How Forgetting One Tiny Thing Crashed This Passenger Jet | Northwest Orient Airlines Flight 6231
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 мар 2022
- Donations are never expected but appreciated: paypal.me/miniaircrash
Join My Discord: / discord
727 Image: JetPix - Gallery page www.airliners.net/photo/Northw...
This is the story of Northwest orient airlines flight 623. On the first of december 1974. A boeing 727 was on the ground at JFk international. The thing was, they didnt need the plane at JFK anymore and so the decision was taken to ferry the plane all the way from JFK to buffalo newyork. This would be a ferry flight, so the only people onboard the plane were the 3 pilots. As they entered the cockpit they started to prep the plane for flight.
Once the plane was fueled with 48,500 pounds or 22 tons of fuel. the plane started to taxi to the runway through the biting cold of december. 14 minutes later the plane was at the runway. Monemtents later the pilots got the all clear from the controllers and they were cleared to takeoff. The pilots pushed the throttles forward and the 727 started to gain speed. In less than a minute the 727 was airborne bound for buffalo. As the jet climbed away from the airport kenedy departure contacted the pilots and cleared them to 14000 feet. In the cockpit as the plane climbed the pilots noticed something strange. Their speed increased from 264 knots to 304 knots, but it didnt stay there. Their airspeed was all over the place, it would drop by 40 knots and then come back up and then it would drop by a 140 knots and then return to normal. All of this happened in less than a minute. As pilots tried to make sense of what was happening the aircraft was handed over from Kennedy departure to new york air route traffic control center.
As flight 6231 passed 16,000 feet their recorded airspeed began to spike again and so did their rate of climb. This caught the first officers eye he said “do you realize were going 340 knots and im climbing 5000 feet a minute!?”. The second officer commented that the high rate of climb was beacuse the plane was so light and soon after he said that the rate of climb increased again this time to 6500 feet per minute. By the time they were at 23000 feet the overspeed warning sounded, they were at 405 knots the captain remarked “would you believe that,?”, the first officer replied with “I do believe it but I cant do anything about it”. The captain asked the first officer to pull back saying quote “let her climb”. Seconds after saying that a second overspeed warning sounded. But then starnegly 10 seconds after the overspeed warning the stall warning sounded, the warning came on intermittently and as it did the plane started to buffet. The first officer said “theres that mach buffeting, guess well have to pull it up” the captain agreed by saying “pull it up”. The plane had gone from an overspeed warning to a stall warning in seconds and the pilots couldnt make heads or tails of what was happening. But as all of this unfolded in the cockpit flight 6231 started to fall at 15000 feet per minute towards the ground.
From the ground controllers perspective everything had been normal upto this point but then at 7:24 pm a radio call came from flight 6231 “mayday mayday mayday were out of control descending through 20000 feet”. Flight 6231 was in trouble and the controller on the ground was trying his best to help the stricken plane, he cleared the airspace around the plane and cleared them down to lower altitudes as the plane dropped. As the plane fell out of the sky he tried to get more information from the pilots about what their exact problem was. The pilots replied with “ Were descending through 12 were in a stall”.In the cockpit the pilots were trying their best to save the plane the captain extended the flaps in an attempt to slow the fall of the plane. In the cockpit the g forces that they were subjected to went from a mild three to a brutal 5 as the pilots fought for control of the falling plane. The plane was dropping fast and the pilots were running out of time to save their plane. But that was the last time anyone heard from flight 6231 moments later the plane crashed into the harriman state park. None of the three pilots on board survived. 
Наука
As soon as you said "their airspeed was all over the place", I though "blocked pitot tubes". Surely pilots are taught to suspect pitot tube blockage on seeing inconsistent airspeed readings, and also to trust the stall warning system over the airspeed? I wonder how often situations like this occur and the pilots *do* correctly identify and resolve the problem without further issue.
Yeah we are - I'm an ex-airline pilot. Whenever something like that happens you pull out one of the manuals and look at a power Vs attitude chart. Just set the power and attitude and the plane will fly along just fine.
Pilots sure are taught that today!
Back in 1974 however.....
(isn't it _weird_ that that's almost 50 years ago??)
From this accident and a bunch of other more recent ones involving blocked pitot tubes (Birgenair 301, Aeroperu 603, and Air France 447) the impression I get is that most people, when getting two contradictory warnings, seem to give precedence to whichever one comes first. And in each case, the overspeed warning came before the stall warning, and the crew fixated on that and discounted the stall warning.
I'm no pilot but I thought the same thing about the Pitot tubes and a stick shaker warning on top of that would make me push the column and see if I could maintain altitude with moderate power settings. But as stated I'm not a pilot. Just one take off, touch and go and a barrel roll (motion off) in a real simulator under my belt.
As I'm not a pilot, I can't help but wonder if there a specific reason why the pitot tube heaters aren't automatically switched on at a certain temperature? It would make sense to have that automated, especially because at higher altitudes the risk of those tubes freezing only increases.
This actually happened to me a few years back. I was flying a brand new Seneca V w/ a glass panel and full deice gear one December morning from Palm Springs to Aspen. I’d flight panned for 18,000 ft; weather was good, just some high level cirrus cloud layers. I was on O2 and happily cruising at 200’kts..I was on top of the cloud layers when suddenly the airspeed plummeted, nose pitched down and autopilot disengaged. It took a few mins to register what had happened. I went through the checklist and could find no anomalies, but when I looked at the wings I saw a thin layer of ice build up, nothing major, but the airplane was descending rapidly and control response was very sluggish. Oddly, there was no Increase in the airspeed or vertical speed indicators. I finally figured out my pitot heat wasn’t on and had iced over. This was an omission in the Piper POH checklist that had apparently killed a number of pilots. I requested a lower altitude,turned on the pilot heat and had to fly the plane w/ visual references to the horizon.
Fortunately, I was not in full
IMC, as it took minutes to respond to pitot heat - much longer than I would have expected. I slowly turned back to Palm Springs knowing that the ice on my tail was probably twice that of what appeared on the wings. The slow response time for pitot heat and my airspeed and VS indicator shocked me. Lesson learned.
Were your sluggish controls due to the ice buildup? I guess you hadn't noticed that until the AP disengaged? How can you prevent ice buildup anyway? Is there anything you can do?
That is shocking that it was not in the checklist, glad you escaped to tell the tale, respect.
That must have been dangerous. But surely, it's not something you forget to check twice, as it must have been scary. But you're alive and it's all that counts.
@@aspuzling I know it's an old thread... BUT I'll try for what I can offer (just in case you ain't found an answer yet)...
Yes, with AP engaged, the plane is literally flying itself. So long as it's within the tolerances of the AP, then it will compensate for weather and aerodynamics "on the fly" without much complaint. It's only when it gets beyond those tolerances that the AP disengages, and the pilot gets everything "dropped in his lap" all at once... THAT is why he only noticed the sluggish controls after the AP shut off mid-flight.
AS to ice... There's only so much you can do in any plane, and only certain types even have anything you can do. The O.P. mentioned that this Seneca V had "full deice gear", so it WAS equipped to deal with icing. His problem was that none of that was on his pre-flight check-list, and it was apparently an issue at the time "that had killed several pilots already"... SO he got lucky in some scary moments.
Most properly equipped planes (those with good deice gear) have heating elements along the leading edges of flight surfaces. This is usually enough to break the bonds ice will make with the metal of the plane so water and icy bits slip free from there and knock anything else away further back. The pitot tubes should also have elements in them to keep ice from building up to block them as well...
BUT in the ages old and trusted Cessna's used by literally every training program in the civilized world, there's NOTHING... If you get into icing conditions... um... well... you just don't want to get into icing conditions. A very VERY few have managed to luck-out and survive their ordeals, and you can hear some hair raising stories on a few channels on YT, like "Air Safety Institute" from their archives, but the best you can do upon finding icing conditions with older and unequipped aircraft is GET THE HELL DOWN ON THE GROUND... before you find "Splatville"... Nobody has any fun in Splatville. ;o)
@@gnarthdarkanen7464 Why is it possible for ice to built up on flying planes? What about all the vibrations, the heat/pressure (from air hitting the wings) and high amount of airflow not enough to remove any ice from a wing?
I'm not an aviator but must be watching too many air crash channels or something.... my first thought was, sort of joking with myself, 'pitot tubes'.
I really appreciate the time and research you must put into your vids. Thanks.
When I heard "there's the Mach buffeting" I knew instantly that this was another Air France 447 type incident, and that that was actually stall buffeting. Very sad that they did not realize in time that they were getting bad data. I wonder if it could have saved them to have known more about the performance characteristics of the 727, specifically that the speeds and rate of climb they were achieving would be impossible even when unloaded. As an armchair observer years and years later, my immediate thought was that they were getting bad data, but I'm not a pilot so I can't know what they were thinking or why. Considering that there were three redundant systems, they probably considered that they were getting bad data but observed the same data from all three independent systems.
Anytime things vary wildly on your instruments and you still trust them over just common sense you're doomed. If they just said we aren't climbing at a ridiculous rate it must be faulty lets ignore the data and just fly the bird it may have helped.
Again no expert just an armchair follower. Get down to a safe altitude in clear skies and attempt to land screw the instruments
Confirmation bias, and both pilot and first officer instruments agreed, so they trusted the display, instead of taking the correct approach and putting in a set of inputs that are "known good" for engine power, and attitude, and troubleshooting what was wrong with the indication. There is also a "Pitot heater failure" warning light, but this light depends on the pitot heating system being turned on, it serves to show that the turned on system is not heating, either due to a broken connection to the heater, or the pitot heater shorting out and popping the pitot heater breaker in the avionics bay.
Deliberately inoperative in the off position, as then there is no current flow to switch the relay that keeps the light off, it has a brief flash when pitot power is turned on, as a lamp test. You do not want pitot heating on the ground, the 100 to 150W of heater will rapidly overheat the pitot tube on the ground, and also will melt the covers used for ground storage as well, plus the heat will degrade the soft unvulcanised rubber tubing used to connect the pitot system to the various avionics boxes. The front rubber tube is there so you can replace the pitot without removing large sections of hard tubing.Gets very brittle with heat and aging, especially if you run it too hot. Turned on just before take off, so it will heat up as you climb out, and keep cool enough with the surrounding airflow to melt ice, and not boil water.
On the other hand, many planes have crashed assuming instruments are incorrect due to ridiculous readings, but in fact were reading accurately but just didn't match up to what the pilot was experiencing (usually due to somatogravic illusion). But that's really just me playing devil's advocate, in this case there were three pilots in the craft, comparing the readings against the characteristics of the flight should have been very doable. And given the values of the data were beyond the limits of any commercial aircraft ever made (including even the Concorde), should have made it even more apparent.
If the pilots did the one thing that I've always heard about flying. And that's Fly the Plane. When things don't make sense, and you're unsure what going on with your instruments. I'm told fly the plane.
with regards to the Air France incident, one of the pilots didn't relinquish control when the other one stepped in to get it out of the stall and the offending pilot kept the yoke pulled back while the one who took over was trying to ease the nose downward to exit the stall. The captain shouted when he realized what was happening but it was pretty much too late. In that case, when someone says they have the controls that other pilot needs to let the hell go.
I am training for my PPL and this justifies my CFI yelling at me for not following the checklist as it needs to be. This is a great lesson.
Note to self: If your insanely heavy commercial jet starts acting like it's performing like a fighter jet, turn on the pitot heat.
at the first mention of unusual airspeed, I thought Pitot Tubes.....and I am not a pilot.....
.....I guess that Pitot Tube problems have brought down a number of planes since the seventies.
Probably the reason they didn't think of that in this case was precisely because it wasn't a well-known problem back then. Nowadays with Air France 447 and such, even a lot of members of the *public* are aware of this phenomenon.
I did too. I guess once again, we find out how important these transparent investigations are. We who aren't even pilots, but just watch aviation videos, know all about pitot tubes now.
Yeah, I don't buy it -- even back then pilots had training in how the airspeed and altitude instruments relate to the pitot-static system. Those crazy airspeed and altitude readings should have 100% immediately cued their training that something was up specifically the pitot-static system, and they needed to fly other instruments until it was resolved.
All three of these pilots had helmet fires that prevented them from taking even a single step back and saving their own lives.
I think the biggest thing that has changed since this incident isn't training relative to pitot-static systems, but rather CRM. In a modern cockpit one of the pilots would have made it their first priority to take a step back, and that would have immediately prevented this incident.
i guess these accidents were need to implement a culture (that is hopefully implemented) of "healthy" system distrust
Yeah. To emphasize this, back in 2003 i got a bit of time flying a family friend's Cessna. Nothing more than flying straight and level- I was only 15 so I wasn't really learning to fly or anything. And even then, the pilot had me walk with him for preflight, and pointed out checking the pitot tube. And we were VFR, with no autopilot- i.e. the pitot wasn't nearly as critical as it is on a jet, and yet still the pilot made sure to check it.
I sit and wait for your videos. And you never disappoint. You really do a great job. Thank you for doing them!
Thank you!
I second this
Wow. I've known about this crash for several years and compiled data about it, even finding where it crashed to the exact point in New York State, with plans to visit the site at some time during a future hike. I lost all the data in a computer crash last year and have been waiting to see if someone would eventually cover it in a video. Thanks so much for doing this accident. All the info I lost can now be rebuilt. I'm going to the site at some point and will make a video.
Isn't there a Wikipedia article with all the info at the ready for you to use?
@@MrNicoJac Not only that, the Wikipedia article links to the actual final report.
Hey, good luck on your hike, and endeavors in NY. You might be able to send the computer's hard drive to a data recovery center ($100-$300 for typical drive, ~$2000 for large capacity), unless your computer used an SSD, then you are kinda S.O.L, but professional recovery is possible. About the aircraft incident, it would be nice that if the outside temperature sensor reads < 41°F (5°C), then a circuit or computer chip could automatically activate the pitot tube deicing heating element. Automation could help pilots not forget things, unless said automation fails. RIP to the crew aboard this aircraft, and hope that no similar future incidents happen.
Bro. You do know you can find the final report online ?
Edit: just seen that this has already been commented.
@@mikekeenan8450 Thanks. I know that's available on Wikipedia, it's just that it was decades ago I heard about it and had a newspaper article. A few years ago, I lost my drive and all my notes, so I couldn't remember the airline, the year, the model of plane. This video gave me back the keys to basically all the info I needed. There was a monument dedicated in 2014, with a video, which I just found yesterday.
I was thinking pitot ice from the moment instruments went strange while in potential icing conditions. Thing is though, it's easy for us to recognise that because 1) incidents like this made icing a big deal, and 2) we're relaxed and watching a video about a crash. For these pilots it's a lot harder because that wasn't as well known back then and their highly stressful situation will lead to confirmation bias. This is shown by the misidentification of stall onset buffetting as Mach buffetting, no doubt helped by the overspeed warning just before.
I'm not a pilot at all, but from what I've seen in this and other cases:
- Buffetting precedes a stall.
- Senseless speed data tend to be related to blocked or damaged sensors.
- If all data from redundant sources is wrong, it is likely that a configuration step was missed.
Correct.
And if the speed/altitude is suspect, you revert to basics while you sort it out.
Set an attitude (say three or four degrees nose up) and a moderate cruise thrust while you investigate.
They would have then almost immediately been able to find the pitot heat switches off, and thus fixed the problem.
I remember this accident very well.. However it took the backseat to another accident on the same day of TWA flight 514, also a Boeing 727 - 231. 85 people lost their lives near Washington DC.
I have to wonder then, how do you remember the accident so well? Were you nearby?
@@aspuzling Family on board TW514. Columbus Ohio to Washington D.C.
@@robm3074
I'm very sorry to hear that. I'm surprised that you even have the capacity to register the loss of another plane on that day but I imagine when something like that happens to you it puts the entirety of air travel safety into question.
I've certainly become a lot more aware of the dangers now because my parents have taken up private flying. Every time I hear about one of these tragedies I imagine what it would be like if it happened to my loved ones.
It underscores what an old timer told me long ago. Nobody cares when pilots die.
TWA crash became a landmark accident that resulted in changes in how ATC issues approach instructions, how pilots fly an approach and it founded the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System to allow information to flow about irregularities.
I really appreciate how thoroughly you cover incidents like this. Subscribed.
I immediately thought of pitot heat when I heard of the situation, honestly it surprises me that the pilots didn't question their strange instrument readings.
Exactly like the AF447 and some other : lack of understanding basics. Climbing at high speed high climb rate high altitude is just physicaly impossible. When you are lost, just push the thrust levers and let the plane fly by itself. It will give you enough time to analyse the problem. Pulling the stick at high altitude will result in a stall sooner or later, Airlines pilots should train on gliders, it is the best way to understand total energy management.
Right on. Energy management is key.
The engines can only add so much energy to the system, so in civilian aircraft you are mostly safe to set thrust to 85% and pitch to something like 5° nose up.
That should be enough to provide a gentle climb to a safe cruising altitude while avoiding overspeeding.
"Pulling" away excess speed is something you only do when you are sure that your speed indication is accurate, or your engine fails and you are (confirmed) way faster than your best glide speed.
When you said that the stall and overspeed warnings were going on I thought it was something like Aeroperú 603 where the pitot tubes were blocked.
I believe this was the one that was ferried to pick up the Baltimore Colts football team in Buffalo after a game.
Not the first time the 'one little thing' brought a jet down. 22 years later there was Aeroperu flight 603 crashed due to tape being left on it. Then there was the Birgenair crash (wasp nests in pitot tubes) and of course we remember the Air France 447 crash (ice in pitot tubes)
It was indeed supposed to pick up the Colts.
My mornings are so lovely despite getting up at 5 for work thanks to your brilliant videos. Thank you!
I don't know if they would have recovered but from the begining I knew what was the problem. It's sad and mind blowing at the same time. I have been a heavy H/C pilot for 10 years in the military (and then an Experimental Test Pilot) but the problem is exactly the same, except the stall, and I can tell you that when you have icy conditions, you are careful about this phenomenon so that in case of strange speed indications, the first reflex is to check if the Pitot tubes are heated.
The point is that they didn't even think about that because of the sacred check-list procedures used in the airline industry: as they had gone through the pre-take-off check-list, everything was supposed to be fine in their mind and consequently they didn't check anything again, they instead tried to understand impossible performances (and they were not confused by the dozens of alarms provided by computers nowadays ...).
This is the problem in this accident: it was a ferry flight w/o passengers so they were somehow more relax, so to speak, and they went through the check-list without thinking, reciting the replies by heart but not checking really the details other than what was obvious and very visible and ... they missed the Pitot tubes heating.
Just my opinion
Is there any reason why the heating of pitot tubes can't be automated to turn on under a certain temperature? Seems like a no brainer that would have prevented this accident.
@@brendaalpert6171 That's a good question. As far as I know it's never automated, anywhere, for many reasons:
- icing is not that simple and just dependant on temperature but also on the humidity rate,
- heating is not supposed to be used out of icing conditions (possible damage of the sensor and/or erroneous measurement) and
- this is adding another potential failure due to the automation that the crew should be able to override anyway.
Eventually the chosen solution has been a manual activation + icing detectors. Usually, from my old experience, we switched the deicing on as soon as there was possible icing conditions (clouds, high humidity AND a temperature between +3° and -5°C). Out of these conditions the heating was switched off and ... it worked. But I admit I was not flying airliners, however we were facing icing conditions quite often since we were precisely at lower altitudes so exactly in the wrong temperatures range especially in winter ...
@@patolt1628 Thanks for your explanation. Makes sense, but perhaps at some time in the future they'll figure out sensors to account for the other factors contributing to icing. So sad how simple human failure has caused this on multiple occasions.
@@brendaalpert6171 Yes, maybe. Anyway we can mitigate the risks as far as possible and the lessons learnt from many accidents have indeed contributed to a real improvement w.r.t. safety but in transport zero risk doesn't exist and will never exist, that's the way it is.
What does H/C stand for?
This is why check lists MUST be followed at all times.
It was followed. It shows why checklist are not foolproof.
Feels like there have been multiple crashes due to cold weather messing up the pitot static system. So many incredible systems and safety measures and yet more than once this little stick being blocked has cost lives
i'm wondering why it can't be automated to heat up when the temperature hits freezing
I was hiking on the Long Path today in Harriman State park and saw the crash site and memorial. Very moving. RIP.
As this story unfolded I immediately suspected lack of pitot heat with the resulting icing of the tubes. Recovery from a stall was always notoriously difficult in a rear engined airliner with a T tail configuration due to a phenomenon known as 'deep stall' . As soon as this aircraft entered a Deep Stall the crew had virtually no chance to recover the aircraft back to normal flight.
The interesting thing is that this problem is so well known these days that you’d be hard pressed to find a pilot at a major airline, today, who wouldn’t immediately recognize the problem for what it is; a problem with the pitot-static system. It has happened too often for the industry to ignore it.
Modern flight training has changed in such a manner that we are taught to always be aware that flight instruments may show erroneous information. When this is suspected, we immediatel go to a pitch attitude which would guarantee a safe flight path. This will provide a safe, sustainable situation from which to investigate the problem further and a base configuration for immediate return, if the problem cannot be solved. Priority number one is to keep the aircraft flying.
That's good to know.
This sort of incident has happened a few times. Pilots are trained to rely on their instruments but if yiu get a stall warning AND overspeed warning they need to identify it as a provlem. Nose level, 60% thrust should be steady flight. If the instruments show high or low numbers then it proves that they gave a problem. The flight was perfectly flyable. They jyst had to think outside the box
Hadn’t studied this incident, but the second I heard of those performance numbers I immediately thought blocked pitot system.
Checklist for unreliable airspeed / pitot static system. 👌
Also those climb / airspeed numbers don’t require boing engineers to tell you they’re impossible, the pilots should have known that immediately.
💯 this 👍
i know i am only a small glider pilot but still it amazed me that none of the pilots tough: my spped is changing quickly and has weird scales. lets just level the plane first and figure out what is happening. I know we small pilots trust ourself far more than our instruments but i also very very often hear that commercial pilots learn to have a "healthy" system distrust. It really amazes me that none of them just said: lets level out set engines to (insert reasonable power level) and figure out what is wrong.
@@tizi087 What you’re saying is exactly one hundred percent correct, and what we would do if there’s doubt about primary flight instruments including airspeed. This accident has astounded me ever since I first read the report decades ago. It’s bordering on bizarre that a trained pilot could do this, let alone two of them (plus a flight engineer).
It’s a very basic skill which must not be forgotten.
This plane crashed in my county, and I never knew about it. Thanks for this video!
The 72 was my 1st assignment at Delta. I spent 1 1/2 years on the panel and 5 1/2 in the right seat. We had a page in the manual for "operation with unreliable airspeed indications". I'm sure this was a result of this accident. It had pages for various weights, each showing configuration, desired airspeed and pitch attitudes and power settings for the target airspeed. Basic stick and rudder stuff- pitch, power and airspeed. Another thing was with mach buffet- your instinct since you're too fast is to pull up. This aggravates the buffet since more lift creates higher velocities over the wing and strengthens the shock wave. Mach buffet- reduce thrust immediately. Great video!
omg i love every episode of MACI ; thanks so much for your solid work !
Looks like a lot of people in the comments, regardless of aviation experience, seem to have also had an immediate instinct that it was blocked pitot tubes. I'm a student helicopter pilot, engineer, and amateur aviation enthusiast and I knew what was wrong right when the airspeed indication was fluctuating at the beginning of the flight. Winds don't change that rapidly. Good pilots will know which systems are unreliable with blocked pitot tubes and find an alternative way to fly the plane. I guess it's tough, when you have no visual horizon. All you can do is set the engine power correctly and hope your gyros can tell you attitude, but without airspeed or altitude, how can you really know if you're straight and level or accelerating directly towards the ground?
Because of watching your videos i think i would immediately know what would be wrong
Makes me wonder why there is even a switch for pitot tube heating and it isn't just 'always on'.
I've heard that would be a problem if the pitot tube covers were on - wouldn't be they melt to the tube?
@@Adam-jk5ql Admittedly I say this as a total lay-woman when it comes to aviation engineering/design (albeit with some physics/engineering background), but it seems like it should be a relatively trivial exercise for multi-billion dollar aerospace companies to be able to build some sort of redundancy into the system, or draw pilots' attention to pitot heating/temperature issues, or cut out heating when a pitot cover is engaged (perhaps a magnetic, mechanical or RFID "catch" system, as a naive couple of first ideas?). I'd also have hoped that those same billion-dollar companies would be capable of providing covers made of materials which wouldn't melt, but maybe that's just me lol
My car warns me of icy conditions, why don't aircraft?
I CAN THINK OF A LOT OF LITTLE THINGS THAT DON'T MAKE SENSE. LIKE THE CABIN PRESSURE VALVE THAT CAN BE PUT ON MANUAL.
AUTO PILOTS THAT SHUT DOWN PARTS WITHOUT VERBAL WARNING.
WHY HAVE TO LEARN THE DIFFERENT CHIMES WHEN THE PLANE COULD SPEAK.
@@Hannah_Em Well now there is that sort of tech. But this was a Boeing 727 in 1974. So not a lot of subtle automation. As for why it’s not default on? It’s a high draw electrical heater. You don’t want electric heating elements to just be always on.
Good video as always
I love this channel. Keep up the good work! 😎❤️
If it's not tape over the tubes it's a little switch the pilots somehow missed!
very similar to birgenair 301 and air france 447
There's a very good life lesson in this:
Always seriously consider the possibility the information you are being given us not accurate. Consider what that means in every situation in life. Also consider the possibility you might not be correctly understanding the situation at hand or the information presented to you. Recognize that, as humans, we can be wrong and it is wise to check and double check ourselves often.
Been similar instances when bees made a nest in a pitot tube and a mechanic put masking tape over the static port while painting it and forgot to remove it. I always make pitot static system no 1 priority during a walk round.
Wow, so incredibly dramatic - and devastating for those pilots and their families.. .it sounds like maybe because of their very experience flying that plane, a touch of complacency crept in regarding the checklist? That is neither an explicit nor implicit criticism, it is merely an observation on human nature, with the emphasis on "human" which ultimately ALWAYS overrides professionalism... they could have subsequently got lucky and realised what the plane was doing was not the same as was being reported by their instruments - by using old fashioned visual reference - had they still had the altitude. Sadly that was not what transpired...
I can see a CRM issue here. According to the NTSB report, the F/O had only 46 hours as a pilot (he had formerly been a flight engineer). The captain probably talked the F/O out of taking appropriate action.
By coincidence, I was flying from LGA to Buffalo at the exact same time. My mother was listening to the radio when they announced that New York to Buffalo flight crashed. I think it took her years to recover. At any rate, the Northwest 727 crashed in Harriman State Park, which is only a few miles from where I’ve been living for 40 years.
I'm surprised by all the crashes that you document. Thank you!
As soon as you suspect unreliable airspeed, set a known power setting, such as an EPR or N1 commonly set for cruise and use the ADI (or the visual horizon if there is one) to fly straight and level. After the aircraft has stabilised you have all the time in the world to figure what’s going on and check your static sources and probe heat, etc.
Excellent video again.
Great graphics. 👏 🙂
Thank you!
Very similar to Air France 447, more than 30 years later: because of iced up pitot tubes, pilots believed they were going too fast, when actually they were going too slow, and constantly pulling the nose up in this situation made the problem worse and worse
and to my knowledge air France did not have heaters in them
Although this is first I heard about this crash, I immediately though sensor error, go to known thrust setting for level flight, slightly nose down. In a T-tail, a stall can quickly become unrecoverable.
The problem that they were seeing is classic blocked pitot. Really puzzling that three experienced pilots didn't figure that out immediately.
blocked pilots too.
When you decide something is true, confirmation bias makes it really hard to get out of that mindset.
Not that it isn’t crazy that they thought they were approaching mach speed in a climb and needed to slow down by climbing more… in a 727… which wasn’t at full power. Our brains can do wacky things when what we can build an incorrect model of what’s going on and can find (wrong) supporting evidence I guess.
@@adamf663 🙂
@@MotorcycleWrites Yes that always amazes me that their throttles are at say 80% you would think that would be the first thing they looked at when it was saying your going too fast?
Blocked pitot and drain hole. Blocked pitot and speed goes to 0. Blocked pitot and drain ASI acts like an altimeter.
Great video I never miss any videos 👍👍
Thanks, your videos are very enjoyable. Short and to the point. Not like the ‘hollywood’ ACI where they repeat the same information over and over to stretch it out. :)
If there’s anything good about this it’s the fact that there were no passengers on board. Only 3 lives lost instead of possibly 100+.
Why can the pitot tube heating be turned off at all?
Or why is there no thermostatic switch in there?
It's just the way it was in those days. Checklists *should* have prevented this. Nowadays, typically, it's activated when the engines are turned on (with increased heat when the aircraft lifts off)
You typically don't want pitot heat while you're on the ground: without the cooling effect of airflow, the pilot pitot tube will get TOO hot, which damages the heating element.
As soon as you said "the airspeed was all over the place" it was clear that probably some line in the pneumatic system was blocked. In this situation there's a simple procedure that every pilot has ingrained: Ignore the display and fly the plane by pitch and power. So yes, the plane was perfectly flyable even with the faulty display. BTW: In 2009, the same lack of basic airmanship brought down Air France 447.
Ahhh... you are back! RUclips totally hides your vids I need to search them out to start getting your videos again.
RUclips sucks! :)
Great video Mini, still waiting on an AF447 video!
Awesome video!😸
As soon as you said that the pilots were getting inconsistent air speed information I knew what the problem was. It is shocking and tragic that the three experienced pilots aboard that 727 did not figure it out. When pilots can't trust their instruments, it's a dire situation, but not impossible. But, once control surfaces were torn away, I don't think they could have recovered.
I’m simply amazed that basic flying skills are lost when pilots inter the realm of airline flying. I flew for the airlines for 34 years and each time I would always query my copilots on power and pitch relationships. Today’s pilots are primarily being flown by automation rather controlling their outcomes.
My thoughts entirely as I was listening to this unfold.
Right from the start of these pilots observations - speed 340, then 200 then 340 again. Climb 5000 fpm then 6400 fpm
This is screaming instrument failure to anyone surely, and those more technical pitot problems. Can't pilots in daylight fly without speed indication anymore?
This incident occurred in 1974-- almost 50 years ago. This video hardly demonstrates an issue with "today's pilots."
The accident was 50 years ago. Commercial aviation only really exists since the 1940s. Those pilots were essentially trained in the first quarter of commercial aviation, calling them "today's pilots" is ridiculous.
Frank’s argument is as valid today as it would have been if it were made in 1974.
I also flew for an airline (everything including 737s, 767s and 747s) for a similar amount of time and concur 100%!
Pilots are relying on automation far too much, and losing basic flying skills. There is no way in a million years that the aeroplane could fly like that (airspeed and rate of climb) just because it’s lighter than usual.
As soon as you suspect bad airspeed and altitude data- revert to basics, set ATTITUDE and thrust.
Then check: “Gee look- the pitot heat is off. How the hell did we miss that?”
Turn it on.
Too easy, problem solved. (Hold the attitude and thrust till the heat does it’s job.)
Then you have just a severe embarrassment instead of a total (fatal) disaster.
Many airline pilots know what buttons to press in what order but not not all know why you press them in that order.
I think a pilot should know that they have an attitide indicator to rely on once the speed indication is questionable. You do not get to overspeed with an airliner if it is flying with a normal horizontal attitude, wings level. For that, one has the attitude indicator and, at dailight above the clouds, the natural vision outside. I am amazed it took them so long to question their speed and rate-of-climb readings.
Imagine if this happened AFTER the plane picked up its passengers. The plane was ferrying to pick up the Baltimore Colts; the original plane that was supposed to ferry to BUF was grounded at DTW because of a snowstorm.
I think they were doomed the moment they forgot to turn on that heater switch.
My immediate thought is that they were hit with two contradictory warnings, and this is what made this lead to the outcome.
If you have IMC then things are much more critical, as a horizon will tell you what is actually happening. What I think they should have prioritized, when getting an overspeed and a stall, is the stall.
Aviate. If you're nose up and overspeed, obviously that's not possible the way it played out. Nose down on stall warning. If you're nose up and you get a stall warning, airspeed in my view is irrelevant at that point. You lower your nose. Maybe they didn't want to increase speed if they were already getting the overspeed warning, but they didn't attempt to cut power to idle either I don't think, so they were obviously confused.
Pilots should get in a sim regularly imo and have situations thrown at them that they must correctly diagnose. Reduce the startle effect of getting contradictory information and make reacting faster and easier. It's just that most flights won't involve odd occurrences and it can lead to screwing up when it does occur. Pilots should be paid more, and given not only rest time, but time to study accidents from the past. Flight basics don't change, and knowing what can happen is a big part of knowing how to react.
The 727 was a really cool looking plane.
Student pilot here, I was wondering if the stick shaker is actualy a mechanicaly induced event (meaning its a fullproof or at least another independent way to recognize the low airspeed/stall) or if it is triggered by the data the FDAU gets, even if it is wrong, meaning you could get a stick shaker when you are not stalling? Could someone enlighten me?
From what i have been able to find out, it seems as though there is a computer involved with the activation of the stick shaker
Stick shakers run off an independent system that measures the aircraft angle of attack.
AND the aeroplane feels sloppy on the controls, and buffets, just exactly as in a light aircraft.
These guys were unfortunately in loo loo land, defies belief really.
@@FutureSystem738 yeah I also was wondering that, if the airliners still give you reliable feedback even though the there is not realy a direct link betwen the yolk and the control surfaces. (even though I know that even the latest boeings are still linked through hidraulic lines if I remember correctly) Still, they must feel quite slugish all the time realy, must be quite challanging to hand fly them. I hope I get the oportunity to fly one someday.
@@AlanTheBest97 After about 25k hours flying heavy jets, and 5k hours in smaller aeroplanes, with half of that in command, I have known this story for many decades and still shake my head in disbelief with some accidents like this, and of course AF 447.
Most of the “feel” attributes through the control column on say a Boeing are “artificial”, but they’re still there- as are the other “symptoms” including high angle of attack, (usually … though not always a high nose attitude) sluggish unresponsive controls and buffeting.
They are still aeroplanes, and they still follow the basic laws of physics etc., whether you’re talking about a 747 or a single engine Cessna, or anything in between.
One thing I was taught during my commercial licence training back in the 1970s was flying without a reliable airspeed indicator. (The instructor would cover mine, and hide his from me whilst monitoring it for safety.)
It’s actually quite easy flying without an airspeed indicator when you know how to use other things, such as attitude, feel, and power etc.
I found then that I was able to extend flaps at a safe speed, approach and land usually all within about 5 knots of the desired speed- training that stands you in good stead basically forever.
I’ve done the same thing in heavy jets in the simulator with basically similar results.
Good luck in your future career.
*Thisss* is a great video.
Odd, I remember watching an episode of air crash investigation where a plane sat for weeks in the Bahamas. The Pito tubes were not covered and a hive of wasps built a nest inside them. Result, crash.
Given the importance of pitot tubes they should have a feedback loop to warn pilots if they are blocked. Planes should not even be able to take off with blocked pitot tubes. It would be incredibly simple to design aircraft with a good pitot tube system. What in the hell are aircraft manufacturers doing? Obviously they are hiring stupid people.
Well told and so sad. I remember a flight from somewhere in a tropical area where a plane had been parked for a few days. Dirt daubers had filled the tubes with mud, resulting in a similar fate.
Great video as always!
I am not a real pilot but know quite a lot through a strong interest and lots of reading. I have not got to the middle yet but I immediately think blocked pitot tube. I'll now watch till the end to see if I was right.
I'm not sure how I feel about the video's title and knowing they were flying on a cold day in December was enough for me to guess the cause of the crash. As soon as weird altitude and airspeed readings was mentioned, I was sure.
Three lives lost for forgetting to flip a heater switch... such a shame.
On FS I've been able (quite easily) to recover from such a stall. You do have to stop looking at your gauges tho. 😉
As soon as the narrator started describing weird climb and speed values, I guessed the problem was going to be the pitot tubes 💀 for something so important, you think more measures would be in place in case of an emergency or failure!!
Anti-ice is crucial, gotta make sure it works too though they get extremely hot, never touch them to test if they’re on just hold your hand close and feel for ambient heat
Pilots need to trust their artificial horizon and distrust their airspeed indicator.
Surely they would have realised that a plane that normally doesn't go so fast shouldn't be automagically going so fast this time
I dont know why but the visuals were oddly beautiful
We always hear about accidents making flying safer. Not 30 seconds into the flight description I knew you would say pitot tubes.
Yet, how many lives have been lost in the decades since this flight because of blocked pitot tubes ? I can think of three cases of the top of my head.
Modern pilot training should include watching many videos like this. After watching several series', I can now predict when they say certain things if it has something to do with auto pilot etc or pitot tubes. While watching this series, it really makes me wonder if they shouldn't be trained to first check their instruments to verify if the error message is valid or not before going through the checklists. What I'm referring to here is something I learned on this channel, partial panel navigation. I learned from a different series the basics, pitch and thrust, but didn't know about partial panel. I've noticed that pilots, who end up crashing, almost always seem to trust in, or be more fearful of the less common warning messages, such as overspeed versus more comfortable with other warnings they probably see more of.
My question is this… more modern planes have gone down (or nearly) from this same problem. Have they not come up with a totally separate system than the tubes by now for at the minimum extra redundancy?
Do pitot switches illuminate when turned on? Ie. red? Like the RAT, I thought it would be inventive to have a deployable pitot tube fresh into the airflow as backup if the others were quickly clogged by ice.
my first tough (glider pilot here) was: I dont have my correct airspeed fuck whatveer else is happening i am going to level the plane and set the engines to reaonable power output anf figure my stuff out.
i know its not that easy in commercial aviation but sometimes it feels really strange that the impuls of small scale aviation could have saved the big boys
I've had this happen a few times. That's why I never fly without wire cutters
Dam switch materials are strong to survive the crashed impact.
This plane's crew/crash could have wiped out the entire Baltimore Colts football team. The plane was being ferried to Buffalo to pick up the team for their flight home.
RUclips's automatic subtitles are for the most part pretty good... but they got "pitot tubes" hilariously wrong 😅 5:37
I dunno. Planes use witchcraft to fly. Wouldn't surprise me if an innocent child was involved. 😂🤣😂😂🤣 Sorry, bad taste joke but 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
7:12 too. Wonder why YT gets them wrong and then right again. Narrator must sound like he's saying the P word rather than the peeto word.
I sure hope something that critical is no longer a manual switch
1:30 in. Pitot Tubes iced up is my guess. Knew it. Can't understand why they didn't smash the engines to full power if they knew they were stalling, regardless of the air speed display. Especially at the completely ridiculous rate of climb they believed they were doing. They must've known that they couldn't achieve those airspeeds with the throttles set relatively low and them climbing.
One switch would have saved the plane and 3 pilots. Damn!!
My aunt who was a flight attendant for Northwest Orient at the time was engaged to the first officer of this flight. From what I have heard the crew was drinking at a bar before the flight and they were tasked with this flight at the last minute.
Houses have had thermostats for ages. Cars have them now. My local plumber just installed a thermostat on the heat tape on my kitchen pipes. Why can’t the pito tubes’ heaters also be automatic at certain temperatures/elevations or when ice is detected?
Exactly! There must be a reason....
I'am wondering that the heater of the pitot tubes can be switched off. These are a basic necessity for the plane. Many devices are watched by the computers a airplane has. But not the heater of the pitot tubes? That's sounds fatal and inapprehensible. For me this is a design flaw by the manufacturer.
They forgot to manually turn on the heat as per the checklist. Nowadays it's automatic.
Like Aeroperu, this is a case of them getting conflicting data, and not basing their actions on what is the most immediately deadly.
I kept thinking this sounded so much like Aeroperu 603
@@crai-crai exactly. If they had headed the gpdws they would likely have stayed in the air long enough for a rescue plane to get to them and feed them the info to get back home.
Very similar to Air Florida 90, Washington DC, January 13 1982
ignoring erroneous engine pressure ratio (EPR) sensor values. What good are sensors if one chooses to ignore them?
Nearly fifty years later there's RUclips - and even the man on the Clapham scooter can figure it out. ;)
Flight sims taught me all about pitot tubes. Dont forget the pitot heat switch if you have moisture and low temps.
It always amazes me how much fuel these planes carry. I wonder how much flights would cost if they used that more expensive but less flammable military jet fuel instead of regular fuel.
That 6k ft per minute climb would be pretty impressive lol it would be similar to a military jet I think.
I'm not even a jet pilot and I instantly thought it was the pitot tubes or the associated system
It's has nothing to do with pitot tubes, that's the reason I rarely fly, THE PILOTS! Thanks for your videos, you are my favourite disaster movie director. Peace be unto you.
As a GA licensed pilot for over 45 years, it is so easy to play Monday morning quarterback, however, I have to believe the stress and fear of an out of control 727 must have been horrifying and impaired their judgement severely. Still, it as their responcebility to manage that flight.
First thing to consider with fluctuating air speed in icy conditions is the pitot system. Then wings level, fly straight and work the problem. ATC could have given them the ground tracking speed.
Second thing is when you are stalling, get the nose down, NOT pull up. This was drilled into me at age 17 by my first flight instructor.
Maybe the individual fear and extreme stress was so contagious that no one was thinking clearly, SHAME !
This crash occurred decades ago and now days flying commercially is extraordinarily safe. However, still out of commercial flight crashes the numbers are still 50% pilot error.
At some point R2D2 /equivalent will be flying flights and early retired pilots can be a part of monitoring 50 or more flights each. For those who love being in the Skyes, general aviation will be the way to go until, plane cost, insurance, maintenance, hanger fees and fuel will make it cost prohibited for all but the wealthiest to fly. Then, I'll fly flight sims and watch YT videos for my aviation thrills !!!!
They should be made where you can't turn the heat off.
U should add the real recording audios from the black box