Brand spanking new Airbus 340-600 destroyed on teh ground

[hoveringuy]

Guys, it's really easy to bash them for wrecking a new plane. Truth is, the Airbus is complicated and several have been lost from pilots not comprehending the excessive automation.

It's the Airbus way.

Air France lost one because the pilot was making a low approach over the runway during an airshow, except when he tried to throttle up the plane (that is, the computer) decided that since the plane was in a landing configuration and it was lower than 50 ft it was landing, damn it. The computer didn't know about the trees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5NXpar4Ouw

The Air Force destroyed a 707 tanker on the ground--- completely blew it to pieces--- because the maintenance crew over-pressurized it. They read the gauge wrong and instead of going to 7 psi it went all the way around again and it exploded at like 25 psi.

Trust me, pilots will find a way to wreck an airplane and the crew of this plane was no different.

[z31maniac]

wow cool funny how none of them would throttle down lol

I think that would be the 1st thing I would do.

Just like the many people you see for the first time on a quad or dirtbike, they just can't seem to let off the throttle!

[Maluco]

Concord fail...

LOL that bird used to face the nose but after the fail it turned away facing aft...

[Hallen]

Guys, it's really easy to bash them for wrecking a new plane. Truth is, the Airbus is complicated and several have been lost from pilots not comprehending the excessive automation.

It's the Airbus way.

Air France lost one because the pilot was making a low approach over the runway during an airshow, except when he tried to throttle up the plane (that is, the computer) decided that since the plane was in a landing configuration and it was lower than 50 ft it was landing, damn it. The computer didn't know about the trees.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5NXpar4Ouw

The Air Force destroyed a 707 tanker on the ground--- completely blew it to pieces--- because the maintenance crew over-pressurized it. They read the gauge wrong and instead of going to 7 psi it went all the way around again and it exploded at like 25 psi.

Trust me, pilots will find a way to wreck an airplane and the crew of this plane was no different.

Yeah, that was my point #1, Airbus usually way over does the automation.

My second point was the Snopes report is just as fishy as the "news" story.

Engineer's don't normally do any kind of test on an airplane from the front seat. Only a test pilot will do that, this crash exact reason why.

Any moron of a pilot will know to throttle back if you are moving unexpectedly. If it was two engineers up front, why were the engines running in the first place? Where BOTH of them so stupid as to not pull back on the throttles for 13 seconds while they skittered down the ramp??

It is especially suspicious because they had time to grab the tiller to try and steer the airplane away from the wall. 13 seconds is a fucking eternity in an emergency situation for most pilots, so unless the computer did decide the airplane was taking off and ignored the pilots inputs (eg, reducing throttle) there is no other excuse for this other than either incompetence, or a serious breach of the rules.

If the computers did get in the way, then it is proof that this Airbus is not ready for the real world.

Anyway, I don't know what Airbus's policy is for runups, but if they were really testing the parking brake and they didn't have a test pilot doing it, they really are stupid.

I have 20 years aviation experience as both a mechanic and a pilot. I am rated in both helicopters and airplanes. I have been on many test flights and test runs. I may not have all the facts here, but I do know what I am talking about.

[Tree18is]

I don't see the problem.

yup fuck them...

but thanks for sharing.

[Maluco]

Yeah, that was my point #1, Airbus usually way over does the automation.

My second point was the Snopes report is just as fishy as the "news" story.

Engineer's don't normally do any kind of test on an airplane from the front seat. Only a test pilot will do that, this crash exact reason why.

Any moron of a pilot will know to throttle back if you are moving unexpectedly. If it was two engineers up front, why were the engines running in the first place? Where BOTH of them so stupid as to not pull back on the throttles for 13 seconds while they skittered down the ramp??

It is especially suspicious because they had time to grab the tiller to try and steer the airplane away from the wall. 13 seconds is a fucking eternity in an emergency situation for most pilots, so unless the computer did decide the airplane was taking off and ignored the pilots inputs (eg, reducing throttle) there is no other excuse for this other than either incompetence, or a serious breach of the rules.

If the computers did get in the way, then it is proof that this Airbus is not ready for the real world.

Anyway, I don't know what Airbus's policy is for runups, but if they were really testing the parking brake and they didn't have a test pilot doing it, they really are stupid.

I have 20 years aviation experience as both a mechanic and a pilot. I am rated in both helicopters and airplanes. I have been on many test flights and test runs. I may not have all the facts here, but I do know what I am talking about.

it's always a combination of a number of things... the infamous "sequence of events" that unfold when it comes to airline disasters. CFIT is actually the most common. I guess that makes this one an UCTIT (Uncontrolled Taxi Into Terrain)

A great percent of my DVR is filled with "Air Disaters" and "Seconds from Disasters" all related to airline tragedies/catastrophies. It's truly amazing to watch and learn the details that lead and have led to so many of these accidents.

[Peterkaczynski]

facepalm

[Maluco]

Check this out...

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20081221/BUSINESS/492423681/1005

'Unsecured wheels' caused Airbus crash

Ivan Gale

• Last Updated: December 21. 2008 6:52PM UAE / December 21. 2008 2:52PM GMT

French investigators have found that an Airbus to be delivered to Etihad Airways crashed during ground engine tests because the wheels were unchocked and attempts to steer away from a wall had decreased brake pressure.

Engineers from Airbus and Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies (ADAT), formerly GAMCO, were aboard the US$250 million (Dh918m) Airbus A340-600 when the accident happened on Nov 15 last year at the Airbus facility in Toulouse, France.
Four of the nine workers on board were seriously injured after the aircraft suddenly surged forward during the tests and slammed into the test-pen wall. The impact of the 220-tonne aircraft moving at 55kmh nearly split the aircraft in two.

A “lack of detection and correction” of violations to test procedures caused the accident, according to the official 30-page report. The official account was released in French last week by the Bureau d’Enquetes et d’Analyses (BEA) and then translated by Air Transport Intelligence, a UK-based aviation website.

The website reported BEA as saying the four Trent 500 engines, carrying 56,000 pounds of thrust each, were being tested at high power and the wheels were left unchocked.

“Surprise led the ground-test technician to focus on the braking system, so he did not think about reducing the engines’ thrust,” the website reported in its translation.
As the main maintenance, repair and overhaul provider for Etihad Airways, ADAT had been a part of the pre-delivery tests.

The firm is expanding rapidly to serve the growing needs of Etihad and last year it said it hoped to earn $800m in revenues per annum by 2012.

“It was all over in 13 seconds,” said David Kaminski-Morrow, an editor at Air Transport Intelligence. “The aeroplane shouldn’t haven been running with engines at higher power and the aeroplane should have had chocks on the wheels to stop [it] moving, and these things didn’t happen. It was basically a schoolboy error.”

While the English translation of the report on the Air Transport Intelligence website details how engineers tried to stop the plane once it was in motion, authorities stopped short of saying who had allowed the accident to occur.

“The report does not say who made the decision to put the aeroplane in the position which led to the accident in the first place. What part ADAT played and what part Airbus made is not publicly clear,” Mr Kaminski-Morrow said.

“This will probably be the subject of Airbus internal inquiries. But I find it hard to believe suddenly all the rules got broken because ADAT came along. It was at the Airbus headquarters, it was an Airbus test pen, it was an Airbus engineer at the right-hand seat, which the report said is where control inputs were coming from. An ADAT engineer was in the left seat.”

An ADAT spokesman declined to comment. “At this stage, we have not seen a copy of the report and so cannot comment on any elements that might refer to Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies,” he said.

Investigators noted in their report that tests on other aircraft in the days before had taken place under similar circumstances.

“Looking at shots recorded several days before the accident, we can see that some tests are carried out with wheel chocks and not others,” the website said in its translation of the BEA report. Airbus has reportedly tightened its procedures for the engine test, which was designed to check for fuel leaks.

In the run-up to the accident, the full-power engine test with wheels unchocked was testing the limits of the parking brake. As the aircraft began to move, an ADAT engineer reported the aircraft was moving. According to the flight recorder, at that point the pedal brake was applied and the parking brake deactivated, said Mr Kaminski-Morrow. Finally, the steering wheel was turned to avoid crashing into the test-pen wall, but that had the opposite effect as it instead reduced the braking pressure.

“It’s definitely one of the more unusual accidents I’ve come across,” said Mr Kaminski-Morrow.

[Maluco]

LOL

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4256135/?threadid=4256135&searchid=4256135&s=Etihad+crash#ID4256135

Talk about a story to tell your friends at a party - "Well, this one time, I was in this brand new $300 million dollar jet, testing it before it was delivered, and the the brakes let go and it crashed! I got fired because they thought it was my fault, but it wasnt!"

[daniel]

I think they did it for the lullz

[Maluco]

this one is going to grow up to make a fine "I can't throttle down" specimen...