3 ms·

This is the flight where one pilot tried to pull up to recover from the stall, and the warning for dual input (which Airbus just averages together) was snoozed

This is the flight where one pilot tried to pull up to recover from the stall, and the warning for dual input (which Airbus just averages together) was snoozed by the system yelling about the other errors and was reduced to a light they didn't notice. The captain commented towards the end"no don't climb". The stall alarm was the one the system chose to display over all others and was mishandled (by the pilot who didn't know how to recover from a stall). Boeing there's physical feed back, when one control moves so does the other. This was not the first time pilots were having conflicting input without noticing. >https://bea.aero/uploads/tx_elyextendttnews/annexe.01.en.pdf https://bea.aero/uploads/tx_elyextendttnews/annexe.01.en.pdf

kortilla 9mo ago
IMO that’s the wrong take about that crash. The stall warning stopped once the attitude was above a certain amount, which was an insane decision on airbus’s part. You can see in the CVR that the stall indicator stopped many times despite them being in a stall the entire time. The pilot (like every other pilot) knew how to recover from a stall on paper. But he had the plane telling him his airspeed was good (frozen tube) and that bringing the pitch down was causing a stall.
- ApolloFortyNine 8mo ago
  The stall voice alarm sounded 75 times, during this time the stick Shaker also was triggering (if both pilots had let go, or just the one who was ignoring the stall warning, the plane rights itself). It's in the last column in the transcript I linked. Imo the whole average input issue would have been it's own Boeing MCAS level issue if it happened a decade later, that's more of the root here imo, since one pilot making a mistake is hardly unheard of.
  - kortilla 8mo ago
    It doesn’t matter how many times it sounded. It matters that it stopped while still in a stall and began again during the process of recovering the stall. When you’re panicking and the airplane is telling you what you’re doing is starting to cause a stall again, you tend to listen.

kortilla 9mo ago

IMO that’s the wrong take about that crash. The stall warning stopped once the attitude was above a certain amount, which was an insane decision on airbus’s part. You can see in the CVR that the stall indicator stopped many times despite them being in a stall the entire time. The pilot (like every other pilot) knew how to recover from a stall on paper. But he had the plane telling him his airspeed was good (frozen tube) and that bringing the pitch down was causing a stall.

ApolloFortyNine 8mo ago
The stall voice alarm sounded 75 times, during this time the stick Shaker also was triggering (if both pilots had let go, or just the one who was ignoring the stall warning, the plane rights itself). It's in the last column in the transcript I linked. Imo the whole average input issue would have been it's own Boeing MCAS level issue if it happened a decade later, that's more of the root here imo, since one pilot making a mistake is hardly unheard of.
- kortilla 8mo ago
  It doesn’t matter how many times it sounded. It matters that it stopped while still in a stall and began again during the process of recovering the stall. When you’re panicking and the airplane is telling you what you’re doing is starting to cause a stall again, you tend to listen.