Air Asia flight low sharp turn 2017

Funny, if they didn't turn on the autopilot they would have been fine, at least in regards to the low alt turn. But that is the last link in the incident chain. All automation, even the mythical airbus, will do what you tell it to do whether you understand what you're telling it to do or not. You need to put program it correctly.

The ol' "the plane did what you told it to do, not what you wanted it to do. Make sure you program it correctly."


But, in the end, if the plane isn't doing what you want, shut off the automation and fly the thing.
 
I’m not sure why it would have turned the wrong direction unless the box created a fix off the end of runway 3 that it was trying to make.

I am also not sure why, when they noticed the plane turning the wrong way, they didn’t immediately turn off the automation and manually turn towards the proper fix. Of course, I wasn’t there, so...
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I’m not sure why it would have turned the wrong direction unless the box created a fix off the end of runway 3 that it was trying to make.

I am also not sure why, when they noticed the plane turning the wrong way, they didn’t immediately turn off the automation and manually turn towards the proper fix. Of course, I wasn’t there, so...
Click to expand...
Probably because there were not any pilots on board.
 
Runway and/or departure changes during taxi-out is something that we have on every checkride due to the oppertunities for error they introduce.

Still, I don't know why anybody is engaging the a/p at 200'!
 
Rex Kramer said:
Funny, if they didn't turn on the autopilot they would have been fine, at least in regards to the low alt turn. But that is the last link in the incident chain. All automation, even the mythical airbus, will do what you tell it to do whether you understand what you're telling it to do or not. You need to put program it correctly.

The ol' "the plane did what you told it to do, not what you wanted it to do. Make sure you program it correctly."


But, in the end, if the plane isn't doing what you want, shut off the automation and fly the thing.
Click to expand...
Even MCAS did was it was told, even if it was told by a bad sensor. Overall, automation is the best thing to happen to aviation.
 
MPL FTW. AP deferred? Oh shhh---
61682776d3ba0b7224c7501916951ae7.gif

:D
 
The reporting does not paint a clear picture of what happened. Seems to imply they took off on the wrong runway, etc. But sounds like they took off on runway 21 which is the correct active runway. But they erroneously had runway 03 as the runway in the FMS. Now, if everything else in the FMS is correct (departure, initial waypoint, etc), their initial turn (left) should the correct turn to get them on course. The report does not say whether the FMS had anything else wrong other than the runway. Of course when they checked the route (assuming they did that), the FMS would have shown a right turn on course, which they may have expected (?). So, the only real problem that caused the reporting may have been the 200 ft when the turn began.

Anybody agree with this? And I agree...shockingly, they turned on the autopilot before 200ft (our opspec says 600 - still low). But sounds like, regardless, they would have turned at 200ft anyway because the flight director would have told them to.
 
noahfong said:
Anybody agree with this? And I agree...shockingly, they turned on the autopilot before 200ft (our opspec says 600 - still low). But sounds like, regardless, they would have turned at 200ft anyway because the flight director would have told them to.
Click to expand...
We're 800' on departure as a minimum but it's actually more work to do that as compared to hand-flying through the clean up and acceleration (in a 737). The AP/FP usually won't turn below 400' unless the departure procedure requires an early turn. Of course, sometimes LNAV captures while still taxiing, so, who knows...
 
noahfong said:
The reporting does not paint a clear picture of what happened. Seems to imply they took off on the wrong runway, etc. But sounds like they took off on runway 21 which is the correct active runway. But they erroneously had runway 03 as the runway in the FMS. Now, if everything else in the FMS is correct (departure, initial waypoint, etc), their initial turn (left) should the correct turn to get them on course. The report does not say whether the FMS had anything else wrong other than the runway. Of course when they checked the route (assuming they did that), the FMS would have shown a right turn on course, which they may have expected (?). So, the only real problem that caused the reporting may have been the 200 ft when the turn began.

Anybody agree with this? And I agree...shockingly, they turned on the autopilot before 200ft (our opspec says 600 - still low). But sounds like, regardless, they would have turned at 200ft anyway because the flight director would have told them to.
Click to expand...
If they programmed the SID from runway 03, the FMS would probably command a 030 (roughly) heading until 400 feet, at which time it would transition to the course to the first waypoint. The flight director would command the turn Ro 030, and the autopilot (and most likely the “pilots”) would follow that command.

I’m not familiar with the U.S. Part 121 regs, much less whatever the budget carrier Air Asia operates under, but from what I’ve seen, much of it parallels Part 135, which prohibits autopilot engagement on departure below 500 ft.
 
Larry in TN said:
Runway and/or departure changes during taxi-out is something that we have on every checkride due to the oppertunities for error they introduce.

Still, I don't know why anybody is engaging the a/p at 200'!
Click to expand...
i fly with guys that turn it on at 100 off at 80 every flight.
 
MauleSkinner said:
If they programmed the SID from runway 03, the FMS would probably command a 030 (roughly) heading until 400 feet, at which time it would transition to the course to the first waypoint. The flight director would command the turn Ro 030, and the autopilot (and most likely the “pilots”) would follow that command.

I’m not familiar with the U.S. Part 121 regs, much less whatever the budget carrier Air Asia operates under, but from what I’ve seen, much of it parallels Part 135, which prohibits autopilot engagement on departure below 500 ft.
Click to expand...

Air Asia operates under the Malaysian Department of Civil Aviation (DCA). Yes, they have rules and regulations, but that doesn't necessarily mean they abide by them.

And FWIW, several foreign carriers operating the Airbus engage autoflight right after takeoff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top