USAir 1549 CVR transcript

[kf4amu]

The CVR transcript shows them following the checklist that would call for thrust levers to be at idle for a restart. They never mention pushing them up.

Do you mention everything you do in the cockpit?

I'm just playing devils advocate here...you may be right. But claiming they didn't do something because they didn't verbalize it is kinda amateurish.

 

[Skyboy722]

The CVR transcript shows them following the checklist that would call for thrust levers to be at idle for a restart. They never mention pushing them up.

I can't remember the last time I verbally anounced that I was advancing the thrust levers. And you're sure it didn't happen because.....they didn't MENTION it????

 

[Bringupthebird]

The words" Try going to TOGA" would have been a tipoff that they had tried that, but those aren't in there. Also, does the cockpit mic pick up a Master Warning CRC that would correspond to a ENG DUAL FAILURE ECAM? If it did, I missed it.

 

[ivauir]

errrr.... since when is Airbus French? It is as multi-national as Boeing. Got some anger to vent?

Non, je ne suis pas fache, mais la plaisanterie est plus drole avec un avion français. "Mulit National Consortium" n'est pas tres drole.

In other words - lighten up, I'm no francophobe. The bus is a fine machine, and it served its crew well that day. Is that PC enough for you?

 

[Dornier 335]

Non, je ne suis pas fache, mais la plaisanterie est plus drole avec un avion français. "Mulit National Consortium" n'est pas tres drole.

In other words - lighten up, I'm no francophobe. The bus is a fine machine, and it served its crew well that day. Is that PC enough for you?

No offense, as I stated earlier my post was slightly inspired by a great movie (excerpt). It's all cool, no need for PC, amigo.

"Don't you oppress me" ... lol

 

[nwaredtail]

Do you mention everything you do in the cockpit?

I'm just playing devils advocate here...you may be right. But claiming they didn't do something because they didn't verbalize it is kinda amateurish.

USAir jumpseater said he was told no ditching PB pushed and thrust levers were never pushed to TOGA, for what it's worth.

 

[ackattacker]

Yes, suppose one of them instinctively knew they were too slow for an unassisted air restart and at least tried something that may have worked, like opening the APU bleed to assist in a restart. Or advancing both thrust levers to TOGA to see if either engine could produce more than the IDLE that they were set to.

Perhaps you should get some facts before you spout off. Here's the think to the FDR data:

http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Aviation/DCA09MA026/418135.pdf

After the impact, N1 on both engines falls off to windmilling levels despite the climb power setting. Vibration goes through the roof. EGT's on both engines shoots to 900C. The power levers for both engines remain at climb power for 1 minute after impact, when they are retarted to idle for the restart checklist. 30 seconds later they advance the power lever on number 1 but get no response except the high EGT again. You can see that N2 on the number 1 engine remains up, there's EGT, the engine is still lit and turning. However there's little to no thrust. There's no way any "restart" procedure is going to work, APU or not. Number 2 engine is even more toast, N2 vibration is extreme, and eventually quits completely (N2 at zero prior to impact).

And, I'm not entirely familiar with the way the ECU works on the Airbus, but I doubt that you would get any increased fuel flow from setting TOGA seeing as how the ECU is already commanding a much higher thrust setting than it's getting

 

[Bringupthebird]

Thanks for the link. At first glance, I don't agree with your assessment of vibration, but I'll take some time and look at it. And EGT could spike due to low N1 (guts and slow IAS) with fuel still flowing to the engine. Could an APU bleed have overcome the clog and allowed the engine to spin sufficiently to start again?

 

[WayBack]

Yes, suppose one of them instinctively knew they were too slow for an unassisted air restart and at least tried something that may have worked, like opening the APU bleed to assist in a restart. Or advancing both thrust levers to TOGA to see if either engine could produce more than the IDLE that they were set to.

The outcome could have been different.

Sully did a fine job with what he had, no argument. Skiles was in over his head, disappointing considering he is a former Capt.

In their defense however, when it became apparent they were committed to an off airport landing, they did not allow themselves to be distracted from flying the airplane. I'm just not convinced (from my interpretation of the CVR data released by the NTSB-my only source of info) it necessarily needed to be an off-airport landing.

You're an idiot.

 

[ableone]

Perhaps you should get some facts before you spout off. Here's the think to the FDR data:

http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Aviation/DCA09MA026/418135.pdf

After the impact, N1 on both engines falls off to windmilling levels despite the climb power setting. Vibration goes through the roof. EGT's on both engines shoots to 900C. The power levers for both engines remain at climb power for 1 minute after impact, when they are retarted to idle for the restart checklist. 30 seconds later they advance the power lever on number 1 but get no response except the high EGT again. You can see that N2 on the number 1 engine remains up, there's EGT, the engine is still lit and turning. However there's little to no thrust. There's no way any "restart" procedure is going to work, APU or not. Number 2 engine is even more toast, N2 vibration is extreme, and eventually quits completely (N2 at zero prior to impact).

If the nose was below the horizon and the crew never disconnected the auto-thrust, then idle thrust would have been commanded with the trust levers in the climb detent. That is the difference between moving them to TOGA and leaving them in the auto-thrust range.

And, I'm not entirely familiar with the way the ECU works on the Airbus, but I doubt that you would get any increased fuel flow from setting TOGA seeing as how the ECU is already commanding a much higher thrust setting than it's getting

The climb thrust detent is an auto-thrust active range setting. If the nose was down and the speed higher than the speed target the system would command idle thrust. Moving the levers to TOGA would send a signal commanding full thrust to the EECs. There is a possibility that the #1 engine may have been capable of producing thrust but it was never given a command to do so. This is the point of most posters.

Personally I don't think it would have made a difference but we may never know for sure.

 

[ackattacker]

If the nose was below the horizon and the crew never disconnected the auto-thrust, then idle thrust would have been commanded with the trust levers in the climb detent. That is the difference between moving them to TOGA and leaving them in the auto-thrust range.

The climb thrust detent is an auto-thrust active range setting. If the nose was down and the speed higher than the speed target the system would command idle thrust. Moving the levers to TOGA would send a signal commanding full thrust to the EECs. There is a possibility that the #1 engine may have been capable of producing thrust but it was never given a command to do so. This is the point of most posters.

Personally I don't think it would have made a difference but we may never know for sure.

The FDR data shows the N1 target and N1 command by the EEC along with the actual N1. You can see that the N1 target remains constant until the TLA is reduced, but the actual N1 on both engines drops dramatically. Airspeed remains at or below speed at impact.

I think the FDR data shows that the EEC's did NOT roll back the power. The EEC's were still commanding climb thrust but the engines simply could not comply and the EEC's will not simply dump more fuel into an engine that refuses to spool up. If they did, the engines would have simply melted, the EGT's were already at 900C...

 

[ableone]

The FDR data shows the N1 target and N1 command by the EEC along with the actual N1. You can see that the N1 target remains constant until the TLA is reduced, but the actual N1 on both engines drops dramatically.

Is this a commanded N1 value or a value corresponding to the TLA donut?

If it's just the donut it doesn't mean anything.

Airspeed remains at or below speed at impact.

By this time the thrust lever had been retarded to idle in anticipation of an airstart.

I think the FDR data shows that the EEC's did NOT roll back the power. The EEC's were still commanding climb thrust but the engines simply could not comply and the EEC's will not simply dump more fuel into an engine that refuses to spool up. If they did, the engines would have simply melted, the EGT's were already at 900C...

EGT values can be high even at very low thrust settings. Take a look at them the next time you are flying on a 38C day. They will often be very close to max value even while at idle. Excessive EGT is one of the few parameters that the EEC does not protect against.

 

[ackattacker]

Is this a commanded N1 value or a value corresponding to the TLA donut?

The FDR data shows both the overall "target" value, and the "commanded" value for each engine. Take a look at the data... I'm no NTSB expert but you can see that the commanded value for engine 1 remains constant until the TLA is reduced, then comes back up again when the TLA is brought up again. You can also see clearly that when the TLA is brought back to idle, N1 on engine 1 drops from about 35 to around 25. Then when the thrust lever is brought back up again in stages, it goes back to around 35 but won't go any higher despite the TLA being advanced further. That's just all that the engine had in it.

The commanded N1 for engine 2 does roll back about 14 seconds after impact with the birds. Presumably this is due the the N2 falling below a threshold value (seems to be around 50%)

 

[B-atch]

All you "tools" that get off on dissing Sully and Jeff can scream and rant till you turn BLUE!!! The fact is this crew acted exceptionally well under incredible circumstances. Thank your lucky stars, that some of you were not in that cockpit that day.....I suspect the end result might have been different.

You've had 10 months to Dissect and analyze all the data and cocktail information. Even a 10 year old with access to Google can do that. These PILOTS had 3.20 minutes to make a decision and execute their plan!! I for one call it REMARCABLE...

Next time you go dissing Sully and Jeff for your own personal reasons, remember that these men have done more for their passengers, crew, and our profession that most of you will do in 3 life times.. Good day!

 

[timmay]

All you "tools" that get off on dissing Sully and Jeff can scream and rant till you turn BLUE!!! The fact is this crew acted exceptionally well under incredible circumstances. Thank your lucky stars, that some of you were not in that cockpit that day.....I suspect the end result might have been different.

You've had 10 months to Dissect and analyze all the data and cocktail information. Even a 10 year old with access to Google can do that. These PILOTS had 3.20 minutes to make a decision and execute their plan!! I for one call it REMARCABLE...

Next time you go dissing Sully and Jeff for your own personal reasons, remember that these men have done more for their passengers, crew, and our profession that most of you will do in 3 life times.. Good day!

All hail King Sully!!! I will bow down in worship of the man if I ever get the chance! But I am confused, is REMARCABLE the same as REMARKABLE or is this a new word used to describe the unworldly actions of King Sully??

 

[Cowboy75]

Next time you go dissing Sully and Jeff for your own personal reasons, remember that these men have done more for their passengers, crew, and our profession that most of you will do in 3 life times.. Good day!

They made it personal when they tried to influence a jury with their "hero" status. I was there to witness it and was not impressed.

They may have been Hudson heros, but not in a courtroom in Phoenix.

 

[B-atch]

They made it personal when they tried to influence a jury with their "hero" status. I was there to witness it and was not impressed.

They may have been Hudson heros, but not in a courtroom in Phoenix.

...Peoples lives were not at stake that day in Phoenix.....

 

[eaglesview]

All hail King Sully!!! I will bow down in worship of the man if I ever get the chance! But I am confused, is REMARCABLE the same as REMARKABLE or is this a new word used to describe the unworldly actions of King Sully??

Here is someone that obviously has nothing to say.

 

[Cowboy75]

...Peoples lives were not at stake that day in Phoenix.....

No, just the careers and the welfare of pilots' families, B-atch.

 

[eaglesview]

No, just the careers and the welfare of pilots' families, B-atch.

yep. on both sides of the country.