Airbus down in the Alps

[Andy95W]

There have been multiple uncomanded pitch down incidents with different Airbus aircraft. They mention software design limitation in the flight control primary computer (FCPC.)

"...and a failure mode affecting one of the aircraft's three air data inertial reference units (ADIRUs). The design limitation meant that, in a very rare and specific situation, multiple spikes in angle of attack (AOA) data from one of the ADIRUs could result in the FCPCs commanding the aircraft to pitch down."http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72http://www.aeroinside.com/item/4946/lufthansa-a321-near-bilbao-on-nov-5th-2014-loss-of-4000-feet-of-altitude

This could be another one.

This is possible, but there is a procedure to deal with it. It is a little obscure, which is a problem, so the pilots actually have to remember to look for it in the case of an uncommanded pitch down. I believe the airspeed increases with this fault, but in this crash airspeed remained fairly constant.

Not sure about the EU, but here in the US when one pilot leaves, a flight attendant or another pilot is always in the cockpit with the remaining one. And there is a way into the Airbus cockpit if locked out- but this can be overridden from the cockpit, but not if someone else is up there.

Curious...

[Piloto]

Not sure about the EU, but here in the US when one pilot leaves, a flight attendant or another pilot is always in the cockpit with the remaining one. And there is a way into the Airbus cockpit if locked out- but this can be overridden from the cockpit, but not if someone else is up there.

Curious...

Good point. But what about if that flight attendant was a terrorist or a mad employed and just killed the pilot and locked the door. Can't imagine the outside pilot and passengers hearing all this door pounding for eight minutes.

José

[mpg]

Well,,,,

 

Someone would need to turn off the auto pilot, before the plane would diverge from coarse and altitude

even with input from the joy stick!

 

Even with the auto pilot turned off wouldn't the "fly by wire computer" maintain coarse and altitude

until someone moves the joy stick?

 

I dont think that airplane just crashed,,,,    someone Crashed that airplane on purpose!!!

[PTK]

This is possible, but there is a procedure to deal with it. It is a little obscure, which is a problem, so the pilots actually have to remember to look for it in the case of an uncommanded pitch down. I believe the airspeed increases with this fault, but in this crash airspeed remained fairly constant.

Not sure about the EU, but here in the US when one pilot leaves, a flight attendant or another pilot is always in the cockpit with the remaining one. And there is a way into the Airbus cockpit if locked out- but this can be overridden from the cockpit, but not if someone else is up there.

Curious...

Do we know airspeed remained constant? They've determined that?

Here's an AD put out just last December having to do with fault from frozen/blocked AOA probes. But air speed increases.

http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2014_0266_E.pdf/EAD_2014-0266-E_1

Could it be the remaining pilot in the cockpit was incapacitated.

[Marauder]

Do we know airspeed remained constant? They've determined that?

Here's an AD put out just last December having to do with fault from frozen/blocked AOA probes. But air speed increases.

http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_ad_2014_0266_E.pdf/EAD_2014-0266-E_1

Could it be the remaining pilot in the cockpit was incapacitated.

Ask and I provide...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hank]

Yeah, 480 knots and 3000 fpm descent won't leave much in the way of "wreckage" . . . .

[wishboneash]

Disturbing trend in aviation if these reports are true (intentional actions by the co-pilot to down the plane). If one can't trust the crew who can you trust?

[PTK]

The co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, had 600 some hours in type. The authorities are treating this as an intentional act by the co-pilot. He was not incapacitated because he is heard to be breathing normally. He just refuses to open the door. 

 

Extremely disturbing if true.

[Mike A]

Thats why I don't fly commercial.  Along with the TSA, tiny seats, huge delays, and massive headaches they cause.

[Marauder]

Thats why I don't fly commercial. Along with the TSA, tiny seats, huge delays, and massive headaches they cause.

I tried not to either. But refueling my Mooney is a bit challenging on those transatlantic flights.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[1964-M20E]

Disturbing to say the least.  I'm in the fly commercial as little as I can category. 

 

We are the fortunate ones that truly have an option when we fly.

 

"From the flight crew we know when you fly you have an option thank you for choosing John Air"

[flyboy0681]

Now you all know why I don't speculate when it comes to cases like this. Ideas are thrown around that, in the end, are so far off the mark that it's not funny. 

 

The media is making it out to be the first incident if this type, but I'm sure many of you remember the Egyptair 767 that was deliberately brought down off the coast of New York in 1999, when the same scenario unfolded. The captain went out to relieve himself and then the F/O disengaged the A/P and down they went. However, that incident was somewhat different because the Captain came back in and fought with the controls, using (according to the investigation) "opposing force" to that of the F/O yoke. When all of that was going on, the engines were deliberately shutdown.

 

What really surprises me with the incident was just how little experience the F/O had. It has been reported that he had a total of 630 hours. What a huge waste if - if - it turns out that he was solely responsible.

[MyNameIsNobody]

Disturbing trend in aviation if these reports are true (intentional actions by the co-pilot to down the plane). If one can't trust the crew who can you trust?

Cue Hal 9000. The latest and greatest completely automated system. What could go wrong? Nothing because there is no human involvment. Who designed it? Engineers. Soulless creatures that are without emotion. We took the human element completely out of the design....It's perfect....Like us.

[chrisk]

What I see coming from this is new regulation, even if this was not a deliberate act.  Who wants the business to equip all airliners with a remote over ride option?   Essentially something that turns an airliner into a remote UAV.  Perhaps a  button that can be activated by any crew member with a code.   And then the next mandatory upgrade to prevent hostile/hacked over ride. 

[flyboy0681]

What I see coming from this is new regulation, even if this was not a deliberate act.  Who wants the business to equip all airliners with a remote over ride option?   Essentially something that turns an airliner into a remote UAV.  Perhaps a  button that can be activated by any crew member with a code.   And then the next mandatory upgrade to prevent hostile/hacked over ride. 

 

This is reminiscent of ideas that were thrown around in the days after 9/11, when the public was demanding for a "switch" to be installed in planes to be used by ATC to override the aircraft systems so that the autoland system could be engaged by the ground.

 

At the time I remember turning to my wife and saying, that's all we need, some pimply faced 16 year old in his parents basement hacking into ATC computers bringing planes down all over the country.

[gsxrpilot]

So much irrational fear in this world, and these accidents certainly don't help.  Commercial air travel is still the safest form of travel ever devised by humans. Even if an airliner went down every month, it would still be the safest form of travel. And it's much safer than what we do in our Mooneys. 

 

I'd still rather fly my Mooney than fly commercial any day of the week! But it's not nearly as safe as going commercial... even on an Airbus. ;-)

[flyboy0681]

So much irrational fear in this world, and these accidents certainly don't help.  Commercial air travel is still the safest form of travel ever devised by humans. Even if an airliner went down every month, it would still be the safest form of travel. And it's much safer than what we do in our Mooneys. 

 

I'd still rather fly my Mooney than fly commercial any day of the week! But it's not nearly as safe as going commercial... even on an Airbus. ;-)

 

Excellent points, although we feel that we are safer because we are "in control".

 

I guess I'm one of the few here that doesn't mind flying commercial. As opposed to what Mike A said earlier, I'd rather put up with a 10 minute TSA line and be subject to a pat down than not see the world as I have. If I'm going to Europe on a two week vacation, even if passing through TSA takes a half hour, that's 30 minutes out of an entire two week trip. BFD.

[Piloto]

Thats why I don't fly commercial.  Along with the TSA, tiny seats, huge delays, and massive headaches they cause.

You forgot the viruses and bacteria that can kill you like Ebola. Or the next guy sitting next to you dispensing gas. And if you are in the middle seat no arm rest for you. And who knows who was sitting last on your seat cushion and what kind of bug or essence left for you. Best passenger I got next to me was an old lady praying with a rosary.

José

[flyboy0681]

You forgot the viruses and bacteria that can kill you like Ebola. Or the next guy sitting next to you dispensing gas. And if you are in the middle seat no arm rest for you. And who knows who was sitting last on your seat cushion and what kind of bug or essence left for you. Best passenger I got next to me was an old lady praying with a rosary.

José

 

 

I've been to Europe, Australia and a few dozen places in between and always arrived in great shape (well, with the exception of the 15 hour flight to Sydney). In May I'm headed to Israel and expect the same outcome. 

[aviatoreb]

Its scary stuff - I wish I could keep it from ever crossing my mind, but it does - Ebola, terrorism, cranky TSA, nutty angry road ragers on the highway, suicidal (? or terrorist?) copilots.

 

Now, I live in a small small town rural usa far removed geographically from the cities.  I do think about "what if" when I go to Washington DC to visit family or for work.  When I grew up in the suburbs of DC, I used to be afraid that someday the Russians would H-bomb us and that would be it and I would never grow up.  I did grow up.  It does cross my mind every time I go to visit in DC, about the possibility of a dirty bomb terrorist, or just a road rager on the beltway.  And the Russian tyranny is rising again - and they still have all those Nukes.

 

Then again, I am thankful to spend less of my life on any car commute, than I used to 15 years ago before I moved here, now where the most dangerous part of my commute is the possibility of a deer running in front of me.  Even a terrorist Moose is a possibility.

[Marauder]

So much irrational fear in this world, and these accidents certainly don't help. Commercial air travel is still the safest form of travel ever devised by humans. Even if an airliner went down every month, it would still be the safest form of travel. And it's much safer than what we do in our Mooneys.

I'd still rather fly my Mooney than fly commercial any day of the week! But it's not nearly as safe as going commercial... even on an Airbus. ;-)

You're absolutely right. From the first accident when Ugg ran over Agg with his stone wheel through the medieval times when you fell out of your chariot only to be run over by Ben Hur, modern commercial aviation is light years ahead.

Where's me club? Barcelona is filled with amazing looking women! Time to look for a date... Don't tell the Mrs. She'll sit on me when I get back...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[MyNameIsNobody]

Living your life in fear. Not a fan. Commercial aviation is safe. Redundancy has engineered out the majority of likely threats...including human error or deliberate action/inaction. Not this time. Let the "We MUST fix this" for the good of the people begin...

[yvesg]

With the re-inforcement of the cockpit doors (triggered by 9-11 I think), the power that be have contributed to this recent event. How can we prevent this scenario from happening again? Have a private washroom in the cockpit? Have 3 people in the cockpit with a minimum of 2 at all times so they can watch each other?

For anything they change, there will always be some advantages and drawbacks. Bad guys will always manage to benefit from these changes.

Yves

[flyboy0681]

With the re-inforcement of the cockpit doors (triggered by 9-11 I think), the power that be have contributed to this recent event. How can we prevent this scenario from happening again? Have a private washroom in the cockpit? Have 3 people in the cockpit with a minimum of 2 at all times so they can watch each other?

For anything they change, there will always be some advantages and drawbacks. Bad guys will always manage to benefit from these changes.

Yves

 

 

This is exactly what El Al had done years before 9/11, they extended the cockpit door to beyond the lav that is located near the front door on 767's and 777's and their 747's have been outfitted with pilot lavs adjacent to the flight deck.

[wishboneash]

Perhaps we have come down to this with regards to automation and aircraft!

[1] An airplane may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. [2] An airplane must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.  [3] An airplane must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.