I just came across this article on the Aviation Herald about an in-flight upset onboard AA4439 that occurred shortly after departing ATL last night: http://avherald.com/h?article=4cef2f7b&opt=0

This seems quite serious. The pilots were apparently in a "stalling situation" with a runaway trim and unable to descend. Their Flightaware log shows them climbing through 7000 feet at ~4500fpm with a ground speed of only 160 knots. This brings back chilling memories of last year's Air Astana incident, although thankfully the control problems don't seem anywhere near as drastic. Let's hope the cause of this scary incident is quickly determined.

Must have been scary!

CO764 wrote:

This seems quite serious. The pilots were apparently in a "stalling situation" with a runaway trim and unable to descend. Their Flightaware log shows them climbing through 7000 feet at ~4500fpm with a ground speed of only 160 knots. This brings back chilling memories of last year's Air Astana incident, although thankfully the control problems don't seem anywhere near as drastic. Let's hope the cause of this scary incident is quickly determined.

My memory is fuzzy, but hadn't the Air Astana airplane just come out of maintenance (sort of like the ZV accident at CLT in 2003)?

Cubsrule wrote:

My memory is fuzzy, but hadn't the Air Astana airplane just come out of maintenance (sort of like the ZV accident at CLT in 2003)?

You're correct. That was the airplane's flight home after extensive maintenance in Lisbon. IIRC, the aileron controls were accidentally inverted during maintenance, which wasn't detected by technicians or the pilots until after takeoff.

Sam Chui reporting on it now:

https://samchui.com/2019/11/08/embraer- ... cTE0VczaUk

Must have been pretty scary.... Haven't seen any statements from AA, Republic or Embraer too.

Major props to the crew for saving the day. This is when countless of hours of sims and studying pays off big time.

I wonder if this was caused by maintenance like the Air Astana or some other issue in the aircraft.

Sam Chui didn't add a thing. Discussion on a couple of pilot boards has more details and is interesting.

And from the crew's own description, they had to cut out trim 1/2, switch into direct law and fly it from the FO side, and that put them back in control. They said they were fighting with the plane until they made those changes.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

Sam Chui reporting on it now.

Thank God Sam Chui is reporting on it.

asuflyer05 wrote:

LoganTheBogan wrote:

Sam Chui reporting on it now.

Thank God Sam Chui is reporting on it.

Yes thankfully we have a professional spotter on the case, with precisely zero aviation maintenance or operational credentials.

KFTG wrote:

asuflyer05 wrote:

LoganTheBogan wrote:

Sam Chui reporting on it now.

Thank God Sam Chui is reporting on it.

Yes thankfully we have a professional spotter on the case, with precisely zero aviation maintenance or operational credentials.

It's not even him that reported it, it's by AARON HILSZ-LOTHIAN through his site.

https://samchui.com/2019/11/08/embraer- ... cTcm5pKiUk

You can listen to the ATC recording here: https://archive-server.liveatc.net/katl ... -0200Z.mp3

The relevant portion starts at about the 6:30 mark. It's not for the faint of heart; you can really hear the pilots struggling at the controls. I'm so glad they made it back safe.

Glad the plane made it back to the field safely, which is what should matter in this story. It is amazing, in a situation that could have turned out much worse we have some focusing on who is bigger at LGA and the other on seat maps for upcoming flights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just a reminder to keep your posts on topic and relevant to the discussion

FWIW, it's very common to have low loads on non-peak flights out of a competitor's hub. Sounds like the Republic pilots did a good job getting the plane back under control.

Wow, that was harrowing. "We're in a stall". Ummpf. 6 souls on board - a total of two passengers.

Not that it matters all that much, but the flight apparently had 6 pax + 4 crew, as per the following statement issued by American Airlines:

“ On Nov. 6, American Eagle flight 4439, operated by Republic Airways, took off from Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport (ATL) at 9:05 p.m. ET. Flight 4439 was en route to New York’s LaGuardia Airport (LGA).

Due to a mechanical issue, the pilots of the Embraer E-175 returned to ATL, safely landing at 9:25 p.m. ET and taxiing to the gate. The flight had six passengers and was operated by a crew of four. Passengers were rebooked on flights that same evening to New York.”

Do the air traffic controllers always speak so fast?
Doesn't it create a issue with international pilots, the accent and the fast talking?

They only had two passengers? Does that happen a lot? I thought the chances of that would be zero at such a large city.

NYPECO wrote:

They only had two passengers? Does that happen a lot? I thought the chances of that would be zero at such a large city.

It is a 22:00 departure from ATL, getting into LGA just after 11PM so not odd to think it might be lightly traveled on certain days.

I know they generally investigate accidents, but wonder if the NTSB will want to look into this one.

maint123 wrote:

Do the air traffic controllers always speak so fast?
Doesn't it create a issue with international pilots, the accent and the fast talking?

They can slow down for international carriers. American controllers are quick in most places and expect yout to respond fast since they are handling so much traffic.

You can always ask for them to repeat as well if you dont catch it the first time.

The aircraft involved is supposed to ferry to IND tomorrow morning. Tail # involved was N117HQ

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/RPA9877

So now that’s 2 emb aircraft with control problems almost exactly 1 year apart.

The aircraft has just been ferried to Indianapolis, at a curiously low cruising altitude of 14,000 feet: https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N117HQ

alasizon wrote:

NYPECO wrote:

They only had two passengers? Does that happen a lot? I thought the chances of that would be zero at such a large city.

It is a 22:00 departure from ATL, getting into LGA just after 11PM so not odd to think it might be lightly traveled on certain days.

2100 departure as opposed to 2200. Not an unusual time for biz travelers to fly to NYC.

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

Well he couldn’t provide much help to the pilots, he was helpful in Getting the frequency clear and not asking for information until the situation was under control. As far as I can count he had to coordinate with Atlanta tracon and Atlanta center in order to get the blocks of airspace the aircraft was intruding on. Priority number 5000 was telling the CFR commander what was going on with an airplane that was still climbing through 14,000 feet, especially when that aircraft is at least 7-15 minutes out from landing.

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

Very interesting thoughts, I really hope you’re not a pilot...

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

As an airline pilot that's flown into every major airport in the United States, I disagree with your opinion. The controllers generally do a very good job, every facility has a few that come off as having an attitude, but the majority are great people, and do an amazing job of moving metal around. Your "cause crashes to happen" statement is just silly, and flat out wrong.

AABusDrvr wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

As an airline pilot that's flown into every major airport in the United States, I disagree with your opinion. The controllers generally do a very good job, every facility has a few that come off as having an attitude, but the majority are great people, and do an amazing job of moving metal around. Your "cause crashes to happen" statement is just silly, and flat out wrong.

You ever think that its you? also where are all these crashes they have been causing? I haven't heard of an ATC induced crash in ages

I thought everyone - the pilots and atc - were incredibly professional and acted textbook. I can’t imagine having runaway trim and not being able to descend. Just saying the words we are in a stalling situation, with no confidence in getting the nose down if stalled, is a very frightening situation to be in.

wjcandee wrote:

Sam Chui didn't add a thing. Discussion on a couple of pilot boards has more details and is interesting.

And from the crew's own description, they had to cut out trim 1/2, switch into direct law and fly it from the FO side, and that put them back in control. They said they were fighting with the plane until they made those changes.

Embraer’s don’t have direct law, Airbus does.

AABusDrvr wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

As an airline pilot that's flown into every major airport in the United States, I disagree with your opinion. The controllers generally do a very good job, every facility has a few that come off as having an attitude, but the majority are great people, and do an amazing job of moving metal around. Your "cause crashes to happen" statement is just silly, and flat out wrong.

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

DeltaConnection wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

As an airline pilot that's flown into every major airport in the United States, I disagree with your opinion. The controllers generally do a very good job, every facility has a few that come off as having an attitude, but the majority are great people, and do an amazing job of moving metal around. Your "cause crashes to happen" statement is just silly, and flat out wrong.

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

Why don't you give us a list of incidents in the last ten years and get back to us? You also a big user of pay phones? It's almost 2020. Do you gripe about auto manufacturers today as crap and talk about their reliability in 1985?

Go slither back under whatever rock you've been living under since the FAA didn't hire you.

mcoatc wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

As an airline pilot that's flown into every major airport in the United States, I disagree with your opinion. The controllers generally do a very good job, every facility has a few that come off as having an attitude, but the majority are great people, and do an amazing job of moving metal around. Your "cause crashes to happen" statement is just silly, and flat out wrong.

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

Why don't you give us a list of incidents in the last ten years and get back to us? You also a big user of pay phones? It's almost 2020. Do you gripe about auto manufacturers today as crap and talk about their reliability in 1985?

Go slither back under whatever rock you've been living under since the FAA didn't hire you.

Trust me, no one wants to work with the FAA willingly. NTSB, DOT, yes, FAA, no.

Anyone else noticed that tool who came on the frequency and asked whether they did the QRH and that he had E175 experience? Maybe he was trying to help, but, those guys were fighting for their lives and the last thing they want to hear is someone asking whether they did the QRH. What a tool!

DeltaConnection wrote:

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

This troll can't cite anything more recent than 28 years ago. Everyone involved here seems to have done a tremendous job, flight crew and ATC alike.

DeltaConnection wrote:

Trust me, no one wants to work with the FAA willingly. NTSB, DOT, yes, FAA, no.

You do know the FAA is an agency of the DOT right?

DeltaConnection wrote:

mcoatc wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

Why don't you give us a list of incidents in the last ten years and get back to us? You also a big user of pay phones? It's almost 2020. Do you gripe about auto manufacturers today as crap and talk about their reliability in 1985?

Go slither back under whatever rock you've been living under since the FAA didn't hire you.

Trust me, no one wants to work with the FAA willingly. NTSB, DOT, yes, FAA, no.

And yet, the FAA routinely receives far more applications for controller positions than it needs, even in a period of record unemployment. So I guess somebody wants the jobs. And no one I'm aware of comes to work at gunpoint. They all appear to be here willingly.

Again, where on the doll did the FAA hurt you? Where are all of those incidents in the last decade where controllers killed people? I must have been too busy yellling at pilots to see your reply.

Roots1 wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

This troll can't cite anything more recent than 28 years ago. Everyone involved here seems to have done a tremendous job, flight crew and ATC alike.

DeltaConnection wrote:

Trust me, no one wants to work with the FAA willingly. NTSB, DOT, yes, FAA, no.

You do know the FAA is an agency of the DOT right?

I don’t think he knows anything factual beyond the four walls of his parents’ basement.

All parties here did a commendable job. The stress from the emergency clearly apparent in all voices on the radios.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DeltaConnection wrote:

mcoatc wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

Why don't you give us a list of incidents in the last ten years and get back to us? You also a big user of pay phones? It's almost 2020. Do you gripe about auto manufacturers today as crap and talk about their reliability in 1985?

Go slither back under whatever rock you've been living under since the FAA didn't hire you.

Trust me, no one wants to work with the FAA willingly. NTSB, DOT, yes, FAA, no.

I do, for 10 years, enjoy it quite a bit. Point to the spot on the doll where the FAA hurt you...

DeltaConnection wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

As an airline pilot that's flown into every major airport in the United States, I disagree with your opinion. The controllers generally do a very good job, every facility has a few that come off as having an attitude, but the majority are great people, and do an amazing job of moving metal around. Your "cause crashes to happen" statement is just silly, and flat out wrong.

Tell that to the victims of Avianca 52, USAir 1493/SkyWest 5569, Aeromexico 498, and PSA 182.

And in exactly one of your cited flights (USAir 1493) was the controller the actual cause of the crash. But keep on keeping on!

Poorpilot wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Sam Chui didn't add a thing. Discussion on a couple of pilot boards has more details and is interesting.

And from the crew's own description, they had to cut out trim 1/2, switch into direct law and fly it from the FO side, and that put them back in control. They said they were fighting with the plane until they made those changes.

Embraer’s don’t have direct law, Airbus does.

I thought the same thing. But if you listen to the ATC the pilot says they are in Direct Law.

MachTen wrote:

Anyone else noticed that tool who came on the frequency and asked whether they did the QRH and that he had E175 experience? Maybe he was trying to help, but, those guys were fighting for their lives and the last thing they want to hear is someone asking whether they did the QRH. What a tool!

I disagree. They answered that they didn’t have time to run it. If 2 people are struggling to control an aircraft, they may not be able (as these guys weren’t) to run the QRH. If I had someone with a clear frame of mind sitting and looking at a QRH and could offer assistance while I can’t even get my own QRH out because I’m fighting an aircraft, I’d take the help. By the time the offer was made the situation was basically resolved so it was of no help, but potentially could have been.

SuseJ772 wrote:

Poorpilot wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Sam Chui didn't add a thing. Discussion on a couple of pilot boards has more details and is interesting.

And from the crew's own description, they had to cut out trim 1/2, switch into direct law and fly it from the FO side, and that put them back in control. They said they were fighting with the plane until they made those changes.

Embraer’s don’t have direct law, Airbus does.

I thought the same thing. But if you listen to the ATC the pilot says they are in Direct Law.

http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Embrae ... ntrols.pdf Page 19 talks about direct mode.

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

Fly into Atlanta ever? Only time they’re nasty is when a pilot has a shitty check on or an unprofessional answer or there is no radio courtesy or answering without a call sign to a control instruction. What a disgraceful comment you made. Would love to have you tour Atlanta Tracon sometime so you understand what you said and get to see the poor phraseology and lack of professionalism from some of the most high time pilots in large mainline aircraft.

JoseSalazar wrote:

SuseJ772 wrote:

Poorpilot wrote:

Embraer’s don’t have direct law, Airbus does.

I thought the same thing. But if you listen to the ATC the pilot says they are in Direct Law.

http://www.smartcockpit.com/docs/Embrae ... ntrols.pdf Page 19 talks about direct mode.

Yes direct mode....when you say LAW it’s Airbus.

SuseJ772 wrote:

Poorpilot wrote:

wjcandee wrote:

Sam Chui didn't add a thing. Discussion on a couple of pilot boards has more details and is interesting.

And from the crew's own description, they had to cut out trim 1/2, switch into direct law and fly it from the FO side, and that put them back in control. They said they were fighting with the plane until they made those changes.

Embraer’s don’t have direct law, Airbus does.

I thought the same thing. But if you listen to the ATC the pilot says they are in Direct Law.

The EJets do have direct mode, this cuts out the computer entirely except for pitch damping. It's yoke inputs straight to the PCUs then on to the control surfaces themselves. It kicks in either by depressing the guarded switches on the pedestal or if all computers self-diagnose erroneous data being fed to them and automatically puts the plane in direct mode.

DeltaConnection wrote:

[photoid][/photoid]

Karlsands wrote:

Miamiairport wrote:

At one point one of the pilots seemed a little sacred when the a/c wouldn't descend. The Controller was really nasty the Fire Chief that called for information on the flight.

He wasn’t nasty, he needed to have the frequency cleared for the issue at hand.

He was nasty, as is the case with most ATC in the US in/around major airports. They are generally rude, unhelpful, hysterical, and cause crashes to happen. The only good controller I’ve seen/heard so far was Patrick Harten who helped US Airways 1549.

How else would you have phrased, "Hey, I'm talking on the radio right now to an airplane in distress and I don't want to be interrupted as I'm also clearing the airspace and calling the TRACON right now. Can I call you back at a more convenient time? Thank you!" in a terse manner?

In the immortal words of Kevin Malone, "Why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?"