Ask The Pilot

[Welsh-Kiwi]

@jb747 - was it rare that you had to take control of the aircraft from the pilot-flying during a flight. James.

 

[jb747]

@jb747 - was it rare that you had to take control of the aircraft from the pilot-flying during a flight. James.

So rare that I can't even recall an instance. But, I was a QFI in the very distant past, so I was probably pretty good at talking people through whatever I wanted.

 

[JohnM]

Mentour Pilot's latest video is on the AF447 crash:

It was harrowing to watch.

@jb747, I know that you have previously commented on this incident, but is there anything else that you would add to what Petter has described?

 

[jb747]

Mentour Pilot's latest video is on the AF447 crash:

It was harrowing to watch.

He does a very good job with these videos. And yes, it was utterly mortifying. Any non pilot passenger could have done a better job.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

A few years back I recall reading something along the lines of the AF447 root cause originating on the AD side of the ADIRS with the QF72 incident being on the IR side of the ADIRS. Not sure what what either of these mean? Are there any similarities between the various A330 ADIRS incidents and the 737 MAX MCAS incidents. From memory the 737 MAX aircraft where grounded whereas the A330 kept flying?

In comparison to AF447 was the QF72 outcome down to the skill / training of Kevin Sullivan and the QF72 crew?

 

[jb747]

A few years back I recall reading something along the lines of the AF447 root cause originating on the AD side of the ADIRS with the QF72 incident being on the IR side of the ADIRS. Not sure what what either of these mean?

The AD side is the air data part of the ADIRS. And the IR side is the inertial side.

The initial issue with 447 was caused by icing of the pitot probe(s). With 72 it was a spurious AoA input, though I don't know if it was an actual signal from the AoA probe, or electrical noise. Remember that 447 did nothing by itself, whereas the 72 input a large amount of nose down elevator.

Are there any similarities between the various A330 ADIRS incidents and the 737 MAX MCAS incidents. From memory the 737 MAX aircraft where grounded whereas the A330 kept flying?

The problem with the 737 Max events was that even if you actually understood what it was doing, there was very little opportunity to recover the situation. AF447 would have done precisely nothing if the FO hadn't panicked ('cos there is no other term to describe his control inputs). All that was needed was for the pilots to simply hold the attitude and to put the power at the cruise setting they'd had previously. Even if they hadn't corrected the power, very little would have happened, and after a minute or two it would have self recovered. In no world does a pitch attitude of 10ºplus whilst at FL300+ make any sense. And as for holding full back stick...the ONLY time you'd need to do that is in a low level terrain avoidance manoeuver. Never at altitude.

In comparison to AF447 was the QF72 outcome down to the skill / training of Kevin Sullivan and the QF72 crew?

Kevin can fly. Others, not so much.

 

[ChrisGibbs]

At what point could the AF447 situation have been recovered? I haven't seen the full transcript of the CVR. When the Captain came back to the coughpit he didn't seem to have any situational awareness and didn't offer up anything that would have stopped the FO from continuing to panic. Do QF (or other airlines) have a procedure that prevents both pilots from making control inputs that nett themselves out (i.e. LHS full forward input and RHS full back input). With the benefit of hindsight and had you entered a coughpit to the same situation as the AF Captain what would you have done differently?

 

[jb747]

At what point could the AF447 situation have been recovered?

I suspect that it became irrecoverable quite early in the event. My guess would be somewhere around FL250. The aircraft had an angle of attack of something in the order of 40º, which is an extraordinary angle, that I didn’t think it would be even possible for it to achieve. The side stick would have to be held full forward until the nose had actually pitched down, and for that to happen, the trim would also have had to run nose down, as I doubt that the elevator alone would have had much response at all.

Assuming that was done, the aircraft will end up quite nose down, and would need to be recovered from that….and that would take time, or more correctly altitude, that they simply didn’t have.

I haven't seen the full transcript of the CVR. When the Captain came back to the coughpit he didn't seem to have any situational awareness and didn't offer up anything that would have stopped the FO from continuing to panic.

I wouldn’t have been obvious to him. The side sticks are not interconnected, nor are they in the line of sight of someone at the rear. And, I’m sure he would not have been able to believe anyone would be such a poor pilot.

Do QF (or other airlines) have a procedure that prevents both pilots from making control inputs that nett themselves out (i.e. LHS full forward input and RHS full back input).

Procedurally you’re supposed to say that you’re taking over, and push the take over switch, which will stop dual inputs. The problem is that the bloke who couldn’t fly used that same switch to lock out the bloke who possibly could. Arguably, Airbus should have interlinked the sticks, as per the C-17.

With the benefit of hindsight and had you entered a coughpit to the same situation as the AF Captain what would you have done differently?

He may as well have stayed in bed. I don’t think there was anything that could be done in the time he had. Makes you think about crew rests that have the Captain in a really remote position (not that this one did).

 

[jase05]

Would love to hear @jb747 or others take on this

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1603469985585762313

 

[RooFlyer]

Ouch! if the pilot landed on the tarmac, I bet that would have hurt! - JB?

 

[jb747]

Would love to hear @jb747 or others take on this.

Firstly I wish people wouldn’t take ‘portrait’ format video!

The initial sink/landing are a little odd. It’s not really a bounce as it doesn’t touch down all that hard, but bounces because the engine literally pushes it back into the air. I wonder if, from around the time it starts to descend if it isn’t’ responding to the throttle. That also explains why the ground motion went on for so long. The pitch down happens because the lift fan is no longer producing any thrust….though I have no idea why.

Ouch! if the pilot landed on the tarmac, I bet that would have hurt! - JB?

I think he broke a leg, but that’s a risk in any ejection. This instance is one of those cases where staying with the aircraft would probably have been the better choice, but I suspect he thought it was going to roll over.

For those who don’t know F-35s, there are three versions. This was an F35B, and is the only version capable of VTOL. The RAAF has F35As. The USN uses the F35C.

 

[Saab34]

They are more like an -800 than the existing -700s. They‘ve got a mix of the features from our newer -800s and some from the ex Silk Air birds. Things like:

Do you personally prefer to fly the -700 or -800?

 

[AviatorInsight]

Do you personally prefer to fly the -700 or -800?

The -700. Quicker to board due to less pax so you’re never late on it. And the sports car feel to it with -800 engines strapped on.

The only thing is the air conditioning in the flight deck is incredibly loud. I’m so glad I’ve got a noise cancelling headset. I don’t know how guys fly without them on the 737.

 

[jb747]

I don’t know how guys fly without them on the 737.

What did you say?

 

[RooFlyer]

@AviatorInsight , this guy was right in the engine space for a while, then went up and had a chat with the pilot through the window. The plane was ‘plugged in’ at the gate. Could you hazard a guess what he might have been doing? Afterwards he cleaned the windscreens and placed flagged tags at various places.

About 9:45 at MEL on Monday morning, possibly VA9912 arrived from OOL.

 

[AviatorInsight]

@AviatorInsight , this guy was right in the engine space for a while, then went up and had a chat with the pilot through the window. The plane was ‘plugged in’ at the gate. Could you hazard a guess what he might have been doing? Afterwards he cleaned the windscreens and placed flagged tags at various places.

About 9:45 at MEL on Monday morning, possibly VA9912 arrived from OOL.

That aircraft operated VA1031 yesterday up to MCY. The fact it's been given a VA99** flight number means it's a ferry flight. So the aircraft has gone tech up there with dispensation to ferry back to MEL this morning.

The engineer in the first shot is checking the oil level through the access panel. The straps and pitot covers are another giveaway that maintenance is being done on it throughout the day before its first scheduled flight again this evening to SYD and back.

 

[jb747]

An anniversary that my pilot mates will understand… 30 years ago today, Captain Jim Woods handed me a set of four bars at the end of my final command check. Six sectors and about 30 hours, with the final two being Sydney-Wellington return.

 

[RooFlyer]

The engineer in the first shot is checking the oil level through the access panel. The straps and pitot covers are another giveaway that maintenance is being done on it throughout the day before its first scheduled flight again this evening to SYD and back.

Thanks. I was more curios as to what the guy, in the first pic 'sitting' on the lip of the cowling, might have been doing a few seconds earlier, when he was entirely within the engine space? Don't know how long he was there - 20 seconds after I noticed it.

Also, odd (I think) that they parked it at gate 2 if it was a prolonged stint of maintenance/inspection. Or perhaps they found more than initially expected.

 

[mjt57]

MEL currently fogged in. Flights cancelled or diverted inc. international arrivals.

According to MEL's webpage and FAQs it has Cat III B ILS which means that aircraft can land in fog. Yet, according to the media, flights are being diverted or cancelled or whatever due to the fog.

Why would this be so?

 

[ChrisGibbs]

Was on this mornings QF410 MEL-SYD (A330-200 - VH-EBK) service. We were scheduled to depart at 07:00am. Pushed back at 7:30am with 4 in the queue in front of us to take-off on RWY27. Eventually got away close to 08:00am. Arrivals were using RWY16.... Lots of time between the 4 take-offs and the 4 landings...