Posts by user "Pilot DAR" [Posts: 16 Total up-votes: 264 Pages: 1]

Thank you tdracer, the thread will benefit from informed speculation!

Thank you, we appreciate being appreciated! It's been a bunch of work today....

Speculation on my part, the 787 has ceiling lights which change colour/colour can be changed? Could they produce "green flickering" if there were an airframe electrical problem? If the ceiling lights in the whole cabin "flickered green" it sure would be memorable!

Who are the posters....

There have been a number of posts going back to the idea that non pilots are posting and cluttering the topic. Sure, this is a pilot's forum, but for myself, I have certainly learned from non pilots, so I don't presume to discount the information from a person about aviation, just 'cause they are not a pilot.

That said, knowing that posted information is from a type qualified pilot is extra good. If a poster is a type qualified pilot, they are welcomed to say so in their post, as some have here. If you have other relevant experience, you're welcomed to present that too, even if you're not a pilot (I think of the poster who has heard many RAT deployments - 'cause he's around the Boeing factory flight route!)

We are trying to encourage compliant, value added conversation here, so it is not PPRuNe's objective to limit discussion without cause...

We had a number of comments earlier on relating to posters displaying their lack of knowledge of 787's, or really, aviation in general. Yeah, it was a thing.... For myself, aside from riding in the back of a few, I know very little about 787's (the 707 was my friend). That said, I'm pretty impressed with the more recent posts in this thread. I'm not qualified to comment on their technical merit, but they are pleasingly thought provoking. For those aviation professionals who were patient through some very pedestrian posts - thank you. I hope you can feel the reward of some recent posts of merit. Thanks posters!

It's your $1000 ticket, you can fly, or not, it is always your choice. If you feel that you need more information than publicly available to make you confident to fly on a 787, you probably should not fly.

For myself, I will fly transatlantic twice in weeks to come, most likely on a 787 (it was two weeks ago), and I will sleep soundly. I have faith that pilot will fly an airworthy airplane well, and I have faith that the continuing airworthiness system will only permit airworthy airplanes to fly. If I do not maintain those faiths as primary, I should probably leave the aviation industry entirely, and just stay on the ground.

Hello posters,

We mods are working away on this thread. To be honest, I cannot recall a recent thread with more discussion - which is what we're we for! Good!

That said, I, and several other mods, have asked that posters "familiarize themselves" with the contents of the thread. Maybe read all of it, maybe read back a few days before posting. Has what you're thining to post as "new" information, already been presented and discussed (and perhaps dispositioned)? We mods have read most of the posts, so we're trying to stay on top of it, to give readers less to no nonsense to have to read through. We have asked some respects for the crew, particularly in regard of postulated intentional acts - just don't.... unless firm, credible (future) evidence opens this theme. We mods are clearing out such posts with no mercy, but it's still work, and other decent thoughts may get lost in the dustbin as a result (we very, very rarely edit out only a part of a post).

And yes, report posts which you really feel are not worthy here, we mods do consider every report. That said, how about not making report worthy posts! My [our] inboxes have been filled with report emails this time around.

We eagerly promote good compliant [to PPRuNe rules] discussion, keeping posts within the guidelines makes it more enjoyable for everyone, and less work for your mod team - we really are trying to keep this place the professional pilot discussion you're looking for!

Thanks, Pilot DAR

P.S. Please don't post AI generated crap, okay? (thanks for reminding me Tu.114)

Okay posters,

I just deleted a stream of posts relating to a "report". There were enough errors to make that "report" very suspect to me (and I trust tdracer's instincts - so I've left his post with the quotes - for the humour).

Please, for all our sakes, and the sanity of the moderating team, do not post things which could appear authoritative, unless you are prepared to attest to their authenticity, and identify the source. Sure, real information is going to come out, please, please do not dilute it's value to all of us by posting nonsense which confuses the real information.

We mods will confer about this, though I fear we may need to begin some thread locks while information becomes authentic, and we confirm it, before allowing the AI nonsense to pollute it!

Senior Pilot has written in this thread:

He has very wisely chosen his words carefully, read them literally!

A few posters have sent pleading PM's asking why their post was deleted, while others remains. Please just go with the flow posters, and re read the quote above. The moderator's actions are final, and we don't have the time to personally justify moderation actions. This post, following on to Senior Pilot's and T28's post are a reminder of very general justification of moderator actions.

This very sad event could touch on a troubling factor, it is not ruled out yet, neither authoritatively suggested. We, professional pilots, on a professional pilot website will give our colleagues the benefit of the doubt. If new facts come to light from an authoritative (certainly NOT A.I.) source, we will discuss them.

There have been pleads from some to weed out newbie speculation posts, this thread is that! For PPRuNe it's not going to be to exclude non pilots, but this thread shows our effort to put very authoritative posters in the forefront.

Moderating this thread has been a lot of work, we're doing our best. The event now has a big vacuum, waiting for the flight data recorder information to be formally released. Many of us have speculation, and it can only remain that until flight data recorder facts are publicly available to show what we really should be discussing.

The best thing maybe just to hold your speculation, until you are commenting on known facts , and I'm confident that we will, when the time is right...

Pilot DAR

I have opened this thread for a period, as I have read a news report updating the status of the data recorders:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/air-in...-box-1.7573145

From the article:

Posts with additional information about retrieving and disseminating data recorder information are welcomed here for while. Let's keep the speculation posts to a very minimum please, hoping that this thread can remain open for a while as authoritative information becomes available...

Pilot DAR

A reminder, for this topic, please spell out in full either: "Air India", or "Artificial Intelligence", whichever you intend. For the purpose of this discussion "AI" is much too confusing!

And let's try to self police before posting Artificial Intelligence nonsense. We all know it's out there, let's not give it any foundation in our discussion by even acknowledging it. Authoritative fact only please!

Thank you Turin, It's nice to hear from people who have first hand experience!

Pilot DAR

Being as this is a professional pilot's site, we will extend the benefit of the doubt to our pilot colleagues, and be respectful to them. As the facts of the event become publicly available from reputable sources, we will of course discuss them as factual entry points to a discussion, rather than speculation. Patience.....

As per my training, don't let communicate interfere with aviate. If you can do both simultaneously, go ahead. For me, "communicate" could be taking your mind away from task to formulate and interact in discussion. So yes, we don't allow a complex discussion to preempt flying the plane. For me, pressing a mic switch and calling Mayday is more instinctive and muscle memory, than distracting. If a pilot got a Mayday out, good for them! I can't see it helping much for the doomed flight, other than being a valuable "very soon after the event" indicator that the pilots knew that something very bad was happening. I've known pilots to wrestle control for seconds/minutes in an effort to regain control, before issuing a Mayday. Okay, tasks in priority. But in this case, it appears that a pilot issued a Mayday even before control was actually lost - a valuable timestamp on the order of events for investigation.

I distinguish between "upset" and "out of control" for any airplane. "Upset" to me implies an unusual attitude, headed for worse if a correction is not made quickly. An airplane can be stalled, and out of control, but not upset. The pilot may no longer have any control effectiveness available to pitch up, so the airplane is not in control in that sense, though it otherwise is stable (for the moment). I saw in the video an airplane which, after suffering a [total] power loss in a climb pitch attitude, and a climb speed, did not noticeably pitch down, so it certainly would have been slowing down, and approaching a stall. If the pilot maintained the attempt to pitch up, and the airplane was not aerodynamically able to respond, it was not in control, so, out of control.

I encountered this thinking while flight testing a modified GA plane in the company of an experienced test pilot. The airplane would bob across an airspeed range with full nose up pitch control. It was a very stable bob, but the indicated airspeed would increase and decrease about 5 knots during this bobbing, while the controls were held against the nose up stop. I asked him, was the indicated stall speed the faster, or slow of the two airspeeds? His reply: "Can you control the airspeed while the airplane is slower than the faster speed?". "No" I replied. Then the airplane is out of control at the faster airspeed, and that is the stall speed. The fact that it would fly slower was not in my control, though the airplane was still controllable in roll and yaw.

It's a fine point, but this event is well into fine point territory!

Wow, that'd be fast! Perhaps he's referring to a preliminary report, in which case, not fast....

Well, to be fair, the poster who posts next after this post did explain this with good clarity earlier on in the thread.

It may be work reading back before you post, but it's more work expecting posters to repeat what they have offered before. I know that this is a very long series of posts, but all technical topics have been touched on by now, so please do search back, and assure that what you're thinking to post is actually new information. The moderator team are now deleting posts which resurrect previously dispostioned theories, without providing any new thoughts - just to keep between the guardrails on this one.