C4 - The Plane Crash

Author
Discussion

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
And not used by that many airlines anymore.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
I don't really understand what there is to be actually "learned" from such an exercise.

We already know the forces the human body can withstand when correctly supported, we know the typical g levels in a crash, we know we can't practically build a plane that can survive those sorts of impacts without making it uneconomic.

And more importantly we know that "chance" plays the biggest part in your survival (or otherwise).

What exactly does this program add to that knowledge? or is it just "plane crash tv"........ ;-)

Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
The latter.

Talksteer

4,843 posts

232 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
stuttgartmetal said:
The black box will survive.
Begging the question, why don't they make the plane out of the same stuff they make the black box out of?
The plane would be too heavy to get off the ground.
The square cube law.... small things have an inherent strength to weight advantage over large things plus the body of the plane is essentially a crumple zone for the black box.

Mutley

3,178 posts

258 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
HoHoHo said:
Not sure, but I always pick a seat near it as they always find that bit after a crash!
Yup, as aircraft rarely reverse into the ground...

Hooli

32,278 posts

199 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Mutley said:
HoHoHo said:
Not sure, but I always pick a seat near it as they always find that bit after a crash!
Yup, as aircraft rarely reverse into the ground...
I'm now waiting for someone to find youtube footage showing this to be wrong hehe

SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

252 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Crossflow Kid said:
Go to the C4 website and you can pick a seat and "check in", then find out if you survived or not.
Last time I looked about 6500 people had logged in and picked a seat. No wonder the fking thing crashed.
Quoted from the page on C4 where you check-in:

Channel 4 website said:
Don’t worry, plane crashes are rare and it is extremely unlikely you will ever be involved in a real one. All crashes are different – the feedback you’ll receive on your seat choice is based on the analysis and knowledge of our crash experts and relates only to this particular crash.
I despair.

Edited by SpeckledJim on Wednesday 10th October 16:40

Geneve

3,857 posts

218 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Surely each passenger should sit in a carbon fibre monocoque, wearing Nomex, Arai, a Hans device and full harness.

Ayahuasca

27,427 posts

278 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
Or, every passenger seat could be fitted with a parachute, at the press of a button the floor would open up like bomb bay doors and the seats would fall out. Would make you wish you had fastened your seatbelt.

Or, the aircraft itself could be fitted with a giant parachute that, at the push of a button, deploys to bring the whole plane gently down to earth. They actually use that with microlights. Just a question of scaling up. wink

Or, the aircraft could be fitted with airbags, big ones for the plane itself, small ones in the seatback for your head.


silverfoxcc

7,683 posts

144 months

Wednesday 10th October 2012
quotequote all
IIRC someone fitted a parachute to a light aircraft....... and it works!!!

Soovy

35,829 posts

270 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
HoHoHo said:
stuttgartmetal said:
The black box will survive.
Begging the question, why don't they make the plane out of the same stuff they make the black box out of?
Not sure, but I always pick a seat near it as they always find that bit after a crash!
I always try to sit next to Beyonce if she's on my flight. They always find the black box intact.


miniman

24,827 posts

261 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
Soovy said:
I always try to sit next to Beyonce if she's on my flight. They always find the black box intact.
rofl

Soovy

35,829 posts

270 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
miniman said:
Soovy said:
I always try to sit next to Beyonce if she's on my flight. They always find the black box intact.
rofl



Eric Mc

121,785 posts

264 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
I'm sure you won't be flying on a knackered old Boeing 727.

Dr Doofenshmirtz

15,187 posts

199 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
I've seen Air Crash Investigation enough times to know that if a plane is going to crash, survival is luck of the draw.
But sitting directly over the wing or at the back of the plane seems to help. Planes always seem to split in half either at the front or rear of the wing section. If it catches fire, you wanna be in the back.

Ayahuasca

27,427 posts

278 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
Watched quite an interesting Air Crash Investigations last night - a latest generation 737 just fell out of the air 500m before landing at Schipol. The three pilots were killed along with some passengers.

What had happened was that one of the two radar altimeters - the port side one - was faulty and it thought that the aircraft was at an altitude of -8m. No problem, there was another good radar altimeter and the normal baro one so the crew just kept switching off the warning sound and used the good instruments.

But unbeknownst to the crew, and to the NTSB investigators, and seemingly everyone else involved, the port side radio altimeter - the faulty one - was linked to the auto-throttles, which automatically pull the throttles back to idle when landing. Thus the plane tried to 'land' itself in middair, stalled and crashed.

As usual, the crew were blamed - for failing to notice that the autothrottle had kicked in prematurely.

But is does beg the question - are aircraft systems becoming too complex when nobody, not the crew, not the NTSB investigators, not the airline, appreciates how the various systems link up?



Edited by Ayahuasca on Thursday 11th October 16:50

Munter

31,319 posts

240 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
Ayahuasca said:
But is does beg the question - are aircraft systems becoming too complex when nobody, not the crew, not the NTSB investigators, not the airline, appreciates how the various systems link up?
Ironic that many people like to fly Boeing because they think the computer in the Airbus might fail to do it's job properly and kill them all with no manual control.

But I think the answer is yes. I think the Air France crash showed that as well. I'm not sure I have a good solution mind you.

Ultuous

2,247 posts

190 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
The problem/ question in mind is always how many lives have such systems saved?

No life-losing accident is 'acceptable', but it's always struck me that for every accident for 'system complexity' is blamed (and quite rightly as the issue clearly needs to be addressed), that complexity has probably (I'm not claiming to know for sure) avoided several other accidents from even starting to occur!


SpeckledJim

31,608 posts

252 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
Ayahuasca said:
But unbeknownst to the crew, and to the NTSB investigators, and seemingly everyone else involved, the port side radio altimeter - the faulty one - was linked to the auto-throttles, which automatically pull the throttles back to idle when landing. Thus the plane tried to 'land' itself in middair, stalled and crashed.

Edited by Ayahuasca on Thursday 11th October 16:50
Is that a necessary automation? Are the pilots to busy upon landing to do that themselves, or at risk of forgetting to do it? Sounds odd.

Sifly

570 posts

177 months

Thursday 11th October 2012
quotequote all
SpeckledJim said:
Is that a necessary automation? Are the pilots to busy upon landing to do that themselves, or at risk of forgetting to do it? Sounds odd.
There were 3 pilots on the aircraft, only usually done for a training flight or a 'check' flight.
For whatever reason (not sure if it was a foggy morning or not), the crew decided to carry out an auto-land. They left the landing checklist later than normal, and got distracted with the checklist at low altitiude whilst the autopilot began the landing flare thinking it was only a few feet above the runway (due to the faulty radio altimeter) and closed the thrust levers.

The stick-shacker kicked in to warn them of an approaching stall, the first officer applied full power but left the auto-throttle engaged. When the Captain took control, he did not place his hand on the thrust levers, and the auto-throttle again brought the engines back to idle resulting in a stall and crash from around 500 feet.

If only the auto-throttle had been disarmed and full power had remained set, they 'might' have got away with it. It's too easy to critisise after the event, but if I ever become uncomfortable with what the automatics are doing whilst at low level, I disconnect them and revert to basic flying techniques - Power, Pitch and most importantly air-speed until I'm happy with the situation.