Support NeoGAF

[Sinatar]

That's the exactly wrong conclusion you should arrive at. The point of articles like these is to show how any one of us could be a "Bonin" given a particular set of circumstances. In Bonin's case, he likely lacked the proper training of how to react in this particular circumstance, was confused by information he was receiving by the technology of the cockpit (the article states based on his understanding of the plane's flight controls, a stall was impossible), and panicked in the moment.

I think the key here is that he panicked. He was not inherently stupid. That's a key difference. I think we all like to imagine ourselves as cool and rational under pressure, but here is a situation in which the scenario described above quickly overwhelmed Bonin, forcing him to make a series of irrational decisions he wouldn't have otherwise made in calmer circumstances. To call him an idiot is to ignore the lessons we can learn here about technology's role in piloting and cockpit and stress management.

The fact of the matter is that if you don't understand the basic concept of how to get a plane out of a stall, you have no place in the cockpit. Stress or no stress, this is a *super* basic concept of aviation.

 

[Alucrid]

"Inexperienced" in this case is a relative term. It takes many years of training to get to the point where you can even sniff the controls of an airliner.

No is airways airbuses have ever gone into alternate law, so this isn't a situation to take lightly.

 

[luxarific]

God, this was fucking horrible to read.

Also, I totally agree that this was probably a contributing factor to the crash.

It also seems like a bad design on that airbus that the flight sticks are independent of each other.

It's insane that both pilots are not aware via physical feedback from the stick what's going on with the controls.

 

[gutter_trash]

remind me to never fly Air France

 

[TheSeks]

even an inexperienced pilot knows that you don't pull a stick back in a stall situation. that's a fundamental concept of flight whether flying commercial jets, fighter jets, cessna's, or prop planes. It's as basic as your multiplication tables. I'd guess the majority of GAF could have figured this problem one out, and they have no training at all. Seems to me that the dude just made some bad decisions incited by panic and compounded by poor communication.

True. But the fact of the matter is, before that Stall they had no indication of their nose pointing what whatever angle. The computer was "off," and that's what caused them to panic. The inexperienced pilot thought "okay, we're fine, maybe we need to climb out of the storm and the computers will come back." Because the computer was off, the computer couldn't tell the more experienced pilot "no, fuck that. Stay level." It's stated in the article. The computer shut down, they were flying essentially "blind" and didn't truly know they were "okay, we can stay level and we're okay."

If this was all truly the result of "inexperience" rather than fear, then he shouldn't have been anywhere near the cockpit of an Airbus or any other plane. Too many lives at stake.

The bigger WTF is the captain leaving him in charge. Inexperience should've told the captain to leave the other one in charge. Even more so that he shouldn't have left to take a "nap" in the middle of a tropical storm until they were sure to be out of the storm. Partial blame to the Captain for making that error, partial blame to Boeing for the dual-stick system (which seems stupid as hell to me, I can't see the advantage of that), partial blame to Bonin for not saying he was going to climb and continued to do so while the other pilot was going to take the controls.

But all the blame for not heeding the "Stall!" warning. I think they need localize the Stall warnings or something if people are going to continue to ignore important warnings like that.

 

[Alucrid]

The fact of the matter is that if you don't understand the basic concept of how to get a plane out of a stall, you have no place in the cockpit. Stress or no stress, this is a *super* basic concept of aviation.

You have no place in this thread if you can't read the full article considering that it addresses their ignoring of the stall alarm.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

That's the exactly wrong conclusion you should arrive at. The point of articles like these is to show how any one of us could be a "Bonin" given a particular set of circumstances. In Bonin's case, he likely lacked the proper training of how to react in this particular circumstance, was confused by information he was receiving by the technology of the cockpit (the article states based on his understanding of the plane's flight controls, a stall was impossible), and panicked in the moment.

I think the key here is that he panicked. He was not inherently stupid. That's a key difference. I think we all like to imagine ourselves as cool and rational under pressure, but here is a situation in which the scenario described above quickly overwhelmed Bonin, forcing him to make a series of irrational decisions he wouldn't have otherwise made in calmer circumstances. To call him an idiot is to ignore the lessons we can learn here about technology's role in piloting and cockpit and stress management.

agreed.

Still, the stall warning WAS sounding for the entire descent. Sadly, it seemed both pilots were too "in the zone" to notice, I guess.

Really, fuck what you remember the manual saying; if the instruments are telling you you're losing speed and falling and that the engines are not broken...put the fucking nose down. Shit, obviously pulling the stick up isn't working.

Even if the inexperienced pilot didn't think of it, the more senior pilot should have. It occurred to nobody until the Captain showed up.

True. But the fact of the matter is, before that Stall they had no indication of their nose pointing what whatever angle. The computer was "off," and that's what caused them to panic. The inexperienced pilot thought "okay, we're fine, maybe we need to climb out of the storm and the computers will come back." Because the computer was off, the computer couldn't tell the more experienced pilot "no, fuck that. Stay level." It's stated in the article. The computer shut down, they were flying essentially "blind" and didn't truly know they were "okay, we can stay level and we're okay."

But remember, the computers were functioning normally again by the time they reached max altitude. The "anti-stall" features disabled because they were at <100 knots, though...but the other computers were working normally?

Unless I misread that part, which is entirely possible. To my recollection, it said that once they reached altitude, the instruments began working properly but they began to stall out because the nose was still pointed up a bit and at max thrust (because max altitude != sea level air density). But I may have misread.

 

[Alucrid]

God, this was fucking horrible to read.

Also, I totally agree that this was probably a contributing factor to the crash.



It's insane that both pilots are not aware via physical feedback from the stick what's going on with the controls.

Regardless both pilots should be communicating want they're doing.

 

[Drazgul]

Holy shit in that link. The stall warning alarm can be heard going off in the background for almost the entire duration of the crash, including a computerized voice that repeatedly says "STALL STALL STALL". The word "Stall" can be heard on the alarm 75 times over the course of the transcript... but not once do any of the pilots ever acknowledge it. They must have been so freaked they just completely zoned out.

They're french, of course they'll ignore a warning in english.

 

[hayejin]

The Airbus's stall alarm is designed to be impossible to ignore. Yet for the duration of the flight, none of the pilots will mention it, or acknowledge the possibility that the plane has indeed stalled—even though the word "Stall!" will blare through the cockpit 75 times. Throughout, Bonin will keep pulling back on the stick, the exact opposite of what he must do to recover from the stall.

Read more: Air France 447 Flight-Data Recorder Transcript - What Really Happened Aboard Air France 447 - Popular Mechanics

The bolded part is making my blood boil! Is this like a car alarm that happens so often that people can tune out or disregard the severity?

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

Even if the inexperienced pilot didn't think of it, the more senior pilot should have. It occurred to nobody until the Captain showed up.

Nobody knew he was pulling up on the stick until he said so. They thought they were letting the plane stabilize on its own when the one guy was fucking it all up.

 

[luxarific]

They're french, of course they'll ignore a warning in english.

Would not be surprised if this wasn't true. English is the international "language" of aviation, but I think if they had heard "Décrochage!" (or whatever the right word is), that may have made a difference.

Wow, I really do think that bad design helped to kill these people:

As the plane approaches 10,000 feet, Robert tries to take back the controls, and pushes forward on the stick, but the plane is in "dual input" mode, and so the system averages his inputs with those of Bonin, who continues to pull back. The nose remains high.

That Robert had no idea from the stick's "feel" that Bonin was pulling it back is just fucking terrible. I wonder what Airbus's rationale was for designing the sticks this way.

 

[TheSeks]

But remember, the computers were functioning normally again by the time they reached max altitude. The "anti-stall" features disabled because they were at <100 knots, though...but the other computers were working normally?

Unless I misread that part, which is entirely possible. To my recollection, it said that once they reached altitude, the instruments began working properly but they began to stall out because the nose was still pointed up a bit and at max thrust (because max altitude != sea level air density). But I may have misread.

No, you're right. But at that point they weren't really reading the sensors or if they were they were making incorrect judgements. Bonin never stated he was continuing to climb. Failure there, but he isn't totally and completely at fault because he thought climbing would bring the computers back. It did, but it didn't "start the auto-pilot" like I guess he thought it would.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Nobody knew he was pulling up on the stick until he said so. They thought they were letting the plane stabilize on its own when the one guy was fucking it all up.

Indeed.

But again, both pilots were pulling back on the stick at times during the descent. Yes, the one was definitely fucking it up...but you'd think that the senior pilot might say, "fuck! we need this fucking nose to point DOWN but I can't get it to go angle down!!" at which time maybe Mr. Inexperience might make mention that he's trying to kill everyone on board. :-(

see: 2:11:37 commentary. Robert pulls up on the stick as well. Yet, at 2:10:55, all instruments are confirmed to be working so both pilots had enough information to know that the plane was in stall and what they needed to do to correct the situation would have become apparent. But that fear and panic clearly gripped their fucking souls because even before then STALL was still blaring throughout the cockpit.

No, you're right. But at that point they weren't really reading the sensors or if they were they were making incorrect judgements. Bonin never stated he was continuing to climb. Failure there, but he isn't totally and completely at fault because he thought climbing would bring the computers back. It did, but it didn't "start the auto-pilot" like I guess he thought it would.

word. this makes my heart hurt. I've never read anything like this before and I suspect it will be the last time.

 

[Ceekus]

The fact of the matter is that if you don't understand the basic concept of how to get a plane out of a stall, you have no place in the cockpit. Stress or no stress, this is a *super* basic concept of aviation.

We all understand what should have been done. If Bonin were here, reading this transcript while sipping his coffee, he'd no doubt be saying the same thing. What's interesting is attempting to understand why the obvious didn't occur; why didn't Bonin just pull down?

My argument is that rather than simply concluding Bonin was imbecilic we should consider the possibility his was a "natural" reaction to a complex and confusing situation that overwhelmed his ability to make what appears to all of us to be sensible choices.

 

[AstroLad]

isn't this pretty much exactly what happened with colgan also? not to be glib because i know these situations must be ridiculously intense, but i learned about stalls and how they work at age 5 playing Flight Simulator and here two plane crashes where the pilots exhibit zero understanding of stalling

 

[Kurtofan]

remind me to never fly Air France

Air France isn't any more prone to crashes than other companies, the pilots were bad doesn't mean the whole company is.

 

[Chittagong]

I was just crossing the Atlantic today pretty South, and we had a long session of turblence that shook even our 747. As a passenger I tend to switch my display to to Flight Data to see our altitude and speed, just out of interest.

I was thinking today how many one the AF flight might have done the same, and what did they see? How did the whole ordeal feel in the cabin? Did people figure out something was wrong, scream etc.?

I felt much more reassured in our old 747, they seem to have never got into these Airbus freak incidents

 

[Dreams-Visions]

We all understand what should have been done. If Bonin were here, reading this transcript while sipping his coffee, he'd no doubt be saying the same thing. What's interesting is attempting to understand why the obvious didn't occur; why didn't Bonin just pull down?

My argument is that rather than simply concluding Bonin was imbecilic we should consider the possibility his was a "natural" reaction to a complex and confusing situation that overwhelmed his ability to make what appears to all of us to be sensible choices.

I don't disagree. I just...this is why most airlines (I can only speak for the American ones, though) require rigorous simulation training and stress testing before letting anyone in the cockpit. Not that it couldn't happen to a team of American pilots, but shit...they get enough training through enough wild circumstances to know how to handle the situation without panicking.

And again, while it's easy to site Bonin (becuase he did the most fucking up of all), "Robert" never attempts to push the stick forward, unless I overlooked it in the article. In fact, at 2:11:37, he also pulls back on the stick. AND he never makes mention of this basic concept of flight/stalling at any point during the descent. Only the captain does, and by then it's too late. Remember, Robert seemed to have no objection to pulling back...he began to do it himself.

Air France isn't any more prone to crashes than other companies, the pilots were bad doesn't mean the whole company is.

whether this is expressly true or not can really only be determined by the processes they use to train, educate and test their pilots before getting into the cockpit. I'd like to assume all airlines have similar expectations of their pilots and train them accordingly...but I really have no idea if that's true or not.

 

[Alucrid]

Still, the pilots continue to ignore it, and the reason may be that they believe it is impossible for them to stall the airplane. It's not an entirely unreasonable idea: The Airbus is a fly-by-wire plane; the control inputs are not fed directly to the control surfaces, but to a computer, which then in turn commands actuators that move the ailerons, rudder, elevator, and flaps. The vast majority of the time, the computer operates within what's known as normal law, which means that the computer will not enact any control movements that would cause the plane to leave its flight envelope. "You can't stall the airplane in normal law," says Godfrey Camilleri, a flight instructor who teaches Airbus 330 systems to US Airways pilots.

But once the computer lost its airspeed data, it disconnected the autopilot and switched from normal law to "alternate law," a regime with far fewer restrictions on what a pilot can do. "Once you're in alternate law, you can stall the airplane," Camilleri says.

It's quite possible that Bonin had never flown an airplane in alternate law, or understood its lack of restrictions. According to Camilleri, not one of US Airway's 17 Airbus 330s has ever been in alternate law. Therefore, Bonin may have assumed that the stall warning was spurious because he didn't realize that the plane could remove its own restrictions against stalling and, indeed, had done so.

For the armchair pilots who can fly a plane and not read an article

Dreams Robert does push forward however it's while bonin is pulling back. Once again lack of communication comes into play

 

[androvsky]

True. But the fact of the matter is, before that Stall they had no indication of their nose pointing what whatever angle. The computer was "off," and that's what caused them to panic. The inexperienced pilot thought "okay, we're fine, maybe we need to climb out of the storm and the computers will come back." Because the computer was off, the computer couldn't tell the more experienced pilot "no, fuck that. Stay level." It's stated in the article. The computer shut down, they were flying essentially "blind" and didn't truly know they were "okay, we can stay level and we're okay."

I thought the only instrument that failed was the airspeed indicator, due to the pitot tube freezing, and it was the override system that was shut down. Surely even a glass cockpit monstrosity has an artificial horizon somewhere.

 

[FStop7]

If Alternate Law is such a rare thing then one would think there should be some serious bells and whistles that go off to notify everyone in the cockpit about it, and that those bells and whistles don't stop until one of the pilots acknowledges it.

 

[AstroLad]

I'll be really interested to see what Ask the Pilot says (said? haven't read in a while) about this. He's been following the story really closely and as an armchair pilot I defer to his opinion completely. He did a great job reporting on Colgan too.

 

[Gareth Bale]

That was not nice to read. With every line I was waiting for the point where they realised that it was over.

 

[John Rabbit]

from what I understood, they expected that they had plotted a course safely around the storm cell(s) and didn't find out otherwise until after the Captain had left. and really, what they should have done to avoid it isn't terribly complicated anyway.

the Captain should not have left in the first place. even if they had assurances/assumptions that they would have been flying around the storm-area you'd think as Captain he'd want to make sure that whole maneuver went smoothly. just feels slightly negligent.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

noted, Alucrid. and that makes it even more sad.

the Captain should not have left in the first place. even if they had assurances/assumptions that they would have been flying around the storm-area you'd think as Captain he'd want to make sure that whole maneuver went smoothly. just feels slightly negligent.

perhaps so. but with 2 pilots that the airline deemed intelligent and capable enough to be in the cockpit with him, such a routine maneuver shouldn't have been a problem.

It's not like Bonin and Robert were interns or something.

 

[ultron87]

That Robert had no idea from the stick's "feel" that Bonin was pulling it back is just fucking terrible. I wonder what Airbus's rationale was for designing the sticks this way.

I really can't think of a single advantage to having the sticks operate in this manner. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[luxarific]

Some really good links and comments on Airbus design and the human error in this accident in the Metafilter thread

http://www.metafilter.com/110222/What-really-happened-aboard-Air-France-447

Those poor people. You just want to reach back in time and help them, but you can't.

Dreams Robert does push forward however it's while bonin is pulling back. Once again lack of communication comes into play

So wow, apparently the Airbus has another auditory alarm when both pilots are manipulating the sticks

When both sidesticks are displaced from the neutral position, an audible alarm "Dual Input" is triggered. A voice in the cockpit literally says that, "Dual Input". This happens several times in the flight, and the warning is audible on the cockpit voice recorder. Both pilots clearly know when the other is making inputs. They don't necessarily know what the other pilot is inputting, but, as I discuss below, there is nothing to suggest that the pilots had conflicting intentions for any significant length of time.

It sounds like Robert was definitely overloaded with panic/all the alarms going off. Again, I think non-auditory, non-visual physical feedback from the stick would have helped Robert grasp that Bonin was pulling back on it. If you have the "Stall! Stall! Stall!" warning going off constantly in the background, I bet he never even heard the "Dual Input" warning going off.

Fuck, those poor people. Agonizing.

 

[Cat Party]

For the armchair pilots who can fly a plane and not read an article

Thanks for highlighting that.

 

[FStop7]

That was not nice to read. With every line I was waiting for the point where they realised that it was over.

I used to have a job that involved frequent air travel. Somehow that led to me becoming interested in air safety. I found a website that documented a lot of the commercial air disasters over the past 30+ years. Besides articles and photos there were often transcripts. The thing that always unnerved me so badly is how often the transcripts ended the exact same way:

*Alarms in the cockpit*

Pilot: *says something calm*

Co-pilot: *responds calmly*

Pilot: *brief, terse statement*

Co-pilot: *terse acknowledgement*

Cockpit: screams

Calm, professional talk and then just... screams. That's always the last thing.

 

[diddles]

remind me to never fly on an Airbus

fixed. yes the young pilot acted like a moron and caused the crash, but i can't even believe how stupid the designers of this plane sound. asynchronous controls that average out??? WHY THE FUCK?

also, i can't believe the plane had modes of operation (like Alternate Law) that the pilots had never trained in... speechless.

 

[Salmonax]

The bolded part is making my blood boil! Is this like a car alarm that happens so often that people can tune out or disregard the severity?

Weirdly, it's probably the opposite. Because it's nearly impossible to stall an Airbus, it's likely they'd never heard the alarm outside a simulation.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Some really good links and comments on Airbus design and the human error in this accident in the Metafilter thread

http://www.metafilter.com/110222/What-really-happened-aboard-Air-France-447

Those poor people. You just want to reach back in time and help them, but you can't.



So wow, apparently the Airbus has another auditory alarm when both pilots are manipulating the sticks



It sounds like Robert was definitely overloaded with panic/all the alarms going off. Again, I think non-auditory, non-visual physical feedback from the stick would have helped Robert grasp that Bonin was pulling back on it. If you have the "Stall! Stall! Stall!" warning going off constantly in the background, I bet he never even heard the "Dual Input" warning going off.

Fuck, those poor people. Agonizing.

+1 on a visual alert. 2 different audio alerts sounds scary..but I assume there would be a visual alert as well. But again, every man in that computer was trained and qualified to be there. SOMEONE should have had their wits about them. :-(

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Weirdly, it's probably the opposite. Because it's nearly impossible to stall an Airbus, it's likely they'd never heard the alarm outside a simulation.

They would have been exposed to it countless times in training. Enough times to know its sound and react accordingly. Panic is the only rational excuse for failing to acknowledge it for 3 minutes.

 

[Deadly Cyclone]

Very dumb question, but what causes a stall? Why can planes not fly completely vertical? Not enough power? I've always wondered this.

 

[ced]

fixed. yes the young pilot acted like a moron and caused the crash, but i can't even believe how stupid the designers of this plane sound. asynchronous controls that average out??? WHY THE FUCK?

also, i can't believe the plane had modes of operation (like Alternate Law) that the pilots had never trained in... speechless.

While I know very little about piloting an aircraft, I always preferred to fly Boeing aircraft when I traveled a lot. Boeing gives the pilots control over computers in emergencies, Airbus does not in most cases. Oddly enough the crash in this case is a result of the pilots control over the computers, but the root cause was that they expected the computers to be doing something they were not, and it seems like training did not account for this. The asynchronous sticks is also ridiculous in my mind.

 

[Kinyou]

Bonin didn't keep a cool head. Poor guy should have never become a pilot.

 

[Javaman]

Think that's bad? Read about the russian flight where the captain let a kid in the seat to fly the plane for a bit. He put a little pressure on the stick and it partially disengaged the autopilot without anyone noticing. The plane started banking and then automatically tried to pull up on the elevators to continue the altitude and it pinned everyone down, unable to save it.

 

[offtopic]

No is airways airbuses have ever gone into alternate law, so this isn't a situation to take lightly.

People are missing the fact that this seems to be a CRITICAL design flaw in the airbus. It sounds as though pilots are not really warned that Alternate Law mode has happened or that there is a system in place that indicates it has happened. If pilots are told that it is virtually impossible to stall the plane then that is how they are will proceed even with data pointing to the fact that the plane might be stalling.

Yes there wasn't a mechanical problem but there was a design issue (let's not even mention that the copilot doesn't even an easy and obvious way to see which way the pilot is pulling the stick - just WTF).

Also, having the captain or senior officer oversee operation and not be the one performing the operation is typically a better scenario - I'm pretty sure that is typically how flight crews are trained these days.

 

[luxarific]

+1 on a visual alert. 2 different audio alerts sounds scary..but I assume there would be a visual alert as well. But again, every man in that computer was trained and qualified to be there. SOMEONE should have had their wits about them. :-(

Another interesting quote from that MeFi thread

Remember, the Airbus flies like no other aircraft in that the sidestick provides no feedback to the pilot. It is a video game, not an airplane.

I believe the Air France pilot unintentionally fell back on all of his previous flying experience, in which aircraft controls "talked" to him when he moved them. Distracted by many confusing inputs, he instinctively expected to be able to control the aircraft by "feel" while dividing his attention to address other matters. I've seen it happen in the simulator, and in an Airbus this is a sure way to lose control of the aircraft and is possibly the most dangerous aspect of Airbus design philosophy.

And another

From the Airbus manuals:

When the Pilot Flying (PF) makes an input on the sidestick, an order (an electrical signal) is sent to the fly-by-wire computer. If the Pilot Not Flying (PNF) also acts on the stick, then both signals/orders are added.

Therefore, as on any other aircraft type, PF and PNF must not act on their sidesticks at the same time.

If the PNF (or Instructor) needs to take over, the PNF must press the sidestick takeover pushbutton, and announce: "I have control".

Note that despite the "dual input" warning on AF447, neither pilot exercised control by pressing the sidestick priority button. Which further underscores the "nobody really took command" CRM argument.

If there really is no visual indication of dual inputs on the stick (there should be a physical indication as well, but let's disregard that for the moment), that just seems like a clear design error to me. From that thread there -is- a visual indicator if the "sidestick priority" button is pressed (allows the pilot to completely override the other pilot's sidestick in the "pilot passed out" situation), but it doesn't say if there's a visual indicator if the "sidestick priority" button isn't pressed.

 

[ced]

Very dumb question, but what causes a stall? Why can planes not fly completely vertical? Not enough power? I've always wondered this.

Stalling is just where the aircraft is angled up too much for the speed it's moving, causing it to lose altitude. Put simply, a stalled aircraft is no longer gaining altitude, and if not corrected can start to go out of control.

Basically not enough power, and obviously not designed for it. Commercial aircraft weigh from 200 - 250K lbs. They are actually so picky about weight effecting flight dynamics that sometimes the passengers and luggage have to be removed (luggage) or shifted around.

Even if they did have the power and aerodynamics for it, no ones wants to be subjected to the amount of G's propelling an aircraft of that weight straight up would cause.

 

[planar1280]

Does anyone think the Pilots got the plane into the 'Coffins Corner' or Q-Corner?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_corner_(aviation)

The coffin corner (or Q corner) is the altitude at or near which a fast fixed-wing aircraft's stall speed is equal to the critical Mach number, at a given gross weight and G-force loading. At this altitude the airplane becomes nearly impossible to keep in stable flight. Since the stall speed is the minimum speed required to maintain level flight, any reduction in speed will cause the airplane to stall and lose altitude. Since the critical Mach number is the maximum speed at which air can travel over the wings without losing lift due to flow separation and shock waves, any increase in speed will cause the airplane to lose lift, or to pitch heavily nose-down, and lose altitude. The "corner" refers to the triangular shape at the top right of a flight envelope chart where the stall speed and critical Mach number lines come together.

 

[IndieJones]

If I had any family or friends on that plane, I would be more pissed off than you can believe after reading this, especially after two years of not knowing what happened.

This whole thing basically reads like the co-pilot committed suicide and took 230+ people with him. Heads should roll.

 

[offtopic]

Very dumb question, but what causes a stall? Why can planes not fly completely vertical? Not enough power? I've always wondered this.

Simply put you need airflow over the wings to create an upward force. If you go too slow the wind isn't flowing quickly enough over the wings to create the upward force and the plane goes down.

Planes can not fly vertically because the engines do not produce nearly enough thrust to propel that sort of mass straight up (which is why we use rockets for that application).

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Another interesting quote from that MeFi thread



And another



If there really is no visual indication of dual inputs on the stick (there should be a physical indication as well, but let's disregard that for the moment), that just seems like a clear design error to me. From that thread there -is- a visual indicator if the "sidestick priority" button is pressed (allows the pilot to completely override the other pilot's sidestick in the "pilot passed out" situation), but it doesn't say if there's a visual indicator if the "sidestick priority" button isn't pressed.

Definitely doesn't seem to be pilot friendly

 

[Alucrid]

If I had any family or friends on that plane, I would be more pissed off than you can believe after reading this, especially after two years of not knowing what happened.

This whole thing basically reads like the co-pilot committed suicide and took 230+ people with him. Heads should roll.

Yeah im sure this guy wanted to kill all the passengers on the plane. Yep you're correct and not a complete douche at all

 

[offtopic]

Definitely doesn't seem to be pilot friendly

Seems like someone failed to perform adequate risk management processes for the airline...these design flaws don't seem all that obscure. Heads should roll for anyone in line with checking over those processes (that probably would include outside auditors as well).

 

[TheSeks]

This is pretty intense, these dudes apparently had no choice other than to fly in the thunderstorm, due to Iran/No Fly Zone. I can't even imagine what was going on in the Airbus at that time.

 

[IndieJones]

Yeah im sure this guy wanted to kill all the passengers on the plane. Yep you're correct and not a complete douche at all

Edited for less rage. I think the whole "LOL guys there's no way that alarm is saying 'STALL!', everything must be fine" thing just pisses me off.

 

[dabig2]

Very dumb question, but what causes a stall? Why can planes not fly completely vertical? Not enough power? I've always wondered this.

This is a pretty interesting NOVA program about the crash. Note: they did this like a year before they even found the black boxes, so everything they said was full of hypotheticals as they treated it like an aviation mystery. I linked the part of the documentary where they begin to talk about the pilots and stalling:
The Crash of Air France Flight AF 447- Part 3 of 4
And then the 4th part of it:
The Crash of Air France Flight AF 447- Part 4 of 4

I remember watching it when it aired and coming away completely convinced that it was egregious pilot error. But they also do a decent job explaining how hysterical the situation likely was and that it is understandable that the crew could screw up so badly.