But did you die?

Are we talking about the Air France flight demo at the air show? If so, the official report claimed pilot error. The PIC and FA were both convicted of manslaughter, as well as several other people.

A lot of people didn't buy that official finding, however. Some claimed that flight recorder data was tampered with to clear Airbus.
 
Are we talking about the Air France flight demo at the air show? If so, the official report claimed pilot error. The PIC and FA were both convicted of manslaughter, as well as several other people.

A lot of people didn't buy that official finding, however. Some claimed that flight recorder data was tampered with to clear Airbus.

That's what it was. I had it backward.
 
The pilot claimed that the plane was in LAND mode due to obivously being configured for landing. Thus the pitch protection activated so that you could only pitch up so far to avoid a tailstrike. Thats why when he went to pitch up the computer wouldnt let him.
 
I thought the cause was that since he was in land configuration with gear and flaps set, the plane thought he was landing so it wouldn't allow for the neccessary pitch increase to prevent tail strikes from occuring.

That's not how Airbus flight control logic works at all. There is absolutely nothing preventing you from smacking the hell out of the tail.

You reference to LAND mode had nothing to do with the accident. LAND simply means that that LOC (and possibly GS) are locked in below 400 AGL. You can only disengage them at that point by TOGA thrust or pressing the APPR button. This LAND FMA only appears with the autopilot on and a valid LOC/GS source that has been captured.

What you may be thinking of is FLARE mode, which activates at 50 feet off the RA. At that point the current pitch of the aircraft is memorized and then the flight computers start adding down elevator, inducing the pilot to pitch back to hold the pitch which simulates "flaring" a non FBW aircraft. The downward pitch applied during flare IS over rideable and flare mode would disengage upon selecting TOGA thrust.

The issue with AF296 was (among many other things) Alpha Protection which is not overridable and does not allow for an increase in pitch until there is an increase in airspeed in order to keep the aircraft out of a stall.
 
So they were in FLARE mode during the flyby and didnt engage TOGA thrust and pitch up in time to clear the trees?
 
Would only add that while some have claimed that the alpha protection contributed to the accident, my recollection is that performance analysis shows that at most it would have elicited a slight very temporary increase before the increased drag and stall would have put them into the trees.
 
So they were in FLARE mode during the flyby and didnt engage TOGA thrust and pitch up in time to clear the trees?

Wait... you made all of those assumptions without actually even reading the accident report?

They did get TOGA thrust. Just not soon enough to have enough airspeed to increase pitch and not have alphaPROT engage. FLARE mode has nothing to do with it.
 
Would only add that while some have claimed that the alpha protection contributed to the accident, my recollection is that performance analysis shows that at most it would have elicited a slight very temporary increase before the increased drag and stall would have put them into the trees.

This is probably true as well from the data I saw a few years back. However, there was no (or almost no) increase in pitch due to alpha protection engaging. It functioned as designed and prevented the aircraft from stalling. They hit the trees still flying, which was considered one of the factors that contributed to the surviveability of the crash.

EDIT to clarify... If there had been no alpha protection they would have been able to pitch up but it would have resulted in a stall and not been helpful in avoiding the trees.
 
Just looked at some notes on it:

The first point is that he had disconnected the autothrust because it would have got in the way of what he was intending to do. This of course disabled alphafloor, so that doesn't come into it. He was then flying height using elevator and thrust control was manual. In other words he had complete authority over energy management.

Then he was attempting to demonstrate maximum lift, but the system, sensing a deceleration (he was by now at flight idle) limited the aoa to about 16deg.

Some have argued that if this limitation had not been there he could have pulled a few more degrees (somehow without exceeding alphamax) and cleared the trees.

People have also queried why, with additional back stick demanded, the system actually applied down elevator. The answer to that latter is linked to the explanation of the accident - he had just applied full power and the nose-up pitch from the extra thrust, which is equivalent to a lot of up elevator at 110kt, was producing a nose up pitch acceleration which the system calculated would take the aircraft well above alphamax if not corrected.

But the essential point here is that he completely underestimated the spool up time of those fan engines starting from flight idle, and applied power too late to gain the required height.

Modeling showed that if the system HAD allowed him to pull up to alphamax he would have gained about 5ft at the treeline, which might just about have been OK, but because the thrust was not there to support the extra drag he would simply have sunk down again and gone into the trees a few yards further on.

The primary reason for the crash was that he applied recovery thrust about two seconds too late.
 
This is probably true as well from the data I saw a few years back. However, there was no (or almost no) increase in pitch due to alpha protection engaging. It functioned as designed and prevented the aircraft from stalling. They hit the trees still flying, which was considered one of the factors that contributed to the surviveability of the crash.

EDIT to clarify... If there had been no alpha protection they would have been able to pitch up but it would have resulted in a stall and not been helpful in avoiding the trees.

That damned science wrecking yet another perfectly good conspiracy theory!
 
Just looked at some notes on it:

The first point is that he had disconnected the autothrust because it would have got in the way of what he was intending to do. This of course disabled alphafloor, so that doesn't come into it.

Was that an early version design feature? I'm pretty sure alpha floor activates regardless of the autothrust being engaged or not.


The primary reason for the crash was that he applied recovery thrust about two seconds too late.

I also read somewhere that due to the fact that they had planned to align and overfly the wrong runway and the angle they approached the correct runway from, the trees at the end appeared to be a different type of grass and they had no idea that there was anything of height in that location.
 
Was that an early version design feature? I'm pretty sure alpha floor activates regardless of the autothrust being engaged or not.
Good question, I would need to research that!

Going off memory, I believe the issue was he flew lower than what was briefed, thus Alpha Floor was unavailable. I think he flew lower than 50 ft RA? Alpha Floor is only available down to 100 ft RA.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top