Air france pilots getting the blame

[OrionFE]

I have suggested since the beginning that it was a inexperienced crew up front while the more senior were resting that lead to the demise of AF447. At many major airlines around the world, only experienced pilots are hired yet at a lot of European, Indian, and Asian carriers, the ab-initio pilot is brought through the ranks because of a corrupt selection process or good grade sheets. Both of which don't necessarily guarantee competent aviators. Even if the FO/ IRO up front had high time, a majority of it since their ab-initio training was probably in cruise flight. Their experience is the database they would be using for judgement, if they gained that via an ab-initio program and then a rather benign career in cruise flight, then they lacked the background to safely navigate around such weather. IMO, they mis-judged the storms and ended up sending the aircraft into a path of danger. Without a stout background of aviating, they would lack the knowledge needed to consider the severity of the storms they were threading through.

By the time the Captain realized there was a problem it would've been too late.

Which is why the MPL is a disaster waiting to happen. In India there are 220 hr pilots in the right seat of a B737. With a competent skipper that may work but pair them up with a weak commander, through in fatigue, bad weather, and an abnormality and they're quickly over their head. Airliners shouldn't be piloted by low-time pilots. There is just too much liability and responsibility and no amount of automation produced by Honeywell, Boeing and Airbus can dumb down the challenge when the proverbial stuff hits the fan.

Of course, this is just the way I see it. But I have flown with very experienced high-time pilots in airliners as well as low-time ab-initio types. The difference between the two is glaringly obvious. It's not a slight to low-time pilots, we were all there once. But the system should/ must change and it is the reason why hiring minimums are being legally raised in the US. The Colgan crash had many of the same experience issue, or lack thereof.

If that is the case, shouldn't the Captain have been aware of the weather form his brief. If he got out of the seat that early in the flight to rest, don't you think he would have thought to brief the crew about upcoming weather? I mean if the nice color weather radar is showing pretty colors, aren't we all taught very early in our career to go around? It's been my experience the Fo's are the first to deviate and it has been the crusty old Captain that has decided to penetrate to save fuel.

it will be interesting to see!

 

[GogglesPisano]

NOVA did a first rate segment on this crash earlier this year.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1685933496

Supercooled water over the tropics. Scary stuff.

 

[IBNAV8R]

Which is why the MPL is a disaster waiting to happen. In India there are 220 hr pilots in the right seat of a B737. With a competent skipper that may work but pair them up with a weak commander, through in fatigue, bad weather, and an abnormality and they're quickly over their head. Airliners shouldn't be piloted by low-time pilots. There is just too much liability and responsibility and no amount of automation produced by Honeywell, Boeing and Airbus can dumb down the challenge when the proverbial stuff hits the fan.

Tragically, the lives lost will be dismissed as the cost of doing business - since the airline "can't afford" to hire, nor are passengers willing to pay for, highly experienced and competent crews.

 

[AA717driver]

I guess passing that JAA 'supertest' will still suffice when airlines don't want to pay for experience...

TC

ETA: I see whymeworry got this. The regulatory agencies have determined that a lot of sim time and a really tough written is a substitute for experience.

 

[Dornier 335]

a few things to consider...

TC,

I don't think the solution is that simple. I agree with you that you cannot substitute experience with just tests and ground school. But LH for example has done it this way for many, many years with their ab-initio training (Scope would have a field day if he knew how much the LH f/o's are in debt for with their LH training). So far, it seems that they have been lucky with very few incidents (e.g. x-wind landing @ HAM).

AF on the other hand seem to have had more than just bad luck. Is it pilot-inexperience? Similar operator culture problem that Korean was going through a few years ago? In-house fighting between different AF pilot unions? AF doesn't have the strict age limit like LH (<- max. age 29) and allows older candidates with air transport experience (LH does not/didn't used to).

When I worked contract in the UK, I realized that priorities were somewhat different and reversed. Proper R/T was far more important than good hand-flying skills. When I handflew my first approach in VMC, my f/o almost cr@pped his pants. Per SOP, it was mandatory to fly circling approaches with the auto-pilot on only. There were tons of little things like this that would drive you crazy. It seemed that the pilot was more taken out of the equation. Yet, I had to listen that us "yanks are just a bunch of cowboys" and are pretty much clueless at what we are doing in the cockpit. At that point it seemed that there were more accidents and incidents over in the US than in Europe. The finger was pointed at us for being less safe. (Talk to a few "foreign" operators (CX, EK, BA etc.), and you'll very quickly pick up this type of vibe. )

Ever since my contract experience I have asked myself what makes a good pilot and how you would train one. Maybe do the theoretical part JAA-style and the flight training FAA style. Not perfect, but maybe a step in the right direction.

 

[Gillegan]

I'm a bit surprized nothing has been mentioned yet about the new "auto-tilt, multi-mode" wx radars. The units are really designed to work with a vertical display but more often than not are only hooked up to the standard planview display. Quite a few times, I have found myself looking out of the window at an obvious thunderstorm only to have the radar showing nothing until I'm 40-50 nm away.

I normally don't like to get caught up in these speculative discussions about an accident and am not trying to advance this as a cause but would not be surprized to find out that these new radars actually cause a few "unintended" penetrations of weather.

 

[ultrarunner]

NOVA did a first rate segment on this crash earlier this year.

http://video.pbs.org/video/1685933496

Supercooled water over the tropics. Scary stuff.

Sure is....

And its the reason that this particular crew likely didn't deviate, as it's possible they never adjusted the radar gain to max and deviated like their other AF crews did that night.

When you're in clouds, and can't see and there's weather out over the ocean, you damn well better have the radar gain set to paint something!

 

[mamba20]

I'm a bit surprized nothing has been mentioned yet about the new "auto-tilt, multi-mode" wx radars. The units are really designed to work with a vertical display but more often than not are only hooked up to the standard planview display. Quite a few times, I have found myself looking out of the window at an obvious thunderstorm only to have the radar showing nothing until I'm 40-50 nm away.

I normally don't like to get caught up in these speculative discussions about an accident and am not trying to advance this as a cause but would not be surprized to find out that these new radars actually cause a few "unintended" penetrations of weather.

Interesting point. I also think that proper use of the radar should be brought up. How often do you fly with people who don't know how to use the tilt properly? Or don't understand attenuation? I just love getting in a plane with someone, flying through an area of T-storms and see the MFD map screen on the max scale and the radar tilt set to 0.

 

[jonjuan]

Sure is....

And its the reason that this particular crew likely didn't deviate, as it's possible they never adjusted the radar gain to max and deviated like their other AF crews did that night.

When you're in clouds, and can't see and there's weather out over the ocean, you damn well better have the radar gain set to paint something!

Agreed-as a result supercooled water overwhelmed the pitot tubes eliminating airspeed indications. I think the focus of the data gathering will then be about what actions the crew did/didn't/couldn't take to keep the plane flying. It's will be intriguing no doubt.

 

[Ty Webb]

If that is the case, shouldn't the Captain have been aware of the weather form his brief. If he got out of the seat that early in the flight to rest, don't you think he would have thought to brief the crew about upcoming weather? I mean if the nice color weather radar is showing pretty colors, aren't we all taught very early in our career to go around? It's been my experience the Fo's are the first to deviate and it has been the crusty old Captain that has decided to penetrate to save fuel.

it will be interesting to see!

You crack me up. The range of airborne radar in autotilt at default gain setting is pretty lame in the upper flight levels. Often, stuff will paint green or not at all, until you are right up on it. That is where experience comes in. . . . a healthy respect for wx, a knowledge of your equipment, and the discipline to stay restless and alert are things that take time to develop.

Your assumptions about FO's and CA's regarding deviating around wx are generalizations. Saving fuel comes a distant third to safety and comfort. You must fly boxes.