LY777
Topic Author
Posts: 2518
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 6:58 pm

Why weren’t the A330s grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:01 pm

I was wondering why the A330s weren’t grounded after the pitot tube issues?
Even before the AF crash, many airlines reported incidents but the plane was not grounded the time the pitot tubes were replaced.
Why?
Last edited by atcsundevil on Sun May 19, 2019 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Title edited for clarity
Flown:717,727,732,733,734,735,738,73H,742/744/748,752,753,762/2ER/763/3ER,772/77E/773/77W, 788, 789, DC8,DC10,E190,E195,MD83,MD88, L1011, A3B2,A319,A320-100/200,A321,A332/A333,A343,A388
 
flyinTLow
Posts: 491
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:40 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:08 pm

The magnitude of the failure of the system was not at all comparable. While the pitot failure had an influence on the aircrafts‘ systems, it did not activly hinder a flight / cause a crash. That is unfortunatly what the AoA issue on the 737Max can be seen. But to be honest, most importantly it is the public outcry that forced the FAA to act on this issue, less the actual failure. Or the grounding would have happened after the Air Asia crash.
- When dreams take flight, follow them -
 
AA737-823
Posts: 5448
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2000 11:10 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:11 pm

Because the AF A330 crash was different.
It was indeed initially caused by a pitot tube problem, but the big issue was EPIC spatial disorientation on the part of the flight crew. They pancaked in, because they chose not to believe their instruments. Which is something that is a natural reaction, but is trained against.
Also, the fix was readily apparent: switch brands of pitot probe ASAP. There were already two manufacturers making A330 pitot probes- one of them had heat that was more effective in those rare storm cloud icing conditions.

So while the outcome was still horrible, and you have not actually mentioned the 737MAX in your post, I can only say that the plane and scenario didn't justify a worldwide grounding in the eyes of the authorities.
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3489
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:14 pm

Because only one crashed.
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2647
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:22 pm

I think a better comparison would be the ADIRU failures the aircraft had about 10 years ago. No aircraft were grounded but I’m willing to bet if one of those aircraft went down, the fleet was going to be grounded.
 
Deeso
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 8:30 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:22 pm

If I recall correctly the pitot icing condition was recovered pretty quickly but the actions of the pilots made the plane stall.
Had they just let the sidesticks go off thier hand the plane would have stabilized itself.
 
airbazar
Posts: 9617
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:32 pm

The pitot tube problem was known and there were measures in place to safely deal with it. AF had already started replacing all pitot tubes with a more reliable model. In a stupid coincidence that aircraft was one of the last in line to get the replacement and it was due to have it replace after arriving back in Paris.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:38 pm

flyinTLow wrote:
The magnitude of the failure of the system was not at all comparable. While the pitot failure had an influence on the aircrafts‘ systems, it did not activly hinder a flight / cause a crash. That is unfortunatly what the AoA issue on the 737Max can be seen. But to be honest, most importantly it is the public outcry that forced the FAA to act on this issue, less the actual failure. Or the grounding would have happened after the Air Asia crash.


Agreed. Once the AF crash reasons became known, it was apparent that the crash was avoidable and if the situation occurred, it could be mitigated. With the second 7M8 crash, it became clear that even if the pilots did everything to mitigate, the AoA issue could still be fatal.

If we are revisiting lack of grounding, I'm surprised the RR 777s werent grounded after BA 038. The issue with the FOHE was dangerous.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS BIS DOH BLR MAA KTM
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1374
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 6:56 pm

Pitot tubes are not specific to A330s. All airliners have them AFAIK. Ground them all??
 
User avatar
Siren
Posts: 772
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:50 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:06 pm

Antarius wrote:
]If we are revisiting lack of grounding, I'm surprised the RR 777s werent grounded after BA 038. The issue with the FOHE was dangerous


The cause of BA038 was something of a mystery initially, took some time to establish cause, and required careful examination of the evidence, wreckage, and testing to come to the conclusions that the FOHE was ultimately responsible. Furthermore, if I recall correctly, entire issue itself could be almost entirely mitigated with careful management of fuel temperatures. Rolls Royce was quick to develop and implement a fix once the issue was identified. It was hardly a chronic systemic flaw - the engine had been in service for 10+ years before the BA038 incident had occurred.

Similar to the A330, it was a very quick fix once the issue was identified.
 
SEU
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:21 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:11 pm

It was probably because a fix was already done, Airbus disclosed the system in the manuals and didntt hide it from any regulator or pilots to keep it in line with certification.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2647
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:19 pm

JerseyFlyer wrote:
Pitot tubes are not specific to A330s. All airliners have them AFAIK. Ground them all??


You realize there are many different types of pitot tubes right?
 
MSPNWA
Posts: 3340
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:48 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:20 pm

KFLLCFII wrote:
Because only one crashed.


Bingo. Which is quite rediculous, but the precedent has now been set. One unknown crash is clearly okay. Two isn't.
 
Zaf
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 9:47 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:23 pm

Because it is a modern 21st century plane. Unlike the b737 a 1950ies fuselage with too large modern engines.
 
lowfareair
Posts: 259
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:40 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:25 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
KFLLCFII wrote:
Because only one crashed.


Bingo. Which is quite rediculous, but the precedent has now been set. One unknown crash is clearly okay. Two isn't.


It's more than that - 1 unknown crash can be many things related or not related to that specific aircraft model, but 2 crashes with many similarities tends to narrow down to something wrong with either the aircraft and/or the training given to the pilots.
 
Weatherwatcher1
Posts: 210
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 5:14 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:33 pm

KFLLCFII wrote:
Because only one crashed.


I think that is the reason.

Every day, Airbus (and Boeing) gets safety events reported to them from the airlines. The safety events could be structural cracks, inflight fires, flight control issues, instrument failures, etc. Each one is evaluated to determine if there is a potential failure mode investigated to ensure the design is safe and that failures happen in predicted ways. Most events are rather benign, but some have safety implications and air safety investigations. Based on some analytical methods a probability of future failure is quickly evaluated. If the risk is high, immediate action may be required. Immediate action could be an inspection, replacement on an interval or even grounding the airplane or fleet. It is all based on probability since there is always risk that another event could happen. Groundings are uncommon and usually require two events. If groundings were done on single events, fleets would get grounded on a weekly basis.

At any given time, there are probably about 100 safety events being actively addressed. Usually the manufacturer gets a year or two to come up with a safety recommendation and airlines then get a few years to implement, it it is all based on a risk assessment. The FAA and EASA carefully watch this process. That is why there are dozens of airworthiness directives published each year.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:38 pm

Zaf wrote:
Because it is a modern 21st century plane. Unlike the b737 a 1950ies fuselage with too large modern engines.


The a330 EIS was before the 21st century.

Nice try. :roll:
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS BIS DOH BLR MAA KTM
 
Antarius
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:45 pm

Siren wrote:
Antarius wrote:
]If we are revisiting lack of grounding, I'm surprised the RR 777s werent grounded after BA 038. The issue with the FOHE was dangerous


The cause of BA038 was something of a mystery initially, took some time to establish cause, and required careful examination of the evidence, wreckage, and testing to come to the conclusions that the FOHE was ultimately responsible. Furthermore, if I recall correctly, entire issue itself could be almost entirely mitigated with careful management of fuel temperatures. Rolls Royce was quick to develop and implement a fix once the issue was identified. It was hardly a chronic systemic flaw - the engine had been in service for 10+ years before the BA038 incident had occurred.

Similar to the A330, it was a very quick fix once the issue was identified.


Good points.

I believe temperatures and routes/FL were modified until the fix was made, similar to how some airlines capped the ceiling on the 320neos due to the PW engine issues.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS BIS DOH BLR MAA KTM
 
1989worstyear
Posts: 615
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:53 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 7:55 pm

Zaf wrote:
Because it is a modern 21st century plane. Unlike the b737 a 1950ies fuselage with too large modern engines.


I didn't realize the new Millenium started in '94.

Good music that year though. Makes me want to load that NIN CD onto my phone the next time I'm on an A330. :lol:
Stuck at age 15 thanks to the certification date of the A320-200 and my parents' decision to postpone having a kid by 3 years. At least there's Dignitas...
 
smartplane
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 8:00 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
I think a better comparison would be the ADIRU failures the aircraft had about 10 years ago. No aircraft were grounded but I’m willing to bet if one of those aircraft went down, the fleet was going to be grounded.

Safety standards continue to evolve and improve. A satisfactory response a decade or more ago, wouldn't / shouldn't be tolerated in 2019. Safety standards, expectations and especially reporting in another decade, will be higher again.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5241
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 8:06 pm

Zaf wrote:
Because it is a modern 21st century plane. Unlike the b737 a 1950ies fuselage with too large modern engines.

The fuselage of the 737 was designed in the 1960s. The upper lobe shares the same dimensions as that of the 707, which was designed in the second half of the 1950s. The fuselage of the A330 is the same fuselage design as the Airbus A300, which was designed in the late 1960s/early 1970s. So not a ~50 year difference as you imply, more a ~5 year difference (or a ~15 year difference if you want to stick with the 707 as being the basis for the 737 fuselage, which is half true)

The wing of the 737 MAX is the same wing as the 737NG. This wing was an entirely new wing compared to the original and classic series 737s, and was designed in the mid-1990s. The wing of the A330, which is common to the A340 (and this in itself is a great feat of engineering to have a common wing for a twin and a quad) was designed in the late 1980s.

Yes that is right, the 737 MAX’s wing is newer than the A330s (and A320s for that matter), but let’s be honest the age difference between them, in terms of the state of the art, is negligible, as is the age difference in the fuselage designs.

Getting away from that red herring, I think there are a couple of other issues not already mentioned above that help explain why one was grounded and the other wasn’t.

  • The issues with the 737 MAX presented early in its service life, whereas the A330’s presented a decade and a half after entry into service. This naturally casts greater doubt on the former’s airworthiness than it would on the latter. It also means a smaller in service fleet so less push-back on removing a type from service.
  • The proliferation of social media in the decade between the A330 issues and the 737 MAX issues. Like it or not, the effect of this is a great deal of pressure being applied.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
beechnut
Posts: 744
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:27 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 8:26 pm

The A330 has more than one pitot tube supplier. Thales and Honeywell come to mind. Only the Thales tubes were affected by the issue.

AF 447 was a classic Swiss cheese. Iced up pitot, night, caught in thunderstorms, severe turbulence and aircraft upset, inexperienced pilot at the controls, captain in crew rest quarters, misidentification of a stall, training issues, etc.

Beech
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 2824
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 8:35 pm

And the pitot tubes on F-GZCP were scheduled to be replaced upon arrival, but the plane crashed on the final flight before that.

Also, until an Afriqiyah A332 crashed, that was the only A330 crash with loss of life.
 
hivue
Posts: 1913
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:26 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 8:41 pm

Antarius wrote:
If we are revisiting lack of grounding, I'm surprised the RR 777s werent grounded after BA 038. The issue with the FOHE was dangerous.


Hardly. BA038 was as close as you're going to see to a major airplane accident with no cause: no pilot error, no mechanical issue, no design flaw, no bad fuel, no bad weather, no ATC issue, no terrorism, no nothing. The 777 had logged millions of hours (including extensive initial flight testing) without the slightest hint of this happening.

Of course, a "cause" for the accident had to be named, and the fuel oil heat exchanger got tagged because that's where the ice accumulated in the flight's very unique set of circumstances.
"You're sitting. In a chair. In the SKY!!" ~ Louis C.K.
 
Antarius
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 8:44 pm

hivue wrote:
Antarius wrote:
If we are revisiting lack of grounding, I'm surprised the RR 777s werent grounded after BA 038. The issue with the FOHE was dangerous.


Hardly. BA038 was as close as you're going to see to a major airplane accident with no cause: no pilot error, no mechanical issue, no design flaw, no bad fuel, no bad weather, no ATC issue, no terrorism, no nothing. The 777 had logged millions of hours (including extensive initial flight testing) without the slightest hint of this happening.

Of course, a "cause" for the accident had to be named, and the fuel oil heat exchanger got tagged because that's where the ice accumulated in the flight's very unique set of circumstances.


What? There was a massive design flaw with the FOHE and the engines.That's why they quickly fixed it.

How can you claim there was no mechanical issue or design flaw with the engines when that's exactly what caused the aircraft to go down? (And I agree there was no issue with the 777 airframe). This was not a case of the EgyptAir 767 crash where a mechanical problem was invented as a way to find blame)
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS BIS DOH BLR MAA KTM
 
rigo
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 11:52 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 9:11 pm

Incidentally, one thing puzzles me about the A330 accident. I understand that ultimately, a space disoriented pilot was pulling on the stick until he led the plane in a stall and then kept it stalled. But I thought that the famous Airbus FBW system was designed to avoid precisely that kind of situation?
 
Antarius
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 9:18 pm

rigo wrote:
Incidentally, one thing puzzles me about the A330 accident. I understand that ultimately, a space disoriented pilot was pulling on the stick until he led the plane in a stall and then kept it stalled. But I thought that the famous Airbus FBW system was designed to avoid precisely that kind of situation?


The autopilot and the envelope protection against bad inputs is disabled in the event of Inconsistent Airspeed data being fed to ACARS.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS BIS DOH BLR MAA KTM
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5241
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 9:36 pm

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Also, until an Afriqiyah A332 crashed, that was the only A330 crash with loss of life.

In commercial service yes, but don’t forget the accident during flight testing for certifying cat III ILS on the P&W powered A330 in 1994: https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19940630-0

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
barney captain
Posts: 2212
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 5:47 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Wed May 15, 2019 11:27 pm

ikolkyo wrote:
I think a better comparison would be the ADIRU failures the aircraft had about 10 years ago. No aircraft were grounded but I’m willing to bet if one of those aircraft went down, the fleet was going to be grounded.


Absolutely.

2 aircraft that suddenly nose-dived because a single source AoA input was misinterpreted by the ADIRU's as a stall. Both incidents happened within a few months of each other. The only reason nobody was killed (though several seriously injured) was because it happened in cruise, given the crews time to analyze and recover.

The ATSB's final report, issued on 19 December 2011, concluded that the incident "occurred due to the combination of a design limitation in the flight control primary computer (FCPC) software of the Airbus A330/Airbus A340, and a failure mode affecting one of the aircraft's three air data inertial reference units (ADIRUs). The design limitation meant that, in a very rare and specific situation, multiple spikes in angle of attack (AOA) data from one of the ADIRUs could result in the FCPCs commanding the aircraft to pitch down."[23]


I'd say there's more than a casual similarity between QF72/73 and the MAX issue.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72
Southeast Of Disorder
 
HTCone
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2017 7:10 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 1:08 am

Because if the AF crew had just sat on their hands and done nothing, everything would have been fine. If the MAX crews had done the same, they'd have crashed sooner.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 1:38 am

beechnut wrote:
The A330 has more than one pitot tube supplier. Thales and Honeywell come to mind. Only the Thales tubes were affected by the issue.

AF 447 was a classic Swiss cheese. Iced up pitot, night, caught in thunderstorms, severe turbulence and aircraft upset, inexperienced pilot at the controls, captain in crew rest quarters, misidentification of a stall, training issues, etc.

Beech


This is not true, all manufacturers types of pitot tubes are subject to icing on the A330 and every other type. Every aircraft is susceptible to pitot icing. There is not a single aircraft or pitot tube certified for flight into severe icing.

What makes the A330 and other modern aircraft different is the onboard computers constantly monitor the data.

The majority (95%) of pitot icing blocking events self resolve within 60 seconds. Even AF447 the pitot actually self resolved but the crew has switched the data away.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2647
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 1:47 am

zeke wrote:
beechnut wrote:
The A330 has more than one pitot tube supplier. Thales and Honeywell come to mind. Only the Thales tubes were affected by the issue.

AF 447 was a classic Swiss cheese. Iced up pitot, night, caught in thunderstorms, severe turbulence and aircraft upset, inexperienced pilot at the controls, captain in crew rest quarters, misidentification of a stall, training issues, etc.

Beech


This is not true, all manufacturers types of pitot tubes are subject to icing on the A330 and every other type. Every aircraft is susceptible to pitot icing. There is not a single aircraft or pitot tube certified for flight into severe icing.

What makes the A330 and other modern aircraft different is the onboard computers constantly monitor the data.

The majority (95%) of pitot icing blocking events self resolve within 60 seconds. Even AF447 the pitot actually self resolved but the crew has switched the data away.


The specific model of Thales pitot tubes that he is speaking of had issues with water ingress. There is a reason Airbus told customers to ditch Thales pitots for Goodrich models. Plus EASA and FAA banned the use of that pitot tube model on the A330/A340 in a AD.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 2:06 am

ikolkyo wrote:
The specific model of Thales pitot tubes that he is speaking of had issues with water ingress. There is a reason Airbus told customers to ditch Thales pitots for Goodrich models. Plus EASA and FAA banned the use of that pitot tube model on the A330/A340 in a AD.


That is not true, the pitot tube model is still in service on hundreds of aircraft.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Antarius
Posts: 1641
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 2:10 am

zeke wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
The specific model of Thales pitot tubes that he is speaking of had issues with water ingress. There is a reason Airbus told customers to ditch Thales pitots for Goodrich models. Plus EASA and FAA banned the use of that pitot tube model on the A330/A340 in a AD.


That is not true, the pitot tube model is still in service on hundreds of aircraft.


https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2009-0195

EASA did issue an air worthiness directive requiring change to the Goodrich ones.
2019: SIN HKG NRT DFW IAH HOU CLT LGA JFK SFO SJC EWR SNA EYW MIA BOG LAX ORD DTW OAK PVG BOS DCA IAD ATL LAS BIS CUN PHX OAK SYD CVG PHL MAD ORY CDG SLC SJU BQN MHT YYZ STS BIS DOH BLR MAA KTM
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13903
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 2:28 am

Antarius wrote:
https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2009-0195

EASA did issue an air worthiness directive requiring change to the Goodrich ones.


That AD states the aircraft must have a mix of Thales and Goodrich tubes. The tubes are still in device on hundreds of aircraft.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
Francoflier
Posts: 4870
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2001 12:27 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 3:16 am

The 330 also benefited from years of safe operations and hundreds of thousands of cycles when the accident and incidents happened. It had demonstrated that the events were very infrequent. That was not the case for the MAX.

The ADIRU fault was the result of a very unusual combination of sensor errors that engineers could not easily have predicted when designing it, unlike the MAX.

In the case of AF447, the flight controls were not affected by the failure. In the case of the QF flights, the pilots regained full control manually without hindrance or, due to the nature of the architecture, any unusually high physical efforts on the sidestick.

I think that the main difference between the 330 and MAX in their respective 'happenings' is that the A330 design did undergo full engineering peer reviews, extensive testing and comprehensive safety assessment. This alone would indicate that the fault mode was not only not discovered, but not envisioned.
The engineering approach behind the MCAS, on the other hand, quickly appeared dubious right after the first accident. Further analysis only seemed to cast more doubt on the integrity of the engineering approach to the implementation, and ultimately, the loss of trust engendered by the latter is what dictated the groundings.
I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2647
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 3:21 am

zeke wrote:
ikolkyo wrote:
The specific model of Thales pitot tubes that he is speaking of had issues with water ingress. There is a reason Airbus told customers to ditch Thales pitots for Goodrich models. Plus EASA and FAA banned the use of that pitot tube model on the A330/A340 in a AD.


That is not true, the pitot tube model is still in service on hundreds of aircraft.


A new Thales Pitot probe P/N C16195BA has been designed which improves
A320 aeroplane airspeed indication behaviour in heavy rain conditions. This
same pitot probe standard has been made available as optional installation on
A330/A340 aeroplanes, and although this has shown an improvement over the
previous P/N C16195AA standard, it has not yet demonstrated the same level
of robustness to withstand high-altitude ice crystals as the Goodrich P/N
0851HL probe. At this time, no other pitot probes are approved for installation
on the A330/A340 family of aeroplanes.


After 07 January 2010, do not install a Thales Avionics P/N C16195AA
pitot probe at any position on an aeroplane.


In short, C16195AA is to not be installed on ANY aircraft. Reading further into the AD, A newer version C16195BA is OK to be installed on the aircraft but must be accompanied with Goodrich pitots also. You can either have 2 of the newer Thales pitots and a Goodrich pitot OR A single Goodrich pitot and 2 Thales. There is a 3rd option of having just all Goodrich pitots.

edit: After skimming through it again I believe the aircraft can only have 2 Goodrich and 1 Thales at backup, or all Goodrich pitots. Feel free to correct me as I'm in a bit of a rush and on a phone.
Source: https://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2009-0195
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3184
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 3:37 am

LY777 wrote:
I was wondering why the A330s weren’t grounded after the pitot tube issues?
Even before the AF crash, many airlines reported incidents but the plane was not grounded the time the pitot tubes were replaced.
Why?


For 1 the requirement for replacement was already in effect and being done as far I a remember.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6882
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 4:58 am

LY777 wrote:
I was wondering why the A330s weren’t grounded after the pitot tube issues?
Even before the AF crash, many airlines reported incidents but the plane was not grounded the time the pitot tubes were replaced.
Why?



Primary reason? AF 447 was a 1 in 10 000 000 event totaly unrelated to any other fatal crashes around it, and in the midst of a long and safe operational record for the type
.
The two MAX accidents were totally related accidents, occuring close together in time, very early in the type's introduction, in the same phase of flight, with the same underlying causes, giving it a 1 in 100 000 probability of accident, totally against the benchmark safety record of its immediate predecessor (in the hands of the very same pilots too). All indications of a fundmental problem with the aircraft.

There is a secondary reason, and one which makes any comprison between the two a disgrace IMO.
In the MAX crashes, the plane ambushed the pilots who then for a variety of reasons struggled to overcome the ambush.

In AF 447 the pilot ambushed the plane.
He took a perfectly stable plane doing exactly what it was expected to, and in a low workload environment, and decided for whatever reason to fly it into coffin corner, where the inevitable happened. What happened after that is irrelevant.
Climbing a fully loaded A332 at 32 000ft at a rate of 8 000ft per minute? Utter lunacy.
No blame attributable to the plane whatsoever

Rgds
 
DeltaB717
Posts: 1667
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 5:18 am

beechnut wrote:
The A330 has more than one pitot tube supplier. Thales and Honeywell come to mind. Only the Thales tubes were affected by the issue.

AF 447 was a classic Swiss cheese. Iced up pitot, night, caught in thunderstorms, severe turbulence and aircraft upset, inexperienced pilot at the controls, captain in crew rest quarters, misidentification of a stall, training issues, etc.

Beech


And that's pretty much why the global A330/A340 fleet wasn't grounded over AF447 - because, ultimately, the same pilots in the same weather and at the same time of day, but with a different aircraft would probably still have crashed. A different crew operating the accident flight in the same conditions, on the balance of probability, would not have. If a regulator were to implement a global grounding as a result of the proven cause of AF447, it would have to ground pilots, not the type.
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 1885
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 6:03 am

Because all airplanes have small issues that can be fixed easily like the pitot issue of the A330. All the pilots of AF447 had to do was keep the plane flying level for less than a minute. Also considering the 737s weren't grounded after the rudder issues I don't think this would warrant a global grounding.
A350/CSeries = bae
 
f4f3a
Posts: 534
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2004 4:07 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 6:16 am

Also worth noting that after this incident airbus promptly came up with a training remedy . All crews in sims (certainly in Europe anyway ) were trained in this scenario . Unfortunately due to the fact that there aren’t that many max sims this can’t be done . I do not feel that a 10 minute iPad session will be sufficient . So not only a tech fix as mentioned but also a procedure that could be trained properly
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12403
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 6:29 am

hivue wrote:
Antarius wrote:
If we are revisiting lack of grounding, I'm surprised the RR 777s werent grounded after BA 038. The issue with the FOHE was dangerous.

Hardly. BA038 was as close as you're going to see to a major airplane accident with no cause: no pilot error, no mechanical issue, no design flaw, no bad fuel, no bad weather, no ATC issue, no terrorism, no nothing. The 777 had logged millions of hours (including extensive initial flight testing) without the slightest hint of this happening.

Wait, what?

First, there was definitely a design flaw.

Second, the same occurrence (though with different outcomes) happened multiple times on multiple carriers (DL being another example).
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Jomar777
Posts: 369
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 8:45 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 8:36 am

Basically, the MAX Fault directly contributed to both crashes since it kept pitching the aircraft down towards the ground.
The AF447/A330 pitot issue only caused the Autopilot to disengage. It was a serious issue but a solution was already in place and the only unlucky thing was that the THALES pitots on the aircraft in question were to due to be replaced by Honeywell after the fatidic flight to solve the problem.
On the A330 crash, when the autopilot disengaged, should the pilots have taken no action apart form keep the aircraft into route with a slight pitch to offset the turbulence, they would arrive in Paris. There were several issues on that flight which came to light when the Pitots frozen: the inability of the crew in flying manually an aircraft, their breakdown in communication, capitains decision making in being out of a crucial part of the flight as well as chosing the wrong pilot to replace him (the junior one rather than the most experience one)and the failure of one of the pilots in informing from the outset that he was pitching the aircraft up regardless of stall messages from the aircraft. Bonin also never relinquished the controls until it was too late and both failed to see the message on the flight instuments stating Dual Input.

This all between other issues like considering the weather forecats properly and taking preventive actions.

The MAX Pilots followed all standard and instructed procedures but the aircraft still crashed. The A330 pilots did otherwise.
 
a380900
Posts: 805
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:26 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 8:46 am

Also, it's the second crash that grounded the Max. There was no second crash in a similar situation within a few months for the A330.

And the A330 was not brand new. It was a proven design. The 737 MAX statistics are abysmal.
 
ratp101
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 5:12 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:20 am

Basically, A330 was a pitot tube disfunctionment, 737MAX was a blatant design flaw...
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1750
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:25 am

Deeso wrote:
If I recall correctly the pitot icing condition was recovered pretty quickly but the actions of the pilots made the plane stall.
Had they just let the sidesticks go off thier hand the plane would have stabilized itself.


The plane was already stable. The auto pilot was flying and there was nothing wrong with how the plane was flying. The auto pilot system detected the pitot tube failure and, as a precaution, handed over control to the pilots.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 8898
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 10:37 am

RickNRoll wrote:
The auto pilot system detected the pitot tube failure and, as a precaution, handed over control to the pilots.

Make it sound as if there was a choice, if I recall correctly, the design of the system is that the autopilot automatically disengages when there is a disagreement.
There were a number of discussions of ensuring that the pilots must always be "aware of their circumstances" in case there was a disagree and control was suddenly returned to them.
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1750
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 11:34 am

par13del wrote:
RickNRoll wrote:
The auto pilot system detected the pitot tube failure and, as a precaution, handed over control to the pilots.

Make it sound as if there was a choice, if I recall correctly, the design of the system is that the autopilot automatically disengages when there is a disagreement.
There were a number of discussions of ensuring that the pilots must always be "aware of their circumstances" in case there was a disagree and control was suddenly returned to them.

I don't know how you get that from my statement. The auto pilot system is designed to hand back control to the pilots in case of the pitot disagree. It is designed to do that as a precaution, although in this case it would have been better off flying the plane itself.
 
WIederling
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Why weren’t the A330s not grounded after the pitot tube issues?

Thu May 16, 2019 5:43 pm

MSPNWA wrote:
KFLLCFII wrote:
Because only one crashed.


Bingo. Which is quite rediculous, but the precedent has now been set. One unknown crash is clearly okay. Two isn't.


Wrong "bingo".

Primary reason, like for the 777 FOHE, was that these types had gobs of unremarkable flight hours accumulated.
10 plus years in service. ( Why did the US investigators in that crash investigation break the "no announcements without the primary investigators consent" rule? )

I am undecided how to categorize the 737 hydraulics inversion thing.
Boeing is very proactive in putting pilots on the block instead of proactively looking for technical reasons why some crash or other happened.
Compare Airbus intense effort to find AF447 and the brutal silence exuded by Boeing about MH370.
Murphy is an optimist

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos