Simviation Forum - Automated Plane

Apr 1^st, 2007 at 11:39pm

a1 Offline
Colonel
Tied In A Knot I Am

Gender:
Posts: 8217

ok i am never going on a plane with out a human pilot. Shocked

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jg1uyRJjqaQ

790i : QX9650 : 4Gb DDR3 : GeForce 8800 GTX : 1 WD Raptor : 1 WD VelociRaptor 150

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #1 - Apr 2^nd, 2007 at 12:25am

murjax Offline
Colonel
MrJake2002 gave me the
idea
Jacksonville,FL

Gender:
Posts: 1471

a1 wrote on Apr 1^st, 2007 at 11:39pm:

ok i am never going on a plane with out a human pilot. Shocked

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jg1uyRJjqaQ

Good idea. Humans may act stupid at times but most of them are not stupid enough to crash planes on purpose (at least I hope most of them aren't that stupid). Computers are nothing but stupid. We have to do everything to keep the computer working otherwise it will just break and cause a ton of problems. Roll Eyes

&&I am just a train fan who happens to like flying and _{attempting to get the better of the mods especially those with 20/20 vision}&&&&I hate Wal-Mart.&&Wal-Mart expansion history videoYou forgot to make the whole sig move eno.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #2 - Apr 2^nd, 2007 at 3:07am

EGNX Offline
Colonel
643 Squadron
Leicester, England

Gender:
Posts: 1683

Actually the aircraft wasn't being controlled directly by the computer on an 'auto-land' like many people believe. It was actually being controlled by rather inexperienced pilots to trying to demonstrate this aircraft at the Habsheim airshow. The reason it crashed was due to the pilots not understanding the long spool up times that the engines had, and hit the trees before the engines started to gain sufficient power. If you listen in the video you can hear the engines spooling up as it starts to go into the trees. So really i'd rather go on a plane without and inexperienced pilot...

&&

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #3 - Apr 2^nd, 2007 at 3:58am

Hagar Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159

The link no longer works so I can't watch it.

Quote:

It was actually being controlled by rather inexperienced pilots to trying to demonstrate this aircraft at the Habsheim airshow.

It was a brand new aircraft so nobody except the manufacturer's test pilots would have much experience of actually flying it. The pilot was a senior Air France captain in charge of training & inauguration of the A320 into service. His version of events differed considerably from the official report. Some people still believe he was stitched up by his employers, Airbus & the French government. http://www.airdisaster.com/investigations/af296/af296.shtml

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #4 - Apr 2^nd, 2007 at 11:42am

|Alex| Ex Member

EGNX wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2007 at 3:07am:

Actually the aircraft wasn't being controlled directly by the computer on an 'auto-land' like many people believe. It was actually being controlled by rather inexperienced pilots to trying to demonstrate this aircraft at the Habsheim airshow. The reason it crashed was due to the pilots not understanding the long spool up times that the engines had, and hit the trees before the engines started to gain sufficient power. If you listen in the video you can hear the engines spooling up as it starts to go into the trees. So really i'd rather go on a plane without and inexperienced pilot...

Jet engines had been in use for decades before this incident, so this has nothing to do with lack of knowledge about spool-up times. As Hagar said, the pilot was a training Captain for Air France, so inexperience was not a factor. The crew were trying to demonstrate the ability of the Automatic Flight Envelope Protection system, which should prevent the aircraft from stalling by automatically increasing thrust. However, the system was not functioning properly, and by the time the Pilots realized and took control, it was too late to avoid disaster...

The reason for the engines spooling up as in went into the trees was due to the pilots trying to avoid the stall. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #5 - Apr 2^nd, 2007 at 12:22pm

EGNX Offline
Colonel
643 Squadron
Leicester, England

Gender:
Posts: 1683

Quote:

Jet engines had been in use for decades before this incident, so this has nothing to do with lack of knowledge about spool-up times. As Hagar said, the pilot was a training Captain for Air France, so inexperience was not a factor. The crew were trying to demonstrate the ability of the Automatic Flight Envelope Protection system, which should prevent the aircraft from stalling by automatically increasing thrust. However, the system was not functioning properly, and by the time the Pilots realized and took control, it was too late to avoid disaster...

The reason for the engines spooling up as in went into the trees was due to the pilots trying to avoid the stall. Roll Eyes

Yes... and the pilots in question had little to experience on 'big fan engines' and demonstrated a lack of understanding of the flight computer architecture and laws. They thought they could not stall or have an accident with this aircraft.

The captain had disabled some of the safety systems to allow him to fly low and slow without the aircraft taking over and flying up. He was briefed to remain higher than 100 feet as he flew over the runway. As he is still descending on idle power the copilot says something like "the trees" and the pilot acknowledges but doesn't take action to increase power and altitude.

Also Airbus has a safety feature called Alpha Floor/Toga Lock that normally commands full power and limits the maximum angle of attack as it a approaches a stall. This feature would normally allow you to simply pull back on the stick and the computer would command full power and allow the aircraft to climb out just below the stall AOA. The reason there was no power increase ( and no pitch up ) in this accident was because this feature does not exist below 100 feet (Which the aircraft was), otherwise it might add full power in the landing flare, which is not a good thing. So if the flyby had been done above 100 feet radio altitude, it would have worked just fine.

So pilot error... it seems. Undecided

&&

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #6 - Apr 16^th, 2007 at 11:52pm

beaky Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender:
Posts: 14187

The two lessons learned here are:
1)Never go along for a test hop in a large airplane with untested automation, particularly if a low pass is involved.
2) Always doubt every single word of narration in a given documentary, particularly if it involves plane crashes.
Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #7 - Apr 17^th, 2007 at 12:31am

bok269 Offline
Colonel
I've become a badger lover.
Make badgers not war!!
HPN

Gender:
Posts: 1461

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296

It amazes me how stupid some people (The ones who made/put that video on youtube with the narration and those that responded to it, believing it) can be.

Check out my around the world tour!

&&http://fsxaroundtheworld.blogspot.com/&&Reality is wrong; Dreams are for real. -Tupac&&&&No bird soars too high, if he soars with his own wings. -William Blake&&&&The way I see it, you can either work for a living or you can fly airplanes. Me, I'd rather fly. -Len Morgan&&&&To invent an airplane is nothing. To build an airplane is something. But to fly ... is everything. -Otto Lilienthal&&&&

I will not be silenced by a stupid badger!

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: