|
Godholio posted:So does carrying enough fuel to actually get to your destination, but
|
# ? Dec 5, 2016 20:05 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 13:22 |
|
Finger Prince posted:It would have to be deliberate, and you probably wouldn't be flying it anywhere. I don't know, there were those guys in indonesia that reset their flight computers while flying and Oh. Hm. Godholio posted:So does carrying enough fuel to actually get to your destination, but
|
# ? Dec 5, 2016 20:53 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I don't know, there were those guys in indonesia that reset their flight computers while flying and Yea by reset you mean flip breakers cause "we saw a guy do it once on the ground" ...https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/circuit-board-solder-crack-cited-in-indonesia-airasi-419593/
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 02:30 |
|
I'm definitely sure this has been addressed in this thread before but I gotta ask again. Are Airbus's fly by wire systems particularly convenient/foolproof or something? It seems like half the time there's an accident it's because Alternate Law was engaged for whatever reason and the pilots literally don't notice/know what's going on.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 10:10 |
|
Eej posted:I'm definitely sure this has been addressed in this thread before but I gotta ask again. Are Airbus's fly by wire systems particularly convenient/foolproof or something? It seems like half the time there's an accident it's because Alternate Law was engaged for whatever reason and the pilots literally don't notice/know what's going on. They're fool resistant, but not completely foolproof.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 10:24 |
|
Any time I see "pilots were unable to notice/understand how aircraft configuration had changed, because of alternate law" in a report, I think of poor training. I'm not a pilot though so I may be off the mark, but I thought understanding the ins and outs of your aircraft was Basics 101 and that the airlines should be trying to keep that bit of the brain pointy-sharp
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 10:37 |
|
Eej posted:I'm definitely sure this has been addressed in this thread before but I gotta ask again. Are Airbus's fly by wire systems particularly convenient/foolproof or something? It seems like half the time there's an accident it's because Alternate Law was engaged for whatever reason and the pilots literally don't notice/know what's going on. It's more complicated than that, and I think it boils down to cascading events. Alternate law = up poo poo creek, direct law = no paddles. Once you get yourself into one of those situations, you're already having a bad day, and one of the pilots is going to be engaged in figuring out what's happening, while the other hand flies the aircraft. You have opportunities there for communication to break down between the pilots. The pilot flying no longer has normal flight envelope protections and probably stopped trusting his instruments because of whatever caused the flight law degradation, so may fly the aircraft into an unrecoverable attitude. The other pilot who normally could spot something like that and take over or say something is distracted by the failure. There's a valid argument that the visual cues of a moving control yoke and throttle levers might alert the pilot not flying to something amiss with what the other pilot is doing. If there's a shortcoming in the system, that's where it lies. The actual fly by wire system is very robust, to the point that experiencing alternate or direct law is something most pilots probably only ever see in their sporadic sim training (I don't even know if that's even part of their training in the sim, though I would hope so).
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 12:51 |
|
One of the findings for AF443 was that pilots didn't spend enough sim time practicing transitions in to alternate law.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 14:01 |
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:One of the findings for AF443 was that pilots didn't spend enough sim time practicing transitions in to alternate law. Training pilots is expensive, so why do it at all?
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 14:20 |
|
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN13V1S5quote:"Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!" said Trump in a Twitter message. Just because he flies his own 757 around, he thinks he knows what it costs to build a hardened flying mobile command base.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 16:52 |
|
Finger Prince posted:It's more complicated than that, and I think it boils down to cascading events. Alternate law = up poo poo creek, direct law = no paddles. Once you get yourself into one of those situations, you're already having a bad day, and one of the pilots is going to be engaged in figuring out what's happening, while the other hand flies the aircraft. You have opportunities there for communication to break down between the pilots. The pilot flying no longer has normal flight envelope protections and probably stopped trusting his instruments because of whatever caused the flight law degradation, so may fly the aircraft into an unrecoverable attitude. The other pilot who normally could spot something like that and take over or say something is distracted by the failure. There's a valid argument that the visual cues of a moving control yoke and throttle levers might alert the pilot not flying to something amiss with what the other pilot is doing. If there's a shortcoming in the system, that's where it lies. The actual fly by wire system is very robust, to the point that experiencing alternate or direct law is something most pilots probably only ever see in their sporadic sim training (I don't even know if that's even part of their training in the sim, though I would hope so). Didn't the same pitot tube failure happen to a northwest a330 and the pilots correctly recovered by doing nothing? (That's all the af443 crew needed to do: nothing)
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 16:57 |
|
So Trump's saying he'll cancel the 747-8 AF1 order, which is being framed as him being fiscally sound, but most journalists haven't dug deeply enough to see that the plane won't be operational until 2020-2024.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 17:06 |
|
Finger Prince posted:It's more complicated than that, and I think it boils down to cascading events. Alternate law = up poo poo creek, direct law = no paddles. Once you get yourself into one of those situations, you're already having a bad day, and one of the pilots is going to be engaged in figuring out what's happening, while the other hand flies the aircraft. You have opportunities there for communication to break down between the pilots. The pilot flying no longer has normal flight envelope protections and probably stopped trusting his instruments because of whatever caused the flight law degradation, so may fly the aircraft into an unrecoverable attitude. The other pilot who normally could spot something like that and take over or say something is distracted by the failure. There's a valid argument that the visual cues of a moving control yoke and throttle levers might alert the pilot not flying to something amiss with what the other pilot is doing. If there's a shortcoming in the system, that's where it lies. The actual fly by wire system is very robust, to the point that experiencing alternate or direct law is something most pilots probably only ever see in their sporadic sim training (I don't even know if that's even part of their training in the sim, though I would hope so). It seems like they could install a blinking red light or something to indicate Alternate Law. I'm an idea guy, Airbus. Hire me.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 17:10 |
|
I dunno poo poo about airplanes but it astounds me that there have been multiple cases of dudes stalling commercial airliners without even realizing it
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 17:16 |
|
Once you get yourself into a state where you distrust your instruments, often times anything is suspect and can get ignored. See Birgenair Flight 301.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 17:20 |
|
Godholio posted:It seems like they could install a blinking red light or something to indicate Alternate Law. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJFyWBLeM7Q
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 17:22 |
|
bull3964 posted:http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN13V1S5 Speaking of, I kinda assumed that he was gonna try and get the TRUMP 757 turned into Air Force 1 instead of using the ol' 747
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 17:59 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Speaking of, I kinda assumed that he was gonna try and get the TRUMP 757 turned into Air Force 1 instead of using the ol' 747 Wouldn't that both (a) be freakishly expensive and (b) put classified technology and material into nominally private, non-government-controlled concerns?
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:07 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Speaking of, I kinda assumed that he was gonna try and get the TRUMP 757 turned into Air Force 1 instead of using the ol' 747 Nah, he doesn't really have a reason to settle for anything less than a gold-plated A380 at this point.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:17 |
|
Davin Valkri posted:Wouldn't that both (a) be freakishly expensive and (b) put classified technology and material into nominally private, non-government-controlled concerns? What part of Donald J Trump is it that you don't understand?
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:17 |
|
Davin Valkri posted:Wouldn't that both (a) be freakishly expensive and (b) put classified technology and material into nominally private, non-government-controlled concerns? Yes, but WHY NOT?!?! Not to mention the fact that his 757 doesn't have the legs needed to get from A>B over the VC-25, and it doesn't have IFR capability or current anti-missile countermeasures. I'm sure he'll have it permanently hangared at Andrews and maintained for "free" using Air Force MX staff.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:20 |
|
Sam Hall posted:Nah, he doesn't really have a reason to settle for anything less than a gold-plated A380 at this point. https://youtu.be/LgF0C-yWID4
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:22 |
|
Davin Valkri posted:Wouldn't that both (a) be freakishly expensive and (b) put classified technology and material into nominally private, non-government-controlled concerns? So you're listing two more reasons for why Trump will want that to happen. The first reason being merely: Craptacular posted:Knowing Trump, this is probably just a scam to try and get the government to pay him for using his 757.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:25 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:So Trump's saying he'll cancel the 747-8 AF1 order, which is being framed as him being fiscally sound, but most journalists haven't dug deeply enough to see that the plane won't be operational until 2020-2024. This is also ignoring the bloated costs of keeping the current 747 flying. Which by 2020 will likely outpace the costs of a new one. He's a god damned moron who overstated the program cost by 4x.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:26 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:and it doesn't have IFR capability Really?
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:30 |
|
He already probably plans to hangar his 757 at Andrews, have it upgraded to DoD standards, and maintained "for free" by Air Force personnel. As I said in the TFR thread, his 757 doesn't meet the requirements for a presidential aircraft since it lacks EMP hardening, an adequate SATCOM system, in-flight refueling capability (which would require Air Force pilots to fly it), and an adequate anti-missile countermeasure suite.The Ferret King posted:Really? In-flight refueling, not instrument flight rules. >.> BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Dec 6, 2016 |
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:32 |
|
Well that's all well and good, but IFR means "Instrument Flight Rules" and I'm sure that plane can fly in clouds just fine.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:34 |
|
The Ferret King posted:Well that's all well and good, but IFR means "Instrument Flight Rules" and I'm sure that plane can fly in clouds just fine. Yeah, that confused me too.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:36 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:In-flight refueling, not instrument flight rules. >.> The Ferret King posted:Well that's all well and good, but IFR means "Instrument Flight Rules" and I'm sure that plane can fly in clouds just fine. Quick someone get LockMart and/or Boeing on the phone to put together an IFRIFR package!
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:41 |
|
Duke Chin posted:Quick someone get LockMart and/or Boeing on the phone to put together an IFRIFR package! No no no. You have to ~think outside the box and shift the paradigm~! IFR2
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:44 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:No no no. You have to ~think outside the box and shift the paradigm~! Pfffft That's just the marketing buzzwords for the RFP
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 18:45 |
|
hobbesmaster posted:(That's all the af443 crew needed to do: nothing) Actually, it would still have crashed in exactly the same way. From the moment the aircraft started climbing in alternate law, active nose down input would have been required to bring the climb rate to zero and keep the aircraft from backing itself into a corner. If nothing is done in a climb in alternate law without low speed protection, the aircraft will eventually climb so high it will run out of performance and need more and more nose-up trim to maintain the climb angle. Without input form the pilots, it will run the stab to the stop and make the aircraft stall at extreme AOA, just like AF447 did (and, I suspect, Air Asia 8501) Tsuru fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Dec 6, 2016 |
# ? Dec 6, 2016 19:09 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:So Trump's saying he'll cancel the 747-8 AF1 order, which is being framed as him being fiscally sound, but most journalists haven't dug deeply enough to see that the plane won't be operational until 2020-2024. Boeing don't even have a contract to build any yet. Just a $170M design contract.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 19:25 |
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:One of the findings for AF443 was that pilots didn't spend enough sim time practicing transitions in to alternate law. And one of the findings for AA8501 was that the Airbus's loving flight crew training manual states that the protections make upset recovery training unnecessary. You know, until you fail over into alternate law and now you have no idea how to fly a plane.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 19:34 |
|
Seeing as the stab plot wasn't included in the final report I guess we'll never know what happened to 8501
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 19:50 |
|
Davin Valkri posted:Wouldn't that both (a) be freakishly expensive and (b) put classified technology and material into nominally private, non-government-controlled concerns? "Spending large amounts of money belonging to other people" is sort the entire point of Donald Trump. I'm sure if Boeing installed stripper poles, a dedicated comb-over maintenance room, and YUUGE amounts of faux marble and gold trim, Trump would have no problem with the deal.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 20:36 |
|
CarForumPoster posted:Yea by reset you mean flip breakers cause "we saw a guy do it once on the ground" ...https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/circuit-board-solder-crack-cited-in-indonesia-airasi-419593/ People absolutely love to bring all sorts of crypto-racist "cultural factors" poo poo up whenever an asian airline has an accident, but I always find it funny when you point out that the pilot who caused this accident was also French.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 21:38 |
|
Trump will delay the order until the 748 line is shutdown, and President Biden will have no choice but to order a new A380, then the GOP will have 8 years to go on about spending money on foreign products, sending jobs offshore, and can we really trust the security and secrecy?
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 21:43 |
|
I watched Sully last night. As a movie, it's essentially empty. What he did was both masterful and heroic. There was no conflict to mine outside of Sully's own internal mental struggle, which wasn't exactly rife with tension. The mishap sequence itself is lifeless. I have trouble figuring out if the choice to depict the event as quietly tepid was to highlight how calm Sully's demeanor was or to not risk losing the audience in a shouting wall of alarms and noise. Sully was way better than that garbage movie American Sniper. He's a far better human being than Chris Kyle.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 21:48 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 13:22 |
|
holocaust bloopers posted:I watched Sully last night. As a movie, it's essentially empty. What he did was both masterful and heroic. There was no conflict to mine outside of Sully's own internal mental struggle, which wasn't exactly rife with tension. Major Kong's write-up about the event (since he opens with saying he hasn't seen the movie) was more interesting about the movie itself. Other than that, it felt too long by 30-45 minutes, and I think Eastwood spent a little too much fantasizing what a fully-fueled A320 would look like crashing into Manhattan. That article, for those who missed it the first time: http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/14/1577211/-The-A320-and-the-Hudson
|
# ? Dec 6, 2016 21:56 |