I don't remember exactly which video here on this channel. It was the one with the Russian pilot who lets his son "fly" the plane. I think the video creator commented that it was as if the pilots wanted to crash because there were 2 points in their disaster that if they simply let go of the controls, the plane would have corrected itself.
@@W8RIT1 you got it mostly right, the plane likely wouldn’t have corrected itself, but had they just turned on the autopilot at any point prior to the final dive, it would’ve easily recovered
Yes, it’s like a panic error made by a private pilot who has only just gone solo and yet you’ve got a couple of experience people on the flight date with lots of automation to help and lots of warnings, interesting I don’t know if that’s relevant or not, but a friend of mine who flew for our national Carrier in New Zealand did an upgrade to a 737 type rating in America, and while he was there, there was a pilot from a very wealthy country from that part of the world in this video I can’t remember the exact country, but apparently the pilot was absolutely useless, but he tried to literally bribe the American instructor with money to pass him when he wouldn’t. He departed and said no problem he will find a flight training instructor that will give him his 737 rating!
@@muitosabaoyou can pull up without pulling up to the moon. In the first video the pilots went 9 seconds without doing anything after hearing “pull up!” In the second video the pilots decided the plane was a rocket and could head to the moon. Can’t pilots just pull up like normal, like they know how to operate a plane or something?
@@hoopdesign I'm not a pilot but on approach you've basically idle thrust since the plane gets more like a glider from your top of decent. All is calculated in a way you land as slow as possible with margin of course. The pilots didn't pull up anything, it's the automatic applied full thrust that made the plane pitch up. As said in the clip, the pilots should actually have pushed the nose down to counteract. You want to keep speed, without enough speed you drop like a brick. And it's all split second work, once you lose sufficient air flow over the wings you're too late. You can add power etc but all has a delay with a big heavy plane and already close to the ground there ain't much margin. Flying a plane ain't hard but doing exactly what's right in some seconds in a unusual situation is. That's why pilots are trained on situations they often never will encounter. Both of these accidents where avoidable but that's with a lot of accidents. Humans are pretty lousy if it's about focussing at a lot at the same time and if there is happening a lot around you it's really easy to miss something. Especially when things are unexpected. If you read the comments you'll notice a lot of super talented pilots who won't make mistakes are actually just commenting RU-vid videos the entire day. Total waste of talent and could make aviation so much saver to have them as pilots /sarcastic
@@wokewokerman5280 ATC in the second video were unbelievable. ww win. watca call it. You n n know, that blowy stuff. Meanwhile on the first video, when the pilots could well have had a missed approach, ATC would send them on a sightseeing tour over the mountains. In both cases, both ATC and the pilots were a bunch of clowns. In the second video, After nearly landing in the water. Airbus automation along with both pilots, could not get them back to 1,000 feet without stalling. What right minded pilot sets the autopilot to descend to zero. Meanwhile, to save interrupting the sterile flight deck, the pilot monitoring had gone off to make some coffee. Sorry. I should not be so light-hearted about situations where people died.
@@wilsjaneand that’s the problem I see in the comment section of a lot of these type of videos. A pilot is required to go under arduous testing and training for a reason. Unless the fault is that of a mechanic or air control personnel, I feel as though you can criticize a bad decision made by the pilot to your heart’s content. I don’t care how much stress they were under before the crash, you are literally trained for this.
@@meadahagainThe problem I often see, is the pilots working like parrots and having little understanding of what the controls are actually doing. The more automation that is added, the worse this is becoming. We have pilots today who would struggle to fly without automation. A friend of ours is the retired chief pilot of a major international airline. Both she and her successors insisted on regular manual flying. In this situation, the automation becomes the backup and if they need to use it, the realise that their skills are lacking. They are the only major airline who have managed 55 years without a crash or incident resulting in injury. Can you name the airline, it's the one that you never see in any of these videos, LOL
@winterhaydn my bad for claiming stuff that 10 people will read on the internet without enough evidence, I really should think next time before claiming such things about some suspicious pieces of shit who just crashed a perfectly calm land approach out of the blue with hundreds of people in the plane, thank you
@@AlexandreG Yeah. So many of these air disaster stories are blatant cover-ups I reckon. Lot's of bombs and pilot murder/suicides passed off as malfunctions or pilot error I reckon
@@TheRuben_musicum. Yea they did. They were in a nose up stall and slammed into the ocean killing everyone aboard except a 13 year old girl. Did you not watch the second part???
The air traffic controller in the first case should NOT have been cleared. He made assumptions, didn't truly listen to what the pilots were saying, and these two pilots trusted his judgement. RIP 180 souls. The second was 100% pilots' errors - many errors. Wow. I'm amazed young Bahia Bakari survived, may God bless her. RIP 152 souls. Thank you for another great presentation.
Yes! I'm so surprised to hear he was cleared of all charges when he initially made an assumption how the pilots were flying. Should have asked instead.
Agreed, I'm no expert, but you would have thought that the ATC controller would have had a much closer eye (radar, ADS-B) of the flight path. Hell...he had ONE job to do. Again, I'm not an expert, but from what I've watched on flight tracking sites, my Monday morning QB'ing doesn't seem like it is all that hard. In fact, more mundane and repeated over and over. I can get the gist by listening to radio communications at a major airport vicinity and flight tracking sites, or just receive my own ADS-B...ACARS or HFDL can be a tool as well.
That's not how it works though. The pilots are the ones in the sky, and they hold the ultimate responsibility in keeping the plane safe. It is their job to override the controller if they are instructed to do something unsafe. If you're driving a car and the GPS tells you to drive off a cliff, and you do it, is the GPS at fault?
@@user-rj4vr2sc2d If they were instructed to do something that they knew was unsafe, they wouldn't "override" the ATC controller, they would raise a dispute over the instruction. No, ATC, I am unable to descend to that altitude due to _______. That's not how it works tho....
First incident in 1981: The pilots were flying a route that was new to them. They obviously did not study terrain charts before departing, and had no clue they were flying toward a mountain. This is inexcusable. They entered a holding pattern at the wrong speed, which means their execution of that holding pattern was incorrect and led them toward the mountain. Again, inexcusable. It was their responsibility to understand the correct speed required of that pattern. If the air traffic controller had access to radar that could tell him where the airliner was, he could have told the pilots in plenty of time that they were in the wrong place. Instead, both he and the pilots made all kinds of assumptions. Had the pilots told him "We have never been here before," maybe he could have been more helpful. The investigation cleared the controllers, but I think their asking the pilots for the airliner's position would have prevented the crash. Second incident (Yemen): Did this flight crew learn how to fly an airplane? Suppose they had shut off all the automatic functions. Could the Captain have manually flown the plane to a safe landing? One girl won the lottery - she lived to tell about it. It's sad that every other passenger and the flight attendants had to die for this crew's gross stupidity.
The controllers should of recognized by the questions, the altitude and speed and what *they were actually supposed to do" that something didn't make sense. Both made mistakes but the altitude alone was a huge sign
@@micheleh5269 The incorrect speed was the cause of an incorrect turn radius, which directly led to hitting the mountain. Lower speed (still above stall) = ability to turn tighter. Higher speed means a wider turn. Simply put, the aircraft ended up in the wrong place because of that.
@user-tz1zo6nu3n when I was a kid I used to think that if I jumped on an airplane it would crash. like I was 100% convinced if anyone jumped we would immediately go down.
I am so thankful, as a pilot, for modern avionics and navigation equipment. Things like this are almost entirely a 'thing of the past' with the access to so much information.
In the 80s we had a horrific approach into Preswick Scotland aboard a British midland aircraft. Looking out the side window you couldn’t see the wingtip. The turbulence was so severe that the over head bins opened up. I was a young Marine and I was with a Corporal from our unit. At first we were laughing but then our wing tip dipped and kept dipping. I looked over at the flight attendant and she was petrified. The plane leveled out and everyone was screaming. I honestly thought I was going to die. The turbulence was even worse and the engines were screaming. I looked out of the window and saw green but no runway. We slammed into the runway and the grass. We shuddered went airborne and slammed back down. Slid sideways and then straightened out. As we taxied to the gate the pilot said in his Scottish accent. “Thank you for flying British Midland airlines. We hope you enjoy your time in Preswick or other Scottish adventures” As I was leaving the plane I asked the flight attendant for her number, what is the worst that could happen after that. We dated for a year after that…
Great production quality, especially since you seem to be a one man crew? I don't know how it works but since you don't voice-over and seem to do the editing yourself, learning of the technicalities of each incident, recreating it in the sim and digesting the info and presenting it to a laymen audience, the effort seems immense.
All the info on these incidents is available on Wikipedia - most of what he has displayed on screen has been copied and pasted directly from Wiki. Even the very start of each upload has the exact opening of Mayday/Air Crash Investigation tv show…..the part about recreation made from testimonies of those involved and the crash reports etc. This channel recreates the events using flight simulation software and he does that well, but the info that goes up on screen is copied. Still, it’s a good channel and involves a lot of work. Makes it easy to imagine what happened rather than just reading a hard copy of the investigation report.
What I like most about this channel, and why a support it, is the textual commentary. The experiments with voice narration fail with me. But the wonderful, detailed, well written, text is an example of the best in film making.
That last sentence makes me think you are a bot, but then a bot would not know about his voice experiments. That last sentence could only have been written by a bot though, or someone who has never seen written English before in their lives...
What is not said in the video is that the circling approach on runway 20 in Moroni is particularly challenging. There is actually a hill (not shown here) near the 20 final. You can’t just extend even a bit the downwind leg, you have to be fairly close and the final is necessarily short. You are stabilized on final only at around 300 ft. There are lights which must be operating at night to provide some guidance. This is way over the level of competency of those pilots, who couldn’t even control even a basic flight path at night, like making a turn without descending, according to this video.
I've looked everywhere to find Bahai Bakari's book "Moi Bahia, la Miraculée" in english, but I don't see any translated editions. If anyone knows how I can get my hands on that book in english, please lmk. What an incredible story - 12 years old, stayed in the water with a broken collarbone and pelvis for 13 hours overnight until she was finally rescued! Incredible story of a young lady with a strong will to survive...even knowing her mother was no longer alive. This is one hell of a story.
@@RoamingHeathen Proud to be a heathen, right? Bruh, you need to humble yourself, creation didn't create itself! Read the Bible for yourself, I guarantee it will surprise you.
@@jamespenny9482 😂😂😂 telling other ppl to humble themselves while ar same time belittling them. Classic christianity. If "creation" needs a creator, that means the creator needs a creator too. Also by letting all those ppl die for no reason, and keeping her alive to live with trauma, is no present. Suffering is many times worse than death.
One glaring thing I noticed about the second case was that there was no communication between the pilots. I never heard a single word spoken on the CVR. Only aural warnings. What were they doing up there?
Having watched about 300 accident case studies like these until now, I can positively conclude that 95% of all disasters could've been avoided if the pilot would be forced to look at his friggin artificial horizon at least once in a while... All these elaborate explanations, explaining somatographic illusions blah blah blah are just describing the symptoms, not the cause. The cause is that pilots over the last 50 years somehow fail to check the single most crucial instrument right in front of their faces.
The aviation industry as a whole, instructor pilots, and instrument qualified pilots all know and acknowledge what you are saying. However, until you have experienced 'vertigo' while in the 'goo' at low altitude doing 150 knots, you have no idea how difficult it is to overcome millions of years of evolution developed 'balance.' Needless to say there are hundreds or thousands of cases where the pilots did overcome this difficulty by using their instruments. We only read or hear about the ones that didn't.
The essence of instrument flying is to learn NOT to rely on your feelings but on the instruments. Always remember the basics; knowing the attitude (artificial horizon attitude indicator) and power at all times. A level attitude and cruise thrust are where you reset to when confusion reigns.
There was a young 12 year old girl who survived the second crash- the sole survivor. Her name is Bahia Bakari and she released a memoir in 2010 including her experience. She was approached by Steven Spielberg to make a movie out of what happened, but she reportedly declined him.
The second crew totally lacked situation awareness and seemed to have little understanding of proper aircraft control/flight dynamics. Never should have been in a cockpit.
Just like the TNFlygirl that crashed recently. If you don't understand the basic mechanics of HOW an airplane is able to fly, you're gonna do something stupid eventually.
As always, awesome production values. The second clip, however, left me wanting a LOT MORE from the video. No history on pilots, and a clearer (if any) understanding of the investigation and the parties involved was very much missed. If that was "real audio" I'm thinking to myself that I have not heard a single word spoken between the pilots the entire time under a barage of circumstances that should have demanded constant verbal communications between the two. I found myself thinking after a bit "are these guys high, or what?" I'm going to have to go find other stuff on this accident. Your videos are great generally--more info on the second accident would have been great.
In the second clip, ATC sounded drunk, or at least had serious difficulties articulating. I´m not sure the pilots were ok, either. Very strange. As you wrote, more information would be nice. Rather one event per video than two abbreviated ones.
Well, I remember the ATC guy was really slow but he seemed clear. But, it was just one thing after another with those guys. I gotta find out more@@flybywire5866
The second one is sadly not the first time an airliner has crashed because of the crews inability to fly a visual circuit in the dark. Gulf Air lost an A320 in 2000 after a go around ended up with a botched circuit and a crash on finals. Worse still Gulf Air did there level best to blame the aircraft and not the crew even after the CVR was released and proved the crew ignored multiple "pull up" calls, along with being all over the place when it came to height, speed, and headings.
If you could do the 1988 YAK-40 crash in Bulgaria, because of being pressured by the communist leader Todor Zhivkov back then, who was in a rush, the plane (YAK-40) took off earlier and crashed, then his Tu-154 plane was taxiying over its debris and had its uneventful flight.Sofia-Varna flight 2nd of August 1988. All Bulgarian plane crashes fall into mystery, we do not have a single one uncovered. So would really appreciate a video about if not this one, any other Bulgarian related.
It's because if there are other aircraft about to land ahead of them, so they have to fly into a holding pattern. If there's no aircraft in the pattern, then ATC could've told them to fly the shortest route. ATC in this case were incompetent, as were the pilots.
Pause at 3:54 To get from the VOR to an over water holding pattern a plane would have to fly directly through the approach path for the airport, much safer to keep aircraft on the "same side of the road" as the VOR rather than sending them through what is likely a busy corridor in the summer holiday season.
They actually changed it after this accident, now it's drawn over the sea. They also installed a radar, which the airport didn't have at that point, and banned alternative words to 'landing' in communications when the intention is initiating landing procedures
how hard is it to monitor your 2 basic instruments, speed and altitude. "all this equipment to monitor" speed and altitude tells you 80% of what you are doing.
WTH, the captain had no clue as to the elevation of the terrain around him and the controller had no idea where the aircraft was and sent it straight into the mountains!!! My gosh, nobody knew what the hell was going on!
they waited 9 sec while the plane was screaming Terrain !.... I'd be on that yoke and throttle in a heartbeat regardless of anything else. you can get your bearings later.
@@danielkokal8819 His brain was trying to process what he was not expecting to see. Pilot instinct left him and he could only react after he could work out why. My guess, is all; but shouldn't training throw these instant curve ball at pilots?
Why do pilots ignore warnings? The system is yelling Pull Up Pull Up Terrain Terrain yet the pilot continues flying as if it's the turn signal of a car in North Carolina that never turns off.
Well presented video concentrating on the essentials needed to see what occurred. Because visual circling approaches require manual memory muscle flying skills, automation can't be used to help these poorly trained pilots. I have done many 600 foot circling night approaches in the mountains, and made sure that one set of eyes remained in the cockpit to monitor speed and altitude. A sad and unnecessary a tragedy.
At least give them an aural warning/red light illumination or something, it's a dial too so I could imagine you setting a low alt then moving your hand away and accidentally lowering it further. Odd, possibly dangerous...
I don't understand the pilots on that second flight. It is obvious in several instances that things are amiss. Why not abort the landing, climb and reassess?
I swear to pieces, if I am a pilot and I hear the words "PULL UP", I would probably OVER REACT to the command! Yesssirree, that command given for a reason!!!!🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
I've watched this three times I still have no idea what this Yemenia crew were doing. Even when the aircraft was climbing vertically like a rocket and was about to stall, the PF still didn't think he should lower the nose incase he hit the sea. What the hell?
In real life, the plane was at most 30 degrees up, nowhere near vertical and much of the time it was only a little steeper than a typical climb attitude. This youtuber is notorious for getting the animations completely wrong in their videos. When the stall warning first sounded the plane was less than 20 degrees nose up, a completely normal attitude for that plane in a low level climb. The crew were focused on the lack of roll control, that's why they didn't recognise the nose was higher than it should have been
Visual approaches are only used if the pilot flying can visually see the runway. If he loses sight of it the approach should be abandoned and a missed approach initiated!
I enjoy your videos. I had to 'rewind' the second incident a few times b/c what I was seeing and what I was reading were two different things. If the overhead view of the approach been aligned with magnetic north or at least a "N" symbol on the map, it would have been easier to follow.
I swear even if it's only animation, watching the plane plummets to the sea still creeps tf out of me. The girl who survived... I can only imagine how it felt to be a 100 tons tube free falling.
Does anyone know the name of the musical piece that starts at 7:12 minutes? It’s in a lot of TFC’s videos, but I can never find the name of it. Thanks to anyone who can help, and thanks to TFC for another great video!
Why does the alpha floor protection not put the plane in a stable climb configuration? If it occurs it is likely the pilots are already overloaded and behind the plane. Expecting a nose down input soon after a GPWS or pull up alarm is counterintuitive at the best of times - let alone when you cannot work out what is happening.
Their problem was poor training and lack of experience. Plenty of pilots fly these same airplanes everyday in worse situations than this and do so with skill and competence. Had the the airplane been built to assume a stable climb in all circumstances (i.e. fly itself) these two might have been able to handle it. But then they really wouldn’t be needed, would they?
In the first accident, does air traffic control not have access to radar and actually see planes? I always thought that was the case instead of strictly relying on verbal communication for determining location and headings.
Another nice video. That's why I don't fly on Third World airlines. I have first hand experience training their Air Force pilots in my younger days in the USAF. Their airline pilots are worse. "Camels to jets" doesn't work. Yes, many never drove cars or dealt with anything mechanical. They got their position because daddy was a high ranking politician. That's how it works "over there". Yes, they do have some very good pilots. But they also have lots of bad ones that don't get cut from the program. BC 26,000 hrs in 14 jets from 707's to 777's
I remember that Ajaccio crash, it was a kinda two day trip if I remember correctly. And tickets where cheap, so the trip was sold out, the interest was that high, so much so, that officials did not know who actually boarded the plane, so for a next couple of days they played the list of all people who showed the interest in the trip on the television...
I remember seeing pictures of the wreckage of this inex Adria plane on the side of a mountain. Apparently,the bits were left there for years,and there was a clean up in 2008,with a memorial plaque being placed where the wing impacted the ground,(I think). The pictures were very sad to look at xx
Re 2nd 🤡 Landing: I have zero experience/knowledge of piloting anything but an automobile so am I missing something when I ask how in the world does a crew member 'accidentally' input "0" for an altitude??? I believe there was an attempt at explanation but I didn't understand. ....otherwise I might be too frightened to ever fly again after seeing this lol.
You should be safe on domestic main line carriers. Otherwise you are taking a risk. The more obscure the air carrier and route, the greater the risk. Private carriers are worse yet.
@@joonsmelodie9927 No - Spirit was caught applying duct tape (or something similar) to a wing. Discount means that corners are being cut to remain profitable. That is pretty much an axiom in business. The money that you save is not worth the risk in my opinion.
I'm not an aviation expert and I watch these videos for leisure in addition to educating myself on the complexity of the aviation industry (I also get help from a lot of the people in the comments section who works and used to work in the aviation industry) but in the first video, I don't think the blame should be placed on the pilots ENTIRELY because firtsly, the ATC officer started the chain of events leading to the disaster, did he not? Well, the crew did commit grave mistakes on their part but the ATC officer did worse I think and they committed the FIRST mistake here and the fact that they were cleared of all charges is beyond me. If I'm mistaken or missing something here, somebody explain it to me, thank you.
If you’ve looked at a lot of accidents, you’ve probably noticed in almost all cases, “blame” is not a good word to use, as accidents are usually a chain of mistakes(though for the second crash in the video is a rare case of pure pilot fuckup). In every day flying, people make mistakes all the time, and nothing happens. Rarely do several mistakes line up so perfectly to cause a crash. You could argue if any of those mistakes didn’t happen, crash wouldn’t have happened. You can’t necessarily blame the first mistake, especially if it wasn’t a severe one. The real question is, how can procedures/systems/training be changed to make this chain of events close impossible. In some rare cases, it’s also ok to declare something an unpreventable freak accident. World is chaotic and crazy shit happens for no reason all the time
Great reproduction as always. I wonder though how the flight lost altitude every time it turned, first -2000 and then -1000 Ft.PM. Could it be due to the tail wind?
Because the pilots were flying manually and not paying attention to the altimeter. I cannot comprehend how anyone can fly an a/c and not look at the altimeter and ASI constantly.
Wind direction does NOT affect an airplane aerodynamically while it is flying thousands of feet high. Wind direction is relative to the ground so it affects groundspeed, never airspeed (except for random turbulence and wind shear which were not in play here).
@@kevinmalone3210 Actually, they were monitoring their airspeed (likely) when they sank. Looking at the simulation and CVR, their airspeed remained constant and there never were any alarms. Planes descend when they are not achieving enough thrust, not when their airspeed gets too low.
Especially on the second one, that's really local-grass-airfield-single-seater tier of flying. Any kid with ten hours of a rec flight sim could do better. Absolutely appalling to think people of their level of incompetence were entrusted with an airliner. You couldn't get a ppl with that level of airmanship in a civilized country.
What's worse, the pilots had 8000 and 5000 hours of flight time respectively! How can anyone be that incompetent after that many hours of flying? It's absolutely beyond me in any conceivable way.
Great video - But I have no clue exactly what was happening with the second video. How did they continuously get so low to the ground? (I think stress lead to the ulitimate loss of control of the plane).
If you're hand-flying and your reaction to getting too low is to pitch up, repeatedly, and never increase thrust, plane will ultimately stall. At that point, with the pilots not even reacting to stick shaker, the plane set thrust to TOGA on its own, but then pilots' only reaction: pitch up. The pilots were severely out of order.
They continuously got too low because they failed to execute a basic maneuver - holding a Rate 1 turn while maintaining altitude. When you execute a turn, you must monitor your altitude and/or vertical speed. If the aircraft is losing altitude, proper pitch correction is due. PF was not doing that, he attempted several turns and lost all the altitude resulting in GWPS warnings. I don’t understand the altitude setting of 0… You are handflying… your altitude setting should be changed to the go-around altitude published for every runway in the charts.
I simply cannot wrap my head around how the young girl survived with just bruises and a broken collarbone. It's like she magically teleported from the jet moments before impact and then reappeared a few minutes later clinging to wreckage in the open ocean. Only thing I can think of is that the plane wasn't going very fast when it hit the ocean.
I don't think they had kind of tech yet in 1981. It was probably because of events like that one, and maybe others, that the technology would be improved upon. Like they say, the laws of aviation and procedures are all written in blood. Well, sign me up!
The first one seems very similar to TWA 514 in 1974. Instructed to descend too low, bad weather and poor visibility. They also couldn't see the mountain
Maybe I'm just spit-balling here (in regards to that first accident) don't air traffic controllers have a screen on which is displayed a visual representation of the location, altitude, and speed of an aircraft (in real time) using those fancy, newfangled radar beamy things, and transponders which broadcast similar information for the ATC fella to reference? You know, so he doesn't give them instructions that send them flying into the side of a friggin' mountain? Yeah, I'm just shootin' from the hip here, but I thought that was pretty standard stuff, even in 1981. You know, you board a plane, thinking to yourself: "Okay, I'm in the hands of professionals. The flight crew, the maintenance guys, the air traffic controllers along the route." Only to then (between three or four of them) manage to fly you into the side of flippin' mountain...Or splashing into the ocean at a couple of hundred miles per hour!
60% of the air crashes I see on ALL of these channels are caused by the planes' onboard computers. The computers are programmed with instruction sets and algorithms based on past experiences so in NEW situations they are not informed and the pilots are left to battle with not only conflicting data but the AIs themselves. How many times do you see a pilot trying to descend but the computer either tells them to ascend or in many cases, fly-by-wire, fights with the pilot's inputs to the craft and what needs to be done in the given circumstance? As a for-instance in this video look at 16:25. Auto-pilot had already been disengaged by the pilots so that the pilots could maneuver the craft in a way they felt could resolve the situation but the AFP took control and drove them all to their deaths. In my humble opinion the pilots actually made the right choices based on their own flying capabilities and immediate plan to resolve the issue but an onboard computer algorithm took over and disrupted their plan throwing them into the catastrophic event chain that followed. At 17:01 the stick shaker then activates. What is the force of the stick shaker to responsiveness of a forward push response for downward action? Does this intense jarring not further rattle the already stressed individuals attempting to bring a craft under control? 17:22: proof that the computer put the aircraft into roll based on its algorithmic approach and ability to control the aircraft when it shouldn't have. 17:41: "Real Audio" is used from the cockpit and NO ONE is saying a word. This is because the pilots have put their full trust in the systems they were told were designed to NOT let something like this happen so they are in utter disbelief that it is actually happening. No one screams, no one shouts out to the other to make a move on their end to help (co-pilot, flight engineer). In a split second they all realize they have been overtaken by the fact that they are not actually in charge of the aircraft itself and are actually powerless to stop it. The verbiage used by investigatory agencies and parroted in these presentations typically lays blame on the pilots but they did not in fact have full control over the aircraft and the sequence of events that followed or ultimately led up to the demise. This is now becoming common with the computer-aided cars and trucks on the road. Folks, we are not at a place in time where a true AI exists so that you can just kick your feet back and let the computer do the work while you collect a paycheck or get from point A to B. Plus, doesn't it take the fun out of life anyway to let some coded pile of junk do your job and joy for you? What's next, the computer eats, sleeps, talks and has sex for you too? Wait... Another point pre-comments. I know everyone likes to blame human error in these instances but like I already stated, who programs the AIs? A system is only as intelligent as its programmers so in ALL circumstances human error IS the culprit. It is human error to go cheap on air traffic controllers working a given area at a given time. It is human error for an air traffic controller to be overworked and not push back. It is human error that goes into programming AIs while not allowing for pilot redress at crucial moments. It is human error to go cheap on sensors on the aircraft so that they become compromised often so that the onboard AI cannot calculate properly, it is human error to trust the airline industry AT ALL anymore based on their obvious lack of concern over the safety of people over more profits than anyone should make in a lifetime and you can't take it with you. One final note. My husband and I have developed a new type of compute architecture that resolves many if not all of these problems and it also applies across the board to any and all other compute-related industries right down to the consumer level but nobody wants to be involved or see it come to fruition. This tells us that they don't want the solution, only the problems. That says to us unequivocally that these incidences are not so much accidents as they are by design. That means they are human sacrifices used to continue a control structure by chaos. Ordo ab chao. Cheers!
insufficient time in the simulator. I worked for an airline that kept pilots in the simulator for extended periods of time, like torture. But they were all good pilots, pulled a 747 out of an inverted roll after an autopilot defect.
Damn, where can I buy my cereal in order to be gifted an aviation licence similar to the gentleman of the second flight? Gotta admit, he gave those people a hell of a last ride on earth
