The Mystery of Flight 603 | Mayday Air Disaster
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Mayday Air Disaster S01 E04
Discover the chilling story of Aero Peru Flight 603, a tragedy caused by a simple human error that led to a catastrophic chain of events. Uncover how the pilots struggled with faulty instruments and made desperate attempts to land safely. This episode reveals the harrowing details of the crash and the lessons learned from this disaster.
✈️ Dive into Mayday Air Disasters! Click the links below to explore gripping air crash investigations, expert analyses, and compelling reenactments.
• Swissair 111's Last Mi...
✈️ Explore the best of Mayday Air Disasters! Click the links below to dive into playlists featuring gripping air crash investigations, expert analyses, and other captivating aviation disaster shows.
• Full Episodes | Mayday...
• Planes Against The Wea...
• Ocean Crashes & Landin...
Welcome to Mayday Air Disasters! This riveting series delves into the world's most catastrophic aviation accidents, uncovering the causes and consequences of each tragic event. Through expert analysis, compelling reenactments, and survivor testimonies, we explore how and why these disasters occurred. Join us as we investigate the crucial lessons learned from these incidents, aiming to make the skies safer for everyone.
✈️ Fascinated by aviation mysteries? Subscribe to Mayday Air Disasters for gripping air crash investigations, expert analyses, and the relentless pursuit of answers. 💥🔍
/ @maydayairdisaster
#MaydayAirDisaster #AirDisasters #AirCrash
Are you fascinated by aviation disasters? Then you'll love Curious? Science and Engineering! Dive into our captivating scientific explanations and innovative engineering solutions.
• How Canadian FLAGS Are...
• Ever Wondered How Rubb...
• How do they make Crayo...
Even watching this give me anxiety with all the alarms going off, must be terrifying for them
@@mrbiaux991 exactly,,,un nerving event
Toughen up
@@trapmfnicc3022 💪 amazing
Nah, they dont even hear them. There are 2,179 different alarms in a cockpit. Actually they should add a 2,180th one that only sounds if one of the others is ACTUALLY important and needs paid attention to...
The actors in these videos give award performances! They are really good!
I believe the actor playing the ATC was a Canadian actor who was in a show called Degrassi, he played a character named Joey Jeremiah. Sounds like him and looks like him. Just checked, it's him his name is Pat Mastroianni.
Omg 1996 was a bad year for airline accidents. Rest In Peace to all the victims.
In high school I used to wash airplanes. We had to tape up the pitots and statics. But (since we were all pilot students) when we were done we always triple checked that we removed the tape!
they should have had typed checklists for that stuff like the pilots do. that way no remembering, just doing what's on the checklist. every. single. time. last checkbox... take off the tape!
It may bave been helpful to use an extremely bright and transparent coulor that could easily be seen.
@@daviddavis3389 i think typically they do. Here's what i got from wiki regarding this crash and the covers:
The design of the aircraft did not incorporate a system of maintenance covers for the static ports. Such covers are commonly employed in aviation for blocking access to critical components when the aircraft is not in operation and are generally a bright color and carry flags (which may have "remove before flight" markings). Instead, the design of the aircraft and the relevant maintenance procedure called for the use of adhesive tape to cover the ports.
Man, radar showing them at 9700 while they are hitting the water. What a tragedy.
I don't understand the reasons the reading from the tower called it wrong. That is terrible and uncomfortable to know they could be so wrong.
@jacquelineoutlaw3252
Radar has made incredible advances. At the time, it, RADAR would ask the plane for information. Altitude, and speed. The plane would tell the radar what its speed was and altitude.
To use another example. What state do I live in? Judging by my area code, 407, Florida would be a good guess. However, I may have mived and have not changed my phone number yet.
In short, you can only work with information you have.
The pilots and controller should have known that the altitude was being given by the plane and not assumed that the tower alt was more accurate than the on board instruments...as in fact they were the same readings. Saying that...these guys had no real chance either way
The same wrong altitude that the pilot sees on his altimeter is transmitted to the ground as Gillham code data. So the radar altitude is coming to the radar screen from a data signal. It is not an altitude reading computed from a radar echo.
The radar altimeter in the cockpit would have shown the altitude above the water. This would only work up to 2500 feet above the water. The pilots may have been able to use this if they understood the situation with the static pressures feeding the pneumatic altimeters.
@@alexramrattan3500all of that in the emergency situation and not having any sighting outside to even notice
This is why I'll never fly at night, or during a crazy weather forecast. I've avoided three crashes listening to my gut instincts. It was obviously worth any 8 hour delay. God bless those precious souls that perished. 🙏✨️✈️😿
It’s cool to fly at night but not over the sea because you don’t have any landmarks to determine if you’re climbing or descending especially if the instrument aren’t working correctly
@@Dizz3378Today, everyone has GPS, making a rough (a few dozen feet off) altitude check easy via your phone.
Same here! I only fly during the day. More so because I don’t want to arrive at my destination at night but after watching several episodes I have another reason.
I will never fly period. as this channel shows too much incompetence in the maintenance and mechanics of the planes. The airlines are rushing through to make more money and the passengers are just guinea pigs
I kind of pity the person who left the tape on the pitot tubes. Can you imagine having to live with the knowledge that YOU are responsible for the loss of all those lives?
I’m sure they feel the weight of the responsibility, but it’s unfair to put it all on that person. It’s worth noting, according to the video, that there were two other people (a supervisor and inspector) who were supposed to check that the tape had been removed, but did not. The captain did the preflight walk around and apparently missed it too.
@@messmeister92yeah
Very unfortunate. That will really haunt.
the pilot is supposed to walk around the aircraft and look for things like that before every flight. It's never up to just one person, there is a string of people responsible but ultimately it falls on the captain's shoulders.
The point is, it’s not the maintenance guy’s responsibility! Thou shalt not kick the cat! Boeing should take responsibility for making the most important part of the plane so vulnerable. The solution is easy. As the engines are powered down, motorised covers cover the tubes and other sensors, so the plane can be washed etc… Then when the plane is powered up, those covers are automatically opened, and a computerised self-check is initiated to verify that all is well. They can do this on camera sensors and camera lenses. Why not on a plane. Instead, they blame the lowliest member of the workforce. Wasn’t his fault at all.
I've read and listened to the CVR transcript and recording many times, and have looked at the route that the plane flew. This is the basic progression of the flight:
Fernandez was flying the plane at takeoff. Shortly after takeoff, the pilots realised that they had an instrument problem. For the first minute or so the plane was flying along the coast. Schreiber ordered Fernandez to turn to the right, probably to get away from land and reduce the chance of a collision as their altimeters weren't working. The crew declared an emergency about a minute and a half later. It was around this point that Schreiber decided to take control of the plane from Fernandez.
The pilots disagreed about what to do next. Fernandez wanted to land right away; Schreiber wanted to spend some time to stabilise. Schreiber, being the captain and pilot flying, got his way. The plane continued on a south-westerly heading, out over the ocean, as the pilots assessed the situation. At 12:51 am, Schreiber apparently decided that the situation had stabilised, and turned the plane to a north- to north-westerly heading. (This turn is not shown in the episode.)
At this point, the plane was flying basically parallel to the runway. The plan was that the pilots would fly north of the airport, turn around 180 degrees to the right, and come in and land. But as they were flying north, the airspeed indicators began giving very high readings, and the overspeed warning went off. Spooked by this, at approximately 12:57 am, they extended the speed brakes.
The speed brakes caused the plane to slow down greatly, and at approximately 1 am, eventually stall. Fernandez realised this for what it was; Schreiber did not. Unfortunately, because Schreiber was flying the plane, the stall recovery procedure was not properly initiated. The plane continued to descend until it was dangerously close to the ground, triggering the terrain alarm at approximately 1:02 am.
Schreiber was spooked enough by the terrain alarm that he turned the plane to the left, to the west, further away from any chance of flying over land. What's not shown in the episode is that 45 seconds after the turn began, the terrain alarm shut off; the plane had just climbed high enough to turn it off. (The episode shows the terrain alarm on constantly once it activates.) What's also not shown is that a couple of minutes after the pilots turned left, the controller told them that they were at 10,000 feet. Upon hearing this, Schreiber decided to turn back to the east and begin landing. This turn is not shown in the episode. (At this point, despite the stress shown in the episode, the pilots actually sound quite calm on the CVR.)
Following the first activation of the terrain alarm, the plane had climbed to 4,000 feet. But at about 1:07 am, Schreiber, believing the plane to be at 10,000 feet, initiated a descent to capture the ILS. This is shown in the episode. This is the final decision that brought the plane down. The plane drifted down from 4,000 feet, until the terrain alarm was triggered again at 1:10 am. (The episode does not show this, as it shows the terrain alarm always on.) Fernandez's confidence that the plane was at a safe height immediately evaporated. He started to doubt the correctness of the 9,700 ft reading on the scope, hence his comment to the controller "Are you sure you have us on the radar at 50 miles?" Unfortunately, he was not flying the plane. Schreiber was, and Schreiber was by now unbothered by the terrain alarm. He continued the descent, believing it necessary to capture the ILS, until the plane hit the water.
Where can you find the original transcripts?
I don't come to UA-cam to read novels. The video speaks for itself.
@@nickv4073 You don't have to read my comment if you don't want. But 28 other people found it useful. Also, in my comment I explain a number of factors that the video missed.
@@nickv4073 why didn't you just scrolled past it then? Why the need to comment?
Thx. Yes, appreciate better facts. The alarms made hard to watch so skipped ahead. Maintenance error by ground crew and pilot who paid with his life. Jailing the worker was not justice. Settling w families for agonizing vs sudden deaths. Not like it was intentional but who knows, maybe it was a mistreated workers revenge and didn't know made impossible to land.
As a pilot I feel sorry for the controller, who gave the crew false hope by accident.
I haven’t been in such a situation, but if I’d receive over speed and stall = I’d believe the stall warning.
If I’d receive a GPWS warning I’d believe it despite any reading.
It’s always Aviate, Navigate, communicate. So my main priority would be to keep the plane airborne.
Easy to say, but that would be my way to go - depending on other factors as well…
They were probably in a situation where they didn't even know which way was UP and which was DOWN. Total blank space. Like a spacecraft travelling in space.
@@indianfan1029Not in this case. Although the speed and altitude readings have been wrong due to the covered static port, the attitude display was fully functioning. Even if that one was wrong, there is the (analog) backup attitude indicator. If you lose your displays, this one is still working.
According to the final report, they hit the water with the left wing tip first.
Even if you lose all the additional tech in your cockpit, just fly it like a Cessna plane - with basic numbers instrumentation.
It is easier said than done, but not impossible (depending on your emergency and system/technical failure).
@@Aviator747 i dont think you would have done better than them mate, its easy when you're watching this from a comfy chair on youtube
@@ura9390 well, I’m also sitting in the left seat of a 748 and we do regular sim training for most possible emergency situations we could possible face when flying. I didn’t say anywhere I’d done it better, I said how I’d act in such a situation. So don’t try come sideways at a professional from your comfy seat.
@@Aviator747 mate you may think you're a big hero and know better than those poor pilots, but with a billion alarms going off and being fed faulty info by ATC literally in the dark don't try to come sideways slapping your own back as if only you would have saved the day, have some respect and also some understanding of how this unfolded in real time, rather than how it does when watching Air Crash investigation on UA-cam from your comfy armchair
Crazy how an investigator gets a call about a plane crash then must board a plane to get to the crash site...😮
I mean it’s kind of like fatal car accidents 🤷
that has crossed my mind😮
Not really considering its the most safe form of transport, his drive to or from the airport would have been more dangerous
too far to walk mate
😂😂
What a terrible death they suffered because of a little piece of tape! It's unimaginable! RIP
I dont think it was fair to blame it on the employee, in such case, the supervisor and manager were also responsible. It was a mistake, he was not trained properly on how important was to remove such piece of tape.
That's right, but the chain always breaks at the weakest link.🤷♂️
None of the pilots did a walk about.
True,but the worker used gray duct tape instead of the standard bright colored tape.
@@serdna9307
Agree. he was probably trained improperly and b/c those above him did not do their job he went to jail
Captain and XO should've immediately declared an emergency and turned back for Lima. It would've saved their passengers, themselves, along with their aircraft, but hindsight is always 20/20.
Easy to say when sitting at home and not being in that situation
@@TalaR04Whacha call "hindsight," or some such.
They should have declared an emergency once they found the altimeters non-working, they took a bit of time to take stock.
But even turning around immediately and declaring an emergency would not have changed the outcome in any relevant way, except for possibly crashing into some houses.
Those Pilots fought to the very end ! 😢😢😢😢😢😢
As all pilots worth anything will. You never give up, even if you want to. Unless you are murderously suicidal and descending into a mountain range.
Of course the chance you will die is high, but you cannot win if you don’t play the game.
The airline is certainly responsible for improper training, but if a manufacturer says "Do it this way and not that way" and someone does it that way instead of this way then the manufacturer is ABSOLUTELY NOT at fault.
I sort of agree with you, however if you buy a food slicer and the manufacturer did not provide any safety cover, it instead just said on the box 'don't cut yourself'... it seems to me that they would be partially responsible
@@cheery-hex Personally, I call that slicer a "knife". ;)
It’s surprising that the first officer was the nephew of one of the investigators💔 and even though he lost his nephew in the crash🛩️💥. He still managed to act professional📚 and put aside his emotions🖤.
this is two times that the Boeing 757 has crashed Birgenair and AeroPeru
That was bloody awful. Poor pilots and passengers. RIP
Pilots must return to the airport as soon they detected the instrument failed.
Agreed!
RIP to everyone that has died
If you lose all instruments...never leave lights for a black ocean!
That's usually a good idea but take 1 look at Lima on google maps and you will see the problem. You will see how high the terrain is around (and even in) the city. 2,000 meters mountains surround it. I wouldn't want to fly around there, with no accurate terrain info. They won't crash into a mountain over the sea, it's 1 less thing to worry about. Bare in mind it would be pitch black around these moutains as well.
Also Lima airport for both runways requires you to fly over the ocean on approach. They mentioned about wanting to land and this is probably why they flew over the sea. Really there was no good option for them.
I agree with everything that Jack Goldbridge has said. I want to add one more thing.
The shot in the episode where the plane flies away from the lights of Lima out toward the ocean is very misleading. According to the accident report, there was a layer of cloud at just 270 metres above sea level. That would have prevented them from seeing the lights, even if the terrain around Lima didn't make it dangerous to fly over the city.
And you do NOT want to crash into buildings at 1am. The people sleeping there are innocent and did not agree to ride a plane.
Never saw an answer for why the pilot went by ATCs altitude figures when even non-pilots know that ATC doesn’t use actual radar - these figures are sent from the aircrafts own instruments via transponder.
Apparently was a miscommunication between the pilots and the air controller. The pilots were asking the controller to give them their altitude. At 13:50 the narrator said " but neither the pilot or the traffic controller knew that the altitude indicated on the scope was incorrect " Since the ground radar can't read the altitude of the plane the controller sees the information that is send by the plane's transponder. In my opinion the pilots and the controllers should have an extensive technical training of how things work.
I'm electrical and electronics technician repairing machines in factories. I always demand from the operator to be present during the repair process. He knows best all the tricks and how the machine should be working.
May all the victims rest in peace.
Such a tragic incident, I've always wondered why they did not turn around keeping the cities lights in some view and nearer to the airport. Just horrible.....
I agree! They should have immediately turned around once they knew there was a problem. The city lights were their only points of reference!
Happens all the time...pilots trust TOO MUCH on their abilities , putting at risk lives of others
@@serdna9307yea and some survive on ither accidents. Some is total malfunction of the plane
@@axeljacobs9723 exactly
My thought exactly
Using this attorney’s logic, we should get rid of attorney’s because it’s foreseeable that people will use them to sue innocent people. 😂
It’s not Boeing’s fault someone ignored the warning written on the side of the plane and taped over the ports and then inadvertently forgot to remove it. If the guy hired to wash the plane wasn’t competent, that’s the fault of the airline who hired and trained him. Give me a break. He’s just an ambulance chaser that saw 💰 when he found a way to try to blame a big company with deep pockets. Notice he didn’t go after the airline that was really to blame because they don’t have any money (at least compared to Boeing).
They should have returned to the airport. Without basic instruments in my mind it is an emergency.. They could have returned and still maintain visual perspective on the horizon.
Yup. They needed the city lights as a visual reference on the horizon/ altitude.
They were returning to the airport actually.
@@Sovereign_Citizen_LEO it was a foggy night with no stars, they couldnt see the city lights
They was returning back to the airport that wasn’t the problem it was a static port being blocked that was given false readings they was over the sea and didn’t have any landmarks to use for a reference point
Princesaleados is right. The cloud cover that night was at less than 1000 feet, which is definitely not a safe altitude to fly at so as to get a visual reference. The shot in the episode of the plane leaving Lima for the ocean is very misleading.
Its like the hospital cleaner unpluging equipment to plug her hoover in. Then finding out the death rates up because she was unplugging life support
Most pilots these days learn using a simple Cessna (or similar) to acquire the basics.
When flying a passenger jet however pilots rely too heavily on onboard computer systems, often with tragic results.
During WW2 B17 and Lancaster pilots routinely managed to land their crippled aircraft back at base with several key parts of the plane missing or severely damaged; they flew on guts, instinct and raw flying skills. In the event of a computer malfunction why don't cabin crews switch off ALL computers and fly the damned thing manually! If they could do it back in 1939-45 they should be able to do it nowadays!
they Left the only visual aid to recalibrate their spatial bearings, the night lights of the city behind them.. Its sad... Condolences to the families
Haze, cloud base below 300 feet, 2000 feet mountains etc in close vicinity, approach to any runway requires going over sea …
Flying over the city would not have been a good idea at all.
@@advorak8529 So very tragic...
I’ve watched so many Mayday air disaster episodes that I believe I’m almost a pilot. 😂😂
My parents' friends daughter died in a plane crash, must've been mid 90s, I wasnt very old.
RIP
Anybody else that listens to this to fall asleep? Lol.
The narrator voice is so soothing….😴
Flying out into open ocean night was a mistake. Lights inland could have helped them a bit
I can't believe that there would be a situation where an aircraft in flight would have the engines set to idle. I'm not a pilot so there may be a good reason.
There was conflicting information which nobody could have made sense of in addition to flying at night with low visibility. I don’t think any pilot could have saved the plane 😢
You can't blame pilots when all areoplane systems failed they are helpless what is the duty of checking staff supervisor to sleep
Why wouldn't they immediately turn around and abort while they could still see and have their bearings about them
One way to detect something blocking the pitot static system would be to have a way to pressurize the system as a test on start up. If any pressure builds, a warning alerts in the cockpit. If it doesn't then it passes the test. A tiny amount of engine air bleed fed from the cabin pressurization system would be all you need.
If these systems components are so critical and fragile why are they dont fit more of them?
i'm not a pilot but couldn't the pilot work out what instrument is accurate by process of elimination? for example, low terrain warning could be checked by climbing and see if it turns off. also, you can't clime going too slow so that could've gave clue as to whether they were stall speed or overspeed.
not really - you can never tell which to eliminate unless you have visual of the ground. if the instruments have faulty sensors, you rely on system redundancies. if all those fail, and it's night, over ocean, you're pretty much screwed.
I wanted to be a pilot, but a military pilot., not a commercial pilot, because you can't bail out of a commercial plane.
well unless you're going to be in a jet fighter, if you ever find yourself in a bad position you'll be in the cockpit unable to jump out.
But you can't bail our of a fighter jet over the ocean at night (either), and hope and pray that a boat will [never] be able to find you.
@@Sovereign_Citizen_LEO _But you can't bail out of a fighter jet over the ocean at night (either)_
You absolutely can. You can bail out from a bomber, too. Even helicopters sometimes have ejection seats. They do work at night.
_and hope and pray that a boat will [never] be able to find you._
Maybe you have not heard of emergency beacons and co. Quite common in WWII, and yes, there was quite a bit of night flying. And ditching into the ocean.
US subs were among those who picked up airmen.
But who am I to destroy your world view with facts?
_you can't bail out of a commercial plane._
Parachutists beg to differ.
And some planes have parachutes for the whole plane.
@@advorak8529 yeah parachutist here, when you're jumping out of a plane, the plane is usually flying more or less 100 mph. We're talking about COMMERCIAL planes carrying REGULAR passengers going commercial speeds usually 300-600mph. you are definitely NOT going to be making a jump at that speed. If the plane is in a dire situation i.e spinning out of control extreme turbulence, good luck orienting yourself to even make it to the door to jump. The only way you're jumping out of a plane safely going faster than 100mph is if you're a paratrooper, but even then, the military plane is going less than 160mph AND the paratroopers are jumping from behind the wings at the sides or from the very back of the aircraft. Again, we're talking about speeds greater than 300mph, going too fast runs the guaranteed risk of damaging your parachute and/or yourself from high air resistance. The opening shock would be absurd. As far as I'm aware, no commercial airliner even has parachutes for their passengers. Another thing too, take a look at a commercial plane where the doors are and then locate where the wings, engines, and horizontal/vertical stabilizers are. If you jump, you are going to instantly die from hitting the wings/stabilizers or getting swallowed by the engines.
I still don’t understand why pilots aren’t taught more about how their aircraft works. If they knew the altimeters and speed indicators relied on the same sensors and that the GPWS used a separate radar signal, they would have known to trust that one and ignore the others. Also, why don’t ATCs know where their info is coming from ie. That the altitude is coming from the transponder and not triangulated by their radar?
They could have just put a bottle of water on the dash as a reference to their attitude and flown safely while waiting for another plane to guide them in to land if they’d had more training and knowledge.
Lastly, why not scramble military jets? They’d get to them much faster and be able to see them in their radar and let them know they were only at 700ft. That 707 would be lucky to even find them since it would be looking at 10,000ft, not 1,000ft and has no radar capable of seeing them.
They are now, but this was way back. I agree though, the absence of understanding of how these systems work is stunning.
Because aircrafts work differently. In addition to that airports and ATC have different work methods in different countries.
@@LAFC. right, but I meant when they get their type ratings. I wouldn’t expect an A380 pilot to know how systems on a 747 work or vice versa but it seems important to know as much as possible about the plane you are flying on a daily basis, especially when you are taking hundreds of other peoples lives in your hand each time.
@@andrewnajarian5994 How the pitot/static system and altitude transponder system work are actually very basic things that are taught to student pilots, and are the same on all planes*. Diagnosing a blocked static port is also a basic skill that's taught at a beginner level. It's one of those simple things that it's assumed every single pilot knows, but if it's been too long since their primary training and they haven't had any reinforcement training, it's something that could be simply forgotten.
Water level is completely useless for determining attitude. Water is affected by the same g forces that affect the human sense of balance. The only (known) way of accurately tracking attitude is either gyroscope, multiple accelerometers in different parts of the plane, or reference to some external source (such as visually observing the horizon).
I don't know about the military jets. It's possible that the controller just couldn't contact the military quickly, they didn't have any jets ready to scramble at the time, the base was so far away that the civilian jet could get there faster, or (most likely, IMHO) the controller simply didn't realize how urgent the situation was.
* It _has_ to be the same on all planes, to avoid having a situation where two airplanes collide because they're at the same actual altitude, but they _thought_ they were at different altitudes due to differences in their altimeters.
@@LAFC. In this specific way, no, airplanes actually _all_ work the same.
I can't exactly explain why, but I've watched hundreds of these, and this one had me crying on the kitchen floor.
Grow up
All modern planes should have 3 mechanical gauges alt,speed and cumpass.
Also hydrolic fluid should have valves at the wings and tail so if a leak is detected a valve turns off so not lose all the fluid and have some control.
I feel sad for the passengers. They didn't even know that the plane was in danger. Its just going to be a sudden death with no time to think.
May they rest in peace 😢💔
If there was tape on the static ports and pitot heads, how did they take off while confirming V1 and (Vr) rotate and the Gears up call without positive rate of climb?
Few pieces of tape costing a few cents, brought down a plane, costing millions. with tragic lives lost. 🥲🥲🥲😢 Human error & negligence. So sad & could have been avoided.
Controller doesn’t even know where the bogus information he’s mindlessly regurgitating comes from.
Totally agree! Both the controller and the pilots should have known that the faulty altimeter info was being transmitted from the airplane.
The tower controller should never have read out the altitude
To the pilots as being accurate!
So sad what happened to all these people!😢
Radar sweeps can be 3000 feeet above or below the actual plane and can sometimes be wrong for 3 sweeps. Most sweeps are about accurate, but it wouldn't be unheard of for one sweep to be 3000 feet above the aircraft, then the next 500 below, then 300 above, and then finally settling on the correct value. Barometric altimeters are usually far more accurate than this. So it's only natural his display trusts the transponder more than it trusts the primary radar information. This is also why when one control saw a plane in Florida at 900 feet, instead of saying "Eastern Air Lines Flight 401 terrain" he asked them if they were OK.
@@alex_zetsu What TF are you talking about? Primary radar doesn't provide _any_ altitude information at all. Zero. Nada. None. The _only_ way for ATC to know a plane's altitude is to be told; either automatically by the transponder, or manually by the pilot reporting what's on their instruments.
@@HiddenWindshield It *can,* just not with any great accuracy.
You would think in training they tell you that the radar is receiving info from the plans computer and not the radar itself.
This is exactly why I do not trust a computer to have control of ANYTHING regarding my life. I will not hand myself over to it.
I mean the computers censors were blocked so of course it didn't work properly.
@@joshntn37111”censors” were blocked😃
I see what you did there👍
@@joshntn37111And still, the radar has failed them. So I see the first person's point.
😅😅😅😅 And yet you do every day ... and this was human error, not caused by a computer.
@@danhickman7103Not every plane crash is caused by human error. Maybe in this case, but a failed radar is the cause also.
I’m more impressed duct tape survived that
Would be possible to climb a little once the too low terrain starts alarming? Just a try to see if it disconnects, it means it was true they were close to a terrain.
But why though? We have all the data now but the same computer was telling them that they were both stalling and overspending so it was safe to assume that it was just another malfunction. Besides the air controller who they assumed had an independent reading gave them an altitude that was relatively safe
Edit: spelling
@@AnonimatosTM True! Let’s suppose they missed the data and the instruments which is the least logical things to miss as a pilot, why they didn’t just pull up? Just pull up..!!!
@@AnonimatosTM Because the GWPS uses a radio altimeter, which is a completely different signal path and completely different instrument.
Also, they know the overspeed warning must be bogus, you do not get an overspeed with engines idle and nose not down … and certainly not with airbrakes on top of that!
And they knew or should have known the altitude display was doubtful and the speed display was bonkers.
I understand there is an emergency checklist for unreliable airspeed that tells you to set the throttle to certain known-good settings and keep a certain attitude to have the speed within a narrow band. No idea if that was on the books at the time of the accident, but that is what - in my completely uninformed and never been there (nor even in a simulator) opinion - they could have tried.
As to the ATC and the pilots, they ought to have been taught that the altitude on the radar screen comes from the transponder, not the radar return itself, and should have understood with unreliable altimeter and speed data in the plane at least the altitude on the scope must be assumed doubtful.
But in the high stress situation I cannot fault them for not being perfect, they were fed BS information by the computers which were the only interface to the information they needed.
I e been binging these kinds of plane accidents and this is too 3 worst thing you ever want to know could/did happen
Watching this, my first question was Who messed with the plane?
Well done by the actors you can hear / feel the confusion and fear in their voices
Virtually every airplane crash is responsible of the manufacturer it's always a manufacturer defect
This is calamitous
Why didn't they immediately turn back to the airport???
Immediately. As soon as the first warning was received and they knew they had bad data.
@@kamakaziozzie3038 that's what im saying LOL.... Like there is a giant gap between takeoff & first radio call of issues
If you listen closely, when Fernandez asks for ILS vectors, Schreiber replies “not yet, let’s get stabilised.” (It’s obscured by the narration.) Being the captain and the pilot flying, it was his decision. I agree it would have been better to turn back earlier; delaying landing to get stabilised is more of a process for when you have structural damage.
Would not have changed the outcome, in the end. Also, if you have the aircraft all over the place, how will you land?
@@advorak8529 it absolutely would have made a difference... They would have had a horizon to work with... Something tangible that they can see
Pilot Instinct and experience in pitch darkness isn't as simple as people think.
Who thinks it is? Lol
Why did not they return to the airport directly when the problems began?
They pretty much did, however, without knowing where the plane is altitude-wise, landing is going to be a real problem.
How did the controller act so nonchalent. He should have gotten his supervisor sounded like he didnt know what he was doing.
The manufacturer should have foreseen all malfunctions and provided ways to overcome them. Instead of issuing a single warning about non-functioning sensors, the computer has gone crazy and bombarded the pilots with garbage alarms. The disaster was mainly caused by incredibly defective software.
The pilots were also resopnsible, since they would have to return immediately. While Lima was in sight, they were able to control the flight visually. By the way, it is not clear do they have radio altimeter and why they don't use it.
0:50 " estamos impactando el agua!". We're impact the water😢😢😢
There has to be a way to mechanically. Check for air flow on the pito tubes. See if there's a pressure build up when you add pressure to the situation. There's gotta be a way to put a cover whether it's magnetic or whatever that stays and?
Beats and flashes a strobe light something I said beeps
A better solution is all aircraft are getting GPS. That can tell you location, speed and altitude. Provide both sets of number to the flight deck so they can check between them. Knowing the difference between air speed and ground speed is useful so it would be important to leave both systems in place.
lol at the comments saying what the pilots should have done. even other pilots didn't judge their actions. Also feel sorry for tape guy... he probably wasn't even properly trained and those above him didn't do their job
At 2 dollars an hour? That’s negligent in itself 🤦🏽♀️
The piece of tape, is mind bothering.
A seen episode for me. Seems they (the maker and/or federation) never tested for a fault were the pitot tubes are completely blocked. Also the altitude being only determined by the planes sensors for both pilot and tower is kind of dumb or in the least should have been disclosed to all.
The employer should have like check list, when finish cleaning to remove the tape. A reminder.
Tbh im just surprised atc over all that time had no inkling he was regurgitating flawed data from the plane. Maybe he wasn't trained in how his equipment works. I'm not usually on the side of corporates but blaming Boeing is like blaming Smith & Wesson on the misuse of their products. At most, contributory negligence.
ngl the air traffic controller looked like walter white
Richard Rodriguez sounds like Master Chief
Always trust your GPWS in the pitch dark night....
a million alarms going off and instruments gone loopy, the things theywere trained to trust they couldnt trust
Managers are never accountable.
In a "steam gauges" airplane you can break the glass on the rate-of-climb indicator (ie the least important gauge) and it will serve as an alternate static air pressure source (which gives you altimeter back). Obviously with a computerized display cockpit all smashing the display will do is make you feel better, cause the real guts are down inside someplace you cant get at. As often as planes crash with frozen pitot tubes or AoA sensors, they need to have an emergency backup set of them behind a panel that they can deploy in an emergency like a RAT.
In an airline panel of this era the pilot would be reading data from the air data system. These instruments may or may not have pneumatic connections. The airdata system sends altimetry and airspeed as electrical signals to the instruments. Also, in an aircraft with a pressurized cabin that idea depends on opening up the cabin pressure to atmospheric which should be automatic.
If you break the glass in a pressurized cockpit gauge, would it not simply read the interior cockpit air pressure? Which stays at 8000ft?
Yes, that is a possibility however the cabin altitude controller may open to outside air pressure under 10,000 feet. Again, this aircraft most likely had an air data system and even with mechanical gauges the functions are more complex that light aircraft gauges. The pilots could have reverted to radar altitude below 2500 feet.
@@m2heavyindustries378 Yes, but pressurization only comes into play above that altitude, where you arent really worried much about hitting something; other than another airplane at least, and an altimeter isnt all that useful for that. Alternatively you can turn the pressurization off.
This happens so often (or at least a habitual watcher of "Mayday..." would think it so) I would have thought they would just have the computer periodically pump a burst of air into the line and see if it went away and if not, set off (yet another) alarm.
Is the pilots responsibility to make sure the aircraft is okay. Because if you drive your car is your responsibility to make sure that your car is safe.
The pilots should have stayed over the lights on land, near the airport they took off from, instead of heading out over the completely dark ocean. They knew already the altimeter was not working.
What's up with the jittery video? The picture jumping up and down is really distracting.
Seems only right that everybody involved with this aircraft from Towing it to the gate to pulling it away to washing it to cleaning it to servicing it the pilot should check before departure that there is nothing covering any instrument air intake..........EVERYONE should check to see nothing is covered that shouldnt be...period!! Captain and FO too.
There's way too much dependance on technology. Pilots should fly their planes,not a computer.
The smartest answer is to have a colorful reflective tape and a checklist and to follow through..
Looks like an assassin’s work to me! Who was on that plane?
too many eggs in one basket
ATC let them down! He should've had someone assist him to manage that plane safely in.
EXACTLY.. and how could anyone not know they were receiving information from the faulty aircraft.
The pilot and/or co-pilot are also responsible. They are required to do a walk around before the flight just for this reason.
How many accidents have been caused by Fly-By-Wire computer controls/ sensors? How many lives have been lost? The answer is literally tens of thousands.
Trust your computers! Alexa, what should I do with my life?
They've done everything they've could...😢
If it was a day, they could see where they are.
The only responsible is he who knew about that previous accident and done nothing about that
tape blocked a sensor, causing the computer to malfunction, they couldn't fly at night without a computer. if on the inside end of the sensor tubes, a part could extrude a needle pin, from the inside center to the outside to clear out the tube and opening. also, shouldn't a pendant broker necklace hang from the cockpit ceiling, the heavy pendant part should point towards the ground
'you' tape over a sensor. and its the airline manufacturer to tell you, you need to take the tape off? I really dont think you should be flying. i have a staple puller and a bin of magazines that need to be worked on. i think this is more your speed. - seriously.
Why are the tubes covered with tape on the ground instead of having very specific caps that are fluorescent yellow to put over the end of the tubes that are connected to each other by cable and impossible to miss once maintenance is completed? But no a bit of sticky tape will do
Boeing should not have paid out any settlement in this case. The blame here lies with Aeroperu and their maintenance workers.
True they blame the American.
I agree 100%.
He yelled "I got it." Then they crashed.
Seems like both the pilot and copilot should check the pitot tubes since they are so important.
I agree
Don't pilots walk around the plane while copilot does the preflight before takeoff?
The only hope for them was to stay within the lights of the city so they can see if they're altitude it was too late to know how fast they were gone or how high they were gone it's all the manufacturer they keep making these murderous planes what are planes should be running by satellite navigation only how many times now have we seen over and over and over it's always the manufacturer they try to act like it's some error of the pilot it's the manufacturer
Its joey Jeremiah!!!
There's a TON of different degrassi characters in this show. It's so fun whenever I spot a new one
From what I have watched in this channel so far, Boeing has been evading taking responsibility and pushing it to the airlines. It's about time Boeing faces the music and pays off for all their wrongdoings. The 737-Max story might just be the icing on the cake for action against Boeing.
Baffled how 2 air carrier pilots and 1 scope dope can none of them know the readout on the screen is sent from the plane.
But all the previous alarms had come from the computer. The GPWS is a SEPARATE system, I would have trusted it. Or at least turned on the landing lights to see if I could see ground.
@2:25 onwards
Bold statement