What happened to Air France Flight 447
Discussion
Chuck328 said:
Hmmm, there are a few things that niggle me about the bus, little things that left me wondering "why did they do that?"
I'd have liked to see the sticks designed as they did for the C-17, moved in unison.
Also on the airbus the throttles don't physically move on auto throttles unlike on a Boeing. I'd have liked to see the sticks designed as they did for the C-17, moved in unison.
BMWBen said:
If the stick is mechanically connected to the control surfaces surely pushing against someones action on the other controls you'll feel the resistance?
Yes. Very much so. Seems an odd choice to remove that sensory feedback to me - one which must have added to the confusion here.I can't believe any pilot's instinct at 37500' would be to pull back on the stick, that seems ludicrous to me and the idea that pilots might just pull back while the alarms are going off and let the plane prevent stall doesn't fill me with much confidence either!
I know very little about flying but read the report and thread with interest- thanks for posting.
One question based on what I've read- I assume had the pilots done exactly nothing, flown straight through the turbulent storm edge they would in all likelyhood have suffer no ill effects?
One question based on what I've read- I assume had the pilots done exactly nothing, flown straight through the turbulent storm edge they would in all likelyhood have suffer no ill effects?
scubadude said:
I know very little about flying but read the report and thread with interest- thanks for posting.
One question based on what I've read- I assume had the pilots done exactly nothing, flown straight through the turbulent storm edge they would in all likelyhood have suffer no ill effects?
Pretty much, if they had selected 85% thrust 5 degrees pitch to achieve their target speed. Pitos started working not long after they malfunctioned, but as people have said its easy for us to say all this now compared to all the confusion and stress they were under. One question based on what I've read- I assume had the pilots done exactly nothing, flown straight through the turbulent storm edge they would in all likelyhood have suffer no ill effects?
Roadrunner23 said:
as people have said its easy for us to say all this now compared to all the confusion and stress they were under.
The pilots created their own stress and confusion.Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
Roadrunner23 said:
Pretty much, if they had selected 85% thrust 5 degrees pitch to achieve their target speed. Pitos started working not long after they malfunctioned, but as people have said its easy for us to say all this now compared to all the confusion and stress they were under.
To be fair, they shouldn't be at the controls if they can't cope under stress. As much as I feel for them I'm still amazed that they managed to let the situation get away from them so badly. Simpo Two said:
The pilots created their own stress and confusion.
Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
He could see though. As much as training and expertise kicks in, again playing the armchair expert here, but I can think of a few Aircrash Investigation episodes where the core problem was lack of visibility/visual horizon and not trusting the instruments.Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
paddyhasneeds said:
He could see though. As much as training and expertise kicks in, again playing the armchair expert here, but I can think of a few Aircrash Investigation episodes where the core problem was lack of visibility/visual horizon and not trusting the instruments.
Indeed, the scenario was different - though the AF crew had power, altitude and therefore time. But the point is - you have a problem - something is missing - how do you use your brains and work together to get out of it? This crew clearly neither thought nor worked togther, and the complexity/design of the aircraft systems didn't help. Flying an airplane has become too divorced from, well flying an airplane.Simpo Two said:
Roadrunner23 said:
as people have said its easy for us to say all this now compared to all the confusion and stress they were under.
The pilots created their own stress and confusion.Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
Isn't Sullenberger an ex-military fast jet pilot? I wonder if there's a measurable difference in the safety of airline pilots from a military background and those that aren't.
davepoth said:
Again, they've replicated an analogue flight system there.
[+]Reminds me of my first real taste of an "at limits" (*cough*) crosswind landing in to Biggin in a C152. FI was demonstrating the "wing down" approach (whereas everything I'd done till then was crabbed). We were so "left wing high" I felt like I was falling out of my seat into his lap. All I got was "don't fight me on the controls Matthew!" as I was anxiously steering left.
Was a great learning experience and with hindsight the feedback through the hands is very valuable in terms of conveying what the other guy is doing and feeling what the aircraft is doing. I know a spamcan is not quite a commercial jet but its a shame to think the designers decided that this sort of feedback was not required.
null said:
Simpo Two said:
Roadrunner23 said:
as people have said its easy for us to say all this now compared to all the confusion and stress they were under.
The pilots created their own stress and confusion.Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
Isn't Sullenberger an ex-military fast jet pilot? I wonder if there's a measurable difference in the safety of airline pilots from a military background and those that aren't.
TBH, I think Air France employes mainly ALA pilots & AF doesn't appear to have that great a safety record. Unlike the UK, France doesn't have many big airline employers. If there was any avoidable deficiencies, they were with Air France's culture and training.
el stovey said:
How do you measure it? Ask every airline that's had an accident or incident what background the pilots had. I know my airline doesn't have quantifiable differences in simulator performance between ex or non military pilots. Any pilots would receive exactly the same training on the aircraft the airline operates. That's what would save you, not what you learned 20 years ago in any previous outfit on a completely different type.
I hope no one ever asks you how many grains of sand you think there are on a beach! 
Clearly in this instance type specific training didn't save them. Instead it seems a copilot kept pulling back on the stick as the plane continued to stall.
el stovey said:
How do you measure it? Ask every airline that's had an accident or incident what background the pilots had. I know my airline doesn't have quantifiable differences in simulator performance between ex or non military pilots. Any pilots would receive exactly the same training on the aircraft the airline operates. That's what would save you, not what you learned 20 years ago in any previous outfit on a completely different type.
Im suprised by your post.I thought you would have definetly known that on the whole Ex-mil pilots tend to be much better pilots as a whole package.
Better in a hot situation, much better discipline, usually better concentration etc.
Anyone can be trained to fly a plane, the above doesn't get trained via a book or simulator.
Simpo Two said:
The pilots created their own stress and confusion.
Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
Yeah, you can really compare his situation where it was day time, great visibility, everything was working as it should and all warnings were working as it should with no doubt about what was wrong or what was going on.Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
Theflyer said:
Im suprised by your post.
I thought you would have definetly known that on the whole Ex-mil pilots tend to be much better pilots as a whole package.
Better in a hot situation, much better discipline, usually better concentration etc.
Anyone can be trained to fly a plane, the above doesn't get trained via a book or simulator.
And I'm sure you'll show us the statistical proof, to back up your theories. I thought you would have definetly known that on the whole Ex-mil pilots tend to be much better pilots as a whole package.
Better in a hot situation, much better discipline, usually better concentration etc.
Anyone can be trained to fly a plane, the above doesn't get trained via a book or simulator.
speedyellowrs said:
null said:
Clearly in this instance type specific training didn't save them. Instead it seems a copilot kept pulling back on the stick as the plane continued to stall.
As previously mentioned, Airbus, until recently, didn't believe that pitch power training at altitude was required. So they had never been given the type specific training for unreliable airspeed at altitude. paddyhasneeds said:
Simpo Two said:
The pilots created their own stress and confusion.
Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
He could see though. As much as training and expertise kicks in, again playing the armchair expert here, but I can think of a few Aircrash Investigation episodes where the core problem was lack of visibility/visual horizon and not trusting the instruments.Sullenberger wasn't 'confused' when his engines packed up near the Hudson at almost ground level. He kept calm and solved the problem. And that is why he and his passengers are alive.
Birgenair Flight 301 springs to mind.
Theflyer said:
Im suprised by your post.
I thought you would have definetly known that on the whole Ex-mil pilots tend to be much better pilots as a whole package.
Better in a hot situation, much better discipline, usually better concentration etc.
Anyone can be trained to fly a plane, the above doesn't get trained via a book or simulator.
That's not supported by the empirical data using scores from our simulator results/ line checks/ promotion course passed etc.I thought you would have definetly known that on the whole Ex-mil pilots tend to be much better pilots as a whole package.
Better in a hot situation, much better discipline, usually better concentration etc.
Anyone can be trained to fly a plane, the above doesn't get trained via a book or simulator.
Perhaps your lot have different results?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff