Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

OmniAtlas

What Really Happened Aboard Air France 447

Recommended Posts

From reading this, I don't see where FBW comes into this.If it is pilot error, then it doesn't matter how the controls are linked.On the other hand,BEA have a habit of blaming pilots.

Share this post


Link to post

You really see the flaws of some of the airbus systems when you read this. I am really confused why any plane would need

asynchronous controls. I mean in what situation do you need to have 2 pilots controlling the plane at the same time?

Share this post


Link to post
From reading this, I don't see where FBW comes into this.If it is pilot error, then it doesn't matter how the controls are linked.On the other hand,BEA have a habit of blaming pilots.
One pilot was pushing down on the stick, the other was pushing up...their effects cancelled each other out

Share this post


Link to post

What has this got to do with the NGX? Head over to the hanger chat forum, this has been discussed to death.http://forum.avsim.net/topic/355822-af447-what-really-happened-popular-mechanics-article/Regards

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting read.

You really see the flaws of some of the airbus systems when you read this. I am really confused why any plane would need

asynchronous controls. I mean in what situation do you need to have 2 pilots controlling the plane at the same time?

From reading one of the comments from FB on this article:
When in dual input mode lights in front of each pilot flash illuminate to show that both pilots are making sidestick inputs. An option exists for an automatic warning to say "Dual Input" when this occurs. I don't know if AF had that option. Each sidestick has a button that allows that sidestick to override the other (the last one pushed has control). The same button also disconnects the autopilot. The override button is intended to override faults, and allow a complete takeover, not solve a fight over who has control (not that there was one). Airline pilot discipline is to be very clear on who is flying the airplane - and as we see in the article, when a transfer of control takes place , e.g., the statement: "I have the controls."

Share this post


Link to post

You guys really should learn how to use the forums system properly. Not everything goes in the PMDG forums.I posted this article where it belongs in Hanger Chat on December 20th.http://forum.avsim.net/topic/355822-af447-what-really-happened-popular-mechanics-article/page__st__25__p__2197031__hl__air%20france%20popular%20mechanics__fromsearch__1#entry2197031

Share this post


Link to post

I rarely leave this forum. I am grateful for the informative link. As long as it doesn't become abusive, I don't really see a problem. However the compare and contrast aspect to the NGX is appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post

yea this link is fine - i mean we are all aviation buffs.however it is the fault of the both the airline for employing pilots who were not properly trained in the understanding of all Airbus systems. And it is also the fault of Airbus for designing a plane that is almost too technical in the cockpit. Before I get a bunch of you angry with me - this unfortunately has happened before with other Airbus aircraft - take the A320 on its first DEMONSTRATION FLIGHT!!! That was many years ago and it is still happening.

Share this post


Link to post
I rarely leave this forum. I am grateful for the informative link. As long as it doesn't become abusive, I don't really see a problem. However the compare and contrast aspect to the NGX is appropriate.
+1

Share this post


Link to post
I rarely leave this forum. I am grateful for the informative link. As long as it doesn't become abusive, I don't really see a problem. However the compare and contrast aspect to the NGX is appropriate.
+1
Well i guess somebody disagreed with us.Anyhow, fascinating read. Amazing how some situations can totally baffle three highly trained professionals. Maybe if the Airbus had the traditional Joystick between the knees, it would have been obvious to the other pilot/s, what the younger pilot was doing and control taken away from him earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
.- take the A320 on its first DEMONSTRATION FLIGHT!!! That was many years ago and it is still happening.
That is debatable!!! Whatever his intentions were, he did in fact come in much too low leaving absolutely no margin for error. and forgot that jet engines don't deliver until seconds later!!On the subject of low passes This is how it should be done!!! See the story herehttp://www.vc10.net/Memories/testing_earlydays.html#WhiteWalthamPaxvololiberista

Share this post


Link to post
That is debatable!!! Whatever his intentions were, he did in fact come in much too low leaving absolutely no margin for error. and forgot that jet engines don't deliver until seconds later!!On the subject of low passes This is how it should be done!!! See the story herehttp://www.vc10.net/...WhiteWalthamPaxvololiberista
You make a valid point - however this point was made during the trial - however it was determined that since the planes' computers prevented the pilots from making dangerous maneuvers, the pilot could not actually pull his plane up. Even if the thrust is delayed, he could have cleared maybe an extra 50ft before a stall actually would have been an issue, and those extra 50 ft would have taken enough time for the engines to get to full thrust and thus prevent the stall and move the plane away from trees. What really happened was that the computer, without knowing they were heading into trees, didn't allow the pilot to pull up because that would have put the plane in a stall at a certain point down the flight path. I understand this is a safety feature - but thats just too much. A computer is good at checking in on the pilot and making sure he doesn't make mistakes - but in an emergency, a computer doesn't realize what is truly happening outside the aircraft that could potentially endanger it, that is the pilots job. In the case of the recent AF crash, the plane functioned normally, perhaps too technically but normally and how it was designed, whether you believe its design is a fault or not. It really was mostly the pilot error, not to mention the pilots themselves depended on the computer to do everything, which in no circumstance should ever be the case.

Share this post


Link to post
×
×
  • Create New...