6 ms·

Entirely speculating, but it sounds like the fundamental problem is that they had a confused Captain and First Officer who both thought they were the Pilot Flyi

Entirely speculating, but it sounds like the fundamental problem is that they had a confused Captain and First Officer who both thought they were the Pilot Flying. Human factors / psychology issue. Sure, on a Boeing you'll feel the other pilot's input, but if you're tired enough, or panicking because the plane's not doing what you expected, you might not get the hint. Task saturation - followed by loss of situational awareness - is a very real problem in today's airliners, particularly during takeoff and approach/landing. You're trying to do a ton of things in a small amount of time, while dealing with a dynamic situation outside, and in this case after a long, tiring flight over the Atlantic. There are a great series of (dated but still good) videos from American Airlines about automation dependency, human factors and the simple but very real problems that develop as a result - often leading to panic and disaster when things go wrong. Search YT for "children of the magenta".

cryptonector 4y ago
> my airplane > your airplane [lets go controls] Those are the words to be exchanged to avoid confusion.
- willidiots 4y ago
  Yeah, simple enough. Also simple enough to go-around when you're obviously slow and going to be short of the runway, but look at Asiana 214. I do wonder if there's some training deficiency or cultural issue that leads to this scenario in Air France flights.
  - cryptonector 4y ago
    This makes me think of Loic Suberville's videos on language...
- Retric 4y ago
  Sure, just make sure that happens exactly that way 1,000,000 times without any failures… And that’s the root of many issues in aviation. It works 99.99% of the time is not always good enough.
  - wahern 4y ago
    I wonder if this was part of some rare coincidence where their inputs were perfectly synchronized but out of phase in such a way that it made it difficult to consider the obvious. If you pull back but feel the plane and/or stick move laterally, and especially across multiple inputs without a clear pattern, it might more easily occur to you to think the person sitting next to you is also providing inputs. Whereas if you're synchronized across many inputs, that's just something that doesn't typically happen in nature, which tends to always have some stochastic quality; instinctively it's something you might assume would only involve a machine.
- esoterae 4y ago
  > my airplane > your airplane > my airplane
- rmk 4y ago
  "I have the airplane" or "my airplane" is an established practice, but over and above that, the stick/yoke/rudder pedals all actually give you feedback when the other guy is also handling them. That feedback gives the fliers another level of protection.
  - antmldr 4y ago
    Agreed, but also given they initially thought the aircraft itself was deviating from a stable approach (or at least the ATC transcription appears to suggest that?), perhaps the pilots may have thought the feedback was due to autopilot and not the person sitting next to them.
kayodelycaon 4y ago
As pointed out by a sibling comment, cockpit resource management training solves this very simply by verbally declaring who should have control.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  As usual, Star Trek was out in front with CRM on how to verbally switch commands: 1. I'm losing command 2. I've got command https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAvRBDQqSmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAvRBDQqSmY
rmk 4y ago
In the AF447 case, the lack of feedback/linkage of the Pilot Flying / Nonflying sidesticks was a big contributing factor. It is true that the Pitot tubes froze up. But the Pilot was roused from his sleep, entered the cockpit, and correctly pointed out that the plane was actually in a dive. It's just that the guys flying were making opposite inputs over an extended period, and it was too late to recover, which doomed AF447. Overall, Airbus and its delinked sidesticks was a factor in the accident. I thought Boeing did not have sidesticks, and the yokes/control columns are linked to give actual feedback (to emulate most airplanes, which do this with mechanical controls). Is that not the case?
- jandrese 4y ago
  That does seem to be what was happening here, as both pilots thought the plane was fighting their inputs, but in reality they were fighting each other.
- inferiorhuman 4y ago
  There were lots of things that went wrong with AF 447 but the side sticks were a minor detail. If anything the stall warning going on and off was a much bigger factor because the one pilot kept pulling back on the stick which is the exact opposite of what he should've done. Had the pilot flying simply flown pitch and power they would've been fine and had plenty of time to calmly troubleshoot the situation. > I thought Boeing did not have sidesticks, and the > yokes/control columns are linked to give actual feedback > (to emulate most airplanes, which do this with mechanical > controls). Is that not the case? Boeing's philosophy seems to be to provide physical feedback for most or all of the controls. So, yeah, the control columns are linked (even on fly-by-wire planes like the 777 and 787). But that's not very useful once you're dealing with startled and/or panicked pilots. Take a look at the Atlas Air or Sriwijaya Air crashes. The problem with Air France has nothing to do with Boeing or Airbus and everything to do with pilot standards and training. At this point Air France is lucky. Look at the Air France incident in 2020 (A318). Or their incident in Bogota in 2017 (A340). Or the 2011, 2012 x2, and 2013 incidents where the Airbus (A320/321) alpha floor protection prevented an Air France crew from crashing on approach to Marseille x2, Hamburg, and Tel Aviv. At some point Air France's luck will run out.
kurupt213 4y ago
Well this is terrifying. Their only job is to pay attention and communicate clearly…especially during takeoff and landings
- denkmoon 4y ago
  Most people are not good at their jobs...
  - hypertele-Xii 4y ago
    Most people don't get to fly airplanes.

cryptonector 4y ago

> my airplane > your airplane [lets go controls] Those are the words to be exchanged to avoid confusion.

willidiots 4y ago
Yeah, simple enough. Also simple enough to go-around when you're obviously slow and going to be short of the runway, but look at Asiana 214. I do wonder if there's some training deficiency or cultural issue that leads to this scenario in Air France flights.
- cryptonector 4y ago
  This makes me think of Loic Suberville's videos on language...
Retric 4y ago
Sure, just make sure that happens exactly that way 1,000,000 times without any failures… And that’s the root of many issues in aviation. It works 99.99% of the time is not always good enough.
- wahern 4y ago
  I wonder if this was part of some rare coincidence where their inputs were perfectly synchronized but out of phase in such a way that it made it difficult to consider the obvious. If you pull back but feel the plane and/or stick move laterally, and especially across multiple inputs without a clear pattern, it might more easily occur to you to think the person sitting next to you is also providing inputs. Whereas if you're synchronized across many inputs, that's just something that doesn't typically happen in nature, which tends to always have some stochastic quality; instinctively it's something you might assume would only involve a machine.
esoterae 4y ago
> my airplane > your airplane > my airplane
rmk 4y ago
"I have the airplane" or "my airplane" is an established practice, but over and above that, the stick/yoke/rudder pedals all actually give you feedback when the other guy is also handling them. That feedback gives the fliers another level of protection.
- antmldr 4y ago
  Agreed, but also given they initially thought the aircraft itself was deviating from a stable approach (or at least the ATC transcription appears to suggest that?), perhaps the pilots may have thought the feedback was due to autopilot and not the person sitting next to them.

kayodelycaon 4y ago

As pointed out by a sibling comment, cockpit resource management training solves this very simply by verbally declaring who should have control.

WalterBright 4y ago
As usual, Star Trek was out in front with CRM on how to verbally switch commands: 1. I'm losing command 2. I've got command https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAvRBDQqSmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAvRBDQqSmY

rmk 4y ago

In the AF447 case, the lack of feedback/linkage of the Pilot Flying / Nonflying sidesticks was a big contributing factor. It is true that the Pitot tubes froze up. But the Pilot was roused from his sleep, entered the cockpit, and correctly pointed out that the plane was actually in a dive. It's just that the guys flying were making opposite inputs over an extended period, and it was too late to recover, which doomed AF447. Overall, Airbus and its delinked sidesticks was a factor in the accident. I thought Boeing did not have sidesticks, and the yokes/control columns are linked to give actual feedback (to emulate most airplanes, which do this with mechanical controls). Is that not the case?

jandrese 4y ago
That does seem to be what was happening here, as both pilots thought the plane was fighting their inputs, but in reality they were fighting each other.
inferiorhuman 4y ago
There were lots of things that went wrong with AF 447 but the side sticks were a minor detail. If anything the stall warning going on and off was a much bigger factor because the one pilot kept pulling back on the stick which is the exact opposite of what he should've done. Had the pilot flying simply flown pitch and power they would've been fine and had plenty of time to calmly troubleshoot the situation. > I thought Boeing did not have sidesticks, and the > yokes/control columns are linked to give actual feedback > (to emulate most airplanes, which do this with mechanical > controls). Is that not the case? Boeing's philosophy seems to be to provide physical feedback for most or all of the controls. So, yeah, the control columns are linked (even on fly-by-wire planes like the 777 and 787). But that's not very useful once you're dealing with startled and/or panicked pilots. Take a look at the Atlas Air or Sriwijaya Air crashes. The problem with Air France has nothing to do with Boeing or Airbus and everything to do with pilot standards and training. At this point Air France is lucky. Look at the Air France incident in 2020 (A318). Or their incident in Bogota in 2017 (A340). Or the 2011, 2012 x2, and 2013 incidents where the Airbus (A320/321) alpha floor protection prevented an Air France crew from crashing on approach to Marseille x2, Hamburg, and Tel Aviv. At some point Air France's luck will run out.

kurupt213 4y ago

Well this is terrifying. Their only job is to pay attention and communicate clearly…especially during takeoff and landings

denkmoon 4y ago
Most people are not good at their jobs...
- hypertele-Xii 4y ago
  Most people don't get to fly airplanes.