Computer glitch caused Qantas drop

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has confirmed the sudden drop in altitude of a Qantas Flight 72 over Western Australia last year was due to a computer error.

Moments after the pilot of Qantas Flight 72 had switched off autopilot, one of the Airbus A330-303's air data inertial reference units (ADIRUs) "started providing erroneous data" spikes, according to an ATSB interim report released today.

The ADIRU is a core component of the aircraft's navigational systems, and is used to capture and relay air data sensor information such as position and altitude which is then fed into the aircraft's flight control computers. The Airbus A330-303 was equipped with three ADIRUs.

While the two other ADIRU's continued to function correctly, the plan's flight control computers had failed to filter data relating to the "angle of attack" of the aircraft — an aviation phrase used to describe a wing's motion while in flight.

story_media/339295336/QF72-ADIRU-1.JPG

QF72 damage (left), Air Data Inertial Reference Unit (right)
(Credit: ATSB)

"The computers subsequently commanded the pitch-down movements," the report said.

Failure warnings had started as soon as the autopilot system was disconnected, the report states. But as flight staff were evaluating the situation, the aircraft suddenly pitched nose-down and fell around 650 feet, according to the report's timeline of events.

Shortly after correcting the fall in altitude to 37,000 feet, the aircraft pitched nose down again, that time descending 400 feet.

The two sudden drops in altitude had resulted in 11 passengers being seriously injured.

The ATSB had also investigated whether the glitches were caused by electromagnetic interference affecting the aircraft's wiring, as well as interference that could have come from nearby communication systems, however, these have been ruled out.

The next phase of the investigation will further interrogate the aircraft's primary flight control computer and two secondary computers. The ATSB had identified problems with the secondary computers' ability to action commands sent from the primary. The investigation will examine the computers' software development cycle, such as design, hazard analysis, testing and certification.

The US manufacturer of the ADIRU units, not disclosed in the report, is also conducting a theoretical analysis of the device's software and hardware to identify possible fault origins, the ATSB said.

Advertisement

Talkback 9 comments

    Airbus again Anonymous -- 06/03/09

    Does anyone remember the Airbus that ploughed into the ground at an air show? That was also a computer problem wasn't it?

    ... and also others Anonymous -- 06/03/09 (in reply to #320124999)

    Yes. I can't recall specifics, but it appears that the A300 overseas has a regular history of suddenly pitching nose down and to the left - I can't recall there being anything other than "computer error" attributed to the fault.
    I may be wrong here but isn't the A300 the first commercial "fly-by-wire" aircraft?

    Airbus Anonymous -- 07/03/09 (in reply to #320125006)

    The first 'fly by wire' commercial aircraft was the Airbus A320, which entered service around 1988. This system of flight control is now almost universal. I think the first Boeing aircraft to use it was the 777. The Paris A320 crash was caused by the pilot turning off the auto flight override system and his flying it manually. The plane stalled at about 500 feet.

    Quorum Anonymous -- 07/03/09

    The reason why there are 3 computers of the same is that they work as a quorum. One failing or giving a different result from the other 2 will be ignored. The NASA shuttle computer system and most of the mission critical systems work that way. So I think it's probably not the cause of the incident.

    This depends Anonymous -- 08/03/09 (in reply to #320125045)

    On whether each computer has been developed and tested in isolation (ie, the software is different) - OR - MORE LIKELY - same software and the other two are redundant for a hardware failure event. Therefore, all three are reporting the same error successfully! Regardless, I urge ALL people to treat computers with suspicion - trust me - I'm a software engineer.

    Report is incorrect Anonymous -- 09/03/09

    The article above states that the pilot terminated the autopilot this is incorrect. The Autopilot was disconnected/terminated by the computer systems due to an IR 1 fail indicator.

    The sytems are redundant and the laws that govern the flight systems are multilayered.

    It will be interesting to see what the hardware/software anlysis has to say.

    This news report is significantly wrong Anonymous -- 09/03/09

    The ATSB report to which ZD Net has linked actually contradicts the story. It neither rules out or in electromagnetic interference but under the heading of continued safety action says more tests in relation to this have been ordered by the safety investigator.

    It specifically says the disassembly of the ADIRU unit has been 'quarantined' until these tests are carried out, and it reveals that there were three such incidents, one other with the same aircraft and ADIRU involved in the QF72 incident, all within 1000 kilometres of the Harold Holt base.

    I'm surprised that ZD Net, which I find an invaluable resource, would publish such a shallow account of the very report it links too, clearly written by someone who hadn't carefully read the index let alone the full document.

    The ATSB document in fact tells us a great deal more than is reported in the facile general media about this accident, including revelations that AIrbus is now in the process of designing a more robust set of algorithms for the unit installed in 397 of the 900 A330/A340s fitted with it.

    It is a sorry day when a factual interim report by the ATSB is so poorly and infactually reported by the media.

    Grammar please Anonymous -- 10/03/09

    "Action" is not a verb...

    Armed Services Base Anonymous -- 10/03/09

    Has everyone forgotten the original thoughts in the media, about an armed services base being in the same region, with a clear line of sight to the aircraft in West Australia

Add your opinion

Latest Videos

Sponsored content

Power Centre - Content from our premier sponsors

Blogs

  • Suzanne Tindal Sick of broken tender sites
    Some of the state governments desperately need to invest in more user-friendly tender sites so that looking for information on government tenders doesn't have to be a game of blind man's bluff.
  • Array Cyberwar: What is it good for?
    In this week's episode, Cyberwar. What is Australia's place in the world of digital warfare? What are the implications for the NBN?
  • Array Is wholesale-only backhaul just a pipedream?
    The potential acquisition of Pipe Networks by SP Telemedia has raised the question about whether vertically integrated backhaul providers will mean higher wholesale prices for ISP customers.
  • More blogs »

Tags

Back to top

Featured