>=20
> You're talking about AF447? Not entirely accurate - yes the pitot iced ov=
er
> and gave incorrect airspeed, which is why it tripped out of autopilot, bu=
t
> the pitot cleared fairly quickly and the plane was fully functional for t=
he
> majority of the incident. The co-pilot pulled back on the stick increasin=
g
> the angle of attack, which is what slowed the plane down - throttles were
> on full power when it crashed. Plenty of warning - the stall alarm was
> sounding most of the time, and all instruments apart from the airspeed
> indicator were fully functional at all times, hence it was clear that the
> plane was climbing (until it stalled and started dropping) and that the
> ground speed (based on GPS, fully functional at all times) was decreasing=
..
> It should have been obvious to anybody with even basic flight training wh=
at
> was happening and what the solution was, but the co-pilot kept the stick
> back regardless and flew it into the sea. Totally incomprehensible from a
> trained professional pilot flying for a major airline - the suggestion is
> that pilots of modern planes have learned to rely on the autopilot and
> automatic systems which usually prevent stalling (when the pitot iced it
> tripped out of that protection and clearly the co-pilot wasn't prepared f=
or
> that).

There were actually 3 pilots, The captain and 2 co-pilots, although
the captain was reliefed and didn't enter the cockpit until it was
too late.

Full report here:

<http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090601.en/pdf/f-cp090601.en.pdf>

/Ruben


--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.