Posted on 03/24/2015 7:32:17 AM PDT by BenLurkin
The following numbered events involve the death of at least one airline passenger where the aircraft flight had a direct or indirect role, and where at least one of the dead passengers was not a stowaway, hijacker, or saboteur. The events that are not numbered are listed because they meet the criteria of a significant event as defined by AirSafe.com
1.26 June 1988; Air France A320; Flight 296Q; near Mulhouse-Habsheim Airport, France: The aircraft crashed into trees during an air show maneuver when the aircraft failed to gain height during a low pass with the gear extended. Three of the 136 passengers were killed.
2.14 February 1990; Indian Airlines A320; Flight 605; Bangalore, India: Controlled flight into terrain during approach. Aircraft hit about 400 meters short of the runway. Four of the seven crew members and 88 of the 139 passengers were killed.
[excerpt]
(Excerpt) Read more at airsafe.com ...
/johnny
Engines out, hydraulics on auxiliary, and nary an landing strip in sight?
(As opposed to the Gimli Glider)
CNN has programing for 2 weeks
Ben, is this a good report, or a bad one?
Flew into a cloud full of mountain.
Airbus - where the pilots are “voting members”.
Until the next case that they can hope to ramp up to a race war!
It does spare us wall-to-wall Cruz Coverage™...
Fox is almost as bad. It’s funny watching struggle to cram 2 minutes of information into hours of programming.
Oh jeeeez. CNN will report 24/7 for a month, just to knock Hillary’s problems off the front page.
Those of us old enough to remember the "Smilin' Jack" comic strip will remember one of the characters in the strip, "Downwind Jackson." You never saw his face. He was always portrayed from the back. The back story was that he got his monicker from landing downwind, overrunning the runway, and smashing his face into the instrument panel, leaving it badly scarred. A cautionary tale.
“The issue here is that the fly-by-wire system on Airbus airliners is highly reliant on pitot tube data for proper flight operation”
It is not even the fly by wire per-se. It is the autopilot system and it’s ability to be overridden by pilot input. Pilot control input should always be able to trump what the computer things should happen. It is is a very critical feature that is designed in. I know, I have don’t avionics testing on autopilots. No combination of failures should allow the automatic system to override the pilots intentions. There are ways to design that in, even with a completely fly-by-wire system. It has to do with segregating various control input paths. So it is not JUST that it is fly-by-wire. It is that it is effed up fly-by-wire. I am starting to think it has some very serious design flaws. Flaws that should have NEVER made it past reviews, verification and certification.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.