QF 72 Diverted to Learmonth

[Michael Rychter]

Hopefully the passenger interviews will try to see if any passenger activated a personal electronic device that was "dirty" enough to upset the aircraft computer.

[Rich W]

I've always been a little worried about the Airbus autopilot systems even since the lecturer at my software programming course at Uni told us about the bugs they found in some of the first Airbus systems.

One of the bugs they discovered would have flipped the aircraft 180 degrees on its back if it ever went over the Arctic circle!

[Nigel C]

Originally Posted by Tony G

In saying that, it does not count out an computer error occuring eg. reverse thrust being engaged. I know it sounds unlikely, as you might need weight on wheels and some other logics to achieve this to operarate, but i have seen computers do weird things.

Remember the Lauda B767? It crashed after this very occurance.

[NickN]

Whichever way we look at things computers are only going to become a greater part of the global flight experience and regardless of what type of computer it is or what function it controls technology is not always perfect and these incidents are going to continue to happen one way or another. The real question is, how often are they going to occur and are people going to die as a result.

We have already seen faulty technology cause loss of life in the past. I really think that we have to try and have a little faith in those responsible for its development and hope they make their systems and hardware as perfect as possible.

[Rich W]

Interestingly I found this from a website about risks to the public in computers and related systems...

The original source is from AFP news:

"On 19 Apr 1999, an Air India Airbus 320 en route from Singapore to Bombay via New Delhi had apparent had an autopilot failure at 27,000 feet, resulting in a dive that injured three crew members (two seriously) and an infant. The pilot was able to regain control, and manually flew the jet to Bombay. [Source: AFP, 19 Apr 1999]"

[NickN]

This from todays news.com.au

Did laptop cause plane plunge?

By Michael Madigan, Nicole Cox and Peter Morley

October 09, 2008 01:55am


Passengers to be quizzed on computers
Safety officials begin investigation
wireless mouse sent another plane off-course

PASSENGERS will be quizzed on whether they were using computers or electronic equipment before a Qantas aircraft plunged hundreds of metres.

One has told of how he heard a loud bang followed by the screams and groans of passengers being thrown about the cabin and slammed against the roof as the Airbus went into a steep dive off Western Australia on Tuesday.

Pictures: First look inside Qantas jet
Turbulence: Babies hit plane roof

Safety officials yesterday began investigating how the aircraft travelling from Singapore to Perth suddenly shot up 300 feet before pitching earthward after signalling to its pilots "irregularities" in its elevator control system.

The possibility passengers using electronic equipment including computers affected the aircraft's navigation system has not been ruled out, The Courier-Mail reported.

A passenger clicking a wireless mouse mid-flight recently sent a Qantas jumbo jet off course on a three-degree bank, an Australian Transport Safety Bureau report revealed.

"Certainly in our discussions with passengers that is exactly the sort of question we will be asking – 'Were you using a computer?'," an Australian Transport Safety Bureau spokesman said yesterday.

Director of aviation safety investigation Julian Walsh said: "We don't know, and we don't fully understand the dynamics of this event.

"Certainly there was a period of time where the aircraft performed of its own accord."

A passenger described how the smooth flight suddenly turned into a nightmare around 1pm when he heard a loud bang.

"All of a sudden there was a big bang – boom – and I found myself up in the ceiling for one to two seconds and then I fell down," said grandfather Yip How Wong.

"I fell down on the walkway a few rows from my seat. I couldn't get up."

Up to 40 passengers and crew were injured when the plane was cruising at 37,000 feet about 177km north of Carnarvon.

The injured, including about 20 suffering serious spinal injuries, broken bones or lacerations, were taken to hospital after the pilot sent out a mayday distress call then made an emergency landing at an old military strip at Learmonth about 40km from Exmouth.

SES volunteer Jackie Tapper, 30, was one of the first to start treating the injured passengers on the aircraft.

"Inside the plane it was like a tornado had gone off," she said.

"On the ceiling where people had hit their heads there was chunks of hair still there. There were a lot of people bleeding so we had to bandage them."

http://www.news.com.au/travel/galler...013959,00.html

[Russell D]

Just wondering, if the ATSB will be quizzing passengers about "whether they were using computers or electronic equipment before a Qantas aircraft plunged hundreds of metres", wouldn't some pax be afraid that they might be found accountable and therefore deny that they were ever using one (even if they possibly were using one at the time)? In such a case, if the use of electronic devices did cause the incident, we might never really know.

"On 19 Apr 1999, an Air India Airbus 320 en route from Singapore to Bombay via New Delhi had apparent had an autopilot failure at 27,000 feet, resulting in a dive that injured three crew members (two seriously) and an infant. The pilot was able to regain control, and manually flew the jet to Bombay. [Source: AFP, 19 Apr 1999]"

That's sounds interesting, however something strikes me as odd. If the a/c was going via New Delhi ex Singapore, then I would imagine it would have been tracking pretty much directly towards New Delhi. When they had the problem (and I'm not sure how far from New Delhi they were), why would they divert to Bombay (Mumbai)?? For one, it would have been closer to New Delhi; and two, there are are many other closer airports they could have gone to (especially since it was an A320 and size wouldn't have been an issue).

[Mark B]

Originally Posted by NickN

We have already seen faulty technology cause loss of life in the past. I really think that we have to try and have a little faith in those responsible for its development and hope they make their systems and hardware as perfect as possible.

On the flip side, technology has greatly improved the safety of flying, and, fopr example, there are far less instances of "controlled descent into terrain" these days, and less events attributes to "pilot error" than when humans were totally in control.

[NickN]

On the flip side, technology has greatly improved the safety of flying, and, fopr example, there are far less instances of "controlled descent into terrain" these days, and less events attributes to "pilot error" than when humans were totally in control.

You are absolutely right there too.

Gotta take the good with the bad.

Look at TCAS, that must have saved a few skins in its time.

Although that incident where the bizjet clipped a GOL 737 coz the bizjet pilots accidentally turned off their TCAS/Transponder was a worry.

Technology is great when it is used properly and it works well.

[Rhys Xanthis]

Originally Posted by Russell D

Just wondering, if the ATSB will be quizzing passengers about "whether they were using computers or electronic equipment before a Qantas aircraft plunged hundreds of metres", wouldn't some pax be afraid that they might be found accountable and therefore deny that they were ever using one (even if they possibly were using one at the time)? In such a case, if the use of electronic devices did cause the incident, we might never really know.


That's sounds interesting, however something strikes me as odd. If the a/c was going via New Delhi ex Singapore, then I would imagine it would have been tracking pretty much directly towards New Delhi. When they had the problem (and I'm not sure how far from New Delhi they were), why would they divert to Bombay (Mumbai)?? For one, it would have been closer to New Delhi; and two, there are are many other closer airports they could have gone to (especially since it was an A320 and size wouldn't have been an issue).

On your 1st point, i dont think if it was something as trivial as a wireless mouse or something that insignificant (thats what they believe so far), i dont think the ATSB would be pursuing any kind of legal action against said person, and would probably make that clear before being interviewed.

2nd point - it may have already landed in New Delhi and was then continuing onwards to Bombay from New Delhi when the incident occurred.