One thing to note is the aircraft wasn't stalled at first. The stall warning activated but it was an improper reaction and made the situation worse. Also stalling a Dash-8 is not like stalling a jet. It has quite a bit of power and nice straight high lift wings so a stall at 3000 AGL should easily be recoverable.

 

It was a tail stall. Not that easy to recover from when the elevators are iced up.

It was a tail stall. Not that easy to recover from when the elevators are iced up.

 

No. It was a stall caused by pilots with little experience, tired and could not recognize that they got to slow on approach. If it was a tail stall their 'technique' was appropriate and would have recovered.

It was a tail stall. Not that easy to recover from when the elevators are iced up.

 

The elevators weren't iced up and there's no suggest of that in the report.

 

The FDR shows the stall warning sounded correctly when the AoA reached 1-2 deg above the trigger and sounded continously for about 51 sec. During that period the FO took the AoA to more than 30 deg and the elevator to full nose-up position.

Then how do you explain the 451 orders for the 737 Max? :Nerd:

 

That's just one side of the question, how many orders have been placed for the equivalent NEO "buses"?

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm not PRO this or PRO that, it's just that people speak bad of Airbus as if they were a bad company, which is the exact opposite - They make good planes and give Boeing a serious headache... Anyway, this is offtopic and sorry i came out with this subject.

 

EDIT: That video.... HAHAHAHA! Crazy people!

 

 

It was a tail stall. Not that easy to recover from when the elevators are iced up.

 

Where are you getting this info from? The aircraft didn't break up and was fully controllable all the way down. The elevators where not iced up, the THS was full nose up due to the autotrim in alternate law.

 

AF447 didn't experience any severe stresses, dispite what some of the media reports suggest the passengers were likely completely unaware they were crashing

That was in reference to the Colgan crash, and not AT447. 2 discussions at once does get confusing.

Also, in terms of the Colgan crash, I'm more interested in what led to the stall instead of the recovery method. The PIC reconized the tail stall and fought the stick shaker. His action was correct, but it was too little too late.

The Colgan crash had nothing to do with icing or tailplane stall as the investigation has revealed, Marvin Renslow simply reacted to the noise and surprise of the stall and descent by pulling back on the stick and holding it there since pulling back on the stick is supposed to make the plane climb.

Again, I'm not interested in the recovery method. I'm interested in what led to the stall in the first place. A tail stall and air foil stall are different stalls that require different action. Stick pusher doesn't know the difference.

 

Fatigue and inadequate training was not the cause of the crash. They were a culprit.

Again, I'm not interested in the recovery method. I'm interested in what led to the stall in the first place. A tail stall and air foil stall are different stalls that require different action. Stick pusher doesn't know the difference.

 

Fatigue and inadequate training was not the cause of the crash. They were a culprit.

 

Stick pusher will not activate during a tail stall. The recovery method for a tail stall does not require realization of a tail stall. The actions for a tail stall recovery are the same as that of pulling out of a dive.

If AF447 didn't brake apart prior to impact, why is the integrity of the A330's fuselage even in question??? Hitting the water at a wrong angle is just as bad as concrete. If you put Sully in AF447, I don't think he would have done any better than the crew did.

 

The a/c did not break up during the descent. Hitting water at "any" angle at 124mph will smash the fuselage. Much of the receovered wreckage shows signs of massive compression forces caused by the impact. As regards Sully he may have identified the stall though more likely prevented the a/c from ever entering one in the first place.

 

AF447 didn't experience any severe stresses, dispite what some of the media reports suggest the passengers were likely completely unaware they were crashing

 

The a/c was falling at about 11,000fpm. Any fluctuations in the descent rate would most certainly have been felt by the passengers. It's quite likely that the cabin pressurisation system couldn't keep up with the descent rate so their ears would have been popping like mad. They would have sensed the extreme nose up position even in the dark. They would have heard the engines at full throttle. At the very least they knew they were in very serious trouble and quite possible more aware of the sittuation than the crew!!

vololiberista

Again, I'm not interested in the recovery method. I'm interested in what led to the stall in the first place. A tail stall and air foil stall are different stalls that require different action. Stick pusher doesn't know the difference.

 

Fatigue and inadequate training was not the cause of the crash. They were a culprit.

 

The Dash 8 has a reference speed switch that increases the speed when the stick shacker activates. They had this switch turned on at the time. The Stick Shacker went off at a higher rate of speed then normal. This was when the pilot reacted by pulling back on the yoke, followed by the co-pilot raising the flaps (further loss in lift) that resulted in the crash.

 

Section 2.2.1 in this article explain the reference speed switch:

http://www.alpa.org/...2-12_Colgan.pdf

It was a tail stall. Not that easy to recover from when the elevators are iced up.

 

That was in reference to the Colgan crash, and not AT447. 2 discussions at once does get confusing.

 

the NTSB's report states:"As a result, the NTSB concludes that the minimal aircraft performance degradation resulting from ice accumulation did not affect the flight crew’s ability to fly and control the airplane........The NTSB further concludes that no evidence indicated that the Q400 was susceptible to a tailplane stall."

 

Tthere was no tail stall and the elevators weren't frozen.

 

 

The a/c did not break up during the descent. Hitting water at "any" angle at 124mph will smash the fuselage. Much of the receovered wreckage shows signs of massive compression forces caused by the impact. As regards Sully he may have identified the stall though more likely prevented the a/c from ever entering one in the first place.

 

 

 

The a/c was falling at about 11,000fpm. Any fluctuations in the descent rate would most certainly have been felt by the passengers. It's quite likely that the cabin pressurisation system couldn't keep up with the descent rate so their ears would have been popping like mad. They would have sensed the extreme nose up position even in the dark. They would have heard the engines at full throttle. At the very least they knew they were in very serious trouble and quite possible more aware of the sittuation than the crew!!

vololiberista

 

I tend to ignore your rambling now however just to clarify a few things..

 

My comment was regarding reports such as 'terrifying dive of death' 'plunge of terror' etc etc

 

The human body only feels acceleration, once the aircraft was stable in the 10000fpm descent the ride would have been relatively calm with no excessive g-force, if anything it would feel like they were flying through a storm.

 

As I am sure you are aware climb thrust and TOGA are very close at high altitude, when the crew initially selected TOGA the initial increase in noise and N1 would have been minimal.

 

Point taken about cabin v/s, I am not saying the situation would not have been abnormal or frightening however I doubt many down the back realised they were dropping that fast and about to crash due to a lack of visual cues and minor sensory cues.

Firstly I take umbrage at being accused of "rambling."

Secondly in my mind I am pretty certain that the pax were in fact in fear of their lives. Even heavy turbulance causes many pax to freak out. Sadly for them they had an incompetent crew up front.

Thirdly with the a/c in the stall wind noise would have been much reduced so the engine noise would be more prevalent and similar to that heard on the ground and during take-off. That for any seasoned passenger would be very unusual. And I'm pretty certain they would have a. noticed that and b. noticed the initiation of the sink with the engines still going flat out. Again a seasoned traveller would be worried I'm sure.

We don't know for sure but if there was any light on the wings from the a/c somebody would have noticed, due to the enormous sink rate, the passing cloud going in the "wrong" direction!!"

vololiberista