Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Another french airbus question?

Okay, so it seems the aircraft was in a stall and impacted the water with a nose up attitude after descending 38,000 feet.

So here is what I have trouble with. I had some crazy instructors that made me do stalls power on and power off, while doing right turns and left turns I even had one instructor that would have me hold the plane in a stall while he rocked the plane from side to side with the rudders then he would take his feet off and tell me to recover.

In all of the stalls I have never had the nose above the tail (accept a full power in a 140 cherokee that kinda porpoised).

So in a big bird doesn't the nose naturally drop in a stall? Usually this is designed into the plane for stability purposes.

4 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Many aircraft have a tendency to pitch downwards after a stall, but not all. In any case, all pilots are trained to pitch the nose down if a stall of the main wings occurs (a tail stall requires the opposite, but tail stalls are very rare).

    However, it seems that there's a strong, instinctive tendency to pull back on the yoke, even in experienced, trained pilots. More than one accident has occurred because a pilot pulled back on the yoke after a stall, which of course worsens the stall and causes a crash. It's frequent enough that one can speculate that it's some sort of natural reaction to the stall—you want to go up right away, so you pull back, even though you know you shouldn't.

    It's one thing to recover correctly in a training environment, but people vary widely in how they react in a true emergency, so it's not guaranteed that a pilot will react correctly in an unexpected stall.

    In the case of AF 447, though, it's still too early to say whether it was pilot error or not—although the preliminary report by the BEA is sure starting to make it look that way.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Leave the investigation getting further and more details from BEA -

    And I do not know how "exactly" the A330 flight controls work -

    I only flew "convential airplanes" in my life -

    KC-135, 707, 727, 747 and DC8... In any stall, the nose falls down first -

    Regardless of configuration -

    Being a check pilot and instructor, I did a few actual stalls in these -

    Lot of things are different with the A330 and the interface of the controls -

    Old farts like me are accustomed to "regular" cable/hydraulic flight controls -

    My airline has A340 airplanes (the 4 engine version of the A330) -

    Next week, one of my ex-colleagues (now A340 pilot) is visiting me -

    He will bring his operations manual to try to educate me how it works -

    These Airbus pilots come from another planet -

    So far, my dear Watson - I haven't got a clue -

    Source(s): Retired 747 pilot - flew with needle, ball, airspeed and steam powered gauges -
  • 1 decade ago

    There is a question on the private pilot written exam:

    Q: An aircraft can be stalled...?

    A: At any attitude or any airspeed.

    Does that make your head hurt? Pretty basic stuff.

  • 1 decade ago

    They all trained on FSX and never a real airplane? Who knows, the investigation should find out what went wrong. At this point, anyone who speculates is just guessing.

    Even in a Big Plane, if the instruments tell you wrong/incorrect information, you might just be trained enough into "always believe them" that you crash. I suspect a lot of things were wrong not just one or two and that is the norm in nearly every crash. Wait for the reports.

    Source(s): TL
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.