Air Disasters - Catastrophe or Cover-Up?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- When the investigation of the Airbus crash leads to pilot Michel Asseline, he's certain they're missing key evidence that would exonerate him.
From: AIR DISASTERS: Pilot vs Plane
bit.ly/1u834vo
I did what any peelot would do
@SupraMk4Nerd 06 he said like Pi lot not pilot
You know that the English word pilot comes from the French pilote, and is pronounced “peelot” in most of the world. Spanish, French, German, Czech, Polish, Russian, and so on.
Wojciech Zylinski wow
Quickly at 1st I did think he said
'I did what any pilock would do '
🤭
SupraMk4Nerd 06 lol
What did you do when you saw the trees?
I did what any *peelot* would do. I tried to climb over them.
Pilot sounds like *peelot*
In french we pronounce the i like a "e". However, the translation avec pilot in french is pilote. Basicly the same word
Ohh.. I thought he said I did what any pillock would do haha
Ok
when someone panics, an accent is almost always thick.
Don’t judge him by his accent. His English is quite good for a French guy.
My dad was actually at that airshow, and witnessed the crash
regularflurfy Wow
well he could have helped in the investigation
@@holtrixstudios Congratulations!
@@bedtimestories5270 wdym
Sure...
I can't imagine surviving a plane crash and then have to fight to prove you didn't cause it. If he didn't I hope he proves it but if he did then he should get whatever comes.
Thats why every incident gets a full investigation
This was one of the demo flights for A320 during the plane's debut. If authorities had sided with the pilot, the plane might have lost certification or experienced poor sales. When there's money involved the one with deeper pockets is always right.
have u watched to the end nitwit
the airbus's elevator have problems
watch carefully will ya
Could have died-
@@airmanfirstclass3535 That didn't work for Boeing on the 737Max. Your theory is implausible.
When I clicked on this video I got a weird advertisement about Hydration Mayonnaise
😂
Why doesn't Smithsonian give you a 'up next' display for the next part of the episode which is likely also uploaded on its channel?
Laziness?
$$ - these are teasers.
Exactly these are just teasers there’s hundreds and hundreds of videos all on DVD or downloadable it’s like 1599 or something like that for an entire season D’s or just snippets to get your dry and then and hopefully get you to purchase the real videos it’s annoying as hell though
They name each part differently....as though it's from a completely different story
@@TheRealGunWhisperer well then they are doing an abysmal job of actually advertising it since 90% of their audience here doesn't even know they are even trying to sell something.
Just read the Wiki page about this... Ultimately the aircraft was only 40 feet from the ground, and going soo slow, that when the captain yanked back, the computer knew that would stall the aircraft, and put the nose down. Too low, too slow... He doomed the aircraft.
So basically the auto pilot actually is what saved 133 passengers.
Ah, yes, Wikipedia. Definitely not known for taking sides when there's corruption afoot. Seriously, what the actual video, listen to the Interview. The plane didn't react and the airline, and France, definitely had something to hide.
@@DeathknightDragon He tried to accelerate the plane 5 seconds before crashing I have flown the A320 it takes about 9 seconds before you feel trust from idle and the trust is not immediate either. The plane did the only correct thing which is to level off at this altitude to avoid a tailstrike due to stall.
The obvious error was that the pilot had never flown to this airport before. They spotted the airfield too late and basically had to reduce speed. Then the pilot changed the runway without informing the co-pilot and they had decreased the airspeed to idle, too low to recover for a turn around. He was unfamiliar with the airfield and his final approach level was bellow what he had discussed with the co-pilot in the briefing ( airplane leveled off from decent around 30 feet bellow 100)
Clearly no corruption and nothing to hide in this case.
This whole flight was a Catastrophe from both pilot and aircraft... The pilot should not have been flying so low in the first place and due to short notice was forced to rush the flight plans thus the reason why the pilot was not aware of the trees, but the aircraft was also flawed in the sense that it's fly-by-wire technology completely ignored the pilots input. I personally side with the captain but think that this flight should not have been given the green light
david schaaf I agree I like the pilot
It was supposed to be airshow. ...probably fuckin control failure. ..so cold artificial intelligence
It was a show he was supposed to fly that low
Actually, the aircraft was not at fault. If the aircraft had direct control, the aircraft would have stalled, making the situation much worse. Instead, the aircraft stayed as nose-high as was safely possible so that once the engines spooked up, it could safely fly away. The problem was that power was applied too late, and it was all the computer could do to slowly sink into the treetops.
david schaaf he was trying to land on the runway
this happened two days after the A320 went into service
That's actually why I'm on the fence on this one. There were failures all around but since this was a new plane and model, it makes me leary of blaming only the pilot. All new planes and models usually have kinks that can only be found with actual service, so it could be as the pilot said or it could be he was used to another model and didn't keep this planes specs in mind.
@@animehuntress9018 Similar story with the MAX (which I flew on with WestJet, excellent flight).
@Yerrrp Yerrrp Well it did push forward because the speed was way too low right? If it would have allowed for the movement the plane would have stalled and probably everyone would have been dead.
@Yerrrp Yerrrp I know the differences; stop splitting hairs. The point is that both involved 2 relatively new aircraft and both were subject to scrutiny on whether it was a problem with the pilots, the aircraft itself, or both.
The Captain does bring up a valid point: If an investigation was ongoing, why was it being constantly leaked to the press that the presumption was Pilot Error? Seems very likely to me that the French Government wanted to pin the blame on the pilot in order to avoid damaging the reputation of the new aircraft. In my opinion, the fault is on the pilot, the aircraft and the airline.
The aircraft ignored the pilots input and set the elevators to down position which prevented the plane from gaining height. Whether or not the plane might’ve stalled is ultimately irrelevant because the engines would’ve been increasing power and thus the likelihood of a stall would’ve been reduced.
The pilot is at fault for flying the plane so low and not reacting fast enough to avoid the tree line.
The airline carries the majority of blame for green lighting the flight in the first place. The original flight plan was changed at the last moment (A MAJOR mistake IMO) and the crew wasn’t informed until shortly before takeoff. This left no time for preparation, contingencies in case of an emergency, etc. Also, considering the dangerous nature of the flight and the fact that it was for an air show and not transportation, the airline should’ve never allowed for so many passengers to take part in the flight.
According to black boxes captain decided to change the flight plan without even telling anything to the first pilot. Not only that they didn't know this runway at all.
He is gud PEELUT
Investigator : I think he is telling the truth.
*End of video*
And of course as usual we are left hanging with no outcome....
Did you not hear it say he told the truth?
NTSB blamed peelot(lol) error. The captain claimed the plane's engines didn't respond and the NTSB and plane manufacturer was using him as a scapegoat.
@@uncletaylorify engines clearly responded according to black boxes not to mention In the video from the crash you can clearly hear engines starting to accelerate
The A320 was quite new and pilots unaware of the FBW protections. He reacted on his instincts and paid the price. He should have waited for a few moments to pull the stick and his input was way too severe. With the FBW you only get pitch deflection while speed is maintained. He should have waited and pitched it up gently. Might have had a few scratches, but any pilot would have done what he did at that moment.
Oh good, you can help with the investigation.
FBW is not good even after the years of what it has done including the current crashes of the dreamliners. Letting technology take over is a mistake that should be taken out of airlines and allow only human control
Bed Time Stories lol
@@MattKearneyFan1 what dreamliner crashes? From what I've read dreamliners still haven't crashed at all since launch
@@MattKearneyFan1 Except fly-by-wire has been used successfully on fighter jets for decades.
Captain Asseline seems like a pretty cool guy to hang out with
He couldn’t face what he was responsible for.
Incredible and double incredible but incredible story!!🇺🇸
See you guys again when this is recommended in another 7 years
3:55 The truth of A320
The truth of a troll called Cyrus
Shut up troll. The A320 is a fantastic airplane.
Thank god Boeing doesn't have any software glitches.
[cough]737 max[cough]
If you believe these cliff hangers are the worst. Dislike the video to let them know
I mean why would you do a fly over at an airshow with FRICKING PASSENGERS ON BOARD !thats like the most craziest things to do.
LondonTubeTV passengers that knew they were going into an airshow
It was a media flight from CDG to Basel airport with a flyover at Mulhouse airfield
I've never seen air shows with pax on the plane. Fighter jets with 1 or2 pilots. Passenger planes 2 pilots. Piloto in Spanish. Proniunced peelowta.
If I could go on such air show I would. People won a lottery to be in that plane. I don't know what's so crazy about the fact that some people like a little bit od adrenaline
That was a Air Buss & the French
Human error caused into tragedy
He was unconsciously trying to get instant response from engines like in a fighter aircraft.
Even fighters Dont give instant response.
Fucking embarrassing lol
Plane crashes at airshow
Thankfully no one died
two children and a flight attendant died
Varun87 Plays oh okay
Rip
Insurance doesn’t want to pay
Anti-stall... Airbusses have it
peelot
Compressor stall in Alpha Max?
No, just an incompetent Captain.
The captain is much stubborn and angry but he is really true and when he gets old he is kind
he did what any pilot would do...fly way too low and head for the trees
Captain Michel Asseline interviews in English using a French accent
Because he was interviewed in the UK, but he is French. What did you expect?
Just an actor.
Congratulations sir you win the dumbest comment award😂
the plane pitched down because it was about to stall 😢😢😢😢😮😮😮
It was his fault.
PIC. Pilot in command. Multiple errors led to this disaster and ultimately it was the pilot’s fault. No reconnaissance flight of airfield leading to lack of situational awareness. Blaming altimeter when it was VFR and he could just look out the window! Crazy excuse. Adhering to an AF flight minimum which he knew was way below regulations. What happened after was a result of all these errors. If he had not made these 3 critical errors any fly by wire issue raised by the pilot, even if they existed, would not have led to the crash. PIC. PIC.
lol they're french so that explains everything
teehee this plane was so unmanned
These things happen when people are in a rush to do things. Plenty of examples from history. The fact that several seconds worth of data from the black box at a critical point in the event mysteriously vanished did not help the pilot. As ever, the long game played a big hand in the outcome, as it must in our commercial world.
In any air crash when the pilot is dead them the tendency is to suspect pilot error .When the pilot survives then you have to look for the real cause that bit harder.
i would never have thought an a-320 would crash
Asseline was right, I've seen the 1h version of this, he was in a jail from 9/1989 to 1/1990.
* Osku* no he wasn’t. The plane did what it was programmed to do. Prevent a stall. And if he had flown at 100ft as he was supposed to instead of 30ft the he’d have cleared the trees
where can we get the full episodes? im tired of 4 minute mysteries that are never solved
these are teasers full episodes need to be bought
theres a link to how to buy in the vid description
but honestly these are a waste of money anyway
Ei, I shd buy to watch aircraft crash? Ei. Lol
Because this is stolen from national geographic channel. Full video is available on RUclips.
@@revelation333 Umm no it's not. NG has nothing to do with Mayday/ACI. Mayday is produced by Discovery Channel in Canada, and Smithsonian is the US provider for the show.
pirate bay
Why they dont pull up before get close to the trees?
they couldn't
Because the captain plan was to show the plane at low speed at it's maximum angle : The maximum angle the sytem will allow you. You cant pitch up more, you have to gain speed before.
The first plan was to show the plane in a different course but they change at the last time because of the place the crowd was.
bib airport too small
Liam Ulrich C. Monjardin no it was a airfield
No one:
Air Crash Investigation at 3am:
Robert de niro in thumbnail
This is still why Boeing>Airbus...
lvlaple4Ever Yeah because the fact that the 737 series has had 10 times more crashes than the A318,19 & 20 combined doesn't matter at all.
Atticon I don’t care what you think just stop telling us the obvious
Tell that to LionAir
Atticon yeah, because it’s around since the 60’s, so it had a lot of crashes since it’s one of the early jets.
I also prefer Boeing.
Actor who plays captains role looks little bit like robert Muller.
"I did what any pillock would do."
Hahahaha "I did what any peelot would do"
Climb over them🤣🤣crazy pilot
lastking tyga lol how is he crazy
Wait wait wait I'm confused why we're the engines on idle??
Because they made mistake.
Why he do to high he don’t land it the captain not mine
Conclusion?
I believe the pilot
Senior Citizen I sought of do
I definitely don’t. The fbw of the aircraft is pretty much the same today as it was back then. Prevent a stall
The Morris minor of the skies
Hahahaha captain asseline "I did what any peelot would do"
The French pilot was caught in a political vise. The government desperately wanted the Airbus to be found faultless. Facts were inconvenient.
Why doesn‘t the plane warn you that there are trees or objects ahead of you and that you have to pull and full power to not crash in the forest?
It was an air show. Even if there were caution warning they wouldn't mind it.
And it's even possible that they have disabled it
When he tried to climb but engines not respond
They did but jet engines don’t t just come up instantly. The pilot must account for this as it is a known characteristic of jet engines.
Engines did respond. In fact in the moment of crash they were around at 80% of power, but it was just too late as it takes some time for an engine to go from idle to max power. Not only that they planned it differently. First pilot was supposed to add a little bit of power all through out the fly by. And they were supposed to keep 100feet bit they went much much lower.
@@siemniak 👍
Havent watched the whole thing but its not that simple as pulling the stick planes go up theres speed before passing the airshow the pilot slowed down which means that the planes could be approaching stall speed also turbo fans require time to spin and make power puling the stick so aggresively will only make the plane reduced speed even more while the engine still trying to rotate thats my lowly civilian views of what happened.
I seen this Crash before , They said the computers wouldn't let the engines Power up !!
Did they set the autopilot for Alpha Max and try to override it when they were too low? Was the plane set for 30 meters or 30 feet AGL?
herman greenstein ft agl
Engines did power up. You can clearly hear it in the original recording plus data from black boxes shows that too. The only problem is he pushed throttles up way too late
my input would have gone up straight away ha
Nope.
What's the difference between Airbus and my birth?
Nothing! Both are mistakes.
Neither one is a mistake. The Airbus, maybe, but not you, God does not make mistakes.
And this is why you don't give machines power over humans.
It didn’t have power over the pilots. Get some facts.
I'm sorry but machines are much better in flying than people. In fact a lot of accidents happen when pilot makes an error in stressful situations after disconnecting an Autopilot.
@@peteconrad2077 Did you not watch the video or are you just dumb? In one part of the video, they show data from the FDR clearly showing that when the pilot pulled up, the elevators did the exact opposite of trying to pull the nose up. Then you have that delay in engine power. Also, Airbus aircraft have all those computer systems and their fly by wire systems which are explicitly meant to override pilot control or limit it in some degree. I've studied these aircraft for years so don't tell me to "get the facts". You go get the facts
@@siemniak No they're not. Sure they're more consistent, but all you need is some bug, glitch, or unknown feature and you get a warehouse full of charred, mangled body parts and wreckage. Do I have to explain the fact that there were numerous fatal Airbus crashes in the 90s, caused by some issue tied to their fly by wire and computer systems? Do I have to explain the MCAS system on the 737 MAX and how that killed 346 people not even 4 years ago?
@@lucah1824 I did. Unlike you, I understood it. Automation doesn’t give computers power over humans. Stop being hysterical.
This is why i hate airbus
Because you’re ignorant?
It's Boeing or I'm not going
MCAS cough cough
Yeah, this sounds like a coverup. It reads like one, it sounds like one, and I'll bet it walks like one, too. Too much faith was put in the computer's control systems, they failed to acknowledge the pilot's input properly, and as a result, they had no choice but to put the blame on the pilot, lest the brand new aircraft get grounded.
Try to do the same thing with a new 320, 30 years after, 6000 produced later, you wil have the same results. The plan was to show the plane at lower speed at maximum angle. they did it a 35ft instead a 100ft, but that's not the problem, the problem is to show a new airplane in an Airshow (25 hours of flight), with passenger, at it's max angle, with a pilot that do not understand, even 30 years after, why an Airbus at alpha prot dont want to nose up again...
They failed to acknowledge the input because any a320 pilots knows the aircraft has high AOA protection. The plane wouldn’t let the pilot pull up because otherwise it would stall and crash before the trees