Right on. I know Carl thinks he is the man, but put him in that ship and he would be well on to his way to the scene of the accident.

 

Don't think that Carl was implying he was the "man, in fact his last paragraph says; "There's no way you can pull this off without the instant reaction that only comes from prior training and mental preparation. Assuming the crew never got this training, they sadly had no chance. Not saying with certainty this recovery technique would have worked in this condition, but it may have."

Sad deal!

 

I agree with that assessment. The 747-400 has very docile aerodynamic stall characteristics. Even the spin that was developing looked like it was beginning to self correct while the aircraft was still stalled.

Carl

 

First off, the fact that we're talking about a wide body has no relevance to aerodynamics and physics. Second, you're not purely "trading" altitude for airspeed because the engines are at full thrust. This is how you are able to maintain a net altitude gain with every roll reversal cycle.

Actually, you do. In my case we started at 10,000 feet only to provide the required altitude to recover if we departed controlled flight. We began the test at 10,000 feet and V2+10. We bottomed out from the first roll reversal cycle at about 10,500 then gained about 500 to 600 feet with every subsequent cycle.

Again, I don't know if this would have worked for this incident since we don't know how bad the CG shift was, or even if there was a CG shift. I'm just saying it may have been a way to prevent a full aerodynamic stall. For me, even if my first cycle resulted in ground contact, I'd rather hit the ground in controlled flight because the airplane slides after it hits. In uncontrolled flight, the airplane wreckage is all in one area and nobody can survive those kind of G loads.

Carl

 

Why weren't those tires on this MRAPs removed or at least deflated?

 

MRAPs have run flat tires. Deflating them wouldn't do any good. As to removing them, That would take a lot of time and effort once they were loaded, only to reverse the process a few hours later.

In case anyone doesn't know what an MRAP is, it's the size of a 18 wheeler rig.

 

For those of you who might be interested, you should take a look at the UAL thread. "ALPA Taking Sides"

Looks like one of our own's consulting business might be in a little trouble. He might have to go back to flying the line full time.



http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ua...ing-sides.html

 

Sorry if I sounded argumentative Carl. I respect your test experience and I understand the maneuver you're describing. It's certainly a better option than doing nothing.

Just to continue the academic discussion though --
I disagree a little bit with "the fact that we're talking about a wide body has no relevance". Certainly you would agree a 747 is not a T-38. The fundamentals of aerodynamics and physics may be constant for all aircraft but there are huge differences in roll rate and thrust to weight ratio, etc.
Executing that procedure in a 750,000 lb. airplane at 500 feet with the gear and flaps out just doesn't seem likely.

At any rate, I agree that it would all depend on how far the CG shifted. The video from Bagram looks like the event was so bad that the airplane went nearly vertical and then pretty much fell out of the sky. Whatever broke on that jet, it left them with basically no control effectiveness at all. Those poor guys were just along for the ride.

 

That's an unnecessary cheap shot. Carl is putting out good info for discussion.
I don't see where he has ever claimed to be "the man" or superior to anyone else.

 

While I find it a little distasteful for a "union guy" to get an ALPA consulting gig while still in the employ of an airline, IMO, any bias or liability falls squarely on his shoulders - assuming his "consulting business" is properly set up. Also, the DPA writer raises some valid questions at the end of his article.

I do find it interesting that the DPA writer posted this in the UCAL thread. This board doesn't really have teeth. The letter might have been more appropriately written to ALPA, NLRB, or the arbitrators. Is it possible that his consultation is as effective as (one guy's) opinion in the late stages of the AA bankruptcy?