Thread: Air India flight AI 133

trained to obey orders and then penalised for doing so .........................

out of order .

Originally Posted by Mozzbie47

Harry, I was under the impression that learner pilots to day, get excellent training with simulators, where every disaster can be, well, simulated, even older pilots get refresher time in them ??

Yes, they do checks regularly, but I'm talking about the experience of flying an aircraft by hand compared to letting computers do it.

One of the findings of the AF447 report was:

A previous report from the French agency also raised questions about the training of the pilots on the flight.
The recorders revealed the pilots had failed to discuss repeated stall warnings and "had received no high altitude training" to deal with the situation, the bureau said.

If you talk to people who used to fly Tristars and the like, they had a feel for how the aircraft was flying, and exactly how it responded to control inputs.

Think we are nearing the point where pilots won't be needed, makes little difference if there is a good pilot or not, if the computers go down the plane will, pilot or not. Jim

Originally Posted by jamescollister

Think we are nearing the point where pilots won't be needed,

best wishes selling that to the great unwashed

Originally Posted by Mid

best wishes selling that to the great unwashed

No telling beats selling

Remember reading last year I think, a pilot did something stupid which may have caused the plane to stall mid air, but the computers overrode his decision. Shuck the plane up a bit, but no one hurt.
Think the space shuttle landed it's self, pilot just there to look good. Jim

What is it with Asians always needing naps ? .
At least the pilots had the sense not to hand the controls over to 2 homo stewards , as thier limp wristed defect and gay panicking would have caused a crash for sure .

Originally Posted by blue

What is it with Asians always needing naps ? .
At least the pilots had the sense not to hand the controls over to 2 homo stewards , as thier limp wristed defect and gay panicking would have caused a crash for sure .

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by jamescollister

Think we are nearing the point where pilots won't be needed,

best wishes selling that to the great unwashed

I done belive there's been at least one crash where its been demonstrated in a simulator, that if the pilot had just stopped flying the plane, let go of the joystick, sat on his hands and just let the plane fly itself... then auto pilot would have pulled the plane out of the dive and not crashed.

But then that's exactly what the 12die pilots did just before they crashed into puket, though I don't think their plane was actually kitted out to land itself

The truth be told, i believe that fully automated planes would be safer than ones with modern pilots trained in the art of watching auto pilots, I just lack the faith to actually get into pilot less airplane.

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by jamescollister

Think we are nearing the point where pilots won't be needed,

best wishes selling that to the great unwashed

I done belive there's been at least one crash where its been demonstrated in a simulator, that if the pilot had just stopped flying the plane, let go of the joystick, sat on his hands and just let the plane fly itself... then auto pilot would have pulled the plane out of the dive and not crashed.

But then that's exactly what the 12die pilots did just before they crashed into puket, though I don't think their plane was actually kitted out to land itself

The truth be told, i believe that fully automated planes would be safer than ones with modern pilots trained in the art of watching auto pilots, I just lack the faith to actually get into pilot less airplane.

Originally Posted by hazz

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by jamescollister

Think we are nearing the point where pilots won't be needed,

best wishes selling that to the great unwashed

I done belive there's been at least one crash where its been demonstrated in a simulator, that if the pilot had just stopped flying the plane, let go of the joystick, sat on his hands and just let the plane fly itself... then auto pilot would have pulled the plane out of the dive and not crashed.

But then that's exactly what the 12die pilots did just before they crashed into puket, though I don't think their plane was actually kitted out to land itself

The truth be told, i believe that fully automated planes would be safer than ones with modern pilots trained in the art of watching auto pilots, I just lack the faith to actually get into pilot less airplane.

I think you're talking about GF072, and you're exactly right. The Bahraini clown flying it - with a young Omani - lost the plot, and if he'd taken his hands off the controls, it would have corrected his errors, even up to about 35 seconds before the crash when he had the aircraft in a right mess. Sadly he didn't have a fucking clue and flew it into the sea, killing everyone on board.

But there have been at least two Airbus crashes caused by the aircraft refusing to follow pilot controls, although they always seem to manage to blame it on the pilots.

A pilotless train I can handle, they work really well in Dubai, but a plane?

Git tae fuck!

Originally Posted by Kurgen

Air India pilots snooze as attendants turn off autopilot

apparently the pilots weren't the only ones napping .............

To be fair, when I'm converting and pumping nitrogen I have a fair selection of dials and gauges to keep an eye on for the safety of everyone, but I only really look at 2 of them...

Originally Posted by Bung

I often wonder what sort of person Is actually in charge of the aircraft I am on, depending on the country of origin.

Western airlines, ok, normal, disciplined pilots

.

mmmm

BA pilot awaits breath test results | Mail Online

British Airways staff run amok in drunken rampage on board flight from London to Washington | Mail Online

British Airways pilot allegedly gropes passenger

Originally Posted by storm1fishing

Originally Posted by Bung

I often wonder what sort of person Is actually in charge of the aircraft I am on, depending on the country of origin.

Western airlines, ok, normal, disciplined pilots

.

mmmm

BA pilot awaits breath test results | Mail Online

British Airways staff run amok in drunken rampage on board flight from London to Washington | Mail Online

British Airways pilot allegedly gropes passenger

BA cabin crew are godawful twats, I've managed to avoid flying that woeful airline for about 10 years now.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I think you're talking about GF072, and you're exactly right. The Bahraini clown flying it - with a young Omani - lost the plot, and if he'd taken his hands off the controls, it would have corrected his errors, even up to about 35 seconds before the crash when he had the aircraft in a right mess. Sadly he didn't have a fucking clue and flew it into the sea, killing everyone on board.

But there have been at least two Airbus crashes caused by the aircraft refusing to follow pilot controls, although they always seem to manage to blame it on the pilots.

A pilotless train I can handle, they work really well in Dubai, but a plane?

A Control input from the pilot automatically disconnects the A/P so I'm not sure what you are on about here....

Which two Airbus crashes would these be?

Most flights involve pilots "flying" for about 10 minutes if their lucky. Accidents tend to happen when something goes wrong and the A/P and/or A/T trip out leaving the pilots wondering why in many cases.

The problem is that pilots have become "button pushers" and "fault monitors" rather than flyers and when the system is behaving itself all is fine (99+% of the time). Good pilot training is about training for the unusual and emergencies that many will never see and with good crews most of the problems become non events. It is only with those that think that having learnt to push the right buttons make them experts that the problem really lies. You will never know how good a crew is until an emergency arises but "luck" is all about practice.

As for the Air India incident...it seems the media can be assured to turn the slightest Chinese Whisper into a full blown incident.

Talk to my pilot son who flies for SIA. He was pretty much nonchalance about this. Auto pilot is what it is and the plane can fly by itself. What his concern is the plane flying into unauthorized air space. Still does not rule out that leaving the cockpit in hands of untrained stewardess and nap.

Originally Posted by Troy

A Control input from the pilot automatically disconnects the A/P so I'm not sure what you are on about here....

Not strictly true, although you might expect it, as this accident demonstrates.

Which two Airbus crashes would these be?

AF447 and an Air New Zealand crash in 2008, both because the aircraft responded to iced-up pitots in a manner which completely flummoxed the flight crew and led to the loss of the aircraft.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

But there have been at least two Airbus crashes caused by the aircraft refusing to follow pilot controls, although they always seem to manage to blame it on the pilots.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

AF447 and an Air New Zealand crash in 2008, both because the aircraft responded to iced-up pitots in a manner which completely flummoxed the flight crew and led to the loss of the aircraft.

I don't think you can say that either of these crashes was due to the aircraft not following pilot inputs. More like the pilot inputs were incorrect and this resulted in the accident.

AF447 has been attributed to incorrect actions following a pitot tube freezing up. This is not the first time thaer has been a pitot tube failure on an Airbus, or other aircraft types. It has led to confusion and accidents in the past and probably will do again but is more to do with lack of training for the event than aircraft not being controllable by the pilot.

The 2008 NZ incident is presumably A320 near Perpignan, which was a test flight as part of the handover to NZ. The AOA indicator was iced up and not working when the crew decided to test the AOA protection functionality. They were not trained to carry out such testing and failed to realise that the protection was not there. The testing was carried out at far too low an altitude and it cannot be said that the aircraft did not respond to the pilot inputs...only that it failed to protect against such unusual inputs due to a failure in the protection system.

For the Flt 593 incident:
It seems that there are so many variations in AP and modes since my day that I was wrong to say All will disconnect on pilot input. In this case, I am not sure if the roll channel disconnected completely or went into CWS mode (autostab engaged). Indication was there but not seen and it is a mode that many pilots enjoy flying in (apparently). Perhaps if the kid had pulled back on the stick the AP would have disengaged completely and be more obvious (If an instinctive cut-out is still employed on all AP).

Originally Posted by Troy

Perhaps if the kid had pulled back on the stick the AP would have disengaged completely and be more obvious (If an instinctive cut-out is still employed on all AP).

Again, it was something that was in the manual but not something on which the pilot had been trained.

What a tragic mistake.

Originally Posted by jamescollister

Have to say over the years I have put a few airlines on my no fly list and just added a new one. Jim

I can't understand why it was not already on your list, Jimmy

Originally Posted by Gayerhole

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I think you're talking about GF072, and you're exactly right. The Bahraini clown flying it - with a young Omani - lost the plot, and if he'd taken his hands off the controls, it would have corrected his errors, even up to about 35 seconds before the crash when he had the aircraft in a right mess. Sadly he didn't have a fucking clue and flew it into the sea, killing everyone on board.

I remember seeing a television documentary about that flight, and if the pilot had let go the stick the auto-pilot would have got the plane out of the dive.

They demonstrated it in the simulator.

But, it would have taken some balls to let go that stick.

The pilot in question was fast tracked to the left seat because of his nationality. Most of his peers considered him a cowboy.

The report for GF072 was interesting reading thanks for mentioning it HarryB

GF072 Final Report



I would be interested to know pilot views on joystick control. Personally I don't like them in civil aircraft, although I think them good in military aircraft because of the extra room for ejection seats. I preferred the 777 approach to FBW that kept the yolk rather than using a joystick. My reasons are:

1. No difference between flying left or right seat for flight controls.
2. Everyone can see the position of the control yolk regardless of who is PIC
3. You have somewhere to stick the fuel chart/airfield chart/SID/approach chart right where you want it.

Autopilot vs autostab vs auto safety protection become very mixed terms when flying FBW...basically the pilot has no direct control of the flying surfaces and many traditional piloting skills are absorbed by the FBW. To the point where both pilots can happily sleep, and get away with it, without incident unless they stray into congested airspace. The incidents of paying the price for not pressurising the aircraft are testament to this.