joshuatree
Captain
They already did at least two days ago.
Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is Missing
- Thread starter no_name
- Start date
They already did at least two days ago.
I could land it on the default airstrip (the one where you can see the Willis tower), but sometimes over run the runway.
It's a bit hard to gauge your height with the graphics as you approach and trying to get the sink rate feel right, and I've never feel comfortable with relying on instruments. You tend to get nervous as the runway pass under you, thinking you are wasting all that length as you get lower and lower, and could not resist to pull your nose down a bit rather than let it float down gently. The lazy way would just to lower the nose a bit until you are very close to the ground, then pull the nose up and cut back on the throttle and let the bird 'drop', hopefully not too hard.
And if on approach I find that the plane's path is not quite lined up with the runway I tend to just adjust with the tail rudder than try to risk big movements with banking, that will also not affect the altitude.
I've never got to handle the glider properly though. And the Sopwith Camel is surprisingly maneuverable (kind of stall proof, even).
Anyway my last digress on the flight simulator.
Last edited:
actually I do, now I could be wrong, but I had guessed that AF447 would be found sans vert/rudder after it became clear they were in a thunder-storm?? as I suggested earlier to master delft, I am indeed disappointed that the aluminum aft fuse/carbon fiber rudder mounting is problematic. When AF447s vert stab was found floating some distance from the rest of the aircraft, I felt the giddy flair of Sherlock Holmes, of #10 Downing ST. or is that Margaret Thatcher? Now to be fair, the Boeing 737 has also suffered from some vert stab/rudder issues that escape me at the moment, but seems to me that one incident at least was over the NorthEastern United States???
Back to Air Asia, very experienced 20,000 hr Captain, previous military experience as a fighter pilot, now I don't know much about the FO other than he was French, so who knows, possible communication issues in the cockpit, maybe not??
Aircraft was reported at 32,000 and experiencing bad weather and requested 38,000, but to recap my speculation with master delft, very low vis and very disorienting in a thunderstorm, heavy precip possible/likely if they were trying to get out of there, aircraft likely under very marginal control, with severe convective activity as in a typical thunderstorm, violent up drafts/down drafts??? I was taught in a Cessna 172, it was a 1968 with the straight leading edge, prior to the increased camber of the 1973 and later 172s.... at the power on stall it would do one of three things, or a combination of the three???? roll off on the left wing, roll off on the right wing, stall straight ahead???? I was taught to stay off the ailerons and apply opposite rudder to level the wings, as applying down aileron to increase camber and lift the wing, would simply exacerbate the stall, increasing the absence of lift over the stalled wing, in addition the downward deflected aileron would cause drag, which would slow that wing allowing the aircraft to pivot around that stalled wing, creating an incipient spin. The very simple, though not initially intuitive solution was to apply opposite rudder, maintaining directional stability, and causing the stalled wing to maintain the same airspeed as the unstalled wing, if you entered a full blown spin, recovery called for forward stick to break the stall, simultaneously with "full" opposite rudder. So if you were in a left spin, you must apply right full rudder to the floor until the rotation stopped, it could be immediate, or if you were in a flat spin, it could take a half turn or more???
That same procedure in the Airbus would quite possibly cause the vert/rudder to depart the aircraft, so structural failure is very possible, maybe even likely for Air Asia??? the black boxes will be on the surface tomorrow or the next day likely, they should be pinging, and the water is less than 75 meters????? that is the best case scenario?
I could land it on the default airstrip (the one where you can see the Willis tower), but sometimes over run the runway.
It's a bit hard to gauge your height with the graphics as you approach and trying to get the sink rate feel right, and I've never feel comfortable with relying on instruments. You tend to get nervous as the runway pass under you, thinking you are wasting all that length as you get lower and lower, and could not resist to pull your nose down a bit rather than let it float down gently. The lazy way would just to lower the nose a bit until you are very close to the ground, then pull the nose up and cut back on the throttle and let the bird 'drop', hopefully not too hard.
And if on approach I find that the plane's path is not quite lined up with the runway I tend to just adjust with the tail rudder than try to risk big movements with banking, that will also not affect the altitude.
I've never got to handle the glider properly though. And the Sopwith Camel is surprisingly maneuverable (kind of stall proof, even).
Anyway my last digress on the flight simulator.
A flight simulator with only a single monitor is very difficult to maintain orientation and alignment with the runway, it is MUCH easier in real life, but still demands that you line up on the extended runway center line as you turn onto the final approach heading, a long straight in approach solves that problem, while making it much more difficult to control your glide path, my last landing was a very long straight in approach, gradually reducing airspeed by pulling the power back and increasing pitch to approx. 80 mph down final, pulling the power and reducing airspeed to 60-70 over the numbers, flaring or increasing pitch to break your decent at 10 to 15 feet, holding that pitch attitude and allowing your speed to bleed off to touchdown. If you open a thread on flight simulators, I promise to join in and add my two cents, as they are a very helpful tool, even the FSX is just a wonderful way to maintain proficiency, and very realistic?
broadsword
Brigadier
Thanks, Brat.
We have more info:
We have more info:
It still makes me wonder, though. Overflying a severe WX area by just a few thousand feet seems wierd. Even though it may look clearer above, there's still going to be considerable up- /downdrafts on top of those cumulunimbus clouds. And possibly even some hail flying around?
Somehow I thought to avoid such weather, you'd much rather circumnavigate it by 10+NM. If you realize it early enough, of course.
I believe it's unlikely, however, that the pilot overstressed the plane to the point of structural failure on his own (by applying fighter pilot controll demands). That would demand some extraodinary hard maneuver input at those altitudes. The effects of severe turbulances coupled with steering demands may have played a role.
Somehow I thought to avoid such weather, you'd much rather circumnavigate it by 10+NM. If you realize it early enough, of course.
I believe it's unlikely, however, that the pilot overstressed the plane to the point of structural failure on his own (by applying fighter pilot controll demands). That would demand some extraodinary hard maneuver input at those altitudes. The effects of severe turbulances coupled with steering demands may have played a role.
If I understand the Airbus concept correctly the aircraft is protected from overstressing by pilot commands by the software.
Indonesia is large. The distance from Medan to Merauke is larger than from New Foundland to Ireland, but there are plenty of islands to build weather radar to advise pilots of ways to avoid the worst of the weather.
thanks T2 for the update, you will notice that this update corroborates much of my previous speculation, this is a very typical thunderstorm encounter, severe and violent up and down drafts, many times the area of wind shear are violent enough to cause bending or even breaking of the airframe. I am fueling my Airbus as we speak, and I will attempt to provide us with a little bit of pertinent information, of course I have my leather flying helmet and goggles on, an my scarf is tied up in the wheel of my rolling chair,,,oh man, that shut off my oxygen, whew!
Okay, I am climbing with full throttle a max rate climb at 180knts indicated at 25,000 feet in my Airbus 321, it has a glass cockpit, and no VSI on the panel, I'm not sure how to pull one up, but once I am at 32,000, I will level out and leave the power levers to the wall and report back on maximum indicated airspeed.
You are of course correct master delft, and one reason I do NOT like to fly the Airbus on my flight sim X is that it will not allow you to bank much steeper than 45 degrees, and I would imagine pitch is limited to 20+ or 20- negative, back to our test flight, stay tuned, I am at 25,000 with the throttles to the wall and 180knts indicated, I may increase that to 200 to see if that helps climb rate???
Okay this is Air Asia flight 320 with you at 32,000 and approx. 230knts IAS, throttles to the wall, I will overshoot my altitude by approx. 1000 ft to see if we can get the IAS to about 330knts IAS, back to you momentarily. std by Air Asia out.
Air Asia, with you at approx. 32,000, IAS is approx. 320 IAS, in a shallow dive, I will level at 32,000 and initiate a max pitch to the vertical, I am imagining that the pitch will max out at around 40 degrees but I will attempt to note that, I will maintain max pitch until the airpspeed falls off the clock, remember, IAS is about 2/3 or less of my actual airspeed which should be about 550knts true??maybe a little better???? OK< Titen your lap and shoulder harness this will get interesting, because I am going to attempt to create an aerodynamic stall, the FCS likely will not let that happen, but we will hold wings level and full aft stick, and we will likely create a very high sink rate??? ready, ok on my mark, 3, 2, 1, "pulling max pitch". air asia 320, out of 32,000 for 40,000ft. Air Asia 320.
Air Asia 320, max pitch angle has pegged at 32 degrees positive on the attitude indicator, I am getting a warning on the same attitude indicator, my approx. rate of climb was around 8,000-10,000+ fpm, my present altitude is 41,000 ft, I am at 110knots indicated airspeed, rate of climb is slowing, I am on a heading of 360degrees, wings level, so we will see the altitude top out here, and I will maintain heading with full aft stick, a side stick by the way, and I will report back to you our rate of decent and whether or not we got any divergent roll or yaw, I expect none???? so we are test pilots now, I'll try not to scare you, but we will be soon going zero G, the airplane will be unloaded, hope you didn't have a heavy breakfast, and your baggy is in that side pouch below your right elbow, you may want to go ahead and get that out please, you make a mess and you clean it up, and snug up those shoulder harness, it will make you feel a lot more secure, here we go, Air Asia 320, reporting, and out.
Ok, Air Asia 320 back with you, full aft pitch did induce -15degrees nose down, full aft pitch, decent at approx. -6,000+ fpm to approx. 36,500, full throttle and full aft stick, the airplane has climbed back to 41,000, positive rate of pitch has stabilized at 30+ above the horizon, I'm going leave the throttles at full, accelerating to max IAS at 32,000, and initiate a hard pull with full aft stick, and full right aileron deflection, I really don't know what to expect myself, although our first test was very successful and NO surprises, it did roll left and right, but that is because I wasn't giving wings level my full attention, OK, ready, keep that bag handy, we don't want any surprises that way, and you look very sharp in that uniform, OK stand by, beginning our high rate of decent to 32,000, we will reach approx. -2 or 3Gs so you will feel quessy, hang on, we are still perfectly safe, here we go????
OK, Air Asia 320 back with you, as you are well aware we did decend to an altitude of 32,000 and an IAS of 360knts, where-upon we applied full aft stick and descended through 31,000 and soon after establishing a positive rate of climb with full throttle, and full aft stick, gave full right aileron deflection, what initially appeared to be a hard right climbing turn proceeded to approx. 39,000 ft, nose level momentarily, right bank angle 60+, (this is a surprise to me) hang on this will get interesting. Ok nose beginning to fall through the turn, full aft stick, full right aileron deflection, nose initially stabilizing at -25degrees nose down, wings overbanking to approx. 80 degrees of right bank, throttle left to the wall, aircraft accerating very rapidly now, nose following through -45 degrees, we are moving 450knots IAS, the ASI is pegged out, nose falling through 60 degrees, bank angle still at 80 degrees right bank, we are over mountains and getting very low, I am attempting to roll wings level and leaving the pitch input at full aft stick deflection??????
how did this turn out, not well at all, I was very surprised that the A321 was able to reach a bank angle of nearly 90 degrees, the nose fell through with full aft stick, and the VSI and ASI pegged out, as we accelerated through 450knts IAS and likely -25,000fpm rate of decent, the nose seemed to stabilize at approximately 65 to 70 degrees below the horizon...
Last edited:
Wow, my computer fan is vibrating, I am feeling sick, but there you have it, the an anatomy of an airplane crash, all in real time on the SDF, ok, I'm going to give you a break have a cup of coffee or hot-chocolate, I really am feeling rather sick?? and sorry for putting you through that as well???? lets take a break???