A320 rate of climb
 

AirAsia jet climbed fast then stalled

Is climbing 6000 ft/min (~70 mph vertical component) an absolute no-no in an A320 or did the weight, attitude and prevailing conditions have something to do with it?

I've seen fighter planes go straight up at considerably more than 70 mph. Aren't airliners typically at 30,000 ft within a half hour of take off? What's the initial rate of climb out of Zurich or out of Orange County after curfew? Sure feels like more than 2000 ft/min for a while.

Sixto
MB-less

I don't agree with the fighter jet comment but this might be more about the angle of attack - if you can go straight up like a rocket then you've got a large vertical force pushing along the body of your aircraft (which arguably should be the strongest part of the structure), but not much of a horizontal loading effect. If you fly at a 45 degree angle then you've got large vertical and horizontal loading (thinking of it in a simple two dimensional way).

They might have been climbing to miss a storm? (I have no idea, just guessing, really).

You can probably do it on Microsoft flight simulator - but in reality...

They may also have been stuck in a massive updraft associated with nearby CB cells. That is according to some speculation on a pilots forum I look at in situations like these.

- Peter.

CB cells?

Err the only CB I know about was last used by Smokey and the Bandit!

Don't tell that guy that a F-15 has a 50,000 ft/minute rate of climb.

Here's the climb rate for an A320:
I'd be inclined to go with the updraft scenario. maybe they got too close to a thunderhead.

A climb rate of 6000 ft/min would put all kinds positive G's on the structure. It also depends whether the pilot is pulling 6000 fpm or wind gusts are pushing the plane up, then you're dealing with negative G's.

Indonesia's own air force has planes that can climb 8-10 times faster than the quoted 6,000fpm... I have no idea where they get these "spokespeople" and who lets them address the public. The A320 has a recommended climb out on takeoff of 2400fpm, I'd imagine that number is short of the max allowed, but I don't have the max number in front of me. It probably isn't over 6000fpm though...

Once the flight data recorder is completely gone through, they'll be able to do a pretty good recreation of the entire event. If its like the Hudson landing, where they did the animation synched with the voice(s),it should go a long way towards letting the general public understand just what happened.

MV

On the other hand with the pilots conversations blocked totally out by the alarms screaming. Creating no usable voice recording has been mentioned. There is also a chance They may never be totally positive on this one. I have to wonder if they can even find out if the pilots control inputs where suitable for whatever condition took place.

I also have to wonder if they were still on autopilot and the system could not rationalize the situation properly if severe enough. Some very strange incidents have occurred with the airbus planes over time.

Remember the Paris Airshow?

Yes unfortunately. The poor pilot tried to spool the engines up for climbing out during a low fly by.

Instead the computer determined the plane was in a landing mode and the computors refused to implement the command. At least that was my general understanding at the time. I imagine some software got re written.

My issue is if that plane had not gone to the airshow. One wonders if the same plane on a landing approach had decided to go around while full of passengers. It takes just enough time to realize the engines are not spooling up on command to get into really serious problems then.

I have even heard of some pilots at one time not really recommending this plane compared to boeing products. I suspect like them there possibly could be other issues not uncovered in their systems. I do not know if the cause of the sudden random uncalled for right banks have been totally solved yet.

Although I do not keep up with aviation. I am also lacking in how the Boeings Dreamliner solved the battery issue with it. There is absolutely no way you can really have a totally safe lithium polymer type of battery.

Obama is now a spokesperson for an airline? " If I had an airplane it would look like a A320" " If you like your A320 you can keep your A320"

I wonder if there was a miss match of data ( caused by weather / wind ) that contributed to the crash. GPS saying one thing / compass / Altimeter saying another. " I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that."

Can't say about Obama, I was referencing the quote from the linked article (and other articles):

And then comparing climb rates amongst Indonesia's standard fighters, SU-30, SU-27, and F-16. You'd think the very basics of public speaking would cover things like not quoting hard numbers unless you were absolutely sure of them, but alas, it seems not, as all sorts of spokespeople seem to put their foot in their mouth all too often.

MV

If I'm remembering correctly, several years back Airbus had a directive to replace pitot tubes on the some of their planes because of icing, which would provide the wrong inputs to the flight computer resulting in instability and loss of control. Sort of like trying to drive your car when you can't see out and the cluster is dead.

As is often the case, though, there are usually a number of factors at play in any plane crash, and I would bet this one will be no different.

I'm guessing if they send over the voice recorder the NSA can probably filter off the alarms. Heck, the NSA probably already has recordings. ;)

Airbus's are not F22's so I expect that 6kf a minute is way past their design envelope.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6j6oIQOKuU

Shhh don't show the expert.