Not at all moot. This is when you sit up straight and pay attention.CID wrote:Mostly moot with autoland which is arguably the ultimate automated task in airplanes these days.System automation is the same principle as having the FO fly the airplane following a Cat II missed approach. You as Captain have some thinking and decision making to do and you are better able to do that if you're not also flying the plane.
Air Canada Incident
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Re: Air Canada Incident
-
Chuck Ellsworth
- Rank 11
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:49 am
- Location: Always moving
Re: Air Canada Incident
Not to mention the crew gets a better picture of just what exactly is going on.Not at all moot. This is when you sit up straight and pay attention.
The most difficult thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Air Canada Incident
If you don't know exactly what's going on you might as well sit in the back.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
- Rank 11
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:49 am
- Location: Always moving
Re: Air Canada Incident
Rocky....while the airplane is flying its self to the landing and the pilots have only to monitor it would that not equate into ...
Or must we argue over semantics? :mrgreengets a better picture
The most difficult thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Air Canada Incident
I'm not arguing with you at all. The autopilot doesn't fly for the crew, it is a tool used by the crew within set procedures to accomplish this particular task, at all times the PF's hands and feet are on the controls. At anytime a go-around could be required due to system failure either on the plane or on the ground, and even on a CAT III with no decision height the airplane still has to be doing what it's supposed to do at set heights above the ground or you bail out of the approach. Monitor is an inappropriate word here because the whole procedure is built on imminent failure of the autoflight system, and training is focused on recognizing go-around conditions more than anything else. It's the old thing where you look like you're just sitting there, but your brain should be spun up to 110% or you're just along for the ride.
I ask people sometimes what's flying the airplane and usually the answer is "the autopilot". I then ask them to show me the autopilot's pilot's licence and if an autopilot ever recieved a violation from Transport Canada or died in a crash. You and Doc of all people know the answer to that one and you don't need me telling you.
I ask people sometimes what's flying the airplane and usually the answer is "the autopilot". I then ask them to show me the autopilot's pilot's licence and if an autopilot ever recieved a violation from Transport Canada or died in a crash. You and Doc of all people know the answer to that one and you don't need me telling you.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
- Rank 11
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:49 am
- Location: Always moving
Re: Air Canada Incident
I agree Rocky, and will refrain from commenting on any further posts you make.I ask people sometimes what's flying the airplane and usually the answer is "the autopilot". I then ask them to show me the autopilot's pilot's licence and if an autopilot ever recieved a violation from Transport Canada or died in a crash. You and Doc of all people know the answer to that one and you don't need me telling you.
Sorry to have upset you to the point you have to spend so much time correcting my ignorance on how things are flown.
Have a peaceful stress free new year.
The most difficult thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Air Canada Incident
I would be surprised if the data from the FDR was released by the TSB anytime within the next 5 years. . wrote:I would be surprised if it doesen't.I'm sure the FDR will reveal all though.
-
Chuck Ellsworth
- Rank 11
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:49 am
- Location: Always moving
Re: Air Canada Incident
Nor would I, having worked with Airbus in Toulouse and spent a lot of time flying with one of their test pilots ( two years ) I can only imagine the concern that this is being examined under.....the issue is mind boggling when you look at what is at play here.I would be surprised if the data from the FDR was released by the TSB anytime within the next 5 years
The most difficult thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
Re: Air Canada Incident
I bet preliminary findings based on FDR data will be released pretty soon. Airbus, Air Canada and TCCA don't want any undue fear of flying based on this incident.
Re: Air Canada Incident
I agree. The only party that would benefit from a delay would be Airbus in the event there was some fault with their airplane, which I doubt. Even in that case the other party's (let's not forget ACPA) would want the findings public as soon as they are available. And the fact that the planes are still flying indicates that so far there is no concern over the airworthiness of the machine. I think there will be some unusual stuff revealed but it's certainly not like the Azores. That one was ridiculous.
Re: Air Canada Incident
See how valuable it is to read boards.harry carnie from Northern, B.C., Canada writes: d w...........Right ON.
The Transport Safety Board Investigates air incidents very effectively, in a timely manner.
Cannot say the same for ferry incidents.
.A B.C. ferry .. The Queen of The North, a modern ,multi million dollar ferry , with ALL of the most modern navigation aids,
ON A BEAUTIFUL CLEAR NIGHT.ran into AN ISLAND AT TOP SPEED ..sending it to the bottom and drowning two passengers.
This will be two years ago in March and still no one held responsible, or a satisfactory explanation.
., what is a test pilot?
-
Chuck Ellsworth
- Rank 11
- Posts: 3074
- Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:49 am
- Location: Always moving
Re: Air Canada Incident
Shelia a test pilot is a guy who takes timid young maidens to bed and explores all their parts and the functions thereof.., what is a test pilot?
And in the morning he gives a professional opinion on how the test went.
It is possible a test pilot was working on the bridge of the BC ferry.
There you go Shelia thats the best I can do for you.
The most difficult thing about flying is knowing when to say no.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying I can not remember even one trip that I refused to do that resulted in someone getting killed because of my decision not to fly.
-
the_professor
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 3:03 pm
Re: Air Canada Incident
While misguided, the media is only satisfying the public's demand to know what happened on this country's largest carrier, which is used by thousands of people every day. It's the media. Get used to it.TOGOMAN wrote:CBC is all over this incident, every time they have something new to report it drives me nuts, why has the media and their so called "experts" come to a conclusion so early. The media needs to shut the F**** up and let TC do their job.
And btw, having CBC's "experts" comment on the incident in no way prevents TC from doing their job.
-
the_professor
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 3:03 pm
Re: Air Canada Incident
I wouldn't get on one.swede wrote:So a system malfunction of some sort caused this upset - that much is obvious and the fdr's will identify what happened. Getting back to the earlier post about pilot-less aircraft. This would in all probability have resulted in the loss of the aircraft if the thing were a drone. Yet to my knowledge, passenger aircraft of the future 10 or so years are going to be flown as drones. Are they really gonna try to pull this off? I find it incredible that the idea is even being discussed, much less considered.
-
the_professor
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 3:03 pm
Re: Air Canada Incident
. . wrote:Shelia a test pilot is a guy who takes timid young maidens to bed and explores all their parts and the functions thereof.., what is a test pilot?
And in the morning he gives a professional opinion on how the test went.
It is possible a test pilot was working on the bridge of the BC ferry.
There you go Shelia thats the best I can do for you.
-
flightsimmer747
- Rank 2
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 12:54 am
Re: Air Canada Incident
Guys, due to traffic and weather, pilotless aircraft is impossible. Imagine pilotless aircraft flying Ifr (descending) during vfr rules, while a cessna is just flying around at about 7000 ft and the ifr airplane is descending with no communication. Imagine how easy hijacking would be, and a lady flight attendant is your defense. Cmon, realistically it wont work but they can try all they want. Sad part it will cost lives before they dump the idea.
Re: Air Canada Incident
Maybe it was a "weather balloon......"
Passing plane likely caused sudden plunge of Air Canada jet
Transport Canada looks at possibility of second plane in Air Canada incident
By FABRICE DE PIERREBOURG, SUN MEDIA
MONTREAL -- The wake of a passing plane is a likely cause of the sudden descent of an Air Canada Airbus en route to Toronto from Victoria last week.
Transport Canada investigators are looking into this possibility as they probe the mid-air incident last Thursday at the edge of U.S. airspace near the Kootenay mountains in southeastern B.C.
The plane made an emergency landing in Calgary, where 10 passengers and crew were taken to hospital.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board is being asked to supply navigational recordings from the area where the incident occurred, said Real Levasseur, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada's Chief of Investigations.
"We know what happened, but we still need to know why it happened," he said.
Levasseur said there was a "high probability that an external force may have caused the incident."
Wake turbulence generated by another craft could be to blame.
It was not the sudden drop of the airplane that struck the investigators as odd, since it kept to about 1,000 feet per minute, but the unexplained rolling of the aircraft, which reached 46 degrees on one side and 30 on the other.
Such shifts generally occur when a plane enters the wake of another aircraft.
It is unclear why the plane's systems wouldn't have detected the mystery aircraft.
Levasseur refused to discuss the theory the aircraft could have been a stealth bomber.
U.S. Air Force officials said yesterday their stealth bombers always leave a radar signature when they are not flying over a war zone.
The possibility the onboard computers failed, as reported by witnesses, also remains unexplained.
Air Canada flight AC190 had left Victoria for Toronto and was airborne for 30 minutes before it was caught in what seemed to be strong turbulence or an air pocket.
Out of the 83 passengers and five crew members, 10 were injured after being launched into the walls and ceiling of the cabin or struck by personal belongings.
Once in Calgary, relieved passengers said the Airbus A319 had plummeted and rolled.
In the hours that followed, some witnesses also mentioned a malfunction of the onboard computers.
Serge Beaulieu, spokesman for the Air Canada Pilots Association, lauded the work of the pilots, who managed to regain control of the plane and land it safely.
He also confirmed wake turbulence was one of the options studied.
Beaulieu said a 46-degree roll was an unusual occurrence.
"The pitch caused by a regular turn generally ranges around 30 degrees," he said.
Air Canada and NAV Canada, which manages air traffic, both refused to comment until the investigation is closed. The U.S. Embassy in Ottawa was also tight-lipped.
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008 ... 75821.html
Passing plane likely caused sudden plunge of Air Canada jet
Transport Canada looks at possibility of second plane in Air Canada incident
By FABRICE DE PIERREBOURG, SUN MEDIA
MONTREAL -- The wake of a passing plane is a likely cause of the sudden descent of an Air Canada Airbus en route to Toronto from Victoria last week.
Transport Canada investigators are looking into this possibility as they probe the mid-air incident last Thursday at the edge of U.S. airspace near the Kootenay mountains in southeastern B.C.
The plane made an emergency landing in Calgary, where 10 passengers and crew were taken to hospital.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board is being asked to supply navigational recordings from the area where the incident occurred, said Real Levasseur, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada's Chief of Investigations.
"We know what happened, but we still need to know why it happened," he said.
Levasseur said there was a "high probability that an external force may have caused the incident."
Wake turbulence generated by another craft could be to blame.
It was not the sudden drop of the airplane that struck the investigators as odd, since it kept to about 1,000 feet per minute, but the unexplained rolling of the aircraft, which reached 46 degrees on one side and 30 on the other.
Such shifts generally occur when a plane enters the wake of another aircraft.
It is unclear why the plane's systems wouldn't have detected the mystery aircraft.
Levasseur refused to discuss the theory the aircraft could have been a stealth bomber.
U.S. Air Force officials said yesterday their stealth bombers always leave a radar signature when they are not flying over a war zone.
The possibility the onboard computers failed, as reported by witnesses, also remains unexplained.
Air Canada flight AC190 had left Victoria for Toronto and was airborne for 30 minutes before it was caught in what seemed to be strong turbulence or an air pocket.
Out of the 83 passengers and five crew members, 10 were injured after being launched into the walls and ceiling of the cabin or struck by personal belongings.
Once in Calgary, relieved passengers said the Airbus A319 had plummeted and rolled.
In the hours that followed, some witnesses also mentioned a malfunction of the onboard computers.
Serge Beaulieu, spokesman for the Air Canada Pilots Association, lauded the work of the pilots, who managed to regain control of the plane and land it safely.
He also confirmed wake turbulence was one of the options studied.
Beaulieu said a 46-degree roll was an unusual occurrence.
"The pitch caused by a regular turn generally ranges around 30 degrees," he said.
Air Canada and NAV Canada, which manages air traffic, both refused to comment until the investigation is closed. The U.S. Embassy in Ottawa was also tight-lipped.
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2008 ... 75821.html
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
-
Zapp Brannigan
- Rank 3
- Posts: 143
- Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 12:00 pm
- Location: bridge of the nimbus
Re: Air Canada Incident
Wow, stealth bomber theories now. I guess you never know, I'm sure stranger things have been done to civilian aircraft by the US armed forces.
Re: Air Canada Incident
I'm still leaning towards weather balloon, have you ever seen the size of those things?!?!
https://eresonatemedia.com/
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
https://bambaits.ca/
https://youtube.com/channel/UCWit8N8YCJSvSaiSw5EWWeQ
Re: Air Canada Incident
Saw this in the Globe and Mail this morning online....
Jumbo jet crossed plane's path moments before wild dive
PETER CHENEY
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
January 17, 2008 at 5:13 AM EST
....
"The pilot-passenger told colleagues on an aviation chat site that the aerial upset exceeded anything he had previously encountered. "All I know is that we were in smooth air in cruise when the plane rolled abruptly to the left followed by a roll reversal to the right," he wrote. "It was nothing that I have ever experienced before. It was a very violent disruption. As you can imagine anything that was not strapped down was airborne. I was lucky that neither I nor my family was hurt." "
....
Jumbo jet crossed plane's path moments before wild dive
PETER CHENEY
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
January 17, 2008 at 5:13 AM EST
....
"The pilot-passenger told colleagues on an aviation chat site that the aerial upset exceeded anything he had previously encountered. "All I know is that we were in smooth air in cruise when the plane rolled abruptly to the left followed by a roll reversal to the right," he wrote. "It was nothing that I have ever experienced before. It was a very violent disruption. As you can imagine anything that was not strapped down was airborne. I was lucky that neither I nor my family was hurt." "
....
Re: Air Canada Incident
You will never live long enough to know it all, so quit being anal about it..
Re: Air Canada Incident
I was just making reference that the reporter got his quote from an online forum board where the pilot was posting.....mind your p's and q's when relating your incidents on the web...or just don't!
-
justplanecrazy
- Rank 8
- Posts: 815
- Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 1:57 pm
Re: Air Canada Incident
Wow, taking a quote off of a web forum that could have been written by anyone and placing it into a national news article??? I think the media's hit a new low on speculation.
Maybe I should write about how I was flying ACA190 and getting a BJ from the female FO, when all of a sudden...
Maybe I should write about how I was flying ACA190 and getting a BJ from the female FO, when all of a sudden...
We have no effective screening methods to make sure pilots are sane.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
— Dr. Herbert Haynes, Federal Aviation Authority.
Re: Air Canada Incident
Couldn't agree more...I'm disappointed that the reporter would resort to that and that he was allowed to by whatever editorial process there is...justplanecrazy wrote:Wow, taking a quote off of a web forum that could have been written by anyone and placing it into a national news article??? I think the media's hit a new low on speculation.
Maybe I should write about how I was flying ACA190 and getting a BJ from the female FO, when all of a sudden...
That being said....IF the crew member actually was chatting about it online...it is a lack of good judgement.
