Page Links: First Previous 1 2 3 Next Last Index Page
M.Mouse
2025-06-18T00:23:00 permalink Post: 11904796 |
In any case the autopilot wouldn’t have been in at such a low altitude and the PF would have been hand flying. Most of the min engagement altitudes for autopilots is 400’ AGL.
767 pilot here, on the 767 it would capture the altitude, but more importantly, it would freeze the airspeed at whatever speed the alt capture occurred at. So the thrust levers would retard to maintain the much slower speed at the point of capture. This could be a possible scenario, especially if the crew was slow to realize what happened, AND the 787 has a similar low altitude capture issue.
5 users liked this post. |
Shep69
2025-06-18T01:18:00 permalink Post: 11904818 |
I wouldn't be surprised.
The speed should be at least at V2 and probably higher. Why would the ATS not just hold that speed, albeit being a shock to the crew. Within a few seconds I'll bet the throttles would end up back in the forward position as the ATS says "hey, we're slowing down fast here!". It would be ugly but I can't see that the jet's going to drop out of the sky. The throttles aren't going to come right back and stay right back. From one of the previous scenarios if capture at a way low altitude occurred they`d (IIRC correctly) engage in SPD mode resulting in a significant loss of thrust as they attempted to maintain speed assuming a level off. Presumably after this when the PF continued a climb (regardless of flight director) they`d come forward after this loss of thrust to attempt to meet commanded speed—V2 or V2+15 or whatever—but there`d be a lag. But I`ve never misset the MCP to a way low altitude in flight or the sim (not a holier than thou thing) so I`m not entirely sure how how the autothrottles would behave. More than one crew has failed to push them to the stops when things went south. And the reverse is true; when the second MCAS accident happened IIRC the autothrottles stayed in THR REF due to task saturation by the crew. Exacerbating the condition and ultimately resulting in an accident. 3 users liked this post. |
Capn Bloggs
2025-06-18T01:26:00 permalink Post: 11904824 |
Originally Posted by
Shep69
Because they are in `hold` after the takeoff thrust is set by engaging the TOGA levers. VNAV will engage at 400` AGL and set them at THR REF — referencing takeoff or climb thrust as programmed.
|
Shep69
2025-06-18T01:33:00 permalink Post: 11904829 |
Minimum autopilot engagement height on the B787 is 200'.
On the B787 if VNAV is engaged and the aircraft captures an altitude below the programmed acceleration height then the vertical mode transitions to VNAV ALT and commences acceleration to the current flap setting limit speed -5 knots. |
Capn Bloggs
2025-06-18T04:01:00 permalink Post: 11904877 |
Originally Posted by
Exdac
I have made no attempt to correct the raw ADS-B altitude data. There is no need to make any correction to see altitude gain.
Originally Posted by
Shep69
Assuming then that VNAV in the 78 engages at 200` AGL vice the 400` of the 777?
Level-off point, approx 11sec after liftoff: ​​​​​​​ ![]() |
M.Mouse
2025-06-18T12:59:00 permalink Post: 11905219 |
Assuming then that VNAV in the 78 engages at 200` AGL vice the 400` of the 777 ?
1 user liked this post. |
Shep69
2025-06-18T14:14:00 permalink Post: 11905284 |
Yes, we know it climbed. I suggested use of the granular data to show
how
high it was, in the context of the 400ft mode changeover point.
I don't have access to a current 787 manual, but have found a couple of unverified references to the VNAV engagement on the net. It appears the VNAV will engage at 400ft also. Happy to be corrected though. Level-off point, approx 11sec after liftoff: ![]() I never tried this in the sim on the 777 so I\x92m not sure. I was grateful that the 777 would change to SPD mode on initial altitude capture (as opposed to the -400 VMo here we go). It\x92s been a few years in any case though. |
Shep69
2025-06-18T14:49:00 permalink Post: 11905304 |
|
M.Mouse
2025-06-18T15:50:00 permalink Post: 11905350 |
VNAV hasn\x92t engaged yet in that scenario. So do I get SPD LNAV ALT ?
At that point the FMAs read: ![]() At 50' LNAV engages and the FMAs change to: ![]() At 400' VNAV engages and the FMAs change to: ![]() The height is referenced to a barometric snapshot taken during the take off roll at 100kts. If an altitude is captured before VNAV engagement (totally bizarre to capture an altitude of less than 400') then the FMAs would change to: SPD | LNAV | ALT 3 users liked this post. |
Shep69
2025-06-18T17:38:00 permalink Post: 11905418 |
Usually on takeoff LNAV and VNAV are armed. During the takeoff roll the autothrottle system goes in to HOLD mode at 80kts.
At that point the FMAs read: ![]() At 50' LNAV engages and the FMAs change to: ![]() At 400' VNAV engages and the FMAs change to: ![]() The height is referenced to a barometric snapshot taken during the take off roll at 100kts. If an altitude is captured before VNAV engagement (totally bizarre to capture an altitude of less than 400') then the FMAs would change to: SPD | LNAV | ALT Could explain the witnesses thought that power came back up before they hit but witness recollections post traumatic event as well as second hand reporting need some time to settle in before accurate facts come out. Last edited by Shep69; 18th Jun 2025 at 17:53 . |
Shep69
2025-06-19T01:08:00 permalink Post: 11905650 |
Non-aviation engineer here: I have a question about the low level altitude capture theory that I've been a bit hesitant to ask, since no-one else seemed to be bringing it up.
My understanding of altitude capture is that the autopilot will automatically adjust both thrust and pitch to intercept the requested altitude. However to my eyes there is very little pitch adjustment in the CCTV video of the plane taken from behind, until the very end of the video when it pitches up somewhat (obscured by buildings, more visible in the smartphone video). Please correct me if I'm wrong but I'd have thought that if the autopilot was trying to capture a very low altitude it would start pitching down (quite noticeably!) to do so, not remain at what looks like 10+ degrees nose-up. I honestly struggle to reconcile what I'm looking at in the video with an attempt to level off at 0ft, 200ft, or any of the other mentioned low-level altitudes. Also maybe I'm missing something 787-specific but generally doesn't the autopilot have to be activated for the aircraft to automatically attempt to capture the pre-selected altitude? That was the case in this incident involving a Dash 8 and a target altitude of 0 feet that I am reading about ( https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...-dash-8-g-ecoe ). I'd have thought the PF would still be hand-flying the departure at the point that things went wrong, considering that the gear hadn't even been retracted yet... Minimum autopilot engagement altitude is 200\x92 for the 78 (from others on the forum). It\x92s 400\x92 AGL on the 777. My interest is in how the auto throttles would have behaved in such a situation\x97where VNAV would not be engaged yet and the automatics gone into SPD/ALT. ; would they have pulled off thrust assuming a level off and then come back in to maintain bug speed (perhaps confusing the crew in the process ?). 1 user liked this post. |
nachtmusak
2025-06-19T04:49:00 permalink Post: 11905714 |
The autopilot would not have been in and the pilot would have been hand flying maintaining the takeoff attitude. The flight director might have commanded a level off which obviously would not have been followed.
Minimum autopilot engagement altitude is 200\x92 for the 78 (from others on the forum). It\x92s 400\x92 AGL on the 777. My interest is in how the auto throttles would have behaved in such a situation\x97where VNAV would not be engaged yet and the automatics gone into SPD/ALT. ; would they have pulled off thrust assuming a level off and then come back in to maintain bug speed (perhaps confusing the crew in the process ?). Actually...doesn't the autothrottle normally enter HOLD mode once the aircraft enters the high-speed regime during its takeoff roll? And only re-engages its actual selected mode at 400 feet (or maybe 200 feet?), and in the time in between the crew is supposed to have manual control of thrust? It seems backwards to me that any automated systems would ever override the pilot's requested thrust on purpose at such a sensitive stage of flight and I thought that the autothrottle goes into hold for exactly that reason. Coupled with the fact that it would be extremely early in the flight to turn on the autopilot...I'm sure I have a very simplified understanding of how this all works. But I'm struggling to see how - unless the crew had also made some other egregious mistake in their preflight preparations in addition to entering the wrong target altitude - it could go so badly in this specific manner so quickly after lift-off. 1 user liked this post. |
604driver
2025-06-19T08:50:00 permalink Post: 11905843 |
The autopilot would not have been in and the pilot would have been hand flying maintaining the takeoff attitude. The flight director might have commanded a level off which obviously would not have been followed.
Minimum autopilot engagement altitude is 200\x92 for the 78 (from others on the forum). It\x92s 400\x92 AGL on the 777. My interest is in how the auto throttles would have behaved in such a situation\x97where VNAV would not be engaged yet and the automatics gone into SPD/ALT. ; would they have pulled off thrust assuming a level off and then come back in to maintain bug speed (perhaps confusing the crew in the process ?). This is a daft question probably, but if the automation commanded a level off below 400\x92 and the AT transitioned to SPD\x85 would the logic have a brain fart and revert back to HOLD? I\x92m guessing not to be honest. I wonder if people have managed to try this in the SIM. Not saying at all that is what happened here. Just interested in the logic. |
nachtmusak
2025-06-19T14:15:00 permalink Post: 11906057 |
Except that the PF does not immediately get the cue that the power is backing off, because he removed his hand from the power levers at V1. If he sees the Flight Directors indicating down after take off.... of course he will ignore that command and maintain the normal 14deg NU +/- for the expected all-engines climb. However when the speed starts to decay he starts to get the message all is not well and tries to salvage the situation. If the FD goes into altitude capture then the autothrottle becomes speed-on-throttle. Unfortunately the AT logic presumes you are following the FD. If you are now NOT following FD commands then the results become unpredictable. On correct speed but above FCU selected altitude = throttles close.
Just after rotate is a very busy time for your scan. The FMA modes are in the HUD for both pilots to see, however did they have time to read and digest rapidly changing autoflight modes? I have way more experience flying the B744 than the B788 but I can see this happening on either type. How many times were you reminded to RTF FMA! My understanding (and others have corroborated this) is that in a standard departure the autothrottle is armed and starts the takeoff roll in THR REF mode. It goes into HOLD mode when the IAS passes 80 knots (obviously still on the ground). While it is in HOLD mode, the autothrottle is physically inhibited from moving the thrust levers. It then automatically re-engages at 400ft AGL (though I am not sure how the altitude is measured), and begins to operate as requested by various human and computer systems. If something about my explanation is wrong, please let me know - but if it is correct, then how would the autothrottle roll back thrust drastically in what looks like the first few seconds of the flight? I do understand that what you describe is how the autothrottle would behave when it is active, but it sounds to me like it is by design not supposed to actually be active during the critical time that we are looking at no matter what automations are armed to be activated once the aircraft is safely away from the ground. Unless the crew did something to cause it to engage - and I'm not sure what that would even be. What would they plausibly be doing before even retracting the landing gear? My only guess was that depending on how the altitude is measured to determine whether the 400ft gate has been passed (radio altimeter? pressure altitude?), the autothrottle might have come out of HOLD mode (along with VNAV if armed) at a lower altitude than it was supposed to due to some mechanical fault or crew error. But that's already a bigger kettle of fish than just altitude capture... |
M.Mouse
2025-06-19T14:25:00 permalink Post: 11906063 |
It then automatically re-engages at 400ft AGL (though I am not sure how the altitude is measured), and begins to operate as requested by various human and computer systems.
3 users liked this post. |
LGB
2025-06-19T14:29:00 permalink Post: 11906066 |
No, it's not. You got that value from ADS-B, which is barometric altitude at standard pressure, and when you correct for that, the highest value is ~100 ft. AAL.
Instead, look at the CCTV video, and consider that the wing span of the aircraft is ~200 ft. I hope you'll agree AI171 didn't come close to 400 ft. AAL at any point. So they only got to around 100' height, half the wing span of a Boeing 787? I think it looks higher than that. 189' elevation, QNH1001, the pressure altitude should be around 550'. First readout from ADS-B is 575', highest is 625'. I did not look up if runway departure end is much different there than aerodrome elevation. Interesting that the readout of pressure altitude doesn't get lower again, after 625', which could support the total loss of all AC (and most DC power?). Transponder possibly stopped working, but one of the pilots was able to transmit a mayday call. So they must have had some kind of electricity available. So what I mentioned about THR REF / VNAV SPD is probably not applicable. Yes, I did not account for the QNH initially, which makes closer to 100' than 400' AGL. I will revert to await the official findings then, with a substantial loss of electricity seeming more and more plausible. |
nachtmusak
2025-06-19T15:04:00 permalink Post: 11906095 |
Re: mayday call transmission, isn't that easily battery powered? At least on the captain's side. Sorry, maybe the context was lost - I was responding to a theory that did argue that the aircraft was automatically trying to capture a target altitude that was incorrectly set too low. That has happened before, but the incidents I could find looked very different from this one (one Dash 8 and one A330, both involved the crew activating the autopilot). 1 user liked this post. |
nachtmusak
2025-06-20T19:02:00 permalink Post: 11907211 |
​​​​​​
An auththrottle malfunction makes as much sense as anything else at this point. But even if not I wonder if the low altitude capture scenario would dramatically pull off power initially assuming the aircraft was going to level off before restoring it as the aircraft slowed down. Didn`t fly the 78 but on the 777 the auththrottles were laggy sometimes. Neither does (or should?) any autopilot mode (except LNAV? at 50 feet?) be active under 400 feet. Armed yes but not actually engaged. So how would either of these things have any effect on an aircraft that's just lifting off unless they're faulty? Everything I can turn up seems very clear that the autothrottle, VNAV, etc only engage at 400 feet AGL on departure. In fact, both altitude capture incidents I've been able to turn up were only triggered when the autopilot was engaged. Why would any pilot be engaging the autopilot bare seconds after lift-off? Last edited by nachtmusak; 20th Jun 2025 at 19:02 . Reason: forgot phrase |
604driver
2025-06-20T19:14:00 permalink Post: 11907224 |
I am specifically asking about the case without a malfunction because my understanding is that the autothrottle
explicitly
does not affect thrust between passing 80 knots on the runway and passing 400 ft AGL.
Neither does (or should?) any autopilot mode (except LNAV? at 50 feet?) be active under 400 feet. Armed yes but not actually engaged. So how would either of these things have any effect on an aircraft that's just lifting off unless they're faulty? Everything I can turn up seems very clear that the autothrottle, VNAV, etc only engage at 400 feet AGL on departure. In fact, both altitude capture incidents I've been able to turn up were only triggered when the autopilot was engaged. Why would any pilot be engaging the autopilot bare seconds after lift-off? No idea of 787 There are other cases where maybe A/T is U/S Not saying any of those things were relevant here. Just answering your question. |
Shep69
2025-06-20T19:23:00 permalink Post: 11907231 |
I am specifically asking about the case without a malfunction because my understanding is that the autothrottle
explicitly
does not affect thrust between passing 80 knots on the runway and passing 400 ft AGL.
Neither does (or should?) any autopilot mode (except LNAV? at 50 feet?) be active under 400 feet. Armed yes but not actually engaged. So how would either of these things have any effect on an aircraft that's just lifting off unless they're faulty? Everything I can turn up seems very clear that the autothrottle, VNAV, etc only engage at 400 feet AGL on departure. In fact, both altitude capture incidents I've been able to turn up were only triggered when the autopilot was engaged. Why would any pilot be engaging the autopilot bare seconds after lift-off? BUT Say the MCP is mis-set to 200’ or so. VNAV never engages and the expected mode (from others; I`ve never tried it) would be SPD xxx ALT. The modes still engage regardless of whether or not the airplane is on autopilot; the autopilot itself just follows the flight director commands (and the PF certainly woudn`t follow the FD in this case). Autothrottles are independent of autopilot. And the autothrottles would initially be expected to reduce thrust to whatever value the squirrels think is appropriate to level flight. They WILL advance (how fast I don`t know) to maintain speed on auto throttle but this would be confusing. That`s the scenario I`m wondering about as well as a failure of the auththrottles themselves; it`s as plausible as anything else they engaged to reduce thrust for some wild reason. |