How A Camera Sent This Passenger Jet Into A Terrifying NoseDive | RAF Voyager 333
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 11. 2021
- Donations are never expected but appreciated: paypal.me/miniaircrash
Join My Discord: / discord
KC2 Image: Anna Zvereva from Tallinn, Estonia
This is the story of Voyager ZZ333. Voyager ZZ333 was a military flight from RAF brize norton to camp bastion in afghanistan. They were flying a KC2 which is a military version of the Airbus a330. The 8 and a half hour flight had 189 passengers and 9 crew members on board. As the plane taxied out, the A330’s IFF system was having trouble. The IFF or the identification friend or foe is a radio transmitter that helps planes identify other planes. In combat situations you do not want to shoot down a friendly aircraft and the IFF prevents incidents like that. As the plane held short of the runway the crew tried to troubleshoot the problem, they tried resetting the system but that just made things worse. They were about to give up and head back to the stand when the IFF fault cleared. Well this satisfied the crew and they got their takeoff clearance.
With the plane almost at its maximum takeoff weight the Kc2 needed almost all of runway 26 to get airborne. Once airborne the pilots engaged the autopilot and the plane started to climb to its cruising altitude of 33,000 feet. In the cabin there was some light turbulence but the meal service went fine and a movie was put on as everyone on board relaxed.
Once the plane was in cruise everything settled into a routine of sorts. The first officer left the cockpit for a bit and the captain monitored all the systems. As they cruised over turkey the captain felt a strange sense of weightlessness starting to come over his body. He felt his shoulder harness pushing him into his seat as everything else was weightless. The plane was pitching down. In less than ten seconds the plane was nosing down at 15 degrees and it went through 300 knots. The first officer who was in the cabin was lifted off his feet and floated to the ceiling. The report says that the first officer reentered the cockpit while experiencing weightlessness, so how does that work did he float through the cabin and into the cockpit as the plane dove towards the ground at 15,000 feet per minute? That sounds incredibly fun but given the context I doubt that it was anything but fun for all involved.
As the first officer entered the cockpit he was greeted by a sea of flashing lights and confusing alarms. The captain was trying to disengage the autopilot. With his feet on the floor the first officer also tried to disengage the autopilot by pulling back on the sidestick. Horrifyingly that seemed to have no effect the plane was still in the dive. He tried again after getting back in his seat and this time the plane responded as the dive eased. As the first officer coaxed the plane out of the dive the pilots got a dual input warning, letting them know that both pilots were making opposing inputs on their respective sidestick.
But before they could tend to that they had a new problem, during the dive the plane had built up quite a bit of speed and they were pushing up against the maximum design speed of the aircraft. So the pilots pulled the throttles back to idle and the plane began to climb, as it did the plane lost too much speed and they were not at risk of stalling. That was rectified when they commanded max power and got the plane back up to 31,000 feet. The upset had taken its toll in the cabin. A large number of people had been thrown into the ceiling and everything from bags to tea pots were strewn around the cabin.
Once the plane was under control the pilots issued a mayday call they wanted to get this plane on the ground the first chance they got, as they were in turkish airspace, ATC suggested diverting to the turkish city of trabzon. But the problem with trabzon was that it was too close only 60 nm away. That would not give them enough time to descend and after what happened they really didnt want to push the plane too much. So at first they decided to div - Věda a technologie
The Plane That Saved Its Pilots: czcams.com/video/Lksrb21Tbg4/video.html
Awesome videos 🤩
Thankful today 😊
This reminded me of the auto-GCAS system that saved an unconscious F-16 pilot from crashing. czcams.com/video/WkZGL7RQBVw/video.html
Now make air bagan flight 11
@@antisoda p
would be nice if u change those 'nm' to 'NM' or 'nmi' because 'nm' is nanometer symbol so it's quite confusing hearing about plane being 60 nanometers from the airport :p
I went to a lecture presented by the main investigator on this incident a few years ago. I remember being very impressed by the level of detective work it took to get to the bottom of this incident, and the lengths they went to to prove what happened. Air accident investigators are underrated professionals.
It is a good thing that people have that level of exceptions in commercial aviation.
The airplane manufactures, the airline and pilots existence are on the line and in case of a repeat, many lives. The liability of improper investigation are HUGE. Something must have gone wrong and that is what it is - but putting the blame on the wrong entity and/or repeating the mistake would be inexcusable.
Now lets us not think about that in a normal criminal court case the standard of prove is much lower.
Did the captain knowingly try to conceal his mistake and deny his cause in the accident? Also, would like to know more about the captain's service record, and wonder if the captain had been "pushed" up the chain of command because of social engineering, any type of equity, or other idiotic form of liberal beliefs.
@@chetmyers7041 Liberal ? Prince Charles overshot the runway in a BAE 146. The aircraft captain got the blame. That's not a liberal society that's one where the aristocracy get off scot free and somebody else takes the rap for them.
@@chetmyers7041 I think your entire understanding on how the world and world history has worked is completely upside down and backwards! Tally-hoo, old chap!
Thank you, good information!!! 🙏👍😷
I am surprised that the captain did not realise the camera was pushing the stick forward. I think the captain was over complicating things - looking too deep into the problem rather than checking the most simple thing first. Even the quickest of visual checks of the controls would have spotted the problem straight away. Mind you, from experience i know it is easy to overlook the obvious. I used to work at sea, and spent a lot of time up on the bridge. We once had a problem where the ship kept turning hard to starboard - seemingly randomly, for no obvious reason. I spent hours going over the entire system, trying to find the cause. What made it even harder was the fact the fault was very intermittent, sometimes going for hours without a recurrence. I soon worked out it would only happen with the auto-pilot engaged, when switched to manual mode everything was fine. I switched out the gps antenna and cabling, that made no difference, so we ordered a new control board for the auto-pilot and came into to port to pick it up and fit it. So we went on our way, only to find a few hours later the same thing was happening. I was out of ideas. In the end the problem was solved by simply turning on the bridge radio - just a car radio we had fitted for something to listen to. We quickly realised that the fault was accompanied by the familiar sound of a mobile phone interfering with the radio. I instantly looked for the phone causing the interference. And there was the skippers mobile phone laying on the console near to the auto-pilot. The skipper always put his phone there, but this was a new phone that he had only got the previous week, and for some reason the new phone and the auto-pilot did not like being that close to each other. The fact that the skipper had always put his phone in that position without any problems made me simply overlook the obvious, and if it was not for putting the stereo on I doubt I would have found out the cause for a good while to come!
Whoa, that's wild!!
I also don't fully understand how my speakers seem to know 5-10 seconds in advance that I'm about to receive a message XD
Hey man thanks for sharing. My brother works at sea so I've screenshotted your comment and will send it to him - could come in very handy for him some day!
It was not a case of overlooking the obvious. It was a case of deploying incompatible technologies in the environment. A microwave radio frequency source can raise havoc with equipment. Hospital equipment, for example, has to be designed to be immune to the RF interference from the myriad of cell phones these days or else patients can suffer greatly. So it should be obvious transportation also has to be made immune.
I had 1994 to 1998 a car mobile phone set with me. I had on my 12 V 6 Ah lead battery, a notebook and the car mobile phone set with big antenna and 8 W sending power.
It happened to me several times that I was asked to turn the device off in stores because they were afraid that the impulses of the device could trigger the sprinkler system.
You are right and, as you mention it, it's not that obvious to figure out what happens when you are in the loop. As they say in the aviation business (I was a pilot): everybody is far more clever in an armchair than in the cockpit ...
Nevertheless, regarding this A330 incident, keep in mind that in an airplane, reaction time is a matter of seconds, not hours ...
“I dunno why I added that to the video”
It was a fascinating fact about the case, that’s why! I find it insane that Turkey, upon learning that a plane has an emergency where they’ve had to call a mayday, that they’ve had to have an emergency landing, decided
“You know what? These folks have had a rough ride and been thrown around, let’s make that experience better by charging them and demanding they pay when they don’t have cash, and also refusing to allow credit cards!”
This must have been a few years ago. You can now pay for a tourist visa for Turkey online by credit card.
Bureaucracy - When adherence to the system is placed above the goals of the people / organization that system was created to serve. The customs officers are probably worried if they don't collect the visa fees they will personally be punished.
Considering what the passengers went through and some might have been injured, someone higher up should have intervened and prevented this. If the UK embassy new about it, i am sure the relevant authority in Turkey was aware of the situation too. No matter what bureaucratic obstacles might have been, it's hurts my brain to think why they were still asking for cash for visas in an emergency like this.
By the way, that happened in 2014, so not so long ago.
Typical Middle East country. Never let an opportunity pass to make a few quid.
@@jake_ From memory I think it was in 2015 that the online visa applications, payable by bank card were introduced.
(Edit) I just checked and the Turkish e-Visa with online application was apparently introduced in 2013.
10:33 “An unlikely hero in all of this is Airbus and its automation.” _As a result, Airbus’s automation was immediately promoted to the rank of Captain._
Except in flight QF72 where Airbus's automation almost crashed the plane.
Meanwhile at Boeing....
“Only when he saw its unmistakable, yet cliched and tired _r/whoosh_ meme did the unsuspecting commenter realize he’d gotten himself caught in an online microburst-but by then, it was far too late.” 🌬💨🌪🔄
Except this couldn't happen in a real plane with a yoke. Making the controls stupid toy joysticks with no force feedback have caused several crashes. Airbus gets no credit here for their shit design.
Can you just name some of them real quick.
"Apparently people who were on the flight now suffer from Anxiety, PTSD and Depression."
Yeah, landing in Turkey does that to people. My heart goes out for them...
That and Turkish prisons
Putting objects anywhere near flight controls sound negligent.
Well, I dont understand why Airbus went all sidestick esp for their gigantic jets. What was the problem with the yoke?
Let alone that yokes are not hand dominance sensitive, but the sidesticks definitely are. As a rightly, I would not want to command a jumbo jet with my left hand, but that's just me
and not figuring it out that your camera is on the controls lol
@@jamescollier3 No ones putting an SLR on a yoke lmao, also not making an excuse for the guy but on a boeing the place where he put his camera would have been just fine
@@wraith8323 I presume the reason for sidesticks if the same reason the captain started with assuming the problem was the autopilot - pilots don't do a vast amount of stick flying. 100ft up and on goes the autopilot for the next 7 hours!
Ya, if there's turbulence the camera might go flying around the cockpit. Isn't there a little storage area cubby hole place?
The fact the copilot fractured his spine on the ceiling and crawled to the cockpit shows how dramatic the drop must have been
I was the British Defence Attaché to Spain when that Voyager was new and being rigged for the RAF, and was very proud to have been associated with the project. As a Navy guy, I have been involved in my fair share of 'close calls' both at sea and on operations - but this incident reminds me of when a Ton Class ship I was navigating crashed following a steering gear breakdown. The cause? Well, one of the crew was eating his lunch in his forward mess when he was called for duty before he'd finished. He put his plate and cutlery out of the way on some deckhead trunking, to finish later. But in his absence, a fork rattled off the plate and landed in the steering gear linkage system from the wheelhouse, thus jamming the wheel and rudder. Significant damage then ensued! Anyway, many thanks for these superb videos!
The whole debacle with having to pay £10 is absolutely ridiculous. Thanks bureaucracy.
Turkey funds ISIS and the Taliban so a £10 visa is the least of our bureaucratic issues with Turkey.
That's what happens when your country is in an ongoing economic crisis
Nope, money talk
turkey are meant to be our ‘allies’ and charged our professional and military personnel during an unforeseen, unplanned and spontaneous incident. despicable and petty.
"You never know when you'll be in a midair upset and need to divert to Turkey."
I too found the extra info fascinating, and laughed heartily at the bit of humor.
For delivery pilots of the airframe makers, it was more like company-issued no-limit American Express cards: "You never know when you will find yourself diverting to an airport in some random country and need to take on 300,000 lb of Jet A to finish the trip."
I will make sure I have enough Euros on me when I fly from Chicago to Orlando next month because I don't want to be stranded in Turkey.
Weightlessness is an amazing feeling... if you know it's coming.
If you don't, claim PTSD, anxiety, and depression, and get a free pass courtesy of a softie government.
Weightlessness is a wonderful and calming feeling...it's when it turns to negative G's and you're pressed against the ceiling (or wherever you really don't want to be) that sucks.
the fact that everyone lived to tell the tale is amazing .. that captain shouldn't have even had his camera on the flight deck . Brilliant detective work.
Passengers keep your seatbelt on at all times unless you're actually out of your seat. Why is this complicated for people
When I'm on a passenger flight I have always the seat belt fastened. Some people looking at me like I'm an afraid pussy.
But I'm a private pilot and I know how fast turbulence can happen...
Because they lack the reality of what happens when it goes pear shaped.
Agreed. In the day, flew a lot. Sometimes, the tugs on the seat belt during significant turbulence might wake you up, but the screaming almost always did. 🙄
Probably the same people who have a problem with “a mask stops you breathing on people”
I always keep mine on because I don't intend to leave my seat. Why undo it, only to fasten it again an hour later?
Your recent content has been excellent man, you're in the groove, in the pipe, on the glide slope, five by five, with visibility clear to the horizon, etc. etc. etc. 🙂
Much appreciated!
He's two whites two reds
Positively A-ok
@@MiniAirCrashInvestigation I really like your videos, I've seen a few. But I can't hold it, one thing that annoys me is your total ignorance toward foreign names. I mean you don't need to know all the languages and pronounce words like natives do, still a little research (eg. opening the corresponding wiki page) would go a long way. In Turkish, c is never pronounced s. In this vid, Incirlik should be pronounced something like Eenjeerleek...
Was working at RAF Benson when this happened, a few of our lads had some injuries cause of this knob.
anything very serious?
It wasn’t a knob it was a lever… oh wait, sorry, wrong language..
@@wcolby The other knob, the one in the left seat.
@@catrinlewis939 I fed “knob” into Google translate and in British comes out totally different than English…😀
@@wcolby Uhm. What language do you think we speak in Britain (and more specifically ENGLand).
I love how your accidental use of a double-negative reverses the intended meaning of this sentence:
"as the plane dove towards the ground at 15000 feet per minute, that sounds incredibly fun! But given the context, I doubt that it was anything but fun"
English is a very weird language for non-natives to be able to perfect.
@@shona5512 are you sure? English isn't my first language. and most of the people I know who learned it as a second language have better command of it than many native speakers, especially if they've taken ESL classes.
@@tomslastname5560 I know what you mean, there definitely are some exceptions.. However, there are so many little nuances and rules that English has that other languages don't have. Like the phrase "The bandage was wound around the wound". Same spelling different pronunciation simply due to context. A Goose within a flock are called Geese but a Moose within a heard aren't called Meese. Words can be synonymous, but aren't always interchangeable "See" & "Watch" basically mean the same thing, you can _watch a movie_ or _watch the television,_ and _see a film_ but you don't _see the television_
If you're not used to those kinds of language rules, it can be hard to wrap your head around it and master it. But since English has derived from Latin, Germanic & French.. The similarities make it easier to understand if your native language is one of those three.
also noticed that. :D
Found it funny but just ignored it as it was obvious what he wanted to say.
Ummm.
I feel dumb because I'm not understanding. I know about double negatives; however, I can't point this one out. Can someone point it out to me?
This is one of those channels where you like before you see it because you know it will be good.
Just 3 points to add to your good video :-
1. "Voyager" is the name given to the Airbus A330 in Royal Air Force Service - itnis NOT its calling.
2. ZZ333 is the Military Serial Number of the Aircraft - not the Flight Number
3. KC2 is the military designation as to the role of the Aircraft in RAF Service,
in this case KC denotes the Aircraft as an Air Tanker with Passenger Carrying capability and the 2 denotes that it is the second variant of that model.
As a side note, the Royal Airforce leases its Voyager Aircraft from a Company called Air Tanker International under a PFI deal whereby it provides 9 Voyager Aircraft initially for routine operations but holds 5 further Aircraft In reserve which are further leased to Civilian operators when not needed by the RAF, these hold UK Civil Registrations such as the example leased to Jet2 Holidays in 2019 which had the registration G-VYGR.
At the end of the 25 year PFI Contract with the RAF, all the Voyager Aircraft will be returned to Air Tanker International for them to dispose of - or the RAF may sign a New PFI Contract to retain use of the Aircraft.
So who owns ZZ336, the royal/government jet?
I bet the RAF changed the Captains call sign to "Canon" or maybe "Fujifilm" and told him he was gonna get to fly a new "aircraft" called the P45
I don't know exactly what it is but somehow these investigations videos are very addictive.
Love the content and how you map things out in layman's terms instead of assuming everyone knows what such and such a part or system is. I can binge these videos and forget what else I'm doing, so kudos and props to you!
I imagine the chaotic situation.
Then suddenly, Superman First Officer floats into the cockpit and saves the aircraft.
I have never seen anything quite like it!
I was born in Trabzon. I'm surprised when I heard the word "Trabzon" on this channel :)). I'm very very sorry on behalf my country and the current government. It is outrageous to ask money for Visa from the victims of a flight accident.
But WHEN did the event take place? For some reason, I *always* have to rewind to hear the date again, I miss it in every single video. Not this time, this one seems to be really missing the date.
If you have a Google, it’s 2014
If you don't have Google it's 1884
@@ILoveWomen Yep it was a trooping flight to camp bastion
By the way this would not be a Voyager flight 333 that is its military registration mark. When in this mode of carrying pax, they usually use the callsign ASCOT which derives from the old title of the original RAF Division of Air Support Command Transport.
In the 60s 70s and 80s at RAF Lyneham there were the Comet 2 and the 4, Hastings, Britannia and then also came the C-130k. The Belfast, VC-10 and L10-11 Tristar were at Brize Norton, where now the Voyagers are based.
All of them using ASCOT followed by 4 numbers as callsigns.
I was in Ops at HQASC in the early 70’s, happy days.
“Everything from bags to teapots” a British stereotype? Probably.
True? Yes! At least one per person is mandatory for us Brits travelling abroad 🤣
Every Brit knows it’s a legal requirement of citizenship to have a teapot on your person at all times.
It's the ROYAL air force....
@@limeyfox don’t forget the bisto too 👍🏼
“Everything from _tea_ bags to teapots”would pretty much span the gamut of the most important carryon items.
You forgot to say we have to say “god bless the Queen” and break out the biscuits.
OMG!!! Just getting better... great!! Congrats!!
Thanks so much!!
Another excellent episode. Thankyou for your awesome content.
How ungrateful of those passengers! The pilot gave them an experience you would have to pay NASA $5,000 to get on their Vomit Comet (Weightless Wonder)! 😜
This is the BEST video you have done!! I love the extra information and the hilarious advice to keep some pocket money just in case we need to divert to Turkey!
Another excellent video! I really look forward to seeing each of your new videos. Keep up the great work!
Fascinating video my friend. Great work as always
Small detail. IFF is between the aircraft and ANY other platform. Aircraft, ships, land installations and more.
I just finished watching Mentour Pilot's video on this subject. He took 31 minutes and yours is just under 12. What I like about your video is there is no preamble about the walkaround and such. Also, no background music (he has a low tune going while he speaks). He didn't mention that Visa and cash problem. "All CSI." Love it. The way it was explained wasn't that he did what he did with the camera that caused the court martial, but rather that he didn't admit it.
Wow that’s impressive I feel like I’ve seen a ton of less severe dives/incidents that the pilots weren’t able to recover from, good on them to be able to save it.
Good on the copilot with a busted back. Lousy on the Captain for deplorable behavior.
This video is very well done well researched well produced and a very great presentation
You’re in the groove now keep it up great work
Las Vegas Craig
Bravo ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
It's insane someone with a credit card wasn't allowed into the terminal for a second, under guard if needed.
You can withdraw cash from an ATM with your credit card... -_-
Great video. I think the fact that everyone pooled their money together is important. It shows that most people are great and want to help one another. I think we need this type of reminder on a regular basis.
They went all CSI on it! Absolutely fascinating details. Thank you!:-)
Funny, at first I thought this was one of the unlikely interferences of common electronics equipment with flight systems that every airline wants to make you believe is a severe risk. I was surprised to hear that it simply was the camera wedged between the control stick and the chair 😅
So many tragedies are caused by 'accidental' human error. Thanks MACI for a great presentation.
Great content! Thank you!
Excellent narration. Thank you.
Nice video have seen this particular aircraft on a few occasions at Prestwick. Still remember this incident.
"DUAL INPUT" means just that, literally inputs on both sidesticks. It does not say anything about which direction they are in. The Airbus FBW system arithmetically adds up both inputs and the sum is then sent via the FBW to the flight control surfaces. So a dual input can happen with inputs in the same direction (doubling the output) or opposite directions (negating each other) or any other combination of inputs. The aural warning is required as the sidesticks are not active and therefore any control input by the other pilot can not be noticed without that help. It is easy to get rid of it, simply press and hold the take over/autopilot disconnect push button on the stick, that cancels out the inputs from the other stick.
Cameras in the cockpit can be dangerous. I started glider flying at 14 and had a very nice gliding holiday with my club in southern france in my first year. The second year i could not go but most of my club went there again. Sadly, once they came back they told us that a very much liked flight instructor died, with his student, during a winch launch. The student apparently had a camera on him, with a strap around his neck. However, during the winch launch they had the rope breaking (not uncommon), which resulted in negative g, the strap floated over the head of the student and on trying to pull out of the dive it was impossible as the camera had lodged itself between stick and seat. I, as most pilots, do love to take pictures during flight. And some of us have SLRs with them, although nowadays a smartphone is usually enough. The smartphone thing has the added bonus that the devices are relatively small and light, therefore are less of a safety hazard during flight.
The photo quality between a camera & phone, are lightyear apart.
I have never understood why adding the conflicting sidestick inputs is ever the right strategy. Pilot A wants to do one thing, pilot B wants to do another, so the plane does a third thing. Makes no sense to me. Perhaps the plane should give control to the stick that made the most recent input. While screaming an alarm of course.
@@RDSAlphard True of course. But so is convenience, weight and bulk. I do have my own nice collection of glass for my Sony A7r IV, but i rarely have it on the flightdeck. Simply because it is way too much equipment and too much hassle.
Current smartphones have a surprising good quality for most situations and casual use.
@@castletown999 It actually does make sense, it is close to what happens when two pilots yank on an interconnected control. If they pull in the same direction you will get a much larger input in a shorter time, if they do in the opposite they will (power being equal) cancel each other out.
No, pilots should never use dual input on either a conventional or FBW plane, that is just poor piloting, but unlike on a conventional plane it is extremely easy to sort it out on an airbus, and that has to be really drummed into the heads of new airbus pilots during training. In my outfit we train it every single simulator event.
@@Soordhin I see your point. But I still don't think it's right , because in the case of Airbus FBW the two sticks are not mechanically linked. One pilot can only fight the other if he knows the other is making an input. Witness: Air France 447. (The first officer was holding the stick full back and the captain never realized it. ). Even if the AF447 captain had realized it, his full forward input would have only resulted in neutral elevator if the sticks are algebraically summed. Hence my case that summing the inputs is rarely the right answer.
BTW: Why didn't the captain smell a rat when the autopilot disconnected?
It is puzzling to me why, when the plane suddenly goes nose down and the AP disconnects,, he doesn't try to pull up the nose manually, thus discovering his camera.
Interesting story. Nice work on graphics. Good job!
“The plane needed almost all of the runway to take off”
*sim shows the aircraft at like 500AGL halfway down the runway.*
Great video thank you!
Thank you for leaving the bit about the cash in. I try to always have both cash and valid plastic with me when I travel, that anecdote will help me remember.
What hasn’t been mentioned in this video is the Captain is a liar who tried to coverup what he did. Not only was he court martialled for negligence but he also faced 2 charges of perjury and one charge of making a false entry into the aircrafts technical log after the incident, by dishonestly claiming the dive was caused by a technical fault with the aircraft. The board of investigation found a blatant dent on his camera.
He's a dumbass (in regards to his failed cover up attempt) for submitting it to them or not immediately throwing it out.
He was dismissed from the RAF by a court martial and given a 4-month jail sentence suspended for 12 months. He was also found not guilty on three other charges - two counts of perjury and one of making a false record.
Nice vids man
vids?
I'm glad u added the VISA thing. That's interesting.
These videos get better and better. The RAF motto should be, Always keep a tenner in your underpants!
Kudos for the FO! Most people would probably be too busy trying not to throw up to get to the cockpit and save the plane!
FO?
RIP to the teapots, it takes a long time to season a teapot
Just found this channel and binge watching all them. I've never heard of some of these 😄
A very well made video! 👏🏻👏🏻
wow!
GREAT VIDEO!
I enjoy your work!
Welcome back to this topic. I wrote about this a few years ago, not this specific event but the idea of cameras mounted in the cockpit, the genesis of a lot of clips entering the internet. It was a British airway passenger jet where the copilot was filming contrails from another aircraft ahead. The crew became distracted by this event for more of a time period that anyone can feel comfortable about, and I took a lot of heat for saying, this was unprofessional behavior. A journalist brought up this event as a response to my remarks although he was a little critical of the content.
I'll say this much; anything that is added equipment in the cockpit that is not a part of the APPROVED EQUIPMENT LIST by the manufacturer or Airline, is a distraction and can affect airworthiness. Anything also that can become dislodged from its mooring and end up in the rudder wells or jamming the full travel and flight authority of control surfaces. Cameras with nicad batteries can also start fires even when off. video clips produced at the expense of your full attention to the many responsibilities even when autopilot is activated, is not the intent of the ample paychecks that crew members are afforded and deserve. If this continues there will be at some point beyond this incident an investigation where video production while operating, is a major factor
Tom A, While I can't disagree with any of what you say, there is risk involved with anything that we do. 'Distractions' could include reading a newspaper during the cruise, browsing your tablet or chatting with the cabin crew who bring you your meal or coffee. A drink can be spilled (and they have been). How many passengers or crew will have cameras or other equipment with nicad batteries that could cause a fire? Unless flight deck cameras are installed to monitor crew behavior during the entire flight, "indiscretions" will always occur.... which is one of several reasons why 'spy in the sky' video cameras have always been resisted by operating crews.
@@dodahspeak Risk being involved with everything does not quantify my observations, or even your response to the situation. Focusing on the job is my point. LEGALY THESE ARE NOT APPROVED EQUIPMENT AUTHORISED FOR USE IN A COCKPIT, AND DO NOT APPEAR ON THE EQUIPMENT LIST FOR CREW ITEMS. Same as a pinball machine or a basket of knitting equipment. Distractions in the cockpit with cameras are becoming a cultural fixture. crew cameras, i have used during training, but no crews want that on actual flights. There is also a risk of objects rolling around in a confined cockpit environment and obstructing equipment including electric or manual seat adjustment, Eating and drinking are necessary for crew performance but even those items require cautionary handling.
Those with no sympathy for the captain have never made a mistake in their lives - at least none with consequence. Maybe never a minor bump in the car. Maybe never knocking off the coffee mug from the armchair they spend their lives in. Perhaps discharge from the service was justified. Maybe harsh but there but for the grace... Once, solo, on long finals I realised I was lined up with the wrong runway. I admit it and I think I was a better pilot for it.
I think I read he was discharged mainly because he lied about what he knew and tried to hide what had happened.
@@tomstravels520 Agreed. Shit happens. But it matters how you handle it. Especially in such a job.
He must have realized immediately what went wrong. But there was no mentioning of a camera or a jammed sidestick on the CVR, am I right?
SLR cases are usually quite sturdy. You can not dent them just by pushing them. I guess it was jammed in so hard, he could not remove it. He could not move his seat either because of weightlessness.So no easy fix. But he did not say anything and let the FO figure it out by himself.
When the FO saved their asses he moved the seat and removed the camera.
@@rtlgrmpf Ive looked it up bercause I was curious, and apparently he was acquitted of having lied about the incident? The discharge and 4 month prison sentence came from negligence alone, if I understand correctly.
Gotta be frank here, if you are responsible for the safety of 100 people, you cause an accident that injures half and nearly cripples some of them, and it turns out youve not been following procedures supposed to avoid this kind of situation... then yeah, you probably deserve the punishment. As people like to say, those rules are usually written in blood.
And even as someone pretty ignorant of flight, shouldnt it be an obviously bad idea to put a camera directly behind the stick, ready to jam? Just seeing that picture I thought "how do you not see the issue".
Obviously that doesnt make you a monster, everyone makes mistakes all the time, but youve almost killed 100+ people (and yourself) by negligence and ignoring rules. Thats not a good look, to say the least.
A mistake is 1 second of not realizing.
If you have 10 seconds of not realizing what happening, it make like 10 mistakes in a row.
After all, who never hurt a pedestrian with the car 10times in a minute?
Captain: "Ladies and gentleman, thank you for flying Miracle Airlines. The only airline where Lady Luck is your co-pilot."
At Miracle, safety is a passing consideration. You don't get much, but you've still got a prayer we'll get you there!
😲🙄👍
picturing the first officer floating back to the cockpit inception-style
I am surprised how the designers of that cockpit didn't realise that they created a pinch-point where an object could be pushed up against the side-stick. Somebody below says that putting anything near the controls is negligent. Well I guess so, but so too the controls and their surrounds should be so designed that any type of accidental action is ruled out as far as possible.
yeah, that definitely struck me as an accident waiting to happen.
This would never have happened in a plane with 'normal' yoke controls in stead of sidestick.
Wrong. There was a C130 that crashed because the pilot lodged his NVG bag behind the controls pulling them forward. On takeoff the plane pitched up and neither pilot could push the nose down because the yokes were mechanically connected. At least with side stick you can disable the other side and have priority control
@@tomstravels520 Touché. Allthough the problem would be clear from the beginning, something blocking control input. With the sidestick there is much less visual, sensory and tactile feedback to the other pilot. It was also one of the issues that brought down Air France flicht 447.
@@supertekkel1 and that is why only one pilot should be flying the plane at anyone time. On the AF nobody made the call who was in control/command and nobody called out what they were doing. Went against everything you get trained as a pilot
@@supertekkel1 traditional yoke are not better, it's just traditional not superior
What a story. I don't understand why there was so little information about the Captains input and why the Captain appears not to have been able to control the aircraft before the co-pilot returned.
Yes I was thinking the same thing. Maybe some relevant bit of information was missing from the video or some action that the captain was doing has been withheld for "security" reasons.
@@R0swell5104 interesting theory,
I agree there seems to be less situational awareness in Airbus. I think in Boeing it's more obvious when there's unintended input.
It seems like the Captain suspected a problem with the autopilot thus failed to realise that the problem was with his side stick.
Probably because the captain's sidestick was still jammed forward. He was pulling back, thinking he was hitting the stops, but he was actually just pushing back against the camera that was jamming it forward.
The first officer used his own sidestick, which was actually capable of moving back, and that cancelled out the forward input on the captain's side.
@@TonboIV excellent point about the Capt probably thinking he was already on the stops.
Though I'm not sure I agree with the 2nd statement of sidestick cancelling leading to level flight. If the plane is in a dive, then it's too late for cancellation to have any benefit because a full forward stick and full aft stick will net a zero/neutral control input...while the plane is already in a dive; meaning it will continue to dive.
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think af447 led to a software change that gave the captain the ability to override the FO, which likely would've meant the FO wouldnt have been able to make any corrective inputs until the captain's stick was freed. That would explain why the first time the FO did pull back on his stick, nothing happened, as the captain's stick was likely still jammed at that point.
"Please keep some cash on you ... You never know when you'll be in a midair upset and needing to divert to Turkey" - oddly specific but wise advice
Its good to listen to a case when the airbus control system finally does something good for a change. Usually the systems play a part in crashes.
I think that's just selection bias. I mean, this is Mini Air *Crash* Investigation after all. I assume we wouldn't hear of too many where the automation saved the plane since that won't be a crash. 😉 This one just happened to get bad enough to be interesting.
Actually the systems usually save the day. We just never hear about it because most of the time, not much happened as the computers intervened and prevented the aircraft from actually going into a dangerous situation, as designed.
Define cash? What monetary system does Trukey have?
@@randomthings8247 What difference does it make? They took British pounds according to the video.
The longer exposure photo where the gauges are zoomed in on looks super cool!
exactly my thoughts hahaha
Nice video ! What was the issue for the IFF’s malfunctioning before taking off ?
I totally forgot that
The camera was resting on the IFF toggle button.
Yes, I'm joking.
@@ddegn Probably the Captain's golf clubs...
@@dougerrohmer 😂😂😂
@@dougerrohmer ...... Both his golf clubs and ego. Plus he lied and expected to get away with it. Typical narcissistic behavior.
Arguably something that never would have happened in an airliner with a yoke.
There was a C-130 that crashed because the pilot left his NVG bag behind the control column and meant he (not the other pilot due to the mechanical connection) couldn’t push down when the plane pitched up steeply after takeoff. I know that’s not a commercial aircraft but the premises is the same for using a yoke
Let's not forget, the captain brought an illegal object into the cabin and jammed the side stick. If I were flying for many hours, I would prefer using the side stick than a yoke.
I don't think it was an "Illegal" object as the comment in the video mention it was allowed, however it is incumbent on the crew members to ensure that whatever they take with them doesn't interfere with the operation and safety of the aircraft. Unfortunately, either through a lapse in concentration, thoughtlessness or negligence this incident happened. What made it worse though is the captains denial and attempts to cover up the cause of the incident and led to him being court-marshalled, jailed and dismissed from the service. I suppose it could be argued that had he admitted what had happened, he still would have been in deep clag but may have kept his career.@@michaelreeves8164
Not true. ANY loose article in ANY aircraft is a potential hazard.
Don't know what actual rank the first officer was but if his military rank wasn't captain then he should have been promoted to captain, both in terms of military rank and a "captain" in command of an aircraft, for saving this flight.
Not operated by the RAF iirc, external company operate these.
Owned and operated by air tanker.
@@justincrawford7508 fair enough.
@@justincrawford7508 crewed by RAF
The first officer was Flight Lieutenant Nathan Jones, who broke his back during the incident. Since he has competed in the Invictus Games, he presumably lost his medical clearance to serve as a pilot. None of the stories refer to him with a higher rank, so he may have been medically discharged from the RAF.
Not the Voyager! That's my favorite aircraft!
It is Project Megapack A330 with Royal Air Force livery
ZZ333 was the tail number not the flight number.
Very interesting video as normal .Thanks
It's like when you want to slide your seat further back in a car but whilst you're braking for a junction. It ends up being an emergency stop with the horn blarring as the seat squishes you up against the steering XD
Airbus automation were already saving lives decades ago before the Boeing decided to go the other way
This is how automation is *supposed* to work. However, this whole thing could have been avoided if Airbus just stuck with the conventional yoke layout.
Yup. Air France jet went to the bottom of the Atlantic because of the side stick junk. Sully explained this in detail.
There have been several accidents due to the conventional yoke layout. From 'locked copilot yoke and forgot about it' on small planes up to 'one pilot preventing the other from improving a situation by not letting go of the yoke'. We've seen all the advantages and disadvantages of both systems. And it's been found that neither of the systems is generally better than the other.
Wrong
@@Ebooger oh you mean when the co pilot kept putting the plane into a stall? That had nothing to do with the yoke.
@@Ebooger Not true. A loose article in ANY aircraft is a potential danger irrespective of the type of control layout. I'll bet if the stats were available, a lot more conventional yolk/stick control systems have been jammed because of the connecting linkage in and under the cockpit floor than have side-stick controls. Side-stick controls are much more compact, generally don't have mechanical linkages joining the 2 sticks and are in sealed enclosures where nothing can easily get in to jam the transducers or servo mechanisms.
The mention of the autopilot saving the aircraft made me think of Air France Flight 296, which has been attributed by some to a software problem.
There was no software problem. The software did exactly as programmed. The pilots flew too low and too slow and left it too late to increase thrust. No protections would have meant the aircraft would have stalled before the trees
very interesting episode
So the captain set his camera down and ran the seat forward pushing the stick he had no idea what he had done. I wonder if he saw it eventually pulled the camera lose but never said anything about it.
It is a true miracle that so few planes crash…
Couldn't do this with a Boeing control column
No, the pilot will just do it himself. Look up Atlas Air 3591
No, the automated flight system based off of one sensor that the pilots weren’t made aware of will do it itself.
Did the video author forget to reveal the date and time?
Airbus automation also helped prevent a far nastier accident on the River Hudson in New York. Had Sullenberger been flying a 737, the passengers would have come off a lot worse.
oh god, i was totally expecting this to be a situation with wireless interference or something lol. thats surprisingly interesting
So in the end, it wasn't the camera but the pilot's negligence
Another excellent video. Thank you. May I ask a personal question? Where are you from?
"Both pilots entered contradicting inputs" - not the one and not the other but BOTH!
Díky!
Looking very nice.
Must say he is not from aviation industry but still his videos saws how much he love flying
Good investigating
I always carry 10 pounds in my wallet in case I ever divert to Turkey. I don't go anywhere with out my emergency "Turkey Divert" money. I make sure my 27,18 and 11 year old kids keep 10 pounds in their shoes just for this situation. We practice getting the 10 pounds out and into the hands of the customs agents weekly. This is one of the most important lessons parents can teach their children! Thank you for bringing attention to this! Great video and channel!!
Voyager got lost in the delta quadrant.
Thanks, just inhaled my coffee!
2:25 okay but this sounds REALLY fun
Umm…no???
i know right!
If they weren't so expensive, I'd pay for one of these parabola flights. The literally only reason I'm not doing one is money.
Another great video. Cash is King. Never leave home without it.✈✈✈
I love that a camera had NO lateral movement. lol
Only during pitch changes the g load changed . When the pitch is constant the g load is constant (1 g ) . The F O experienced negative g during the pitch down moment , thereafter he was able to work again (1 g ).
ZZ333 is the raf serial not the flight number and KC2 is the variant of the Voyager