This post is (or was) written on the fly, literally... Between legs spanning the vast American Empire. No lap-tops were used in flight...
I viewed a PBS production, Nova, the evening before this trip. It was about Air France 447, the A330 that disappeared over the Atlantic. I am a huge Nova fan... It is one of the few shows I still take the time to watch. However, a fifty minute report only scratches the surface... And there was heavy usage of qualifiers, such as may, could have, might have, probably, etc.
Here are three areas needing enhancement (sprinkled with my own qualifiers):
1. As I suspected, the ground track did take the A330 through a line of thunderstorms, and then, unfortunately, through a second line hidden by the ferocity of the first line. In my business, this is known as a radar shadow. A radar shadow is extremely dangerous, as in WARNING: Do not fly through a radar shadow! A direct quote from the Pilot Manual.
A warning, as opposed to a caution, translates to possible death and/or loss of airframe: another quote directly from the Pilot Manual. This is (major) serious stuff! The show portrays the pilots as confused and trying to understand the multiple warnings being thrown at them from Fi-Fi's electronic monitoring system as they penetrate the storms. The co-pilot is seen looking through a Quick Reference Checklist. I can (mostly) guarantee you that this was the furthest thing from their minds.
A thunderstorm's violence is indescribable. They come in six levels; the first being the tamest and the sixth the worst. Inside of a level three (half-way up the scale) is really nasty... Moving further up the food chain is, well... Bad news. Think about looking at the wing and seeing your long dead relatives sitting on the leading edge waving at you... Yikes!
That Air France crew was not reading anything. You cannot read in extreme turbulence because nothing stays in front of your eyes long enough to focus. This includes instruments, checklists, etc. It is very weird and scary phenomena.
If the QRC (quick reference checklist) says to push a certain button... Good luck! You cannot push it because it will not stay underneath your finger. How do I know this? Don't ask...
The Air France crew was trying to keep the wings level, auto-pilot ON or not. The captain would be wiping coffee out of his eyes and the co-pilot "may" (media approved qualifier) have been knocked silly from the cockpit fire extinguisher that broke loose from it's holder. The g-force from updraft/downdraft reversal of direction is something that has to be felt to be truly understood. The forces are so bad that you can barely breath.
All manuals, pieces of luggage, water bottles, crew meals; everything not tied down would be airborne. There would be a steady onslaught of aural alarms, flashing red warning and yellow caution lights during the hellacious ride. The airframe would be groaning, creaking, and popping. Oh, yes, lets not forget the sizzling lightning bolts in all quadrants.
The extreme turbulence and wild airspeed deviations would (absolutely) cause the auto-pilot to disconnect. The show's assertion that if the pilots had only maintained airspeed control everything would have been OK is, in my view, ridiculous. What airspeed control?
Now it gets interesting...
2. A thunderstorm is a tremendous atmospheric water pump. Part of the water in every storm is super-cooled, i.e., pure water with a temperature of less than 0 degrees Celsius and looking for a surface to attach itself as ice. An aircraft is perfect, especially anything protruding into the slipstream, like those evil and politically incorrect pitot tubes... Super cooled water will cover and block pitot tubes with clear ice instantaneously, easily overwhelming the heating elements. This, in turn, causes BIG problems with the air data computers, a primary supplier of information to the flight management computers.
Keep in mind that all of this happens in seconds; the seconds that the pilots are trying to get a glimpse of the artificial horizon... Holy [deleted], did I just see a 70 degree bank and 30 degree nose down attitude?
Her auto-thrust would, in the wild speed fluctuations, revert to a survival mode. Fi-Fi trys to protect herself from overspeeds and underspeeds, but with the pitot tubes temporarily blocked, she has lost her digital mind. The auto-thrust would eventually fail from the bad data it is receiving, further complicating a situation that is rapidly spinning out of control. And then (it's very possible), the unthinkable happens... The aircraft passes through an area of intense water/hail and one or both of the engines flame out. If you think your hands were full before...
The A330 is a magnificent aircraft; the Grace Kelly of airframes, and I would like to think that it successfully penetrated the first line of storms intact, giving the crew a minute or so to try an emergency engine re-start. I wonder if they could see the second line of storms looming ahead?
3. The data stream Fi-Fi was sending to Mother showed a rapid failure of critical systems. This is to be expected in the situation she was in... Probably a high altitude upset from the turbulence. Nova implied that contemporary airline pilots are not trained to recover from an upset or a stall where the aircraft rolls over on its back before plummeting earthward. I say that is Bravo Sierra... I believe most airline pilots could recover from an upset or stall, given enough altitude. Nova failed to include the thunderstorm vector in its implication.
I will gladly buy popcorn, sodas, and M & M Peanuts for anyone wishing to join me in the simulator to watch the "experts" try to recover from a high altitude upset inside a thunderstorm. This offer does not extend to Chuck Yeager or Neil Armstrong. I would have included Scott Crossfield, but he had a recent clash with a thunderstorm and lost.
Why did the Air France crew lose the airframe and all the pax on that fateful night over the Atlantic? I try to put myself in that captain's seat... Now, the view through the Plexiglas is hazy, but I am hoping the flight data recorders will eventually be found.
Oh, Lord, there but for the Grace of God, go I...
Life on the Line continues...
53 comments:
Captain Dave - I am always looking for more info about AF 447, can't thank you enough for the update. I was searching all over the internet for more information shortly after she went down, and that was how I discovered your blog. I missed that special on Nova, I am traveling and have limited cable, but I'll look for a rebroadcast or see if they have it on the website. It seems so unlikely they will ever find the black boxes, I guess that would be the key to knowing the attitude of the plane and whether it had any power. I assume the 330 has a pretty sophisticated monitoring system feeding into the boxes. If they do find the boxes, do you think they would be absolutely sure what happened or just raise more questions? I haven't heard if Air france has started Phase Three of the search.
Thank you for your critique of this program. I have it DVR'ed and will watch it during the week.
RIP Flight 447.
Te mai guide anges à la porte du ciel, où vous serez accueillis sur le trône de Dieu. Amen.
Unfortunately, the Nova programme isn't available in the UK -- thanks for your discussion, though.
I must admit, despite my love of flying, I am a somewhat nervous flyer because of my knowledge of incidents such as AF 447.
Just yesterday I watched an A330 line up and take off and marvelled at the beauty and power of the 'plane. And then AF 447 crossed my mind. I hope it was swift for those onboard, that they didn't suffer unmercifully.
I'll never forget reading in a book about Pan Am 103, how some passengers and crew showed signs of being alive during the descent and, in some cases, for a short while after contacting the ground. I cannot imagine anything more terrifying.
Fantastic thoughts and observations Captain Dave, the people who make these documentaries would do well to first consult with individuals such as yourself.
All the best
Stu
Absolutely agree about being unable to push a particular button during turbulence. We had a helicopter get iced up and start to descend IMC over mountains. The copilot tried to zoom in the moving map display to show the high ground and valleys but missed the right button and managed to turn the map OFF. Cross cockpit swearing ensued!
(They popped out of cloud with plenty of height to spare)
Inside a thunderstorm would have been a million times worse - absolutely terrifying.
Well done Capt. Dave. A very good description what happens during flying through such a "storm".
I really like your blog and your writing style. The explanations about Fifi are so true everytime :-)
And yes, the A33X is a real Lady. A reliable workhorse and a Lady you can trust in :-) I remember my change from the MD11 to the A33X and I've never met such an airplane with such a high rate of forgivness! Used to fly a MD11 I did a lot of needless GA with her, but she teached how to fly her :-)
Wish you always 3 Green from Europe!
Funny, I just watched that show last night. I was also struck by the ridiculous depiction of light shaking while they're supposed to be going through a thunderstorm. Then again, the full motion sim can't really provide anywhere near the real level of turbulence.
They also didn't talk about the possibility that all these message might have come because of the spin, rather than being the cause of it.
One thing they pointed out is something I've always wondered about - the way Airbus throttle levers don't move under autothrottle, while Boeing's do. It seems to me that being able to see and feel the levers move could be a very useful form of visual and tactile information in a high stress environment. Do you feel that this is a flaw in the Airbus?
Captain D - thank you. This is by far the best appreciation of what "might" have happened, because the truth is that no-one knows. As a pilot myself, (albeit of a smaller variety made in Wichita) an aeronautical engineer and long time aviation observer, I know that there simply are times when nothing is going to work. Even Yeager was shot down once and crashed more than once. Bob Hoover was shot down by an inferior, but lucky adversary. Scott Crossfield died in a Cessna after surviving the X15. I doubt that the crew of AF 447 were anything but the very best - you simply don't get to the front of an A330 on an international route without being the best. RIP.
Dave,
Is there no way to tie the GPS into the flight management system as a backup for bad data from the pitot tubes?
PaulTomblin- auto-throttles and auto-thrust are two different beasts, but that's for another post. When I first started flying auto-thrust on the 320/319, I wondered if I would ever get used to it, which I did and now like very much. I can see how you would feel it might be a flawed design, though... I do not see it that way.
Paul- yeah, if they find the boxes and they are intact or partially intact, they will know fro sure.
D.B.- thats is the way I see it, too. I don't know anyone who would intentionally fly through a dangerous storm. Great comment, by the way.
HMS Defiant- yes, GPS altitude is used when the air data computers are off-line. Its not very easy, because you have to dig for it and the digits are very small. But it does show the trend, either descent or a climb.
Russel- that's kind of funny... Cross cockpit swearing ensued. I've heard some of that in my career.
From Europe- thanks... Keep the greasy side down.
When I worked in ZJX during thunderstorm season (North FL--among the worst thunderstorms on the planet), pilots would frequently request to deviate around the storms. The warning areas along the coast were often active with live fire exercises. When told that, the pilots said they'd take their chances with the live fire to avoid the thunderstorms. We couldn't approve it, of course, because we could never coordinate with the Navy in a timely way.
In one of the gazillion aviation "lore" posts floating around the internet is a quote allegedly from Air Force operations, "there is no reason to fly in a thunderstorm in peacetime," referring to fighter aircraft which are at least stressed for part of the power to which nature can subject them.
LRod
ZJX, ORD, ZAU retired
I'm on disability now and retired from a 30 plus years flying career.
I miss it every day.
But not the days I wake up and hear thunder.
People often mention GPS in this sort of connection.
GPS is good on position, excellent on speed, usable on altitude, but it has absolutely no way of determining direction. That depends on compasses, gyro or magnetic, and in extreme turbulence compasses aren't useful.
FiFi's computers badly need to know airspeed, how fast she's moving through the air in the direction the sharp end is pointed. If a gust, up down or sideways, is moving the airplane at tens of meters per second, which is perfectly possible in a thunderstorm, GPS will faithfully tell her how fast to two decimal places, but not which way. This is not useful information, either to FiFi or to Captain Dave.
I do hope that they find those boxes. The question marks surrounding this crash are too many.
Captain; If there would have been a flameout wouldn't that be reported to Mother in the same way as the other acars messages?
According to the BEA report they conclude that "the aircraft was probably intact on impact", "the aircraft struck the water with a positive attitude, a low bank and a high rate of descent" and "there was no depressurization".
The only conclusion I can make of this would be that the plane was "flying", now with flying I mean in this case forward motion through the air. However, I'm wondering if the plane was in a stalled state or just loosing altitude because of the thrust/weight differential being to big. Could it be that the crew was unaware of the altitude loss due to the loss of ADIRU computers? Could this be a CFIT (or CFIW) due to weather? The BEA report states that 3 of the 11 flight attendant seats were unused at the time of impact, does that mean that the F/As were up and running?
Again, we need those black boxes to really find out.
For those of you that would like to read the interim report here's the link: http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.af.447/flight.af.447.php
In two weeks I'm getting on another 332 and I have no hesitation at all. The guys in the pointy end don't want to crash anymore than I do.
Thanks Dave for your insight, I'll bring the sodas for the simride.. ;)
Earnest K. Gann: 'Fate is the Hunter'
Programs like these (Nova, ACI - Mayday, a few others), while very interesting, really only provide the most basic of insight. it's really designed for the non-aviation audience. Not being much of a pilot myself (still working on the PPL), I find the shows helpful, but with blogs like yours, the more important details are more clearly seen.
Obviously, for such peril to strike AF447, the circumstances must have been monumental.
For anyone else wanting to watch this NOVA episode, I believe it is available to watch free on Hulu, or you can open a trial account with netflix where I'm sure it's available (this is how I saw it).
Lastly, Captain, if that offer to demonstrate in the sim isn't an empty one, and you find yourself with some free time in NY, i'll join you any time. I'll even buy you lunch, for all the great reading you've given me over these years.
Keep the great posts a'comin.
-Roger
If people have Netflix, this episode is available both on DVD & instant streaming, titled "Crash of Flight 447: Nova". I watched it several weeks ago and appreciate your insight, Dave. Thanks for the blog...really appreciate it.
Cap'n Dave:
I'm struck by your metaphor re: Fifi "losing her digital mind" due to a flood of bad (conflicting, erratic, etc.) data. So, in extremis, is there a final, deep down, close to the bare metal mode that links the pilot's mind (Fifi's having gone awol) to the side stick displacement, to the control surfaces, without resorting to cybernetic intervention? Or do you just shake hands with the FO and say, "Been nice flyin' with ya'"?
(A while back I had a talk with a flight controls engr at Sikorsky about their modes and he said the last one is essentially rod-and-cable emulation.)
As always, thanks for your insights...
Frank
You can watch the Nova episode at:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/crash-flight-447.html
I am a long time fan of Nova, but I found this episode to be very, very disappointing, in that there was nothing new presented that hadn't been known or postulated for at least a year. As you said, Cap'n Dave, there were lots of "might have been, may have been, could have been".
Also, the Nova "team" had no access to information except through Air France transcripts and photos of the airplane pieces. The shots of the team's structural engineer standing amid wreckage was staged, as those pieces were only props. The "look what we found" earnestness belied the fact that they were only going through the motions of an actual accident reconstruction.
But I found one part of the show to be puzzling indeed: at 31:10 the team's atmospheric scientist declares that he calculated the temperature at FL350 was about minus 40 degrees, or "much warmer than is usual at 35,000 feet". Keep in mind here that supercooled water can be stable at that temperature, but if the air temperature was roughly +/- -60F, which I think may be more normal for that elevation, that could be much too cold for stable supercooled water.
If the whole chain of events to the AF447 disaster requires initiation from frozen pitot tubes, then I would think that Nova would have wanted to dwell on that critical assumption that the atmosphere was 20 degrees or so "warmer than is usual." My take is that the Nova team used cloud top temperatures from the satellite photos, postulated the altitude, then extrapolated downward to 35000 feet using an estimate of the temperature lapse rate. They seemed to need to get the temperature at that FL within the range of supercooled water stability.
What no one mentioned is whether the automatic data transmission from the plane to Air France included outside air temperatures.
Sorry for rambling on, Cap'n Dave, but this event has really bothered me for a long time, and watching the show did not help. (I did did think that the PBS commercial that runs at the start of the show was quite good, however.)
Oooooh-kay, now I am definitely reconsidering the Greyhound bus alternate transportation method -- including routes that take me over water.
Until the boxes are found everything is speculation. I appreciate your educated analysis of the scenario, and I think you are on the right track. One thing that puzzles me is the simplest question of all, and the only thing we really know for sure: WHY would they fly through the first line of storms in the first place? Defective radar? In your perspective, is flying through a storm common practice?
Franke van Haste- Yes, the digital magic is easy to turn off giving you complete manual control of every parameter. You can even turn off the flight control laws with a single button push, getting rid of edge of the envelope protections, although I can think of only one scenario where that might be helpful. Flight controls are controlled by hydraulics (activated by electrons); there are three hydraulic systems with no sharing of lines or fluid. The chance of losing all three is very remote.
john- good comment....
jaymarywarden- yeah, there is nothing like sitting at home during a tstorm with a cool one. Only pilots truly understand that...
Thomas- I find it hard to believe that they hit the water like that; I'll have to be shown proof. As far as the flight attendants running around, I would like to know how they determined that... I don't believe they could. If the engines flamed out, the data stream would report that event in a calmer scenario, but with a cascading emergency event plus severe turbulence, it might not. No, I don't believe it was a cfit; I think they either lost control, or the airframe broke up in flight.
Capt Dave,
I too just watched the Nova special on AF 447. Not being a pilot, but having read your blog (as well as other pilot blogs)I watched the Nova special with fascination rather than horror. Having enjoyed your wisdom as well as that of your fellow pilots, something did not seem right to me either. You nailed it when you menitioned that you doubted that the first officer was frantically thumbing through an ops manual. They portrayed those guys as harried button pushers. I am pretty sure they were engrossed in doing everything their training taught them to save their ship. And yes, they were probably pretty keyed up--but I'd like to think Pros that you guys are, they were more focused on getting their aircraft flying than on being scared out of their wits.
Captain Dave,
I watched the NOVA episode and wished you were around to help interpret. Have you ever had all the pitot tubes freeze over at the same time?
captain D. thank you again, for an amazing post. The AF crash has really left too much doubt, and too little answers.
what is so staggering to me is why ,with such a sophisticated aircraft, would these pilots fly through such dangerous storms? let's not forget there were several planes flying in that same area ahead and behind the AF plane and neither reported anything out of the norm.
AIR France, and many other airlines, have flown this route since the 40s, with far less advanced planes....through that same line of frequent storms. It still doesn't make much sense to me. Granted I'm not a pilot, but i tend to believe that maybe an unfortunate miscomunication or distraction (or over confidence?) might have contributed to this accident: that plane should have not been there.
i fly A330 every month to europe, it is a beautiful bird, and I always hope those guys upfront keep an eye on storms ahead of us.
vanderleun- OK, for me, this is kind of like giving advice to, uh... A supreme being in as much as your writing elevates you to a god like status. I think you can continue to fly without worrying about crashing. Have you ridden on Greyhound lately? It is not pretty...
allesandra- I can guarantee you that the Air France pilots would not knowingly fly through dangerous weather.
ecuaprof- no, I have never had both pitot tubes freeze at the same time, or even one at a time. I am paranoid about thunderstorms and do everything possible to stay out of them.
Diego- yes, we fly through storms on a regular basis. The trick is to know which storms are dangerous. Some of the weather interpretation comes from the captain's experience, although not all.
Oh, Lord, there but for the Grace of God, go I...
Best line ever
In which I spout off:
The first time I ever got aboard a plane was almost thirty years ago, and on the KDEN-KSAT segment the plane was being buffetted fifty feet at a time if it was an inch. I heard engine pitch that I've never heard since.
A three-quarters full 727-200 halfway through that flight would weigh something like eighty tons, maybe seventy-five, according to the back of this proverbial envelope. Fifty feet, all at once? Must be some crazy bad weather.
In the Midwest and Texas, someone standing on the dry line can watch the sky go from 0/10 to falling hail and an epic wall cloud in twenty minutes. I'm called upon to imagine that the guys flying AF447 were confronted with something even worse.
Captain Dave as always I love your insight and your means of conveying fascinating stories. I watched the nova special with my father and also felt that they didn't really rely the right message. Pilot or not no sane person would knowingly put 300+ people into a situation of that danger. Mother nature can be hostile adversary and it prevailed against an unknowing party that night. I can not speak from experience but speculate, conditions like those are like trying to fly through a aerial earthquake at night. rip af447. After instructing over the last few years I hope to join the line with you some day. happy writing and may landings always be assured (on runways of course)
Hi Captain - I was able to go to PBS website and watch the whole show online. I have a question regarding supercooled water. The demonstration was really good, showing how the water froze instantly on the pitot tubes in the lab setting. Okay. so if the water froze like that on the pitot tubes, could it have also frozen that fast on the control surfaces of the plane? I would imagine in addition to upsetting the lift, the extra weight of the ice could be problematic. Or.. would the ice not stick anywhere. I would assume seeing the storms on radar they would have had whatever wingtip de-icers on that were available. If they flew into a big updraft, could the ice build up on the bottom of the airframe? I find it interesting that you don't ascribe to the theory that the plane hit the water intact, I tend to agree that until some evidence beyond a few pieces is found, that it is a real stretch to conclude she hit in one piece. Thanks again for following up on AF 447.
As always Captain Dave... your posts just leave me captivated. Well done.
The show I think was produced by the BBC in England. Nova just changed the narrator for the USA market.
One thing the documentary stroke me first was the producers were not attacking nor blaming anybody that is airlines, pilots , plane or pitot tubes manufacturers because with just the data transmitted by FiFI to Mother, it is not enough. We need the tapes, no question about it.
In the commotion by the storm there are always passengers that will be needing reassurance and I am sure that there were F/A's doing just what is part of their job and but being unfastened because of their duties unfortunately.
Let's remember that according with FIFI's messages this whole nightmare lasted 4:10 minutes or 250 seconds give or take, from beginning to end. Not enough time even though they probably felt like they were the longest in their lives.
The captain was never shown in the documentary because probably he retired to rest sometime during the first 4 hrs of the flight out of 11 hrs scheduled. A three crew member flight. Also, his remains were found among the 50 bodies recovered with one F/A also. We can't say he wasn't in the cockpit but just that he wasn't fastened or strapped.
The following is a link of the BEA (European counterpart of the NTSB). It shows all flights at the approximately time of the AF447 up to the fatal moment . You can see that AF447 kept straight ahead with no deviations. The other airline scrambled away from the storm before and after AF447. Why didn't AF447???
http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.af.447/trajectoires/trajectoires010609.html
Note: Push the play button, top right arrow, color green.
I am okay with the BEA conclusion that implies the plane hit the water with a +5 degree pitch up, wing level , straight on its present course (not necessary Paris nor Senegal but nevertheless straight), at downward acceleration of approximately 35G's. Structural Engineering can be a great tool for what looks like just ruble.
If you missed it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqZZlyGmgbE&feature=related (UK version)
Good news, the third expedition to recover the Black Boxes is already on their way. They left Seattle (yes, the Empire) on the 14-15th of February 2011. It would take them 40 days to get to crash zone which includes the crossing the Panama Canal. Long way from home. Let's cross our fingers.
Cheers,
MAB
Dave, Thanks for confronting this in public, one of the few who will. Unless/until more real data are available, your scenario is reasonable. (I have not owned a TV for >10 years and quention even your favored Nova at times.) Since the 'Operations Book' is a company thing, but in conjunction with the manufacturer and the civil (FAA)authorities, it is a conservative, expected safe method. Stuff outside that box happens. It is then up to the pilot to understand the systems and how they interact, discard bad data try to fly with good data. While most thoroughly understand the book, I am not convinced that enough pilots understand what is outside that book and are able to fly with NO book and corrupt data. One in a thousand or one in a lifetime, I still want that experienced, well-rested and attentive pilot leading the crew that drives my airplane. I too wonder what happened to that A-330 and guesses are not good enough. As much as I hate to say it, I suspect some poor choices were made. If it looks questionable, get out, even go back if necessary. There are hundreds of lives on the line. Pissing of a dispatcher or a few clients is still the smarter choice. Yes, your 'Fi-Fi' gives you tons of data. If they do not compute or agree with your own experienced brain, get that SOB on the ground and figure it out later. The mission or that sacred schedule are not, repeat NOT you highest priorities. If the machine does not work as expected, ground it and park it until you are satisfied that it will work. That's why Captains are called Captain! Happy ans safe flying, always safe...
-Craig
Someone asked, "Why would any crew fly knowingly fly through a radar shadow?" don't know any crew who would.
Another asked why did the crew not take the route of 40 other flights before it... I don't know. It's easy to be an arm chair expert on the internet, but quite different in the cockpit. Flying through storm lines is done on a regular basis. I do it every spring and summer on a weekly basis. You can't take wide diversions around every storm line you face on the Line. Not enough time and fuel.
An excellent commentary!
Captain Dave, thank you for yet another great post and an insight into the AF tragedy. Sure hope they find the black boxes. I've stumbled on your blog when BBC mentioned your take on this tragedy back in '09 and have been an avid reader ever since. Keep up the great work and happy contrails to you, Sir!
Roma
P.S. I'll take you up on your simulator offer, when are the showtimes? =)
Captain Dave!
It would appear, from what you have written, that there is no way of being certain that there is another band of storms behind the one that you are headed toward. In North America, you are flying over heavily traveled air routes. Chances of encountering a hidden storm is remote because so many others have flown the same route and the information is passed on to later flights. So, in a way, it similar to walking in Afghanistan. Follow exactly behind the person in front of you or you might step on an improvised explosive device. To go off the path that previous planes have flown before is to enter unknowns that might be dangerous. It would appear that there is a trade off between going through a rough patch that others have gone through before - but knowing the intensity of what you will encounter - versus avoiding a certain storm but without complete information of what is ahead of you. Is there more to this?
Man, this accident just gives me the cold cobbley wobblies, as it apparently does a lot of people judging by the responses here as well as on other sites.
I think it's because of the tremendous amount of the "unknowns".
The most important unknown being the strength of a particular thunderstorm(TRW).How many accidents involved an airplane in weather that others had successfully transited?
A million years ago I was flying a Cessna 411 (dangerous in itself)through a line with just a bit of moderate turbulence. Well on the other side the controller asked how the ride through there was. I said not bad. The controller said he asked because they just got word of a tornado touch down right where I was in the line. I'm sure glad he waited to tell me until we were clear of the weather.
Anyway, yeah , it's really nice to be throttling back a brew watching a storm rage. I used to do that a lot on off days just so ops couldn't call with a pop-up trip that I would have to fly.
When I am flying either my RV-6 of 15 meter glider it is very difficult to adjust delicate things when in any sort of turbulance beyond the lightest bumps. Changing frequency, transponder code, adjusting autopilots seem to result in random numbers the first several tries.
I know that the non-flying pilot at least has two hands to help, but considering the huge numbers of knobs to twist, keyboards to type and buttons to push, how do you do it?
I can't imagine anyone in severe turbulance that they must have seen doing anything but hanging on. I have flown with a sidestick and suspect that that is better than the standard wheel. At least you can lock your arm down and fly with the wrist.
Bruce Patton
I would have thought that using the GPS speed data would not be that helpful a replacement for the loss of pitot data. The GPS would tell you the ground speed, but not the airspeed (which the pitot reports). It is the airspeed info is that is needed when flying the plane (via pilot or computer)...
Capt Dave, Thanks for your input about AF 447. I guess this type of incident shows we haven't learned everything about flight yet. The most frightened I've ever been was inside a P2V-7, which itself was inside a massive thunder storm south of Chicago. How we got there is another story but we made several unvoluntary trips up inside the belly of the beast. Hail, Lightning so bright it blinded you, thunder so loud it deafened you. Every loose piece of gear in that plane was richocheting around. Including several loose Practice Depth Charges. (5 lbs of tnt each) The cockpit crew did an outstanding job of keeping those Wrights on line. Sometimes at full Military power, sometimes back at near idle, depending on which direction mother nature was taking us. We never got over on our backs however and that's what probably saved our day. That bad ol' thunder storm spit us out in one piece after several cycles up through it. Suddenly,it was very quiet again and we were flying over a moonlit country side as if nothing had ever happened. It was several moments before anyone spoke. I was down in the plexiglass bow where I got a very close look at mother natures nasty side. 19 years old and so damn glad to be alive. A lesson in humility I carry with me to this day.
I assume you've read Ernest Gann's "Fate is the Hunter." Great blog, Captain, great blog.
Once AP disconnected and speed info was lost, would an 85% thrust setting really be the best thing to do, considering the storm 447 was flying through. Could this have not led to overspeed?
I unfortunately did not catch the program but am hopeful that they do eventually find the FDR/CVR so that we can truly learn what happened that evening.
Keep up the good work.
A bout with a thunderstorm in Florida many years ago was bad enough to make me stick to the ground once the plane landed in Detroit. I drove the 2 hours home in a snowstorm and felt much safer for it.
Captain Dave, thanks for years of excellent aviation reading. My feeling is that there are still many electromagnetic phenonema that occur in high altitude storms that are still unknown, and that one of these phenomena is the missing piece of the puzzle that brought down AF 447. As I understand it, the aircraft appears to have attempted a water landing, indicatingg that the crew may have regained control of the aircraft.
Surely a Skype type voice over IP feature could be added to all aircraft the enables all of the black box data to be transmitted in real time back to base? Such an innovation must now be possible with cell phones andd internet available during flights. Such a feature could be used in conjunction with black boxes.
Hi Captain Dave!
Great writing as usual.
I was flying the same route, the same plane with a different paint job, about 1 hour ahead of the AF447 (not on the pointy end though). At some point, the captain did tell us we would have some turbulence later, but nothing special really happened (yes, I was awake!). I have no idea if he opted to go around, or the storm was not as bad as he first thought.
Now, a pilot friend of mine has told me the AF pilots do tend to cut straight through the storms more than others... obviously they wouldn't go in if they thought it was dangerous, maybe they misjudged it. I can imagine a report from the captain of the plane I was in to the AF447 to be something like "It didn't look good on the radar but it eventually turned out to be nothing special". That is if he didn't go around...
I find this wild competition on fuel/time saving really annoying!!!
I can't understand a comment of one of the readers saying GPS cannot provide direction. It's not very useful for speed, because it reads groundspeed, not airspeed. But the algorithm that calculates speed (by Doppler effect) also calculates direction pretty good. And anyway, you have direction readings regardless the pitot tubes. You don't need GPS for that....
And I imagine that in a wild situation you wouldn't care much about where you're going. You just want to go wherever, as stable as possible, greasy side down, no stall, no overspeed, and wait/hope for better moments.
If you manage to survive the "wild moments" but still have no pitot tubes, you still have a problem. Your GPS won't provide you airspeed. But it provides altitude (actually the least precise measurement coming from a GPS, but still more than enough to fly an airplane). And I imagine there must be a relation "engine power/altitude" from which you can derive airspeed. As for direction, you can rely on you GPS, it will be very precise. Obviously, all pilots are aware there is a difference between magnetic north and true north. There is still a problem with altitude. Pitot altitude measurements have an error (present pressure at sea level). All the planes in the same area share this error, so, it's not a problem. If one of the planes is reading altitude from a GPS, it will be the only plane in that area that is flying with true altitude. With 300 feet separation this could be a problem...
Humberto- I agree with most of your comment except the part about AF pilots flying more direct routes thru storms. You would have to prove that to me. Also, the gps does provide direction and altitude but would not matter in a storm. You could not read it in severe turbulence, so it's a moot point...
captain Dave, it's a second hand comment, heard on a friendly wined dinner. I'm sure it was well meant, but probably based on some "personal statistics", which we all know can be deceptive. Bottom line, I should have kept it to myself. Sorry for that one!
"C"aptain Dave:
Back in your original posts about the horrible tragedy of AF#447, I mentioned that I thought that AirFrance, AirBus and the French Gov't MIGHT collude to hide the facts of this accident, given the incredible LIABILITY of them all being "in bed" together.
Someone immediately "informed" me that European Courts were not "LIKE AMERCIAN COURTS" IE: "Lawsuit-happy."
Well, it looks like the tides have changed, and both Air France and Airbus are facing charges for manslaughter.
It REALLY makes one wonder what they have uncovered, that they have not made public YET. And if they EVERY will.
I've never seen a carrier or aircraft company charged like this, with no explanation, evidence, or conclusion/ruling of the cause of the crash. Don't the need to know what cause the crash, before they can deduce who is liable for what?
I also read that BOEING, of all people, are playing a huge role in the next attempt to find the CVR & CDR Black Boxes.
What say you about the charges leveled against both companies?
I'd LOVE to hear your thoughts... Is it a witch hunt, a blame game, a cover up, a 'charge them first, before they can charge/sue us by the Gov't, a set of legitimate charges, or something else...???
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/18/air-france-faces-manslaug_n_837449.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1367509/Airbus-faces-manslaughter-charges-Air-France-crash-killed-228.html
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/france/110318/air-france-atlantic-airbus-air-crash-brazil-rio-a330
Captain Dave
I have had the privilege of reading your blog for many miles now and indeed, like so many of your readers, I take your entries as much needed comfort in a complicated world. CBC news reported today that more Air France wreckage had been found; Airbus has incentive following a French ruling that would make them liable under French law. A renewed effort in finding the black box may produce results, however, do you think the safety focus going forward should involve air traffic control regulations? I often wonder if the pilots took a big left turn - having seen the sattelite images of their storm alley way in the nytimes - perhaps they might have been the easiest solution? I recall flying into Mexico, up through Flordia, and chugging along to get to DC on account of tornadoes. Your thoughts are always appreciated.
Best,
James
Found your blog accidentally while writing my own...who knew? and have been following since....
Now that the data is out there....waiting patiently for AF 447...Part 4 !!
What do you think? Inquiring minds wanna know!
Then again, there are pilots like this: http://gunsnplanes.blogspot.com/2011/07/ice-water-in-veins-of-engineless-f-16.html
Post a Comment