the same. The CPUs went from Intel 80186s to 80286s, but the switching logic remained the same. There was nothing in the BEA report on AF296 suggesting panel switching or logic issues. Maybe an A320 driver could confirm.



Empty vessels make the most noise.
User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9524 posts, RR: 42
Reply 23, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4425 times:

Quoting Kaiarahi (Reply 22):
There's a difference between running a checklist in response to a fault alert and shutting the system down

There's also a difference between hand-flying (pilot decides where the aircraft points) and Direct Law (pilot decides where the control surfaces point).


User currently offlinebonusonus From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4335 times:

Quoting Rara (Reply 6):
I was going to say... Grabbing the yoke and hitting the red button, while at the same time pushing the thrust levers forward should do the trick, right? If the Habsburg pilots had done that a bit earlier, they wouldn't have crashed into the trees. NWAROOSTER makes it sound like you have to use a programming language or something.

Isn't it as simple as switching to TO/GA mode? or would the envelope protection in that mode still prevent the pilots from pulling out of a low pass like that?


25 Post contains images Pihero : You are correct. Nothing changed in the 'Bus FC architecture after this accident No need to hit the A/P disconnect button as they were in manual flig
26 UALWN : Actually, in normal law, the envelope protection would allow pulling out of that situation better than without the protection. Just hit TOGA, pull th
27 Post contains links travelavnut : A feat demonstrated on every Airbus airshow take-off I understand; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfHTc69AFUo
28 AAExecPlat : Geez...some of the comments here are so clueless/baseless. Thank you Pihero and Kaiarahi for keepings things sane around the asylum (yet again).
29 BrouAviation : Not true, Airbus will not let you balance on the edge of a stall like you are able to do in a truly direct controlled aircraft, when you fly it prope
30 travelavnut : He probably meant to say; "flying closer to the stall limit than a human could do safely" Which is of course entirely correct AFAIK.
31 David L : But isn't it true that Airbus will let any pilot balance very close to the stall better than a significant number (perhaps most) could on other types
32 BrouAviation : That completely depends on the experience you have with an aircraft. Yes, I bet the FBW computers do a fine job compared to most pilots flying Airbus
33 David L : Agreed, but I'm still a bit puzzled that you said: It will let you balance the aircraft "on the edge of a stall" better than can be done by most pilo
34 travelavnut : I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough to make that bet or not. And to be honest, I kinda question if you are. Also I don't think it's a very relevan
35 Aesma : BrouAviation : I'm not a pilot (yet), but from what I understand, flying an airliner "by the pants" is not really a good idea because you don't get an
36 Post contains images InsideMan : nothing else to say. Funny how the same topics surface again and again and the same arguments are exchanged, yet cetain people are immune to logic an
37 BrouAviation : I think it is. In discussions like this it is always FBW that's being discussed, while the actual problem (and as such the solution) lays in pilot tr
38 David L : As far as feedback through the "seat of the pants" goes, it depends on the rate of change, not on the actual values. With the buffeting and other dis
39 MD-90 : Avweb has had some interesting letters recently regarding cockpit automation. Here are three of them to consider. and and
40 UALWN : In the Mulhouse situation we were discussing, a sudden realization that you have to get the hell out of here asap, where every second counts and you
41 BrouAviation : Naturally rate of change is the vital factor, but looking at the flight path of AF447 the rate of change should have been enough. (although turbulenc
42 Pihero : Hear, Hear ! Certainly not, and quite a few observers (myself included ) think that the main fault of that crew was to have believed their senses ( h
43 Pihero : There is somewhere in the web an ALPA report on FBW comparison (basically, A330 vs 777) Funny enough, the A330 was consistently better than the 777 w
44 travelavnut : Just wondering Brou, for what aircraft are you certified?
45 BrouAviation : True, but I was talking about hypothetically removing that system. (or it gets removed thanks to frozen up pitots) You can take the aircraft further
46 Post contains images BrouAviation : I don't want to, but history shows us somebody else should as the system is rotten throughout. No commercial aircraft, for the rest, let's just say I
47 notaxonrotax : A detail that often gets forgotten about this crash, is that the pilots were looking for the airstrip (visually), found it quite late and then continu
48 tdscanuck : It does have something to do with it, because airliners don't have the same stall or flight dynamics as small aircraft. The ability for pilots to cor
49 Post contains images travelavnut : Indeed, I fly gliders and wouldn't dare making assumptions or speak as-matter-of-factly about how it is to fly heavy metal. I guess someone needs to
50 David L : While that might be technically correct, I don't think you can get a great deal closer to a stall than the alpha-protection will let you. It would ce
51 Post contains images BrouAviation : That is not the point I am making. I am not saying that I can recover stall in an A330 because I can in a 4-cylinder piston. I am saying it is scary
52 Post contains images David L : indeed, but it does illustrate the limitations of "seat of the pants" flying. ; Ah, I see. When you said this... ... you meant the training system ra
53 BrouAviation : Exactly!
54 cmf : Just signed up to join this discussion. I've always found this kind of objection to the control limitations fascinating. From my point of view this w
55 Kaiarahi : And that's where you're dead wrong. Using your senses at night in IMC and turbulence is a sure recipe for disaster. As for the attitude indicator, I'
56 BrouAviation : I am really getting tired of this. I should have learned by now that answering off-topic questions gives problems to people that lack the ability to r
57 Kaiarahi : Of course it's relevant. The professional Airbus drivers on this thread have actually been through the training you are describing as "completely rot
58 BrouAviation : When you want to discuss a wound, do you need to discuss the plaster that covers it? Lufthansa is a great exception you use as an example. Find me an
59 cmf : But is the Mulhouse-Habsheim a good example of that? From the reports I have read the problem wasn't automation but directing the plane in to a situa
60 Post contains images David L : FBW can't be covering up the shortfall in training for non-FBW types, though. In that context, I thought we'd agreed that fleet-wide training and exp
61 Pihero : I find quite amusing the hurt feelings of someone who started on some drastically opinionated -and wrong - assumptions about airline flying in general
62 tdscanuck : There's no evidence that they couldn't recover from a stall. They never even tried. They never knew they were in a stall. You don't try to recover fr
63 Post contains links Speedbird741 : For those of you who may be curious, I believe this is the report Pihero is referencing. Indeed an interesting read. http://cf.alpa.org/internet/alp/
64 Post contains images Pihero : But at the very least it is posing the question, and there are no easy answers. And no definite ones at the moment. Yes, it is . Thanks.
65 David L : Yes, perhaps the issue has been overstated by some, including me. I took the recent concerns to mean that the focus of training has shifted rather th
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...
What Happened To The AF A320 Crash At Airshow? posted Fri Aug 25 2000 00:23:01 by Qantas777
Air Inter A320 Crash: Airbus' Or Pilot's Fault? posted Sun Jun 26 2005 20:18:06 by RootsAir
Report Says Pilot Error Behind Gulf Air A320 Crash posted Tue Jul 16 2002 17:47:35 by Jgore
French Court: CO responsible for AF Concorde crash posted Mon Dec 6 2010 02:28:20 by alasdair1982
Air NZ/XL Airways A320 Crash Final Report Findings posted Thu Sep 16 2010 06:14:31 by 777ER
2008 A320 Crash - Final Report Due Out Friday posted Tue Sep 14 2010 03:37:28 by NZ1
AF A320 In PUJ posted Mon Aug 9 2010 16:04:59 by AFCDGPTP
AF A320-100 Final Retirement Schedule posted Thu Jul 1 2010 11:20:32 by Loran
Regarding AF Concorde Crash posted Wed May 12 2010 03:46:58 by 777way
AF A320 In HAV & SJU posted Tue Mar 9 2010 21:44:19 by AFCDGPTP