Mayday mayday the terror on flight 32

[Simo]

Watched it and was really disappointed, hardly any actual content, though the previous two incidents they flashed back to were interesting in their own right. I wonder if they managed to fit them into an hour-long program instead of the 15 minutes allocated in the program within a program

Well said,

Very poor program,

That is one hour of my life I will never get back.

ACI mash up.

 

[VHOEJ]

Rubbish really - embarassing for all involved. And it isn't anywhere near Air Crash Investigations - to hear that show mentioned with this one is insulting!

 

[jb747]

I watched some of it. Appalling. The only thing they got right was that QF32 was a flight in an aircraft.

The was no relationship with the Sioux City DC10. The DC10 had NO flight controls, and the pilots had to invent a way to fly it. QF32 had half of its hydraulics, and, in any case, an A380 will fly perfectly well with ZERO hydraulics.

The ANZ A320...the only relationship was that they're made by the same company.

One can only hope that absolutely none of this ends up on the ACI episode...otherwise it will call into doubt everything they've ever said.

 

[Craigie]

Sensationalized cough. Yes what happened was absolutely very serious but for different reasons.

If you go by channel 9 then the engine blew up with an explosion big enough to blow the whole plane up. The first officer did nothing but turn alarm sounds off (which sounded the whole episode) The computers failed completely which left the plane unable to be flown(thank you completely unrelated Air NZ test flight segment). There was 2 other pilots in the coughpit to tell Richard what to do otherwise everyone was dead(thank you 25 year old throwback to DC10 flight where pilots did amazing but had unavoidable crash). And then they landed. Pretty much in that order and with that detail.

Waste of time and an embarrassment to CH 9. More of an embarrassment to me cause I watched the thing.

 

[RooFlyer]

I watched some of it. Appalling. The only thing they got right was that QF32 was a flight in an aircraft.

The was no relationship with the Sioux City DC10. The DC10 had NO flight controls, and the pilots had to invent a way to fly it. QF32 had half of its hydraulics, and, in any case, an A380 will fly perfectly well with ZERO hydraulics.

The ANZ A320...the only relationship was that they're made by the same company.

One can only hope that absolutely none of this ends up on the ACI episode...otherwise it will call into doubt everything they've ever said.

JB, what's your opinion of ACI, maybe in the context of an expert watching a program designed for the punters ? I must admit to being a regular watcher. Whilst feeling so sorry for the pax and crew involved, I am much re-assured every time I see an incident recounted and the lessons (usually) learned and put to work making flying safer. Also the fact that most incidents are the result of a series of events (each potentially able to stop the later disaster), rarely an isolated failure.

I tried to see if the current US series of ACI includes QF32, but didn't see it.

 

[Craigie]

I saw an ad the other day for QF32 on ACI sometime in March on discovery channel.

 

[jb747]

JB, what's your opinion of ACI, maybe in the context of an expert watching a program designed for the punters ? I must admit to being a regular watcher. Whilst feeling so sorry for the pax and crew involved, I am much re-assured every time I see an incident recounted and the lessons (usually) learned and put to work making flying safer. Also the fact that most incidents are the result of a series of events (each potentially able to stop the later disaster), rarely an isolated failure.

I tried to see if the current US series of ACI includes QF32, but didn't see it.

Whilst I don't particularly like the reenactments, ACI does seem to try to get their basic facts right. For instance the recent ANZ 320 accident told the story, as I understand it, pretty well.

 

[harvyk]

I watched some of it. Appalling. The only thing they got right was that QF32 was a flight in an aircraft.

The was no relationship with the Sioux City DC10. The DC10 had NO flight controls, and the pilots had to invent a way to fly it. QF32 had half of its hydraulics, and, in any case, an A380 will fly perfectly well with ZERO hydraulics.

The ANZ A320...the only relationship was that they're made by the same company.

One can only hope that absolutely none of this ends up on the ACI episode...otherwise it will call into doubt everything they've ever said.

Be fair, they also got the plane type right (aka calling it an A380)...
Yeah I was wondering if you had watched it and if you had an opinion on it... For me I was planning on playing a drinking game, a drink every time they made a mistake that 5 minutes of actual journalism / research would have given them the correct answer and / or when they used certain emotive words but luckily I decided against it. Didn't really want to go to hospital for alcohol poisoning...

 

[jb747]

Sensationalized cough. Yes what happened was absolutely very serious but for different reasons.

If you go by channel 9 then the engine blew up with an explosion big enough to blow the whole plane up. The first officer did nothing but turn alarm sounds off (which sounded the whole episode) The computers failed completely which left the plane unable to be flown(thank you completely unrelated Air NZ test flight segment). There was 2 other pilots in the coughpit to tell Richard what to do otherwise everyone was dead(thank you 25 year old throwback to DC10 flight where pilots did amazing but had unavoidable crash). And then they landed. Pretty much in that order and with that detail.

Waste of time and an embarrassment to CH 9. More of an embarrassment to me cause I watched the thing.

All of the flight control computers were working normally (there are six main ones, any one of which can fly the aircraft), with the only change being a drop to alternate law 1 (caused by the system detecting the loss of the slats). Autothrust failed because some of the engines went to degraded mode (which is the mode that 747 Classics were in all the time....). Autopilot and flight director still worked normally.

The only computer that was having issues was the ECAM computer...the system that generates the checklists. It was never designed to handle so many items at once. Ignoring it is a fairly easy solution.... Nevertheless, it was working exactly as it was designed to do.

 

[Justinf]

Did the flight crew ever mention the word 'mayday' to air traffic control? The very title of this program is grossly inaccurate.

 

[harvyk]

Autothrust failed because some of the engines went to degraded mode (which is the mode that 747 Classics were in all the time....). Autopilot and flight director still worked normally.

So if I'm reading this right, in degraded mode, there is still full power available, it's just not controlled by the computer it's directly controlled by the pilots. That's a fair assessment?

 

[jb747]

Did the flight crew ever mention the word 'mayday' to air traffic control? The very title of this program is grossly inaccurate.

As far as I know, they declared a 'Pan'. Which perhaps gives an indication of what they (the crew) thought about things at the time.

 

[Alanslegal]

Glad I didn't watch it then

 

[jb747]

So if I'm reading this right, in degraded mode, there is still full power available, it's just not controlled by the computer it's directly controlled by the pilots. That's a fair assessment?

There are three modes. Normal, alternate and degraded. Normal and alternate can use autothrust. All three can be manually controlled.

In the normal mode, the EECs (the engine computerised control, on each engine) will control the engine behaviour, and will keep it clear of any limits. Thrust selection is based upon % thrust (i.e. a computed figure).

Alternate mode, the autothrust still works, but max thrust is reduced by 4%, and N1 becomes the controlling target. Similar to a 747-400.

Degraded, all of the thrust ratings are lost, N1 is the target. About the same as a 747-200.

 

[harvyk]

There are three modes. Normal, alternate and degraded. Normal and alternate can use autothrust. All three can be manually controlled.

In the normal mode, the EECs (the engine computerised control, on each engine) will control the engine behaviour, and will keep it clear of any limits. Thrust selection is based upon % thrust (i.e. a computed figure).

Alternate mode, the autothrust still works, but max thrust is reduced by 4%, and N1 becomes the controlling target. Similar to a 747-400.

Degraded, all of the thrust ratings are lost, N1 is the target. About the same as a 747-200.

Yeah thought so... Don't know how much you saw last night, but they where making it out as if the plane was down to 1 engine and the other 3 had pretty much failed...

 

[Barks]

I watched some of it. Appalling. The only thing they got right was that QF32 was a flight in an aircraft.

The was no relationship with the Sioux City DC10. The DC10 had NO flight controls, and the pilots had to invent a way to fly it. QF32 had half of its hydraulics, and, in any case, an A380 will fly perfectly well with ZERO hydraulics.

The ANZ A320...the only relationship was that they're made by the same company.

One can only hope that absolutely none of this ends up on the ACI episode...otherwise it will call into doubt everything they've ever said.

I missed most of it as I was watching the new series of Top Gear on BBC Knowledge but from what I could tell, this show was exactly the same as an episode of "Air Crash Confidential" shown on the Discovery channel last year. The only difference was that Peter Overton was the narrator.

 

[drewbles]

I saw an ad the other day for QF32 on ACI sometime in March on discovery channel.

Actually, it's due to air tonight in the USA:

http://thetvdb.com/?tab=season&seriesid=79771&seasonid=569417&lid=7

I'm eagerly awaiting it =)

 

[timster]

For anyone who likes to read the fine detail on these things, the ATSB final report is a good read.
Investigation: AO-2010-089 - In-flight uncontained engine failure Airbus A380-842, VH-OQA, overhead Batam Island, Indonesia, 4 November 2010

The set of circumstances that caused QF1 to end up on the golf course in BKK some years ago is even more interesting IMHO. Fascinating human factors engineering.
Investigation: 199904538 - Boeing Co 747-438, VH-OJH, Bangkok, Thailand, 23 September 1999

BTW, anyone read Richard de C's book on QF32 ? Worth the effort ?

 

[jb747]

If you got something from the ATSB reports, then no...

 

[Flying Fox]

BTW, anyone read Richard de C's book on QF32 ? Worth the effort ?

Read it; liked it; would recommend it.