G'day Gary and others,
I could probably hazard a shot at answers to most of your questions, but
in the interests of accuracy I will refrain, since it's a while since I
lost interest in the story, and in the avalanche of information and
speculation in the days, months and years since the accident much of it
has become blurred. However you can find answers from the resources of
the internet.
The AF 447 story has been exhaustively discussed on PPRuNe with numerous
threads covering almost everything that might be said about anything to
do with it - and more - over and over again as happens. Here
<http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/489790-af-447-report-out.html> is
somewhere to start if you want to go down the speculative path.
Warning! despite it's name which suggests that PPRuNe is a Professional
Pilot's forum, it is open to anyone who registers, and a lot of the
contributions are made by people who are not in the industry at all.
However in amongst the falsehood, there are worthwhile contributions
from people who do know their stuff.
Alternatively you can get a fairly comprehensive report on the events
from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447
If you really want to dig deeply there are links to the official BEA
reports at the bottom of the Wikipedia article, none of which work for
me at the moment but they did a couple of days back. .
Caution. You can while away a lot of hours on this one. It's a
fascinating, albeit tragic series of events.
TOGA is partially explained here
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takeoff/Go-around_switch>.
Best wishes,
Terry
On 15/05/2013 12:15 AM, [email protected] wrote:
Thanks Macca.
It is certainly very difficult to get a mixed message here:
Sullenberger makes his viewpoint crystal clear.
Talking about mixed messages, I was earlier trying to make some sense
out of the last bit of the transcript from the flight without much
luck. However one of the other vids on YouTube made it quite clear
that the 3 pilots had displays, each fed with their own individual
pitot input, and of course as a result, each pilot was getting
DIFFERENT information. End of MY confusion, whilst they were
discussing THEIR confusion. Apparently one pilot (at least), ended up
with a correct set of inputs. Anybody know who this was?
According to Lindsay Holmwood "Computer Geek and Software Manager at
Bulletproof Networks"), it would seem that elsewhere Sullenberger has
talked about Systems and Man/Machine interface, and is quoted by
Holmwood as saying "If you look at the human factors alone, then
you're missing half or two-thirds of the total system failure."
Does anybody on this forum want to make comment on this?
As an aside "TOCA" appeared in the transcript. This is what the flight
computer was showing shortly before the fatal impact. If you want to
know what it means here it is; Take Off Go Around.(???? Yeah, not in
the least helpful.)
Can anybody update me on the current status of the criminal
proceedings, brought by the French Government against Air France, and
Airbus?
Here is a last question to the members of this forum. I have
no understanding of the capabilities of the Airbus instrumentation.
However it would seem that there is a instrument that displays the
pitch angle of the aircraft to the pilots: The Captain said he was in
a 10 degree attitude just prior to impact. We all know that pitch
angle (angle of attack), and stall are intimately related. So if the
aircraft was stalled at 38,000' or so, this onboard instrument would
be indicating the fact, and the pilot should have reacted and taken
the appropriate (quite routine), action to correct the situation.
I would be interested to know the height loss figures for recovery
from a straight ahead stall for this aircraft. Can anybody provide
this information?
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
