The Mystery of Flight 603 | Mayday Air Disaster
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 06. 2024
- Mayday Air Disaster S01 E04
Discover the chilling story of Aero Peru Flight 603, a tragedy caused by a simple human error that led to a catastrophic chain of events. Uncover how the pilots struggled with faulty instruments and made desperate attempts to land safely. This episode reveals the harrowing details of the crash and the lessons learned from this disaster.
✈️ Dive into Mayday Air Disasters! Click the links below to explore gripping air crash investigations, expert analyses, and compelling reenactments.
• Swissair 111's Last Mi...
✈️ Explore the best of Mayday Air Disasters! Click the links below to dive into playlists featuring gripping air crash investigations, expert analyses, and other captivating aviation disaster shows.
• Full Episodes | Mayday...
• Planes Against The Wea...
• Ocean Crashes & Landin...
Welcome to Mayday Air Disasters! This riveting series delves into the world's most catastrophic aviation accidents, uncovering the causes and consequences of each tragic event. Through expert analysis, compelling reenactments, and survivor testimonies, we explore how and why these disasters occurred. Join us as we investigate the crucial lessons learned from these incidents, aiming to make the skies safer for everyone.
✈️ Fascinated by aviation mysteries? Subscribe to Mayday Air Disasters for gripping air crash investigations, expert analyses, and the relentless pursuit of answers. 💥🔍
/ @maydayairdisaster
#MaydayAirDiasters #AirDisasters #AirCrash
Are you fascinated by aviation disasters? Then you'll love Curious? Science and Engineering! Dive into our captivating scientific explanations and innovative engineering solutions.
• How Canadian FLAGS Are...
• Ever Wondered How Rubb...
• How do they make Crayo... - Zábava
Even watching this give me anxiety with all the alarms going off, must be terrifying for them
@@mrbiaux991 exactly,,,un nerving event
Toughen up
In high school I used to wash airplanes. We had to tape up the pitots and statics. But (since we were all pilot students) when we were done we always triple checked that we removed the tape!
they should have had typed checklists for that stuff like the pilots do. that way no remembering, just doing what's on the checklist. every. single. time. last checkbox... take off the tape!
It may bave been helpful to use an extremely bright and transparent coulor that could easily be seen.
Omg 1996 was a bad year for airline accidents. Rest In Peace to all the victims.
Crazy how an investigator gets a call about a plane crash then must board a plane to get to the crash site...😮
I mean it’s kind of like fatal car accidents 🤷
that has crossed my mind😮
Not really considering its the most safe form of transport, his drive to or from the airport would have been more dangerous
Man, radar showing them at 9700 while they are hitting the water. What a tragedy.
I don't understand the reasons the reading from the tower called it wrong. That is terrible and uncomfortable to know they could be so wrong.
@jacquelineoutlaw3252
Radar has made incredible advances. At the time, it, RADAR would ask the plane for information. Altitude, and speed. The plane would tell the radar what its speed was and altitude.
To use another example. What state do I live in? Judging by my area code, 407, Florida would be a good guess. However, I may have mived and have not changed my phone number yet.
In short, you can only work with information you have.
The pilots and controller should have known that the altitude was being given by the plane and not assumed that the tower alt was more accurate than the on board instruments...as in fact they were the same readings. Saying that...these guys had no real chance either way
The same wrong altitude that the pilot sees on his altimeter is transmitted to the ground as Gillham code data. So the radar altitude is coming to the radar screen from a data signal. It is not an altitude reading computed from a radar echo.
The radar altimeter in the cockpit would have shown the altitude above the water. This would only work up to 2500 feet above the water. The pilots may have been able to use this if they understood the situation with the static pressures feeding the pneumatic altimeters.
@@alexramrattan3500all of that in the emergency situation and not having any sighting outside to even notice
As a pilot I feel sorry for the controller, who gave the crew false hope by accident.
I haven’t been in such a situation, but if I’d receive over speed and stall = I’d believe the stall warning.
If I’d receive a GPWS warning I’d believe it despite any reading.
It’s always Aviate, Navigate, communicate. So my main priority would be to keep the plane airborne.
Easy to say, but that would be my way to go - depending on other factors as well…
They were probably in a situation where they didn't even know which way was UP and which was DOWN. Total blank space. Like a spacecraft travelling in space.
@@indianfan1029Not in this case. Although the speed and altitude readings have been wrong due to the covered static port, the attitude display was fully functioning. Even if that one was wrong, there is the (analog) backup attitude indicator. If you lose your displays, this one is still working.
According to the final report, they hit the water with the left wing tip first.
Even if you lose all the additional tech in your cockpit, just fly it like a Cessna plane - with basic numbers instrumentation.
It is easier said than done, but not impossible (depending on your emergency and system/technical failure).
I kind of pity the person who left the tape on the pitot tubes. Can you imagine having to live with the knowledge that YOU are responsible for the loss of all those lives?
I’m sure they feel the weight of the responsibility, but it’s unfair to put it all on that person. It’s worth noting, according to the video, that there were two other people (a supervisor and inspector) who were supposed to check that the tape had been removed, but did not. The captain did the preflight walk around and apparently missed it too.
@@messmeister92yeah
Very unfortunate. That will really haunt.
Its like the hospital cleaner unpluging equipment to plug her hoover in. Then finding out the death rates up because she was unplugging life support
I dont think it was fair to blame it on the employee, in such case, the supervisor and manager were also responsible. It was a mistake, he was not trained properly on how important was to remove such piece of tape.
That's right, but the chain always breaks at the weakest link.🤷♂️
None of the pilots did a walk about.
True,but the worker used gray duct tape instead of the standard bright colored tape.
@@serdna9307
Agree. he was probably trained improperly and b/c those above him did not do their job he went to jail
What a terrible death they suffered because of a little piece of tape! It's unimaginable! RIP
I've read and listened to the CVR transcript and recording many times, and have looked at the route that the plane flew. This is the basic progression of the flight:
Fernandez was flying the plane at takeoff. Shortly after takeoff, the pilots realised that they had an instrument problem. For the first minute or so the plane was flying along the coast. Schreiber ordered Fernandez to turn to the right, probably to get away from land and reduce the chance of a collision as their altimeters weren't working. The crew declared an emergency about a minute and a half later. It was around this point that Schreiber decided to take control of the plane from Fernandez.
The pilots disagreed about what to do next. Fernandez wanted to land right away; Schreiber wanted to spend some time to stabilise. Schreiber, being the captain and pilot flying, got his way. The plane continued on a south-westerly heading, out over the ocean, as the pilots assessed the situation. At 12:51 am, Schreiber apparently decided that the situation had stabilised, and turned the plane to a north- to north-westerly heading. (This turn is not shown in the episode.)
At this point, the plane was flying basically parallel to the runway. The plan was that the pilots would fly north of the airport, turn around 180 degrees to the right, and come in and land. But as they were flying north, the airspeed indicators began giving very high readings, and the overspeed warning went off. Spooked by this, at approximately 12:57 am, they extended the speed brakes.
The speed brakes caused the plane to slow down greatly, and at approximately 1 am, eventually stall. Fernandez realised this for what it was; Schreiber did not. Unfortunately, because Schreiber was flying the plane, the stall recovery procedure was not properly initiated. The plane continued to descend until it was dangerously close to the ground, triggering the terrain alarm at approximately 1:02 am.
Schreiber was spooked enough by the terrain alarm that he turned the plane to the left, to the west, further away from any chance of flying over land. What's not shown in the episode is that 45 seconds after the turn began, the terrain alarm shut off; the plane had just climbed high enough to turn it off. (The episode shows the terrain alarm on constantly once it activates.) What's also not shown is that a couple of minutes after the pilots turned left, the controller told them that they were at 10,000 feet. Upon hearing this, Schreiber decided to turn back to the east and begin landing. This turn is not shown in the episode. (At this point, despite the stress shown in the episode, the pilots actually sound quite calm on the CVR.)
Following the first activation of the terrain alarm, the plane had climbed to 4,000 feet. But at about 1:07 am, Schreiber, believing the plane to be at 10,000 feet, initiated a descent to capture the ILS. This is shown in the episode. This is the final decision that brought the plane down. The plane drifted down from 4,000 feet, until the terrain alarm was triggered again at 1:10 am. (The episode does not show this, as it shows the terrain alarm always on.) Fernandez's confidence that the plane was at a safe height immediately evaporated. He started to doubt the correctness of the 9,700 ft reading on the scope, hence his comment to the controller "Are you sure you have us on the radar at 50 miles?" Unfortunately, he was not flying the plane. Schreiber was, and Schreiber was by now unbothered by the terrain alarm. He continued the descent, believing it necessary to capture the ILS, until the plane hit the water.
Where can you find the original transcripts?
I don't come to CZcams to read novels. The video speaks for itself.
@@nickv4073 You don't have to read my comment if you don't want. But 28 other people found it useful. Also, in my comment I explain a number of factors that the video missed.
@@nickv4073 why didn't you just scrolled past it then? Why the need to comment?
Thx. Yes, appreciate better facts. The alarms made hard to watch so skipped ahead. Maintenance error by ground crew and pilot who paid with his life. Jailing the worker was not justice. Settling w families for agonizing vs sudden deaths. Not like it was intentional but who knows, maybe it was a mistreated workers revenge and didn't know made impossible to land.
The airline is certainly responsible for improper training, but if a manufacturer says "Do it this way and not that way" and someone does it that way instead of this way then the manufacturer is ABSOLUTELY NOT at fault.
I sort of agree with you, however if you buy a food slicer and the manufacturer did not provide any safety cover, it instead just said on the box 'don't cut yourself'... it seems to me that they would be partially responsible
@@cheery-hex Personally, I call that slicer a "knife". ;)
Captain and XO should've immediately declared an emergency and turned back for Lima. It would've saved their passengers, themselves, along with their aircraft, but hindsight is always 20/20.
Easy to say when sitting at home and not being in that situation
@@TalaR04Whacha call "hindsight," or some such.
They should have declared an emergency once they found the altimeters non-working, they took a bit of time to take stock.
But even turning around immediately and declaring an emergency would not have changed the outcome in any relevant way, except for possibly crashing into some houses.
i'm not a pilot but couldn't the pilot work out what instrument is accurate by process of elimination? for example, low terrain warning could be checked by climbing and see if it turns off. also, you can't clime going too slow so that could've gave clue as to whether they were stall speed or overspeed.
All modern planes should have 3 mechanical gauges alt,speed and cumpass.
Also hydrolic fluid should have valves at the wings and tail so if a leak is detected a valve turns off so not lose all the fluid and have some control.
This is why I'll never fly at night, or during a crazy weather forecast. I've avoided three crashes listening to my gut instincts. It was obviously worth any 8 hour delay. God bless those precious souls that perished. 🙏✨️✈️😿
It’s cool to fly at night but not over the sea because you don’t have any landmarks to determine if you’re climbing or descending especially if the instrument aren’t working correctly
@@Dizz3378Today, everyone has GPS, making a rough (a few dozen feet off) altitude check easy via your phone.
Those Pilots fought to the very end ! 😢😢😢😢😢😢
As all pilots worth anything will. You never give up, even if you want to. Unless you are murderously suicidal and descending into a mountain range.
Of course the chance you will die is high, but you cannot win if you don’t play the game.
RIP to everyone that has died
May they rest in peace 😢💔
May all the victims rest in peace.
If you lose all instruments...never leave lights for a black ocean!
That's usually a good idea but take 1 look at Lima on google maps and you will see the problem. You will see how high the terrain is around (and even in) the city. 2,000 meters mountains surround it. I wouldn't want to fly around there, with no accurate terrain info. They won't crash into a mountain over the sea, it's 1 less thing to worry about. Bare in mind it would be pitch black around these moutains as well.
Also Lima airport for both runways requires you to fly over the ocean on approach. They mentioned about wanting to land and this is probably why they flew over the sea. Really there was no good option for them.
I agree with everything that Jack Goldbridge has said. I want to add one more thing.
The shot in the episode where the plane flies away from the lights of Lima out toward the ocean is very misleading. According to the accident report, there was a layer of cloud at just 270 metres above sea level. That would have prevented them from seeing the lights, even if the terrain around Lima didn't make it dangerous to fly over the city.
And you do NOT want to crash into buildings at 1am. The people sleeping there are innocent and did not agree to ride a plane.
this is two times that the Boeing 757 has crashed Birgenair and AeroPeru
They should have returned to the airport. Without basic instruments in my mind it is an emergency.. They could have returned and still maintain visual perspective on the horizon.
Yup. They needed the city lights as a visual reference on the horizon/ altitude.
They were returning to the airport actually.
@@Sovereign_Citizen_LEO it was a foggy night with no stars, they couldnt see the city lights
They was returning back to the airport that’s wasn’t the problem it was a static port being blocked that was given false readings they was over the sea and didn’t have any landmarks to use for a reference point
Princesaleados is right. The cloud cover that night was at less than 1000 feet, which is definitely not a safe altitude to fly at so as to get a visual reference. The shot in the episode of the plane leaving Lima for the ocean is very misleading.
Pilots must return to the airport as soon they detected the instrument failed.
Never saw an answer for why the pilot went by ATCs altitude figures when even non-pilots know that ATC doesn’t use actual radar - these figures are sent from the aircrafts own instruments via transponder.
Using this attorney’s logic, we should get rid of attorney’s because it’s foreseeable that people will use them to sue innocent people. 😂
It’s not Boeing’s fault someone ignored the warning written on the side of the plane and taped over the ports and then inadvertently forgot to remove it. If the guy hired to wash the plane wasn’t competent, that’s the fault of the airline who hired and trained him. Give me a break. He’s just an ambulance chaser that saw 💰 when he found a way to try to blame a big company with deep pockets. Notice he didn’t go after the airline that was really to blame because they don’t have any money (at least compared to Boeing).
If there was tape on the static ports and pitot heads, how did they take off while confirming V1 and (Vr) rotate and the Gears up call without positive rate of climb?
This is heartbreaking 💔 and sad 😞 Rip 🙏
The actors in these videos give award performances! They are really good!
I believe the actor playing the ATC was a Canadian actor who was in a show called Degrassi, he played a character named Joey Jeremiah. Sounds like him and looks like him. Just checked, it's him his name is Pat Mastroianni.
Such a tragic incident, I've always wondered why they did not turn around keeping the cities lights in some view and nearer to the airport. Just horrible.....
I agree! They should have immediately turned around once they knew there was a problem. The city lights were their only points of reference!
Happens all the time...pilots trust TOO MUCH on their abilities , putting at risk lives of others
@@serdna9307yea and some survive on ither accidents. Some is total malfunction of the plane
@@axeljacobs9723 exactly
My thought exactly
I’m more impressed duct tape survived that
Flying out into open ocean night was a mistake. Lights inland could have helped them a bit
Why didn't they immediately turn back to the airport???
Immediately. As soon as the first warning was received and they knew they had bad data.
@@kamakaziozzie3038 that's what im saying LOL.... Like there is a giant gap between takeoff & first radio call of issues
If you listen closely, when Fernandez asks for ILS vectors, Schreiber replies “not yet, let’s get stabilised.” (It’s obscured by the narration.) Being the captain and the pilot flying, it was his decision. I agree it would have been better to turn back earlier; delaying landing to get stabilised is more of a process for when you have structural damage.
Would not have changed the outcome, in the end. Also, if you have the aircraft all over the place, how will you land?
@@advorak8529 it absolutely would have made a difference... They would have had a horizon to work with... Something tangible that they can see
Apparently was a miscommunication between the pilots and the air controller. The pilots were asking the controller to give them their altitude. At 13:50 the narrator said " but neither the pilot or the traffic controller knew that the altitude indicated on the scope was incorrect " Since the ground radar can't read the altitude of the plane the controller sees the information that is send by the plane's transponder. In my opinion the pilots and the controllers should have an extensive technical training of how things work.
I'm electrical and electronics technician repairing machines in factories. I always demand from the operator to be present during the repair process. He knows best all the tricks and how the machine should be working.
I wanted to be a pilot, but a military pilot., not a commercial pilot, because you can't bail out of a commercial plane.
well unless you're going to be in a jet fighter, if you ever find yourself in a bad position you'll be in the cockpit unable to jump out.
But you can't bail our of a fighter jet over the ocean at night (either), and hope and pray that a boat will [never] be able to find you.
@@Sovereign_Citizen_LEO _But you can't bail out of a fighter jet over the ocean at night (either)_
You absolutely can. You can bail out from a bomber, too. Even helicopters sometimes have ejection seats. They do work at night.
_and hope and pray that a boat will [never] be able to find you._
Maybe you have not heard of emergency beacons and co. Quite common in WWII, and yes, there was quite a bit of night flying. And ditching into the ocean.
US subs were among those who picked up airmen.
But who am I to destroy your world view with facts?
_you can't bail out of a commercial plane._
Parachutists beg to differ.
And some planes have parachutes for the whole plane.
@@advorak8529 yeah parachutist here, when you're jumping out of a plane, the plane is usually flying more or less 100 mph. We're talking about COMMERCIAL planes carrying REGULAR passengers going commercial speeds usually 300-600mph. you are definitely NOT going to be making a jump at that speed. If the plane is in a dire situation i.e spinning out of control extreme turbulence, good luck orienting yourself to even make it to the door to jump. The only way you're jumping out of a plane safely going faster than 100mph is if you're a paratrooper, but even then, the military plane is going less than 160mph AND the paratroopers are jumping from behind the wings at the sides or from the very back of the aircraft. Again, we're talking about speeds greater than 300mph, going too fast runs the guaranteed risk of damaging your parachute and/or yourself from high air resistance. The opening shock would be absurd. As far as I'm aware, no commercial airliner even has parachutes for their passengers. Another thing too, take a look at a commercial plane where the doors are and then locate where the wings, engines, and horizontal/vertical stabilizers are. If you jump, you are going to instantly die from hitting the wings/stabilizers or getting swallowed by the engines.
One way to detect something blocking the pitot static system would be to have a way to pressurize the system as a test on start up. If any pressure builds, a warning alerts in the cockpit. If it doesn't then it passes the test. A tiny amount of engine air bleed fed from the cabin pressurization system would be all you need.
Would be possible to climb a little once the too low terrain starts alarming? Just a try to see if it disconnects, it means it was true they were close to a terrain.
But why though? We have all the data now but the same computer was telling them that they were both stalling and overspending so it was safe to assume that it was just another malfunction. Besides the air controller who they assumed had an independent reading gave them an altitude that was relatively safe
Edit: spelling
@@AnonimatosTM True! Let’s suppose they missed the data and the instruments which is the least logical things to miss as a pilot, why they didn’t just pull up? Just pull up..!!!
@@AnonimatosTM Because the GWPS uses a radio altimeter, which is a completely different signal path and completely different instrument.
Also, they know the overspeed warning must be bogus, you do not get an overspeed with engines idle and nose not down … and certainly not with airbrakes on top of that!
And they knew or should have known the altitude display was doubtful and the speed display was bonkers.
I understand there is an emergency checklist for unreliable airspeed that tells you to set the throttle to certain known-good settings and keep a certain attitude to have the speed within a narrow band. No idea if that was on the books at the time of the accident, but that is what - in my completely uninformed and never been there (nor even in a simulator) opinion - they could have tried.
As to the ATC and the pilots, they ought to have been taught that the altitude on the radar screen comes from the transponder, not the radar return itself, and should have understood with unreliable altimeter and speed data in the plane at least the altitude on the scope must be assumed doubtful.
But in the high stress situation I cannot fault them for not being perfect, they were fed BS information by the computers which were the only interface to the information they needed.
I can't exactly explain why, but I've watched hundreds of these, and this one had me crying on the kitchen floor.
they Left the only visual aid to recalibrate their spatial bearings, the night lights of the city behind them.. Its sad... Condolences to the families
Haze, cloud base below 300 feet, 2000 feet mountains etc in close vicinity, approach to any runway requires going over sea …
Flying over the city would not have been a good idea at all.
@@advorak8529 So very tragic...
My parents' friends daughter died in a plane crash, must've been mid 90s, I wasnt very old.
There's way too much dependance on technology. Pilots should fly their planes,not a computer.
There has to be a way to mechanically. Check for air flow on the pito tubes. See if there's a pressure build up when you add pressure to the situation. There's gotta be a way to put a cover whether it's magnetic or whatever that stays and?
Beats and flashes a strobe light something I said beeps
A better solution is all aircraft are getting GPS. That can tell you location, speed and altitude. Provide both sets of number to the flight deck so they can check between them. Knowing the difference between air speed and ground speed is useful so it would be important to leave both systems in place.
Why did not they return to the airport directly when the problems began?
They pretty much did, however, without knowing where the plane is altitude-wise, landing is going to be a real problem.
@2:25 onwards
Bold statement
In a "steam gauges" airplane you can break the glass on the rate-of-climb indicator (ie the least important gauge) and it will serve as an alternate static air pressure source (which gives you altimeter back). Obviously with a computerized display cockpit all smashing the display will do is make you feel better, cause the real guts are down inside someplace you cant get at. As often as planes crash with frozen pitot tubes or AoA sensors, they need to have an emergency backup set of them behind a panel that they can deploy in an emergency like a RAT.
In an airline panel of this era the pilot would be reading data from the air data system. These instruments may or may not have pneumatic connections. The airdata system sends altimetry and airspeed as electrical signals to the instruments. Also, in an aircraft with a pressurized cabin that idea depends on opening up the cabin pressure to atmospheric which should be automatic.
lol at the comments saying what the pilots should have done. even other pilots didn't judge their actions. Also feel sorry for tape guy... he probably wasn't even properly trained and those above him didn't do their job
too many eggs in one basket
Always trust your GPWS in the pitch dark night....
Few pieces of tape costing a few cents, brought down a plane, costing millions. with tragic lives lost. 🥲🥲🥲😢 Human error & negligence. So sad & could have been avoided.
ngl the air traffic controller looked like walter white
I'm watching this @ 00:40 AM 😅
Pitot tubes are a very dumb engineering solution! Why depend on something so easy and vulnerable to failure? Also--today--why not put digital cameras outside on the plane so pilots can see what's going on all over the fuselage?
They have been used reliably for many years and were probably first used in the 1920s or maybe before that. Simple and if you don't tamper with them, very reliable. As for Cameras, you have to expect the failure to aim the camera and if you know the failure, you can put it on a check list.
How many accidents have been caused by Fly-By-Wire computer controls/ sensors? How many lives have been lost? The answer is literally tens of thousands.
Tragic
I'm first to watch!
😂❤
Is the pilots responsibility to make sure the aircraft is okay. Because if you drive your car is your responsibility to make sure that your car is safe.
Seems only right that everybody involved with this aircraft from Towing it to the gate to pulling it away to washing it to cleaning it to servicing it the pilot should check before departure that there is nothing covering any instrument air intake..........EVERYONE should check to see nothing is covered that shouldnt be...period!! Captain and FO too.
Virtually every airplane crash is responsible of the manufacturer it's always a manufacturer defect
in conclusion the pilots should have immediately declared emergency and should have never left the lights pf Peru...they are to be blame by going into dark ocean and their ultimate fate
When those ports were covered up a lock should have been put on the cover and the plane should be inoperable until unlocked...When I worked in an heavy industrial plant we locked systems out. A two person team locked it out and one person unlocked it. The machine wouldn't operate until it was unlocked. It's hard to believe a passenger jet could be operated with those ports covered up....Period.
Why wouldn't they immediately turn around and abort while they could still see and have their bearings about them
What's up with the jittery video? The picture jumping up and down is really distracting.
Basically they had no chance to landed the plane after the plane takeoff, poor pilot😢
Its joey Jeremiah!!!
There's a TON of different degrassi characters in this show. It's so fun whenever I spot a new one
You can't blame pilots when all areoplane systems failed they are helpless what is the duty of checking staff supervisor to sleep
Trust your computers! Alexa, what should I do with my life?
I feel sad for the passengers. They didn't even know that the plane was in danger. Its just going to be a sudden death with no time to think.
I may not be a pilot. I would have returned to airport father than flu out to the ocean.
I got it I got it heard and said that before
Might be a good idea to start paying your maintenance guys a lot more wages. Pay peanuts…….
Shouldn’t the pilots have e noticed this on their pre flight inspection?
The aircraft's belly was 5 metres (17 feet) tall and the tape was also the same colour and that made impossible to view the tape
If these systems components are so critical and fragile why are they dont fit more of them?
With all those issues straight after take off, it should have been a quick return to the airport. Ridiculous to continue flying towards the ocean and loose all references
This kind of documentaries always break my heart
A seen episode for me. Seems they (the maker and/or federation) never tested for a fault were the pitot tubes are completely blocked. Also the altitude being only determined by the planes sensors for both pilot and tower is kind of dumb or in the least should have been disclosed to all.
They should have immediately turned back in 3-4 minutes
If I knew anything about flying ( such as all the checks that have to be made pre - flight ) I`d never get on a plane. " Have they cheked this ? Have they checked that....... ?
Even in 1996 $2:00 / hour is hardly commensurate with the responsibility of being the cleaner of an aircraft whose passenegers are dependent on a thouroughly good job being done.
The piece of tape, is mind bothering.
I know bugger all about airplane design but wouldn’t an old fashioned mechanical back up that will work when computers have a nosebleed be a good idea??
Altimetry and airspeed information are dependent on pitot and static systems. The problem here is not the instruments it is the static system. You can add another instrument however there is no solution without another static system. Also, in today's world, the pitot sends data electronically. No more pneumatic sysyems.
Strange that they couldn't navigate. I mean how did pilots navigate in the old times. Instruments etc are ofcourse very useful, but if you dont have thr readings, you should still have some awareness about where you are.
how is it that the radar was incorrect?
From what I understand Civilian Radars aren't capable of measuring altitudes reliably, so instead the screen displays altitudes fed by the aircraft's instruments
They should have returned asap to airport.and stayed over land using the grouned lights to help with speed and altitude.
Why did they not look at the radio altimeter
Not Joey from degrassi 😂❤
My my and now in 2024 Boeing is so much trouble for shitty plane quality.......
I’m second! Good Day!
😂❤
Seems like both the pilot and copilot should check the pitot tubes since they are so important.
I agree
Don't pilots walk around the plane while copilot does the preflight before takeoff?
Is before rekte tow ports are just papit show on ✈️
Don't 757's also have RADAR altimeters? ....Or, does this predate them?
I think they did
yes but it was only used mostly for gpws and it is also only used for radio minimums but you have to select it over barometric minimums for it to use it and radio altimeters only just got mandated in 2017 by the faa for civil aviation
43:45 hope it wasn’t Tom Giradi 😮😮
2:14 if you wnat to avoid the irritating pre show spoilers
I am so sorry that people always want monetary compensation when accidents happen.
At the end of the day human error will happen.
I still don’t understand why pilots aren’t taught more about how their aircraft works. If they knew the altimeters and speed indicators relied on the same sensors and that the GPWS used a separate radar signal, they would have known to trust that one and ignore the others. Also, why don’t ATCs know where their info is coming from ie. That the altitude is coming from the transponder and not triangulated by their radar?
They could have just put a bottle of water on the dash as a reference to their attitude and flown safely while waiting for another plane to guide them in to land if they’d had more training and knowledge.
Lastly, why not scramble military jets? They’d get to them much faster and be able to see them in their radar and let them know they were only at 700ft. That 707 would be lucky to even find them since it would be looking at 10,000ft, not 1,000ft and has no radar capable of seeing them.
They are now, but this was way back. I agree though, the absence of understanding of how these systems work is stunning.
Because aircrafts work differently. In addition to that airports and ATC have different work methods in different countries.
@@LAFC. right, but I meant when they get their type ratings. I wouldn’t expect an A380 pilot to know how systems on a 747 work or vice versa but it seems important to know as much as possible about the plane you are flying on a daily basis, especially when you are taking hundreds of other peoples lives in your hand each time.
@@andrewnajarian5994 How the pitot/static system and altitude transponder system work are actually very basic things that are taught to student pilots, and are the same on all planes*. Diagnosing a blocked static port is also a basic skill that's taught at a beginner level. It's one of those simple things that it's assumed every single pilot knows, but if it's been too long since their primary training and they haven't had any reinforcement training, it's something that could be simply forgotten.
Water level is completely useless for determining attitude. Water is affected by the same g forces that affect the human sense of balance. The only (known) way of accurately tracking attitude is either gyroscope, multiple accelerometers in different parts of the plane, or reference to some external source (such as visually observing the horizon).
I don't know about the military jets. It's possible that the controller just couldn't contact the military quickly, they didn't have any jets ready to scramble at the time, the base was so far away that the civilian jet could get there faster, or (most likely, IMHO) the controller simply didn't realize how urgent the situation was.
* It _has_ to be the same on all planes, to avoid having a situation where two airplanes collide because they're at the same actual altitude, but they _thought_ they were at different altitudes due to differences in their altimeters.
@@LAFC. In this specific way, no, airplanes actually _all_ work the same.
The plane is falling out of the sky that's why it's saying it's over speed
40:41 🤷♀️ AF447 was because of blocked pitot tubes too.
13 years later 💀
They had to went back and land the plan
No airspeed cross check at 80 kts ??
Their 80 knots on the ground were right at that point
They should have had a helicopter go straight up. A 707 would have made it difficult
Same issue as air France, Boeing.
In this case, pure incompetence.
Controller doesn’t even know where the bogus information he’s mindlessly regurgitating comes from.
Totally agree! Both the controller and the pilots should have known that the faulty altimeter info was being transmitted from the airplane.
The tower controller should never have read out the altitude
To the pilots as being accurate!
So sad what happened to all these people!😢
Radar sweeps can be 3000 feeet above or below the actual plane and can sometimes be wrong for 3 sweeps. Most sweeps are about accurate, but it wouldn't be unheard of for one sweep to be 3000 feet above the aircraft, then the next 500 below, then 300 above, and then finally settling on the correct value. Barometric altimeters are usually far more accurate than this. So it's only natural his display trusts the transponder more than it trusts the primary radar information. This is also why when one control saw a plane in Florida at 900 feet, instead of saying "Eastern Air Lines Flight 401 terrain" he asked them if they were OK.
@@alex_zetsu What TF are you talking about? Primary radar doesn't provide _any_ altitude information at all. Zero. Nada. None. The _only_ way for ATC to know a plane's altitude is to be told; either automatically by the transponder, or manually by the pilot reporting what's on their instruments.
@@HiddenWindshield It *can,* just not with any great accuracy.
You would think in training they tell you that the radar is receiving info from the plans computer and not the radar itself.