Man vs. Machine

AdamZ

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
14,866
Location
Montgomery County PA
Display Name

Display name:
Adam Zucker
This is an article from an Aussi publication that was posted on another site. First I think its a great article. Second it is a reminder IMHO that over reliance on automoation in the cockpit even in our GA planes can be dangerous. Third it just makes me a bit skidish about Airbus, there have been a couple of this incidents. That said I don't know that Boeing does not now do that same with their planes.
Crashes, as the piece suggests are down dramatically over the past 19 years but I do wonder if that is due to automation.

http://www.theage.com.au/good-weeke...-leaves-pilots-powerless-20170510-gw26ae.html
 
From the story:

"Until they printed out the maintenance log after landing, the pilots of QF72 did not know that the A330 had sustained 10 simultaneous failures at the same moment."

So the failures were both simultaneous and at the same moment. Now that is amazing. o_O
 
From the story:

"Until they printed out the maintenance log after landing, the pilots of QF72 did not know that the A330 had sustained 10 simultaneous failures at the same moment."

So the failures were both simultaneous and at the same moment. Now that is amazing. o_O

I had to read that a couple times myself.

My Engrish much gooldlier now....:lol::lol::lol:
 
From the story:

"Until they printed out the maintenance log after landing, the pilots of QF72 did not know that the A330 had sustained 10 simultaneous failures at the same moment."

So the failures were both simultaneous and at the same moment. Now that is amazing. o_O

Like being "completely surrounded"... :D
 
That kind of automation is a win-win on both sides. It may even make detractors do a complete 360.
 
...They reason that the failure mode was "probably initiated by a single, rare type of trigger event"

Sounds like those Airbuses need a safe space.
 
...They reason that the failure mode was "probably initiated by a single, rare type of trigger event"

Sounds like those Airbuses need a safe space.
I bet that if they were medicated then they would behave well for their 'sitters.
 
Seems a little sensationalized.. Airbuses have direct law reversion and stand by instruments and should be able to be flown as such.

As a pilot I want to have control over the plane, as a pilot I prefer Boeing. But as a passenger, and as a generally apprehensive person when it comes to human nature and mistakes I feel much safer traveling Airbus. There have been only 16 fatal Airbus accidents if we look at the Airbus 320 family and beyond... that is remarkable. The Airbus 340 has 3.03M flight and zero fatalities. The Airbus 330 has 4.76M fligts and two fatalities. The Afriqiyah Airways just seems like poor CRM during a botched go-around. Can't blame Airbus for that. The Air France crash had some people upset about Airbus's automation, but frankly pitch and power would have saved that crew.. I can't blame Airbus' automation for the Air France crash

Envelope protection at the edges of the flight regime (60* bank, stall, etc.) seem like very valuable safety features to me

My critiques of Airbus: non-connected flight controls, so pilot doesn't know what co-pilot is doing and vice versa. And the throttles that don't move when in managed mode... otherwise it's a pretty revolutionary design

This is worth a watch... about 5 minutes in they do an engine failure on take off (not simulator, actual flying) with his hands off the controls... They do some other maneuvers, overspeed, hold it at 102 knots with high AoA at 20 degree bank angle, etc... very impressive

 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top