Fifi slimline
#41
But from his seat, Captain Dubois is unable to infer from the instrument displays in front of him why the plane is behaving as it is. The critical missing piece of information: the fact that someone has been holding the controls all the way back for virtually the entire time. No one has told Dubois, and he hasn't thought to ask.
02:12:14 (Robert) Qu'est-ce que tu en penses? Qu'est-ce que tu en penses? Qu'est-ce qu'il faut faire?
What do you think? What do you think? What should we do?
02:12:15 (Captain) Alors, là, je ne sais pas!
Well, I don't know!
As the plane approaches 10,000 feet, Robert tries to take back the controls, and pushes forward on the stick, but the plane is in "dual input" mode, and so the system averages his inputs with those of Bonin, who continues to pull back. The nose remains high.
02:13:40 (Robert) Remonte... remonte... remonte... remonte...
Climb... climb... climb... climb...
02:13:40 (Bonin) Mais je suis à fond à cabrer depuis tout à l'heure!
But I've had the stick back the whole time!
At last, Bonin tells the others the crucial fact whose import he has so grievously failed to understand himself.
02:13:42 (Captain) Non, non, non... Ne remonte pas... non, non.
No, no, no... Don't climb... no, no.
02:13:43 (Robert) Alors descends... Alors, donne-moi les commandes... À moi les commandes!
Descend, then... Give me the controls... Give me the controls!
Bonin yields the controls, and Robert finally puts the nose down. The plane begins to regain speed. But it is still descending at a precipitous angle. As they near 2000 feet, the aircraft's sensors detect the fast-approaching surface and trigger a new alarm. There is no time left to build up speed by pushing the plane's nose forward into a dive. At any rate, without warning his colleagues, Bonin once again takes back the controls and pulls his side stick all the way back.
02:14:23 (Robert) Putain, on va taper... C'est pas vrai!
Damn it, we're going to crash... This can't be happening!
02:14:25 (Bonin) Mais qu'est-ce que se passe?
But what's happening?
02:14:27 (Captain) 10 degrès d'assiette...
Ten degrees of pitch...
02:12:14 (Robert) Qu'est-ce que tu en penses? Qu'est-ce que tu en penses? Qu'est-ce qu'il faut faire?
What do you think? What do you think? What should we do?
02:12:15 (Captain) Alors, là, je ne sais pas!
Well, I don't know!
As the plane approaches 10,000 feet, Robert tries to take back the controls, and pushes forward on the stick, but the plane is in "dual input" mode, and so the system averages his inputs with those of Bonin, who continues to pull back. The nose remains high.
02:13:40 (Robert) Remonte... remonte... remonte... remonte...
Climb... climb... climb... climb...
02:13:40 (Bonin) Mais je suis à fond à cabrer depuis tout à l'heure!
But I've had the stick back the whole time!
At last, Bonin tells the others the crucial fact whose import he has so grievously failed to understand himself.
02:13:42 (Captain) Non, non, non... Ne remonte pas... non, non.
No, no, no... Don't climb... no, no.
02:13:43 (Robert) Alors descends... Alors, donne-moi les commandes... À moi les commandes!
Descend, then... Give me the controls... Give me the controls!
Bonin yields the controls, and Robert finally puts the nose down. The plane begins to regain speed. But it is still descending at a precipitous angle. As they near 2000 feet, the aircraft's sensors detect the fast-approaching surface and trigger a new alarm. There is no time left to build up speed by pushing the plane's nose forward into a dive. At any rate, without warning his colleagues, Bonin once again takes back the controls and pulls his side stick all the way back.
02:14:23 (Robert) Putain, on va taper... C'est pas vrai!
Damn it, we're going to crash... This can't be happening!
02:14:25 (Bonin) Mais qu'est-ce que se passe?
But what's happening?
02:14:27 (Captain) 10 degrès d'assiette...
Ten degrees of pitch...
#42
Sullenberger, who flew the bus and runs a safety consulting firm, participated in this report.
Air France 447: Final report on what brought airliner down - YouTube
Air France 447: Final report on what brought airliner down - YouTube
#43
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 709
Likes: 6
From: 320 Captain
Boeing has its own issues too. Linked/moving controls is no panacea for eliminating crashes.
Directive Targets 'Relic' 737NG Autothrottle Issue Spotlighted In Turkish Crash
Directive Targets 'Relic' 737NG Autothrottle Issue Spotlighted In Turkish Crash
FAA on Monday will publish a proposed AD targeting the Boeing 737NG flight altimeter/autothrottle interface anomaly that Dutch investigators concluded was a huge link in the chain of events that caused the February 2009 crash of Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 near Amsterdam Schiphol Airport.
Read our subscriber-only story here, and check out the Dutch report, issued in 2010, here.
Here's how the report lays out the issue:
The Boeing 737-800 can be flown either manually or automatically. This also applies to the management of the engines. The autothrottle regulates the thrust of the engines. The aircraft is fitted with two radio altimeter systems, one on the left and one on the right. In principle, the autothrottle uses the altitude measurements provided by the left radio altimeter system. Only if there is an error in the left system that is recognised as such by the system, the autothrottle will use the right-hand radio altimeter system.
In a worst-case scenario, the left-side altimeter tells the autothrottle that the aircraft is lower than it is while the right-side autopilot is flying the plane, but the left altimeter thinks its data is good. Fly low enough in this condition, such as a final approach, and data from the left altimeter can roll the throttles back to idle while the right-side autopilot, relying on accurate data from its altimeter, will keep pushing the nose up to maintain the glideslope.
If this happens at too low an altitude and the pilots aren't quick enough to recover from an unexpected aircraft state, the results can be devastating.
This is what happened to Turkish Flight 1951. Not for nothing, the flight's crew included a captain acting as a flight instructor alongside the less experienced first officer, as well as a "safety pilot" who, among other things, was supposed to help the captain--tasked with a few extra instructional duties--keep an eye on the aircraft state.
The three pilots, one crewmember, and five passengers died in the accident.
Photo: Dutch Safety Board
Again, from the report:
This [design] a relic from the Boeing 737, certificated long ago, which in the original design prioritised the provision of information to the left pilot (captain). This original design has now been superseded by both technical facilities and a democratisation and reallocation of pilot duties in the cockpit. It is noticeable that this subject cannot be found in any of the Boeing 737 manuals or training documents for pilots. Pilots therefore do not have the correct knowledge about links between the control systems and data input for their own aircraft. The result of this is an incomplete or even incorrect ‘mental model’ of the automated flight control.
FAA's AD is based on Boeing service bulletin issued in November. The directive will require autothrottle computer replacements or modifications on affected 737NGs, which FAA says number 497 in the U.S. alone.
"The service bulletin referenced in the NPRM is one of the final components of the changes Boeing has made," a Boeing spokesman notes.
Others include operations manual updates and software changes in April 2010, and a July 2010 production line cut-in that added an AIRSPEED LOW aural alert to new 737NGs.
Read our subscriber-only story here, and check out the Dutch report, issued in 2010, here.
Here's how the report lays out the issue:
The Boeing 737-800 can be flown either manually or automatically. This also applies to the management of the engines. The autothrottle regulates the thrust of the engines. The aircraft is fitted with two radio altimeter systems, one on the left and one on the right. In principle, the autothrottle uses the altitude measurements provided by the left radio altimeter system. Only if there is an error in the left system that is recognised as such by the system, the autothrottle will use the right-hand radio altimeter system.
In a worst-case scenario, the left-side altimeter tells the autothrottle that the aircraft is lower than it is while the right-side autopilot is flying the plane, but the left altimeter thinks its data is good. Fly low enough in this condition, such as a final approach, and data from the left altimeter can roll the throttles back to idle while the right-side autopilot, relying on accurate data from its altimeter, will keep pushing the nose up to maintain the glideslope.
If this happens at too low an altitude and the pilots aren't quick enough to recover from an unexpected aircraft state, the results can be devastating.
This is what happened to Turkish Flight 1951. Not for nothing, the flight's crew included a captain acting as a flight instructor alongside the less experienced first officer, as well as a "safety pilot" who, among other things, was supposed to help the captain--tasked with a few extra instructional duties--keep an eye on the aircraft state.
The three pilots, one crewmember, and five passengers died in the accident.
Photo: Dutch Safety Board
Again, from the report:
This [design] a relic from the Boeing 737, certificated long ago, which in the original design prioritised the provision of information to the left pilot (captain). This original design has now been superseded by both technical facilities and a democratisation and reallocation of pilot duties in the cockpit. It is noticeable that this subject cannot be found in any of the Boeing 737 manuals or training documents for pilots. Pilots therefore do not have the correct knowledge about links between the control systems and data input for their own aircraft. The result of this is an incomplete or even incorrect ‘mental model’ of the automated flight control.
FAA's AD is based on Boeing service bulletin issued in November. The directive will require autothrottle computer replacements or modifications on affected 737NGs, which FAA says number 497 in the U.S. alone.
"The service bulletin referenced in the NPRM is one of the final components of the changes Boeing has made," a Boeing spokesman notes.
Others include operations manual updates and software changes in April 2010, and a July 2010 production line cut-in that added an AIRSPEED LOW aural alert to new 737NGs.
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
United was the launch customer for the 777. I was told when senior UAL pilots went to see the cockpit mock-up, it had a stick.
"No damn United airplane will ever have a stick in it!! Put in a yoke!!" I was told. So, Boeing did.
Who asked for that? Senior United Captains who find themselves on such buying committees; guys who undoubtedly had flown B-377s, DC-6s and -7s, DC-8s -10s, and the B-720 and 727.
A few months later, some United captains went to see the Bus on a buying tour. Northwest was the first big North American customer; so the Bus somewhat of an unknown.
I would guess these guys were somewhat more junior. To them, a sidestick was fine. Suddenly, United announces a huge order for stick-equipped airplanes that aren't built by Boeing or Douglas.
To the dyed-in-the-wool McBoeing crowd, this was heresy. Not made in America, sidestick, fly-by-wire (which only the F-16 had done to this point) and the ever popular "Airbus---even the name sucks." (Which I will admit is pretty funny).
So, pilots looked for way to insult and denigrate it. Final assembly of the A-320 was largely done in France (some is now done in Germany, and China; Mobile Alabama in 2018). So, thinking it was a "French airplane," they started calling it Fifi (pronounced "fee-fee," as in a Moulin Rouge can-can girl's name).
The FMC of the Airbus is slightly different from Boeing. It has no Execute key. I was told that Boeing made the software proprietary, so Airbus had to make theirs different. It means that when you put in the last digit in a field, it takes it. You can't say "Does that look right to you?" and then execute.
You just have to change your habit pattern to put in all but the last digit before you ask that question.
It did lead to the stereotypical "What (or Why) is it doing that?!?!" derogation of the A-320 and its FMC architecture.
When I was hired (99), I didn't know much about the bus. I had never flown on one even as a passenger, and couldn't tell an A-300 from a 767. I didn't know that the wings are made in the UK, the empennage in Spain, the aft fuselage in Germany, and the forward fuselage in France. I didn't know the Brits did the human engineering for the cockpit layout, and proposed the sidestick. I think the UK makes the FBW electronics.
I was going through 747-400 school with a great Captain, when I was barely off probation. When 9-11 happened and I knew I was going to get bumped, I remembered what he had told me while going through 747 class:
"There are two kinds of pilots--those who hate the Bus, and those who have flown the Bus."
I like the Bus. I like the sidestick, the logic in handling emergencies, the roominess, the quiet, the tray, the seat, and the far-better air conditioning. "Fifi" is fine, but it isn't really French. Neither is California sparkling wine.
The worst part of all this? The 777 and 787 having a freaking wheel between your legs, even though they are both FBW. My biggest disappointment is that Boeing doesn't build as smart or comfortable a cockpit as Airbus. Thanks, United buying committee on the 777.....
I have no desire to fly the 787. But I would like to fly the A-350.
"No damn United airplane will ever have a stick in it!! Put in a yoke!!" I was told. So, Boeing did.
Who asked for that? Senior United Captains who find themselves on such buying committees; guys who undoubtedly had flown B-377s, DC-6s and -7s, DC-8s -10s, and the B-720 and 727.
A few months later, some United captains went to see the Bus on a buying tour. Northwest was the first big North American customer; so the Bus somewhat of an unknown.
I would guess these guys were somewhat more junior. To them, a sidestick was fine. Suddenly, United announces a huge order for stick-equipped airplanes that aren't built by Boeing or Douglas.
To the dyed-in-the-wool McBoeing crowd, this was heresy. Not made in America, sidestick, fly-by-wire (which only the F-16 had done to this point) and the ever popular "Airbus---even the name sucks." (Which I will admit is pretty funny).
So, pilots looked for way to insult and denigrate it. Final assembly of the A-320 was largely done in France (some is now done in Germany, and China; Mobile Alabama in 2018). So, thinking it was a "French airplane," they started calling it Fifi (pronounced "fee-fee," as in a Moulin Rouge can-can girl's name).
The FMC of the Airbus is slightly different from Boeing. It has no Execute key. I was told that Boeing made the software proprietary, so Airbus had to make theirs different. It means that when you put in the last digit in a field, it takes it. You can't say "Does that look right to you?" and then execute.
You just have to change your habit pattern to put in all but the last digit before you ask that question.
It did lead to the stereotypical "What (or Why) is it doing that?!?!" derogation of the A-320 and its FMC architecture.When I was hired (99), I didn't know much about the bus. I had never flown on one even as a passenger, and couldn't tell an A-300 from a 767. I didn't know that the wings are made in the UK, the empennage in Spain, the aft fuselage in Germany, and the forward fuselage in France. I didn't know the Brits did the human engineering for the cockpit layout, and proposed the sidestick. I think the UK makes the FBW electronics.
I was going through 747-400 school with a great Captain, when I was barely off probation. When 9-11 happened and I knew I was going to get bumped, I remembered what he had told me while going through 747 class:
"There are two kinds of pilots--those who hate the Bus, and those who have flown the Bus."
I like the Bus. I like the sidestick, the logic in handling emergencies, the roominess, the quiet, the tray, the seat, and the far-better air conditioning. "Fifi" is fine, but it isn't really French. Neither is California sparkling wine.
The worst part of all this? The 777 and 787 having a freaking wheel between your legs, even though they are both FBW. My biggest disappointment is that Boeing doesn't build as smart or comfortable a cockpit as Airbus. Thanks, United buying committee on the 777.....

I have no desire to fly the 787. But I would like to fly the A-350.
A-bleeping-men... Give me the bus over Boeing yoke any day of the week.
#47
Sorry to all for the thread-drift. My real intent was to show the origin of the "Fifi" moniker.
Guppy:
I believe the origin here is that if all the airliners were fish, it was the littlest fish in the sea.
No conspiracy.
My Dad worked at Western. There, it was referred to as "Fat Albert," or "Fat Al." The character immortalized by Bill Cosby was quite popular when the 737 made its public introduction, so the name was a logical consequence.
Due to a common fuselage diameter with the other Boeings, and shorter length, it appeared to be "fat" due to fineness-ratio.
Anyone else have popularized names for the 737 at other airlines?
Guppy:
I believe the origin here is that if all the airliners were fish, it was the littlest fish in the sea.
No conspiracy.
My Dad worked at Western. There, it was referred to as "Fat Albert," or "Fat Al." The character immortalized by Bill Cosby was quite popular when the 737 made its public introduction, so the name was a logical consequence.
Due to a common fuselage diameter with the other Boeings, and shorter length, it appeared to be "fat" due to fineness-ratio.
Anyone else have popularized names for the 737 at other airlines?
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Sorry to all for the thread-drift. My real intent was to show the origin of the "Fifi" moniker.
Guppy:
I believe the origin here is that if all the airliners were fish, it was the littlest fish in the sea.
No conspiracy.
My Dad worked at Western. There, it was referred to as "Fat Albert," or "Fat Al." The character immortalized by Bill Cosby was quite popular when the 737 made its public introduction, so the name was a logical consequence.
Due to a common fuselage diameter with the other Boeings, and shorter length, it appeared to be "fat" due to fineness-ratio.
Anyone else have popularized names for the 737 at other airlines?
Guppy:
I believe the origin here is that if all the airliners were fish, it was the littlest fish in the sea.
No conspiracy.
My Dad worked at Western. There, it was referred to as "Fat Albert," or "Fat Al." The character immortalized by Bill Cosby was quite popular when the 737 made its public introduction, so the name was a logical consequence.
Due to a common fuselage diameter with the other Boeings, and shorter length, it appeared to be "fat" due to fineness-ratio.
Anyone else have popularized names for the 737 at other airlines?
I had a coach in high school nickname HIMSELF "killer"!!!! He would say, "please call me killer". I...of course...never did. Total dork.
#49
I just can't call airplanes by their dumb nicknames. I think people are TRYING to sound cool and I honestly get a bit embarrassed for them. I simply say "737".
I had a coach in high school nickname HIMSELF "killer"!!!! He would say, "please call me killer". I...of course...never did. Total dork.
I had a coach in high school nickname HIMSELF "killer"!!!! He would say, "please call me killer". I...of course...never did. Total dork.
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,168
Likes: 0
From: Gets weekends off
Most United pilots call it the guppy. Its like calling the F-14 the Tomcat or the F-4 the Phantom.
Its tradition to refer to an airplane by something other than the number designation that the manufacture gave it. In WWII even each airplane had its own name. Ever heard of the "Enola Gay"? It was a B-29 Stratofortress.
It's not a big deal to call it the Guppy, but could you imagine being in a Navy Squadron and having the new guys refuse to call the F-18 a "Hornet" and just tell people "I fly the F/A-18C"
Call it what you want, but its a guppy.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



