Atlas 767 went down in Houston
03-12-2019, 02:55 PM
#581
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2015
Posts: 516
[QUOTE=123494;2781000]I think we all know what happened deep down but are not ready to come to terms with it.
Yep, it was probably bad maintenance.
Yep, it was probably bad maintenance.
03-12-2019, 02:55 PM
#582
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2018
Position: retired
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by 123494
I think we all know what happened deep down but are not ready to come to terms with it. If true, it’s very bad for our profession...
sorry if I'm dense: SEC school.
but i've got two hunches.
03-12-2019, 03:02 PM
#583
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2018
Position: retired
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by pangolin
The NTSB changed this after my reply to be elevator deflection.
03-12-2019, 03:06 PM
#584
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,888
Originally Posted by Name User
Well with what was originally reported by the NTSB, they were not whispers anymore.
03-12-2019, 03:19 PM
#585
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2018
Position: retired
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by pangolin
The rumor I heard wasn't the CA. Let's wait for the NTSB - it'll be clear sooner than later I think. CVR once they can hear it all should resolve this particular rumor. Accidental TOGA could explain a lot as well but the full thrust nose down sure appears suspicious.
Seems to me like the MsM is not tuned into "the rumor".
03-12-2019, 03:37 PM
#586
Banned
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 848
Originally Posted by costalpilot
Seems to me like the MsM is not tuned into "the rumor".
03-12-2019, 03:38 PM
#587
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Apelo@290
Posts: 345
Originally Posted by Blackhawk
Please provide the link where the NTSB stated that a pilot disconnected the autopilot and intentially pushed the yoke forward to put the airplane in an unrecoverable dive.
Crash: Atlas B763 at Houston on Feb 23rd 2019, loss of control on approach
Excerpt: “Also, about this time, the FDR data indicated that some small vertical accelerations consistent with the airplane entering turbulence. Shortly after, when the airplane’s indicated airspeed was steady about 230 knots, the engines increased to maximum thrust, and the airplane pitch increased to about 4° nose up. The airplane then pitched nose down over the next 18 seconds to about 49° in response to nose-down elevator deflection. (Editorial Note: the sentence originally read: "and then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input." and was later edited by the NTSB). The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.”
03-12-2019, 03:55 PM
#588
Banned
Joined APC: May 2014
Position: Tom’s Whipping boy.
Posts: 1,182
Let’s not rule out loss of stabilizer control. Anyone remember the MD-83 crash which later resulted in this from the FAA; circa 2005
SUMMARY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Boeing Model 767 airplanes. This proposed AD would require the following actions for the drive mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer: Repetitive detailed inspections for discrepancies and loose ball bearings; repetitive lubrication of the ballnut and ballscrew; repetitive measurements of the freeplay between the ballnut and the ballscrew; and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD is prompted by a report of extensive corrosion of a ballscrew in the drive mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer on a similar airplane model. We are proposing this AD to prevent an undetected failure of the primary load path for the ballscrew in the horizontal stabilizer and subsequent wear and failure of the secondary load path, which could lead to loss of control of the horizontal stabilizer and consequent loss of control of the airplane.
SUMMARY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Boeing Model 767 airplanes. This proposed AD would require the following actions for the drive mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer: Repetitive detailed inspections for discrepancies and loose ball bearings; repetitive lubrication of the ballnut and ballscrew; repetitive measurements of the freeplay between the ballnut and the ballscrew; and corrective action if necessary. This proposed AD is prompted by a report of extensive corrosion of a ballscrew in the drive mechanism of the horizontal stabilizer on a similar airplane model. We are proposing this AD to prevent an undetected failure of the primary load path for the ballscrew in the horizontal stabilizer and subsequent wear and failure of the secondary load path, which could lead to loss of control of the horizontal stabilizer and consequent loss of control of the airplane.
Last edited by BMEP100; 03-12-2019 at 04:10 PM. Reason: Date
03-12-2019, 04:12 PM
#589
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,888
Originally Posted by l8fr82hub
They never said that. They initially said the airplane pitched down due to control column input. Here a link to an article that shows the change made by the NTSB
Crash: Atlas B763 at Houston on Feb 23rd 2019, loss of control on approach
Excerpt: “Also, about this time, the FDR data indicated that some small vertical accelerations consistent with the airplane entering turbulence. Shortly after, when the airplane’s indicated airspeed was steady about 230 knots, the engines increased to maximum thrust, and the airplane pitch increased to about 4° nose up. The airplane then pitched nose down over the next 18 seconds to about 49° in response to nose-down elevator deflection. (Editorial Note: the sentence originally read: "and then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input." and was later edited by the NTSB). The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.”
Crash: Atlas B763 at Houston on Feb 23rd 2019, loss of control on approach
Excerpt: “Also, about this time, the FDR data indicated that some small vertical accelerations consistent with the airplane entering turbulence. Shortly after, when the airplane’s indicated airspeed was steady about 230 knots, the engines increased to maximum thrust, and the airplane pitch increased to about 4° nose up. The airplane then pitched nose down over the next 18 seconds to about 49° in response to nose-down elevator deflection. (Editorial Note: the sentence originally read: "and then rapidly pitched nose down to about 49° in response to column input." and was later edited by the NTSB). The stall warning (stick shaker) did not activate.”
So again, instead of destroying the reputation of the pilots involved let’s wait for the NTSB to say something like this. Reputations are easy to destroy but very hard to repair.
03-12-2019, 04:26 PM
#590
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Apelo@290
Posts: 345
Originally Posted by Blackhawk
So in other words you were besmirching pilots with no proof? Nothing about the autopilot being disconnected- and frankly if I were to do something like that I would disconnect the autopilot prior to pushing the yoke forward. I don’t see a pilot intent on killing themself over riding the autopilot. Other things could have caused the elevator to cause this nose down pitch.
So again, instead of destroying the reputation of the pilots involved let’s wait for the NTSB to say something like this. Reputations are easy to destroy but very hard to repair.
So again, instead of destroying the reputation of the pilots involved let’s wait for the NTSB to say something like this. Reputations are easy to destroy but very hard to repair.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
