Me, seeing the date: it's Birgenair. Oh god, no. This flight is the reason I found the Flight Channel in the first place. When I was a toddler we were in Puerto Plata at this exact date. This was the flight we would take home, but exactly a week earlier. A lot of people from our hotel were on that flight, my parents talked to a few of them the evening before. When we went to the city days later they were in the process of bringing the body bags in, we could see the ships. One guy actually partied too hard the night before and missed his flight. He drank himself to oblivion the next day. As you can imagine, the flight home to Germany was hell. This flight will forever be engraved in our memory. Thank you for doing it justice, dear Flight Channel!!
I have railed about Pitot tubes various times, and each time I'm met with either poo-poo or dead silence. It is absolutely ridiculous that such a critical piece of equipment last revised in the 1950's has not been improved upon. Someone will ask, "And just what would you suggest?" And I will post in advance that touch screen technology is a possible improvement, maybe a few square feet of film over the paint job, with software to screen out impact data from rain drops and hail and bird strikes. Just a suggestion. A thousand engineers working over 70 years of aircraft refinement can't come up with any improvement to a Pitot Tube? (Puke.)
@Kiril Mihaylov It would've never been no mistake made had the maintenance staff done their jobs by covering the pitot tubes while not in use, and by removing the damn tape. i.e. They didn't do their jobs.
One thing not mentioned in the Aeroperu crash is that the pilots asked if another plane could guide them back to the runway. The ATC requested such a rescue plane and a Boeing 707 was on taxi to come and assist them but it was too late.
I once had an incidence in which a spider had built a nest in the pitot tube of the aircraft I was flying. It was a friend's small aircraft which he had kept it in a hangar for several months and asked me to fly it to another city for him. In the middle of the takeoff I noticed that the airspeed read about 10kts, half way down the short runway. I decided to keep going because the acceleration felt normal, and there wasn't much runway left. It was extremely uncomfortable to fly around and land without an airspeed indicator and that was in daylight, clear air, and calm winds. The mechanic and I opened the pitot tube and cleaned out the nest and the flight proceeded without further incident. It must have been terrifying for these pilots flying a complex aircraft without visual references and no air data.
Pitot tubes were adapted to aircraft in the 1950's. Since you fly, does it make any sense to you that no one has improved on them since, especially given all the technological advances in, for example, pressure-sensitive things like touch screens?
@@davesmith5656 And even GPS was introduced in aviation in February 1994. This means all these accidents could have been avoided if the aircraft had GPS altitude readings.
@@fontexstudios Isn't that bizarre to ponder? A passenger with an iPhone could've made a difference? The more time goes by, the quicker 'cutting edge' becomes the norm.
It's so frustrating when something isn't working right and the captain still has time to abort but goes ahead with the take off, as in the first case. Felt so bad for the second plane, the crew did try hard to figure out what was going on and knew they needed to land the plane as quickly as possible. 259 souls lost. So very sad. Thank you for another great presentation!
Both of these were due to this disgusting time crunch put on airlines, pilots, mechanics, etc. THESE PLANES WEREN'T MEANT TO SIT AROUND THEY WERE MADE TO MAKE MONEY, NOW MAKE IT WORK AND FLY THE DARN THING! And despite all these terrible crashes, this attitude still persists today. It's so frustrating.
@@markheinle6319you’re absolutely right. that guy is an armchair pilot. but i still don’t get why your first instinct wouldn’t be to apply thrust after you start stalling
Lima one always struck me as savable, if they had turned back as soon as they realised there was a problem shortly after take off while they still had eyes on Lima nobody would have died.
Exactly, the moment the captain said turn right, there was no going back. If he would have said turn left and keep circling aroung the city they would have probably landed the plane with that visual reference.
They both were savable. The captain should have rejected the take off of the first one when he was getting any air speed indication. I'm sure there's always an undertone of arriving on time from airlines to pilots, but safety should always come first no matter what.
I'm not a pilot but what amazes me about both of these is that they were more worried about the potential overspeed even when gauges were faulty and I would think that is very uncommon within normal thrust settings etc and so I would think they would have assumed that was likely a false warning and possibility of a stall is a much bigger issue than a potential overspeed
yeah, that what's puzzling here as common sense would seem to tell you this and wouldn't whatever control they use to increase engine thrust not pretty much signify their probable air speed as well.....I mean, if you have the Captain Kirk call for Warp 10 or whatever and you can feel or hear the engines roaring....then, yeah, I guess its time to back off on the engine thrust......but when you aren't doing that, how could they expect the speed to be so high....then again, the real issue I suppose is flying in the dark......where you have absolutely no visual sense of anything.....that...I have to admit is probably pretty difficult for you to make sense of; although, probably not impossible, but given the circumstances and what is on the line, like, you know, life or death...the stress of questioning your decision making of right or wrong...well....its kind of like OMFG!.....it would be curious to see if they did flight simulations with these exact types of circumstance, how many pilots would be able to land the aircraft safely.......
I agree. If you are a experienced pilot, how o earth you don’t know what thrust setting you need to keep normal ish speed?! I know it’s easy to comment after the fact, but cmon these people supposed to be well trained pilots
@@emililiev1621 yeah, its a little puzzling to say the least.......I mean, I realize this is a different scenario but if you car's speedometer stopped working I would imagine most would be able to drive it without it crashing.....granted, there are MANY visual cues going on even at night when driving a car, but I don't see how it could be much different in relative terms with an aircraft and pilots....not saying its easy, but not impossible....
The captain's feel for the aircraft was totally absent. He knew before he left the ground in a second what the implications and requirements of doing so would be. There's was a total disconnect from reality.
I cannot imagine the amount of absolute terror that was going through each and everyone of those souls on that plane as it careened out of control! I was on a flight just yesterday and I could not imagine having to go out like that. It’d be a quick way to go, but my God the terror on the way down… poor people
@edwinmaguillicuddy9069 Absolutely terrifying for all, I have the most sympathy for the families of those lost souls, this just did NOT have to happen, it is GROSS carelessness and disregard for correct protocol of the flight crew!
@@SJF15 This was not the case for the Aero Peru plane as it initially inpacted the water at quite a shallow angle as was evidenced by the the fact that the pilots were still talking after the first contact with the water. According to the TV series "Mayday" (Air Crash Invesrigation) this accident resulted in one of the highest court awards up to that time because the passengers would have been aware what was happening to them and the fact they likely drowned.
I wrote about the Birgenair crash as a journalist in Germany in 1996. What stays with me to this day is the slogan on the T-shirt of one of the passengers whose body was later recovered: The Future Goes On. Well it didn't in this case. So tragic, RIP all lost souls on both flights!
As a pilot, both of these are BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION. I'm an instrument-rated private pilot with 986 total hours and Single Engine Land and Glider ratings. The day before the flight test for the instrument rating, my CFII and I went for a dress rehearsal. It was one of 3-4 days out of the year where there was a low, solid cloud deck over Santa Monica (I had done all my training with the hood on to ensure I couldn't see outside.) So on the initial climb out, the departure procedure called for a right turn, climb and maintain 4000 feet, which I initiated. However, the Attitude Indicator (often called the artificial horizon) showed a slightly descending turn to the left. For just a second or two that made my feel physically sick. Altimeter showed a climb and the airspeed indications were good, so I did the one thing any student pilot getting dual instruction would do, namely start crying loudly and offer the instructor any price he could name to save our lives. Okay, slight exaggeration: what I did was point to the instruments and say, "Craig, I put us in a climbing right turn but the AI is showing a left turn and descending." He replied -- and this is 1000% true and I will never forget it -- "Okay. Now kick its ass!" Second best lesson I ever got from an instructor. So I proceeded to kick its ass: The big fat main instrument, the Attitude Indicator, showed a turn to the left BUT the compass and turn coordinator showed a turn to the right. Airspeed and Altitude were constant so I wasn't in a dive. That meant the Attitude Indicator was OUTVOTED. All of that to say this: When I started my instrument training, Craig had insisted I go to a pilot store and get a big, black, rubber suction cup, and keep it handy, AND THE REASON I DID THAT was because the second the AI was outvoted I give the suction cup a lick and COVERED THE FAULTY ATTITUDE INDICATOR. We do this so that we do not inadvertently get visual cues from a dead instrument. The single most important thing in instrument flying is to TRUST YOUR INSTRUMENTS. But in both of these cases, the moment that the airspeed indicators were clearly malfunctioning those presumably trustworthy bastards are LYING TO YOU and from that moment on they should not have existed. ANY airspeed indication -- overspeed, rudder, etc. -- is being told to you by a miserable, low-down, lying son of a bitch. How do you get an Airline Transport Pilot rating without knowing that ground based radar is reading your mode c transponder, which is reading your airspeed indicator, which is LYING TO YOU? And in both cases they were over urban terrain that provides a perfectly good visual reference. Watching this, both times I wanted to shout "look out the goddam window! That's why they put windows in airplanes!" Which leads me to the BEST single lesson I ever learned from a flight instructor. I started in gliders. It was my very first lesson. As we were walking out to the aircraft to begin a thorough PRE-FLIGHT INSPECTION (paying extra special attention to the pitot tube and static ports that provide the airspeed and altitude data) my instructor, whose name is Geoff Larkin and is now an airline captain, said to me the best thing I ever heard about flying. He said, "Bill, if things go south up there you will become so scared and disoriented that you reptile brain will take over. My job is to make sure that THE REPTILE KNOWS WHAT TO DO."
Thanks for this. It makes me feel better. I always knew these pilots were horrifically incompetent, most of them on this page anyways, and sometimes I felt maybe I was being disingenuous, or not giving the situation even thought. It just always seemed to me that if you *KNOW* something is faulty like an indicator that you should probably *IGNORE* it. L
OMG its Bill Whittle! Ive been watching you since PJ media! This is so cool its like meeting a movie star ! I mean, i'm not actually meeting you but you get what i mean! Thanks for all that you do Bill!
Basic rule of thumb: Check that all maintenance operations are completed correctly. First rule of thumb for pilots; When instruments aren't working correctly, abort take off. Both of the flights were lost due to maintenance and pilot error.
the terror when an aircraft inverts and you're flying straight towards the ground must be unimaginable. the notion of knowing, seeing and hearing you're about to die and all you can do is watch is horrible. RIP.
As soon as you detect an error or defect, no matter how minor it is, even if it's a light not working, just reject the takeoff asap. I'd rather figure out what's going on while on the ground than in the air.
All this computerized sophistication designed to reduce human error, yet, you can't stop Mother Nature, or a guy with a roll of tape. Those visuals of the rolls made me airsick from my seat. I just can't fathom how a human being would actually feel going through this. The terror felt must be horrendous! RIP, to all the flight crews and passengers
Actually you can stop nature look at Japan anti earthquake buildings. And this is just the beginning of technology in a few hundred years natural disasters are just gonna tickle us
The problem is, though, that you should be able to stop Mother Nature or a guy with tape if you actually carry out the pre-flight checks the way they are supposed to be completed. So many failures, way too many lives lost.
As long as humans are able to override computers, there will always be accidents. I would much rather have a robot as a pilot than a human. We are inherently prone to error.
I'm currently studying to get an Aircraft Maintenance Licence for commercial aircrafts. Just today I studied Pitot Tubes, how static and dynamic sensors work and the different implications when they don't work properly, not casually analizing these exact accidents as "Case Studies" on EASA and FAA authorized manuals. This video is a good reminder of how much small mistakes can bring to a chain of events that if it's not broken can lead to disaster.
@@WALTERBROADDUS Absolutely. Pitot Tubes are such a critical hardware that are always checked and protected during daily routine maintenance operations. Pilots also have the opportunity to check during Pre flight inspection if any foreign object has obstructed or damaged the tubes. That is what cross checks are for.
These two accidents seem more preventable 27 years later in 2023 when any passenger can bring up real-time readings of altitude and groundspeed on their GPS equipped phone.
I'm an English guy living here in Thailand, and we have similar small wasps. I must check every bit of plastic tubing before using for anything. Their nests are like concrete and they have to be smashed apart. I've found their nests in spare fuel lines for my motorbike... thin metal tubing etc... down to 5-6 mm pipes/tubes... little gits! So sad that such a small insect can have such tragic outcomes :(((
I'm curious, shouldn't it be mandatory to reject take off when speeds don't match? I mean how could you be certain that the FO display was correct? And if he knew his display wasn't correct, why did the captain react to his readings instead of the FO's?
In the case that the speed doesnt match and reaches V1 you can't abort the takeoff due to aviation protocols, once you're in the sky you can turn around and land immediately but in both cases idk
If you realise the fault before the aircraft reaches V1, you can and most definitely should reject takeoff. Airspeeds HAVE to match since the ADC of the autopilot takes the same data inputs. If it's after V1, then takeoff must be continued since the aircraft cannot stop safely on the length of runway remaining. Obviously, you'd also turn back and land asap.
@@jamespatton724 you cant really blame the pilots of flight 301, neither of them received sufficient training which is not suprising for a start up charter airline that went out of business only a few months later.
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world. Social media narcissism at its finest." ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
Yes, should have either rejected takeoff, or else only trust the FO's instruments. If you knew that your ASI wasn't working correctly, why would you trust it when it says you're going way too fast? I'd have asked the FO what his ASI said. And, if there's a way, have the autopilot read from the FO's side instead of the captain's side.
Amazing how an entire flight deck of "professionals" could so casually disregard such an obviously dangerous instrument malfunction. I've been watching this channels content for a few weeks and I am stunned to see the amount of F**K IT! YOLO! attitudes appear equal to the amount of actual competent crew reactions. The more I see, the less I want to fly.
But that's only because nominal crew and systems performance is the norm, whereas the opposite is unique enough to warrant vastly greater scrutiny, including videos like this one. Also, in these particular cases, the crew reactions were not reckless. Both occurred at night with no visual reference, and placed the respective crews in situations far outside anything they were trained to handle. Most tragically, in Aeroperu 603's case, they were just minutes away from help in the form of an aircraft about to take off from Lima to guide them back to the city for an approach.
@@DrMackSplackem Both crews continued to make a series of errors that led to the crashes. The pilots are there for a reason and making multiple mistakes like they did is not the reason.
@@DrMackSplackem I am mostly referring to the air speed indicator malfunction at takeoff. I know less than nothing about piloting, but I am aware that knowing proper air speed is fairly important. Back in the mid-1990's I was a military instructor teaching MOS 11HE9, Heavy Anti-Armor Infantryman. At the end of each training cycle, we had a live fire exercise. We chose only one M901 ITV as the firing platform to reduce possible problems. The instructors, myself included, went over the 901 meticulously, checking, testing, and calibrating everything with a special focus on the missile guidance set. Then the 45K technicians came out to certify the vehicle as ready for firing. Once all of this was done, we cleared the lane and let the trainees take their shots. If at any time, any component malfunctioned to any degree, or range control threw a flag, all firing would cease and the entire safety check process would be repeated. During all those years, I only encountered one firing excursion, and the defect was with the missile itself, which was beyond anyone's ability to detect prior to launch. The BGM-71 popped out of the tube, ignited, then made it about 100 meters before losing a wire. It then followed it's internal programming, went ballistic, expended all it's fuel, and landed harmlessly on a hillside a few miles away. I find it insane that enlisted men have better safety protocols than commercial pilots, many of whom I assume have military experience, have the lives of 100+ souls on their shoulders, millions of dollars of plane under them, and will be traversing a sea of civilian infrastructure and residents. Rolling on the tarmac and seeing a blatantly obvious air speed discrepancy and STILL deciding to take off is simply brain-melting.
If I'm that pilot, I am immediately turning around to use the city lights as a guide. At least you can have some visual references to heading, altitude and attitude.
I think theres are certain protcols in place that says a plane cannot turn around on a whim, they have to run through cheklists to try and troubleshoot/rectify the problem in flight. I agree this makes no sense in an emergency.
I don't know anything about aviation, but from the number of pitot tube related incidents I've heard about, I wonder if a compressed air injection test can be routinely conducted, perhaps from a compressor carried on the tug, to check the ports just prior to pushback. Probably this is impractical though for reasons I'm not aware of, otherwise I imagine it would have been implemented long ago.
Pitch Dark...Wing Hits Water...Plane Inverts...Slams into Ocean...Passengers Must Have Been So Scared in These Brief Moments...Cant Even Imagine Being in This Situation
Pitot tubes and static port vents are included in the walk-around that was supposed to have been done by F/O. The ground crew is also responsible for noting anything that is 'abnormal', such as blocked static port vents. These are CRITICAL to the accurate determination of airspeed. Further, the decision to take off with only one (or perhaps both) invalid airspeed indications was a serious mistake and the flights should have aborted on the runway; it amazes me that these high-time pilots didn't immediately recognize the immensity of the danger posed by these failures.
The tape used was silver, same colour as the whole area where the pitot tubes are located, so when they inspected the plane at night it was difficult to see the problem.
That first crash was the one from which I received the navigational messages sent to ships about a 757 ditching in the ocean off the Dominican Republic and to keep a lookout for possible survivors.
@@l3gendarylag805 There was a case of an Italian pilot who told the F/O basically screw everything and he shut off the autopilot and flew the plane to a successful landing. And then there was Sully, a glider pilot as a hobby.
There are a few things that could have been done differently on the aero puru. Was there no rad alt on a 757? Once below 2500 they could have used that. Could have used a known power setting and pitch to constantly climb the plane and head back to Lima to re obtain visual references. Then attempt decent. Always easier to look with hindsight though.
This will probably sound crazy. But I never book night time flights because of this accident. My reasoning (not a pilot) is that If anything goes bad, atleast the pilots can see out the window 😅
@@deepthinker999 it really depends on how the plane crashes, and the difference is not that big. But yeah, on average you're slightly safer towards the back.
Those senior pilots knew (at least I would hope they did), that the readings on the panel were wrong from the onset, so the only way they could know was by visual. When visual is not a choice then don't take off, and if you do take off, turn around and land and save as many souls as possible, including their own. God bless those souls lost and God bless those pilots for trying and doing what they thought at the time was their only options. Thank you TheFlightChannel for these stories (both the happy and the sad ones). It is nice to know the whole stories of these flights that were compromised for whatever reasons. Your channel is very informative and enlightening. Thank you.
I flew in the USAF many years ago. Back then, we had autopilots etc, but we always hand flew the aircraft, in my case a K/EC-135 (Boeing 707 variant) as much as possible. I always remember the Instructor pilot telling us, new pilots, while in the traffic pattern, to learn the throttle positions by feel which provided you safe pattern airspeed, in our case 200 knots--"straight up and down around 80%" if I remember right. You could set the throttles by feel and not worry about airspeed because you would be in the ballpark. One thing less to think about in the busy traffic pattern with checklists to run! I was also an instructor pilot in USAF pilot training, I recall teaching to ALWAYS check the attitude indicator with the turn&slip, magentic compass, outside references, etc. In some cases, I would pull the cirucit breakers in simulators for the attitude indicator and RMI (heading and nav) and made the student fly using known power settings, mag compass and timing using windup clock. Not easy but a great way to increase cross check speed and situational awarness. While modern aircraft have great technology, this technology seems to have erroded hands on pilot skill(s). As long as I remember flying in th USAF, I never recall using autopilot in the takeoff or landing phases of flight, only once at altitude and flying straight and level. Just my opinion.
On the second flight, the autopilot disengages because the readings from FO and CPT didn't match. Why did it not disengage on the first flight and made the plane stall instead? Question two: Where does the stall prevention system get the speed/altitude data from?
One solution to help eliminate this kind of tragedy is for the pilot to do a comprehensive pre-flight walk around the aircraft, with a checklist and a flashlight. Another solution is to ensure that pitot covers are installed whenever the aircraft is expected to be parked for extended periods of time. These pilots were very experienced and should have no excuse for not aborting a takeoff whenever instruments are not syncing. That should be a huge red flag. Especially primary flight instruments. And Cockpit Resource Management should have been in full effect, meaning that one pilot should perform a pilots basic duty, which is to fly the airplane, while the second pilot works to zero in on the problem. I know it’s easy to play armchair quarterback, but when all else fails it’s always crucial to go back to the basics.
Is that sarcasm? One of the pilot DO walk round before every flight to check the pitot tubes and parts of the aircraft. This is something they should notice and it should also be something noted in the log book if a cover has been placed.
If you haven't watched the previous video on this channel, it shows why no amount of 'what people should do' to prevent such incidents is sufficient to guaranty that they actually will do it. (pitot tubes were covered to prevent insect nesting. Multiple people aware of this but all failed to pass on the info as required. Other people who should also have been aware simply failed to check. Flight engineer spotted the covers with a flashlight during walk-around but 'forgot' to mention it. Pilot spotted faulty airspeed early in take-off but failed to abort. First officer failed to spot faulty airspeed during take-off until too late. Etc, etc.)
This is a true story: My uncle and his family were about to board this very flight, when my uncle suddenly had a gut feeling and said "there is no way I am getting on this plane." My aunt argued with him, my cousins argued with him, but he stayed adament and firm, and so they decided not to get on the plane. My aunt was furious at first, knowing they would have to wait for their next flight. You can imagine how incredibly shocked our entire family was, after what transpired so tragically shortly after. But it does not stop there: only 2 weeks prior, me, my father and my mother flew on this very plane. I kid you not, I swear on my grandmother, may she rest in peace. You can imagine how incredibly shocked we all were when we found out, and to this day it drives chills down my bones and I think often of this tragic flight, and the luck my family had in connection with it at the same time, and I feel very strongly and deeply for the unlucky souls who died in this tragedy. Needless to say: my aunt never, ever, questioned my uncle's gut feelings after this again, and we all are extremely grateful for my uncle to have had this hunch.
Yeah I have days when really weird things will happen to me all day... specifically, I'll be watching UA-cam videos for instance, and think about things totally unrelated to the video, but 15 seconds later they'll be mentioned in the video, and this'll happen repeatedly for a couple of hours straight. I can't say that I believe in fate because when things like what you described happen, fate kinda disproves itself as it were, but I've had so many experiences myself that I do feel like although time is an illusion, it's probably moving backward while we're standing still, rather than us moving forward through it. Only thing that seems to make sense. Oi. Glad you survived this deathtrap of a plane, anyhoot!
There was no such thing as “Luck” in this case… nope it was the Lord giving him that gut feeling of intuition… rely on it with the Lord to stay alive and you’ll be okay…
I never understand these "speed confusion" cases. Even if all speed indicators stop working. If you then fly the plane straight ahead wings level with, say, 70% thrust are you not pretty freaking sure you are not over speeding nor stalling
It boggles my mind how they realized & knew witch speed indicator was broken watched the correct one took off, and then started flying with the BROKEN ONE!!! Where did the common sense go?
@@GhostWatcher2024 ---- My hypothesis is that people become over-reliant and over-confident in computers, at the expense of their own reasoning and deductions. E.g. That pilot. Imagine getting your oil changed, and two days later the idiot light flashes that you're low on oil. Most guys would stop, pop the hood, and check the oil. The computer is a computer, it can't lie. Anything could have happened, maybe the oil filter threads were stripped, or a nail pierced the oil pan. On an airplane, when seconds count, delay isn't permissible, so you'd go with the indicator light. Not saying a low oil indicator light is the same as driving down the freeway at 80 and noticing the speedometer says you're not moving. Just trying to make a point that when a computer says something, we tend to listen to it, like we used to believe the evening news. "Economic projections generated by XYZ University's twin super-computers say that the world will end in 2133 due to fresh water exhaustion. New government regulations in response to this looming extinction mandate that all swimming pools be drained immediately. Death penalty will apply to anyone with a pool full of water after April 15th 2023. Swedish designer Eewe Stienkke rolls out a new clothing line of wash-free underwear, on sale now at Ocean dot com." (Watch, I betcha someone drains their pool before April 15th.)
I. agree with many of the comments. I think BOTH situations could have been prevented by proactive pilots making a better decision right at the point they notice something wrong. Especially if it’s right after taking off.
I've flown in and of Lima maybe 100 times. February is in the middle of summer and usually only one of 3 or 4 months a year when visibility after take off is completely clear. They should have imediatly turned around while still having Lima in sight and headed right back to the airport using their experience with throttle control and positioning to ballpark them at a safe speed back to Jorge Chavez airport. So what if they came in too fast , anything is better than crashing into a dark ocean. This accident was so tragic. Rest their souls.
When you hear that voice, "Too low -- terrain," you push the throttles to the firewall and haul back on the stick and pray. There's no time to sit and argue about the instruments.
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world. Social media narcissism at its finest." ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
The central theme on many of these aircraft accidents is that the pilots panic during a serious incident. It looks like they are not trained to handle any serious problems that might occur. And, the panic seems to occur whether the pilots are new or veterans. Isn't this what simulators are for??
You say that, yet you don't have instruments to tell you your proper airspeed or your approach altitude. And it's at night. They're trained to follow their instruments. But without them giving the proper information; you're kind of in a mess. You see the pilot confusion. Are they going too fast or too slow? Are they too high or too low?
If you’re piloting a plain and you don’t know the speed and altitude you need to ground that plane as soon as possible. At least over the city they had a visual reference.
wasp nest didn't bring it down, Captain did! a) should have rejected takeoff, plenty of time, b) if in the air, hand over control to copilot, c) under no circumstances couple autopilot to side with faulty indications. How to know which side is right, attitude and power, they have flown enough to know about the normal climb attitude associated with normal climb power
Captain: "My airspeed indicator isn't working. Tell me your airspeed and when to rotate." Also Captain: "Your airspeed indicator is showing we're too slow, but mine is showing too fast. Let's reduce the throttle and slow this baby way down." 🤦♂🤦🤦♀
@@deepthinker999 The issue I see here with the captain's thinking is he decided to trust the co-pilot's readings for take off but not trust them after they were in the air. Then he kept trying to read his own after seeing it was clearly wrong during takeoff. Maybe because the alerts were throwing him off? Even still, it seemed reasonable to trust the pilot monitoring.
@@AaronHarberg Exactly, that's the first ignorant act to just ignore it and take off anyway. Then follow up with a flurry of poor decision making. Makes you wonder sometimes these pilots that supposedly have countless hours behind them. Very seldom are these accidents occurring with inexperienced pilots.
"My instruments are crazy... Let's continue the take off!... And let's fly over the Ocean at night! Everything will be fine!!". I speak Spanish and I just wondered WTF.... It was kind of frustrating watching both avoidable tragedies develop.
My air speed indicator doesn't seem to be working properly, would you kindly tell me when we arrive at takeoff speed. Now that we're airborne, I will completely ignore the fact that my air speed indicator wasn't working two minutes ago and base all my decisions on it. Am I missing something here?
I would say great work by TheFlightChannel, absolutely amazing graphics, and animation. I have already watched the detailed film of Peruvian aircraft in NatGeo's Aircraft Investigation Program. One can easily imagine the terror those in the cockpit had to face that fateful night. Very gruesome episodes of mindboggling horror those poor pilots had to go through over the dark sea.
I wonder if there was a chance for Aeroperu to restore control, after first touch on the water? It sounded like just light splash without severe damage. If they would went in TOGA immediately ?
In the case of the AeroPeru crash, whilst the maintenance staff did not remove the protective tape from the static ports, the first thing that crossed my mind was why the flight crew did not spot the tape covering them as part of the pre-flight external aircraft walk round check.
The tape is non standard (put it simple it's just everyday tape, not the tape commonly use for maintenance which is bright) and blend in with plane skin colour
@@kidpagronprimsank05 interesting point. How do you know this? The accident report I read didn't state that. However, in addition to maintenance staff, the report did also attrubute blame to the crew for missing seeing the tape on the pre-flight walk around checks.
@@dodahspeak Accounts of this accident I have read also say that instead of using the brightly colored tape they were supposed to, the maintenance crews used plain old gray duct tape.
@@Middcore sounds like a mess up all round. If that were the case then I am quite sure some maintenance mangament heads would have rolled for that. So, who would you blame for missing that on the pre-flight walk around check? The pilot, the maintenance staff .... or would both take a proportionate share of the blame?
First of all condolences to the families that suffered so much through this disaster. As a no expert in flying i have one dumb question. Since the pilots realised the problem with the instruments regarding the speed and the altitude of the aircraft why didn't they follow the coast of Lima so that they could have visual reference and safely return to the airport? I apologise again if my question is stupid enough to those who have flown or have some kind of experience but in my opinion, it is the most obvious thing to do in a situation like that.
The pilot's ASI was clearly having an issue; why didn't they hand fly it via the attitude indicator and the FO's ASI, and/or abort the TO? Ridiculous that 20+K hour pilots failed like this; button pushers. Looks like in both cases the AI was working fine, PLUS they had a standby Attitude Indicator AND a steam gauge ASI. Pro Tip: "Terrain"; might want to add power and pull up.
@@BrilliantDesignOnline This is not an aviation channel. It appeals to the general public. YT? Do you realize not every viewer of this channel is not a Sully like you. I doubt if Sully were here, he would be so hip and cool as you. using aircraft acronyms. He would understand as smart as he is, he would not try to show up others using terms like CVR,CRM, GA. EFB, TOGA, FO. But you are not him you need to prove what you know. That type of person is known as a know it all or smart ass.
You still don't know your speed or altitude. How do you line up for an approach for the proper descent? You're either going to come in too high or too low.
This is one of several accidents in which both the pilots, and ATC were unaware that speed and altitude amongst other parameers, is read from the aircraft's transponder. Shouldn't aircraft crew and ATC be very familiar with this fact?
@Doctah Wahwee I've seen other channels saying that YT is requiring them to post song credits, even for royalty-free songs, so they've removed the music.
And the second one was proved the existence of that subconscious trigger in pilots head(Oh, we have a problem here?! Hurry, push the AP button!!! It'll solve that all!)
It's baffling really. They seemed to know on takeoff that the F/O's airspeed indicator was the only one that was correct. Can't you "assign" the autopilot to use the F/O's instruments? Literally just needed to ignore the pilot's instruments and fly the plane with the F/O's instrument readings, just like they did on takeoff. Senseless tragedy. The second accident was more understandable. They seemed to have no valid instrument readings whatsoever. That had to be terrifying flying over water in the dark, not knowing speed, altitude, AOA or anything.
I've said it before and in every instance in these videos that I watch, it would have saved lives. IF THERE IS ANY PROBLEM WITH THE PLANE - ANYTHING - DO NOT PUT IT IN THE AIR BECAUSE IT MAY LEAD TO OTHER PROBLEMS. If you are in the air, get it on the ground ASAP. No matter how small you think a problem is, do not put the plane in the air. That pilot was well below the threshold and should have aborted.
Just imagine the world we are quickly approaching where computers control everything we use for transportation, from our vehicles to get to the airport,to the planes we board, to the taxis to our destination, lucky if we survive it all.
Not as if the humans here with "Oh, I don't know how high and fast I am going, lets turn off thrust and extend speed brakes" strategy did the passengers any good.
In both cases, humans caused the crash. They make covers to prevent wasps making nests. And humans couldn't be bothered to remove tape after washing a plane. I think a robot that chased a human around the airport smacking him in the head untill he put the covers on, or removed the tape, would be a great thing.
The problem is lack of common sense, and not just reliance upon computers, but dependence on computers, as if humans were inferior. There is no computer in the universe capable of common sense - and there never will be. A computer is exclusively 0100 1000 1101 1001 0101 0100 1000 1101 1001 0101 0100 1000 1101 1001 0101 (etc. to Nth).
What's sad is that logic dictates that when engines have problems they will lose power not suddenly go supersonic. Therefore, unless a pilot had just pushed the engines to full power, a runaway airspeed indicator would never be correct except in only one other situation and that would be nosediving straight toward the ground in which case, the altimeter and attitude indicator would indicate that kind of descent.
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world. Social media narcissism at its finest." ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
Thanks to this channel, I'm not to keen on flying, and I limit how often I need to ride in an airplane. Too many things can go wrong. I understand statistically, flying is safe, that's why I still do it. But my odds of finding myself in the cabin of one of these ill-fated flights increases the less I fly.
I'm supposed to go to Japan in December. I recently started watching these videos as The Flight Channel was recommended by UA-cam. I'm rethinking the whole trip now. I used to love flying too. I'm going to talk to an Uncle who was a Pilot in the Canadian Armed Forces; he may be able to ease the anxiety I'm already feeling.
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world. Social media narcissism at its finest." ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world. Social media narcissism at its finest." ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
Its unreal how many of these crashes are caused by leaving tape over a sensor, wasp nests blocking a sensor, maintenance leaving covers on those pitot things...hundreds of people dying because of blocked sensors. Unreal.
Indeed. These ground crew maintenance people are fkwits responsible for a multiplicity of deaths. They should be tried in a court of law for failure to carry out their job resulting in termination of life, & be handed a 40 year without parole prison sentence. Arsholes.
@@paulfitzpatrick6566 Definitely agree. How hard is it to check these things before each flight? As much as I find the vids on this channel interesting, it makes me sick to my stomach when it's some small issue that could have easily been prevented that ends up causing tragedy. Hurts the heart.
@@ajzepp8976 absolutely. You can tell from the voice recorder that these pilots from Latin America are having difficulty conversing as they are speaking broken English one to another. Which exacerbated the ondeck issues. The international language in flight is English & pilots should all be conversant in the language, or not be allowed to obtain a licence. Dropping this requirement leads to an inability to communicate & resolve issues that lead to an emergency situation & often tragedy. Iv got a friend who married a Colombian girl 8 years ago, before Covid & since he’s flown with these dipstick Colombian airways many times. I told him before the first flight he took out there 8 years ago, make sure you’ve had your Will written up by a solicitor. I’d never travel by air to these Wally countries, we crossed the border of Juarez Mexico 6 years ago, by road, with a 10 strong group of American friends. That one day experience was enough for a lifetime. These South American people are backwards & all they know is black market & crime. You could immediately gauge why Trump said - the Mexican is not your friend.
It is the clear responsibility of the pilot flying to make a detailed external inspection of the aircraft. If he had done these checks with due diligence then the chances are that this accident might have been avoided . . . . 😎
So, curiously, I wonder if they even run flight simulations with Pilots with these exact or similar circumstances and how many pilots are able to safely land the aircraft........and do they even run a simulation like this...and if they don't...well, based on these two examples....THEY SHOULD!
@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 Thanks for correcting me,now I remember Kenya's aircraft that crashed into Atlantic Ocean minutes after take off.Would you agree with me that it's a very scenario?
those pitot tubes tell the alarms like the stuff. it is crucial to have a tape on it so it deosnt freeze. another thing, lets see what you do in that situation... all you see is pure black on the windows, you don't know what alarm to trust that is real, you don't know how high or low you are, etc etc. @@stephenmapeka7774
I hate those accidents , where a plane enthusiast with 50 hours on xplane "game" would react correctly every time but a professional routinely flying for years out of fear of having issues with employer, stress or just for lack of emergency training does the very worst.
indeed. as soon as they had no instrument readings and the plane was airborne, I cant understand why they just didnt steer slowly to the left to follow the coast line to have visual guidance, and then return to the airport. It seems so easy to do on a simulator.
I always thought that all communications had to be in English, from all the air crash videos I've watched, they've stated that English is the communications language, to prevent any misinterpretation of instructions given by pilots and ATC.
I believe non-English countries can give permission to specific flights to speak in the same non-English language. Especially under conditions of emergency (?) The 747 that crashed into a mountain in Japan was given permission to speak in Japanese when everything was going to shit. Though it might cause confusion for other flights in the area (but they're not really supposed to be relying on each other, instead of ATC)
It's puzzling that experienced pilots could not figure out that there was a problem with the pitot tubes and that the instruments using the pitot tubes were not to be trusted.
no pilot error was involved in that incident though, it was a bunch of errors made on the ground and thank god the pilots knew how to handle the situation
Watching these videos makes me rethink taking a trip to Japan in December. In fact, I'm not sure I want to fly again, ever, and I used to enjoy it so much. RIP to all those who perished. I cannot even begin to fathom the fear they must have felt.
@@ottokarvonschnallenburg2572 atleast only one or 2 might die in car crash while in planes you can't do anything and wait for 200+ humans to die in the most horrific way. Sorry but not taking my chances. Last year a Chinese booing flight crashed so meaning our technology isn't perfect yet. I'm sure the ones who crashed said the same thing "so rare it won't happen to m-" sadly it did. You also forget there's millions of cars driving right now currently everyday non stop so close together while planes not... Why would I ever trust my life to a stranger I don't know (pilot)
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world. Social media narcissism at its finest." ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
i am puzzled about the Birgenair flight: if the pilots knew or suspected the Captain's air speed was faulty and trusted the FO's at take off, why didn't they continue to trust it during the flight and ignore the Captain's instruments?
I'm puzzled by why they didn't just continue to rely on the FO's pitot and override the Captain's ap? Why would they opt for the as indicator they'd already identified as faulty during takeoff?
Oh metal coffin in the sky You’re the reason I refuse to fly 😢 The horror for the souls on board Brings me terror and strikes a chord .. I know it’s safer than in a car but I’d rather die that way by far ! Rest in peace innocents x
I love when people say flying is safer than driving. GREAT! But guess what? There are two sides to a coin. You are much more likely to survive a car crash than a plane crash. Duh.
@@Dick_Z_Normas When passengers of airplane die, the number are like 20, 50, 150, 200, etc but in a car crash if someone dies what can be the max number 5 or 10 or what. It is far less than the plane. You MOR0N!
@@Dick_Z_Normas how many car journeys have there been during that time, though, compared to flights? I'd say a lot more. I'm not disputing the fact that one is less likely to die in a plane crash than in a car. But also, how many times does one go into a car versus on a flight over a lifetime?
I see this issue involving unreliable, airspeed, fairly frequently? Aren’t there procedures pilots are trained to follow when they are getting conflicting and erroneous airspeed over speed readings? What are they supposed to do when they can’t rely on their airspeed gauges?
There was low cloud / fog cover over the entire city, although that is not shown in this video. They had no ground visual reference soon after take off, and with faulty instruments they could not return to Lima Airport safely.
Really well done video. I'm amazed the Birgenair Captain committed to take off knowing something was wrong with at least half of his speed instrumentation and can't believe that the Captain of the Aeroperu flight committed to leave the lights of Lima behind and fly over sea at night knowing his flight systems were malfunctioning. I hope this didn't have anything to do with the pressure of trying the keep the flight on schedule. RIP all involved.
How would it feel to have been the person who put the tape on but forgot to take it off after the washing of the plane? I imagine that person lost their job on top of knowing they caused the death of 70 people. Sad...so sad.
![Crashing Inverted Into the Pacific Ocean Just After Takeoff | Flying Blind [With Real Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sqLZOjnZJGY/mqdefault.jpg)
Me, seeing the date: it's Birgenair. Oh god, no.
This flight is the reason I found the Flight Channel in the first place. When I was a toddler we were in Puerto Plata at this exact date. This was the flight we would take home, but exactly a week earlier.
A lot of people from our hotel were on that flight, my parents talked to a few of them the evening before. When we went to the city days later they were in the process of bringing the body bags in, we could see the ships. One guy actually partied too hard the night before and missed his flight. He drank himself to oblivion the next day.
As you can imagine, the flight home to Germany was hell. This flight will forever be engraved in our memory.
Thank you for doing it justice, dear Flight Channel!!
It must have been a coincidence. But how did you miss this flight tho?
@@Interdictiondeltawing I think he means that they would be taking the same flight number, but the following week.
Yeah we went home the week after.
The guy who missed the flight was a young dude from our hotel who partied too hard the day before
@@ZentaYason I wonder if he is ever haunted by any guilt. He shouldn't be, but you never know how people react to such trauma.
@@annab6726 oh thanks
It's amazing what a wasp nest and a piece of tape can do, RIP all 259 who were taken from us in those two disasters
I have railed about Pitot tubes various times, and each time I'm met with either poo-poo or dead silence. It is absolutely ridiculous that such a critical piece of equipment last revised in the 1950's has not been improved upon. Someone will ask, "And just what would you suggest?" And I will post in advance that touch screen technology is a possible improvement, maybe a few square feet of film over the paint job, with software to screen out impact data from rain drops and hail and bird strikes. Just a suggestion. A thousand engineers working over 70 years of aircraft refinement can't come up with any improvement to a Pitot Tube? (Puke.)
Thanks for the spoiler, b.t. Which was seen immediately, without even opening the comments.
And what maintenance negligence can do
@@lonerebeI this was mostly pilot mistake . The captain shouldn't have taken off with faulty speed readings
@Kiril Mihaylov It would've never been no mistake made had the maintenance staff done their jobs by covering the pitot tubes while not in use, and by removing the damn tape. i.e. They didn't do their jobs.
One thing not mentioned in the Aeroperu crash is that the pilots asked if another plane could guide them back to the runway. The ATC requested such a rescue plane and a Boeing 707 was on taxi to come and assist them but it was too late.
They did a whole separate video on that flight in which that is mentioned.
it wouldn't have helped at all.
They should’ve called the military and had a fighter intercept
What is the protocol for when something like this happens? Obviously it's rare, but for Aeorperu in particular: what the hell do you even do?
spiderman no way hiome
I once had an incidence in which a spider had built a nest in the pitot tube of the aircraft I was flying. It was a friend's small aircraft which he had kept it in a hangar for several months and asked me to fly it to another city for him. In the middle of the takeoff I noticed that the airspeed read about 10kts, half way down the short runway. I decided to keep going because the acceleration felt normal, and there wasn't much runway left. It was extremely uncomfortable to fly around and land without an airspeed indicator and that was in daylight, clear air, and calm winds. The mechanic and I opened the pitot tube and cleaned out the nest and the flight proceeded without further incident.
It must have been terrifying for these pilots flying a complex aircraft without visual references and no air data.
Pitot tubes were adapted to aircraft in the 1950's. Since you fly, does it make any sense to you that no one has improved on them since, especially given all the technological advances in, for example, pressure-sensitive things like touch screens?
@@davesmith5656 these systems are used because they are very simple so there is less to go wrong
@@davesmith5656 And even GPS was introduced in aviation in February 1994. This means all these accidents could have been avoided if the aircraft had GPS altitude readings.
@@fontexstudios Isn't that bizarre to ponder? A passenger with an iPhone could've made a difference? The more time goes by, the quicker 'cutting edge' becomes the norm.
Just how big is the opening in these tubes?
It's so frustrating when something isn't working right and the captain still has time to abort but goes ahead with the take off, as in the first case. Felt so bad for the second plane, the crew did try hard to figure out what was going on and knew they needed to land the plane as quickly as possible. 259 souls lost. So very sad. Thank you for another great presentation!
The 2nd one was fustrating too because they flew away from their visual references and decided to fly in the dark and try to "figure it out".
Both of these were due to this disgusting time crunch put on airlines, pilots, mechanics, etc. THESE PLANES WEREN'T MEANT TO SIT AROUND THEY WERE MADE TO MAKE MONEY, NOW MAKE IT WORK AND FLY THE DARN THING! And despite all these terrible crashes, this attitude still persists today. It's so frustrating.
spiderman no way hiome
If you knew your speed gauge was fucked, why would you trust it after takeoff???
EXACTLY!!! Unbelievable incompetence or arrogance. Absolute stupidity
This is the most baffling part
@@AaronHarberg you know the event and aftermath situation is different for something to happen to you
@@AaronHarberg i gaurantee you have no idea what youre doing most of the time for you to dunk on these pilots. what do you do professionally?
@@markheinle6319you’re absolutely right. that guy is an armchair pilot. but i still don’t get why your first instinct wouldn’t be to apply thrust after you start stalling
Lima one always struck me as savable, if they had turned back as soon as they realised there was a problem shortly after take off while they still had eyes on Lima nobody would have died.
Exactly, the moment the captain said turn right, there was no going back. If he would have said turn left and keep circling aroung the city they would have probably landed the plane with that visual reference.
They try to save the fuel, especially if its a long haul flight. So the pilots do their best to solve the problem the best they can.
Yeah i legit shouted "NOOO" when he decided turning right to open sea with no lights as reference..
@@mohabatkhanmalak1161 Yeah. Trying to engage the autopilot without correct instruments readings. That's exactly what any professional pilot would do.
They both were savable. The captain should have rejected the take off of the first one when he was getting any air speed indication. I'm sure there's always an undertone of arriving on time from airlines to pilots, but safety should always come first no matter what.
I'm not a pilot but what amazes me about both of these is that they were more worried about the potential overspeed even when gauges were faulty and I would think that is very uncommon within normal thrust settings etc and so I would think they would have assumed that was likely a false warning and possibility of a stall is a much bigger issue than a potential overspeed
yeah, that what's puzzling here as common sense would seem to tell you this and wouldn't whatever control they use to increase engine thrust not pretty much signify their probable air speed as well.....I mean, if you have the Captain Kirk call for Warp 10 or whatever and you can feel or hear the engines roaring....then, yeah, I guess its time to back off on the engine thrust......but when you aren't doing that, how could they expect the speed to be so high....then again, the real issue I suppose is flying in the dark......where you have absolutely no visual sense of anything.....that...I have to admit is probably pretty difficult for you to make sense of; although, probably not impossible, but given the circumstances and what is on the line, like, you know, life or death...the stress of questioning your decision making of right or wrong...well....its kind of like OMFG!.....it would be curious to see if they did flight simulations with these exact types of circumstance, how many pilots would be able to land the aircraft safely.......
I agree. If you are a experienced pilot, how o earth you don’t know what thrust setting you need to keep normal ish speed?! I know it’s easy to comment after the fact, but cmon these people supposed to be well trained pilots
@@emililiev1621 And there's the ticket, supposed to be well trained. Not so much.
@@emililiev1621 yeah, its a little puzzling to say the least.......I mean, I realize this is a different scenario but if you car's speedometer stopped working I would imagine most would be able to drive it without it crashing.....granted, there are MANY visual cues going on even at night when driving a car, but I don't see how it could be much different in relative terms with an aircraft and pilots....not saying its easy, but not impossible....
The captain's feel for the aircraft was totally absent. He knew before he left the ground in a second what the implications and requirements of doing so would be. There's was a total disconnect from reality.
I cannot imagine the amount of absolute terror that was going through each and everyone of those souls on that plane as it careened out of control! I was on a flight just yesterday and I could not imagine having to go out like that. It’d be a quick way to go, but my God the terror on the way down… poor people
@edwinmaguillicuddy9069
Absolutely terrifying for all, I have the most sympathy for the families of those lost souls, this just did NOT have to happen, it is GROSS carelessness and disregard for correct protocol of the flight crew!
The G stresses would mean they passed out pretty quickly.
@@watershed44 first was pilot mistake. Second was more complex but still avoidable
Strange but I see it as a very slow way to go. All the up and down, side to side...too much time to take it all in.
@@SJF15 This was not the case for the Aero Peru plane as it initially inpacted the water at quite a shallow angle as was evidenced by the the fact that the pilots were still talking after the first contact with the water. According to the TV series "Mayday" (Air Crash Invesrigation) this accident resulted in one of the highest court awards up to that time because the passengers would have been aware what was happening to them and the fact they likely drowned.
I wrote about the Birgenair crash as a journalist in Germany in 1996. What stays with me to this day is the slogan on the T-shirt of one of the passengers whose body was later recovered: The Future Goes On. Well it didn't in this case. So tragic, RIP all lost souls on both flights!
As a pilot, both of these are BEYOND MY COMPREHENSION. I'm an instrument-rated private pilot with 986 total hours and Single Engine Land and Glider ratings. The day before the flight test for the instrument rating, my CFII and I went for a dress rehearsal. It was one of 3-4 days out of the year where there was a low, solid cloud deck over Santa Monica (I had done all my training with the hood on to ensure I couldn't see outside.) So on the initial climb out, the departure procedure called for a right turn, climb and maintain 4000 feet, which I initiated. However, the Attitude Indicator (often called the artificial horizon) showed a slightly descending turn to the left. For just a second or two that made my feel physically sick. Altimeter showed a climb and the airspeed indications were good, so I did the one thing any student pilot getting dual instruction would do, namely start crying loudly and offer the instructor any price he could name to save our lives. Okay, slight exaggeration: what I did was point to the instruments and say, "Craig, I put us in a climbing right turn but the AI is showing a left turn and descending." He replied -- and this is 1000% true and I will never forget it -- "Okay. Now kick its ass!" Second best lesson I ever got from an instructor. So I proceeded to kick its ass: The big fat main instrument, the Attitude Indicator, showed a turn to the left BUT the compass and turn coordinator showed a turn to the right. Airspeed and Altitude were constant so I wasn't in a dive. That meant the Attitude Indicator was OUTVOTED. All of that to say this: When I started my instrument training, Craig had insisted I go to a pilot store and get a big, black, rubber suction cup, and keep it handy, AND THE REASON I DID THAT was because the second the AI was outvoted I give the suction cup a lick and COVERED THE FAULTY ATTITUDE INDICATOR. We do this so that we do not inadvertently get visual cues from a dead instrument. The single most important thing in instrument flying is to TRUST YOUR INSTRUMENTS. But in both of these cases, the moment that the airspeed indicators were clearly malfunctioning those presumably trustworthy bastards are LYING TO YOU and from that moment on they should not have existed. ANY airspeed indication -- overspeed, rudder, etc. -- is being told to you by a miserable, low-down, lying son of a bitch. How do you get an Airline Transport Pilot rating without knowing that ground based radar is reading your mode c transponder, which is reading your airspeed indicator, which is LYING TO YOU? And in both cases they were over urban terrain that provides a perfectly good visual reference. Watching this, both times I wanted to shout "look out the goddam window! That's why they put windows in airplanes!" Which leads me to the BEST single lesson I ever learned from a flight instructor. I started in gliders. It was my very first lesson. As we were walking out to the aircraft to begin a thorough PRE-FLIGHT INSPECTION (paying extra special attention to the pitot tube and static ports that provide the airspeed and altitude data) my instructor, whose name is Geoff Larkin and is now an airline captain, said to me the best thing I ever heard about flying. He said, "Bill, if things go south up there you will become so scared and disoriented that you reptile brain will take over. My job is to make sure that THE REPTILE KNOWS WHAT TO DO."
Thanks for this.
It makes me feel better.
I always knew these pilots were horrifically incompetent, most of them on this page anyways, and sometimes I felt maybe I was being disingenuous, or not giving the situation even thought.
It just always seemed to me that if you *KNOW* something is faulty like an indicator that you should probably *IGNORE* it.
L
OMG its Bill Whittle! Ive been watching you since PJ media! This is so cool its like meeting a movie star ! I mean, i'm not actually meeting you but you get what i mean! Thanks for all that you do Bill!
Basic rule of thumb: Check that all maintenance operations are completed correctly. First rule of thumb for pilots; When instruments aren't working correctly, abort take off. Both of the flights were lost due to maintenance and pilot error.
the terror when an aircraft inverts and you're flying straight towards the ground must be unimaginable. the notion of knowing, seeing and hearing you're about to die and all you can do is watch is horrible. RIP.
As soon as you detect an error or defect, no matter how minor it is, even if it's a light not working, just reject the takeoff asap. I'd rather figure out what's going on while on the ground than in the air.
All this computerized sophistication designed to reduce human error, yet, you can't stop Mother Nature, or a guy with a roll of tape. Those visuals of the rolls made me airsick from my seat. I just can't fathom how a human being would actually feel going through this. The terror felt must be horrendous! RIP, to all the flight crews and passengers
Actually you can stop nature look at Japan anti earthquake buildings. And this is just the beginning of technology in a few hundred years natural disasters are just gonna tickle us
No freaking thing as mother nature! GOD IS THE CREATOR OF LIFE FOOL YOU HAVE LOST YOUR MIND
The problem is, though, that you should be able to stop Mother Nature or a guy with tape if you actually carry out the pre-flight checks the way they are supposed to be completed. So many failures, way too many lives lost.
As long as humans are able to override computers, there will always be accidents. I would much rather have a robot as a pilot than a human. We are inherently prone to error.
I'm currently studying to get an Aircraft Maintenance Licence for commercial aircrafts. Just today I studied Pitot Tubes, how static and dynamic sensors work and the different implications when they don't work properly, not casually analizing these exact accidents as "Case Studies" on EASA and FAA authorized manuals. This video is a good reminder of how much small mistakes can bring to a chain of events that if it's not broken can lead to disaster.
Yes...good luck to ya on your journey..
@@kennethhacker3014 Thanks a lot!
@@kennethhacker3014 this is important because most pilots get confused when something happens with pilot tubes
Is this something that is normally checked doing a PreFlight?
@@WALTERBROADDUS Absolutely. Pitot Tubes are such a critical hardware that are always checked and protected during daily routine maintenance operations. Pilots also have the opportunity to check during Pre flight inspection if any foreign object has obstructed or damaged the tubes. That is what cross checks are for.
The closeness of these 2 accidents and the similarities between them are incredibly unnerving.
RIP to all those involved.
Both completely unnecessary.
At the risk of being redundant, stick with main line carriers wherever you go. When flying in the third world, fly in the daytime if possible.
@@deepthinker999 good advice . Just to add don't fly Air France
These two accidents seem more preventable 27 years later in 2023 when any passenger can bring up real-time readings of altitude and groundspeed on their GPS equipped phone.
Ty 7
I'm an English guy living here in Thailand, and we have similar small wasps. I must check every bit of plastic tubing before using for anything. Their nests are like concrete and they have to be smashed apart. I've found their nests in spare fuel lines for my motorbike... thin metal tubing etc... down to 5-6 mm pipes/tubes... little gits! So sad that such a small insect can have such tragic outcomes :(((
Who cares what race you are,that doesn't matter
Ladyboys?
I'm curious, shouldn't it be mandatory to reject take off when speeds don't match? I mean how could you be certain that the FO display was correct? And if he knew his display wasn't correct, why did the captain react to his readings instead of the FO's?
In the case that the speed doesnt match and reaches V1 you can't abort the takeoff due to aviation protocols, once you're in the sky you can turn around and land immediately but in both cases idk
If you realise the fault before the aircraft reaches V1, you can and most definitely should reject takeoff. Airspeeds HAVE to match since the ADC of the autopilot takes the same data inputs.
If it's after V1, then takeoff must be continued since the aircraft cannot stop safely on the length of runway remaining. Obviously, you'd also turn back and land asap.
This is one of the first flight channel videos I watched and it’s great how it’s being payed tribute again
Imagine Flying upside down and suddenly crashing in the ocean. RIP those 259 people
That’s all I was thinking as I was watching it. Can you imagine?
@@seriouslyyoujest1771 yeah exactly. What a horrible sight would it be just before hitting the ocean.
Nah. RIP the 256. The 3 pilots don’t deserve any pity.
@@jamespatton724 you cant really blame the pilots of flight 301, neither of them received sufficient training which is not suprising for a start up charter airline that went out of business only a few months later.
What about the wasps? Did they die?
Excellent representation of two tragic accidents. Thank you FlightChannel. Those who live MUST learn. RIP to all the souls who perished.
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world.
Social media narcissism at its finest."
ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
That first accident has to be one of the most avoidable crashes I've ever seen.
Yes, should have either rejected takeoff, or else only trust the FO's instruments. If you knew that your ASI wasn't working correctly, why would you trust it when it says you're going way too fast? I'd have asked the FO what his ASI said. And, if there's a way, have the autopilot read from the FO's side instead of the captain's side.
Bruh yes , the first one is pure dumbness and stupidity .
Should have immediately gone back over the city into a holding pattern while diagnosing the issue.
How would they find the city when it was covered in dense cloud meaning you would t be able to see the lights?
Should have returnned immediately and sorted it out safely on the ground
Two accidents with poor crew coordination and what seems like over lack of knowledge.
To much dependency on automation
Lol.. should have couldn't save them!!
Amazing how an entire flight deck of "professionals" could so casually disregard such an obviously dangerous instrument malfunction. I've been watching this channels content for a few weeks and I am stunned to see the amount of F**K IT! YOLO! attitudes appear equal to the amount of actual competent crew reactions. The more I see, the less I want to fly.
But that's only because nominal crew and systems performance is the norm, whereas the opposite is unique enough to warrant vastly greater scrutiny, including videos like this one. Also, in these particular cases, the crew reactions were not reckless. Both occurred at night with no visual reference, and placed the respective crews in situations far outside anything they were trained to handle. Most tragically, in Aeroperu 603's case, they were just minutes away from help in the form of an aircraft about to take off from Lima to guide them back to the city for an approach.
@@DrMackSplackem Both crews continued to make a series of errors that led to the crashes. The pilots are there for a reason and making multiple mistakes like they did is not the reason.
@@DrMackSplackem I am mostly referring to the air speed indicator malfunction at takeoff. I know less than nothing about piloting, but I am aware that knowing proper air speed is fairly important. Back in the mid-1990's I was a military instructor teaching MOS 11HE9, Heavy Anti-Armor Infantryman. At the end of each training cycle, we had a live fire exercise. We chose only one M901 ITV as the firing platform to reduce possible problems. The instructors, myself included, went over the 901 meticulously, checking, testing, and calibrating everything with a special focus on the missile guidance set. Then the 45K technicians came out to certify the vehicle as ready for firing. Once all of this was done, we cleared the lane and let the trainees take their shots. If at any time, any component malfunctioned to any degree, or range control threw a flag, all firing would cease and the entire safety check process would be repeated. During all those years, I only encountered one firing excursion, and the defect was with the missile itself, which was beyond anyone's ability to detect prior to launch. The BGM-71 popped out of the tube, ignited, then made it about 100 meters before losing a wire. It then followed it's internal programming, went ballistic, expended all it's fuel, and landed harmlessly on a hillside a few miles away. I find it insane that enlisted men have better safety protocols than commercial pilots, many of whom I assume have military experience, have the lives of 100+ souls on their shoulders, millions of dollars of plane under them, and will be traversing a sea of civilian infrastructure and residents. Rolling on the tarmac and seeing a blatantly obvious air speed discrepancy and STILL deciding to take off is simply brain-melting.
Scary fact that both accidents happened within less than 8 months apart from each other 🥶
If I'm that pilot, I am immediately turning around to use the city lights as a guide. At least you can have some visual references to heading, altitude and attitude.
He was clueless doomed the minute the gear went up.
I think theres are certain protcols in place that says a plane cannot turn around on a whim, they have to run through cheklists to try and troubleshoot/rectify the problem in flight. I agree this makes no sense in an emergency.
Yeah, but even so I rather crash in the ocean, versus us a city full of people. Less casualties
Declare an Emergency and inform ATC what your requirements are and they will clear the air space for you. Happens every day.
I’m thinking the same thing. Would never travel in the dead of night with known potential error.
I don't know anything about aviation, but from the number of pitot tube related incidents I've heard about, I wonder if a compressed air injection test can be routinely conducted, perhaps from a compressor carried on the tug, to check the ports just prior to pushback. Probably this is impractical though for reasons I'm not aware of, otherwise I imagine it would have been implemented long ago.
Pitch Dark...Wing Hits Water...Plane Inverts...Slams into Ocean...Passengers Must Have Been So Scared in These Brief Moments...Cant Even Imagine Being in This Situation
No one can.
"I have no airspeed indication. I shall continue the takeoff." Says no pilot worth his salt, ever.
Agree 100%. Too bad so many people died horribly. It's kind of frustrating watching this.
Pitot tubes and static port vents are included in the walk-around that was supposed to have been done by F/O. The ground crew is also responsible for noting anything that is 'abnormal', such as blocked static port vents. These are CRITICAL to the accurate determination of airspeed. Further, the decision to take off with only one (or perhaps both) invalid airspeed indications was a serious mistake and the flights should have aborted on the runway; it amazes me that these high-time pilots didn't immediately recognize the immensity of the danger posed by these failures.
The tape used was silver, same colour as the whole area where the pitot tubes are located, so when they inspected the plane at night it was difficult to see the problem.
That first crash was the one from which I received the navigational messages sent to ships about a 757 ditching in the ocean off the Dominican Republic and to keep a lookout for possible survivors.
If I listened to "overspeed" and "too low terrain", I'd definitely go with the 2nd.
I stg lol ill rather be going too fast than be too low on a plane!
@@l3gendarylag805 There was a case of an Italian pilot who told the F/O basically screw everything and he shut off the autopilot and flew the plane to a successful landing. And then there was Sully, a glider pilot as a hobby.
There are a few things that could have been done differently on the aero puru. Was there no rad alt on a 757? Once below 2500 they could have used that. Could have used a known power setting and pitch to constantly climb the plane and head back to Lima to re obtain visual references. Then attempt decent. Always easier to look with hindsight though.
This will probably sound crazy. But I never book night time flights because of this accident. My reasoning (not a pilot) is that If anything goes bad, atleast the pilots can see out the window 😅
Fair point. I was thinking exactly the same.
They also say that survival is best in the rear of the plane (which I hate).
Not crazy. Sound logic
@@deepthinker999 it really depends on how the plane crashes, and the difference is not that big. But yeah, on average you're slightly safer towards the back.
Another reason I don’t ever drive at night esp on long distances. So many things you can’t see until it’s to late…
Those senior pilots knew (at least I would hope they did), that the readings on the panel were wrong from the onset, so the only way they could know was by visual. When visual is not a choice then don't take off, and if you do take off, turn around and land and save as many souls as possible, including their own. God bless those souls lost and God bless those pilots for trying and doing what they thought at the time was their only options.
Thank you TheFlightChannel for these stories (both the happy and the sad ones). It is nice to know the whole stories of these flights that were compromised for whatever reasons. Your channel is very informative and enlightening. Thank you.
I flew in the USAF many years ago. Back then, we had autopilots etc, but we always hand flew the aircraft, in my case a K/EC-135 (Boeing 707 variant) as much as possible. I always remember the Instructor pilot telling us, new pilots, while in the traffic pattern, to learn the throttle positions by feel which provided you safe pattern airspeed, in our case 200 knots--"straight up and down around 80%" if I remember right. You could set the throttles by feel and not worry about airspeed because you would be in the ballpark. One thing less to think about in the busy traffic pattern with checklists to run! I was also an instructor pilot in USAF pilot training, I recall teaching to ALWAYS check the attitude indicator with the turn&slip, magentic compass, outside references, etc. In some cases, I would pull the cirucit breakers in simulators for the attitude indicator and RMI (heading and nav) and made the student fly using known power settings, mag compass and timing using windup clock. Not easy but a great way to increase cross check speed and situational awarness. While modern aircraft have great technology, this technology seems to have erroded hands on pilot skill(s). As long as I remember flying in th USAF, I never recall using autopilot in the takeoff or landing phases of flight, only once at altitude and flying straight and level. Just my opinion.
On the second flight, the autopilot disengages because the readings from FO and CPT didn't match. Why did it not disengage on the first flight and made the plane stall instead? Question two: Where does the stall prevention system get the speed/altitude data from?
One solution to help eliminate this kind of tragedy is for the pilot to do a comprehensive pre-flight walk around the aircraft, with a checklist and a flashlight. Another solution is to ensure that pitot covers are installed whenever the aircraft is expected to be parked for extended periods of time. These pilots were very experienced and should have no excuse for not aborting a takeoff whenever instruments are not syncing. That should be a huge red flag. Especially primary flight instruments. And Cockpit Resource Management should have been in full effect, meaning that one pilot should perform a pilots basic duty, which is to fly the airplane, while the second pilot works to zero in on the problem. I know it’s easy to play armchair quarterback, but when all else fails it’s always crucial to go back to the basics.
Is that sarcasm? One of the pilot DO walk round before every flight to check the pitot tubes and parts of the aircraft. This is something they should notice and it should also be something noted in the log book if a cover has been placed.
If you haven't watched the previous video on this channel, it shows why no amount of 'what people should do' to prevent such incidents is sufficient to guaranty that they actually will do it.
(pitot tubes were covered to prevent insect nesting. Multiple people aware of this but all failed to pass on the info as required. Other people who should also have been aware simply failed to check. Flight engineer spotted the covers with a flashlight during walk-around but 'forgot' to mention it. Pilot spotted faulty airspeed early in take-off but failed to abort. First officer failed to spot faulty airspeed during take-off until too late. Etc, etc.)
@@GK-yi4xv and they paid with their lives. A high price to pay for not being conscientious about their work.
This is a true story: My uncle and his family were about to board this very flight, when my uncle suddenly had a gut feeling and said "there is no way I am getting on this plane." My aunt argued with him, my cousins argued with him, but he stayed adament and firm, and so they decided not to get on the plane. My aunt was furious at first, knowing they would have to wait for their next flight. You can imagine how incredibly shocked our entire family was, after what transpired so tragically shortly after. But it does not stop there: only 2 weeks prior, me, my father and my mother flew on this very plane. I kid you not, I swear on my grandmother, may she rest in peace. You can imagine how incredibly shocked we all were when we found out, and to this day it drives chills down my bones and I think often of this tragic flight, and the luck my family had in connection with it at the same time, and I feel very strongly and deeply for the unlucky souls who died in this tragedy. Needless to say: my aunt never, ever, questioned my uncle's gut feelings after this again, and we all are extremely grateful for my uncle to have had this hunch.
But the plane wasn’t flown 20 days prior to this tragedy. So how did you board this plane 2 weeks prior
Yeah I have days when really weird things will happen to me all day... specifically, I'll be watching UA-cam videos for instance, and think about things totally unrelated to the video, but 15 seconds later they'll be mentioned in the video, and this'll happen repeatedly for a couple of hours straight. I can't say that I believe in fate because when things like what you described happen, fate kinda disproves itself as it were, but I've had so many experiences myself that I do feel like although time is an illusion, it's probably moving backward while we're standing still, rather than us moving forward through it. Only thing that seems to make sense. Oi. Glad you survived this deathtrap of a plane, anyhoot!
Which flight are you talking about? TFC covers two of them.
There was no such thing as “Luck” in this case… nope it was the Lord giving him that gut feeling of intuition… rely on it with the Lord to stay alive and you’ll be okay…
God bless your uncle. Have you seen the movie Final Destination?
"Always trust your instruments" except for 0.001% of the time you can't.
I can't even imagine the confusion they went through.
I never understand these "speed confusion" cases. Even if all speed indicators stop working. If you then fly the plane straight ahead wings level with, say, 70% thrust are you not pretty freaking sure you are not over speeding nor stalling
It boggles my mind how they realized & knew witch speed indicator was broken watched the correct one took off, and then started flying with the BROKEN ONE!!!
Where did the common sense go?
😀
This was not an established standard procedure in 1996. On,y some airlines had adopted it
Yep, that's what we all would do, but shit pilots wouldn't.
@@GhostWatcher2024 ---- My hypothesis is that people become over-reliant and over-confident in computers, at the expense of their own reasoning and deductions. E.g. That pilot.
Imagine getting your oil changed, and two days later the idiot light flashes that you're low on oil. Most guys would stop, pop the hood, and check the oil. The computer is a computer, it can't lie. Anything could have happened, maybe the oil filter threads were stripped, or a nail pierced the oil pan. On an airplane, when seconds count, delay isn't permissible, so you'd go with the indicator light.
Not saying a low oil indicator light is the same as driving down the freeway at 80 and noticing the speedometer says you're not moving. Just trying to make a point that when a computer says something, we tend to listen to it, like we used to believe the evening news.
"Economic projections generated by XYZ University's twin super-computers say that the world will end in 2133 due to fresh water exhaustion. New government regulations in response to this looming extinction mandate that all swimming pools be drained immediately. Death penalty will apply to anyone with a pool full of water after April 15th 2023. Swedish designer Eewe Stienkke rolls out a new clothing line of wash-free underwear, on sale now at Ocean dot com." (Watch, I betcha someone drains their pool before April 15th.)
With two contradictory readings, why did it never occur to the Birgenair captain that *his* ASI might be the faulty one?...
I. agree with many of the comments. I think BOTH situations could have been prevented by proactive pilots making a better decision right at the point they notice something wrong. Especially if it’s right after taking off.
Neither of these crews displayed what could be called good cockpit sense or cooperation, to their own and all those people's loss.
Shocking the Captain relied on his instruments until the bitter end. Experienced Captain's with 15,000 flight hours.
goes to show you how everything barely works and we mostly rely on luck
I've flown in and of Lima maybe 100 times. February is in the middle of summer and usually only one of 3 or 4 months a year when visibility after take off is completely clear. They should have imediatly turned around while still having Lima in sight and headed right back to the airport using their experience with throttle control and positioning to ballpark them at a safe speed back to Jorge Chavez airport. So what if they came in too fast , anything is better than crashing into a dark ocean. This accident was so tragic. Rest their souls.
Very true, Im peruvian and lima’s visibility at night is terrible
When you hear that voice, "Too low -- terrain," you push the throttles to the firewall and haul back on the stick and pray. There's no time to sit and argue about the instruments.
RIP to everyone who died ❤ and i can't believe a wasp nest could cause the deaths of that many people, I am shocked
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world.
Social media narcissism at its finest."
ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
It makes no sense that these pilots don't decide to turn around and land the aircraft asap.
The central theme on many of these aircraft accidents is that the pilots panic during a serious incident. It looks like they are not trained to handle any serious problems that might occur. And, the panic seems to occur whether the pilots are new or veterans. Isn't this what simulators are for??
You say that, yet you don't have instruments to tell you your proper airspeed or your approach altitude. And it's at night. They're trained to follow their instruments. But without them giving the proper information; you're kind of in a mess. You see the pilot confusion. Are they going too fast or too slow? Are they too high or too low?
If you’re piloting a plain and you don’t know the speed and altitude you need to ground that plane as soon as possible. At least over the city they had a visual reference.
Amazing how a wasp’s nest took down the Birgenair Flight. AeroPeru’s CVR was used in the play, Charlie Victor Romeo.
CVR?
@@Capecodham Cockpit Voice Recorder
wasp nest didn't bring it down, Captain did! a) should have rejected takeoff, plenty of time, b) if in the air, hand over control to copilot, c) under no circumstances couple autopilot to side with faulty indications. How to know which side is right, attitude and power, they have flown enough to know about the normal climb attitude associated with normal climb power
@@rickpilot601 no one experience this before?
@@Randomly_Browsing What did he with the time saved not typingockpit oice ecorder??
Captain: "My airspeed indicator isn't working. Tell me your airspeed and when to rotate."
Also Captain: "Your airspeed indicator is showing we're too slow, but mine is showing too fast. Let's reduce the throttle and slow this baby way down."
🤦♂🤦🤦♀
Slap palm on forehead here.
They had no clue about what was happening and how to recover. No evidence of training on how to handle these situations.
@@deepthinker999 The issue I see here with the captain's thinking is he decided to trust the co-pilot's readings for take off but not trust them after they were in the air. Then he kept trying to read his own after seeing it was clearly wrong during takeoff. Maybe because the alerts were throwing him off? Even still, it seemed reasonable to trust the pilot monitoring.
Simple solution, Reject takeoff. Everyone lives.
@@AaronHarberg Exactly, that's the first ignorant act to just ignore it and take off anyway. Then follow up with a flurry of poor decision making. Makes you wonder sometimes these pilots that supposedly have countless hours behind them. Very seldom are these accidents occurring with inexperienced pilots.
In both cases, with the plane displaying incorrect fast airspeed, how did the stick shakers know to activate?
"My instruments are crazy... Let's continue the take off!... And let's fly over the Ocean at night! Everything will be fine!!".
I speak Spanish and I just wondered WTF.... It was kind of frustrating watching both avoidable tragedies develop.
My air speed indicator doesn't seem to be working properly, would you kindly tell me when we arrive at takeoff speed. Now that we're airborne, I will completely ignore the fact that my air speed indicator wasn't working two minutes ago and base all my decisions on it. Am I missing something here?
Nope.
This has been one of my fav channels on UA-cam since it started...
I would say great work by TheFlightChannel, absolutely amazing graphics, and animation. I have already watched the detailed film of Peruvian aircraft in NatGeo's Aircraft Investigation Program. One can easily imagine the terror those in the cockpit had to face that fateful night. Very gruesome episodes of mindboggling horror those poor pilots had to go through over the dark sea.
I wonder if there was a chance for Aeroperu to restore control, after first touch on the water? It sounded like just light splash without severe damage. If they would went in TOGA immediately ?
That Aeroperú 603 flight was CRAZY! Seriously like everything that could have possibly gone wrong did.
In the case of the AeroPeru crash, whilst the maintenance staff did not remove the protective tape from the static ports, the first thing that crossed my mind was why the flight crew did not spot the tape covering them as part of the pre-flight external aircraft walk round check.
The tape is non standard (put it simple it's just everyday tape, not the tape commonly use for maintenance which is bright) and blend in with plane skin colour
@@kidpagronprimsank05 interesting point. How do you know this? The accident report I read didn't state that. However, in addition to maintenance staff, the report did also attrubute blame to the crew for missing seeing the tape on the pre-flight walk around checks.
@@dodahspeak Accounts of this accident I have read also say that instead of using the brightly colored tape they were supposed to, the maintenance crews used plain old gray duct tape.
@@Middcore sounds like a mess up all round. If that were the case then I am quite sure some maintenance mangament heads would have rolled for that.
So, who would you blame for missing that on the pre-flight walk around check? The pilot, the maintenance staff .... or would both take a proportionate share of the blame?
First of all condolences to the families that suffered so much through this disaster. As a no expert in flying i have one dumb question. Since the pilots realised the problem with the instruments regarding the speed and the altitude of the aircraft why didn't they follow the coast of Lima so that they could have visual reference and safely return to the airport? I apologise again if my question is stupid enough to those who have flown or have some kind of experience but in my opinion, it is the most obvious thing to do in a situation like that.
The pilot's ASI was clearly having an issue; why didn't they hand fly it via the attitude indicator and the FO's ASI, and/or abort the TO? Ridiculous that 20+K hour pilots failed like this; button pushers. Looks like in both cases the AI was working fine, PLUS they had a standby Attitude Indicator AND a steam gauge ASI.
Pro Tip: "Terrain"; might want to add power and pull up.
TO?
@@Capecodham TakeOff
@@BrilliantDesignOnline What did you do the time you saved not typing akeff?
@@Capecodham Why do you bother watching an aviation channel? On YT?
@@BrilliantDesignOnline This is not an aviation channel. It appeals to the general public.
YT?
Do you realize not every viewer of this channel is not a Sully like you. I doubt if Sully were here, he would be so hip and cool as you. using aircraft acronyms. He would understand as smart as he is, he would not try to show up others using terms like CVR,CRM, GA. EFB, TOGA, FO. But you are not him you need to prove what you know.
That type of person is known as a know it all or smart ass.
With all of those malfunctions that close to the airport, its amazing the choice isn't "how about a left turn back to the downwind?"
For Aeroperu the airport was surrounded by low cloud. It would be next to impossible to see the airport or any lights
You still don't know your speed or altitude. How do you line up for an approach for the proper descent? You're either going to come in too high or too low.
This is one of several accidents in which both the pilots, and ATC were unaware that speed and altitude amongst other parameers, is read from the aircraft's transponder. Shouldn't aircraft crew and ATC be very familiar with this fact?
Yeah one would think that fact would be in the first chapter of the handbook or manual etc that is used to train air traffic controllers...
The second one: Gawdamn, fellas. Turn around while you still have some city lights. RIP.
Sad to see the intro music scenes no longer included in your productions. They had always set the tone quite well for the rest of the video segments.
The Flight Channel got complaints that they "spoiled the video." That might have had something to do with it.
@Doctah Wahwee I've seen other channels saying that YT is requiring them to post song credits, even for royalty-free songs, so they've removed the music.
Intros are coming back in some videos.
Yes I also do miss the intro music
@theflightchannel I am glad to hear this, thank you.
Your channel is one of my favourites, you're doing a fantastic job.Greetings from Germany
It’s interesting that compressed air is not available on board to reverse blow out pitot tubes. Ram air and a diverted valve might work fine.
The blast of compressed air would need to be very strong to operate against the airflow, though.
Excellent, I'm pleased, you just get, right into it.
Thanks
M.
I'm confused. The Captain knew his airspeed indicator was unreliable, but when the autopilot disengaged, he suddenly believed it was reliable again?
The first accident is another example of some pilot's inability to adecuate react after his job(takeoff) 'is done', since the autopilot button is on.
And the second one was proved the existence of that subconscious trigger in pilots head(Oh, we have a problem here?! Hurry, push the AP button!!! It'll solve that all!)
It's baffling really. They seemed to know on takeoff that the F/O's airspeed indicator was the only one that was correct. Can't you "assign" the autopilot to use the F/O's instruments? Literally just needed to ignore the pilot's instruments and fly the plane with the F/O's instrument readings, just like they did on takeoff. Senseless tragedy.
The second accident was more understandable. They seemed to have no valid instrument readings whatsoever. That had to be terrifying flying over water in the dark, not knowing speed, altitude, AOA or anything.
Yes. Modern aircraft you can select which autopilot to use. One will use captains, other will use FO’s
@@tomstravels520 first tragedy was pilot mistake. Second was more complex but still avoidable
I've said it before and in every instance in these videos that I watch, it would have saved lives. IF THERE IS ANY PROBLEM WITH THE PLANE - ANYTHING - DO NOT PUT IT IN THE AIR BECAUSE IT MAY LEAD TO OTHER PROBLEMS. If you are in the air, get it on the ground ASAP. No matter how small you think a problem is, do not put the plane in the air. That pilot was well below the threshold and should have aborted.
Just imagine the world we are quickly approaching where computers control everything we use for transportation, from our vehicles to get to the airport,to the planes we board, to the taxis to our destination, lucky if we survive it all.
Not as if the humans here with "Oh, I don't know how high and fast I am going, lets turn off thrust and extend speed brakes" strategy did the passengers any good.
In both cases, humans caused the crash.
They make covers to prevent wasps making nests. And humans couldn't be bothered to remove tape after washing a plane.
I think a robot that chased a human around the airport smacking him in the head untill he put the covers on, or removed the tape, would be a great thing.
The problem is lack of common sense, and not just reliance upon computers, but dependence on computers, as if humans were inferior. There is no computer in the universe capable of common sense - and there never will be. A computer is exclusively 0100 1000 1101 1001 0101 0100 1000 1101 1001 0101 0100 1000 1101 1001 0101 (etc. to Nth).
@@davesmith5656 Not many people who have common sense either.
What's sad is that logic dictates that when engines have problems they will lose power not suddenly go supersonic. Therefore, unless a pilot had just pushed the engines to full power, a runaway airspeed indicator would never be correct except in only one other situation and that would be nosediving straight toward the ground in which case, the altimeter and attitude indicator would indicate that kind of descent.
This is tragic mane… rip to everyone involved 😢
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world.
Social media narcissism at its finest."
ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
Thanks to this channel, I'm not to keen on flying, and I limit how often I need to ride in an airplane.
Too many things can go wrong. I understand statistically, flying is safe, that's why I still do it. But my odds of finding myself in the cabin of one of these ill-fated flights increases the less I fly.
bru a crash litterally happens once every 11 million flights, and once your on that 11 milion one, it is very rare for it to be severe.
I'm getting on a plane in a few months. God help me LOL. Great video. I can't even imagine of frightening that was for everyone. May they all RIP
I'm supposed to go to Japan in December. I recently started watching these videos as The Flight Channel was recommended by UA-cam. I'm rethinking the whole trip now. I used to love flying too. I'm going to talk to an Uncle who was a Pilot in the Canadian Armed Forces; he may be able to ease the anxiety I'm already feeling.
@@JaniceWithTheTarlovCysts You will be okay. You are safer in a plane than a car. I'm still going to London and France even after watching these, LOL.
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world.
Social media narcissism at its finest."
ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
@@JaniceWithTheTarlovCysts You should stop watching these videos if they make you feel that way
Got Damm visuals of the plane accident in this video are good But makes me imagine what the people on the planet are going through Bless there Souls!
Nobody should have to go through this absolute panic - nobody! RIP!
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world.
Social media narcissism at its finest."
ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
Its unreal how many of these crashes are caused by leaving tape over a sensor, wasp nests blocking a sensor, maintenance leaving covers on those pitot things...hundreds of people dying because of blocked sensors. Unreal.
Indeed. These ground crew maintenance people are fkwits responsible for a multiplicity of deaths. They should be tried in a court of law for failure to carry out their job resulting in termination of life, & be handed a 40 year without parole prison sentence.
Arsholes.
@@paulfitzpatrick6566 Definitely agree. How hard is it to check these things before each flight? As much as I find the vids on this channel interesting, it makes me sick to my stomach when it's some small issue that could have easily been prevented that ends up causing tragedy. Hurts the heart.
@@ajzepp8976 absolutely.
You can tell from the voice recorder that these pilots from Latin America are having difficulty conversing as they are speaking broken English one to another. Which exacerbated the ondeck issues. The international language in flight is English & pilots should all be conversant in the language, or not be allowed to obtain a licence.
Dropping this requirement leads to an inability to communicate & resolve issues that lead to an emergency situation & often tragedy.
Iv got a friend who married a Colombian girl 8 years ago, before Covid & since he’s flown with these dipstick Colombian airways many times.
I told him before the first flight he took out there 8 years ago, make sure you’ve had your Will written up by a solicitor.
I’d never travel by air to these Wally countries, we crossed the border of Juarez Mexico 6 years ago, by road, with a 10 strong group of American friends.
That one day experience was enough for a lifetime.
These South American people are backwards & all they know is black market & crime.
You could immediately gauge why Trump said - the Mexican is not your friend.
It is the clear responsibility of the pilot flying to make a detailed external inspection of the aircraft. If he had done these checks with due diligence then the chances are that this accident might have been avoided . . . . 😎
So, curiously, I wonder if they even run flight simulations with Pilots with these exact or similar circumstances and how many pilots are able to safely land the aircraft........and do they even run a simulation like this...and if they don't...well, based on these two examples....THEY SHOULD!
Ground proximity and stall warnings are the 2 warnings that are never wrong,
That’s not true. If airspeed is unreliable you could get a false stall warning. GPWS warnings are known to occur in areas of GPS blocking.
@kickedinthecalfbyacow7549 Thanks for correcting me,now I remember Kenya's aircraft that crashed into Atlantic Ocean minutes after take off.Would you agree with me that it's a very scenario?
those pitot tubes tell the alarms like the stuff. it is crucial to have a tape on it so it deosnt freeze. another thing, lets see what you do in that situation... all you see is pure black on the windows, you don't know what alarm to trust that is real, you don't know how high or low you are, etc etc. @@stephenmapeka7774
I hate those accidents , where a plane enthusiast with 50 hours on xplane "game" would react correctly every time but a professional routinely flying for years out of fear of having issues with employer, stress or just for lack of emergency training does the very worst.
indeed. as soon as they had no instrument readings and the plane was airborne, I cant understand why they just didnt steer slowly to the left to follow the coast line to have visual guidance, and then return to the airport. It seems so easy to do on a simulator.
The difference is actually being in the situation. For example: Shooting a real gun is alot different than call of duty or a vr game
The incompetence of maintenance and flight crews is truly stunning.
I always thought that all communications had to be in English, from all the air crash videos I've watched, they've stated that English is the communications language, to prevent any misinterpretation of instructions given by pilots and ATC.
I believe non-English countries can give permission to specific flights to speak in the same non-English language.
Especially under conditions of emergency (?)
The 747 that crashed into a mountain in Japan was given permission to speak in Japanese when everything was going to shit.
Though it might cause confusion for other flights in the area (but they're not really supposed to be relying on each other, instead of ATC)
It's puzzling that experienced pilots could not figure out that there was a problem with the pitot tubes and that the instruments using the pitot tubes were not to be trusted.
The same situation happened at 2018 (MH134) was saved though (the previous video)🙂
no pilot error was involved in that incident though, it was a bunch of errors made on the ground and thank god the pilots knew how to handle the situation
Biggest goosebumps is this slow B major music piece of the incident summary
Watching these videos makes me rethink taking a trip to Japan in December. In fact, I'm not sure I want to fly again, ever, and I used to enjoy it so much.
RIP to all those who perished. I cannot even begin to fathom the fear they must have felt.
I agree
Enjoy your flights. The way to your airport is much more dangerous than the flight itself...
@@ottokarvonschnallenburg2572 atleast only one or 2 might die in car crash while in planes you can't do anything and wait for 200+ humans to die in the most horrific way. Sorry but not taking my chances. Last year a Chinese booing flight crashed so meaning our technology isn't perfect yet. I'm sure the ones who crashed said the same thing "so rare it won't happen to m-" sadly it did. You also forget there's millions of cars driving right now currently everyday non stop so close together while planes not... Why would I ever trust my life to a stranger I don't know (pilot)
@@ottokarvonschnallenburg2572 you never know
"Virtue Signaling by posting RIP all over the internet while doing actually nothing to better the world.
Social media narcissism at its finest."
ua-cam.com/video/PTmCxbcRXs4/v-deo.html
i am puzzled about the Birgenair flight: if the pilots knew or suspected the Captain's air speed was faulty and trusted the FO's at take off, why didn't they continue to trust it during the flight and ignore the Captain's instruments?
I'm puzzled by why they didn't just continue to rely on the FO's pitot and override the Captain's ap?
Why would they opt for the as indicator they'd already identified as faulty during takeoff?
disorientation, its a weakness in the human that has led to multiple deadly crashes.
That stick shaker is undefeated for real , never ignore that !
Oh metal coffin in the sky
You’re the reason I refuse to fly 😢
The horror for the souls on board
Brings me terror and strikes a chord ..
I know it’s safer than in a car but I’d rather die that way by far !
Rest in peace innocents x
And by far you are likely to die in a car wreck, or over a thousand other ways to die.
I love when people say flying is safer than driving. GREAT! But guess what? There are two sides to a coin. You are much more likely to survive a car crash than a plane crash. Duh.
@@sparky8506 Fun fact: A grand total of one person has died in commercial US aviation in the last 11 YEARS. How many have died in cars since then?
@@Dick_Z_Normas When passengers of airplane die, the number are like 20, 50, 150, 200, etc but in a car crash if someone dies what can be the max number 5 or 10 or what. It is far less than the plane. You MOR0N!
@@Dick_Z_Normas how many car journeys have there been during that time, though, compared to flights? I'd say a lot more. I'm not disputing the fact that one is less likely to die in a plane crash than in a car. But also, how many times does one go into a car versus on a flight over a lifetime?
I see this issue involving unreliable, airspeed, fairly frequently? Aren’t there procedures pilots are trained to follow when they are getting conflicting and erroneous airspeed over speed readings? What are they supposed to do when they can’t rely on their airspeed gauges?
2nd plane could've just turned around and emergency land back in Lima🤦🏾♀️
I dont get it. Im not a pilot but I would have turned around and gone back where the lights were, not into the sea
@@chennygrapes that where pilots got it all wrong . Nobody knows why they did not return to the city lights immediately.
There was low cloud / fog cover over the entire city, although that is not shown in this video. They had no ground visual reference soon after take off, and with faulty instruments they could not return to Lima Airport safely.
Really well done video. I'm amazed the Birgenair Captain committed to take off knowing something was wrong with at least half of his speed instrumentation and can't believe that the Captain of the Aeroperu flight committed to leave the lights of Lima behind and fly over sea at night knowing his flight systems were malfunctioning. I hope this didn't have anything to do with the pressure of trying the keep the flight on schedule. RIP all involved.
It's amazing how the speed was checked on roll out but ignored. Why bother checking or following procedure if you don't care about it?
How would it feel to have been the person who put the tape on but forgot to take it off after the washing of the plane? I imagine that person lost their job on top of knowing they caused the death of 70 people. Sad...so sad.
These budget airlines obviously employ fkwit maintenance staff.
You never hear this nonsense happening with major airlines.