Brazil Plane Crash

[Astro14]

How difficult is it and how much time does it take to get upper level winds forecasts and/or observations? It seems the 737 crew was remiss in doing so before they asked for a shortcut though an area with much stronger headwinds.

It takes a couple of minutes for uplink to be received and loaded once the datalink request is sent.

But you have to have the waypoint set to which those winds are attached in order for the FMC to make reasonable fuel predictions.

So, if you get a “shortcut“ that is, say, 1000 miles, you have to manually build several waypoints along that track, and then send for the winds.

This can be done in your backup route, and only then, can the analysis and comparison of burn and time be done accurately.

It is better, and frankly faster, to have dispatch do the work.

I’ve seen how accurate our flight planning software and processes are. Flying 14 hours across the Pacific, arriving within a couple minutes and a few hundred pounds.

With a 350,000# burn, arriving at destination within 500 lbs is about 0.15% accuracy. Remarkable, frankly.

Not every airline has that degree of accuracy in their flight planning software. Some airlines tend to skimp on software, and IT architecture, leading to low faith in the flight plan itself.

Getting a “shortcut“ offer from ATC may be well-intentioned, but in some cases, it may lead to an increased burn and a slight delay.

A lot of pilots ask for the shortcut out of ignorance. I am quite certain that @Just a civilian pilot is thoughtful and strategic in how he asks but I have sat enough jump seats to know, that there are many pilots who operate at a level far below him.

 

[IndyFan]

The conventional wisdom is grasping at straws because an externality (ice) is a whole lot easier for people to accept than the real cause - pilot error.

But one has only to look at Colgan Air 3407, or Air France 447, where ice was blamed.

Until the facts came out.

Yes, true, but as some have pointed out....it could be that icing was there and the pilot error would be in not dealing with it correctly or at all. In that case, I see what you are saying....icing would really not be the cause if pilot negligence or error were involved.

As others have said, the ATR has been through an enormous amount of icing testing, so the procedures should be very well developed and the pilots should be well versed in procedures for dealing with it.

ATR's aren't falling out of the sky every day. It's a very mature airplane. As interesting as it is to speculate, my heart is heavy for the suffering of the people on that plane as it dropped, including the crew, and the enormous loss felt by the families and friends and the same for anyone on the ground who might have been hurt or killed.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

How difficult is it and how much time does it take to get upper level winds forecasts and/or observations? It seems the 737 crew was remiss in doing so before they asked for a shortcut though an area with much stronger headwinds.

Just back from flying.

You are required to do periodic fuel checks and why they didn’t do this is the real problem for taking so long and finally realizing they are in a fuel emergency.

The FMS is not a flight planning tool, it’s for predictions only despite being very accurate when it has accurate data to calculate predictions.

No way any airline pilot should get so low in fuel just because they went direct if they are monitoring the fuel and doing fuel checks.

Sounds like their “ fuel check” was solely looking at the FMS predictions which no aircraft manufacturer considers a proper fuel check.

The Airbus has an “ abeam” FMS function which keeps the winds when going direct.

It’s very rare to get super long directs unless flying late at night

My airline has very accurate ( Lufthansa LIDO flight planning system ) flight planning. We arrive within a minute and 100 KG what are supposed to have upon arrival.

Anyone who reviews their flight plan properly will see if their route is avoiding strong headwinds or hugging the jet stream to take advantage of strong tailwinds and should know going direct in these situations isn’t going to save them time or fuel but even if they failed to recognize this during flight planning, that’s no excuse for doing it , flying for hours, and arriving in a fuel emergency situation.

If you see a big difference between the great circle versus total track miles and have either a strong tailwind or headwind, it means the dispatcher built the flight plan to hug the jet stream ( tailwind ) or avoid it and our flight plans pictorially show this with a map and our route.

If you don’t have the FMS abeam function, then either build en route waypoints and get the upper winds ( insert in the FMS ) OR do basic math…..how many miles to the destination, what’s our speed and how much fuel are we burning to calculate the arrival fuel.

GS 475 knots……1000 miles to go……burning 2500 KG total per hour = will burn 5263 KG. Now subtract that from the fuel gauges = how much fuel will have in tanks when land.

There are times when the FMS predictions are inaccurate even if not taking “ shortcuts” and it has accurate winds.

If you have certain system failures, they can cause an increase in fuel burn that the FMS predictions will not show so you have to know how to check fuel even if on the route.

E.g blue hydraulic system failure in cruise ( I have had this twice ) ……increased drag due to spoiler up ……FMS doesn’t know this …..have to manually calculate new arrival fuel to see if have enough or divert. Not a big deal on short flights but it is on long flights.

 

[JimPghPA]

I come here also for the humour, and a good laugh at times.

A person who has never been in a real stall/spin even as a passenger in a small plane, doesn’t have a pilots licence, flies RC planes yet thinks he knows more than real commercial pilots who had to undergo stall/spin training just to get a licence in the first place and are still required to prove they can recognize a stall and recover as airline pilots.

They need to update the definition of arrogance, and hypocrisy.

That’s called a know-it-all.

There are arrogant , know-it-alls in the airlines , but most don’t make it as Captains because their attitude gets them into trouble during the upgrade process.

I've spent decades flying RC, and have a few hours in behind the yoke of a few small aircraft.

In RC I've flown everything from sailplanes to stunt. People dismiss RC as a toy. They are real aircraft, just smaller. Often RC have much more power to weight than civilian full size. But there's a lot that can be learned about flying RC that transfers over to full size. Sure there's a lot about full size that one can not learn flying RC. And there's a lot about RC one can not learn flying full size. As an RC instructor for many years I have sometimes flown beginners home built planes that were a handful to say the least. Some of the skill set does cross over into full size. Actually probably more than most people who fly full size and never flew RC, realize.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I've spent decades flying RC, and have a few hours in behind the yoke of a few small aircraft.

In RC I've flown everything from sailplanes to stunt. People dismiss RC as a toy. They are real aircraft, just smaller. Often RC have much more power to weight than civilian full size. But there's a lot that can be learned about flying RC that transfers over to full size. Sure there's a lot about full size that one can not learn flying RC. And there's a lot about RC one can not learn flying full size. As an RC instructor for many years I have sometimes flown beginners home built planes that were a handful to say the least. Some of the skill set does cross over into full size. Actually probably more than most people who fly full size and never flew RC, realize.

I don't dismiss anybody unless they prove to me they don't know what they are talking about based on decades of flying real commercial airliners. I don't think some people understand when they don't know what they are talking about at times. That's arrogance.

We already heard one RC guy say something that doesn't work with real planes regarding powering out of stalls. He didn't just didn't just disagree with us, he argued with us and called ( real pilots ) us arrogant.

Get hired by an airline, argue with them that they are not teaching stall recoveries properly ( power out like he said he does in his RC plane ) , try and explain how RC experience is relevant to flying commercial jet will get you fired on probation just as I would get fired if NASA or Elon Musk ever hire me to be a rocket pilot and I start bringing up my 27000 hours real aircraft experience and argue with them.

I guarantee you, I will stay in my lane if BITOG ever has a RC section , I won't be trying to tell them how to operate RC planes just because I have 40 years, almost 27,000 hours experience and someone let me fly an RC a few times.

I know nothing about flying RC planes, how to land space shuttles, how to land on carriers or how to fly air combat ( I just read and listen with those discussions ).

Same with min fuel in jet fighters. I don’t express my opinion because I don’t have any experience flying jet fighters. I express strong opinions on fuel management, taking “ short cuts” in airline operations because I have experience.

A liitle bit of knowledge can be dangerous in some cases and make some feel they know more than they really know at times.

** Has BITOG ever thought of a RC section?






.

 

[RedSpider]

I'm all in favor of an R/C section!

I only have a few hours of formal flight training (real planes, not R/C) before college, marriage, and babies and real life in general got in the way. The instructor I had was happy I had been flying R/C since I was in grade school, he said his students that had R/C experience usually did very well transitioning to flying real planes as they at least were familiar with the basics of flight, what control surface does what, etc.

All my R/C flying is self taught, and I crashed many... MANY.... of my models, but I got good after destroying a lot of them. When I was talking to our R/C local club instructor he said he didnt like training real-life pilots on R/C, as many assumed that flying real planes would translate into being able to fly R/C planes well right from the get go and that almost never happened in his experience, and a lot of them smashed their planes early on and got discouraged and gave up.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I'm all in favor of an R/C section!

I only have a few hours of formal flight training (real planes, not R/C) before college, marriage, and babies and real life in general got in the way. The instructor I had was happy I had been flying R/C since I was in grade school, he said his students that had R/C experience usually did very well transitioning to flying real planes as they at least were familiar with the basics of flight, what control surface does what, etc.

All my R/C flying is self taught, and I crashed many... MANY.... of my models, but I got good after destroying a lot of them. When I was talking to our R/C local club instructor he said he didnt like training real-life pilots on R/C, as many assumed that flying real planes would translate into being able to fly R/C planes well right from the get go and that almost never happened in his experience, and a lot of them smashed their planes early on and got discouraged and gave up.

Me too!

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I'm all in favor of an R/C section!

I only have a few hours of formal flight training (real planes, not R/C) before college, marriage, and babies and real life in general got in the way. The instructor I had was happy I had been flying R/C since I was in grade school, he said his students that had R/C experience usually did very well transitioning to flying real planes as they at least were familiar with the basics of flight, what control surface does what, etc.

All my R/C flying is self taught, and I crashed many... MANY.... of my models, but I got good after destroying a lot of them. When I was talking to our R/C local club instructor he said he didnt like training real-life pilots on R/C, as many assumed that flying real planes would translate into being able to fly R/C planes well right from the get go and that almost never happened in his experience, and a lot of them smashed their planes early on and got discouraged and gave up.

Arrogance can work both ways.

I am not at all surprised some real pilots think they know everything and how they could just pick up a RC control box and fly them just as we have seen some RC pilots feel they know how to fly real planes just because they fly RC.

When I go to rent a small aircraft ( and I used to be a flight instructor ), I will be very careful and make sure I get a good checkout before flying it. I won’t even tell them I am an airline pilot ( hey, I don’t want to make a fool out of myself ).

 

[Astro14]

Arrogance can work both ways.

I am not at all surprised some real pilots think they know everything and how they could just pick up a RC control box and fly them just as we have seen some RC pilots feel they know how to fly real planes just because they fly RC.

When I go to rent a small aircraft ( and I used to be a flight instructor ), I will be very careful and make sure I get a good checkout before flying it. I won’t even tell them I am an airline pilot ( hey, I don’t want to make a fool out of myself ).

I tried to fly an RC airplane once. It was a very humbling experience, I was fine when the aircraft was headed away from me because the orientation made perfect sense, but when that thing was coming at me, I couldn’t wrap my brain around rolling the opposite direction from what I thought the airplane needed.

A couple summers ago my kids gave me a glider ride out of Boulder airport in Boulder, Colorado, as a Father’s Day present.

It was a lot of fun, and an 18 year old glider pilot was PIC for the whole thing. He asked “have you ever flown an airplane before?” I replied, “I’ve done some flying.” so, he let me take the controls a couple of times, and the glider is a very different animal from what I am used to. It makes sense, but takes a lot of rudder to coordinate the turns.

While in Flight, I wanted to understand the glider better, so I asked a lot of questions. I let the kid talk. He’s the one that was in his home environment, and I was the one that had a lot to learn.

When we landed, I was chatting with him, and the young lady who was manning the counter. Turns out they are both aspiring commercial airline pilots. She had a question on a practice test for the instrument written, which I was able to help her answer.

So, a few weeks later, I got them both in the 757 simulator. We talked about everything, what it’s like to fly a turbine in airplane, how swept wings differ, the range of flaps settings, all of it. We did some normal takeoff and landings, a couple of circuits around the patterns, reconfiguring the airplane each time so they can get a feel for the trim changes, power settings, and pitch attitudes of a commercial airliner. We did some stall work. Spent four hours.

We talked about the path to the cockpit of an airliner, and we have stayed in touch since.

Turned out to be a bit of a win-win. It wasn’t until after we landed, that anyone found out that I flew in the Navy, flew Fighters, and flew for a major airline. I wanted to learn about glider flying from him. Afterwards, turned out I had a bit of experience that could help them.

No names, just a couple of young pilots getting some experience.

A great day.

 

[RedSpider]

When it comes to R/C versus real flying, I think there is a lot of room for Dunning-Kruger to rear its head, and I think thats understandable from both sides, at least to a point. I can more understand a (real) pilot thinking they can handle an R/C with minimal instruction, but an R/C flyer thinking they could somehow fly an airliner or even just instantly pull a basic single engine out of trouble using what they learned flying R/C is probably a disappointingly bitter pill for some to swallow.

My friend is a retired F16/F22 pilot and he told me the very first time he flew an airliner (DC-8 freighter, a high school friend of ours was a pilot for UPS and let him fly for a few minutes) he said he was shocked how cumbersome and lethargic it felt after flying almost nothing but fighters his whole career. In his words, "Imagine driving nothing but a Ferrari all your life, then suddenly you're driving a Greyhound bus full of bricks."

 

[JimPghPA]

I don't dismiss anybody unless they prove to me they don't know what they are talking about based on decades of flying real commercial airliners. I don't think some people understand when they don't know what they are talking about at times. That's arrogance.

We already heard one RC guy say something that doesn't work with real planes regarding powering out of stalls. He didn't just didn't just disagree with us, he argued with us and called ( real pilots ) us arrogant.

Get hired by an airline, argue with them that they are not teaching stall recoveries properly ( power out like he said he does in his RC plane ) , try and explain how RC experience is relevant to flying commercial jet will get you fired on probation just as I would get fired if NASA or Elon Musk ever hire me to be a rocket pilot and I start bringing up my 27000 hours real aircraft experience and argue with them.

I guarantee you, I will stay in my lane if BITOG ever has a RC section , I won't be trying to tell them how to operate RC planes just because I have 40 years, almost 27,000 hours experience and someone let me fly an RC a few times.

I know nothing about flying RC planes, how to land space shuttles, how to land on carriers or how to fly air combat ( I just read and listen with those discussions ).

Same with min fuel in jet fighters. I don’t express my opinion because I don’t have any experience flying jet fighters. I express strong opinions on fuel management, taking “ short cuts” in airline operations because I have experience.

A liitle bit of knowledge can be dangerous in some cases and make some feel they know more than they really know at times.

** Has BITOG ever thought of a RC section?






.

I know full size is a whole other world from RC. And just as an experienced RC flyer would be lost getting into even a small full size, and an experienced visual flight only small full size pilot would be lost getting into a Comercial Jet, still there are some skills that do transfer over.

A Pitts Special can power out of many situations quickly that many other aircraft can not.

There are skills learned in small full size that are useful in larger aircraft. And believe it or not, some of those skills can even be acquired in RC.

BTW, you want to see an RC plane crash, watch a retired airline pilot refuse instructions and try to fly an RC without help.

I totally know I would not have a clue of how to fly an aircraft beyond the two seaters I have taken instructions in.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I know full size is a whole other world from RC. And just as an experienced RC flyer would be lost getting into even a small full size, and an experienced visual flight only small full size pilot would be lost getting into a Comercial Jet, still there are some skills that do transfer over.

A Pitts Special can power out of many situations quickly that many other aircraft can not.

There are skills learned in small full size that are useful in larger aircraft. And believe it or not, some of those skills can even be acquired in RC.

BTW, you want to see an RC plane crash, watch a retired airline pilot refuse instructions and try to fly an RC without help.

I totally know I would not have a clue of how to fly an aircraft beyond the two seaters I have taken instructions in.

I know full size is a whole other world from RC. And just as an experienced RC flyer would be lost getting into even a small full size, and an experienced visual flight only small full size pilot would be lost getting into a Comercial Jet, still there are some skills that do transfer over.

A Pitts Special can power out of many situations quickly that many other aircraft can not.

There are skills learned in small full size that are useful in larger aircraft. And believe it or not, some of those skills can even be acquired in RC.

BTW, you want to see an RC plane crash, watch a retired airline pilot refuse instructions and try to fly an RC without help.

I totally know I would not have a clue of how to fly an aircraft beyond the two seaters I have taken instructions in.

Same here, if I ever wanted to take up RC I would ask a person just like you who knows what they are doing and talking about.

If I ever showed up at an RC club, I would not even mention I am an airline pilot ( I don’t want to give them anything extra to laugh about me ).

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

I tried to fly an RC airplane once. It was a very humbling experience, I was fine when the aircraft was headed away from me because the orientation made perfect sense, but when that thing was coming at me, I couldn’t wrap my brain around rolling the opposite direction from what I thought the airplane needed.

A couple summers ago my kids gave me a glider ride out of Boulder airport in Boulder, Colorado, as a Father’s Day present.

It was a lot of fun, and an 18 year old glider pilot was PIC for the whole thing. He asked “have you ever flown an airplane before?” I replied, “I’ve done some flying.” so, he let me take the controls a couple of times, and the glider is a very different animal from what I am used to. It makes sense, but takes a lot of rudder to coordinate the turns.

While in Flight, I wanted to understand the glider better, so I asked a lot of questions. I let the kid talk. He’s the one that was in his home environment, and I was the one that had a lot to learn.

When we landed, I was chatting with him, and the young lady who was manning the counter. Turns out they are both aspiring commercial airline pilots. She had a question on a practice test for the instrument written, which I was able to help her answer.

So, a few weeks later, I got them both in the 757 simulator. We talked about everything, what it’s like to fly a turbine in airplane, how swept wings differ, the range of flaps settings, all of it. We did some normal takeoff and landings, a couple of circuits around the patterns, reconfiguring the airplane each time so they can get a feel for the trim changes, power settings, and pitch attitudes of a commercial airliner. We did some stall work. Spent four hours.

We talked about the path to the cockpit of an airliner, and we have stayed in touch since.

Turned out to be a bit of a win-win. It wasn’t until after we landed, that anyone found out that I flew in the Navy, flew Fighters, and flew for a major airline. I wanted to learn about glider flying from him. Afterwards, turned out I had a bit of experience that could help them.

No names, just a couple of young pilots getting some experience.

A great day.

View attachment 236370

View attachment 236371

That’s a great story and you are very kind to answer their airline questions and get them into the United Training centre ( Canadian spelling ).

We all want to know, just like in Top Gun, who was better, Wayne or those two glider pilots

Just kidding.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

When it comes to R/C versus real flying, I think there is a lot of room for Dunning-Kruger to rear its head, and I think thats understandable from both sides, at least to a point. I can more understand a (real) pilot thinking they can handle an R/C with minimal instruction, but an R/C flyer thinking they could somehow fly an airliner or even just instantly pull a basic single engine out of trouble using what they learned flying R/C is probably a disappointingly bitter pill for some to swallow.

My friend is a retired F16/F22 pilot and he told me the very first time he flew an airliner (DC-8 freighter, a high school friend of ours was a pilot for UPS and let him fly for a few minutes) he said he was shocked how cumbersome and lethargic it felt after flying almost nothing but fighters his whole career. In his words, "Imagine driving nothing but a Ferrari all your life, then suddenly you're driving a Greyhound bus full of bricks."

And it’s a very different operation.

I have flown with a lot of ex military pilots.

 

[Astro14]

That’s a great story and you are very kind to answer their airline questions and get them into the United Training centre ( Canadian spelling ).

We all want to know, just like in Top Gun, who was better, Wayne or those two glider pilots

Just kidding.

Those kids had a lot of flight time. A lot of it sailplane, but a lot of SE piston. They did great.

So did Wayne.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

Those kids had a lot of flight time. A lot of it sailplane, but a lot of SE piston. They did great.

So did Wayne.

My wife and son just came back from a 5 day trip to DEN, I should have told them to head over to the United training centre ( I can’t even get them in my own simulator )

They flew on a United 737.

 

[Astro14]

My wife and son just came back from a 5 day trip to DEN, I should have told them to head over to the United training centre ( I can’t even get them in my own simulator )

They flew on a United 737.

The rules for getting a tour of United training Center are somewhat complex.

You have to have a “sponsor“, someone who works there. You have to provide your drivers license, phone number, address, and email, and that sponsor has to obtain prior permission with all of your above information.

The family of every new hire pilot gets a tour, on “family day” when the new hires get their wings. United flies the families out to Denver, gratis, positive space, and provides a shuttle from the airport to the training center. The tour doesn’t include flying the Sim, but you get to see all of the evacuation training and aircraft mockups that the flight attendants use in addition to the flight training devices.

It’s the world’s largest airline training center, there’s a lot of space to wander around and see cool stuff. We have a Memorial Garden for the crews lost on 9-11. We even have a museum, with uniforms, and other artifacts, models and film footage dating back to 1928. It’s a great tour honestly.

If you want to fly the simulator, then your sponsor must be qualified to operate the simulator, which means they have to be either an instructor or evaluator. Further, Scheduling is not allowed to schedule a tour during normal business hours.

So, a lot of pieces have to line up for the simulator tour. You need to know in advance, you have to get permission, you have to have the right “sponsor“ and you have to have the simulator availability.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

The rules for getting a tour of United training Center are somewhat complex.

You have to have a “sponsor“, someone who works there. You have to provide your drivers license, phone number, address, and email, and that sponsor has to obtain prior permission with all of your above information.

The family of every new hire pilot gets a tour, on “family day” when the new hires get their wings. United flies the families out to Denver, gratis, positive space, and provides a shuttle from the airport to the training center. The tour doesn’t include flying the Sim, but you get to see all of the evacuation training and aircraft mockups that the flight attendants use in addition to the flight training devices.

It’s the world’s largest airline training center, there’s a lot of space to wander around and see cool stuff. We have a Memorial Garden for the crews lost on 9-11. We even have a museum, with uniforms, and other artifacts, models and film footage dating back to 1928. It’s a great tour honestly.

If you want to fly the simulator, then your sponsor must be qualified to operate the simulator, which means they have to be either an instructor or evaluator. Further, Scheduling is not allowed to schedule a tour during normal business hours.

So, a lot of pieces have to line up for the simulator tour. You need to know in advance, you have to get permission, you have to have the right “sponsor“ and you have to have the simulator availability.

Wow, I am very impressed how generous United is flying families out confirmed.

My airline would never do that.

I got a bit choked up to be honest when you mentioned the 9-11 memorial garden.

RIP.

 

[Taildragger]

Very informative 9 pages!
Living in Florida where I hear many foreign accents flight training on local frequencies, I can't help but think that these guys and gals didn't grow up flying Champs, 150s and Cherokees.

 

[edyvw]

Preliminary report: https://dedalo.sti.fab.mil.br/en/85259

Summary:

Brazil's accident investigator has published their preliminary report into the Voepass ATR 72-500 accident on August 9.

The report indicates that the co-pilot was speaking to the Voepass operational dispatcher, who was on the ground, after the anti-ice alarm went on and off eight times. The pilots also received CRUISE SPEED LOW and DEGRADED PERFORMANCE alerts while flying in icing conditions at Flight Level 170. Two minutes before control of the aircraft was lost the co-pilot commented: “a lot of ice”.

The investigation has found that the plane's anti-icing system was activated several times by the pilots during the flight. However, at one point, the plane flew for six minutes with an ice warning without the de-icing system being activated.

The Cenipa report does not yet indicate what caused the accident. The lieutenant colonel explained that, at this point, what the agency did was analyze the objective facts regarding the flight. It is not yet possible to say that a failure led to the crash.

The pilots did not report an emergency at any point during the flight.