曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
membership on the RSAF flight demonstration team, the “Black Knights.” It is apparent
that, had the pilot attempted to recover by initiating immediate corrective action using
standard flight control inputs and techniques, the airplane would have recovered to a
straight and level attitude with a minimum loss of altitude.
NTSC COMMENTS:
• The NTSB statement is based on the assumption that the
recovery was possible if recovery action was taken
immediately (eg JAR ACJ 25.1329 gives a norm of 4 secs).
Without such immediate recovery action the airplane could
exceed the normal flight envelope. Airframe manufacturers
have not specified to airline crew recovery techniques for
flight outside the normal envelope.
• There was evidence indicating that the Captain had the
intention to leave the cockpit.
• There was no evidence that the recovery of the airplane was
not attempted. The fact that during impact the
engine was in high power and that the undercarriage was
N-11
retracted do not preclude the possibility of pilot attempts to
recover from the steep dive by using flight controls and
varying engine thrust.
As previously mentioned, the simulations indicate that from the time it departed
cruise flight, a sustained nose-down flight control input was necessary to maneuver the
airplane through the recorded radar points. Additionally, the impact damage to the engine
was consistent with a higher-than-cruise power setting. (Without pilot input, the
autothrottle system would have reduced engine power to idle when the descent began;
therefore, the high power setting must have been input by the pilot.) Further, there was
no evidence that any other measures were taken (such as deploying aerodynamic drag
devices on the airplane) to slow the airplane’s speed. The wing leading-edge devices and
trailing-edge flaps, the “speed brakes” (in-flight spoilers) and the landing gear were found
to have been in a position that was consistent with cruise flight.
NTSC’S COMMENTS:
There was no FDR recording to provide any data as to what
actually happened from the time the recording stopped until
impact.
The simulation results, in combination with the physical evidence of a high engine
power setting, a horizontal stabilizer trim setting positioned for maximum nose-down
attitude, and the absence of any indication of an attempt to reduce the airplane’s speed,
are clearly inconsistent with an attempt to a recover from a dive and return to cruise
flight, and strongly suggest the maneuver was intentional.
NTSC’S RESPONSE:
As mentioned above, there was no FDR recording to provide
any data as to what actually happened from the time the
recording stopped until impact.
d) It is more likely that the nose-down flight control inputs were made by
the captain than by the first officer.
The HPG evaluated the professional, personal, and financial backgrounds of the
flight crew of flight MI185. The HPG findings are discussed in more detail in comments
on individual sections of the draft Final Report later in this document. In summary, the
HPG investigation revealed that both pilots were trained in accordance with applicable
company and civil aviation authority regulations and were competent to promptly
recognize, address, and manage an unanticipated in-flight situation using all resources
available to them; there was no evidence to indicate that the performance of either pilot
was adversely affected by any medical or physiological condition existing before the
accident; there was no evidence to indicate that there were any difficulties in the
relationship between the two pilots before or during the accident flight; and there was no
N-12
evidence that either pilot was experiencing any significant difficulties in personal
relationships involving family and friends.
Further, with respect to the first officer, the evidence developed by the HPG
revealed the first officer was not experiencing any professional setbacks or difficulties at
the time of the accident, nor was he experiencing any financial difficulties. Also, there
was no evidence that he was experiencing any behavioral changes before the accident.
However, the investigation of the captain’s background developed evidence that
revealed he had experienced multiple work-related difficulties, particularly during the
6-month period before the accident. Additionally, the investigation found that the captain
was experiencing significant financial difficulties about the time of the accident, and there
were indications that the captain's behavior and lifestyle had changed before the accident.
NTSC’S COMMENTS:
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
NTSC Aircraft Accident Report SILKAIR FLIGHT MI 185 BOEING B(52)
