European low-cost carrier Ryanair (who claims to be "the world’s favourite airline") opened its new base at Oslo's Rygge airport today. The Ireland-based airline will be offering flights to 27 destinations from Rygge, including Berlin, Brussels, London and Madrid. I have no idea where Rygee is, but knowing Ryanair I assume it's 150 kilometers away from Oslo, with no other airline flying there. Oh well, at least Ryanair is cheap, very safe and their fleet is really new. Velkommen til Norge, Ryanair!
To read the press release, please click here.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Qantas 747 with Engine Problems Returns to Sydney
A Qantas Boeing 747-400 en route from Sydney to Singapore had to return to Sydney after the pilots noticed an issue with at least one of the 747's engines earlier today. It is not clear yet what happened or what the problem was, but the pilots dumped some fuel and headed back to Sydney, where they landed safely. Qantas insists the incident was not an accident. However, witnesses report fire coming out of one engine. From my experience, that doesn't mean anything, since even engine stalls can cause fire from an engine and they are completely harmless.
If you want to read more about today's incident, please click here.
If you want to read more about today's incident, please click here.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Chicago Tribune - Airline Radiation
Are you afraid of the radiation coming from the new full-body scanners that will be introduced at airports around the world? Click here to read an interesting article from the Chicago Tribune. I am not really convinced. Even if radiation is low, it is still in addition to the radiation we are already being exposed to during a flight. Personally, I would refuse to be checked with one of those scanners because of the radiation.
Also, watch this interesting video about the new full-body scanners at Chicago's O'Hare Airport:
Also, watch this interesting video about the new full-body scanners at Chicago's O'Hare Airport:
Continental Inaugurates Munich-Newark Service
I used to live in Munich, Germany, for several years and I always wondered: Why is it easier to get from Munich to Toronto or Beijing than to New York City? Back in 2006, there was only one daily nonstop service from Bavaria's capital to the Big Apple. Luckily, Lufthansa has introduced another daily service to Newark since then. Still, Lufthansa owned the route. After joining Star Alliance last October, Continental Airlines announced it would start daily service from Munich to Newark on March 27 and the service, on a 767-200, was indeed inaugurated yesterday. So why are there suddenly so many nonstop flights to NYC? Well, you need to know that Lufthansa is very powerful in Munich and more or less "blocked" all other airlines from flying to New York. Since Lufthansa pretty much paid for Munich Airport's Terminal 2 and is its main driver of growth, it has had a lot of power over who flies in and out of Munich. Now that Lufthansa and Continental are, well, "friends" and members of the same alliance, it apparently agreed to let this third daily nonstop service happen. Good for Munich, good for Continental and good for Lufthansa!
To read Continental's press release, please click here.
To read Continental's press release, please click here.
WSJ - Embraer: Plane Speaking
The last one and a half years haven't been too positive for Brazil's Empresa Brasileira de Aeronáutica SA (Embraer). Orders have declined and the company had to lay off 20% of its workforce. But which aviation company can claim that the time since 2007 has been a good one? So compared to other businesses, Embraer has done pretty well during the economic crisis. Now, the bosses of South America's largest plane manufacturer are at a crossroads: Where to go from here? Should Embraer continue to focus on small jet planes? Or should it enter the market for larger, maybe even long-haul aircraft and try to compete with Airbus and Boeing, the two dominant (actually: ONLY) players in the market?
Click here to read the Wall Street Journal piece.
Click here to read the Wall Street Journal piece.
WSJ - EU Makes Push for Real-Time Flight Data
In the wake of the AF 447 crash last June more and more pilots, aviation experts and policy makers support the introduction of real-time flight data streaming. The International Civil Aviation Organization's global aviation summit will start tomorrow in Montreal, Canada, and the EU's transport commissioner, Siim Kallaswill, will officially endorse such a program. This will mark the first official government endorsement of such data streaming.
To read the Wall Street Journal Article, please click here.
To read the Wall Street Journal Article, please click here.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Lufthansa to Resume Flights to Iraq in April
German national carrier Lufthansa yesterday announced it would start flying to Iraq again on April 25, 20 years after it stopped service during the first Iraq war. The airline will use an A319 for the Frankfurt - Erbil service and the flight will operate four times a week. Lufthansa also plans to offer service to Iraq's capital Baghdad soon and is currently making the necessary preparations to do so.
To read the press release, please click here.
To read the press release, please click here.
A Lego Version of the A380
Ryan McNaught from Melbourne, Australia, spent 5,000 Australian Dollars to build a Lego version of the A380. To build this 1.8-meter long plane, McNaught used 35,000 bricks. Someone had a lot of time! Still, it looks great.
Check out the pictures and the entire story here.
Check out the pictures and the entire story here.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Lufthansa's Airbus A380 - First Flight
Nice video about Lufthansa's first A380, which will be delivered in the spring of this year. To my knowledge, the first flight will bring Germany's soccer team to South Africa for this year's World Championship. What a lovely plane...
CNN.com - US Airways Applies for Tarmac Delay Exemption
Starting on April 29 of this year there will be a new rule for U.S. passengers stuck on a plane: The Department of Transportation will be able to fine airlines $27,500 per passenger on domestic flights that sit on the tarmac for more than three hours with passengers on board. I absolutely support this new rule and I think there is no excuse for having passengers wait on a plane for such a long time. But sometimes it is not the airlines' fault. Some major airports in the U.S. are just so over-strained that take-off slots get shuffled around and, sometimes, pilots only learn that their take-off time has been delayed when they already left the gate. Going back to the gate is not an option in some cases, since another plane may have taken it already. However, the Department of Transportation allows some airlines to apply for waivers to this new rule if they are based at airports that tend to be congested, such as pretty much all NYC airports. US Airways has filed an application for an exemption to this rule, since its Philadelphia hub is considered part of NYC's airspace.
To read the CNN.com story on US Airways, please click here. To learn more about the new bill, please click here.
To read the CNN.com story on US Airways, please click here. To learn more about the new bill, please click here.
Monday, March 22, 2010
MarketWatch - Air Berlin Reduces 787 Order
Bad news for Boeing: The only airline from Europe's largest economy, Germany, that has ordered Boeing's 787 has reduced its order from 25 to 15. Air Berlin, Germany's second largest airline, also reduced the number of options from 10 to 5. The news underlines Boeing's difficulty in selling the 787 in Europe.
To read the MarketWatch article, please click here.
To read the MarketWatch article, please click here.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Deutsche Welle - Russian Firm to Enter Bid for US Tanker
Interesting turn in the bid for the U.S. military supertanker contract. Russia's state-owned United Aircraft Corporation today announced it would enter the bid for the Pentagon contract. Geeeez, how low are the Americans setting the bar here after EADS dropped out? This could be a turn from best in class to worst in class...
To read the Deutsche Welle story, please click here.
To read the Deutsche Welle story, please click here.
Bloomberg - Boeing Boosts Output on 777s and 747s to Meet Demand
I wasn't surprised to read that Boeing is boosting the production of its 777. The 777 is an awesome plane and it has been really successful with airlines from all over the world. But I was a bit stunned to read that Boeing is also increasing its 747-8 production. I am not a big fan of the 747-8, since I don't really understand why you would need a plane like it at all. I don't understand its unique selling point. The 747-8's design is a bit obsolete and it looks like a 747-200 with new engines (and apparently a fly-by-wire system). To me, it is just a "we need to build a successor of the 747-400" plane to compete with Airbus's A380. Airlines feel this way too. Only two passenger airlines (Korean Air and Lufthansa) have ordered the 747-8 so far and demand is less than expected. For a while, Boeing even considered axing the passenger version of the new jumbo jet altogether. Well, we'll see if the 747-8 turns out to be a success. Several dozen freighter versions have been sold already.
To read the Bloomberg piece, please click here.
To read the Bloomberg piece, please click here.
Fast Company - Guide to Boeing's Jumbo-est Jumbo, the 747-8
Being a subscriber to Fast Company magazine, I have noticed an interesting fact: They are apparently big fans of Boeing. You might agree or disagree with their obvious preference of the American aircraft manufacturer, but they ran a very interesting online article on the new 747-8 on March 18. It's funny they kinda over-emphasize the fact this is the largest passenger plane ever built in the U.S. However, compared to Airbus's A380, this is not very impressive...
Fact Company
The Fast Company's Guide to Boeing's Jumbo-est Jumbo, the 747-8
BY Kit EatonThu Mar 18, 2010
Late yesterday, Boeing's 747-8 freighter prototype number three lumbered into the Spring sky above Everett's Paine Field on its maiden flight. It then flew about successfully for two and a half hours before swooping heavily down on the tarmac at Boeing Field in Seattle. The beast checked out okay during this trip, topping out at 30,000 feet an a maximum speed of 280 mph, and is the latest success for the new marque of jumbo jet. But what exactly is exciting about this airborne monster? Continue reading here.
Fact Company
The Fast Company's Guide to Boeing's Jumbo-est Jumbo, the 747-8
BY Kit EatonThu Mar 18, 2010
Late yesterday, Boeing's 747-8 freighter prototype number three lumbered into the Spring sky above Everett's Paine Field on its maiden flight. It then flew about successfully for two and a half hours before swooping heavily down on the tarmac at Boeing Field in Seattle. The beast checked out okay during this trip, topping out at 30,000 feet an a maximum speed of 280 mph, and is the latest success for the new marque of jumbo jet. But what exactly is exciting about this airborne monster? Continue reading here.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
So What Happened in Hamburg in March 2008?
The weather in Hamburg was nasty on March 1, 2008. It was nasty pretty much all over Europe. LH 44, an Airbus A320, was en route from Munich to Hamburg during the storm "Emma" when it tried to land at Hamburg's Fuhlsbüttel airport in strong crosswinds. Seconds before touch down, the Airbus was hit by a strong gust of wind and its left wingtip made contact with the rundway, causing the pilots to go around. The plane landed without any problems a few minutes later and nobody was injured. However, thousands of people who watched the video online or on TV have been asking themselves what happened here? Was it the pilots' fault? Was the wind just too strong and should they have shut down the airport during the storm? Was there a problem with the fly-by-wire system? Last week, the German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation (BFU) issued its final report on the accident.
But before I summarize the report's key facts, you should watch the video again:
Initially, people praised the pilots for their "heroic" reaction. They pulled the plane back up and, consequently, avoided a crash. Then, experts started to doubt this version and asked why the pilots didn't use a different runway at the airport in the first place, one that was better suited for landing in strong winds? And why was the 24-year old, inexperienced co-pilot flying in such bad conditions and not the captain himself? Finally, Airbus's fly-by-wire system was blamed for causing the accident. By switching to "Ground Mode" when the plane's first pair of tires hit the runway, the system didn't allow the pilots to fully control the plane anymore - it limited the inputs the pilots could give via the sidesticks, which prevented them from leveling the wings again quickly.
The BFU's report offers some interesting insight into what really went wrong on March 1, 2008. First of all, the crew was well trained to land the plane in weather conditions like those present on this day in the spring of 2008. Even the 24-year old co-pilot had adequate training to land the A320 in strong crosswinds and the captain is not to be blamed for letting her land the plane. He took over control as soon as it was clear a go-around was necessary. However, the cockpit crew is is still at least partly to be blamed for this accident. They knew that there were crosswinds with gusts of up to 55 kts and they still decided to land on one particular runway that was not the wisest pick under the given conditions. Also, the A320 is only approved for crosswinds of up to 38 kts. The cockpit crew should have been aware of that. The BFU report states that most pilots are not aware of the crosswinds limits and the BFU blames Airbus and Lufthansa for not communicating those limits clearly enough. I think this is pretty ridiculous, since even I know that there are limits for landing a plane in crosswinds and I am not (yet) a pilot. So this is a pretty lame excuse.
Another factor here was the impact of Airbus's fly-by-wire (FBW) system. As soon as an Airbus plane touches the runway with one of its tires, the FBW automatically switches from "Flare Mode" (which is operating during the approach) to "Ground Mode" (which applies when a plane is on the ground). During Flare Mode the pilots are allowed to give inputs within the entire scope of permissible commands, during Ground Mode this is no longer the case. But why did Airbus design the FBW to switch into Ground Mode before at least all of the tires in the rear of the plane touch the ground? Well, the reason for this is: Airbus wants to prevent pilot-induced oscillation shortly before the plane touches the runway, which is actually pretty smart. This means, the pilots' controls over the ailerons are very limited when the system switches to Ground Mode. Ironically, this was implemented to prevent the plane from hitting the ground with its wingtips. In this specific instance, however, it caused some trouble, since the plane didn't react to the pilots' inputs and the FBW took over control for several seconds, leaving the pilots with very limited control over the plane. The only option for them was: Get the plane to switch into Flare Mode by increasing speed and taking off again. However, the pilots said they were not aware of these Ground Mode limitations either.
To summarize this: In the end, several factors contributed to the accident. I have to say though that this was not as severe as some people and the media made it look like. This was not an "almost crash" at all. There was some minor damage to the plane, but it absolutely didn't render it uncontrollable. The first factor was: The pilots landed in crosswinds that were too high for the A320 and they should have known that. However, they didn't. I blame Lufthansa more than Airbus. Lufthansa should inform all their pilots about crosswind limits for all its planes. Second, the crew didn't choose the best runway for the wind conditions. They should have chosen the runway they used for their second (successful) landing attempt in the first place. Third, pilots have to be aware that Airbuses switch into Ground Mode as soon as one tire hits the runway. It wouldn't have helped in this case, since there was nothing they could have done, but at least it wouldn't have been a surprise.
Should Airbus change their FBW system and make it switch to Ground Mode only after the tires on both sides touch the ground? Absolutely not! This was probably the first time an accident happened because of the FBW during landing in crosswinds. I am sure it has already prevented dozens of accidents in the past.
But before I summarize the report's key facts, you should watch the video again:
Initially, people praised the pilots for their "heroic" reaction. They pulled the plane back up and, consequently, avoided a crash. Then, experts started to doubt this version and asked why the pilots didn't use a different runway at the airport in the first place, one that was better suited for landing in strong winds? And why was the 24-year old, inexperienced co-pilot flying in such bad conditions and not the captain himself? Finally, Airbus's fly-by-wire system was blamed for causing the accident. By switching to "Ground Mode" when the plane's first pair of tires hit the runway, the system didn't allow the pilots to fully control the plane anymore - it limited the inputs the pilots could give via the sidesticks, which prevented them from leveling the wings again quickly.
The BFU's report offers some interesting insight into what really went wrong on March 1, 2008. First of all, the crew was well trained to land the plane in weather conditions like those present on this day in the spring of 2008. Even the 24-year old co-pilot had adequate training to land the A320 in strong crosswinds and the captain is not to be blamed for letting her land the plane. He took over control as soon as it was clear a go-around was necessary. However, the cockpit crew is is still at least partly to be blamed for this accident. They knew that there were crosswinds with gusts of up to 55 kts and they still decided to land on one particular runway that was not the wisest pick under the given conditions. Also, the A320 is only approved for crosswinds of up to 38 kts. The cockpit crew should have been aware of that. The BFU report states that most pilots are not aware of the crosswinds limits and the BFU blames Airbus and Lufthansa for not communicating those limits clearly enough. I think this is pretty ridiculous, since even I know that there are limits for landing a plane in crosswinds and I am not (yet) a pilot. So this is a pretty lame excuse.
Another factor here was the impact of Airbus's fly-by-wire (FBW) system. As soon as an Airbus plane touches the runway with one of its tires, the FBW automatically switches from "Flare Mode" (which is operating during the approach) to "Ground Mode" (which applies when a plane is on the ground). During Flare Mode the pilots are allowed to give inputs within the entire scope of permissible commands, during Ground Mode this is no longer the case. But why did Airbus design the FBW to switch into Ground Mode before at least all of the tires in the rear of the plane touch the ground? Well, the reason for this is: Airbus wants to prevent pilot-induced oscillation shortly before the plane touches the runway, which is actually pretty smart. This means, the pilots' controls over the ailerons are very limited when the system switches to Ground Mode. Ironically, this was implemented to prevent the plane from hitting the ground with its wingtips. In this specific instance, however, it caused some trouble, since the plane didn't react to the pilots' inputs and the FBW took over control for several seconds, leaving the pilots with very limited control over the plane. The only option for them was: Get the plane to switch into Flare Mode by increasing speed and taking off again. However, the pilots said they were not aware of these Ground Mode limitations either.
To summarize this: In the end, several factors contributed to the accident. I have to say though that this was not as severe as some people and the media made it look like. This was not an "almost crash" at all. There was some minor damage to the plane, but it absolutely didn't render it uncontrollable. The first factor was: The pilots landed in crosswinds that were too high for the A320 and they should have known that. However, they didn't. I blame Lufthansa more than Airbus. Lufthansa should inform all their pilots about crosswind limits for all its planes. Second, the crew didn't choose the best runway for the wind conditions. They should have chosen the runway they used for their second (successful) landing attempt in the first place. Third, pilots have to be aware that Airbuses switch into Ground Mode as soon as one tire hits the runway. It wouldn't have helped in this case, since there was nothing they could have done, but at least it wouldn't have been a surprise.
Should Airbus change their FBW system and make it switch to Ground Mode only after the tires on both sides touch the ground? Absolutely not! This was probably the first time an accident happened because of the FBW during landing in crosswinds. I am sure it has already prevented dozens of accidents in the past.
Monday, March 15, 2010
The Aviation Insider on Twitter and Facebook
Don't forget to follow The Aviation Insider (AviationInsider) on Twitter. Also join The Aviation Insider Group on Facebook (I would add a link here, but don't know how that works for Facebook - but just search for "The Aviation Insider").
Lovely Windy Emirates 777-300 Landing in MAN
I just love Emirates and the 777-300. So I really enjoyed watching this (not so) windy landing. Enjoy!
Continental to Stop Serving Free Food
What a disappointment! My second favorite U.S. airline (after JetBlue) will stop serving free food on its U.S. flights this fall. It's quite ironic, since free meals were the focus of Continental's last advertising campaign (remember the "There are starving people on other airlines" campaign?). Well, I guess Continental's gotta do what it's gotta do. They somehow need to finance their newest fleet in the industry. Read more about Continental's discontinuation of free food here.
CNN.com - Pilots Who Overflew Airport Drop Attempt to Keep Licenses
It's probably the best thing those two morons could do. I mean: How stupid can you be? Flying past your destination because you were watching videos? I don't want people like that to be pilots...
By Mike Ahlers, CNN
March 15, 2010 2:44 p.m. EDT
Washington (CNN) -- The Northwest Airlines pilots who lost their licenses after overflying their Minneapolis destination last year have dropped their appeal, the Federal Aviation Administration said Monday. Continue reading here.
Washington (CNN) -- The Northwest Airlines pilots who lost their licenses after overflying their Minneapolis destination last year have dropped their appeal, the Federal Aviation Administration said Monday. Continue reading here.
Friday, March 12, 2010
United Signs Firm Order for 25 A350 XWB Aircraft
United on Wednesday signed a firm order for 25 Airbus A350 planes. The Chicago-based airline already signed an order for 25 Boeing 787 a few weeks ago. But it's a smart move to order both of those state-of-the art jets. The orders come after years of reluctance by United to order any new planes at all. Again, wise move to wait until these newer, lighter, better planes enter the market. Read Airbus's press release here.
United Announces First Ever Nonstop Flight to Africa
United Airlines announced it will start its first ever nonstop flight to Africa on June 20. The service between Washington's Dulles airport and Accra, Ghana, will be on a 767-300 (surprisingly, they are not using one of their 777s) and the duration will be 10.30 hours to Ghana and 11.25 hours to DC. For more information click here. Pending government approval.
Beautiful Formula 1 A340-600 from Etihad
My brother forwarded me this pic of an A340-600 (one of my most favorite planes) in Formula 1 livery yesterday. The owner is Abu Dhabi-based Airline Etihad. I was among the first people to fly Etihad back in 2005 and it's really an awesome airline. If you want to learn more about the official airline of Abu Dhabi, go to www.etihadairways.com.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Airlines and Destinations - Boeing Completes Initial Airworthiness Testing for the 747-8F
Boeing Completes Initial Airworthiness Testing for the 747-8F
by Staff on March 11, 2010
Boeing has completed initial airworthiness testing on the 747-8 Freighter, a milestone that enables test engineers to be on board during future flights and allows the remaining two 747-8 Freighter test aircraft to begin flight tests. Continue reading here.FastCompany - Aviation Emissions: Understanding the Carbon Offset Market
FastCompany posted an interview with Brad Pitt and several climate expert a few days ago (please find the whole story here) on the idea of paying for the CO2 emissions on every flight. I am not a big fan of this idea. However, they have this nice video:
aerochannel - 2009: Fewest Flyers since 2004
Aerochannel just posted this, which is really interesting. Whenever I'm at an airport I feel like never before have there been so many people in the security check line...
Thursday, March 11, 2010
2009: Fewest Flyers since 2004
The final year-end numbers for 2009 are now in, and they show just how much of an economic hit the air travel industry has taken. Please continue reading here.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
2009: Fewest Flyers since 2004
The final year-end numbers for 2009 are now in, and they show just how much of an economic hit the air travel industry has taken. Please continue reading here.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Blizzard Landing Denver 757
Just watched this awesome blizzard landing in Denver. Check it out:
Northrop and EADS to Drop Bid for Tanker
I know this is not real news, but sad still. Well, your loss, U.S. Air Force...
The New York Times
Northrop and EADS to Drop Bid for Tanker
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: March 8, 2010
The Northrop Grumman Corporation said on Monday that it would not bid for a $40 billion contract to build aerial refueling planes for the Air Force, leaving its rival, Boeing, as the likely winner of one of the Pentagon’s largest contracts. To continue reading, please click here.
The New York Times
Northrop and EADS to Drop Bid for Tanker
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: March 8, 2010
The Northrop Grumman Corporation said on Monday that it would not bid for a $40 billion contract to build aerial refueling planes for the Air Force, leaving its rival, Boeing, as the likely winner of one of the Pentagon’s largest contracts. To continue reading, please click here.
Take-off from LaGuardia
To start off this new blog I would like to post this beautiful video from shortly after take-off at New York's LaGuardia airport on a 737-800. Queens and Brooklyn in the morning sun. Enjoy!
Air France Flight 447 - The Last Minutes
It's been nine months since Air France flight 447 crashed into the Atlantic, killing all 228 people on board. Still, the black boxes have not been found and we don't really know what happened. The following is what I believe happened. I will try to reconstruct what was going on on board the A330 over the Atlantic on June 1, 2009. I have no idea if what I'm posting here is correct and I am not able to explain everything. But knowing a bit about planes and aviation in general, I think I have a pretty good understanding of what contributed to this horrible crash.
It was a rather calm afternoon in Rio de Janeiro on May 31, 2009. Captain Marc Dubois and his two First Officers David Robert and Pierre-Cedric Bonin started to prepare the A330-200 with the tail number F-GZCP for the 11 hours and 30 minutes flight to Paris Charles de Gaulle at around 6 pm local time. The plane was fairly new, only four and a half years old, and had gone through a major overhaul just two months before. Captain Dubois was a very experienced pilot, with more than 11,000 flight hours, more than 1,500 on the A330. He knew this plane and he knew it well. His two First Officers were in their 30s and fairly new to the A330.
Flight 447 was pretty heavy that afternoon. Dubois allowed for ten tons of cargo to be loaded into the plane plus 70 tons of kerosene. In the end, the A330 was only 240 kilograms lighter than its maximum weight. But it didn't matter. The fuel he had pumped into the Airbus was more than enough to get them to Charles de Gaulle. At 10.03 the A330 lifted into the air and headed north, north-east along the Atlantic coast of Brazil. An hour after takeoff they reached their cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. The air was a bit rough, but nothing serious so that Dubois engaged the Airbus's autopilot pretty early into the flight.
At around 1.15 am on June 1, 2009, the Airbus left the mainland of Brazil and headed towards Fernando de Noronha, an island 350 kilometers to the east of the coast of Brazil. The "fasten seat belt" signs were illuminated. Dubois knew this area well - it is feared for its strong winds, heavy turbulence and unpredictable weather conditions. They were about to enter the "Intertropical Convergence Zone" (ITCZ), an area which encircles the area around the equator. Strong thunderstorms develop in the ITCZ and clouds filled with hail and lightning pile all the way up to 15 kilometers above the sea. There is no "flying above the weather" inside the ITCZ. In the spring and early summer thunderstorms are particularly strong and common. But Dubois checked the latest weather details before take-off and kept a constant eye on the A330's weather radar.
At 1.33 am the last contact with Brazil's air control took place: AF 447 was flying through moderate turbulence, but the cockpit crew stated that the Airbus was flying at normal level (35,000 feet) at a speed of 865 km/h and that they were using airway UN873 to get to Senegal within 50 minutes. Dubois and Robert were in the cockpit, the plane still flying mostly on autopilot. They started to see supercells with thunderstorms in the distance. Those thunderstorms caused winds of up to 165 km/h that were starting to hit the Airbus. Still, the cockpit crew was not worried. The ITCZ is a nasty area to fly through, but planes do that all the time and Dubois had done it dozens of times before. If the supercells started to become too nasty, he would have to leave his assigned corridor and manually fly around them. But the weather didn't look too bad that night. Only a few bad cells were directly in the way.
In order to prepare flying around a few cells and because of worsening turbulence, Dubois disengaged the autopilot and firmly took over command of the A330 soon after they left the coast of Brazil. "Flight attendants, please take your seats!" At 1.48 am, Air France 447 left Brazilian radar surveillance. The next ten to 15 minutes were fairly bumpy, but soon after, the A330 had passed through the most severe portion of the thunderstorm area and flew into calmer skies. Dubois re-engaged the autopilot and left the cockpit to take his break (all pilots on long-haul flights take a rest at some point). First officer Bonin took over the pilot's seat. The flight attendants were allowed to move around the cabin again. Soon after, the nightmare started...
While flying through a thunderstorm and without the cockpit crew noticing, ice crystals started to form on the Airbus's pitot tubes. The pitot tubes provide planes with much-needed airspeed data, in addition to the GPS system that also offers details on the plane's speed over ground. The Airbus A330 is equipped with three pitot tubes, which are mounted at the front of the plane. At around 2.08 am, the pitot tubes started to measure different speeds. The autopilot needs consistent, exact speed data to control the plane. In this case, the computers were provided with three different speeds. Consequently, the autopilot shut down and the auto-thrust system too. The A330 was now back in the hands of the two First Officers in the cockpit. At 2.10 am the plane sent automated messages to Airbus's headquarters in Toulouse, France, that the autopilot and auto-thrust had disengaged.
The cockpit crew was now confronted with a situation they had probably never experienced before. The autopilot was dysfunctional and the plane's speed was not clear anymore. However, they could still see the speed over ground via the plane's GPS system. At that moment they had to make sure they were fast enough but not too fast either. And they needed to manually fly the plane while figuring out what was going on. Only seconds later the plane's TCAS turned into fault mode and the crew could no longer see where other planes around them were. This was the point when the cockpit crew realized that there's more going on than just inconsistent speed data. Computer after computer, monitor after monitor and system after system started to die. Soon after, the fly-by-wire computers resigned and the A330 turned from normal law into alternate law. The pilots could now fly the Airbus outside of its usual fly-by-wire limits. At that time, Air France 447 was halfway between Brazil and Senegal.
Whatever happened that night, the entire systems of the Airbus crashed. Within five minutes, AF 447 lost all systems necessary to fly the plane. The cockpit crew tried in vain to re-start the systems. They didn't work. The pilots started to realize they wouldn't make it, but kept trying. It was their only chance. The Airbus was not responding to any stick inputs. The movements of flight controls in modern airplanes are converted to electronic signals transmitted by wires (hence the term fly-by-wire), and flight control computers determine how to move the actuators at each control surface to provide the expected response. When those computers die, it renders a plane uncontrollable and that is what probably happened that night. Bonin's and Robert's only chance was restarting the systems. They tried it three times, but they wouldn't re-start (two error messages relative to restarting the systems were sent between 2.11 and 2.14 am). The plane was now flying downwards at a high speed. The pilots tried it again and YES the system restarted, the monitors started to turn on again. The computers realized they would hit the sea momentarily and lifted the nose of the Airbus up. They were only 600 meters away from the water at that point.
But it was already too late. With forces of 35 times the earth's gravity, the A330 hit the water, fuselage first. The forces were so strong that the rudder of the plane broke off, parts of the wings broke off and seat belts cut people into two parts. F-GZCP was gone. And with it 228 people. Everything happened within less than five minutes. Not even enough time for the First Officers to call the Captain back into the cockpit.
Even today it is not clear if and how the faulty pitot tubes caused the fly-by-wire system to die. Neither is it clear why the crew did not try to radio "mayday" to planes around them. Until the black boxes are found, we will not know what really caused all the systems to fail. Was this a problem that can only happen on Airbuses? Probably not, because apparently all electronics failed. A Boeing 777 cannot be steered without electronics either. However, on pretty much all older planes an accident like this one could not happen; they are still flown manually, not through electronic interfaces.
I am absolutely convinced that this problem was not caused by Airbus's fly-by-wire system itself. Something must have caused all backups to fail. However, I have no idea what this could have been...
It was a rather calm afternoon in Rio de Janeiro on May 31, 2009. Captain Marc Dubois and his two First Officers David Robert and Pierre-Cedric Bonin started to prepare the A330-200 with the tail number F-GZCP for the 11 hours and 30 minutes flight to Paris Charles de Gaulle at around 6 pm local time. The plane was fairly new, only four and a half years old, and had gone through a major overhaul just two months before. Captain Dubois was a very experienced pilot, with more than 11,000 flight hours, more than 1,500 on the A330. He knew this plane and he knew it well. His two First Officers were in their 30s and fairly new to the A330.
Flight 447 was pretty heavy that afternoon. Dubois allowed for ten tons of cargo to be loaded into the plane plus 70 tons of kerosene. In the end, the A330 was only 240 kilograms lighter than its maximum weight. But it didn't matter. The fuel he had pumped into the Airbus was more than enough to get them to Charles de Gaulle. At 10.03 the A330 lifted into the air and headed north, north-east along the Atlantic coast of Brazil. An hour after takeoff they reached their cruising altitude of 35,000 feet. The air was a bit rough, but nothing serious so that Dubois engaged the Airbus's autopilot pretty early into the flight.
At around 1.15 am on June 1, 2009, the Airbus left the mainland of Brazil and headed towards Fernando de Noronha, an island 350 kilometers to the east of the coast of Brazil. The "fasten seat belt" signs were illuminated. Dubois knew this area well - it is feared for its strong winds, heavy turbulence and unpredictable weather conditions. They were about to enter the "Intertropical Convergence Zone" (ITCZ), an area which encircles the area around the equator. Strong thunderstorms develop in the ITCZ and clouds filled with hail and lightning pile all the way up to 15 kilometers above the sea. There is no "flying above the weather" inside the ITCZ. In the spring and early summer thunderstorms are particularly strong and common. But Dubois checked the latest weather details before take-off and kept a constant eye on the A330's weather radar.
At 1.33 am the last contact with Brazil's air control took place: AF 447 was flying through moderate turbulence, but the cockpit crew stated that the Airbus was flying at normal level (35,000 feet) at a speed of 865 km/h and that they were using airway UN873 to get to Senegal within 50 minutes. Dubois and Robert were in the cockpit, the plane still flying mostly on autopilot. They started to see supercells with thunderstorms in the distance. Those thunderstorms caused winds of up to 165 km/h that were starting to hit the Airbus. Still, the cockpit crew was not worried. The ITCZ is a nasty area to fly through, but planes do that all the time and Dubois had done it dozens of times before. If the supercells started to become too nasty, he would have to leave his assigned corridor and manually fly around them. But the weather didn't look too bad that night. Only a few bad cells were directly in the way.
In order to prepare flying around a few cells and because of worsening turbulence, Dubois disengaged the autopilot and firmly took over command of the A330 soon after they left the coast of Brazil. "Flight attendants, please take your seats!" At 1.48 am, Air France 447 left Brazilian radar surveillance. The next ten to 15 minutes were fairly bumpy, but soon after, the A330 had passed through the most severe portion of the thunderstorm area and flew into calmer skies. Dubois re-engaged the autopilot and left the cockpit to take his break (all pilots on long-haul flights take a rest at some point). First officer Bonin took over the pilot's seat. The flight attendants were allowed to move around the cabin again. Soon after, the nightmare started...
While flying through a thunderstorm and without the cockpit crew noticing, ice crystals started to form on the Airbus's pitot tubes. The pitot tubes provide planes with much-needed airspeed data, in addition to the GPS system that also offers details on the plane's speed over ground. The Airbus A330 is equipped with three pitot tubes, which are mounted at the front of the plane. At around 2.08 am, the pitot tubes started to measure different speeds. The autopilot needs consistent, exact speed data to control the plane. In this case, the computers were provided with three different speeds. Consequently, the autopilot shut down and the auto-thrust system too. The A330 was now back in the hands of the two First Officers in the cockpit. At 2.10 am the plane sent automated messages to Airbus's headquarters in Toulouse, France, that the autopilot and auto-thrust had disengaged.
The cockpit crew was now confronted with a situation they had probably never experienced before. The autopilot was dysfunctional and the plane's speed was not clear anymore. However, they could still see the speed over ground via the plane's GPS system. At that moment they had to make sure they were fast enough but not too fast either. And they needed to manually fly the plane while figuring out what was going on. Only seconds later the plane's TCAS turned into fault mode and the crew could no longer see where other planes around them were. This was the point when the cockpit crew realized that there's more going on than just inconsistent speed data. Computer after computer, monitor after monitor and system after system started to die. Soon after, the fly-by-wire computers resigned and the A330 turned from normal law into alternate law. The pilots could now fly the Airbus outside of its usual fly-by-wire limits. At that time, Air France 447 was halfway between Brazil and Senegal.
Whatever happened that night, the entire systems of the Airbus crashed. Within five minutes, AF 447 lost all systems necessary to fly the plane. The cockpit crew tried in vain to re-start the systems. They didn't work. The pilots started to realize they wouldn't make it, but kept trying. It was their only chance. The Airbus was not responding to any stick inputs. The movements of flight controls in modern airplanes are converted to electronic signals transmitted by wires (hence the term fly-by-wire), and flight control computers determine how to move the actuators at each control surface to provide the expected response. When those computers die, it renders a plane uncontrollable and that is what probably happened that night. Bonin's and Robert's only chance was restarting the systems. They tried it three times, but they wouldn't re-start (two error messages relative to restarting the systems were sent between 2.11 and 2.14 am). The plane was now flying downwards at a high speed. The pilots tried it again and YES the system restarted, the monitors started to turn on again. The computers realized they would hit the sea momentarily and lifted the nose of the Airbus up. They were only 600 meters away from the water at that point.
But it was already too late. With forces of 35 times the earth's gravity, the A330 hit the water, fuselage first. The forces were so strong that the rudder of the plane broke off, parts of the wings broke off and seat belts cut people into two parts. F-GZCP was gone. And with it 228 people. Everything happened within less than five minutes. Not even enough time for the First Officers to call the Captain back into the cockpit.
Even today it is not clear if and how the faulty pitot tubes caused the fly-by-wire system to die. Neither is it clear why the crew did not try to radio "mayday" to planes around them. Until the black boxes are found, we will not know what really caused all the systems to fail. Was this a problem that can only happen on Airbuses? Probably not, because apparently all electronics failed. A Boeing 777 cannot be steered without electronics either. However, on pretty much all older planes an accident like this one could not happen; they are still flown manually, not through electronic interfaces.
I am absolutely convinced that this problem was not caused by Airbus's fly-by-wire system itself. Something must have caused all backups to fail. However, I have no idea what this could have been...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)