Commercials pilots: stall warning, and they pull up!

Wolf_Rider · #1 09-01-2011, 02:17 PM

Cockpits of the future will carry a pilot and a dog...

The pilot's job is to feed the dog, and the dog's job is bite the pilot if he tries to touch anything

bongodriver · #2 09-01-2011, 06:41 PM

I can assure you none of us are trained to pull up, the case in point was not the whole story, the aircraft was caught in severe weather with much windshear, and the pitot probes were blocked, the pilots had alot of confusing information to deal with, ultimately their response was a gamble...

Tomcat is right to suggest newer pilots are loosing many basic skills, here in europe we have pilots flying the heavies who have never flown a 'propper' light aircraft in training, they hold these new and bizarre 'multi-crew' licenses having done all their training in simulators, he is also right in saying the newer guys are doing the job because 'they can', instead of it being a life long ambition it is now just another career path with a nice uniform.

Jungmann · #3 09-01-2011, 09:21 PM

For an exhaustive look at this issue in regards to the Air France 447 crash, take a look at the several threads at http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...age-found.html. See what the pros say about it.

Jungmann

IvanK · #4 09-01-2011, 10:17 PM

Keep the multi crew licences out of the cockpit would be a good start !

Blackdog_kt · #5 09-02-2011, 12:42 AM

I was having a similar conversation today with a friend from back in high school who is a pilot in a charter airline.

I was asking his opinion about all the automation that exists and how in many accidents the subsequent investigation came up with pilots focusing all their attention on getting the automatic systems back online, instead of focusing on flying the aircraft first and foremost.

Let's just say he's not very appreciative of the existing trend. He told me he's glad that while flying a jet he still flies a smaller plane that is hand-flown for much of the flight and there are many people who really are in it because they like it.

He also said that a lot of people just get into it because it's a well-paying carreer that their parents can subsidize before them landing their first job. According to him, it's mostly this part of the demographic that tends to aim for landing a first job at a major airline in a big jet and a lot of them tend to end up being more of a systems monitoring agent than a pilot after a while.

I think this is because of the way aviation is in Europe. In areas of the world like Canada, Alaska, Australia or Africa, conditions and geography make smaller aircraft very useful. A sizable portion of pilots tend to get valuable stick time in bush-flying conditions, flying smaller aircraft with less sophisticated systems and not much in the way of automation. These guys really are in the driver's seat and they rack up not only a good amount of hours, but hours logged in diverse conditions and mostly under their direct control.

However, Europe is mostly about the big jets and in all fairness, it seems that it doesn't make sense for a new pilot to pursue a career that will start in smaller airframes and work up from that, simply because there's not enough demand for this kind of flying to create the needed jobs that will absorb pilots willing to start off small and work up from there.

I don't know how things are in terms of cargo airlines, but as far as passengers go it seems to be a case of big jets mostly with everything that entails for building pilot habits when a 25 year old is placed into a highly automated cockpit straight out of flight school.

Madfish · #6 09-02-2011, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bongodriver

I can assure you none of us are trained to pull up, the case in point was not the whole story, the aircraft was caught in severe weather with much windshear, and the pitot probes were blocked, the pilots had alot of confusing information to deal with, ultimately their response was a gamble...

You make it sound like you're a pilot with a major airline. Without looking into the details let me say one thing: I'm suprised that you say it's a gamble!

At that flight altitude with a stall warning - bad weather or not (should've been over-, underflown or avoided in the first place?) - it was only a gamble because they didn't do what would've been done ususally - either leveling out that plane OR descent to get out of that stall, or am I wrong there?

Would there be any reason to not descent until you get out of the stall or at least level it out before pulling the controls back?

I guess the age of safe travel is over until we get fully automated machines. Real people can't ever be good pilots by sitting there sleeping for the whole flight and only flying simulators back home to get some experience. That's not trained at all - it's the opposite.

bongodriver · #7 09-02-2011, 08:56 AM

Quote:

You make it sound like you're a pilot with a major airline. Without looking into the details let me say one thing: I'm suprised that you say it's a gamble!

At that flight altitude with a stall warning - bad weather or not (should've been over-, underflown or avoided in the first place?) - it was only a gamble because they didn't do what would've been done ususally - either leveling out that plane OR descent to get out of that stall, or am I wrong there?

Would there be any reason to not descent until you get out of the stall or at least level it out before pulling the controls back?

I guess the age of safe travel is over until we get fully automated machines. Real people can't ever be good pilots by sitting there sleeping for the whole flight and only flying simulators back home to get some experience. That's not trained at all - it's the opposite.

No I'm Not, I fly Bizjets, but we all go through the same training....what difference would it make if I fly for a 'major airline' or not?
Why is it not a gamble? those guys found themselves in exeptional circumstances, with limited information, I don't need to fly for British airways to be able to say that whatever happened must have been extremely confusing for them and their actions were based on whatever information that lovely super-duper airbus computer alowed them to see.
as for replacing pilots......I'd like to see how you feel being replaced by a computer, thats what this world really needs isn't it?

Madfish · #8 09-02-2011, 09:41 AM

You didn't answer my question.

The information was alright - they got a stall warning and pulled up. Considering their altitude this was the most unlogical thing to do I believe. They could've just nosed down a bit and see if that levels the plane out, clears the stall warning or makes it accelerate. Pulling up is not a gamble - it's just stupid.

And why it makes a difference? Because those huge airliners behave like cargo ships compared to racing boats. They are not just a simple chessna with the weight of a fly. Also they carry hundres of passengers, not just 2 or a dozen. There is a HUGE difference of responsability and you'd expect only the elite of the elite to fly a REAL passenger plane.

These guys clearly made a mistake and were unable to cope with the situation. From what I've read they just acted on some panic feeling instead of going through real emergency procedures also. Not a very good sign.

As for replacing pilots completely, times change. People get replaced by better tools and computers all the time. Feelings have nothing to do with this. How do you think the families of the people who died on that flight feel?
Let me tell you straight: everyone would've felt better if there was 50 backup computers instead of 2 untrained pilots. The people who died. The families of the dead. The ocean that wouldn've have to get polluted once again. Air France if they didn't lose a multi million dollar plane. And also the pilots who wouldn't be ashamed if they lived through it.

I can't see a single reason why you'd try a nose up with a stall warning. It's like when my car's automatic brake system tells me on a highway I'm about to crash into a car ahead but I override it and I accelerate because I gamble that it might be wrong.

IvanK · #9 09-02-2011, 09:44 AM

"You didn't answer my question. The information was alright - they got a stall warning and pulled up. Considering their altitude this was the most unlogical thing to do I believe. They could've just nosed down a bit and see if that levels the plane out, clears the stall warning or makes it accelerate. Pulling up is not a gamble - it's just stupid."

Err they got a darn sight more than just a Stall warning ... they got a whole series of conflicting warnings including many transient and erroneous airspeed readings/fluctuations and changes in flight control laws as well. That aside on the surface there apperrs to be some Human factors issues in that incident based on the interim report made after FDR and CVR evaluation.

http://www.bea.aero/fr/enquetes/vol....mai2011.en.pdf

Like all accidents though its better to wait until the full investigation is complete before making sweeping statements.

For the record here are the memory recall items for a stall in the biggest bus:

As you can see AOA reduction is the first action.

Madfish · #10 09-02-2011, 09:52 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Fra...interim_report

Not sure which part of that I am unable to comprehend but by my logic they did wrong all they could. The only thing that would've been the right thing to do was to nose down. And that was even before the whole thing happened?