Next leap in airliner safety?

[Garyw]

You can, it has been done, in ALT law as you say.

You took my comment out of context. you CANNOT stall an airbus in Normal law. 447 wasn't in normal law but I suspect the crew didn't fully register that fact.

Have you read the preliminary report and the CVR transcript?

Yes and the ACARS warnings as well as watched some of the expert opinion on the accident.

There certainly was a lot of confusion, I'll give them that.
But who in their right mind pulls back on the stick/yoke and keeps it there and then does not tell his colleagues he is doing so? Especially when speed readouts are unreliable!

with 20/20 hindsight we know that the airspeed was unreliable. At the time of the incident did the aircrew truly know that the airspeed was unreliable? Did the aircrew truly know that 447 was in Alt law? If so then yes, they'd probably not have pulled back on the stick.

you are right that the pilot should have communicated, the fact he didn't shows poor CRM. However, shouldn't the other pilots have ASKED him what he was doing? Why were they passive? CRM allows and expects pilots to challenge each other and that never happened.

[Amiga500]

Why would it? in fact, it could make the problem worse as air trapped behind the ice expands in the tube and provides even more confusing information to the aircrew.

You do realise the pitots are heated right?


So yes - while the ice remains the readouts will be faulty. (I dunno where your running with the expansion idea - the various pitots will all be reading different, i.e. wrong results - the computer will still be in alternate mode)


However, instead of dealing with supercooled liquid at 35 kft, by dropping down to 10 kft you will clear the ice and you will have working pitots.

You will also have avoided stall and kept control of the aircraft - which is (or should be) rule no. 1.

[Amiga500]

OK I give in. You obviously have much more insight into what happened that night than anyone else.

Running behind the lame excuse of "you weren't there" is pathetic.


Fact is - the pilots f**ked up. Their procedures were f**ked up (not their fault) and the aircraft warnings were not clear enough, or prioritised enough (not their fault), to deal with bad pilots (their fault).


Other pilots closing ranks to protect their profession is not doing aircraft safety any favours.

[Arthur Pewtey]

I'm not sure why they bothered taking so long with the investigation. You clearly have it all worked out. Have you thought of applying to the AAIB?

[Garyw]

You do realise the pitots are heated right?

If pitot heat is turned on, yes.

So yes - while the ice remains the readouts will be faulty. (I dunno where your running with the expansion idea - the various pitots will all be reading different, i.e. wrong results - the computer will still be in alternate mode)

Because it's happened before -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birgenair_Flight_301 - if you read the report into that accident you'll see that that Captains pitot tube was blocked, as the aircraft climbed the air trapped in the tube expanded due to the outside airpressure dropping. The captain believed this to be a true IAS reading and stalled the plane. The co-pilot had a perfectly working pitot tube and correct IAS readings. They still crashed.

However, instead of dealing with supercooled liquid at 35 kft, by dropping down to 10 kft you will clear the ice and you will have working pitots.

You will also have avoided stall and kept control of the aircraft - which is (or should be) rule no. 1.

I'm sorry but there is no basis for fact in that. Super cooled liquid water is a theory and not a fact. Also, by dropping 10kft you may well make the problem worse with less room to deal with the issue. Personally I always like sky below me - it can be useful if something goes wrong.

Rule number 1 is 'fly the airplane' which I'll agree that AF447 pilots did not do but it was a confusing, strange situation that few pilots are trained for. It was dark and there was no horizon. Probably one of the worst situations to have problems in.

[Paolins92]

A few quick facts:
- Icing is worse between 0°C and -35°C, theoretically supercooled water droplets does not form under -35°C. Although, here we have a MCC (Mesoscale Convective Complex) which is a whole bunch of thunderstorm clusters so intense and vast, which such strong convective currents (and relatively warm air on that 1st of june 2009) that such supercooled droplets were there at FL350.
- If anyone didn't remember those pitot probes were faulty