1 hour ago, martin-w said:

 

Huh... how, when the flight envelope protection would have prevented a stall?

You can literally pull the thrust back to idle and the stick full back and it will go into Alpha Floor (in normal law) and prevent the stall.

Some of the flight protections had been disabled. I believe because of a temporarily iced-up pitot tube.

13 hours ago, birdguy said:

For those who have flown both the Airbus and the Boeing which left seat would you rather be in during and emergency?

Noel

This will count for basically nothing since I've flown neither, but my gut feeling, the 777 would be my number one choice. Any professional pilot on any type of plane will be very familiar with all the systems, but to me somehow the layout of the 777 cockpit seems the most simple, easy to memorize, and it all makes sense. So at least in any sim emergency, I'd pick the 777. But that's just out of the three sim planes I'm most familiar with DC8, 747-400, and 777-200LR. The DC-8 is the most fun but would be my last choice out of those three in a sim emergency. This topic has got me curious about trying an Airbus though.

10 hours ago, Holdit said:

Some of the flight protections had been disabled. I believe because of a temporarily iced-up pitot tube.

 

Hmm... so not in normal law. I can see I'm going to have to do a thorough analysis here. Otherwise known as a quick glance on Google. 😏

 

 

According to  Wiki: 

 

 

Quote

 

The third interim report stated that some new facts had been established. In particular:

• The pilots had not applied the unreliable-airspeed procedure.
• The pilot-in-control pulled back on the stick, thus increasing the angle of attack and causing the aircraft to climb rapidly.
• The pilots apparently did not notice that the aircraft had reached its maximum permissible altitude.
• The pilots did not read out the available data (vertical velocity, altitude, etc.).
• The stall warning sounded continuously for 54 seconds.
• The pilots did not comment on the stall warnings and apparently did not realize that the aircraft was stalled.
• There was some buffeting associated with the stall.
• The stall warning deactivates by design when the angle of attack measurements are considered invalid, and this is the case when the airspeed drops below a certain limit.
• In consequence, the stall warning came on whenever the pilot pushed forward on the stick and then stopped when he pulled back; this happened several times during the stall and this may have confused the pilots.
• Despite the fact that they were aware that altitude was declining rapidly, the pilots were unable to determine which instruments to trust; all values may have appeared to them to be incoherent.^{[4][page needed]}

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

On 12 August 2009, Airbus issued three mandatory service bulletins, requiring that all A330 and A340 aircraft be fitted with two Goodrich 0851HL pitot tubes and one Thales model C16195BA pitot (or, alternatively, three of the Goodrich pitot tubes); Thales model C16195AA pitot tubes were no longer to be used.^{[220][3]: 216} This requirement was incorporated into ADs issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency on 31 August^[220] and by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 3 September.^[221] The replacement was to be completed by 7 January 2010. According to the FAA, in its Federal Register publication, use of the Thales model has resulted in "reports of airspeed indication discrepancies while flying at high altitudes in inclement weather conditions" that "could result in reduced control of the airplane." The FAA further stated that the Thales model probe "has not yet demonstrated the same level of robustness to withstand high-altitude ice crystals as Goodrich pitot probes P/N 0851HL."

On 20 December 2010, Airbus issued a warning to roughly 100 operators of A330, A340-200, and A340-300 aircraft regarding pitot tubes, advising pilots not to re-engage the autopilot following failure of the airspeed indicators.^{[222][223][224]} Safety recommendations issued by BEA for pitot probes design, recommended, "they must be fitted with a heating system designed to prevent any malfunctioning due to icing. Appropriate means must be provided (visual warning directly visible to the crew) to inform the crew of any nonfunctioning of the heating system".^[3]: 137

 

Edited August 11, 20223 yr by martin-w

I am a bit late on the game here but I will say this, when I signed up for Flight School we had two choices for training, the grand ole C150 of the Katana, without hesitation I chose the C150 even though the Katana was the better aircraft, reason for that was because my shoulders fit better into a C150 and it also had a yoke.

Same thing with the Airbus vs Boeing debate, my opinion is overall Airbus is the better aircraft but as for the pilot point of view I would prefer Boeing as well because Yoke over side stick. 

Edited August 12, 20223 yr by Matthew Kane