Air France 447, automation and the pilot

[Erlanger]

Here's a good article about the human factor, automation in flying and the Air France 447 crash. Long article but good read.

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2014/10/air-france-flight-447-crash

 

[SpauldingSmails]

Good read. Thanks.

 

[freightdogfred]

The thing that has always disturbed me about this accident is why that crew flew that airplane into a cell with tops above 56,000 ft.. The icing/stalling the wing is one thing, but what were they doing there in the first place?

http://ahrtp.com/RSS-JSfeeds/AF_447_weather_bkgrd.files.html

 

[SpauldingSmails]

With that crew, I think the tail was wagging the dog all along. They even had the FYI from dx.

 

[freightdogfred]

The focus of the investigation was on the inadequacies of the pitot heaters, and the lack of basic flying skills by the costar. A TAP (Air Portugal) 767 was 15 mins behind them on the same route and deviated over 200 miles off track. There never was any questioning on why they were where they were in the first place. My conclusion is
A) The radar was not on or it was not tuned or malfunctioning
B) They were asleep (72 hr Rio layover could be taxing)
C) They did not know what they were looking at

In defense of the crew I'm convinced they had a malfunctioning radar, it's the only plausible explanation to me.

 

[INIT REF]

I've come back to the cockpit after my break to find all the lights on, both relief pilots reading, and the radar off.

In the middle of the night.

In the middle of the North Atlantic.




It only takes once.

 

[Dan Roman]

Here's a theory on the radar. The radar return intensity is a knob within a knob. I.E. The knob that controls the nav display also has an inner knob that controls the radar return. On shutdown, crews dim all the screens (including the radar knob with the Nav display).
On preflight it's easy to turn the Nav display knob up but not the radar return knob. You would then be flying around with the radar on and not painting anything on your Nav display.

 

[tomgoodman]

Another radar tip: Certain failure modes will show a normal indication in the "test" switch position. To fully verify radar operation (when in a safe position to do so), turn it on and lower the tilt until it paints terrain.

 

[freightdogfred]

I've come back to the cockpit after my break to find all the lights on, both relief pilots reading, and the radar off.

In the middle of the night.

In the middle of the North Atlantic.




It only takes once.

The radar being off in the middle of the North Atlantic, in the middle of the night, would not bother me too much. The radar being off in the ITCZ in the middle of the night would bother me greatly. The flashes in the window, the St Elmo's fire lighting up the windows would have me twisting and tuning to get some kind of return. Infrared imaging showed temps of -75 to -80C which puts those cloud tops above 56,000 ft. And they flew right thru the middle of them. It's unexplainable.

 

[freightdogfred]

Here's a theory on the radar. The radar return intensity is a knob within a knob. I.E. The knob that controls the nav display also has an inner knob that controls the radar return. On shutdown, crews dim all the screens (including the radar knob with the Nav display).
On preflight it's easy to turn the Nav display knob up but not the radar return knob. You would then be flying around with the radar on and not painting anything on your Nav display.

That's a plausible explanation. But with all the flashing goin on outside?

 

[Dornier 335]

If you want a deeper analysis of AFR447, I recommend "Understanding Air France 447" by Bill Palmer. Very well researched.

 

[Dornier 335]

The focus of the investigation was on the inadequacies of the pitot heaters, and the lack of basic flying skills by the costar. A TAP (Air Portugal) 767 was 15 mins behind them on the same route and deviated over 200 miles off track. There never was any questioning on why they were where they were in the first place. My conclusion is
A) The radar was not on or it was not tuned or malfunctioning
B) They were asleep (72 hr Rio layover could be taxing)
C) They did not know what they were looking at

In defense of the crew I'm convinced they had a malfunctioning radar, it's the only plausible explanation to me.

One weather possibility being discussed in the book are high ice crystal concentrations aka graupel.

 

[freightdogfred]

Once again.....the focus shifts to the conditions encountered. Super-cooled water, graupel, under-sized pitot heat etc

WHAT WERE THEY DOING INSIDE THAT CELL TO BEGIN WITH

 

[Baronman]

They definitely weren't asleep or with the radar off. A while ago I read or saw some scenarios from that evening where there was probably some attenuation going on...They were deviating around fairly large areas that were hiding an even larger area that they ended up penetrating.

 

[FR8mastr]

The weather was just a contributing factor, according to the transcripts and the data, the ride wasn't all that bad. The real problems come in with basic airmanship then the fact that the AB philosophy does not allow feedback to the other pilots to let them overcome the bad airmanship. The left seat guy obviously did not hear the warning that the right seat guy took back control, so when he moved his nintendo stick nothing happened further adding to the confusion.
When you are task loaded as you all should know the fine motor skills start degrading and you miss otherwise very obvious stuff.

All planes have their quirks, in this case the AB design helped doom this plane. You will never hear this mentioned from AB or anyone admitting that the super high tech, we hardly even need a pilot modern design, has any kind of design deficiency.
Why, because then they would have to fix it $$$$$$$$. That would open up liability for the thousands of airframes currently flying.
Doesn't anyone find it interesting that there has NEVER been an accident caused by an Airbus Design flaw? It is always pilot error, and only pilot error. name another aircraft manufacturer that has ever been that good.
This case is a perfect example, as there is plenty of contributing items. Bad weather decisions, Ab initio pilots, and pitot system failure. The report even talks about the confusion caused by the flight control design, but as always it stops short by just blaming the pilots for the confusion via bad communications.
Yea I know all aircraft ever manufactured have had problems surface except Airbus, they are perfect.