If you mean the A320 that crashed into the trees, it did not run out of fuel - I don't know where you got that information. There is still argument about what caused the crash, but the investigation basically blamed the pilot for flying too low and slow.
The A320 is computer controlled in the sense that it is 'fly-by-wire', where the pilot's commands are processed by a computer. One theory is that the computer 'thought' the pilot was trying to land and wouldn't let him recover. Maybe.
This was pilot error in that when he throttled up to climb above the trees, he did not allow enough time for the engines to spool up to the power level called.
Correct, that's why I said 'too low and slow'. According to the investigation, the engines actually spooled up faster than their rated specs - but there are some who dispute the findings and claim the FDR was tampered with. While I think the A320 is a magnificent aircraft, the pilot was probably over-confident in its ability to recover from an unusual flight condition.
The final clip is of a BAe Hawk crash at Moose Jaw,Saskatchewan, Canada and occured on the 14th May 2004 - it was the result of a bird strike and the instructor was seriously injured.
from 0:54, your text says "first computer landing, and last"..you know nothing about these incidents, that was a test flight and i can assure you test pilots died aboard the flight.
Research your images before posting, for example the first image was of a carrier landing, the pilot missed the wires and throttled up to go round again... research before posting crud.....
That was obviously a carrier takeoff via catapult dumbass. And how the fuck do you know the pilots died in the computer landing? They could have jumped the fuck out or never been on the plane to begin with. Why dont you shut your ignorant ass up. Stupid motherfucker.
I guess we will just have to take your questionable word on that documentary. And as to my swearing, well i can comment without swearing. But its just so fun to curse at people like you who come on peoples channel and complain when they clearly have no idea what they are talking about. You dont deserve not to be cursed at. And i thought using adult language was grown up. Why dont you lighten up? And try not speaking about things on which you are ignorant.
i assure you i am far from ignorant, and i have a passion for aircraft and have fly myself, so you say its fun to curse at people and then claim to use adult language?... my point is made..i can admit when i am wrong, u just stay in your cot and leave grown up stuff to us adults, i am now signing off on this as you are boring me....night night choada.....oh..heres your teddy..... :)
They did not die. It wasn´t a test flight either, much more an airshow display at the airport of Basel/Mulhouse. It was Air France flight 296, of 136 people 3 died.
Nice to see someone got their facts straight. Considering how easy it is to just Google these days, I can't understand how such a sad argument erupted in the first place.
Who's the stupid idiot who entered the text "world's first computer landing... and last". Hundreds of airliner flights land completely by autopilot (autoland) every day around the world. The A320 in the video was flown manually. Instead of arguing about it here by air disaster vol. 3 and read the investigation
Read the investigation. The pilot over relied on the fly by wire flight protection envelope. The Captain was flying it manually as I already stated, if you read my comment, and over relied on the flight protection envelope while performing the fly past excessively low. NO COMPUTER FAILED. And don't be so insulting to say "are you drunk" BTW I don't drink and I don't want to.
At 0:52: "This was at an airshow in France back in eighties I think. The plane was being piloted and had passengers and was being demonstrated to the crowds as the latest product from airbus. Not a very good advertisment" by jagdriver
The Computer controlled landing happened as follows:
This occured at an airshow in 200x, forget what year, the pilot wanted to take the plane in for a landing. He executed the usual landing pattern, and he noticed nothing wrong. However, as the pilot put in the autoland, he pressed the wrong altitude at which the runway lied. He realized this too late. He moved the throttles forward, and the throttles would not respond. The plane accelerated into the trees, and could not pull out of it.
yeh the air bus was flown by a piolet it was the computer trying to land and the piolet not wanting to they had a dissagrement and hit a bunch of trees lol
guys i cant emphasise enough how the Airbus was actulally flown by a pilot. He was doing a slow flyby to represent the continuation of French aviation. I have few sources (Pilots on 747 and A330) who have cofirmed this fact!
I've had loads of abuse on that one. I'm convinced that the Airbus crashed because the pilot was showing off and couldn't see the forest coming over the raised nose. He survived and was prosecuted.
What you say is more or less correct, and your last point (about not seeing the trees due to the pitch angle) was a factor in the accident investigation. The pilot over-relied upon the fly-by-wire flight protection envelope believing it could get the aircraft out of any situation, which of course is not true. This is not just speculation either, but in the air accident investigation report.
Thanks. I've had a lot of people calling me an idiot for saying what I know is accurate. Americans mostly. They basically want to smear any competition to Boeing.
I don't see a runway Dark Eskimo so what is it computer landing on? I know that Boeing have been trying to say that it crashed due to computer error to put Airbus in a bad light. What's your version?
i've even seen the documentary quite a while back on discovery wings when it was still up. It was a test computer controlled landing, u don't see the runway because the aircraft doesn't get low enough for the camera to pan down.
The Airbus crash was pilot error. If you look closely there's no room to land anyway. He was so pleased to be doing a low level pass at an airshow he couldn't see the forest coming up as it was below the nose. At the last minute he realised something was wrong and opened up the engines cutting a swathe through the trees. Contact with the trees meant he stalled and crashed. He survived.
2:16 was one of the intial flights of the Harrier (the orginal Harrier, not the AV-8B or the Sea Harrier)...they had a lot of control issues back then. I'm assuming that was just one of the incidents. The V/STOL version of the F-35 (JSF) entering service soon is a far stretch from those days. While the current versions of the Harrier are very hands-on while in hover, the F-35 will allow you to take your hands off the stick completely, and hold whatever attitude you had prior to unsticking...
The last clip was a Hawk trainer in the states.have seen the full clip..involving a birdstrike...both survived, tho the instructor was badly injured as i recall ..
Its a CT-115 Hawk - the canadian version of the BAE Hawk. The reason the view from the HUD cam is different is because the HUD camera is mounted lower down and further forward than the pilot's eyeline. I'm not mad on name dropping, but that info is from our Lecturer at uni from Smiths Aerospace, who designed that HUD.
88,888 views
Go me
Candelstik25 2 years ago
How awsome is 3:07
13youngy 2 years ago
whats so special about 1:27 and the takeoff afterword?
televisionremote 2 years ago
erm i think it was ment to be a taxi but took of lol
PULSE1337 2 years ago
that airliner was not computer controlled, the plane ran out of fuel.
AJFlame06 2 years ago
That Airliner was computer controlled actually
MrJamesRKing 2 years ago
Comment removed
AJFlame06 2 years ago
Also, if it was computer controlled which it wasnt, it would'nt be tested on Air france Plane
AJFlame06 2 years ago
If you mean the A320 that crashed into the trees, it did not run out of fuel - I don't know where you got that information. There is still argument about what caused the crash, but the investigation basically blamed the pilot for flying too low and slow.
The A320 is computer controlled in the sense that it is 'fly-by-wire', where the pilot's commands are processed by a computer. One theory is that the computer 'thought' the pilot was trying to land and wouldn't let him recover. Maybe.
camilleri63 2 years ago
This was pilot error in that when he throttled up to climb above the trees, he did not allow enough time for the engines to spool up to the power level called.
AFishCalledEric 2 years ago
Correct, that's why I said 'too low and slow'. According to the investigation, the engines actually spooled up faster than their rated specs - but there are some who dispute the findings and claim the FDR was tampered with. While I think the A320 is a magnificent aircraft, the pilot was probably over-confident in its ability to recover from an unusual flight condition.
camilleri63 2 years ago
1:16 Flying Class = F 2:16 he is like "I got it,I got it, I got it. Heyy i did it OH CRAP!" -boom-
Cploket47 2 years ago
1:13 Well all the wolves have to let the gas go somewhere lol in other words welcome to the jungle Mr.Plane :]
Cploket47 2 years ago
The plane that people are calling the avro arrow is actually a avro vulcan bomber.
hwames 3 years ago 7
ahh damn i love the avro arrow stupid prime minister at that time cancelled it fucking idiot.
COLONELDUDE 3 years ago
I agree with your sentiments re the Avro Arrow, but where did you see one in this video? I played through it twice - must have missed it twice.
KeybdFlyer 3 years ago
1:10, well i have to agree it did land.. lol
EliteGamers3501 3 years ago
u were there in plane
JeetMaan 3 years ago
yeah, how did you know? fag
EliteGamers3501 3 years ago
The final clip is of a BAe Hawk crash at Moose Jaw,Saskatchewan, Canada and occured on the 14th May 2004 - it was the result of a bird strike and the instructor was seriously injured.
HalloweenJack69 3 years ago
from 0:54, your text says "first computer landing, and last"..you know nothing about these incidents, that was a test flight and i can assure you test pilots died aboard the flight.
Research your images before posting, for example the first image was of a carrier landing, the pilot missed the wires and throttled up to go round again... research before posting crud.....
pullmyyolk 3 years ago
That was obviously a carrier takeoff via catapult dumbass. And how the fuck do you know the pilots died in the computer landing? They could have jumped the fuck out or never been on the plane to begin with. Why dont you shut your ignorant ass up. Stupid motherfucker.
TheChoada 3 years ago
choada, i was wrong about the carrier i admit, but as for the plane that dissapeared into the trees....i am right as i saw a documentary on it.
I am sorry you cannot comment without stooping to swearing.... maybe one day you will grow up.
pullmyyolk 3 years ago
I guess we will just have to take your questionable word on that documentary. And as to my swearing, well i can comment without swearing. But its just so fun to curse at people like you who come on peoples channel and complain when they clearly have no idea what they are talking about. You dont deserve not to be cursed at. And i thought using adult language was grown up. Why dont you lighten up? And try not speaking about things on which you are ignorant.
TheChoada 3 years ago
i assure you i am far from ignorant, and i have a passion for aircraft and have fly myself, so you say its fun to curse at people and then claim to use adult language?... my point is made..i can admit when i am wrong, u just stay in your cot and leave grown up stuff to us adults, i am now signing off on this as you are boring me....night night choada.....oh..heres your teddy..... :)
pullmyyolk 3 years ago
Wow. That was lame. Is that the best you can do? Careful you may hurt my feelings. Its pleasing to see that I got to you though.
TheChoada 3 years ago
choada wins
televisionremote 2 years ago
They did not die. It wasn´t a test flight either, much more an airshow display at the airport of Basel/Mulhouse. It was Air France flight 296, of 136 people 3 died.
updraft3 3 years ago
Nice to see someone got their facts straight. Considering how easy it is to just Google these days, I can't understand how such a sad argument erupted in the first place.
camilleri63 2 years ago
Whats the name of the song?
germanUSAfan2go 3 years ago
The pilot at 1:17 was retarded for having the landing gear down when he was landing in water. That's why he flipped like that
windowmaker525 3 years ago
Those are fixed wheels, they don't retract. He landed too fast and i bet it had to do with ground effect.
ponchoyo 3 years ago
No...the wheels do retract into the floats. Yes, the floats are fixed
windowmaker525 3 years ago
show me your sources that indicate this cessna model equiped with floats also has retracts.
ponchoyo 3 years ago
its common knowlede. why else would they have floats. was i just trolled?
televisionremote 2 years ago
can u restate that?
ponchoyo 2 years ago
Who's the stupid idiot who entered the text "world's first computer landing... and last". Hundreds of airliner flights land completely by autopilot (autoland) every day around the world. The A320 in the video was flown manually. Instead of arguing about it here by air disaster vol. 3 and read the investigation
richarddx22 3 years ago
Are you drunk? The landing maneuver is manually, computer's only an aid.
That air france flight crashed due computer failure.
GFBSync 3 years ago
Read the investigation. The pilot over relied on the fly by wire flight protection envelope. The Captain was flying it manually as I already stated, if you read my comment, and over relied on the flight protection envelope while performing the fly past excessively low. NO COMPUTER FAILED. And don't be so insulting to say "are you drunk" BTW I don't drink and I don't want to.
richarddx22 3 years ago
wow that harrier pilot barely made it out
belkan991 3 years ago
what happened at 3:20?
legoman4thou 3 years ago
it seems that a bird or something hit the plane
chivacar1 3 years ago
The bird got sucked into the engine of that F-16 and then had engine failure
BucsPride24 3 years ago
Canadian Hawk, bird strike, engine failure, both ejected. Prob search and find the original vid.
startsem 3 years ago
look up birdstrike F-16 and you can actually see t he engine flame out from the outside.
BucsPride24 3 years ago
the DC9 or MD80 that crashes that sick anyone know what happend?
juuls26 3 years ago
At 0:52: "This was at an airshow in France back in eighties I think. The plane was being piloted and had passengers and was being demonstrated to the crowds as the latest product from airbus. Not a very good advertisment" by jagdriver
Granduca233 3 years ago
wow what a hard landing tore the whole tail off 2:27 must have warped the air frame lol
korbindallis 3 years ago
can you tell me the title of the background song?
hartiganutube 3 years ago
Mr. Bright side, don't know who though. Yeah I listened to it too here on Youtube just by typing that name.
freiherrudet 3 years ago
The Killers- Mr Brightside
reddevilhill 3 years ago
It's a vulcan
Gilderoy82 3 years ago
is the one at 2:33 the avro arrow?
AngryHappyFace 3 years ago
Did the pilot of the computer controlled plane survived?
GHell94 3 years ago
wtf at 2:22
iGameemaGi 3 years ago
Eh, the song ain't the best but holy crap some of these plane crashes are shocking.
doop01 3 years ago
whats the song called
dandaman2345 4 years ago
The Killers - Mr. Brightside
Mobiusoneighteen 4 years ago
TUNE!!!!!
we6812 3 years ago
The Computer controlled landing happened as follows:
This occured at an airshow in 200x, forget what year, the pilot wanted to take the plane in for a landing. He executed the usual landing pattern, and he noticed nothing wrong. However, as the pilot put in the autoland, he pressed the wrong altitude at which the runway lied. He realized this too late. He moved the throttles forward, and the throttles would not respond. The plane accelerated into the trees, and could not pull out of it.
CallMeSarge504 4 years ago
1988 I believe, Habsheim in France.
koptastic69 4 years ago
yeah probably it. i completely forgot the year it was. i think i got everything else right though, friend of mines dad went to investigate tht crash
CallMeSarge504 4 years ago
yeh the air bus was flown by a piolet it was the computer trying to land and the piolet not wanting to they had a dissagrement and hit a bunch of trees lol
spenner52 4 years ago
guys i cant emphasise enough how the Airbus was actulally flown by a pilot. He was doing a slow flyby to represent the continuation of French aviation. I have few sources (Pilots on 747 and A330) who have cofirmed this fact!
loxyloxan 4 years ago
I've had loads of abuse on that one. I'm convinced that the Airbus crashed because the pilot was showing off and couldn't see the forest coming over the raised nose. He survived and was prosecuted.
Arcmate 3 years ago
What you say is more or less correct, and your last point (about not seeing the trees due to the pitch angle) was a factor in the accident investigation. The pilot over-relied upon the fly-by-wire flight protection envelope believing it could get the aircraft out of any situation, which of course is not true. This is not just speculation either, but in the air accident investigation report.
richarddx22 3 years ago
Thanks. I've had a lot of people calling me an idiot for saying what I know is accurate. Americans mostly. They basically want to smear any competition to Boeing.
Arcmate 3 years ago
I don't see a runway Dark Eskimo so what is it computer landing on? I know that Boeing have been trying to say that it crashed due to computer error to put Airbus in a bad light. What's your version?
Arcmate 4 years ago
i've even seen the documentary quite a while back on discovery wings when it was still up. It was a test computer controlled landing, u don't see the runway because the aircraft doesn't get low enough for the camera to pan down.
DarkEskemo 4 years ago
The Airbus crash was pilot error. If you look closely there's no room to land anyway. He was so pleased to be doing a low level pass at an airshow he couldn't see the forest coming up as it was below the nose. At the last minute he realised something was wrong and opened up the engines cutting a swathe through the trees. Contact with the trees meant he stalled and crashed. He survived.
Arcmate 4 years ago
worst interpretation ever
DarkEskemo 4 years ago
aimed at arcmate btw
DarkEskemo 4 years ago
duuuude. it was a computer-controlled flight. you're very creative though! you should be a lawyer.
torigolddust 4 years ago
what the hell happened at 2:16???
dada101788 4 years ago
2:16 was one of the intial flights of the Harrier (the orginal Harrier, not the AV-8B or the Sea Harrier)...they had a lot of control issues back then. I'm assuming that was just one of the incidents. The V/STOL version of the F-35 (JSF) entering service soon is a far stretch from those days. While the current versions of the Harrier are very hands-on while in hover, the F-35 will allow you to take your hands off the stick completely, and hold whatever attitude you had prior to unsticking...
cycloneblack 4 years ago
did the pilot eject, i think i saw a glimps of him...
jstevo15 4 years ago
ugh, the killers
NikitasGuitars 4 years ago
why is one of the tags raf i see pelnty of usaf!!!!
TJlaaaaaa 4 years ago
i like 2:58!!!!
mww88 4 years ago
Forgot to mention excellent mix of scenes and final. Well done.
ranchigan 4 years ago
Cannot see my response... 3rd time I try, lets go
The Killers
Mr Brightside
ranchigan 4 years ago
what song?
Dragonguy22 4 years ago
The Killers - Mrs Bightside
Xanaxa1681 4 years ago
Mr. even :P
Xanaxa1681 4 years ago
yea thats an f-16 bitches
redfox1984 4 years ago
The last clip was a Hawk trainer in the states.have seen the full clip..involving a birdstrike...both survived, tho the instructor was badly injured as i recall ..
luvpump1 4 years ago
Sucked a bird into the engine...see, you don't need a million dollar weapon to bring down a 25 million dollar plane...just throw birds at em ;)
Brando1274 4 years ago
It's actually an F-16, not a hawk. Hawks do not have pitot probes that stick out as far as can be seen on the HUD video
iangarfield 4 years ago
Its a CT-115 Hawk - the canadian version of the BAE Hawk. The reason the view from the HUD cam is different is because the HUD camera is mounted lower down and further forward than the pilot's eyeline. I'm not mad on name dropping, but that info is from our Lecturer at uni from Smiths Aerospace, who designed that HUD.
dowdtim 4 years ago
mitä paskaa...
MikaelTaipale 4 years ago
you are wrong on both counts.
1. the aircraft is a display model on test in canada.
2. the hawk does have one engine put it took it into the starboard air intake.
thanks fr the comment tho
sharprc 4 years ago
1 americans dont fly RAF hawks, 2 Hawk only has one engine
123Tom2 4 years ago
The aircraft is a RAF Hawk T1, and it took a bird into the starboard engine... and it failed to restart
sharprc 5 years ago
what happened with the last one?
Obelix6 5 years ago