Everyone is dumping on Boeing and running to Airbus. Has everyone forgotten about Air France 66 where a known pitot tube issue & the associated software brought down a huge plane and killed a bunch of people? How soon we forget......

(Written on 05.07.2019)(Permalink)

The NTSB has already indicated that there were light winds and no storm activity that would have causes Atlas Air crash. In fact, a United flight overflew the crash site less than 6 minutes after the crash and reported :moderate chop at worse". The storms to which ATC was referring were more than 20 miles to the west of the crash site to the airport.

(Written on 01.03.2019)(Permalink)

From the very beginning instrument pilots are trained to scan and review data from multiple sources/instruments to both determine the situation of the aircraft and to cross reference instruments to determine which if any are defective. If a plane is at a level flight attitude with a few hundred knots of airspeed at a nearly constant altitude and the engines running a with significant amount of power the software should be able to determine that even it the angle of attack indicator is reading 40 degrees positive the aircraft is not in a stall condition. Where does Boeing get these software code writers? To detect a high angle of attack indication and immediately lower the attitude based only on that is absurd.

(Written on 07.11.2018)(Permalink)

I agree a go around is always a good option - while one is in the air. Once on the ground and the wobbling starts the best choice is to ride it out. Sorry, but you are very wrong about the gear. It can stand extreme vertical forces without damage for exactly this reason. The gear is design to detach with extreme shear forces (Asiana 214) but vertically one would be shocked at the strength. I challenge anyone to show me one accident photo where the gear has popped through the wing....

(Written on 09.10.2017)(Permalink)

Under the circumstances this might be the best possible outcome.... Having said that the pilot had two choices and split the difference and that made the situation worse. The choices were 1) land the aircraft in the crab. Since the center of gravity is forward of the landing gear the forward momentum would have straightened the aircraft out with no control inputs from the pilot. There would have been some nose movements back and forth but far less than what was experienced (if one watches the vast number of crosswind landings in large aircraft this is what is generally done) -or- 2) transition to a slight slip. The pilot straighten the nose but did not simultaneously lower the right wing. Lowering it 5-10 degrees and allowing touchdown on the right gear followed by the left gear would have made the transition smoother. A perfectly executed crab approach / transition to a slip upon flare crosswind landing is a thing of beauty. Tried to locate a video but this was the best I co

(Written on 08.10.2017)(Permalink)

To Tony Perez: I've lost a suction pump in solid IFR and the controller knew exactly what that meant when I stated that. Even small aircraft have an electric turn coordinator and a magnetic compass so navigating the aircraft is not an issue. Controlling it with a "partial panel" involves a higher workload but any comptent and current IFR pilot should be able to handle it with no problem.

(Written on 14.03.2017)(Permalink)

Looks like the NTSB version just backed me up!

(Written on 07.07.2013)(Permalink)

Predictions: Since the ILS and VASI were OTS (out of service) the flying pilot (Captain or First Officer) was flying a visual approach totally "seat of the pants". Flight Data Recorder will indicate an unstabilized approach that began too high at the Final Approach Fix. A higher than rapid descent rate was commanded at an angle higher than the normal 3 degree glide path. In the final 30 seconds Cockpit Voice Recorder will show the Captain and First arguing about the situation until aircraft ended up low and slow with power applied too late to fully recover. In an effort not to land short the flying pilot commanded a nose high attitude and the aircraft struck the breakwater wall short of the runway in a very nose high attitude in a partially stalled (aerodynamically, that is) condition with engines commanded at full power but most likely not yet developing full power due to spool up delay. End of story.... ATP & +35 years as Certified (now Authorized) Flight Instructor

(Written on 07.07.2013)(Permalink)

Is anyone looking at the track log. Between 4:09 and 4:10 the plane lost over 20,000'. Not an emergency?

(Written on 20.06.2012)(Permalink)

Obviously the "unlike" was meant to be "like". As a flight instructor and check pilot for over 35 years this is the best article I've read on this matter.

(Written on 26.08.2011)(Permalink)