This is what happens when the committees that design the plane and its systems think they know better than the pilot.
Posted on 01/30/2015 7:23:35 AM PST by george76
Exactly. A cacophony of warnings alerts lead to extreme pilot sensory overload in a already intense situation. Pilots were trying to fly the plane and likely pulled the computer plug just shut off the alarms so they could simply gain control and fly the plane.
“politically agnostic. What are you trying to say? “
No, they are not, not when a bunch of socialists design and develop these systems. Liberals can’t help but to inject their ways of thinking into such things. Liberals always think they know better than everyone else, including pilots.
You have no idea what you are talking about.
And WHERE is ML370???
“You have no idea what you are talking about.”
Coming from an liberal idiot like you, I can ignore such stupidity as your comments. You liberals are all alike, dumber than a bag of doorknobs but you think you’re the smartest people in the room and cockpit. Piss off, stupid.
They did land on a comet...
Although I am no aviation expert, isn’t “trust your instruments” a pretty common saying?
“isn’t “trust your instruments” a pretty common saying?”
Trusting instruments is a far cry from Airbus changing pilot inputs on the controls as Airbus does.
Airbus problems are legend, thus, the moniker “SCAREbus.” These particular pilots likely were just trying to fly the darn thing. Getting false readings is always disconcerting, especially in what was probably pretty turbulent weather conditions.
The sudden climb could have been from causes besides the deliberate acts of the pilots. For instance, an elevator tab could have gone whacky and been almost under control so long as the computer was fighting it. Once shut off, the flight crew couldn’t overcome it. Lots of other scenarios, too.
Anyway, it’s a tragedy. I have loved ones who are pilots, some flying “heavies” in the USAF right now. I worry a bit, given the age of the stuff they fly.
Oldplayer
Try control, alt, delete and see if we can get rid of that blue screen.
I’m liberal because I disagree with you?
Seek help.
I’m not sure why these reporters keep repeating something that is physically impossible. The plane couldn’t climb that fast on its own. It flew into a strong cluster cell updraft and eventually stalled.
It's disconcerting when you are hand-flying but it's worse than that when the computerized flight-control system takes over. In that crash of the Airbus at the Paris Air Show, the FCS flew the plane right into the ground, despite the (skilled) test-pilot trying to stop it.
Of course, the Airbus system is a different situation altogether. That is flying by computer decision-making.
Just want to correct a few things you wrote - it still may be a system error, but not as you describe.
The pitot tube usually has two openings, the front entrance and the drain hole. If just the front entrance is blocked and the drain hole remains open, then a normal airspeed indicator will read “0” as the speed. If both holes are blocked, then the airspeed indicator begins to act like an altimeter, meaning that as the aircraft climbs the “airspeed” will indicate an increase in the what is shown on the dial (contrary to what typically happens with airspeed when you pitch up and begin to climb) and when the aircraft descends the “airspeed” will indicate a decrease in the what is shown on the dial, again opposite what is expected. This messes up a pilot’s normal cross-check of the attitude indicator and can introduce confusion. A quick cross-check of the altimeter against the attitude indicator will usually be enough for a good pilot to isolate which of the instruments are providing false information, but that can certainly be tough when it is dark, stormy, frantic and loud in the cockpit.
We are of course assuming old-school steam gauges, but the same cross-check principles apply with modern MFDs and speed/altitude tapes likely found on the Airbus. As far as the effects of a completely frozen pitot tube and drain hole on the modern, theoretically redundant systems and autopilot on an Airbus, that I do not know, but there are obviously scenarios where it can result in system confusion and failure that can ultimately result in a crash.
“Ask HAL 9000.”
Everyone thinks Skynet will start off with a takeover of everything all at once. Actually, it will start off with tests of small systems - an Airbus here, an Iranian centrifuge system there - all to find the optimal strategy when the time comes. You think it’s a bug in Windows 8 or some kind of power surge, but it’s Skynet.
Poorly designed control panels allowing them to hit the wrong buttons easily?
This is what happens when the committees that design the plane and its systems think they know better than the pilot.
I read that they were denied course alteration.
Can you post video of an aircraft designed completely by pilots?
denied or not, pilots are able to divert regardless if they determine weather is too severe. That’s my understanding from talking to other airline pilots.
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.