How one confused pilot killed over 200 people..

[Steve1968LS2]

Wow.. just wow..

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-6611877

Talk about suspensful reading.. too bad it was a real tragedy.. all because one co-pilot somehow forgot the basics of flying.. what a cluster fk and none of those people needed to die in a perfectly functioning aircraft :(

[David Pozzi]

Wow, amazing to read that!

[Boss 5.0]

horrifying.....

[GregWeld]

That transcript was actually hard to read (emotionally) because you want to yell at the guy!

Okay -- I'm walking to Europe for the Monaco Grand Prix in May.... no way I'm flying now!

[skatinjay27]

indeed a compelling read! gave me goosebumps after reading it...

[James OLC]

As a guy whos been flying something around 10,000 miles a month lately it scares the heck out me that in addition to the mechanical complications of flight I'm still ultimately at the mercy of guys like this.

And for what it's worth, while the copilot ultimately crashed the plane through his incompetence, there were two other huge human errors that ultimately brought the plane down - not looking at the weather they were heading in to (and having the radar set wrong) and the captain heading for a nap as he plane entered a bad storm, leaving the most jr pilot in command,

[Musclerodz]

Sounds very much like vertigo got the best of them. Still the safest form on transportation in the world today.

[Rybar]

Wow that is just nuts, I've been wondering what happened with this crash for some time. Had no idea they found the black boxes...

That is a very scary read. I think they should put video recorders in cockpits to better understand what happened vs just voice recorders.

RIP to the people who died on board.

[Steve1968LS2]

As a guy whos been flying something around 10,000 miles a month lately it scares the heck out me that in addition to the mechanical complications of flight I'm still ultimately at the mercy of guys like this.

And for what it's worth, while the copilot ultimately crashed the plane through his incompetence, there were two other huge human errors that ultimately brought the plane down - not looking at the weather they were heading in to (and having the radar set wrong) and the captain heading for a nap as he plane entered a bad storm, leaving the most jr pilot in command,

Actually the second most senior pilot let the low guy keep command when the Captain left..

I like how Boeing ties the controls together.. this "averaging" deal seems flawed.

[David Pozzi]

It isn't good when one guy is pulling full up on the controls and the other guy doesn't even know it! Really there were 3 flying that plane, two co-pilots and the computer!
I'm sure they have a gps speedometer on the plane somewhere but there is information overload if you ever look in a cockpit.

[Simmo]

It's quite common for a Second Officer to have control of the aircraft (above a given altitude), but the chain of command is always Captain - First Officer - Second Officer. So the SO can "have the controls" (ie manipulate the aircraft) but the responsibility of the trajectory of the aircraft lies with the guy in the left seat (Captain or FO in this case). So here we have the Captain Dubois, FO Robert & SO Bonin in that order.

Bonin appears to have been so overloaded he's load shedded to the point that he is relying on ab initio skills to attempt to recover the aircraft. Scary stuff but it happens, even in experienced crew. The trick is to manage the situation so it doesnt get even close to that level of workload. In some parts of the world guys can be in that seat with little over a commercial pilots licence so its not surprising he was struggling.

As low cost carriers continue to dominate, and the bean counters continue to shave every margin (and people continue to fly low cost to save $3 and go without a biscuit) I personally cant see the situation getting any better. The "cream" if you like, will no longer choose aviation as a career as it is no longer viable. {end of rant} lol.

I didnt realise Airbus' equalise the control inputs in alternate law, thats scary s*it.

[Spiffav8]

That's messed up. I knew about the sensor icing, but had never read the CVR transcripts.

I see this in two ways. The first being that Airbus takes the piloting out of their airplanes in a lot of ways. With the flight controls in manual and set to "Dual" the airplane averaging the two inputs is just stupid if you ask me. Airbus programs all kinds of funky logic (if you want to call it logic) into their aircraft. Is it unsafe? No. Manned by a well trained and experienced flight crew that understand how the aircraft thinks, works and knows the limitations, it's not a problem.

The second thing is the flight crew. It appears that an inexperienced pair where put together in what's called a "green on green" situation with no clear line of who was the PIC (Pilot in Command) while the Captain was resting. The airline is to blame for that. Both pilots failed to see the reality of the situation after the airspeed failure (obviously) and put the aircraft into a falling leaf type stall. Easy to get out of if you're paying attention. I'd bet that they where under the impression that the aircraft was having more than one type of failure and ignored the warnings as such. Basically, they didn't trust or believe what the instruments where telling them. The break down in basic CRM is unforgivable.

I can honestly say that in all my flying I have never seen this type of situation with flight crews. Not even in the SIM while training on all types on emergency's including that types of a stall. I should note that I am not type rated in any Airbus. Huge fan of Boeing though and have flown a few. The 757-200 being my favorite. I like to describe it as the ZR1 of airliners. :unibrow:

Greg & James....just stick to U.S. carriers and you're fine.

:captain:

[Spiffav8]

Actually the second most senior pilot let the low guy keep command when the Captain left..

It's not a good idea to transfer control from one pilot to the other during an emergency. We actually train as "flying" and "non-flying" pilot for all scenarios. It's been proven that the transfer has caused more problems than it's solved.

[Spiffav8]

It's quite common for a Second Officer to have control of the aircraft (above a given altitude), but the chain of command is always Captain - First Officer - Second Officer. So the SO can "have the controls" (ie manipulate the aircraft) but the responsibility of the trajectory of the aircraft lies with the guy in the left seat (Captain or FO in this case). So here we have the Captain Dubois, FO Robert & SO Bonin in that order.

Bonin appears to have been so overloaded he's load shedded to the point that he is relying on ab initio skills to attempt to recover the aircraft. Scary stuff but it happens, even in experienced crew. The trick is to manage the situation so it doesnt get even close to that level of workload. In some parts of the world guys can be in that seat with little over a commercial pilots licence so its not surprising he was struggling.

As low cost carriers continue to dominate, and the bean counters continue to shave every margin (and people continue to fly low cost to save $3 and go without a biscuit) I personally cant see the situation getting any better. The "cream" if you like, will no longer choose aviation as a career as it is no longer viable. {end of rant} lol.

I didnt realise Airbus' equalise the control inputs in alternate law, thats scary s*it.

That's a very good rant. :lol: Sadly it's true.

[jon72vega]

That's a very interesting article.

[Beegs]

Actually the second most senior pilot let the low guy keep command when the Captain left..

I like how Boeing ties the controls together.. this "averaging" deal seems flawed.

SEEMS flawed? Holy crap....when I read that I about fell over!!!! I can't BELIEVE they are set up that way. If they had been synced...the reaction most likely would have been: "WTF are you pulling back so much for????"

I hope someone here can shed some light as to why being "averaged" is a good idea...

[Gandalf]

Yikes! Makes you want to slap someone but I'm not entirely sure who I'd start with! As someone who clocks up miles back and forth across the Pacific, I'm always concious that you are totally at the mercy of the crew, the conditions and the current state of the aircraft with few to no options if something goes wrong. Still scares the bejesus out of me and I'm fairly sure reading this doesn't help. An eye opener for sure.

G

[James OLC]

Actually the second most senior pilot let the low guy keep command when the Captain left..

I like how Boeing ties the controls together.. this "averaging" deal seems flawed.

Actually, the Captain left the most junior pilot in command when he left:

At approximately 2 am, the other co-pilot, David Robert, returns to the cockpit after a rest break. At 37, Robert is both older and more experienced than Bonin, with more than double his colleague's total flight hours. The head pilot gets up and gives him the left-hand seat. Despite the gap in seniority and experience, the captain leaves Bonin in charge of the controls

[James OLC]

Greg & James....just stick to U.S. carriers and you're fine.

:captain:

I do when I can Curtis but from time to time I have to fly on a Caribbean carrier who does tend to make me a little bit nervous. :_paranoid

[Steve1968LS2]

It's not a good idea to transfer control from one pilot to the other during an emergency. We actually train as "flying" and "non-flying" pilot for all scenarios. It's been proven that the transfer has caused more problems than it's solved.

I meant when the Captain first left.. before the problems started.

[Spiffav8]

At approximately 2 am, the other co-pilot, David Robert, returns to the cockpit after a rest break. At 37, Robert is both older and more experienced than Bonin, with more than double his colleague's total flight hours. The head pilot gets up and gives him the left-hand seat. Despite the gap in seniority and experience, the captain leaves Bonin in charge of the controls

I read this as Bonin being "the flying pilot". That doesn't mean he was the "Pilot in Command". If it was his leg (or turn to fly) he would remain as the "flying pilot" until the end of the flight or until it was his turn to get some rest. Pretty much standard.

I do when I can Curtis but from time to time I have to fly on a Caribbean carrier who does tend to make me a little bit nervous.

Are you riding between JFK and POS with them? They seem to be decent and are now starting to run 737-800's. Awesome airplane that I really enjoy flying. The biggest challenge is flying into POS is at night in heavy rains due to poor visibility and their crews seem to have that down pretty well. Probably due to all those flights between POS and TAB (Crown Point) when they where commuter pilots. I'd fly with them....if that helps.

[James OLC]

Are you riding between JFK and POS with them? They seem to be decent and are now starting to run 737-800's. Awesome airplane that I really enjoy flying. The biggest challenge is flying into POS is at night in heavy rains due to poor visibility and their crews seem to have that down pretty well. Probably due to all those flights between POS and TAB (Crown Point) when they where commuter pilots. I'd fly with them....if that helps.

When I'm flying with "them" it's usually between YYZ and POS - occasionally from POS to BGI. Most of the time through I'm able to fly CA through IAH but with the weather changing in Calgary that connection is getting tighter and tighter so it may have to be YYZ, JFK or MIA in the future.

And yeah - the approach in to POS at night is tricky at the best of times - especially now in the rainy season. And yeah... your endorsement makes me feel a bit better.

[GregWeld]

I'm never flying again.

Where's the Red Barron?!?! Or Snoopy?

[Simmo]

That's a very good rant. :lol: Sadly it's true.

Lol don't get me started. I'm still driving a Q300 down here in NZ...nice to have cables and pulleys though :cool: . To fly a Jet down here would require signing up with one of "those" airlines right now, bad career call most probably but f it I have principles and I'll wait my turn to stick with decent T's & C's. The race to the bottom is alive and well in the Asia Pacific thats for sure.

Always wanted to do some lighty flying up your way...we'll get there one day!

[racin66coupe]

Just read that... that is scary as hell..

[MattG]

With over 13,000 hrs of flight time and over 4,000 in an airbus, this is one of the most outrageous events I have ever heard of in my profession. It makes me sad and angry to see such a terrible event unfold. Even the most basic airmanship could have prevented this event...not the planes fault, not Airbus' fault, just an extremely poor pilot doing everything wrong.

I have equal time in Boeing and Airbus, and I always compair them as Ford and Chevy. They both do the job equally as well, just with different approaches. I prefer Boeing and I prefer Chevy, because of senority, I fly an airbus (won't own a Ford..Ha)!

I can assure all of you that if you get on a mainline flight with any major airline in the U.S. that you will have highly experienced pilots that have earned the right year after year to get you where you need to go safely. The regionals are full of hightly competent grossly underpaind pilots that are safe as well. Sometimes a bad apple slips through the cracks, it happens in every profession, and unfortunately in aviation, it kills people as in this case.

Don't let this change how you feel about flying. Get on the plane, say thanks to the pilot when you get to your destination, and let's all go safely drive the crap out of our cars!

Matt

P.S. The laws designed in the airbus are to protect the state of the aircraft as much as possible. With a much more direct input while in Alternate Law(the first downgrade of flight controls), if both pilots were to get equal action on the controls, you could very easily over stress the aircraft and cause an even worse situation. Last but not least, there is a lockout that either pilot can use to completely take control of the aircraft and "Lockout" the other pilots ability to control the aircraft. The Airbus engineers are no dummies. In this case the pilots were 100% the cause of the accident.

[Sieg]

This was posted in on a thread I started on another forum:

I'm pretty sure the philosophy for Boeing is to always give the pilots full control, and this is maintained in fly by wire systems similar to mechanical systems.

The Airbus control philosophy is similar on all models after the A320. It looks like the flight crew finally recovered from the stall at around 2,000ft, however the envelop protection prevented them from exceeding a positive G limit set in alternate mode for the purpose of protecting the airframe structure from damage due to excessive loads. This is one of many fundamental flaws in the Airbus flight control laws. In a similar accident, a newly appointed Gulf Air A320 captain mishandled the airplane while executing a missed approach at night with similar results; a late recovery followed by envelop protection kicking in at low altitudes with a subsequent crash into the ocean. Very unfortunate for all involved.

[ProTouring442]

This was posted in on a thread I started on another forum:

I'm pretty sure the philosophy for Boeing is to always give the pilots full control, and this is maintained in fly by wire systems similar to mechanical systems.

The Airbus control philosophy is similar on all models after the A320. It looks like the flight crew finally recovered from the stall at around 2,000ft, however the envelop protection prevented them from exceeding a positive G limit set in alternate mode for the purpose of protecting the airframe structure from damage due to excessive loads. This is one of many fundamental flaws in the Airbus flight control laws. In a similar accident, a newly appointed Gulf Air A320 captain mishandled the airplane while executing a missed approach at night with similar results; a late recovery followed by envelop protection kicking in at low altitudes with a subsequent crash into the ocean. Very unfortunate for all involved.

If I understand the problem correctly (and I am in no way familiar with the real state of things) the Airbus system lacks two features that could have saved this aircraft:

1) The computer needs a way to recognize an "out of bounds" situation wherein it allows inputs and maneuvers that may otherwise damage the aircraft.

2) A big red button that gives full control of the aircraft to the pilot during immediately lethal situations (i.e. pulling out of a dive and exceeding maximum G forces).

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

[MattG]

If I understand the problem correctly (and I am in no way familiar with the real state of things) the Airbus system lacks two features that could have saved this aircraft:

1) The computer needs a way to recognize an "out of bounds" situation wherein it allows inputs and maneuvers that may otherwise damage the aircraft.

2) A big red button that gives full control of the aircraft to the pilot during immediately lethal situations (i.e. pulling out of a dive and exceeding maximum G forces).

Shiny Side Up!
Bill

The Airbus has both:

1. Direct Law
2. Lockout

Once again, there is nothing wrong with the design of the aircraft. The pilots had ALL of the control necessary to save the aircraft.

It may appear that they regained control of the aircraft at 2000ft, but they had not and it takes 2-5 thousand feet to recover a transport category aircraft from a full stall like they were in (depending on how high you are).

All I want everyone here to know is that Airbus is completely safe to fly. Training for this aircraft is completey up to date and they pilots were COMPLETELY at fault...they did nothing right.

[Spiffav8]

The Airbus has both:

1. Direct Law
2. Lockout

Once again, there is nothing wrong with the design of the aircraft. The pilots had ALL of the control necessary to save the aircraft.

It may appear that they regained control of the aircraft at 2000ft, but they had not and it takes 2-5 thousand feet to recover a transport category aircraft from a full stall like they were in (depending on how high you are).

All I want everyone here to know is that Airbus is completely safe to fly. Training for this aircraft is completey up to date and they pilots were COMPLETELY at fault...they did nothing right.

I'd ride the Airbus any day. Heck I just took an A330 across the Pacific a few weeks ago. The head phone jack was broken in my seat so I couldn't watch any movies, but other than that the 15 hour trip was fine.

[onelapduster]

I am a little confused as to the why the aircraft has controls which can be operated seperately? I am used to controls being joined together so either pilot can feel what the other is doing. Why is this aircraft designed like this?
_____
And is it just me, but why did neither initiate an emergency checklist? I cant believe they didnt verbally recognize the stall warning. Crazy!