BREAKING: Boeing 767 cargo jet operated by Atlas Air has crashed in Texas

[Gabriel]

It's more of a question to ask why the PIC didn't intervene and take control but it happens much more quickly than I first realized.

He took control quite quickly (after a reasonable, expected and understandable "startle and info gathering" delay) and started to pull back hard on the control column. The problem is that he was fighting a battle with the FO for the control column, and losing it. WHen they came below the clouds and the FO saw the ground coming, he either started to pull up too or let go on the yoke and finally we had a positive nose-up elevator input and the plane started to pitch up quite quickly with a load factor that went from -1G to 4G. It was too late, though.

The FO didn't communicate much (except shouting STALL an praying to the Lord to have mercy of his soul) and the captain didn't speak at all.
The reaction of this particular FO is unfortunately what we could have expected from hi, given his antecedents
But, as I mentioned before, 2 words by the captain would most likely saved the day. 2 words that he should have said, it was SOP and his duty to say, and it was obvious that he should have said: "My plane".

[Gabriel]

I don't think it would be overkill to add some aural alert on go-around mode activation. Like, "GO-AROUND". A mere software update. The counter-argument is "competent pilots don't need that!" Right, just like they don't need "TOO LOW GEAR"...

I side with 3we in what the pilot is expected to do (keep attitude in the safe range) and that this should be a primordial and permanent item in pilot training, certification selection and and evaluation,

But I side with Evan that extra layers of safety would not an overkill because we know that not all pilots are as competent as they should and even a very competent pilot in his worst day can use some help.

Why choose one thing or the other instead of gong for both?

But, as 3WE said, a pilot that is not skilled in this fundamental aspect can be dangerous in other situations outside of an inadvertent TOGA. Or ask Air France.

[BoeingBobby]

And so it continues.....

[Evan]

Yes, there are several cues an indications. The thrust levers move forward, the "N1 target" goes to the max, Ni, N2, EPR and Fuel Flow all start to increase, sound of engine increases, thrust increases, you can feel the acceleration, the aircraft pitches up, the speed increase, the vertical speed increases...

But the most important one... There is an instrument called PDF, PRIMARY FLIGHT DISPLAY. It was given that name for a reason, you know, it is the PRIMARY DISPLAYthat the pilots use to FLY the airplane, the one that should take the bulk of the attention of the PILOT FLYING and that the PILOT MONITORING should MONITOR.frequently. It contains the most important information the pilots need to fly the plane, some of which we mentioned above: Attitude (artificial horizon, i.e. roll and bank), airspeed, altitude, vertical speed...

It aslo contains a thing called FMA, FLIGHT MODE ANNOUNCIATOR. It has 3 boxed that show what the automation is doing, one box for the vertical channel (pitch, altitude, vertical speed), one for the horizontal channel (heading, bank) and one for the autothtrottle. The mode that each channel is doing will be shown inside each box (like VS -2000 // HDG 090 // 230KT). When one of these modes changes, the new mode will be displayed but also, for some seconds, the new mode will either flash, have a frame drown around it, or have a different color, to call the attention that the mode has changed. In this case, when Go Around was activated, all 3 boxes would have flashed GA.

Why do you guys persist in pointing out the obvious. Yes, not flying by the instruments in IMC is pilot error. Solved. But trusting the sensations of one's body over the instruments is a human weakness and a human factor stemming from the fact that we were not meant to fly around in three-dimensional space. So training and vetting must be uncompromising. But we need more than that because human factors can never be fully overcome. We need safeguards and situational cues for multiple senses. Like the eyes AND the ears.

The plots you posted show a moment of 'go-around annunciation'. Is that just referring to the silent FMA indication or is there some aural alert that I'm not aware of?

[Evan]

But, as I mentioned before, 2 words by the captain would most likely saved the day. 2 words that he should have said, it was SOP and his duty to say, and it was obvious that he should have said: "My plane".

CRM requires this. Until a pilot declares that he is the pilot flying, he is not the pilot flying. This error on the part of the PIC was a significant contributing factor. CRM is still too often thrown out the window during upsets.

[3WE]

And so it continues.....

It does.

I hope you are entertained.

While I will never know, I still think it's valid to wonder how someone can get licenses and pass check rides and interviews and then dive a perfectly good plane into the ground...

Sure, there's no good reason, but the bad reason seems to be a continuing question.

[3WE]

I don't agree.

Valid counterarguments noted.

But I THOUGHT (dangerous ground here) he uttered "We're stalling" (YouTube transcript.)

[Some area for further discussion]

[Gabriel]

Why do you guys persist in pointing out the obvious.

What? Somene asked if there was an indication that go around had activated. Someone answered.

The plots you posted show a moment of 'go-around annunciation'. Is that just referring to the silent FMA indication or is there some aural alert that I'm not aware of?

Yes, I suppose. I don't know if there is any aural alarm associated with that.

Again, someone asked for an indication, I said there is an indication. I am not against an alarm. An alarm is not an indication and I was not answering about an alarm.
But we need the pilots to use the PFD because things can go wrong in ways that don't involve the GA alarm or any alarm, unless you start putting alarms associated with every single flight mode change, AT mode change, FMS input, etc... and when you start having alarms sounding al the time and for everything they stop calling ones attention so they stop working as alarms, rather as background sounds.

[Evan]

What? Somene asked if there was an indication that go around had activated. Someone answered.


Yes, I suppose. I don't know if there is any aural alarm associated with that.

Again, someone asked for an indication, I said there is an indication. I am not against an alarm. An alarm is not an indication and I was not answering about an alarm.
But we need the pilots to use the PFD because things can go wrong in ways that don't involve the GA alarm or any alarm, unless you start putting alarms associated with every single flight mode change, AT mode change, FMS input, etc... and when you start having alarms sounding al the time and for everything they stop calling ones attention so they stop working as alarms, rather as background sounds.

There is a profound difference between any FMS mode change and a go-around, as you know. This is a major alteration of the vertical flight path, the energy and the game plan in proximity to the ground. I would be on the conservative side about adding aural warnings and alerts in high workload phases, but this one seems justified. Not only would it help prevent accidents such as this one, it would help prevent accidents caused by a failure to activate the go-around mode.

[Gabriel]

Valid counterarguments noted.

But I THOUGHT (dangerous ground here) he uttered "We're stalling" (YouTube transcript.)

[Some area for further discussion]

He did. My guess is that the super-high perceived pitch coupled with the sensation of falling (induced by himself pushing down) made him think that h was stalling.

The somatogravic scenario would be:
- Airplane pitches up a bit (giving the angular sensation) and accelerates a lot (pushing you against the back of the seat as if the plane was tilted nose up) and you perceive a high pitch.
- You push down on the yoke, possibly not realizing that you are pushing way too much, which induces the low Gs which in turn induces a sensation of falling.
- However, while feel the falling sensation and your nose is actually pointing down now, you still feel that you are tilted up because the longitudinal acceleration is still pushing you against the back of your seat.
- "I am aiming too high and while I am pushing down we are still aiming too high and I feel the falling sensation: This is a stall and I am not pushing down hard enough, let's push harder"

The FO didn't call "stall" right away. By when the FO shouted "we are stalling" (the first time) he had already been pushing down several seconds, they had been well below 1G and even in negative Gs for some seconds, the pitch was already 25 degrees nose down, and the perceived pith was just apparent pitch was just descending from too high nose-up and just monetarily reaching zero before increasing again.

So, in short, what I believe happened is that he first thought that the plane had a nose-high upset and seconds later though that this nose high condition developed into a stall.
If I am correct on that, that is incompatible with the initiation of the go-around itself being interpreted as an accelerated stall.

[3WE]

CRM requires this. Until a pilot declares that he is the pilot flying, he is not the pilot flying.

Awesome absolute statement. I don't think the control systems of the airplane give a damn what the pilots declare and either pilot can do all sorts of things (albeit not with full independence).

[Gabriel]

There is a profound difference between any FMS mode change and a go-around, as you know. This is a major alteration of the vertical flight path, the energy and the game plan in proximity to the ground. I would be on the conservative side about adding aural warnings and alerts in high workload phases, but this one seems justified. Not only would it help prevent accidents such as this one, it would help prevented accidents caused by a failure to activate the go-around mode.

But I side with Evan that extra layers of safety would not an overkill because we know that not all pilots are as competent as they should and even a very competent pilot in his worst day can use some help.

I am not against an alarm.

Instead of reading between lines and trying to guess what I wanted to say, why don't you focus on the lines and read what I did say?

[Evan]

Instead of reading between lines and trying to guess what I wanted to say, why don't you focus on the lines and read what I did say?

Because of lines like this:

unless you start putting alarms associated with every single flight mode change, AT mode change, FMS input, etc... and when you start having alarms sounding al the time and for everything they stop calling ones attention so they stop working as alarms, rather as background sounds.

Is that what I did say?

I acknowledge that that you sort of concur on the go-around alert.

[3WE]

He did...By when the FO shouted "we are stalling" (the first time) he had already been pushing down several seconds, blah blah for some seconds blah blah blah.

I get it, the time sequence does not support my idea that he thought he was stalling.

Or does it...He might have THOUGHT he was stalling several some blah blah seconds EARLIER and was just now (AFTER some seconds) TELLING the captain.

I dunno- I may stick with my theory until we croak and can ask him what he was thinking.

I can also see him dozing off, and dreaming something and making control inputs consistent with his dream (another question for the hereafter).

I missed the part of the report where he was fatigued, though...

PS, I don't mind Evanie's ideas for a go-around annunciator (or all sorts of other annunciations), as long as they are divided into "basic aural backup/confirmation" versus "warning, this is big $shit".

I also generally understand what you say, unlike Evan...you do sometimes get into gray areas and areas where there is subtle conflict and tension...cool world, that is.

[Gabriel]

Because of lines like this:

I said why choose one, we should go for both.
That part was stressing that even with the TOGA alarm we still better certain plots or filter them out, because they will find ways other than TOGA to screw it up, and since putting alarms everywhere would not work.

And even with the TOGA alarm, I don't trust certain pilots to correctly react to it. Remember how certain pilots from certain European airline reacted to a stall alarm that was shouting "honk honk Stall Stall" in plain English while flying over certain ocean after departing from certain city of certain Portuguese-speaking South American country?

Again, no saying no to the TOGA alarm, just staying that can help but it's not enough, and the "pilot improvement and filtering" part can also help but is not enough since no filter filters 100%. So go for both.