It was a Chinese domestic flight, does he do those?
I don't know that he has ever specifically stated who he works for, but he does fly both within China and the surrounding countries. He's certainly flown over Vietnam and evidently his home-away-from-home is Shanghai China. I emailed him and asked him to check in here.
There is a ton of speculation currently about the crash. The video I've seen shows an aircraft coming out of the clouds in a vertical dive. There is no official word from my company yet.
I hope it's not what I and others have been complaining about. That is the lack of actual flying skills. We are taught to always use the autopilot. Now when the aircraft is so broken the autopilot doesn't work then you better have the skills needed. Most do not. We shall see.
This was a Boeing 737-800 I believe. With everything going on don't be surprised if China pivots to Airbus even more. Plus they have an airplane under development here to rival both the 737 and A320, called the C-919. It's a mix between the two previous aircraft.
When I first entered USAF pilot training they had us take foot prints. Very much like finger prints, you step on an ink pad and then step on a piece of paper. Why? Because if you crater in like the above picture your feet are the only thing that might survive intact for identification.
And if you wonder why they haven't found any wreckage on the bottom of the ocean from the lost Malaysian Airlines flight 370 it's most likely because it disintegrated upon impact. Hitting water at high speed is not soft.
I'm happy that you are okay. Although I'm not a flier by any stretch of the imagination, I understand what you are talking about. Same as with a lot of industries. Sad, though.
quote
Originally posted by Hudini:
When I first entered USAF pilot training they had us take foot prints. Very much like finger prints, you step on an ink pad and then step on a piece of paper. Why? Because if you crater in like the above picture your feet are the only thing that might survive intact for identification. ...
Reminds me of when my wife visited NASA, as part of a work/study group, years ago. They were viewing the bay/hangar where the shuttle was being reworked. When they entered the room, they were required to remove their "Visitor IDs", and place them in a rack, outside the room. That was because, if there was "an accident", they would know who/how many people had been in the room, when it happened.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 03-21-2022).]
There is a ton of speculation currently about the crash. The video I've seen shows an aircraft coming out of the clouds in a vertical dive. There is no official word from my company yet.
I hope it's not what I and others have been complaining about. That is the lack of actual flying skills. We are taught to always use the autopilot. Now when the aircraft is so broken the autopilot doesn't work then you better have the skills needed. Most do not. We shall see.
This was a Boeing 737-800 I believe. With everything going on don't be surprised if China pivots to Airbus even more. Plus they have an airplane under development here to rival both the 737 and A320, called the C-919. It's a mix between the two previous aircraft.
The National Transportation Safety Board determined during a public board meeting held Tuesday that Atlas Air flight 3591 crashed in Trinity Bay, Texas, because of the first officer’s inappropriate response to an inadvertent activation of the airplane’s go-around mode, resulting in his spatial disorientation that led him to place the airplane in a steep descent from which the crew did not recover.
The NTSB concluded the first officer likely experienced a pitch-up somatogravic illusion – a specific kind of spatial disorientation in which forward acceleration is misinterpreted as the airplane pitching up – as the airplane accelerated due to the inadvertent activation of the go-around mode, which prompted the first officer to push forward on the elevator control column. The first officer subsequently believed the airplane was stalling and continued to push the control column forward, exacerbating the airplane’s dive. However, no cues consistent with an aerodynamic stall —such as stick shaker activation, stall warning annunciations, nose-high pitch indications or low airspeed indications—were present. Additionally, the NTSB’s airplane performance study found the airplane’s airspeed and angle of attack were not consistent with having been at or near a nose-high stalled condition. The first officer’s response was contrary to standard procedures and training for responding to a stall. The NTSB concluded that while the captain, as the pilot monitoring, was setting up the approach to Houston and communicating with air traffic control, his attention was diverted from monitoring the airplane’s state and verifying that the flight was proceeding as planned.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 03-22-2022).]
There is a ton of fake stuff being posted. Mem, you know that's not how airplanes work. If the tail just suddenly detaches the aircraft does not act like a missile, it acts like a frisbee. Look at the American Airlines crash in Jamaica, NY when the FO was kicking the rudder so hard it broke the vertical stab. Now if an aircraft is accelerated enough the tail might detach AFTER reaching the critical mach number, but not before.
There was a crash in South America of an older 737 where one of the two gyros had failed and was giving erroneous attitude information. In this case you are supposed to compare the two attitude indicators to the standby attitude indicator to figure out the bad one. Not sure why they failed to do this but the aircraft was flown out of control and disintegrated midair from a high speed dive. They found the airspeed indicator in the wreckage stuck at something like 505 knots.
At cruise altitude it's not likely this exact thing occurred. But it very much could be spatial disorientation from other things. I don't know if I have ever told ya'll about the peculiar things the locals do here. When they get to cruise altitude they place newspapers or maps or whatever over the windscreens to keep out the sunlight. Most of the time it's only where the sun is directly shining onto a person but I have seen the entire cockpit papered over. Something about the ink on the paper blocking the radiation from the sun.
There are many plausible reasons a flyable aircraft was flown into the ground. Pilot error from not following the checklist or flight manual, terrorism, suicide by pilot, mechanical failure. Normally aircraft don't just fall out of the sky at cruise. The 737-800 has been flown many years without issue. And the possibility exists you will never know what actually happened because it makes the locals look bad (i.e. lose face). Forget all the death and destruction, you cannot lose face to the world. That's most important.
There is a ton of fake stuff being posted. Mem, you know that's not how airplanes work. If the tail just suddenly detaches the aircraft does not act like a missile, it acts like a frisbee. Look at the American Airlines crash in Jamaica, NY when the FO was kicking the rudder so hard it broke the vertical stab. Now if an aircraft is accelerated enough the tail might detach AFTER reaching the critical mach number, but not before.
There was a crash in South America of an older 737 where one of the two gyros had failed and was giving erroneous attitude information. In this case you are supposed to compare the two attitude indicators to the standby attitude indicator to figure out the bad one. Not sure why they failed to do this but the aircraft was flown out of control and disintegrated midair from a high speed dive. They found the airspeed indicator in the wreckage stuck at something like 505 knots.
I was actually thinking more bomb or missile to take it off like that picture.
How it acts after the entire ass end is gone depends a lot on the CofG and we have no idea how it was loaded, nor how much weight was lost off the back. Spin initially, yup, How it develops after (????) turns who knows.
IF it is even the same plane from a different angle.
Now if an aircraft is accelerated enough the tail might detach AFTER reaching the critical mach number, but not before.
I didn't even think that was possible, but I suppose if going straight-down, you say speeds like that are in the realm of possibility?
In either case, at those speeds (or at least at the speed with which the plane impacted) would anyone on the plane be conscious at the end? I'm asking as uninformed... but guessing if the G-forces were so significant, hopefully at least most of the people in the plane were unconscious and not looking out the window as the plane shot like a rocket towards the earth. Would there need to be some sort of compression loss for people to be affected like that?
I know super-sonic planes are designed differently, but I'm trying to remember what I learned about Chuck Yeager's first experience with supersonic flight on that orange plane (XB-1 or something) was like?
The cockpit voice recorder has been recovered. Battered, but maybe salvageable. They're still looking for the flight data recorder. That's the last I read, a few minutes ago.
I didn't even think that was possible, but I suppose if going straight-down, you say speeds like that are in the realm of possibility?
In either case, at those speeds (or at least at the speed with which the plane impacted) would anyone on the plane be conscious at the end? I'm asking as uninformed... but guessing if the G-forces were so significant, hopefully at least most of the people in the plane were unconscious and not looking out the window as the plane shot like a rocket towards the earth. Would there need to be some sort of compression loss for people to be affected like that?
I know super-sonic planes are designed differently, but I'm trying to remember what I learned about Chuck Yeager's first experience with supersonic flight on that orange plane (XB-1 or something) was like?
That's definitely interesting, thanks for the link. I do wonder still whether the people were conscious about what was happening as they came towards earth quickly...
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: That's definitely interesting, thanks for the link. I do wonder still whether the people were conscious about what was happening as they came towards earth quickly...
If, (and that's a big if) cabin pressure was lost at 30k feet, and the aircraft was descending at near Mach 1, I doubt very many were conscious or aware of what was really happening. But, we don't know if or when anything happened, whether or not emergency oxygen was working, we don't know about the turbulence issue, we just don't know. Too much is unknown at this time as to what was happening in the cockpit to really know what was happening in the passenger area. What we do know is, there wasn't much time for anyone to suffer prior to their ultimate demise.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 03-23-2022).]
What we do know is, there wasn't much time for anyone to suffer prior to their ultimate demise.
Rams
I guess that's really what I was asking.
I was on a KLM 747 Series 100 back in the early to mid 1980s on a flight from Cairo to Skipol (Netherlands). The plane just "fell" ... for lack of a better explanation. We hadn't experienced any turbulence before then... but the plane was in a freefall for what felt like at least half a minute, if not more. Maybe it was less than that, but it felt like forever. Anyone who wasn't buckled in, flew up into the air. Many of the oxygen masks (sporadically, not all of them) dropped... maybe 1/8th or less of them on the plane from what I could see. When the plane finally "came to," everyone who was now in the air or plastered on the ceiling of the plane fell back down in a large crash, along with a couple of the luggage compartments. There was a lot of screaming, and a lot of crying.
I was buckled in, as was my dad's secretary who was flying with me (sigh... I know). I don't remember being "scared" so to speak, but I was shocked. I know how much it sucked, and I hate to think that the people in that plane experienced that for a prolonged amount of time. Almost like drowning... long and drawn out.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I guess that's really what I was asking.
I was on a KLM 747 Series 100 back in the early to mid 1980s on a flight from Cairo to Skipol (Netherlands). The plane just "fell" ... for lack of a better explanation. We hadn't experienced any turbulence before then... but the plane was in a freefall for what felt like at least half a minute, if not more. Maybe it was less than that, but it felt like forever. Anyone who wasn't buckled in, flew up into the air. Many of the oxygen masks (sporadically, not all of them) dropped... maybe 1/8th or less of them on the plane from what I could see. When the plane finally "came to," everyone who was now in the air or plastered on the ceiling of the plane fell back down in a large crash, along with a couple of the luggage compartments. There was a lot of screaming, and a lot of crying.
I was buckled in, as was my dad's secretary who was flying with me (sigh... I know). I don't remember being "scared" so to speak, but I was shocked. I know how much it sucked, and I hate to think that the people in that plane experienced that for a prolonged amount of time. Almost like drowning... long and drawn out.
Perhaps Blackrams has had it happen too, as I have in a helicopter. Cruising along in clear calm air at about 1500' and suddenly the aircraft just 'drops' straight vertically (not nose down) about 10-15 ft then continues on as normal. The 1st time it happened while I was on board the most experienced pilot in the CH53 program was at the controls abput 1/2way between Danang and Chulai. "There's that old transient T(?) problem" the pilot remarked. Here's the same pilot a few years earlier https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC2E8RJE3Jo
(The T problem he remarked on is in referenceto some adjustment on a sensor with the nomenclature of 'T' and a number which I have forgotten. (T-6 maybe) Located on a panel between left gunner window and bulkhead betwwen cargi bay and flight deck and was one of several little screws you adjusted for different 'stuff'.)
Perhaps Blackrams has had it happen too, as I have in a helicopter. Cruising along in clear calm air at about 1500' and suddenly the aircraft just 'drops' straight vertically (not nose down) about 10-15 ft then continues on as normal. The 1st time it happened while I was on board the most experienced pilot in the CH53 program was at the controls abput 1/2way between Danang and Chulai. "There's that old transient T(?) problem" the pilot remarked. Here's the same pilot a few years earlier https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC2E8RJE3Jo
(The T problem he remarked on is in referenceto some adjustment on a sensor with the nomenclature of 'T' and a number which I have forgotten. (T-6 maybe) Located on a panel between left gunner window and bulkhead betwwen cargi bay and flight deck and was one of several little screws you adjusted for different 'stuff'.)
Love the video Don. Reminds me of some of the things I tried at one point or another in my time as a mission pilot. As a Test Pilot, it was all business and not nearly as much fun although, I've had a few experiences that could have ended differently had I not practiced auto rotation often and developed a pretty good technique for putting the aircraft back on the ground without the assistance of a power plant. Over my entire test flying career, eight engine failures give one a reason to get and stay good at auto rotations. Rule of thumb, always take the crew chief who worked on the aircraft with you on the test flight (he/she may not have your best interests at heart) and always keep the flight over a clear landing site with a good place to set her down.
I have experienced that drop in altitude while flying a UH-1 while flying IFR a few times, it always gets your attention. As to the specific cause, I always attributed it to micro bursts of downward flowing channels of air. The kind you can't see. The absolute worst situation that got my attention the most was while flying to a destination that required us to fly through an occluded front with several concentrated thunder storms. ATC was giving us guidance and directed us between some major atmospheric down pours through what he described as one or the lesser disturbances/cells. While attempting to maintain the desired and assigned altitude, we entered the cell, initially we began to climb at a rate of about 3000 feet per minute so I obviously lowered the collective to maintain altitude. When we hit the center of the cell, we dropped like a rock and the Vertical Indicator actually maxed out. Scared the crap out of me. Reminded me of my skydiving days in freefall. Not sure what altitude we ended up at but we maintained a 90 +/- knot forward airspeed the entire time while heading what felt like straight to our demise. Thankfully eventually came out the other side of that downward column of air and back into the clean air upward moving outside and ended up at the previous assigned altitude. Scared the hell out of me and the folks in the back. I apologized but, from the looks of the rear, my apology went un-noticed, they were still throwing up their dinner. The whole event may have lasted 30 to 40 seconds but, seemed like a life time.
Have experienced similar but much shorter or faster/quicker drops like that on commercial airliners since but, nothing like that. Edited: At this point with what is apparently known, I don't believe this was in anyway related to weather.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 03-24-2022).]
Perhaps Blackrams has had it happen too, as I have in a helicopter. Cruising along in clear calm air at about 1500' and suddenly the aircraft just 'drops' straight vertically (not nose down) about 10-15 ft then continues on as normal. The 1st time it happened while I was on board the most experienced pilot in the CH53 program was at the controls abput 1/2way between Danang and Chulai. "There's that old transient T(?) problem" the pilot remarked. Here's the same pilot a few years earlier https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC2E8RJE3Jo
(The T problem he remarked on is in referenceto some adjustment on a sensor with the nomenclature of 'T' and a number which I have forgotten. (T-6 maybe) Located on a panel between left gunner window and bulkhead betwwen cargi bay and flight deck and was one of several little screws you adjusted for different 'stuff'.)
That video is pretty awesome, seeing that helicopter do rotations in the air (or whatever the technical term is). Hahaha... that's pretty crazy.
For me, something happened to the plane, and they had to make an emergency landing in East Germany. I've told the story on here before, so I won't bore everyone. But it was definitely more than just turbulence... it was a free-fall.
Anyway, I just hope that whatever happened, it was quick, and those people didn't suffer for as long as it took for the plane to fall from the sky and finally impact.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: That video is pretty awesome, seeing that helicopter do rotations in the air (or whatever the technical term is). Hahaha... that's pretty crazy.
.
That wasn't the first Sikorsky to do loops and rolls, but what is interesting is the difference between the 1968 CH53 test and the first one in 1949, specifically where the 2 test flights took place. Both took place near the Sikorsky plant in Ct, with the ch53 test out over the water starting at a relatively high altitude but in 1949, Sikorsky S-52 test pilot Tommy Thompson just let it all hang out right over the Sikorsky plant itself in the first documented and intentional helicopter loops and rolls and very close to the ground. He died of natural causes at age 82 in 2003 but not before giving up flyin helicopters for 29 years..
quote
His career came to an abrupt halt on a spring day in 1950, when he took an admiral aloft at the Navy's Lakehurst, New Jersey, base. Suddenly, a shaft snapped, and the tail rotor came apart.
Thompson skillfully kept the craft from spinning around, the usual result of such an accident. The helicopter landed hard, crushed the landing gear and tilted, while the spinning overhead rotor chewed up the ground and disintegrated. Tommy crawled out with nothing worse than a cut cheek. The admiral was shaken, but game: "All in a day's work, eh, boy?" Thompson however had walked away from more than 20 forced landings and now his fifth helicopter crash. Figuring he had stretched the law of averages too far, he replied, "Maybe for you, sir, but not for me". That night, when he got home he talked to his wife and refrained from flying again in a helicopter until 1979.
After his flying career came to a halt, he moved back to Hobart, Indiana, and began working with his father, delivering fuel oil for the Standard Oil Company. In 1979, Thompson visited the Tucson Convention Center where a large helicopter convention was taking place. He immediately was recognized for his feats during the convention and given the opportunity to pilot one of Sikorsky's S-58s.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 03-24-2022).]
I'm curious. Does the pilot change the collective pitch throughout the maneuver? Is there such a thing as negative collective?
I'm guessing that once he is facing skyward and gets slightly negative to start the roll, he changes collective to zero pitch and allows the front of the helicopter to simply be "top heavy" and fall backwards which makes the loop. Then once facing the ground he adds collective and pulls out of the dive. Just a guess though
I'm curious. Does the pilot change the collective pitch throughout the maneuver? Is there such a thing as negative collective?
On that S 52. I have no idea, that was before my time. I suspect it was similar to what I flew but can't say with any real authority.
But, the birds I flew had a negative pitch (so to speak) on the outboard ends of the rotor blades. That pitch is what allows the helicopter to maintain rotor speed during auto rotation. So no, the collective didn't have a negative pitch capability in the aircraft I flew.
Once showboating I.................. No, never mind, that one still scares me to this day.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 03-24-2022).]
That video is pretty awesome, seeing that helicopter do rotations in the air (or whatever the technical term is). Hahaha... that's pretty crazy.
A Loop and a Roll.
And yes, one has to be a little bit nuts to do those things although some of today's aircraft can easily accomplish both. About 20 years ago (maybe longer, can't remember), the Army finally figured out it needed to teach aerial combat to helicopter pilots. Think Top Gun type school but for helicopters. I sent a few Warrant Officers to the school but, never got the opportunity myself. Any chance I may have had evaporated when I went to Test Pilot School.
The whole event may have lasted 30 to 40 seconds but, seemed like a life time.
