http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/...france.crash.report/

Any comments from the many experienced pilots here?

I am not a pilot and even I know not to pull back on the stick until you crash.

It is easy to comment when one is sitting safe in a chair in front of the computer. IMHO, it is completely different when you are in an unusual attitude, especially at night in IMC with a broken airplane. I've done all of that, just fortunately not all at the same time!

Also, it is always the cleanest solution to blame the pilot and leave everyone else out of it. I note they haven't mentioned putting other pilots in simulators yet and seeing how they have dealt with this particular situation, except they can't add the severe thunderstorm.

Yes it is very hard to criticize. None of us were there. However the first rule of aviation is, "fly the airplane." The stall warning system is independent of the airspeed indicator. If you've lost the ASI and the stall warning is going off put the nose down, not up. Pulling up will only deepen the stall and make recovery more difficult if not impossible. The attitude indicators will let you keep the wings level and the nose at a safe attitude. None of those systems require the pitot or static source to operate. If the static source is still functioning, which it probably was, then the rate of climb instrument and altimeter can be used as a check on the other instruments. However, it was at night, in a storm, and in a very complex airplane that just suddenly turned on you. I suspect few of us would come out without getting hurt. What must be done is a careful analysis of what happened and determine what can be done to keep it from happening again.

Jerry Liles

Jerry Liles

Well to much of the time Pilots on that level let the boxes fly the airplane. Airbus is not my favorite make. But I taught enough people to fly over the years Stall reconition and recovery visually and on instruments till it becomes second nature. While I will not second guess the pilot here, they want to hang them out to dry because of law suits and well Airbus is pretty much a State owned Company. There are problems with TAA's (Technically Advanced Aircraft) Information over load is one, you stop thinking about things like flying the airplane. In GA packages like the G-1000 is suppose to make things easier and safer but its not always the case. Its when things go wrong is were a pilots metal and skill are tested.

Northwest had a similar incident within two weeks of the Air France crash. The Captain flew out of it by using his knowledge of the pitch/power charted airspeed-thrust numbers. They lost some altitude if I remember correctly, but did do what we taught first and foremost at NWA "always fly the airplane".

Every NWA Captain had to know certain things, one of them was the pitch-power charts. That was due to the loss of a B727 years ago when the pitot heat was left off and they encountered icing conditions. It looks like Airbus tried to engineer that out of the airplane, but they failed.

It is not my place to judge the Air France crew. Only to learn from their errors.

Never having flown anything more complex than a super cub and only being licensed on a j3 I am not sure what instruments are but as an ex civil servant I do know the first rule of cock up recovery...1st- Blame the dead, they cannot argue. 2nd...if there are no dead, see who you can pass the blame on to. 3rd Only blame the living if compensation can be claimed.

Applies to mistakes in war, poaching, flying and deep water Horizon etc.

A couple of things here.

1. I don't now how Airbus is going to get past this one. The Bus is SUPPOSED TO recover from a stall no matter what the pilot does. When the airplane reaches Alpha Max (Critical AOA) the bus is supposed to over ride the pilots pitch inputs lower the nose down and lock the power at TOGA (Take Off Go Around)until the airplane is no longer in a critical AOA condition. So no matter what the pilots did Fi Fi the magical flying bus made a boo boo.

2. How many of you guys have done a high altitude recovery in a heavy transport category jet aircraft? I know f224 has done it in the sim just like I have. It takes a LONG time with the nose pointed WAY down to get one of these big guys flying again if you get to or even near the stall at high altitude especially at heavy weights. A 777 at high weight takes about 5K to 8K worth of altitude to recover that is with the nose down at 10 deg or so. And that knowing it's coming and being ready for it with everything working in a nice safe simulator. In the pitch black in the middle of T-storm with every known warning horn blaring in your ear you'd have your hands full. ESPECIALLY in an airplane that has no feel or feed back in the controls.

3. Transport cat and ATP level stall training needs to change. The whole take it to the shaker and then recover all within 100 feet altitude is teaching guys the wrong thing. At lower altitudes at lighter weights it works just fine to get to the shaker pour on the power pull back and fly out of a stall. However any other time it ain't going to work for you.

4. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that both of those F/o's were euro style ab initio trained pilots who have never done anything but drive simulators and jets. They simply don't have any real world flying experience. Welcome to the brave new corporate approved model of what a pilot is supposed to be. The days where a guy goes out and builds 5 or 6 thousand hours of time flying light twins in the worst possible weather and nearly killing himself in the process before he can even dream of having a shot at being an airline pilot are quickly coming to an end. Those guy (us) guys got weeded out early if they didn't have good piloting /survival skills in an airplane. They either scared the crap put of themselves and quit or died.

The new version of an airline pilot is rapidly becoming a kid who had great math and science grades who shows a strong ability to do what he is told and follow orders no matter what. He gets selected to an airlines flight cadet program and further proves his ability to be a good boy and kiss corporate ass every chance he gets. After a couple of years of "intensive" training he's made an International Relief Officer who never gets to actually fly but who can run the radios and manage the auto pilot in cruise. After 5 to 10 years of that he's made a flying F/o and has never once in his life had to make a life or death descion while flying an airplane. I don't care how automated you airplane is when you take basic flying and judgement skills out of the cockpit you are going to lose airplanes.

Have you guys heard of the MCPL (Multi Crew Pilots License)? It is already happening in Europe in response to a world wide shortage of qualified pilots. It is a program where a candidate is given a year or two of simulator and procedural training and about 35 hours of actual flight time. he is then stuck in the right seat of an airliner and acts as an assistant to the captain. he can not legally fly an airplane unless he is under direct supervision of an actual pilot he can not take off or land ever as he isn't qualified to do so unless the pilot is incapacitated.

Instead of providing a livable wage and a decent lifestyle with some security. The airlines would rather put you the passenger at risk and place these kids in the cockpit for close to minimum wage than have to start paying what a professional pilot what a professional pilot is worth.

Standby for more of these types of accidents to come to an airport near you.

What SureStrike said...

Personally I'm not a pilot either, though I used to build the damned things (I worked for a Boeing subcontractor in the early 80s) but I'll go With JohnHunt's comment.

I also know how to not pull back on the stick until the aircraft crashes.

quote:

The new version of an airline pilot is rapidly becoming a kid who had great math and science grades who shows a strong ability to do what he is told and follow orders no matter what. He gets selected to an airlines flight cadet program and further proves his ability to be a good boy and kiss corporate ass every chance he gets. After a couple of years of "intensive" training he's made an International Relief Officer who never gets to actually fly but who can run the radios and manage the auto pilot in cruise. After 5 to 10 years of that he's made a flying F/o and has never once in his life had to make a life or death descion while flying an airplane. I don't care how automated you airplane is when you take basic flying and judgement skills out of the cockpit you are going to lose airplanes.

That's pathetic... I personally like seeing a bit of gray under the cap of pilots when I am at the airport. My uncle flew until he was almost 80 (I last flew with him in his Twin Comanche when he was 78) I think he'd be saying much the same as you guys. Check out the book I wrote on him www.baxterbyrd.com. Say you saw this post and I'll ship free to US addresses.

I am not a pilot.
Did you ever notice that the first guys to fly were bicycle mechanics.
You don't learn to ride a bike by reading a book.
I don't think an air plane should be much different.

There is a great article in the latest issue of FLYING Magazine on this crash...very vivid...that said, I didn't see anyone mention the fact that Airbus had similar incidents including the NWA incident...all included the icing up of the three pitot static sensors...so no computer input...shortly after the AF crash the FAA finally issued an emergency Airworthiness Directive to fix the problem that was being covered up...for what ever reason...probably economic and prowess.
Bottom line is that all of these big jumbos have a back up battery powered Gyro Horizon and turn and bank...I think the biggest problem today is that pilots are not trained to fly by the seat of their pants or read the old steam gauges....simply put, can't fly the airplane...and you shouldn't be flying into thunder storms either...simple deviations still work...and even at night, when the pilot looks outside...you can generally see some cloud layer horizon to get your attitude...EH??
Fly the airplane!!...and yes you can hand fly jets at this altitude...fighter pilots do it all the time in VERY unusual attitudes...they FLY THE AIRPLANE...

quote:

Originally posted by Jerry Liles:
Yes it is very hard to criticize. None of us were there. However the first rule of aviation is, "fly the airplane." The stall warning system is independent of the airspeed indicator. If you've lost the ASI and the stall warning is going off put the nose down, not up. Pulling up will only deepen the stall and make recovery more difficult if not impossible. The attitude indicators will let you keep the wings level and the nose at a safe attitude. None of those systems require the pitot or static source to operate. If the static source is still functioning, which it probably was, then the rate of climb instrument and altimeter can be used as a check on the other instruments. However, it was at night, in a storm, and in a very complex airplane that just suddenly turned on you. I suspect few of us would come out without getting hurt. What must be done is a careful analysis of what happened and determine what can be done to keep it from happening again.

Jerry Liles

Jerry Liles

There is an old parody of a chinese proverb that states: "Man who go to bed with itchy ass wake up with smelly fingers"

Pushing forward on the stick in response to a stall warning (either a horn or stick shaker)
should involve about as much intelligent thought.

What is bizarre is a trained pilot doing ANYTHING ELSE.

Yet AirFrance flt 447 is NOT the first case where pilots did this...

Anyone remember ColganAir Flight 3207?

I wonder what they are putting in the pilot's coffee supply that BOTH sets of pilots pulled back on the stick until the plane crashed.