Airbus 340-600 accident?

Author
Discussion

speedy_thrills

Original Poster:

7,793 posts

258 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
I read on some website that an Arab flight crew who had never bothered reading the manual crashed a brand new A340-600 by powering it up with the brakes on and then disabling the circuit that controlled the warning buzzers...and control systems eek. Aircraft ends up needing more than a polish:


Seems unlikly though that anyone would be that inept or allowed to operate an aircraft without reading the manual? So what is the truth?

welshbikerduck

1,448 posts

204 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Classic case of RTFM if ever there was one hehe

However i doubt that is the truth, Pilots are required to do hours "on type" so i don't see it myself. Maybe something like they misread instructions in the flight manual in a certain proceedure they had to carry out and that has now been exagerated.

MrVelox

2,974 posts

202 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Not quite, but truth be told, the story is even better.

Airbus themselves wrecked it at Toulouse a few days before delivery to Eithad. The plane was scrapped.

Well done indeed!

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/11/19/21...

Bernie-the-bolt

15,313 posts

265 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Girl driving, foot slipped off the clutch whilst applying lippy...... whistle

LukeBird

17,170 posts

224 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
That happened a while back.
It was on a full power ground engine run, testing the aircraft prior to delviery; the Etihad pilots who were going to collect it were actually at Toulouse inspecting the aircraft!
Anyhow, it had a problem and ended up going through one of the walls...
I have the report somewhere! smile

speedy_thrills

Original Poster:

7,793 posts

258 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
LukeBird said:
it had a problem
So not "operator error"? What sort of problem? I'm suprised it could stand still at full tilt with just the tires friction to stop it sliding, especially empty yes.

hugoagogo

23,416 posts

248 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
the conveyor belt jammed

getmecoat

bigbubba

1,005 posts

234 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
The plane did not have a problem, the crew removed a circuit that deactivated the buzzers that warned them that they were at take off thrust and the flaps weren't in the take off position and that the parking brake was on. When they did this the plane then though it was in the air so it took off the parking brake.

The crew didn't think to throttle back until two seconds before impact, they had been at full thrust for eleven seconds!

I bet they didn't get their bonus that year!

Bubba

Jasandjules

71,044 posts

244 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
hugoagogo said:
the conveyor belt jammed

getmecoat
I think the problem here appears to be the conveyor belt was in full working order, it was the wall at the end of the belt that was the problem...biggrin

anonymous-user

69 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Wasn't that one here a year ago when it happened?

The aircraft was still owned by Airbus at the time as It hadn't been delivered to Etihad yet.

anonymous-user

69 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
The 9 people on board during the test were Airbus and Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies employees.

williamp

19,819 posts

288 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
So that's who Ferrari are sponsored by. I was wondering...

hugoagogo

23,416 posts

248 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Jasandjules said:
hugoagogo said:
the conveyor belt jammed

getmecoat
I think the problem here appears to be the conveyor belt was in full working order, it was the wall at the end of the belt that was the problem...biggrin
you could be right

maybe the engineers were the types who said "Of course it won't move! the conveyor cancels the force"

mark69sheer

3,906 posts

217 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Another airbus computer related crash. . worrying.

Their automated TOGA routine is scary too and has caused crashes that pilots can't overide.

wildoliver

9,158 posts

231 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Does that say Jihad? hehe

Taffer

2,250 posts

212 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
mark69sheer said:
Another airbus computer related crash. . worrying.

Their automated TOGA routine is scary too and has caused crashes that pilots can't overide.
Are you referring to the Mulhouse crash, caught on video in 1988? That was pilot error (inappropriate height, airspeed, angle of attack and thrust settings), not a fault of the aircraft.

fadeaway

1,463 posts

241 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
mark69sheer said:
Another airbus computer related crash. . worrying.

Their automated TOGA routine is scary too and has caused crashes that pilots can't overide.
I always thought the airbus computers were very good. Only heard of problems when people decide to do something silly/odd/unusual that the computer wasn't told about.

mark69sheer

3,906 posts

217 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Taffer said:
mark69sheer said:
Another airbus computer related crash. . worrying.

Their automated TOGA routine is scary too and has caused crashes that pilots can't overide.
Are you referring to the Mulhouse crash, caught on video in 1988? That was pilot error (inappropriate height, airspeed, angle of attack and thrust settings), not a fault of the aircraft.


No not refering to mullhouse . Refering to sccidents where the toga lever is pushed and then pilots crash because the system then doesn't allow manual input leading to loss of throttle control and wing flaps.

S3_Graham

12,830 posts

214 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
basically the airbus wont let you do anything that it thinks it cant do... whereas a boieg will let you do whatever the hell you want... which although causes some accidents also saves some!

anonymous-user

69 months

Thursday 16th October 2008
quotequote all
Taffer said:
Are you referring to the Mulhouse crash, caught on video in 1988? That was pilot error (inappropriate height, airspeed, angle of attack and thrust settings), not a fault of the aircraft.
That's an overly simplistic summary of the crash.

Crashes are very rarely the result of one thing, pilot error,"the computer", or any other glib title people like to give. If you read up on that event there were many other factors leading up to and contributing to the event.