Hard to believe that so much modern technology,  can be so gravely mismanaged...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/crashes/what-really-happened-aboard-air-france-447-6611877

.... what happend to logic and common make the beast with two backsing sense??

I read that article.  Another example of an over reliance on technology instead of skills  and experience

that was hard to read and not think

but

if three trained folks such as that can make the beast with two backs it up, flying one of those can't be the cake-walk the article makes it out to be

It was the least experienced of the three that was in control for most of the improper input.

I'm not a flyer.  But I understand the physics of an aircraft stalling.... and the clear and obvious action which ought be taken to increase airspeed.  

Yet those trained with actually doing so did the exact opposite to that which was required to recover the situation  .

Why  

Quote from: Dan on December 14, 2011, 03:48:53 AM
It was the least experienced of the three that was in control for most of the improper input.

I can't help but think back to anything I have make the beast with two backsed up

the first thing the senior guy does is say

"get the make the beast with two backs out of the way"

then procedes to fix it

why they left bumble make the beast with two backs in a pilot's seat is beyond me

It seems as things get more automated for us, we understand less of the physics.

mitt

Quote from: Mother on December 14, 2011, 03:54:49 AM
I can't help but think back to anything I have make the beast with two backsed up

the first thing the senior guy does is say

"get the make the beast with two backs out of the way"

then procedes to fix it

why they left bumble make the beast with two backs in a pilot's seat is beyond me

My thoughts exactly

Quote from: mitt on December 14, 2011, 06:34:50 AM
It seems as things get more automated for us, we understand less of the physics.

mitt

exactly why I hate things like that on cars:  first it starts with the lights.  now they have cars that brake for you if you're too close.


years ago they were talking about how much automation is on airplanes and how much will be in the future and that "pilots" won't be necessary, they will have "flight managers" instead.  good god i am glad that train of thought did not continue in the USA

Those 2 guys should never have been left to pilot that plane alone. I believe that in international flights there have to be at least 4 pilots. They switch every 2 hours. In that case, you should always have 1 pilot and one co-pilot.

Quote from: duccarlos on December 14, 2011, 10:30:39 AM
Those 2 guys should never have been left to pilot that plane alone. I believe that in international flights there have to be at least 4 pilots. They switch every 2 hours. In that case, you should always have 1 pilot and one co-pilot.

depends on the length of the flight.  I believe the limit is 9 hours.

Quote from: ducatiz on December 14, 2011, 11:33:40 AM
depends on the length of the flight.  I believe the limit is 9 hours.

They have to switch ever 2 hours on transatlantic flights. This from a pilot friend.

Quote from: duccarlos on December 14, 2011, 11:36:37 AM
They have to switch ever 2 hours on transatlantic flights. This from a pilot friend.

That doesn't jibe with what I can find.  Airlines can have different rules, but the maximum flight time allowed is 10 hours for transatlantic flights.

2 hour switch over?  that really doesn't make sense given it takes less time to fly to Heathrow from NYC than it does to fly to LAX from NYC.

airlines can have their own rules that switchover more frequently, but the max allowable is 10 hours flight in a 14 hour duty shift.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)#Drag_in_aerodynamics
The low point in the total drag curve corresponds with the "best rate" of climb airspeed. Usually aircraft are faster than this, so any increase in power causes an increase in airspeed.
If you're to the left of the low point it is called slow flight, the interesting thing is once you're on the left side of the curve to go slower requires more power.
They got so slow that, they did not have enough power to either climb or accelerate. To save themselves and the aircraft would have involved nosing over and getting the airspeed back on the right side of the curve.

I remember quit well slow flight in Cessna 152's and 172's, don't try it in a 182 without using elevator and rudder trim. (182's are a little heavy on control forces, it will give you a workout)

Quote from: sno_duc on December 14, 2011, 04:08:35 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_(physics)#Drag_in_aerodynamics

This. ^^^

Add to it that they were flying on instruments and one of their major instruments (airspeed indicator) was gone and you can see where they got into trouble.

Add to it where they thought they were in an autopilot mode where the plane couldn't stall (they weren't) and there's your disaster right there.

I remember from flight training how they drill into you to have an almost Pavlovian response to the stall horn doing off (nose down and full power now!)

Seems like these guys lost that response...