Atlas 767 went down in Houston - Page 15 - Airline Pilot Central Forums

#141

Blackhawk , 02-24-2019 05:18 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by Globemaster2827

If that's true then those descent rates at the end are higher than a Tactical Descent on a C-17 with the thrust reversers out. That can't be a Tstorm... It's still way too early and who knows if any of this stuff is accurate. Witnesses claimed it was in a pretty nose low attitude.

Yeah. Who knows. Something went terribly wrong very quickly. An experienced crew. Not even a mayday call.

#142

Joachim , 02-24-2019 05:28 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Whatever it was it looks like it happened around second 98 with a reversion from a steady descent at -2500fpm to a climb to an uncontrolled dive.

#143

A320fumes , 02-24-2019 05:36 AM

Ben Salley

Quote:

Originally Posted by Globemaster2827

I never enjoyed those...What was the limitation, "Do not exceed 20,000 fpm rate of descent"?

#144

BravoTango , 02-24-2019 05:38 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackStraw

I’m going to have to call bs on those charted numbers.

What’s a “charted number”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#145

blinkpilot182 , 02-24-2019 05:44 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Hi everyone. An Atlas Pilot here. The outpouring of support and kind sentiments on this thread has been beautiful, overwhelming and much appreciated. A lot of us are viewing this thread for that very reason. It offers a sense of calm in the confusion. Please hold off on the speculation. It doesn’t help. Those aviators were our colleagues and friends. And we are all still out here flying these airplanes. Thank you again for all of the support.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#146

JackStraw , 02-24-2019 05:47 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by BravoTango

What’s a “charted number”

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Numbers on a chart.

#147

BravoTango , 02-24-2019 05:56 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackStraw

Numbers on a chart.

They are the raw data points broadcast by the airplane, they aren’t opinion, they are what they are

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

#148

Globemaster2827 , 02-24-2019 05:56 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackStraw

I’m going to have to call bs on those charted numbers.

51,000 fpm isn’t logical.

I agree. I don't know if you could reach that if you nosed down and fire walled the throttles.

#149

Globemaster2827 , 02-24-2019 05:57 AM

Gets Weekends Off

Quote:

Originally Posted by BravoTango

They are the raw data points broadcast by the airplane, they aren’t opinion, they are what they are

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That stuff isn't official.

#150

ZeroTT , 02-24-2019 05:59 AM

Banned

Quote:

Originally Posted by JackStraw

I’m going to have to call bs on those charted numbers.

51,000 fpm isn’t logical.

The data is integrated from multiple sources and a second's uncertainty in the time between two altitudes can make some wonky numbers.

But it seems clear that something abruptly changed from a normal descent to a VERY abnormal one.

add: 51000 fpm is 510 kts. Seems plausible for straight down.