EconoBoy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 157 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 2 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2020 times:
A de Havilland Trident crashed in the seventies as it climbed from LHR (I think), killing all on board. The crash was caused by the plane entering a deep stall, however, the Trident was fitted with devices (droops?) to help prevent deep stalls occurring (as, presumably, are other planes with a T-tail like the 727). The crash was eventually attributed to pilot error, which was not challenged by the co-pilot, probably because he was intimidated by the Captain. What was the error that caused the crash, and have there been other incidents where a co-pilot failed to challenge the actions of the captain (other than the crash on Tenerife)?
Leezyjet From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 4041 posts, RR: 55 Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 23 hours ago) and read 1707 times:
Don't forget that all these crashes were back in the 70's and 80's.
Since then alot more has been done to improve things in the cockpit to ensure that F/o's speak up if they think the Captain is in the wrong.
IIRC the F/O can even take command of the a/c if they think the Captain is making a gross error that could endanger the a/c. They have to make a call to ATC saying that they are taking over command or something like that. Maybe some of the Flight Crew on here can confirm that.
"She Rolls, 45 knots, 90, 135, nose comes up to 20 degrees, she's airborne - She flies, Concorde Flies"
411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 months 19 hours ago) and read 1670 times:
Unfortunately, the Trident series of aircraft, altho very advanced for their time (especially automatic landing...the first jet transport to do so) had a very big flaw...the 'droops' could be retracted independantly of the flaps.
This is not possible with American designs...Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed.
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 months 12 hours ago) and read 1633 times:
Gee, you just had to make the "this is not possible with American designs" comment.
It was a flaw, but with modern CRM, cross-checking and a less irate pilot who wasn't having a heartattack, the accident would not have happened, independent lever or no. Also, a better trained F/O would have noticed the speed decrease.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - from Citadel by John Ringo
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 months 8 hours ago) and read 1599 times:
The G-ARPI accident was due to a combination of pilot incapacitation and, in these days, lack of CRM. Ever since the mid-1970s, training scenarios in simulator of pilot incapacitation are part of simulator training, and CRM is all a part of any training program since early 1980 with most airlines.
CRM was initiated with much support from BALPA, British Airways and, in the USA. with the efforts of United Airlines initially.
411A From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1826 posts, RR: 9 Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 7 hours ago) and read 1570 times:
Seems I touched a nerve with you, Starlionblue.
In reality of course, is just happens that Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed are indeed American companies...and Hawker Siddely (manufacturer of the HS121 Trident) was not.
Gee, what a surprise.
But hey, don't let this simple fact get you down.
Remember, the first widebody jet airliner certified to CATIIIC was the Lockheed TriStar, and Lockheed hired some of the guys from the original Trident/Smiths team to design the autopilot...and with good reason, it worked GOOD.
American companies, in the days when the Trident was designed, had really no need for autoland capability, so they never bothered.
The Brits OTOH, took on the task, and did it very well indeed.
By the way, the FIRST aircraft with complete autoland capability was another British design, the Shorts SC3 Belfast.
With, oddly enough, the same Smiths autopilot as the Trident.
EconoBoy From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 157 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 6 hours ago) and read 1548 times:
Good posts, 411A.
I wondered how procedures had advanced regarding the F/O's role. Leezyjet says that an F/O can take over if he thinks the Captain is in the wrong, but is that easy, especially if the Captain thinks he is right, or is too arrogant or offended to hand over to the F/O?
Starlionblue From Hong Kong, joined Feb 2004, 15870 posts, RR: 66 Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 5 hours ago) and read 1540 times:
411A. Sorry about that, I reacted too strongly. It was just the way you said it. And I'm not even British. I'm just stuck on this island for another 2 months!
Anyway IMHO there is nothing wrong with Brit engineering, but in the 40s, 50s and 60s it was hampered by conflicting and changing requirements, more often than not leading to underwhelming sales, and finally to the untimely demise of the UK airframer industry as an independent entity.
Backfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 months ago) and read 1499 times:
I wonder if the co-pilots didn't say anything because they thought that if the captain thought it was okay then they must be wrong.
It's still happening today - it's believed that the co-pilot on the Korean Air 747 cargo flight which came down at London Stansted was too intimidated by the skipper to point out problems with the aircraft's attitude.
B747skipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1407 times:
The Oriental Culture is difficult to adapt to the flight crew CRM environment. I have a high respect for that culture, which is largely based on respect of others, this especially with rank, unfortunately, even in 2004, that wall remains with Japanese, Korean or Chinese air carriers.
With the end of PanAm, many of us went overseas for jobs, I had a few friends who ended up flying for Japanese or Korean airlines... Some had really a tough time adapting to that social culture, starting even in training.
One illustration of that problem. A friend of mine was a 747 captain, and got assigned to his first flight as captain from NRT to LAX and back, two days later. Since he lived in Los Angeles, he went home, and joined the crew at the hotel, for pick-up to the airport, his two other cockpit crewmembers, and some 14 or 15 flight attendants.
Captain always walks in front - a form of respect... everyone follows. He did not know where the "operations" office was, for his airline in the LAX terminal, so he entered a few doors - wrong way - (entire crew following him respectfully), tried another few doors, still followed by the respectful crew. Finally he asked the ticket agents for his way.
None of his crewmembers would have dared to say "It is that way, captain"... to their culture, this would have been considered insulting to a captain. With the way I am, I would not last a week with such respectful crew. If I am wrong, please tell me...
In my early days of airline flying, there was still a bit of that type of behaviour left with captains and their crewmembers. I had some captains tell me to shut-up or sit on my hands... but in the 1970s... that changed a lot, thanks maybe to CRM... and retirement of some senior captains, who were captains with PanAm since the days of the DC-4s...
SonicKidatBWI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1303 times:
Like other people have already commented, the crash of the Trident was caused by the premature retraction of the aircrafts "droops", which are leading edge devices similar to "slats". The retraction of the droops (which was thought to be the result of the captains orders who might have been incapacitated due to suffering a brain hemorrhage) caused the plane to stall and it entered an unrecoverable, tail-down nearly vertical decent. The plane slammed into an open field adjacent to a major thoroughfare, killing all passengers.