All this technology, but no lockout to prevent premature unlocking of the feathering unlock lever. Murphy's Law still applies even as we hurtle into space. And no amount of training can preclude human error.
But the lockout could also fail... So not being able to unlock the feathering unlock lever would be an issues as well... Keep in mind a plane crashed partially because of icing on the engines around 2017 - makes you wonder how the fuck icing cannot be detected with today's technology!
Events like this always make me wonder: if unlocking the mechanism inside that speed range will always result in catastrophic failure, why does the ship make it possible (or at least so easy) to do so? At the very least, where are the warnings and confirmations? Unfortunate that the first officer's mistake cost him his life. At the same time, wonderful that the captain survived. I'm sure if the first officer could somehow know, he'd be extremely relieved the mistake didn't take the captain's life as well. Great video, thank you!
@@AirspaceVideos Yes, leaving humans in control is a terrible design flaw. That action should have been totally automated - like the captain's parachute was.
@@millomweb Actually, we can re-design humans, to an extent. It's called training. But, for automation, the more complex the tasks we're asking automation to do, the harder it is to verify that it's doing what we think it's doing. Automation in the cockpit has an amazing potential to protect against human error and reduce the human workload, but we're nowhere near ready to have computers flying planes. If there is a conceivable reason a human might need to do something against the inclination of the automation, then a human should be able to do it. Safeguard against errors, yes. Take the routine workload off the humans, yes. Given such drastic consequences, it was irresponsible not to do it in this case. But if people are going to be given responsibility for the outcome, they should have every avenue at their disposal to improve that outcome.
I wonder how the surviving pilot is doing? He barely made it out of that one, bad ass he got things done while going in and out of consciousness and falling from the stratosphere.
Good job NTSB. This is a good example of them appropriately chastising lack of detail in paying attention to dangers. I wish we took this approach to road vehicle crashes. While almost every crash represents a human error at the controls, road design plays significantly into the chances of a single error causing a crash. For example, I live next to a road with highway style barriers, that is clearly designed for speeds of 55 to 65 mph, but it is signposted for 45 mph and has several stoplights. Crashes happen on a monthly basis on this road, because the road design encourages speeding, and lack of attention. Often people do not notice a light has turned red until rear ending a slowing or stopped vehicle.
I was a new employee at Scaled and new to experimental aerospace that devastating day. Though with 28 years in aviation at that time, most of that in military aviation I was not new to mishaps. Scaled allows all employees to watch first flights so we were all gathered on the flight line to watch. I made sure I was standing near one of the engineers with a radio so I could hear the communications between the ship, chase plane and ground. The last audible words I heard over the radio were "Knock it off, Knock it off" which is a pretty standard call in imminent danger/ safety of flight situations. Scaled Composites designs and builds some of the most amazing aircraft with a small number of highly skilled engineers, technicians, and test pilots. With the family like atmosphere you can imagine the shock and horror of those who had hand built this craft and knew the pilots very very well.
Yeah, but some basic ones like "don't jump off your 10th floor balcony" are so hardcoded into your brain that you won't do it because you know it will result in your death. No matter how stressed you are. Unless he was suicidal.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 - similar to how babies hold their breath if they are submerged in water. The reptilian brain will stop you, if it has been told x action will kill you enough times over.
It's crazy to me that a space craft that costs millions of dollars wouldn't have some safety feature to prevent the pilot from operating the trim to early. It's just mind blowing that the engineers could build something so technologically advanced and yet they didn't make sure to program some safety software to prevent pilots from making a catastrophic mistake like engaging the trim to early, especially since they knew that would cause an immediate breakup of the space craft.
One person died on an experimental flight in a suborbital spacecraft. On that same day, many people died in automobile accidents. When you drop the "nut" and replace it with "engineer," maybe then you will be qualified to judge and give advice regarding how the spacecraft should be designed and operate.
@@HangTimeDeluxe well that's one way to look at it, I was more thinking about spacex's dragon, that's fully autonomous and hasn't had a single hiccup. even the shuttle which was made ages ago was partially autonomous and for good reason.
@@HangTimeDeluxe Wow are you serious?. You should really get your head examined. How the hell do you even compare a death rate of people in cars which there is millions of cars and one spacecraft flying maybe twice a year?. And don't tell me what I can and cannot say, just because I am not an engineer doesn't mean I can't say something about the safety of the spacecraft. Stop pretending like you're some sort of an engineer telling people what they can and cannot say, because you're too dumb for your own good. It's called freedom of speech you should really look it up. I really thought I seen stupid people on the internet, but you truly have to be the dumbest, comparing car deaths to spacecraft deaths.🤦
Wow, thanks for this video! Somehow I completely missed this incident. No. I wouldn’t go on a shuttle or anything else that goes into space. I would consider mountain climbing using ropes before I would enter a space craft. Luckily there will be many brave and eager souls who will line up for this adventure. I admire their spirit! The closest I came to anything resembling space aviation was in the Seattle Museum of Flight. It’s a great museum, btw, if you’re ever in the area, pay a visit. It’s a huge museum, you could spend a whole day there and still not see everything!
Tbh I've been binging your videos for the last two days. I absolutely love them! Such high quality too! You deserve 10 fold the subs you currently have. Keep it up! :)
I think interlocks are needed. If that's the result of a small error. Bet they have them now. Never knew about the feathering. Seems to be a key feature, that you wouldn't want to fail.
I was thinking the same thing, the pilot should not have been able to unlock the wing if the speed was not reached. Simple programming could have prevented this.
this is such an interesting incident to be honest, rip the FO he did a mistake that if we were honest most of us could have done at that stress & G-Forces, May he rest in peace. Also thanks for the great video explaining what happened, really appreciated
I didn't think I'd like this episode because it was a departure from traditional airplane content, but it was actually a good story with important lessons! Congrats on hitting 26k followers! just 974k to go! 1Mill followers will be sooner than we imagined, I think. 😉
This is the first time I have watched any of your videos. What an excellent job! The details, the clarity, the editing all done so well. With a fairly recent successful launch of Unity a week ago I became interested in this crash and found your video. Glad I did.
Great content as always! Interesting probable cause from the NTSB - in my uneducated vortex of a brain I'd have thought the fault lay with pilot training, as it appears they weren't fully versed on the nature of the beast while transonic - though doubtless Rutan & Co could have added a system to prevent this. Excellent work :)
Well, the report sorta does say it was insufficient pilot training, right? I mean, technically it was the communication between engineers and pilots... But how is that not the same thing in the end?
Reminds me of the engineer at Thiokol who was desperately trying to get people to listen about the dangers of the solid rocket boosters right before Challenger was lost.
I m not confident about the safety culture at Virgin galactic. I m pretty sure they fixed the issue and made the feathers impossible to deploy before mach 1.4 but from what l heard SpaceShip two went out of his planned path on the July flight. They were supposed to abort the flight in such situation and they did not. As this aircraft behaves like a glider after engine cut off it s important they strictly follow their flight plan otherwise they could be unable to go back to the runway. The pilot were aware of that but they went on anyway. At this point it s unknown if they were pressured by Richard Bronson not to abort to avoid the shame of an unsuccessful first tourist flight. Now SpaceShip 2 is grounded.
Yes indeed if they would pay the $455,000 ticket for me I would definitely go I always wanted to be an astronaut I'm 64 years old to experience the zero g and be above the atmosphere even for brief moment would be heavenly...
You guys would have better luck with space x. You can’t be considered an astronaut riding in a virgin aircraft, it doesn’t get nearly high enough, just enough to be in tumble upper atmosphere
In the future, spaceflight will be very common, opening up a niche market for videos covering spaceflight incidents. You should make the channel, could call it Spacespace
Many people in the space sector would not like a youtube channel on spacecraft incidents, especially in an emerging industry. It could ruin the public image.
Very good video and analysis of what happened. A follow-up video would be good to describe any technical changes made after this incident. For example, was the flight system modified to recognize that it is trans-sonic and not unlock the feathering mechanism even if the pilot tried to enable it? What training and simulation changes did Virgin Galactic make? A video explaining the escape mechanism would also be interesting ... how did the captain survive a breakup of his craft? Why did the copilot not survive?
what I can tell you is that virgin galactic modified the craft so that the mechanism can now only be unlocked at the correct range of speed. The rest, unfortunately, is beyond me!
I think I'd take the small chances that I would die to fly to low orbit. After this happened they probably increased the safety of the space plane rocket. I also believe that people tend to get overconfident and loose on the safety rules if nothing happens. Because this happened during testing probably made the authorities harder on the company.
I agree with you, Victor, on the overconfidence. I think all of us have been guilty in that respect, be it on the job, driving a car, or performing a task we‘ve performed so many times we‘re sick and tired of it. When driving my car I often like to remind myself I’m operating a potentially deadly weapon. So far I’ve dodged any bullets. But it may only take a fraction of a second to change that.
You’d hopefully think differently if you had kids. Why risk your kids calling someone else “Daddy” just so you can be a passenger on some billionaire’s ego wang.
Beautiful Footages and Great Narration👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 May the FO's soul Rest In Peace🙏🏻 I wouldn't go in the Virgin Galactic, I like to be flying in a Plane and Not In A Spaceship😅😅😅
Whether the first officer was aware of the danger is irrelevant, the fact that he could actually unlock the feathering mechanism before the craft reached Mach 1.4 was the problem. Clearly the designers knew, as did the executives of Scaled Composites... for there not to be, at the very least, an alarm warning against it, or ideally a lockout preventing it from occurring until reaching the proper velocity, is beyond comprehension. That said, would I take a ride if given the chance? Without hesitation!!
I can't speak to why Scaled Composites didn't do it before, but the current vehicles that VG has now have a feather unlock inhibit function that will prevent pre-mature unlocking of the feather system.
@@MarcusArmstrong037 Safety systems in prototypes are likely to cause accidents instead of preventing them. Normally such systems are only introduced when the behavior of the vehicle has been well characterized and even then are introduced in a cautionary way. Imagine if for instance the as yet untried safety system were to prevent the feathering from being activated when it absolutely needed to. Alternatively you don't even need to imagine, just look at what Boeing did with the 737 Max - the MCAS was meant to make the plane safer by avoiding stalls but because some idiot (or criminal) decided to classify it as a non critical system, arguing that it only 'augmented' the maneuvering of the plane so they neither analysed it theoretically in enough detail nor tested it comprehensively enough. The result was that it activated when it shouldn't have, driving the plane into the ground. There is no way that would have happened if the system had been analysed and tested in the proper way that any flight critical system is.
@@listerdave1240 I feel that a safety system should be in place to prevent feathering below M1.4, but if the system prevented feathering on decent, there should be a way to shut down the feather unlock inhibit function with a switch. Same with the 737 Max, the MCAS should be shut down with one button if it were to malfunction. RIP to the lives lost in both incidents.
What I love about your channel name, is that it took a non-native English speaker to finally correctly translate aerospace to English. Now we need someone to make a channel called Airdynamics, and we achieved some more greatness
If you have AI and sofrware automation on your side then Elons fail forward with empty ships approach is the correct way forward. Virgin have spent years fixing this presumably .
Great video and information on the cause of the crash. I don't think the news had any information about this after the investigation. It's unfortunate that the FO ultimately paid for his mistake -- RIP.
There is a concept in safety engineering called a “HazOp” analysis. This is where EVERY POSSIBLE combination and sequence of hazardous conditions are studied as to their cause, impacts, prevention, detection, and remedy. So WHY didn’t the Scaled Composites safety officer (I presume they have one) do this standard analysis so that the designers could put in the appropriate safety measures and protections against inevitable human limitations??? The Coast Guard designates these sort of craft “manifestly unsafe” and will prevent people from going to sea in them. So how could the FAA likewise allow this craft to fly to space? I agree with the NTSC finding. SC needs to up their game.
Great video! Any way to know if they made any modifications to the way the feathering system is unlocked? Like it cannot be unlocked until Mach 1.4 is reached? Or, is it still up to the pilot to manually unlock at that speed? Also, does Virgin Galactic call their pilots Capitan and First Officer? I know with NASA shuttle flights, the pilot in the left seat is called the Commander and the one in the right is called the Pilot. Not sure if they use this nomenclature or not. I know this seems odd to ask, but it's on my mind with tonight's Inspiration4 launch. As Dr. Proctor is considered the pilot and Jared is the Commander. Thanks again for the great video!
How could they not have known... EVERYBODY who knows anything about rocket launches or aerodynamics knows the stresses and forces through MaxQ. There is absolutely no way that they wouldn't have known this unless they took a couple of random people off the street and had them pilot this craft
Pay for my ticket and heck yes, I would go. This was just an example of the very old syndrome where the engineers think "no-one would be silly enough to do that. No need to bring it up (put it in the manual)" competing with a pilot's usual attitude of "if it isn't forbidden in the manual, then it must be okay to do it."
this accident is the clear example of why you always automate these mechanisms with a computer. even as far back in the 70's, variable wing geometry fighter jets controlled their wing configuration through the on board computer. of course manual overrides are always a must, but as "mission complexity" increases (i.e pilots flying at subsonic speed > supersonic > whatever you'd call this, it has a lot of moving parts) the stakes get higher and mistakes can lead to more dramatic consequences, the pilots need that automated backup.
This is why aircraft fighter pilots keep their hand off the control stick during a catapult launch from the deck. I'm surprised there was no one in the US Navy on this engineering or flight team. They would have corrected this problem and prevented this situation from ever having happened.
In hindsight yes. It would also make sense to make a car with a steering wheel that will not let you jerk it so hard in one direction that would lose control and crash.
To answer the question No I wouldn’t go even if it was free . I can barely get on a plane every few years and that’s enough for me. Great video well explained and put together as always 👍🏻
Yes, absolutely. It would be great to experience 5 minutes of zero gravity rather than the 20 to 30 seconds of past flights. Like anything, there will have to be improvements made and I feel like Virgin Galactic can do it. I am so impressed with Virgin Galactic. We must remember there have been lives lost in every aspect of spaceflight with the most lives being lost during the NASA spaceflights with 14 people dying in 2 space shuttle disasters. NASA was very careless about keeping their flights safe.
@@AirspaceVideos Yes adding a pun like that might be viewed as a slightly bad attempt at humour for a single video but a whole other channel about accidents wouldn't be as in the cheek I think.
Anyone in front of me in the queue to ride on Virgin Galactic would be putting their life at risk. Or, if no one was willing to pay for me to fly, tellers at the bank closest to Virgin's launch complex had better get some bags pre-filled with cash. Because I'm coming for it!
That surely would be interesting, but I have to admit my knowledge is largely in the subsonic range, as that's the range airliners fly in... if there's somebody more knowledgable than me out there (combat pilots, maybe?), let me know!
Hindsight is 20/20, but I'll say it anyways; 1) There should be an interlock between Pilot and copilot, requiring the both to each pull a lever to activate feathering... 2) The levers CANNOT be moved un-commanded... 3) That another "Speed" interlock be in place to prevent the unlikely event that both pilots can actuate the levers before it has reached the correct speed range, or if the case of a false speed indication that the Interlock also blocks the feathering.. 4) There should be 3 separate speed indicators and speed measuring mechanisms, and vote system that confirms the correct speed has been attained. If these precautions were in place, I'd have no reluctance to fly Virgin Galactic... (Blue Orgasm, well that's another matter....)
It would make sense, given that they knew that premature unlocking of the feathering mechanism would result in structural failure, that an interlock, tied into the airspeed indicator, would prevent the unlock lever to be moved until 1.4 IMN,
Most people think Virgin Galactic is a super advanced space craft. It isn't, the controls are very old school in a pullies and levers kind of way. Pilots on that level know every single detail about a flight like that, but we all make mistakes. There should have been a system that prevented this from happening. I think there is now.
Excellent video and since you'd asked at the end of the episode...no! Hell, NO! I would not take a seat on this vehicle. If I'm going to risk high altitude flight, it may as damn well be in formal, low earth orbit ( as on the ISS) and not screwing around in some arbitrary "border" between our atmosphere and space.
Karman line (or the boundary between airplanes and spaceships is 100km) .Above Karman line the speed any aerofoil (or airfoil) requires to produce positive lift is above the escape velocity.
10:00. It’s what I call the “red button theory”. Don’t touch the red button or something bad will happen. You were never going to touch it until you were told not to
Rich Branson gave an inspirational speech to the kids. When Jeff Bezos went to space he asked if he could deep throat some skittles from a trust fund baby. " i want a skittle in my mouth shoot me some in my mouth" Just imagine flying on the border of Earths atmosphere and asking a trust fund baby to throw a skittle into your mouth.
I thought that the feather system was activated until re-entry, so that it would act as a parachute. Doing it at supersonic speeds sounds crazy to me and I inherently think the spaceship will shatter into a million pieces due to the friction and maximum drag of this position.
I would go. I heard William Shatner has been invited to go up in Basels rocket. I like the spirit of having this done by a commercial establishment. Many of the people chosen are exnasa or other highly-rated professionals. It remains to be seen, if this system, or typical launch, will ever achieve higher orbits.
Honestly, I was surprised to learn that the Spacecraft is piloted manually at all during ascent. Most space vehicles, including all kinds of rockets as well as the Space Shuttle, ascend on autopilot to match their ascent path precisely as well as avoid human error altogether. This is not because agencies like NASA don't trust their astronauts, but because a lot is at stake with each rocket launch, and failures are still more likely than for example in commercial aviation. Why does Virgin Galactic have humans controlling their craft during this phase of the flight?
Surely it would be a simple modification to fit an inter-lock, preventing activation of the unfeathering until at a safe speed to do so ??? Inter-locks are used in many industries in many ways. Their principle is very simple. You cannot open a door/hatch to a pressurised vessel until pressure is equalised for example.
@@AirspaceVideos As is usually the case :-( I work in the oil industry and it took many accidents to force operators to fit inter-locks onto such things as saturation diving habitats, that prevent hatches being opened whilst the habitat is pressurised
the strain that caused the wreckage : is it really due to triggering the mechanisme at "too low speed" ... or rather at "too low altitude" = denser air ?
Would I go? Absolutely! To see and experience the edge of space, something only a very small number of people have ever experienced, without a doubt I would go.
✈ Support the channel here! ✈
✅Patreon: www.patreon.com/airspace_yt
All this technology, but no lockout to prevent premature unlocking of the feathering unlock lever. Murphy's Law still applies even as we hurtle into space. And no amount of training can preclude human error.
NO CALL OUT?
THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE.
Ir's TRAINING . . . 💀
But the lockout could also fail... So not being able to unlock the feathering unlock lever would be an issues as well... Keep in mind a plane crashed partially because of icing on the engines around 2017 - makes you wonder how the fuck icing cannot be detected with today's technology!
I belive that after this crash, a system to prevent that was implemented in the other one.
Events like this always make me wonder: if unlocking the mechanism inside that speed range will always result in catastrophic failure, why does the ship make it possible (or at least so easy) to do so? At the very least, where are the warnings and confirmations?
Unfortunate that the first officer's mistake cost him his life. At the same time, wonderful that the captain survived. I'm sure if the first officer could somehow know, he'd be extremely relieved the mistake didn't take the captain's life as well.
Great video, thank you!
Thank you! This really was a terrible design flaw...
@@AirspaceVideos Yes, leaving humans in control is a terrible design flaw. That action should have been totally automated - like the captain's parachute was.
@@millomweb Automation is just humans in control with extra layers. Advantageous? Often. Infallible? Never.
@@Amanda-C. If fallible automation is better than fallible humans, then automation is better.
Automatic systems can be redesigned. Humans can't.
@@millomweb Actually, we can re-design humans, to an extent. It's called training. But, for automation, the more complex the tasks we're asking automation to do, the harder it is to verify that it's doing what we think it's doing. Automation in the cockpit has an amazing potential to protect against human error and reduce the human workload, but we're nowhere near ready to have computers flying planes. If there is a conceivable reason a human might need to do something against the inclination of the automation, then a human should be able to do it. Safeguard against errors, yes. Take the routine workload off the humans, yes. Given such drastic consequences, it was irresponsible not to do it in this case. But if people are going to be given responsibility for the outcome, they should have every avenue at their disposal to improve that outcome.
I wonder how the surviving pilot is doing? He barely made it out of that one, bad ass he got things done while going in and out of consciousness and falling from the stratosphere.
I wonder about that, too. Especially his mental state...
He became chief test pilot at the company and has gone on to test many amazing aircraft.
he flew months later
Good job NTSB. This is a good example of them appropriately chastising lack of detail in paying attention to dangers. I wish we took this approach to road vehicle crashes. While almost every crash represents a human error at the controls, road design plays significantly into the chances of a single error causing a crash. For example, I live next to a road with highway style barriers, that is clearly designed for speeds of 55 to 65 mph, but it is signposted for 45 mph and has several stoplights. Crashes happen on a monthly basis on this road, because the road design encourages speeding, and lack of attention. Often people do not notice a light has turned red until rear ending a slowing or stopped vehicle.
I was a new employee at Scaled and new to experimental aerospace that devastating day. Though with 28 years in aviation at that time, most of that in military aviation I was not new to mishaps. Scaled allows all employees to watch first flights so we were all gathered on the flight line to watch. I made sure I was standing near one of the engineers with a radio so I could hear the communications between the ship, chase plane and ground. The last audible words I heard over the radio were "Knock it off, Knock it off" which is a pretty standard call in imminent danger/ safety of flight situations. Scaled Composites designs and builds some of the most amazing aircraft with a small number of highly skilled engineers, technicians, and test pilots. With the family like atmosphere you can imagine the shock and horror of those who had hand built this craft and knew the pilots very very well.
I'm convinced he knew the dangers if he did it too early. We've all made mistakes when under pressure or stressed. RIP
Yeah, but some basic ones like "don't jump off your 10th floor balcony" are so hardcoded into your brain that you won't do it because you know it will result in your death. No matter how stressed you are.
Unless he was suicidal.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 - similar to how babies hold their breath if they are submerged in water. The reptilian brain will stop you, if it has been told x action will kill you enough times over.
"We've all made..." ? If you had made such a huge mistake you wouldn't be here to tell us the story.
@@AlainNaigeon I didn't specify the mistake or specified the severity of mistake we've all made lol
@@Alex632 gosh people act like they've never done something after telling themselves NOT to. Smh
It's crazy to me that a space craft that costs millions of dollars wouldn't have some safety feature to prevent the pilot from operating the trim to early. It's just mind blowing that the engineers could build something so technologically advanced and yet they didn't make sure to program some safety software to prevent pilots from making a catastrophic mistake like engaging the trim to early, especially since they knew that would cause an immediate breakup of the space craft.
you'd think that they automate such a complex vehicle but no..
One person died on an experimental flight in a suborbital spacecraft. On that same day, many people died in automobile accidents. When you drop the "nut" and replace it with "engineer," maybe then you will be qualified to judge and give advice regarding how the spacecraft should be designed and operate.
@@lachlanhempell Like the Boeing 737 Max??? Yeah, thanks for playing.
@@HangTimeDeluxe well that's one way to look at it, I was more thinking about spacex's dragon, that's fully autonomous and hasn't had a single hiccup. even the shuttle which was made ages ago was partially autonomous and for good reason.
@@HangTimeDeluxe
Wow are you serious?. You should really get your head examined. How the hell do you even compare a death rate of people in cars which there is millions of cars and one spacecraft flying maybe twice a year?. And don't tell me what I can and cannot say, just because I am not an engineer doesn't mean I can't say something about the safety of the spacecraft. Stop pretending like you're some sort of an engineer telling people what they can and cannot say, because you're too dumb for your own good. It's called freedom of speech you should really look it up. I really thought I seen stupid people on the internet, but you truly have to be the dumbest, comparing car deaths to spacecraft deaths.🤦
Nicely done. Interesting as usually everything in this channel.
Just today I checked your channel to see if I somehow missed a new video and just a few minutes later ... there it is. Great!
Wow, thanks for this video! Somehow I completely missed this incident.
No. I wouldn’t go on a shuttle or anything else that goes into space. I would consider mountain climbing using ropes before I would enter a space craft. Luckily there will be many brave and eager souls who will line up for this adventure. I admire their spirit!
The closest I came to anything resembling space aviation was in the Seattle Museum of Flight. It’s a great museum, btw, if you’re ever in the area, pay a visit. It’s a huge museum, you could spend a whole day there and still not see everything!
Tbh I've been binging your videos for the last two days. I absolutely love them! Such high quality too! You deserve 10 fold the subs you currently have. Keep it up! :)
thank you so much!
I think interlocks are needed. If that's the result of a small error. Bet they have them now.
Never knew about the feathering. Seems to be a key feature, that you wouldn't want to fail.
I was thinking the same thing, the pilot should not have been able to unlock the wing if the speed was not reached. Simple programming could have prevented this.
The current vehicles that VG has now have a feather unlock inhibit function that will prevent pre-mature unlocking of the feather system.
@@MarcusArmstrong037 Until that fails, then what? No too many complications then results in chasing the needle. Should be 100% automated no pilots.
this is such an interesting incident to be honest, rip the FO he did a mistake that if we were honest most of us could have done at that stress & G-Forces, May he rest in peace.
Also thanks for the great video explaining what happened, really appreciated
I didn't think I'd like this episode because it was a departure from traditional airplane content, but it was actually a good story with important lessons!
Congrats on hitting 26k followers! just 974k to go! 1Mill followers will be sooner than we imagined, I think. 😉
Thanks - I thought it loosely ties into aviation as well :)
This is the first time I have watched any of your videos. What an excellent job! The details, the clarity, the editing all done so well. With a fairly recent successful launch of Unity a week ago I became interested in this crash and found your video. Glad I did.
thank you so much and welcome to the channel!
Great content as always! Interesting probable cause from the NTSB - in my uneducated vortex of a brain I'd have thought the fault lay with pilot training, as it appears they weren't fully versed on the nature of the beast while transonic - though doubtless Rutan & Co could have added a system to prevent this. Excellent work :)
thank you!
Well, the report sorta does say it was insufficient pilot training, right?
I mean, technically it was the communication between engineers and pilots... But how is that not the same thing in the end?
Anyone who has worked a job knows there is a huge gulf between what you learn in training and what you actually experience on the floor.
I heard about the engineer in this project talk about the terrible safety culture of Virgin Galactic and get fired.
Reminds me of the engineer at Thiokol who was desperately trying to get people to listen about the dangers of the solid rocket boosters right before Challenger was lost.
I m not confident about the safety culture at Virgin galactic. I m pretty sure they fixed the issue and made the feathers impossible to deploy before mach 1.4 but from what l heard SpaceShip two went out of his planned path on the July flight.
They were supposed to abort the flight in such situation and they did not. As this aircraft behaves like a glider after engine cut off it s important they strictly follow their flight plan otherwise they could be unable to go back to the runway.
The pilot were aware of that but they went on anyway. At this point it s unknown if they were pressured by Richard Bronson not to abort to avoid the shame of an unsuccessful first tourist flight.
Now SpaceShip 2 is grounded.
Yes indeed if they would pay the $455,000 ticket for me I would definitely go I always wanted to be an astronaut I'm 64 years old to experience the zero g and be above the atmosphere even for brief moment would be heavenly...
I turn 25 the 4th and ina start saving a lil at a time to invest to get a rental property
Right there with you. Few people have the opportunity to do something that significant in their lives
You guys would have better luck with space x. You can’t be considered an astronaut riding in a virgin aircraft, it doesn’t get nearly high enough, just enough to be in tumble upper atmosphere
That wouldn’t make you an astronaut.
It would make you a passenger.
You all are nuts
Great video! Just found this channel a few days ago and I'm very glad I did. Keep up the good work!
Greetings from Basel ;)
Thank you - merci viu mau!
There is no way you'd get me up in one of those things. And I love flying!
This is crazy!! Crazy amazing and informative. This channel is incredible.
RIP
Fascinating!! Thanks for all your work!
He was a rich child with a dream. I think that might've helped
In the future, spaceflight will be very common, opening up a niche market for videos covering spaceflight incidents. You should make the channel, could call it Spacespace
Many people in the space sector would not like a youtube channel on spacecraft incidents, especially in an emerging industry. It could ruin the public image.
your content is awesome, my friend! cheers from Brazil
thank you!
Great video and lots of good comments. If my price was paid then hack yes I would go. Being 65 years old I am prepared for any outcome.
Interesting analysis. Hopefully VG implemented some safety mechanisms to prevent premature fettering.
The current vehicles that VG has now have a feather unlock inhibit function that will prevent pre-mature unlocking of the feather system.
Very good video and analysis of what happened. A follow-up video would be good to describe any technical changes made after this incident. For example, was the flight system modified to recognize that it is trans-sonic and not unlock the feathering mechanism even if the pilot tried to enable it? What training and simulation changes did Virgin Galactic make? A video explaining the escape mechanism would also be interesting ... how did the captain survive a breakup of his craft? Why did the copilot not survive?
what I can tell you is that virgin galactic modified the craft so that the mechanism can now only be unlocked at the correct range of speed. The rest, unfortunately, is beyond me!
Thanks for covering this.
Wonderfully done!
I think I'd take the small chances that I would die to fly to low orbit. After this happened they probably increased the safety of the space plane rocket. I also believe that people tend to get overconfident and loose on the safety rules if nothing happens. Because this happened during testing probably made the authorities harder on the company.
I agree with you, Victor, on the overconfidence. I think all of us have been guilty in that respect, be it on the job, driving a car, or performing a task we‘ve performed so many times we‘re sick and tired of it. When driving my car I often like to remind myself I’m operating a potentially deadly weapon. So far I’ve dodged any bullets. But it may only take a fraction of a second to change that.
You’d hopefully think differently if you had kids. Why risk your kids calling someone else “Daddy” just so you can be a passenger on some billionaire’s ego wang.
Beautiful Footages and Great Narration👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 May the FO's soul Rest In Peace🙏🏻 I wouldn't go in the Virgin Galactic, I like to be flying in a Plane and Not In A Spaceship😅😅😅
Love your Profile picture, reminds me of the Reise Reise Album cover!
Thanks :) I know, both show a stylized flight data recorder
Whether the first officer was aware of the danger is irrelevant, the fact that he could actually unlock the feathering mechanism before the craft reached Mach 1.4 was the problem. Clearly the designers knew, as did the executives of Scaled Composites... for there not to be, at the very least, an alarm warning against it, or ideally a lockout preventing it from occurring until reaching the proper velocity, is beyond comprehension.
That said, would I take a ride if given the chance? Without hesitation!!
Mind you, this was the 2nd accident on this program. 1st accident was ground based, where an engine test resulted in 3 deaths.
was it that hard to put a failsafe to avoid the deployment before reaching mach1.4? just wondering ....
I can't speak to why Scaled Composites didn't do it before, but the current vehicles that VG has now have a feather unlock inhibit function that will prevent pre-mature unlocking of the feather system.
@@MarcusArmstrong037 Safety systems in prototypes are likely to cause accidents instead of preventing them. Normally such systems are only introduced when the behavior of the vehicle has been well characterized and even then are introduced in a cautionary way. Imagine if for instance the as yet untried safety system were to prevent the feathering from being activated when it absolutely needed to.
Alternatively you don't even need to imagine, just look at what Boeing did with the 737 Max - the MCAS was meant to make the plane safer by avoiding stalls but because some idiot (or criminal) decided to classify it as a non critical system, arguing that it only 'augmented' the maneuvering of the plane so they neither analysed it theoretically in enough detail nor tested it comprehensively enough. The result was that it activated when it shouldn't have, driving the plane into the ground. There is no way that would have happened if the system had been analysed and tested in the proper way that any flight critical system is.
@@listerdave1240 I feel that a safety system should be in place to prevent feathering below M1.4, but if the system prevented feathering on decent, there should be a way to shut down the feather unlock inhibit function with a switch. Same with the 737 Max, the MCAS should be shut down with one button if it were to malfunction. RIP to the lives lost in both incidents.
I was never knew those details. Thanks for this insight
Very good vid!
What I love about your channel name, is that it took a non-native English speaker to finally correctly translate aerospace to English. Now we need someone to make a channel called Airdynamics, and we achieved some more greatness
Oh, this had me worried as I thought this was a new crash. Thankfully this happened 7 years ago and has been accounted for by VG.
If you have AI and sofrware automation on your side then Elons fail forward with empty ships approach is the correct way forward.
Virgin have spent years fixing this presumably .
7 year gap between the accident and Branson's flight, it was still amazing
Great video and information on the cause of the crash. I don't think the news had any information about this after the investigation. It's unfortunate that the FO ultimately paid for his mistake -- RIP.
I would take the ticket and give it to a very very famous flat earther.
If that was not an option, I'd still fly to space anyways.
😄
Nice work
There is a concept in safety engineering called a “HazOp” analysis. This is where EVERY POSSIBLE combination and sequence of hazardous conditions are studied as to their cause, impacts, prevention, detection, and remedy. So WHY didn’t the Scaled Composites safety officer (I presume they have one) do this standard analysis so that the designers could put in the appropriate safety measures and protections against inevitable human limitations??? The Coast Guard designates these sort of craft “manifestly unsafe” and will prevent people from going to sea in them. So how could the FAA likewise allow this craft to fly to space? I agree with the NTSC finding. SC needs to up their game.
Great video! Any way to know if they made any modifications to the way the feathering system is unlocked? Like it cannot be unlocked until Mach 1.4 is reached? Or, is it still up to the pilot to manually unlock at that speed? Also, does Virgin Galactic call their pilots Capitan and First Officer? I know with NASA shuttle flights, the pilot in the left seat is called the Commander and the one in the right is called the Pilot. Not sure if they use this nomenclature or not. I know this seems odd to ask, but it's on my mind with tonight's Inspiration4 launch. As Dr. Proctor is considered the pilot and Jared is the Commander. Thanks again for the great video!
Thanks! Yes they did, the mechanism now can't be unlocked prematurely.
How could they not have known... EVERYBODY who knows anything about rocket launches or aerodynamics knows the stresses and forces through MaxQ. There is absolutely no way that they wouldn't have known this unless they took a couple of random people off the street and had them pilot this craft
They did know, its called human error. This is very old news and issue is now resovled.
Pay for my ticket and heck yes, I would go.
This was just an example of the very old syndrome where the engineers think "no-one would be silly enough to do that. No need to bring it up (put it in the manual)" competing with a pilot's usual attitude of "if it isn't forbidden in the manual, then it must be okay to do it."
this accident is the clear example of why you always automate these mechanisms with a computer. even as far back in the 70's, variable wing geometry fighter jets controlled their wing configuration through the on board computer. of course manual overrides are always a must, but as "mission complexity" increases (i.e pilots flying at subsonic speed > supersonic > whatever you'd call this, it has a lot of moving parts) the stakes get higher and mistakes can lead to more dramatic consequences, the pilots need that automated backup.
This is why aircraft fighter pilots keep their hand off the control stick during a catapult launch from the deck. I'm surprised there was no one in the US Navy on this engineering or flight team. They would have corrected this problem and prevented this situation from ever having happened.
There was one point in my life I would have taken the journey but now I'm happy with both boots on the ground.
I’d hold my money and wait for musk to let the public ride his ships
If I could afford such a trip I'd most certainly spend that money on something else to elevate my ego.
In hindsight yes. It would also make sense to make a car with a steering wheel that will not let you jerk it so hard in one direction that would lose control and crash.
To answer the question No I wouldn’t go even if it was free . I can barely get on a plane every few years and that’s enough for me. Great video well explained and put together as always 👍🏻
Yeah sorry Richard, not all of us have the cash to do as we please
After watching the Branson, Musk and Bezos Space Race… I would only ride SpaceX.
It's still a great accomplishment..Well Done...
Yes, absolutely. It would be great to experience 5 minutes of zero gravity rather than the 20 to 30 seconds of past flights. Like anything, there will have to be improvements made and I feel like Virgin Galactic can do it. I am so impressed with Virgin Galactic. We must remember there have been lives lost in every aspect of spaceflight with the most lives being lost during the NASA spaceflights with 14 people dying in 2 space shuttle disasters. NASA was very careless about keeping their flights safe.
You should launch a new channel called "spacespace" for space related accidents.
I actually had that pun in there but I removed it, because I thought I shouldn't joke around in videos where people die 🙃
@@AirspaceVideos Yes adding a pun like that might be viewed as a slightly bad attempt at humour for a single video but a whole other channel about accidents wouldn't be as in the cheek I think.
Anyone in front of me in the queue to ride on Virgin Galactic would be putting their life at risk. Or, if no one was willing to pay for me to fly, tellers at the bank closest to Virgin's launch complex had better get some bags pre-filled with cash. Because I'm coming for it!
I can’t even imagine the experience of flying a plane one second, and being outside a cockpit 10 miles up in open air the next second
Can you make a video explaining, why the aerodynamic forces can be higher at lower speeds? Seems like an interesting topic
That surely would be interesting, but I have to admit my knowledge is largely in the subsonic range, as that's the range airliners fly in... if there's somebody more knowledgable than me out there (combat pilots, maybe?), let me know!
it is very complicated and needs much to know about
Hindsight is 20/20, but I'll say it anyways;
1) There should be an interlock between Pilot and copilot, requiring the both to each pull a lever to activate feathering...
2) The levers CANNOT be moved un-commanded...
3) That another "Speed" interlock be in place to prevent the unlikely event that both pilots can actuate the levers before it has reached the correct speed range, or if the case of a false speed indication that the Interlock also blocks the feathering..
4) There should be 3 separate speed indicators and speed measuring mechanisms, and vote system that confirms the correct speed has been attained.
If these precautions were in place, I'd have no reluctance to fly Virgin Galactic... (Blue Orgasm, well that's another matter....)
It would make sense, given that they knew that premature unlocking of the feathering mechanism would result in structural failure, that an interlock, tied into the airspeed indicator, would prevent the unlock lever to be moved until 1.4 IMN,
Most people think Virgin Galactic is a super advanced space craft. It isn't, the controls are very old school in a pullies and levers kind of way. Pilots on that level know every single detail about a flight like that, but we all make mistakes. There should have been a system that prevented this from happening. I think there is now.
If I didn’t have to pay for it, I’d go.
NO WAY WOULD I GO ON THAT AIRCRAFT!
Totally missed the detail that it's named Enterprise.
Technically 80 km is under the karman line as defined by international standards but by US standards it is space. It really might as well be.
Excellent video and since you'd asked at the end of the episode...no! Hell, NO! I would not take a seat on this vehicle. If I'm going to risk high altitude flight, it may as damn well be in formal, low earth orbit ( as on the ISS) and not screwing around in some arbitrary "border" between our atmosphere and space.
Karman line (or the boundary between airplanes and spaceships is 100km) .Above Karman line the speed any aerofoil (or airfoil) requires to produce positive lift is above the escape velocity.
I would go in a heartbeat! I could think of no better way to die if anything went wrong
10:00. It’s what I call the “red button theory”. Don’t touch the red button or something bad will happen. You were never going to touch it until you were told not to
The NTSB was quite right to put the blame on Scaled Composites, not the pilots. A serious lack of thinking by the designers.
Yes I will go it would Be a Beautiful Experience. I have less Fear going to space than Crossing a Street
Nope nope nope. I bet everyone understands now the risk in prematurely unlocking the feather system!
Rich Branson gave an inspirational speech to the kids. When Jeff Bezos went to space he asked if he could deep throat some skittles from a trust fund baby. " i want a skittle in my mouth shoot me some in my mouth" Just imagine flying on the border of Earths atmosphere and asking a trust fund baby to throw a skittle into your mouth.
Better training needed, plus the new safety feature. Was the guy suicidal? MCAS in the boeing 737 was a accident waiting to happen also!
For sure🎉 it'd be amazing 🤩
Its amazing anyone survived.
If someone pays my ticket, I'm there. Yes I'm going.
If I'm strapping my ass to a bomb, I want the full Monte, I want orbit.
Therefore I have to fly SpaceX.
I thought that the feather system was activated until re-entry, so that it would act as a parachute. Doing it at supersonic speeds sounds crazy to me and I inherently think the spaceship will shatter into a million pieces due to the friction and maximum drag of this position.
Cold War bombers in the 1950s (B36) crashed at a completely unacceptable level. An entire crew was killed each time. 32 out of 385 planes crashed.
Great video! Also, in case you don't know: You've uploaded the video twice.
Thank you! Yes I noticed. I accidentially published the patreon version first. oops!
I would go. I heard William Shatner has been invited to go up in Basels rocket. I like the spirit of having this done by a commercial establishment. Many of the people chosen are exnasa or other highly-rated professionals. It remains to be seen, if this system, or typical launch, will ever achieve higher orbits.
What time would it take for the spacecraft to go from Mach 0.80 to 1.4?
I can't really give you a number, but I bet it would be just a few seconds!
Honestly, I was surprised to learn that the Spacecraft is piloted manually at all during ascent. Most space vehicles, including all kinds of rockets as well as the Space Shuttle, ascend on autopilot to match their ascent path precisely as well as avoid human error altogether. This is not because agencies like NASA don't trust their astronauts, but because a lot is at stake with each rocket launch, and failures are still more likely than for example in commercial aviation.
Why does Virgin Galactic have humans controlling their craft during this phase of the flight?
Hell yes I would go up with Virgin Galactic if I could.
I wanna go!😎✈️
I thought that would be a billion dollars to rebuild it💀
Surely it would be a simple modification to fit an inter-lock, preventing activation of the unfeathering until at a safe speed to do so ???
Inter-locks are used in many industries in many ways. Their principle is very simple.
You cannot open a door/hatch to a pressurised vessel until pressure is equalised for example.
would be simple, yes. They did that after the crash.
@@AirspaceVideos As is usually the case :-( I work in the oil industry and it took many accidents to force operators to fit inter-locks onto such things as saturation diving habitats, that prevent hatches being opened whilst the habitat is pressurised
the strain that caused the wreckage : is it really due to triggering the mechanisme at "too low speed" ... or rather at "too low altitude" = denser air ?
This is old news. Literally their first ever test flight…
Nooooooooooooo, unless I was flying.
Would I go? Absolutely! To see and experience the edge of space, something only a very small number of people have ever experienced, without a doubt I would go.
I am not interested to do a luxurious space tour now when the world is suffering from Corona pandemic. ...